Understanding the multiple dimensions of transportation disadvantage: the case of rural North Carolina

Transportation disadvantage, which may be described in simple terms as a mismatch between the need for mobility and accessibility and the travel options available, often is assumed to correlate with certain socio-demographic characteristics, such as age (young and old), physical mobility, income, English proficiency, and vehicle access. This paper reports on a study that combined quantitative Census data with qualitative field data collected in interviews and focus groups, to better understand which individuals may in fact be transportation-disadvantaged, and which personal and household factors or environmental conditions correlate with concentrations of transportation-disadvantaged populations. In five rural counties of North Carolina, maps showing areas of elevated risk of transportation disadvantage were used in key informant interviews with planners and other transportation-relevant professionals, as well as in focus groups that probed the travel experiences and patterns of residents. Content analysis of interview and focus group data yielded insights into who is transportation-disadvantaged; what personal, household and environmental factors are notable; and what strategies they use to manage their travel needs. Qualitative data revealed populations not identified by Census data, and yielded rich and nuanced insights into how rural residents perceive their travel needs and habits and how they respond to limits on their mobility and access to routine destinations.

[1]  J. Sallis,et al.  Many Pathways from Land Use to Health: Associations between Neighborhood Walkability and Active Transportation, Body Mass Index, and Air Quality , 2006 .

[2]  Debbie A. Niemeier,et al.  Civil rights guidance and equity analysis methods for regional transportation plans: a critical review of literature and practice , 2013 .

[3]  J. Kolodinsky,et al.  It is not how far you go, it is whether you can get there: modeling the effects of mobility on quality of life in rural New England , 2013 .

[4]  P. Apparicio,et al.  Measuring the Accessibility of Services and Facilities for Residents of Public Housing in Montreal , 2006 .

[5]  J. Stanley,et al.  Mobility, social exclusion and well-being: Exploring the links , 2011 .

[6]  Graham Currie,et al.  Investigating links between transport disadvantage, social exclusion and well-being in Melbourne: preliminary results , 2007 .

[7]  Anne Power,et al.  Social inequality, disadvantaged neighbourhoods and transport deprivation: an assessment of the historical influence of housing policies , 2012 .

[8]  John Farrington,et al.  Rural accessibility, social inclusion and social justice: towards conceptualisation , 2005 .

[9]  Darren M. Scott,et al.  Examining the role of urban form in shaping people's accessibility to opportunities: an exploratory spatial data analysis , 2008 .

[10]  Irene Casas,et al.  A Comparison of Three Methods for Identifying Transport-Based Exclusion: A Case Study of Children's Access to Urban Opportunities in Erie and Niagara Counties, New York , 2009 .

[11]  Drivers of disadvantage and prosperity: is car ownership a good indicator? , 2008 .

[12]  Raj Chetty,et al.  The Effects of Exposure to Better Neighborhoods on Children: New Evidence from the Moving to Opportunity Experiment , 2015, The American economic review.

[13]  K. Lucas Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now? , 2012 .

[14]  Richard Shearmur,et al.  Comparing alternative approaches to measuring the geographical accessibility of urban health services: Distance types and aggregation-error issues , 2008, International journal of health geographics.

[15]  Jarrett Walker Purpose-driven public transport: creating a clear conversation about public transport goals , 2007 .