Journal of Transport and Land Use

Comparing the application of different justice theories in equity analysis of transit projects: A case study of the Lisbon Metro Circular Line

Julianno Amorim

Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2817-8129

João de Abreu e Silva

Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7893-2671

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2024.1895

Keywords: Public transit, Equity, Justice theories

---

Abstract

Although issues of equity and accessibility have already been addressed in transportation, especially with regard to the distribution of costs and benefits, there is no consensus on which concept and metric of fairness would be most appropriate for the evaluation of transportation infrastructure proposals. Normally, a utilitarian perspective is adopted, where issues of unequal distribution of costs and benefits are not the main focus. This paper aims to incorporate the assumptions of other justice theories, namely egalitarianism, communitarianism, and Capability Approach (CA), into the equity assessment of transportation infrastructures, and by doing so, pay closer attention to those who are less advantaged or more open to social exclusion. These theories are critically reviewed considering their contribution to the assessment of equity in terms of transportation infrastructure accessibility impacts. Based on the reviewed theories, accessibility indicators are built and used to assess the equity impacts of the Lisbon Metro expansion project. The findings support the importance of adding other justice perspectives to assessing transportation projects. The CA and Maximax support a need to establish minimum or acceptable distribution standards of accessibility. However, the results from the CA are strongly dependent on the assumptions as to the maximum acceptable travel times.

---

Author Biography

João de Abreu e Silva, Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa

Associate Professor, with Habilitation

Department of Civil Engineering, Architecture and Georesources

CERis-Civil Engineering, Research and Innovation for Sustainability

Instituto Superior Técnico, Universidade de Lisboa

---

References

Arrington, G. B., R. Cervero, National Research Council, Transportation Research Board, Aultman-Hall, L., Roorda, M., & Baetz, B. W. (1997). Using GIS for evaluation of neighborhood pedestrian accessibility. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 123(1), 10–17. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(1997)123:1(10)

Bertolini, L., le Clercq, F., & Kapoen, L. (2005). Sustainable accessibility: A conceptual framework to integrate transport and land use plan-making. Two test-applications in the Netherlands and a reflection on the way forward. Transport Policy, 12(3), 207–220. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2005.01.006

Boschmann, E. E., & Kwan, M.-P. (2008). Toward socially sustainable urban transportation: Progress and potentials. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 2(3), 138–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568310701517265

Câmara Municipal Lisboa—Geodados. (2018). Geodados. http://geodados.cm-lisboa.pt/

de Abreu e Silva, J. A. (2007). Poderão os padrões de uso do solo contribuir para uma mobilidade sustentável? Uma aplicação da modelação de equações estruturais à área Metropolitana de Lisboa (Ph.D. thesis), Instituto Sperior Técnico (IST), Lisbon, Portugal.

De Scitovszky, T. (1941). A note on welfare propositions in economics. The Review of Economic Studies, 9(1), 77–88. https://doi.org/10.2307/2967640

Deboosere, R., & El-Geneidy, A. (2018). Evaluating equity and accessibility to jobs by public transport across Canada. Journal of Transport Geography, 73, 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.10.006

DETR. (2000). Social exclusion and the provision and availability of public transport (with TRAC) mobility and inclusion unit. London: Department of the Environment Transport and the Regions.

Di Ciommo, F., & Shiftan, Y. (2017). Transport equity analysis. Transport Reviews, 37(2), 139–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2017.1278647

Farber, S., & Grandez, M. (2017). Transit accessibility, land development and socioeconomic priority: A typology of planned station catchment areas in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1), 879–902. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2017.980

Farber, S., Morang, M. Z., & Widener, M. J. (2014). Temporal variability in transit-based accessibility to supermarkets. Applied Geography, 53, 149–159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.06.012

Fransen, K., Neutens, T., Farber, S., De Maeyer, P., Deruyter, G., & Witlox, F. (2015). Identifying public transport gaps using time-dependent accessibility levels. Journal of Transport Geography, 48, 176–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.09.008

Geurs, K. T., & Wee, B. V. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, 12(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2003.10.005

Golub, A., & Martens, K. (2014). Using principles of justice to assess the modal equity of regional transportation plans. Journal of Transport Geography, 41, 10–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.07.014

Griffin, G., & Sener, I. (2016). Public transit equity analysis at metropolitan and local scales: A focus on nine large cities in the US. Journal of Public Transportation, 19, 126–143. https://doi.org/10.5038/2375-0901.19.4.8

Guzman, L. A., & Oviedo, D. (2018). Accessibility, affordability and equity: Assessing ‘pro-poor’ public transport subsidies in Bogotá. Transport Policy, 68, 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.04.012

Hansen, W. G. (1959). How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 25(2), 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944365908978307

Hausman, D., McPherson, M., & Satz, D. (2006). Economic analysis, moral philosophy, and public policy. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

INE. (2018a). Estatísticas dos transportes e comunicações, 2017. Lisbon, Portugal: Instituto Nacional de Estatistica.

INE. (2018b). Mobilidade e funcionalidade do território nas Áreas Metropolitanas do Porto e de Lisboa, 2017. Lisbon, Portugal: Instituto Nacional de Estatistica.

Jones, S. R. (1981). Accessibility measures: A literature review. Workingham, Berkshire, UK: Transport and Road Research Laboratory.

Karner, A. (2018). Assessing public transit service equity using route-level accessibility measures and public data. Journal of Transport Geography, 67, 24–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.01.005

Karner, A., & Niemeier, D. (2013). Civil rights guidance and equity analysis methods for regional transportation plans: A critical review of literature and practice. Journal of Transport Geography, 33, 126–134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2013.09.017

Kymlicka, W. (2001). Contemporary political philosophy: An introduction (Vol. 104). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Levitas, R., Pantazis, C., Fahmy, E., Gordon, D., Lloyd, E., & Patsios, D. (2007). The multidimensional analysis of social exclusion. Bristol, England: Department of Sociology and School for Social Policy Townsend Center for the International Study of Poverty and Bristol Institute for Public Affairs University of Bristol.

Litman, T. (2018). Evaluating transportation equity, guidance for incorporating distributional impacts in transportation planning. Victoria, BC, Canada: Victoria Transport Policy Institute.

Lucas, K. (2006). Providing transport for social inclusion within a framework for environmental justice in the UK. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 40(10), 801–809. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2005.12.005

Lucas, K. (2012). Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now? Urban Transport Initiatives, 20, 105–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2012.01.013

Martens, K. (2011). Substance precedes methodology: On cost–benefit analysis and equity. Transportation, 38(6), 959–974. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-011-9372-7

Martens, K. (2012). Justice in transport as justice in accessibility: Applying Walzer’s ‘spheres of justice’ to the transport sector. Transportation, 39(6), 1035–1053. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-012-9388-7

Martens, K. (2017). Transport justice: Designing fair transportation systems. London: Routledge.

Martens, K., & Ciommo, F. (2017). Travel time savings, accessibility gains and equity effects in cost–benefit analysis. Transport Reviews, 37(2), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1276642

Martens, K., & Golub, A. (2012). A justice- theoretic exploration of accessibility measures. In Accessibility analysis and transport planning: Challenges for Europe and North America (pp.195–210). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Martens, K., Golub, A., & Robinson, G. (2012). A justice-theoretic approach to the distribution of transportation benefits: Implications for transportation planning practice in the United States. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(4), 684–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2012.01.004

Mavoa, S., Witten, K., McCreanor, T., & O’Sullivan, D. (2012). GIS based destination accessibility via public transit and walking in Auckland, New Zealand. Journal of Transport Geography, 20(1), 15–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.10.001

Nahmias-Biran, B., Martens, K., & Shiftan, Y. (2017). Integrating equity in transportation project assessment: A philosophical exploration and its practical implications. Transport Reviews, 37(2), 192–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2017.1276604

Pasha, O. (2018). Social justice implications of municipal transportation apportionments in Massachusetts: A case of disparate impact. Transport Policy, 72, 109–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.10.001

Pereira, R. H. M., Schwanen, T., & Banister, D. (2017). Distributive justice and equity in transportation. Transport Reviews, 37(2), 170–191. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1257660

Rawls, J. (2001). Justice as fairness: A restatement (Vol. 112). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Rawls, John. (2003). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard Univ. Press.

Rodrigue, J.-P., Comtois, C., & Slack, B. (2017). The geography of transport systems (4th edition). London: Routledge.

Ryan, J., Wretstrand, A., & Schmidt, S. M. (2015). Exploring public transport as an element of older persons’ mobility: A capability approach perspective. Journal of Transport Geography, 48, 105–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.08.016

Sen, A. (1992). Inequality reexamined. Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

Sen, A. (2000). Development as freedom. New York: Alfred Knopf.

Sen, A. (2009). The idea of justice. Cambridge, MA; Harvard University Press.

Silva, A. (2016). Mobilidade urbana e equidade social: Possibilidades a partir das recentes políticas de transporte público na Metrópole do Rio de Janeiro. GOT, Revista de Geografia e Ordenamento do Território, 10, 293–317. https://doi.org/10.17127/got/2016.10.014

Smith, N., Hirsch, D., & Davis, A. (2012). Accessibility and capability: The minimum transport needs and costs of rural households. Social Impacts and Equity Issues in Transport, 21, 93–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.01.004

Teuber, A. (1984). Book review of Spheres of justice by Michael Walzer. Political Theory, 12(1), 118–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591784012001008

Walzer, M. (1983). Spheres of justice: A defense of pluralism and equality. New York: Basic Books.

Wee, B. V., & Geurs, K. (2011). Discussing equity and social exclusion in accessibility evaluations. European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research, 11(4), 350–366. https://journals.open.tudelft.nl/index.php/ejtir/article/view/2940

Wee, B. V., & Roeser, S. (2013). Ethical theories and the cost–benefit analysis-based ex ante evaluation of transport policies and plans. Transport Reviews, 33(6), 743–760. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2013.854281

Whitelegg, J. (1997). Critical mass: Transport, environment and society in the twenty-first century. London, UK: Pluto Press.