Equitable transportation and resilience hubs: Analysis of underserved population needs, usage, and travel behaviour

Thayanne G.M. Ciriaco , Syeda Narmeen Zehra , Veronica Wambura , Stephen D. Wong
{"title":"Equitable transportation and resilience hubs: Analysis of underserved population needs, usage, and travel behaviour","authors":"Thayanne G.M. Ciriaco ,&nbsp;Syeda Narmeen Zehra ,&nbsp;Veronica Wambura ,&nbsp;Stephen D. Wong","doi":"10.1016/j.trip.2024.101314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Extreme weather events and other hazardous events often require a range of strategies to safely shelter people, distribute resources, and facilitate recovery efforts. This is particularly important for underserved populations who usually lack reliable access to shelters, transportation, and social networks. To begin addressing these problems and increase community capacity, resilience hubs – physical locations that support residents in emergencies and everyday conditions – have emerged as a possible equitable strategy. Despite potential benefits for underserved populations, research and practice have yet to consider how different demographic groups will use or travel to/from these hubs.</div><div>To address these gaps, we conducted an empirical study using survey data from 950 respondents in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region in Alberta, Canada. Of these respondents, we focused on several underserved groups. Simple descriptive statistics and statistical tests were used to understand the groups’ needs and observe similarities and divergences between groups. We also calculated spatial statistics to identify how mode choices varied with people’s preferred resilience hub locations. We found a high willingness of groups to use resilience hubs, especially in emergency conditions. However, differences between groups and with non-underserved groups were relatively moderate and varied. Respondents prioritized a range of basic services along with transportation-related elements, including accessibility for individuals with disabilities, transit connections, parking, and walkability. Moreover, our mode choice analysis highlighted the necessity of incorporating multimodal transportation options to resilience hubs. We offer several policy recommendations that inform the equitable development of resilience hubs, including the importance of local placement and needs-based services.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36621,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","volume":"29 ","pages":"Article 101314"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198224003002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Extreme weather events and other hazardous events often require a range of strategies to safely shelter people, distribute resources, and facilitate recovery efforts. This is particularly important for underserved populations who usually lack reliable access to shelters, transportation, and social networks. To begin addressing these problems and increase community capacity, resilience hubs – physical locations that support residents in emergencies and everyday conditions – have emerged as a possible equitable strategy. Despite potential benefits for underserved populations, research and practice have yet to consider how different demographic groups will use or travel to/from these hubs.
To address these gaps, we conducted an empirical study using survey data from 950 respondents in the Edmonton Metropolitan Region in Alberta, Canada. Of these respondents, we focused on several underserved groups. Simple descriptive statistics and statistical tests were used to understand the groups’ needs and observe similarities and divergences between groups. We also calculated spatial statistics to identify how mode choices varied with people’s preferred resilience hub locations. We found a high willingness of groups to use resilience hubs, especially in emergency conditions. However, differences between groups and with non-underserved groups were relatively moderate and varied. Respondents prioritized a range of basic services along with transportation-related elements, including accessibility for individuals with disabilities, transit connections, parking, and walkability. Moreover, our mode choice analysis highlighted the necessity of incorporating multimodal transportation options to resilience hubs. We offer several policy recommendations that inform the equitable development of resilience hubs, including the importance of local placement and needs-based services.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Engineering-Automotive Engineering
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
185
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
Sensitivities of weighting methods in the sustainability assessment of public transport in Latin American cities Citizen-centric design in mHealth: Concept mapping for active transportation promotion Using computer vision and street-level videos for pedestrian-vehicle tracking and behaviour analysis Public transit of the future: Enhancing well-being through designing human-centered public transportation spaces Data linkage between health and compensation systems improves the profiling of transport-related injuries
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1