A study conducted by the University of Sydney’s Business School has found that improved access to public transport results in better health, increased employment and a reduction in crime.
The recently published paper indicates that improved mobility for disadvantaged citizens can result in increased financial benefit for said citizens, and should therefore be factored into cost-benefit analysis for transport projects.
The paper is an evolution of USYD Professor John Stanley’s previous transport and social inclusion research.
“Investment in local public transport is a valuable way to improve inclusion and, as such, inclusion benefits which are currently ignored in transport evaluation should be factored into government infrastructure spending decisions,” he says.
“Public transport is not just about bums on seats – it’s about who's bums get on the seats, and how much their life could be changed through improved mobility and inclusion.”
Stanley says public transport serves either a mass transit or social transit market.
“Mass transit, such as peak-hour train and light rail services, delivers benefits for users and the wider society, including reduced road congestion costs, cleaner air, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and productivity improvements from denser urban places,” he says.
“All of these benefits are relatively easy to quantify in dollar terms, which is important when doing a cost-benefit analysis of a major mass transit project. The same is true of road improvements – which is why we tend to spend so much on major new roads.
“Social transit, such as more frequent local bus routes and active travel infrastructure, does not deliver these external benefits. But it indirectly benefits society in the form of lower unemployment, lower crime rates and better health, which reduces legal system costs, health system costs and adds to productivity.
“These initiatives are particularly important in outer suburbs, where local transport options are typically few in Australian cities.”
Place-based disadvantage – which factors in location as well as income, employment status and social connections – was considered in the paper. The authors created an equation which determined the monetary value of a trip which can be utilised for cost-benefit analysis.
“This provides an opportunity to reduce the inherent bias in current methods of evaluating transport compared to initiatives whose main purpose is to increase social inclusion,” Stanley says.
“Equity is getting much higher priority in cities such as London and Vancouver. In personal mobility terms, it’s very much about improving access to travel opportunities and thereby removing a significant potential barrier to social inclusion.
“The research also shows the importance and high value of subjective wellbeing, social capital and sense of community for social inclusion – particularly for those at most risk of exclusion. The monetary values we have developed can be used to help make the case for measures that can deliver a more inclusive society.”
To read the study in full, click here.
