Towards Transportation for All: The Mobilizing Justice Workshop Outcomes Report Acknowledgements

The authors would like to acknowledge the following organizations for their support and assistance with the development of this report, and the 2019 Mobilizing Justice workshop:

The Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of The University of Toronto Transportation Research Institute (UTTRI) The School of Cities at the University of Toronto The Department of Human Geography at the University of Toronto Scarborough The Department of Geography and Planning at the University of Toronto The Department of Civil and Mineral Engineering at the University of Toronto The Faculty of Applied Sciences and Engineering at the University of Toronto The University of Toronto Scarborough

2020

Lead Author: Matthew Palm Cover Photo Credit: Jeff Allen Principal Investigator: Steven Farber Co-Investigator: Amer Shalaby Towards Transportation for All: With support from: Pat Doherty The Mobilizing Justice Workshop Outcomes Report is licensed under a Creative commons Published by: Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Mobilizing Justice License. Department of Human Geography University of Toronto Scarborough ISBN 978-0-7727-6453-9

2 Contents

Summary 3-5 Measuring Transport Equity 17-18 6-7 Introduction 1. Access to Destinations 19 2. Multi-modality 20 Local Government Perspectives 8 3. Activity Participation 21 Social geography as a challenge to transport equity 8 4. Consumer Surplus 22 5. Travel Time Savings 23 1. Housing, Gentrification, and the Suburbanization of 9 Poverty Conclusions—Multiple Metrics for a Multifaceted 24 2. Sprawl and weather 10 Problem 3. Supporting Urban Indigenous Populations 11 Industry Perspectives on Tranportation Equity 25 Social equity and changes in the transportation sector 12 1. Equity challenges in the provision of new transport 26 1. Transit is not keeping up with demand, competition 12 technologies 2. A growing digital divide 13 2. Opportunities to achieve more inclusive, equitable outcomes 27 3. Industry perspectives on regulation 28 How Canadian cities are tackling transport inequities 13 Towards a Shared Vision of Transport Equity in Canada 29-30 Vancouver - -Toronto 14 Montreal - Winnipeg - Ottawa 15 Research Needs for Building Equitable Transportation 31-33 Systems in Canada Research needs of cities 16 References 34 Conclusions 16

3 agencies to serve disadvantaged in transportation. Summary travellers who are relocating to Canada has not. Canadian localities communities with lower levels of have filled this gap on their own. transit service. Transit agencies are adopting For planners in the prairies, low- discounted fare programs to support density suburbanization makes it disadvantaged travellers. challenging to provide equitable, Local governments are increasingly multimodal transportation systems, incorporating equity analysis into their Mobilizing Justice began as a two- especially in cold winter months. short- and long-range plans to ensure day workshop bringing researchers, Providing equitable transportation to that disadvantaged travellers benefit government stakeholders, and indigenous urban Canadians is also a from transportation investments. industry together. The project started growing focus of Canadian planners, with two goals: to develop a shared particularly in Winnipeg. Planners need support from vision for equitable transportation Existing transportation inequities are researchers to define, measure planning among academics in exacerbated by a lack of investment and plan for transport equity Canada, and to identify the research in transit relative to population growth needs of stakeholders preparing for in many places. Furthermore, the Practitioners at the workshop called the equity impacts of new mobility arrival of new technologies like ride- for researchers to support the technologies.This brief summarizes hailing is raising concerns about development of communicable equity the workshop’s findings. digitally-disconnected households metrics that are holistic enough to being left behind, yet data on these capture the diversity of Canadian Localities and regional planning populations and their needs is sparse. travellers’ needs. Practitioners also agencies are increasingly highlighted the need for research concerned with providing Localities are responding to into forging new transportation equitable transportation transport inequities without planning processes through tools like federal guidance or support participatory budgeting. Finally, many In the country’s three largest practitioners expressed concerns metropolitan areas,inner-city Federal governments in the U.S. and about the lack of consensus on what gentrification and the suburbanization U.K. have provided guidance and transport equity means and how to of poverty are making it harder for resources to support equity planning define equitable outcomes.

4 Key Themes for a Canadian Vision for Transportation Equity Industry sees challenges and opportunities for equity and new transportation technologies, embraces regulation Through a series of small group discussions, workshop participants identified the key themes that should be included Industry voices at the workshop highlighted companies’ reluctance to in a Canadian framework for transportation equity. They also gather demographic data on individual riders. This presents a major identified knowledge gaps preventing policymaking in these barrier to identifying the equity impacts of new technologies. Firms like Uber expressed a preference for partnering with academics areas. The themes are: for detailed equity analysis to protect individuals’ identities. Industry also see technologies creating more inclusive transportation systems Affordability by providing cost-effective solutions to the challenges of underserved Canadian planners should strive to ensure that fare costs do not groups, as in the case of Uber’s WAV service for the mobility impaired, inhibit disadvantaged Canadians’ travel. Canadian transit agencies and Pantonium’s on-demand transit for night shift workers. Sidewalk rely more on fares than agencies in many other countries, making Labs highlighted the role of affordable housing in transit and active- fare costs a significant issue for disadvantaged travellers here. travel rich communities in providing locational affordability forToronto The potential for discounted fare programs to improve the travel residents, and Zygg highlighted the potential for shareable e-bikes to outcomes of disadvantaged Canadians is not well understood. provide a fast, safe, affordable alternative to driving through clogged city streets. Finance equity Industry panelists expressed support for regulations that reward or Canadian taxpayers support road infrastructure to a much larger incentivize shared use of vehicles, including congestion pricing. They extent than other modes, and participants believed that a just also supported more effective regulation of curb space to ensure that transportation system should distribute resources more equitably. disadvantaged travelers are not denied access to destinations. Finally, However, the extent to which Canadian transportation funding is one industry representative called for the creation of public agencies fairly or justly distributed—by mode, by community, and relative to that operate as “data trusts” that can host the data generated by new need—and the impact of those inequities is not documented. technologies. These entities can ensure that cities’ data will be used in equitable, transparent ways. Multi-modality An equitable transportation system provides travellers with multiple options to reach their destinations. Right now in Canada, investments in active travel infrastructure in Canada favour higher

5 income neighbourhoods. Planners need support in identifying how to provide multi-modal infrastructure in a more equitable Research Needs Identified for manner. Achieving Equitable Transportation Systems Enabling people to thrive An equitable transportation system does not act as a barrier for people to participate in the activities they want and need to 1. Canada needs a national survey of transportation participate in. Unfortunately, car-centric infrastructure and lack disadvantage across its cities.This survey needs to document of transit is putting many Canadians at risk of transport poverty. the causes, extent and impact of transport inequities Transport poverty occurs when a lack of transportation options on disadvantaged communities, including low-income compounds the problems experienced by disadvantaged households, recent immigrants, indigenous urban residents, communities. Research is needed to identify what standards of rural residents and refugees. transportation service can prevent transport poverty.

Inclusivity 2. Local planners need standardized and holistic metrics Contemporary design and planning of transportation systems to assess the potential impacts of their decisions on often considers only the “typical” or “average” traveller. In reality, disadvantaged travellers from these and other groups. there is no ‘average’ traveller. Practitioners need new metrics of transportation system performance that reflect the diversity of Canadian travellers’ 3. Cities need to develop real-time, joint data collection across needs. all modes that can present an “un-washed” picture of travel in cities. Safety An equitable transportation system provides safety to travellers and those impacted by travel externalities. The extent to which 4. Planners need new modelling and simulation tools that can a lack of safety inhibits the travel of vulnerable groups in Canada predict the equity implications of new transportation policies is not well documented. and technologies.

Progressivity An equitable transportation system provides safety to travellers 5. Future pilots of new policies and technologies should explicitly and those impacted by travel externalities. examine the potential impacts of changes on disadvantaged travellers.

6 Introduction

Mobilizing Justice began as a two-day workshop bringing researchers, government stakeholders, and industry together. The project started with two goals: to develop a shared vision for equitable transportation planning among academics in Canada, and to identify the research needs of stakeholders preparing for the equity impacts of new mobility technologies.

The Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC) funded the event, along with several departments and offices across the University of Toronto campuses. The workshop, held Nov. 7th and 8th at the University of Toronto, Scarborough, aimed to develop a network of researchers across Canada committed to inclusive and equitable transportation systems.

This report summarizes the discussions, issues raised, outcomes and next steps identified during Mobilizing Justice. The report is meant to raise the profile of transport equity issues in Canada today, with a focus on the equity impacts of new transportation technologies, while offering new avenues of inquiry and policy for academics and decision-makers.

This is not meant to be the last or definitive word on the subject, nor is the representation of voices in this document complete. Mobilizing Justice was very much an effort by Canadian academics concerned with transport equity to start a conversation, so that we can begin to engage with government, non-profits, advocates, and community members more effectively on a national scale.

7 Most of the workshop presentations and discussions are posted in an online repository hosted on the Mobilizing Justice YouTube channel. References to these presentations are hyperlinked throughout this document.The remainder of this report is organized roughly in order of workshop activities:

Local Government Perspectives Towards a Shared Vision for Transport Summarizes local government views on transport equity Equity in Canada problems in their localities, how cities are attempting Articulates participants’ visions of what an equitable to address these problems, and how researchers can transportation system looks like in the Canadian urban help. The results of this section are based on “lightning context and how cities can start to build towards these talks” and a panel by transportation planners from six of visions. This section is based on a series of breakout Canada’s largest cities. discussions.

How Planners Measure Transport Equity Research Needs on Building Equitable Introduces five approaches to measuring the benefits Transportation Systems in Canada of transportation systems and summarizes issues with Synthesizes discussions among workshop participants each of them. The section is based on a workshop regarding the data, modelling, and qualitative analysis activity in which participants ‘caucused’ in favour of their needed by government, industry and non-profits to preferred measure (think Dragon’s Den, but for how deliver more equitable and inclusive transportation planners need to measure transport equity). systems and services. This section is based on a series of breakout discussions. Industry Perspectives Summarizes the views of industry representatives presenting at the workshop.This section covers industry attitudes towards how new technologies can make transportation systems more inclusive, the equity challenges of technology companies, and what regulations are necessary to support equitable deployment of new technologies.

8 Local Government Perspectives

We invited ten of Canada’s largest cities and regional planning agencies to present their perspectives on developing equitable transportation systems. Representatives from six regions participated:

Toronto, Montreal, Winnipeg, Edmonton, Vancouver and Ottawa

We asked these representatives to prepare brief “lightning talks” that answered four questions:

• What is a major equity challenge driven by the social geography of your city/region?

• What is a major equity challenge in your region driven by changes in the transportation sector?

• In what ways is your region addressing these problems?

• What research is needed to achieve your equity objectives?

This report section is organized around the answers to these four questions, reporting on staff presentations and a subsequent Q&A with other workshop participants.

Social geography as a challenge to transport equity

Participants’ answers on the role of social geography in exacerbating transportation inequities fell into three, broad, overlapping categories: housing and the suburbanization of poverty, sprawl and the weather, and meeting the needs of underserved urban indigenous populations.

9 1 Housing, Gentrification and the Examples Suburbanization of Poverty In Vancouver Incomes have increased in the urban core, but have decreased in su- In Canada’s largest metropolitan areas, urban cores have rapidly burban communities along the region’s SkyTrain lines (Ley and Lynch gentrified, making it difficult for lower-income households to afford to 2012). live in communities well served by transit. In Toronto Incomes have increased in and around the subway lines while they have declined in peripheral communities with poorer transit access (Hulchanski 2010).

These longer-term social shifts make it difficult for agencies to provide equitable access to frequent, reliable public transportation. In some cities, such as Vancouver, researchers suggest that the introduction of new lines contributes to gentrification, making it harder for low-income families to remain in these areas (Jones 2015). The result is growing numbers of low-income households in areas with poor transit access.

Let the numbers speak

Figure 1 plots the number of jobs that commuters can access by transit in Vancouver, accounting for competition from other workers. Lighter colours (yellow, light green) indicate relatively poorer transit access.

The dots overlaid on the map represent residents below the Low-income Cut Off (LICO), a measure of poverty in Canada. While significant numbers of residents in poverty remain in the core of Vancouver, the map shows notable pockets of residents in poverty living in transit- poor areas, with even more poor residents de-concentrated through the region’s suburban and rural edges. Figure 1: The dispersion of low-income households into low-transit suburbs in Vancouver, Courtesy of (Allen 2018)

10 2 Sprawl and weather

In other cities, such as Winnipeg and Edmonton, the challenge remains providing effective transit service throughout entire regions characterized by low-density, vehicle-oriented communities.

The Edmonton metro has a population density of about 125 people per square kilometre (psqkm) while Winnipeg has a density of 146 people psqkm.

These numbers are quite low compared to Toronto at 630 and Montreal at 890 people psqkm. Low densities present a significant challenge to transit service providers in North America, as decades of empirical research suggests that traditional transit modes need to operate in high density environments to be cost effective (Cervero 2013; Guerra and Cervero 2012).

Sprawl compounds other geographic challenges for these cities, such as the weather. Long transit wait times are burdensome for riders in winter, and can discourage transit ridership. Edmonton, for example, is the northernmost city in North America with a population of over a million.

Weather poses a challenge for promoting active travel and maintaining quality transit service. Trouble with light rail vehicles operating in cold weather, for example, has complicated efforts to deliver light rail service connecting Ottawa’s core and suburbs (Chianello 2019b).

credit photo: Scott Walsh on Unsplash

11 3 Supporting Urban Indigenous Populations Indigenous residents of Canada’s major cities face disproportionate burdens in transportation.

For example

Edmonton: In Edmonton indigenous residents make up 6% of the city’s population but constitute 44% of tickets issued on Edmonton Transit Service.

Edmonton has the second largest urban indigenous community in Canada (Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada 2016), and planners there are identifying the level of transit and active travel infrastructure available to indigenous residents (Figure 2). This will help the city identify transportation NEEDED MEASURES & investments to better serve this community.

Ontario: Ontario’s Urban Indigenous Action Plan highlights inadequate public transportation as a major concern of the province’s urban indigenous residents, and calls on ministries to consider transportation and geography when delivering services (Province of Ontario, Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres, Métis Nation of Ontario, & Ontario Native Women’s Association, 2018, p. 26).

Figure 2: Percent Indigenous Population and Transit Service, Courtesy of the City of Edmonton

12 "cities are pushed to focus on expensive new technologies Social equity and changes in the when there are simpler, transportation sector cost effective solutions, like Equity concerns have motivated some cities to limit the introduction of reserved rights of way" new technologies like Uber, Lyft, and Lime onto their streets. Other cities that do allow these companies have expressed additional — local government participant. concerns, ranging from the cost of keeping transit competitive, to the impact of new private transport technologies on transit usage. These concerns are summarized here.

1 Transit is not keeping up with demand, competition

Voices from Winnipeg and Toronto noted that transit investment has not kept pace with population growth, making it more difficult to compete with emerging technologies. The loss of inter-city transportation options like Greyhound has also worsened transit accessibility for residents in Canada’s west. The cost of newer transit technology has also made it difficult for transit to keep pace. Investments in light rail transit in Ottawa, for example, have diverted an extra 1.2 billion dollars towards new light rail expansion, meaning the city will have fewer resources available to maintain and improve bus service in other parts of the city (Chianello 2019a; 2019b).

One city representative noted that city staff are pushed by elected officials to focus on expensive new technologies in lieu of more cost-effective solutions, like reserved rights of way for buses. Local government participants also noted that the cost of owning and operating new transit infrastructure requires cities to charge higher Photo of York Viva Purple Bus, Photo Credit: Sean Marshall fares, which can discourage lower-income residents from using new transit infrastructure.

13 2 A growing digital divide

Representatives from several cities expressed equity concerns about integrating new technologies like ride-hailing into transit service. These participants worried that not all residents in their service areas have equal access to the internet and online banking resources, and these fears are not unfounded. Roughly 3%—or one million—Canadians are unbanked, meaning they do not have a chequing and savings account or access to credit (Buckland 2011).

According to some reports, under-banked households, or those with just some of these resources, may constitute up to 15% of the population (ACORN Canada 2016). Indigenous and low- income residents of Canada are more likely to fall into these categories (Edmonton Financial Empowerment Collaborative 2016).

Transit agencies and technology firms are piloting solutions to these problems. In the United States, unbanked individuals with SMS access can purchase use of a Lime bike or scooter at one of 27,000 retail locations and then text a code to unlock a bike or scooter (LimeBike 2019). Third party intermediaries like GoGoGrandparent also provide phone and web based services for non- smart phone users hoping to access ride-hailing services, an innovation that could be integrated into ride-hailing partnerships (GoGoGrandparent, 2019). How Canadian cities are tackling transport inequities?

Canadian cities lack federal and provincial guidance on how to consider social equity in transportation planning, with the exception of supporting people with disabilities.

Despite this lack of support, the cities present at the workshop offered numerous examples of their efforts to promote inclusive, equitable transportation systems.

We summarize these efforts, which constitute the state of transport equity practice in Canadian cities, here.

14 Vancouver day to reflect drivers’ impact on congestion. city’s diverse communities and residents The Independent Commission’s final report (City of Edmonton 2018). The city is calls for any decongestion charge to be also examining how new transportation Translink is in the process of updating its designed with equity as a primary goal technologies can address first/last mile Regional Transportation Strategy, and (Mobility Pricing Independent Commission problems and improve service delivery. recently released a Phase 1 report covering 2018). The report also advises that Finally, the city is conducting analysis of public attitudes on transportation issues revenues from such a charge should pedestrian and cycling safety through an in the region. Respondents were asked be spent addressing the affordability of equity lens to think about Metro Vancouver’s next 30 . transportation for low-income people. This years and rank their top priorities, values, includes spending congestion charge and concerns from a range of possible Toronto revenue on reduced transit fares, reducing answers. Input was received from every the fuel tax, or providing a mobility or tax Transportation equity has a prominent role jurisdiction in the region, with 31,700 credit to low-income households (p. 29). in the city’s Mobility Action Plan, and its responses and over 4,000 ideas submitted. TransLink has also explored changes to the Autonomous Vehicle Strategy. The city is Among the top priorities and concerns from region’s transit fare system. A 2018 report experiencing historic investment in higher- survey respondents was the growing cost concludes that the region should expand order transit and organizations across the of renting or buying a home. Along with the discounted fare programs for low-income region are paying increased attention to the climate emergency and congestion, equity travellers (TransLink 2018). equity impact of the incoming infrastructure. and affordability has emerged as one For example, Metrolinx commissioned of the ‘triple threats’ faced by the region a recent analysis of the socio-economic (TransLink 2019). Work is underway to Edmonton distribution of benefits that will be provided identify possible headline targets for equity Edmonton’s proposed City Plan is to residents by the province’s proposed and affordability, which includes a range anticipated to deliver significant benefits Ontario Line (Farber and Allen 2019). The of technical work as to how to define and to lower-income households. A summary analysis suggests that the time savings measure these terms, including agreement of the plan’s land use approach finds and accessibility benefits of the line will on a range of metrics and KPIs. that it will decrease transportation costs be evenly spread across residents of for Edmontonians by an average of different socio-economic backgrounds Equity is a central component of $700 per household, while reducing the in the area, and will be advantageous to TransLink’s investigation into Mobility number of households choosing to own the area’s lower-income residents. The Pricing for the Metro Vancouver area. vehicles (The City Plan Team 2019). Toronto Transportation Commission has In 2017, TransLink established an The city’s Smart Transportation Action also adopted equity as a goal in its 5-Year Independent Commission to consider how Plan, a report on preparing the city for Service Plan, applying equity lenses to its a decongestion charge could be levied new transportation technologies, calls for service planning to ensure service changes across the region. A decongestion charge expanded public engagement and research improve transit options for disadvantaged is a fee drivers pay for use of roads, to ensure new technologies provide communities. frequently calibrated by location and time of new transportation options for all of the

15 Figure 4: Partial results from an equity analysis of the Ontario Line, showing differences in accessibility benefits the Line provides to different social group, courtesy of (Farber and Allen 2019) Winnipeg

The city of Winnipeg is in the process of implementing a Low Income Transit Pass. Adults below Statistics Canada’s Low- Ottawa Income Cut Off (LICO) will qualify for a Montreal 30% reduction in transit pass prices in Ottawa provides EquiPass, discounted fares 2020, with the subsidy deepening to 50% for low-income people (City of Ottawa 2019). by 2022 ( 2019). The Similar to Winnipeg’s new pass, all adults The Quebec government’s Sustainable city’s Transportation Master Plan includes a Mobility Policy calls for equal transportation under LICO qualify to purchase single use “safe, efficient and equitable transportation or monthly fare passes. The pass provides access for vulnerable, low-income, mobility- system” as a key strategic goal (City of impaired and disabled people (Transports roughly a 50% reduction in fare cost. The Winnipeg, 2011, p. 9). Finally, the city is in city is also in the process of updating its Québec 2018). The report calls for efforts the process of developing a Transit Master to ensure gender equity in transit as well. Transportation Master Plan. An objective Plan that includes, as a goal, developing of the new master plan includes applying The Autorité Régionale de Transport a transit system that enables people of all Métropolitain (ARTM) has started public an equity lens to address potential systemic ages and abilities to get around the city (City barriers and inequities in transportation engagement for its first ever strategic plan, of Winnipeg 2019a). The Phase One Public (Manconi, 2019, p. 53). providing an opportunity for the region to Engagement Report notes that affordability, address spatial and economic inequality, social equity and planning with a gender- along with a social fare for disadvantaged based lens emerged as key themes from transit riders (ARTM 2019). stakeholder engagement (City of Winnipeg 2019b), with 19% of public comments concerning equity or affordability (p. 18).

16 Research needs of cities Finally, most local government attendees mentioned the need for communicable equity metrics and performance indicators. These metrics are needed for the evaluation Local government participants want more support of proposed projects and plans, as well as monitoring of from researchers in defining performance metrics plan outcomes. Participants felt appropriate indicators and measuring planning success with respect to could help stimulate dialogue and illuminate the transportation equity. Most city panelists agreed that different trade-offs at play in planning to meet equity, federal guidance or standards would make it easier environmental and economic goals simultaneously. One for jurisdictions to benchmark their efforts and make participant noted the need for a metric that considers the it easier for city staff to guide equity considerations cumulative or holistic impacts of inequities on individuals through the political process. This included the need for attempting to use the transportation system to access understanding what a baseline for an equity analysis needed resources and opportunities. should look like, and research on what an “equitable transportation system” means and how it can be measured both quantitatively and qualitatively. Conclusions Local government participants called for research into In sum, the country’s largest metros face the how to improve transportation planning processes to challenge of providing equitable transportation to make them more inclusive, including exploring newer disadvantaged populations relocating to less-served engagement tools such as participatory budgeting. Some suburbs, while the country’s medium-sized cities are speakers felt that planners need a better understanding contending with providing effective transit service of what travellers and residents value with respect to in low-density environments. Canadian cities are accessibility (e.g. to what, to where?). Participants also responding by providing reduced-fare transit passes noted the difficulty in explaining complex transportation for disadvantaged riders, and incorporating equity planning concepts to councilors and the public, and goals into their transportation plans. Agencies need seek resources that better translate research into plain support from researchers on how to quantitatively language. measure plan performance from equity lenses, and how to qualitatively engage with equity-seeking communities in a just and impactful manner.

17 Measuring Transport Equity Transportation planners use quantitative metrics to model how proposed projects will benefit residents in their communities. To consider equity impacts, planners sometimes take an additional step of looking at how the benefits of proposed projects are distributed across different communities, asking questions such as: is any group left out? Does any group experience burdens from a proposed project (poorer air quality, more noise), without experiencing the benefits? Sometimes, the answers to these questions can be biased by which benefit of transportation systems is used in the equity analysis. Researchers, advocates and government agencies have long debated which metrics are most appropriate to use in equity analysis.

Mobilizing Justice provided academics with a formalized space in which to advocate for their preferred metric in a caucus format. Modelled after the Iowa caucuses, this activity gave academics a chance to persuade the practitioners in attendance to “vote” for their preferred measure of transport system benefits for equity analysis. Below are the rank-ordered results of the caucus and a brief description of each metric in terms of how they help evaluate a proposed transport project. The rest of this section provides more detailed explanations of each approach along with examples of agencies and academics using these measures to build more equitable transportation systems.

Ultimately, each adds value to planning by providing community members with additional knowledge on how proposed projects will impact their communities. As a few workshop participants adamantly stated, no one metric can be expected to capture the multifaceted ways in which transportation systems impact human wellbeing. However, the debate

Figure 5: Workshop participants brainstorm revealed many important strengths and weaknesses of each of these the case for multi-modality as a critical equity metric commonly used metrics. This section lays out these strengths and weaknesses to help demystify these measures and support their informed use in advancing equity goals.

18 1 Access to estinations Quantifies the potential for a proposed project to help travellers access a greater range of destinations within a reasonable amount of time and money. The destinations measured often include jobs, shopping, healthcare, schools, and other services.

2 Multi-Modality Documents the potential for a proposed project to provide travellers with more alternative means of travel to get where they need to go. Alternative means include walking, cycling, public transit, and emerging modes like ride-hailing.

Measuring 3 Activity Participation Evaluates how a proposed project will impact the Transport Equity number and duration of out-of-home activities individuals can participate in on a regular basis. This section lays out strengths and Activities measured include all activities travellers engage in on a regular basis, such as work, shopping, weaknesses to help demystify and medical appointments, and community and social support their informed use in activities. advancing equity goals. 4 Consumer Surplus +++ Quantifies the extent to which a proposed project delivers +++ +++ greater value to travellers. Engineers use data on how people currently choose to travel to model how much people value aspects of travel like travel time, comfort, monetary costs, etc. These models are then used to predict how much better off travellers will be with the proposed project added to their communities. 5 Travel Time Savings Estimates how much time travellers will save as a result of a proposed project.

19 1 Access to Destinations

Formally, academics have defined this as “the potential to access a range of activities within a predefined effort in terms of time, money, comfort, and so on” (Martens & Golub, 2018). Access metrics used in equity analysis can take many forms. Many agencies measure the number of jobs that can be reached from each neighbourhood within a given travel time threshold, such as 30 or 45 minutes. They then compare how this estimate varies between people of different income groups, genders, races, or locality.

Below are examples of agencies adopting access to destinations in equity analysis:

• To ensure the racial and economic equity of its 2019 Transportation Improvement Plan, SEMCOG, the regional planning agency for Detroit, USA, adopted an access to destinations measure. The agency examined how the proposed plan would impact the average number of jobs that travellers of different races, incomes, and ages could reach within 25 minutes by car or 50 minutes by transit. Figure 6: SEMCOG's equity analysis of their Regional Transportation Plan ensured that low income, minority, senior and zero-car households • In 2014, the Plan de déplacements urbains Île de France, would see increases in access to jobs by transit. Figure from page 47 the Conseil régional d’Île-de-France tracks how the Plan impacts (SEMCOG, 2019) the number of jobs accessible to communities within 60 minutes of travel time by transit. The Conseil selected this metric to track how the plan would ensure spatial equity in access to mobility while improving access to jobs and economic centres.

20 2 Multi-modality Multi-modality encompasses the availability or supply of alternative modes of travel, and the equity of investments into different modes across different communities.

This is particularly important for low-income travellers, for whom vehicle ownership can be economically burdensome (Klein and Smart 2017).

Lower-income households also tend to own older vehicles that are less reliable and more likely to break down (Klein and Smart 2017), making the availability of alternative modes critical for these households. Measures of multi-modal equity can be deployed to track the equity of active travel investments across a city.

They can also be deployed in the formulas agencies use to rank active travel projects to ensure a portion of active travel budgets serve disadvantaged households. Figure 7: Equity Measures Constituted 35% of the Possible Score in Seattle's Ranking of Pedestrian Infrastructure Investments for the The City of Seattle’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans both include equity as a primary goal.Towards this City's Pedestrian Master Plan end, the city’s equity performance measure target for cycling is “Zero areas of the City lacking bicycle facilities by 2030” (p. 25). The city’s Pedestrian Master Plan weighted indicators of social disadvantage as 35% of possible points used when ranking pedestrian infrastructure investments (p. 35).

21 3 Activity Participation

Activity participation includes the number and duration of out-of-home activities that individuals participate in given their preferences and constraints. Individuals who cannot participate in essential activities, such as grocery shopping or work, due to a lack of transportation are said to be experiencing transport-related social exclusion. The challenge of tracking how often people are able to travel to essential daily activities has limited the use of these metrics to destination specific transportation programs, such as programs providing rides to medical offices or stores selling fresh food. The metric is also used by academics to measure the impacts of transportation systems on individual wellbeing.

For example: • Phillips conducted a pilot in which low-income job seekers in Washington, D.C. received subsidies for transit passes to measure if such a policy would increase individuals’ job search activities. Phillips found that the reduced transit cost increased both the number of jobs individuals applied for, and the number of interviews they Figure 8: Where Increases in Transit Accessibility To Jobs Are Likely To participated in (Phillips 2014). Increase Activity Participation The Most (Allen and Farber, 2020)

• Allen and Farber (2020) conducted an analysis on the relationship between activity participation and public transit in Toronto. Their modelling showed that increasing transit service in low-income, inner-suburbs offers the greatest return on investment from an activity participation perspective (Allen and Farber 2020).

22 4 Consumer Surplus

Transportation planners use econometric models to predict how residents travel, where they choose to travel to, and the locations they choose to live in. Each of these models uses survey data of people’s observed choices to estimate the value different types of travellers place on different attributes of transportation. For example, the model can identify that some travellers, such as women, are more likely to prefer modes that offer more safety. These profiles of what different groups of travellers prefer, known to researchers as utility functions, can be used to estimate how those groups of travellers are likely to perceive the value of new infrastructure, and thus whether the new infrastructure will benefit those travellers.

While consumer surplus is among the most complex measures to comprehend, a large contingent of academics believe it is among the best metrics for evaluating transportation systems. This is because it is grounded in data on peoples’ actual travel choices, and because it can better account for the diversity of preferences across populations, among other things (Miller 2018). Academics have used consumer surplus in equity analysis most extensively: Figure 9: Bills and Walker (2017) use the log sum to measures how travel time savings for different modes impact low- and high-income communities in the San Francisco Bay Area. Their results demonstrate that reductions in travel times for active travel modes A 2010 study sought to examine the cost-benefit ratio of paratransit, or (walking, cycling) will provide disproportionate benefits to low income travellers transit for mobility impaired individuals, in the United States (Nguyen- Hoang and Yeung 2010). Using a consumer surplus approach, the authors found the benefits of paratransit dramatically exceed its costs (Nguyen- Hoang and Yeung 2010). The authors attribute this finding to the reality that paratransit riders have few affordable alternatives.

A 2017 study highlights how consumer surplus measures can evaluate the distribution of benefits from a proposed transport project both within and across different groups (Bills and Walker 2017). The authors argue that the consumer surplus provides a more robust measure of transport Figure 10: Paratransit Benefit-cost estimates calculated using the log sum. equity versus comparing average differences in transport benefits between The lack of alternatives to Paratransit make social returns on these systems extremely high (Nguyen-Hoang and Yeung 2010) groups.

23 Share of Travel Time and Person-Mile Travel Benifits by Income

60%

5 Travel Time Savings 50%

The impacts of proposed transport infrastructure on local travel times are among the most 40% straightforward and commonly measured benefits of transportation investments used in practice. Practitioners and researchers measure the 30% economic impact of travel time savings from new infrastructure by assigning a dollar value to the time individuals spend travelling. 20%

SCAG, the Metropolitan Planning Organization for most of Southern California, provides an example 10% of how travel time savings can be incorporated in equity analysis. SCAG evaluated its 2012 Regional Transportation Plan to ensure the Quintile 1 Quintile 2 Quintile 3 Quintile 4 Quintile 5 travel time savings produced by the plan were proportionally distributed by income. They found Person Mile Travel Local Bus-hours All transit-Hours this to be mostly the case (Figure 7), except that Person Hour Travel Usage: Auto mode Usage: Local bus the travel time savings of the plan for transit were disproportionately higher among low-income travellers, suggesting the plan offered significant benefits to disadvantaged households. Figure 11: Results of an Equity Analysis of a transportation plan for Southern California (SCAG). It shows the travel times savings benefits of the proposed plan, and how they are distributed by income group in Southern California

24 Conclusions-Multiple Metrics for a Multifaceted Problem

Transportation researchers have developed many different ways of measuring the equity of transportation systems. Among these, workshop participants believed that measures of access to destinations are among the most important for supporting equity analysis of transportation projects and plans. However, participants also agreed that planners should deploy multiple metrics to test if proposed infrastructure will deliver benefits in an equitable manner. No single approach can capture the full range of equity impacts that transportation systems have on individuals and communities.

25 Industry Perspectives on Transportation Equity

Mobilizing Justice included presentations and a panel for industry representatives to share their perspectives on equity issues. 1 What do you see as the biggest These talks focused on new mobility equity challenges involving the provision technologies. The panel spanned a broad of your services? range of technologies:

Uber, a ride hailing company, Pantonium, What are the biggest opportunities an on-demand transit company, Sidewalk 2 to use your technologies to achieve Labs, a smart-city developer, and Zygg, more inclusive, equitable outcomes? an e-bike subscription company.

You can watch the talks and panel here 3 How should your industry Workshop organizers prompted the talks be regulated to overcome equity by asking industry representatives to challenges? answer three questions, around which we have organized this section:

26 Ongoing Fairness Work

from riders. This protects riders’ anonymity. Data issues Equity challenges in the were similarly raised as barriers to considering equity by provision of new transport representatives from Pantonium and Zygg. technologies To support equitable outcomes, Uber is working internally to define, detect, and remediate biases in their services. Uber Industry representatives highlighted the lack of demographic also seeks to ensure equity across three domains—financial, data of their ridership as a limitation to understanding the geographic and personal. For Uber, financial equity means equity impacts of their services. In assessing the impacts of providing travelers with a variety of options at different price its Bike Share program in San Francisco, Uber relies on public points. Geographic equity means maximizing options to serve agency provided definitions of “Communities of Concern” to as many people as possible, and personal equity means infer if residents of disadvantaged communities are using their ensuring services for those who interact differently with the services. Uber platform.

Academics in the audience noted that data on the Sidewalk Lab’s highlighted vehicle ownership as a major demographics of riders is critical to identifying disparate, challenge to its provision of equitable transportation in its or unequal, impacts of services on different groups. waterfront development. The company is responding by Uber representatives noted that many communities are minimizing parking requirements, supporting Mobility-as-a- uncomfortable with companies capturing the demographic Service in the community, and funding transit and active transit data of individual riders. Uber’s preference is to partner with infrastructure in the area. academics who can voluntarily solicit demographic information

27 Opportunities to achieve more inclusive, equitable outcomes

Each company offers significantly different In Belleville, the company sees most of this services, yet their perspectives on how they are benefit accruing to residents who work and shop promoting inclusive transportation are uniform: at night, as these are the primary trip purposes of riders in that pilot. Each company sees their technology uniquely able to fill a pressing equity gap in transportation Representatives from Sidewalk Labs offered a services today. land use and development perspective, arguing Uber representatives highlighted the success that the company’s proposed development in the of the company’s wheelchair-accessible ride waterfront of Toronto will create over a thousand service, WAV, and noted that its wait times are affordable homes in a community that will provide significantly lower than wait times for traditional “a convenient, affordable and sustainable paratransit services in several cities. alternative to the private car for every trip.” In Toronto, Uber reps noted, WAV wait times In doing so, Sidewalk Labs aims to overcome the are getting as low as 7 minutes—helping an high housing + transportation costs burdening underserved population access transportation households in major Canadian cities. faster. Innovations at Sidewalk Labs to support low- Pantonium’s representatives believe their cost, car free living include heated sidewalks, services are filling a gap in needed evening Mobility-as-a-Service for residents and workers, transit, highlighting a 300% increase in ridership a high-quality active transit network, shared au- in Belleville, Ontario, resulting from the city’s tonomous vehicles, and high-quality public transit adoption of Pantonium’s on-demand bus software service. Finally, Zygg’s shared e-bikes provide an for its evening transit service. Pantonium sees affordable, fast, and efficient alternative to driving itself as a cost-effective solution to improving in Canada’s dense urban cores. transit services for night transit riders and others Despite the large differences in their products, who may depend on infrequent or unreliable industry voices at Mobilizing Justice see their static bus routes. products contributing to more inclusive, equitable transportation systems by filling critical gaps in transportation services, and by bringing affordable housing into transit-rich communities.

28 Industry perspectives on regulation Industry panelists offered the least consensus on the question of how they believe they should be regulated. Uber representatives stated that the company is supportive of regulations in six major policy domains: anti-discrimination, communications, pricing, reliability, insurance, and safety.

In particular, Uber supports regulations to ensure reliable service to disadvantaged populations, such as those relying on WAV, and supporting regulations that provide users with upfront information on pricing for trips. How should Quayside be regulated to overcome equity challenges? Representatives from Pantonium and Sidewalk Labs, in contrast, emphasized their support for better regulations on data sharing and management. Voices from Sidewalk Labs went as far as calling for cities like Ts oronto to establish their own agencies that can serve as data repositories to ensure technology firm data is stored in a transparent and systematized way that benefits the public good.

Voices from Sidewalk Labs and Zygg highlighted the importance of better regulation of the curbside to ensure equity. Speakers noted that curbside access is a scarce resource and its unavailability can present a serious barrier to travel for many residents, while curbside space in many suburban communities is underutilized at the expense of the taxpayer and local residents.

The companies in attendance agreed that regulations of vehicle travel should reward shared behaviour. Uber representatives believed that future congestion pricing charges should reward shared automobility with reduced or waived fares. Sidewalk Figure 13: Sidewalk Labs see regulation supporting equity in data governance, autonomous vehicle regulation, and curbside access, From Lab’s representative argued that autonomous vehicles must Sidewalk Lab's presentation at Mobilizing Justice 2019 be regulated to ensure they are shared and electric.

29 Affordability Finance equity Towards a Shared Vision of Participants believed an equitable transporta- Several participants emphasized that Cana- tion system in Canada is one where transit fare dian taxpayers finance roads and bridges to a Transport Equity in Canada systems do not place undue financial burdens much larger extent than they fund transit and on disadvantaged travellers who may depend active travel infrastructure.The extent to which We challenged participants to articulate what a just on transit to get where they need to go. Par- funding is fairly distributed—by mode, by com- transportation system in Canada would look like, and ticipants noted several obstacles to achieving munity, and relative to need—is unknown. consider what a framework for understanding transportation affordable transit systems. Canadian transit Participants called for a better understanding equity would need to help planners reach that vision. agencies maintain much higher farebox reco- of the equity of transportation systems from a very ratios than agencies in other countries financing perspective, and highlighted a need The resulting discussions yielded a range of themes that due to a lack of government support. to ensure a just distribution of resources. planners should consider when embedding equity goals into transportation planning. This means that transit fares are higher in Ca- nada relative to transit operating costs, making Multi-Modality An equitable transportation system provides it harder for transit agencies in the country travellers with multiple options to reach their to provide affordable fares to disadvantaged destinations. Participants noted that the histo- travellers. In some places, fares are flat— ric focus of equity in transportation planning is it doesn’t matter where you are going, you between automobiles and transit, with equity in pay the same. In other places, fares are dis- active travel a more recent focus. This led to tance-based, meaning you pay relative to how uneven provision of new cycling infrastructure much you travel. Participants noted that the across much of Canada. Researchers find that relative equity or fairness of these various ap- disadvantaged Canadians have worse access proaches to fare-setting is not well understood to bike share compared to more advantaged in the Canadian urban context. communities (Hosford and Winters 2018), while people with higher incomes tend to live Furthermore, researchers have not measured in communities with better overall bicycle in- the social economic benefits of subsidized fare frastructure compared to lower-income Cana- passes, despite their increasing use by cities. dians (Fuller and Winters 2017). The costs of Finally, participants also linked transportation automobile ownership make the availability of affordability to housing—arguing that an equi- non-auto modes, such as transit, walking and table transportation system requires transit-rich cycling, critical to ensuring more equitable pro- communities that are affordable to live in. vision of active travel infrastructure. Scholars have started developing tools to support equity in active travel planning (Grisé and El-Geneidy 2018), but more work is needed.

30 that is multifaceted enough to recognize Enabling people to thrive the diversity of individuals’ needs and An equitable transportation system aspirations. This means embracing a does not act as a barrier for people to broader range of measures of transpor- participate in the activities they want tation system performance than those and need to participate in. Travellers currently used in practice today. should have the means to reach the activities and services they need using Safety modes appropriate to their abilities and An equitable transportation system comfort. It also means that travel times provides safety to travellers and those do not present a burden on travellers impacted by travel externalities. Safety by consuming their time for activities in an equity framework encompasses or requiring them to give up activities. the different aspects of safety that are Unfortunately, suburban sprawl and in- emphasized for different populations. creased reliance on driving means that For example, parental perceptions of Canadians are spending more time tra- safety impact the travel behaviour of velling to activities than participating in boys differently than girls (Guliani et al. them, with longer travel times consu- 2015). ming peoples’ schedules (Farber and The extent to which a lack of safety in- Paez 2011). hibits the travel of vulnerable groups in Canada is not well understood. Inclusivity Contemporary design, modelling and Progressivity planning of transportation systems of- An equitable transportation system fa- ten considers only the “typical” or “ave- vours inclusive travel modes, projects rage” traveller. In reality, there is no and infrastructure. ‘average’ traveller. This means that when difficult choices Different individuals have different have to be made on which investments needs from the transportation system, to prioritize, essential service to disad- from when they need to travel, what vantaged and disconnected communi- they can afford to pay to travel, limits ties is prioritized or ensured a minimum to how they can travel, and where level of quality service. they need to go. For example, recent Figure 14: Workshop Participants Discuss the Meaning of An Equitable Transportation immigrants in Toronto are much more System for Canada reliant on public transit for their travel compared to others (Lo, Shalaby, and Alshalalfah 2010). Participants called for a transportation equity framework

31 Research Needs for Building Data and Measurement Needs Equitable Transportation Canada does not maintain a national travel survey, unlike many Systems in Canada other countries. Furthermore, the regional travel surveys used for transportation planning across Canada are generally designed to The workshop closed with small group discussions on research needs measure transport demand, rather than to measure where a lack of for building more equitable transportation systems. We summarize these transportation is preventing people from traveling where they need to research needs here. go. Participants agreed that Canada needs new surveys that explicitly measure transport disadvantage. Big data enables researchers and planners to better understand the transportation needs of disadvantaged residents. However, the emerging landscape of big data in transportation presents several equity challenges. First, researchers and planners need truly open access to big data, rather than access to “washed” data by providers that limits the usefulness of the data. As new technologies such as e-scooters, ride-hailing, and autonomous transit hit Canadian streets, providers need to share their data in standardized formats that make it easier for planners to combine them and draw a comprehensive picture of transportation in cities. For example, existing transit service data is stored through an open source format known as the General Transit Feed Specification (GTFS) format. Workshop participants articulated a need for a GTFS for emerging modes and technologies. This discussion culminated in participants calling for real time, joint data collection and processing governed by localities. Finally, participants called for more research into how aspects of big data and algorithm-governed transportation options may introduce new biases into transportation systems. For example, algorithms can suffer from recency bias, meaning that big data platforms tend to have more and better data from more recent periods, making their predictions of travel needs biased towards recent events. Furthermore, algorithms can also be biased towards serving the needs of populations who Figure 15: At roundtables, workshop participants discussed the research needed to support a more equitable vision of transportation in Canada generate more data. The needs of disadvantaged travellers who generate a smaller digital footprint may be discounted by algorithms due to lack of data.

32 Modelling and Simulation Needs

Transportation planners use simulations and models to estimate how changes to the transportation system will impact cities. These models can also be deployed to forecast the likely equity impacts of infrastructure investments. (see “Measuring Transport Equity” for examples)

To meaningfully forecast equity impacts, participants expressed a need for more demographically representative models. This may require updating existing forecasting models to include more detailed demographic and social data. It also means developing new simulation and modeling tools that can explicitly measure the equity of outcomes like travel times savings.

Participants believed these new tools must “move beyond the means” and enable measurement of how the distributions of travel outcomes change within and between different groups.

Research Needs for Understanding Transportation Disadvantage

Participants noted that the extent and impacts of transportation disadvantage are not well understood for many Canadian communities known to suffer from a lack of transportation options.

These include urban indigenous Canadians, recent immigrants, and refugees. Figure 16: GoLA's Mobility-As-A-Service app provides travellers with multiple, multi-modal options when scheduling a trip. Subsidies to Participants also called for further research into the impacts and extent of low-income travellers using such apps could help policy makers learn transport disadvantage in rural communities, and in remote areas. which services to target investments in to support low-income travellers

33 Causes of transportation disadvantages A Safe Night Rider

In Canada, the causes of transportation disadvantages One group of participants envisioned an on-demand night are not fully documented. Several participants questioned bus service that would provide safe, fast travel for night shift if access to opportunities is too narrow a measure to use workers. The pilot would complement existing bus service, when identifying who may be experiencing transportation and target night shift workers in hospitality, healthcare, hotels, disadvantage. Participants noted that transportation surveys and manufacturing. In such a pilot, participants would survey need to consider asking questions about the trips the on-demand bus users to understand: how travellers households cannot make due to transportation commuted before the buses ran, if the buses increased barriers, and then link this information with other traveller’s ability to get to work, take on extra shifts, seek out data—health outcomes, insurance records, new employment, and any other impacts of the service on etc.—to understand the total impact of transport travellers’ wellbeing. A similar pilot partnership between Uber disadvantage on individuals’ wellbeing. and the Pinellas-Suncoast Transit Authority (PTSA), TD Late Participants called for researchers to develop more Shift provided free Uber or taxi rides to night shift workers holistic approaches to understanding transportation there. PTSA found evidence of pilot participants taking more disadvantage: different facets of disadvantage can shifts, securing new employment, and being able to spend compound in a person’s life to limit individuals’ more time with family as a result of participating in the pilot. movement in ways not easily captured by looking at different facets of transport disadvantages Money for Mobility separately. Platforms that integrate a variety of transportation modes and technologies under one service are known as Mobility- as-a-Service. They provide travellers with multiple options Pilots to get where they need to go, making vehicle ownership unnecessary. MaaS already exists in Asia and Europe. In this Workshop organizers challenged several groups pilot, agencies would trial a MaaS for low-income residents of participants to imagine pilot projects that could along with mobility credits, or cash subsidies participants yield important insights on how new transportation could spend in the app. The pilot would track how residents technologies can be leveraged to address transport chose to use their mobility credit: which modes they chose inequalities. Workshop participants came up with to go to which places, and then follow up with interviews two proposed pilots. and surveys on the impact of improved mobility. This would include questions exploring if the service improved their ability to get to work, access essential services, or overall Figure 17: partnership between Uber and a Florida Transit Agency wellbeing. Results of such a pilot could be used to target provided night-shift workers with safe rides to work, allowing workers to new mobility programs towards solving the specific obstacles take more shifts of disadvantaged travellers.

34 References transportation-action-plan.pdf. City of Ottawa. 2019. “Equipass.” Octranspo (blog). 2019. https://www.octranspo. com/en/fares/reduced-fares/equipass/. City of Winnipeg. 2011. “Winnipeg Transportation Master Plan.” Winnipeg, ACORN Canada. 2016. “Submission to the Financial Sector Review.” Ottawa: Manitoba: City of Winnipeg. https://winnipeg.ca/publicworks/transportation/pdf/ ACORN Canada. https://www.fin.gc.ca/consultresp/pdf-ssge-sefc/ssge-sefc-01.pdf. transportationMasterPlan/2011-11-01-TTRWinnipegTMP-Final-Report.pdf. Allen, Jeff. 2018. “Mapping Inequalities of Access to Employment and Quantifying ———. 2019a. “Winnipeg Transit Master Plan-Help Us Shape Our Transit System Transport Poverty in Canadian Cities.” Toronto, Ontario: University of Toronto. for the Future!” Winnipeg, Manitoba: City of Winnipeg. https://winnipegtransit.com/ https://uttri.utoronto.ca/files/2018/07/Allen_Jeff_201811_MA_thesis.pdf. assets/2352/WTMP_Transit_Handout_20190314_FINAL.pdf. Allen, Jeff, and Steven Farber. 2020. “Planning Transport for Social Inclusion: ———. 2019b. “Winnipeg Transit Master Plan Phase One Public Engagement An Accessibility-Activity Participation Approach.” Transportation Research Part Report.” Winnipeg, Manitoba: City of Winnipeg. https://winnipegtransit.com/ D: Transport and Environment 78 (January): 102212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. assets/2454/WTMP_-_Phase_1_Full_PE_Engagement_Report__FINAL.pdf. trd.2019.102212. Edmonton Financial Empowerment Collaborative. 2016. “Submission to the ARTM. 2019. “Let’s Talk Mobility.” Talkmobility.Quebec (blog). 2019. https:// Financial Sector Review.” Edmonton, Canada: Edmonton Financial Empowerment talkmobility.quebec/. Collaborative. Bills, Tierra S., and Joan L. Walker. 2017. “Looking beyond the Mean for Equity Farber, Steven, and Jeff Allen. 2019. “The Ontario Line: Socioeconomic Distribution Analysis: Examining Distributional Impacts of Transportation Improvements.” of Travel Time and Accessibility Benefits.” Metrolinx. https://metrolinx.files. Transport Policy 54 (February): 61–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.08.003. wordpress.com/2019/10/read-the-full-report-here.pdf. Brown, Anne E. 2018. “Ridehail Revolution: Ridehail Travel and Equity in Los Farber, Steven, and Antonio Paez. 2011. “Running to Stay in Place: The Time-Use Angeles.” Dissertation, Los Angeles, CA: University of California, Los Angeles. Implications of Automobile Oriented Land-Use and Travel.” Journal of Transport https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4r22m57k. Geography 19 (4): 782–93. Buckland, Jerry. 2011. Passing the Buck? Examining Canadian Banks Fuller, Daniel, and Meghan Winters. 2017. “Income Inequalities in Bike Score and Approaches to Financial Exclusion. Research and Working Paper, #9. Winnipeg, Bicycling to Work in Canada.” Journal of Transport & Health 7 (December): 264–68. Manitoba: Institute of Urban Studies, The University of Wimmipeg. http:// https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2017.09.005. winnspace.uwinnipeg.ca/bitstream/handle/10680/411/Buckland_Passing_Buck. GoGoGrandparent. 2019. “Your Agent for Affordable Rides.” 2019. https:// pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. gogograndparent.com/. Cervero, Robert. 2013. “Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): An Efficient and Competitive Mode Grisé, Emily, and Ahmed El-Geneidy. 2018. “If We Build It, Who Will Benefit? of .” Working Paper 2013–01. Berkeley, CA: Institute of Urban and A Multi-Criteria Approach for the Prioritization of New Bicycle Lanes in Quebec Regional Development, UC Berkeley. https://iurd.berkeley.edu/wp/2013-01.pdf. City, Canada.” Journal of Transport and Land Use 11 (1). https://doi.org/10.5198/ Chianello, Joanne. 2019a. “4 Things You Should Know about the $4.66B Contract jtlu.2018.1115. for LRT Stage 2.” Canadian Broadcast Corporation (blog). February 25, 2019. Guerra, Erick, and Robert Cervero. 2012. “Transit and the ‘D’ Word.” ACCESS https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/4-things-you-should-know-about-the-4-6b- Magazine, 2012. contract-for-lrt-stage-2-1.5030839. Guliani, Amarpreet, Raktim Mitra, Ron N. Buliung, Kristian Larsen, and Guy ———. 2019b. “‘Unreliable’ LRT Trains Can’t Handle Ottawa Winters, Internal E.J. Faulkner. 2015. “Gender-Based Differences in School Travel Mode Choice Reports Reveal.” Canadian Broadcast Corporation (blog). March 4, 2019. https:// Behaviour: Examining the Relationship between the Neighbourhood Environment www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/lrt-trains-unreliable-says-report-1.5038832. and Perceived Traffic Safety.” Journal of Transport & Health 2 (4): 502–11. https:// City of Edmonton. 2018. “Smart Transportation Action Plan.” Edmonton, Canada: doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2015.08.008. City of Edmonton. https://www.edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/smart-

35 Hosford, Kate, and Meghan Winters. 2018. “Who Are Public Bicycle Share org/10.1016/j.labeco.2014.07.005. Programs Serving? An Evaluation of the Equity of Spatial Access to Bicycle Share Province of Ontario, Ontario Federation of Indigenous Friendship Centres, Métis Service Areas in Canadian Cities.” Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Nation of Ontario, and Ontario Native Women’s Association. 2018. The Urban Transportation Research Board, July, 036119811878310–036119811878310. https:// Indigenous Action Plan. Toronto, Ontario: Province of Ontario. https://files.ontario.ca/ doi.org/10.1177/0361198118783107. uiap_full_report_en.pdf. Hulchanski, JD. 2010. THE THREE CITIES WITHIN TORONTO Income Polarization The City Plan Team. 2019. “Expected Benefits of Recommended Land Among Toronto’s Neighbourhoods, 1970-2005. Toronto, Ontario: Cities Centre, Use Concept.” Edmonton, Canada: City of Edmonton. https://www. University of Toronto. http://3cities.neighbourhoodchange.ca/wp-content/themes/3- edmonton.ca/city_government/documents/PDF/CityPlan_ExpectedBenefits_ Cities/pdfs/three-cities-in-toronto.pdf. RecommendedLandUseConcept.pdf. Indigenous and Northern Affairs Canada. 2016. “Urban Indigenous Peoples.” TransLink. 2018. “Transit Fare Review: Final Recommendations.” Vancouver, Government of Canada (blog). September 1, 2016. https://www.aadnc-aandc.gc.ca/ Canada: TransLink. https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/plans_and_ eng/1100100014265/1369225120949. projects/transit_fare_review/phase_4/TFR-Final-Recommendations-Report. Jones, Craig. 2015. Transit-Oriented Development and Gentrification in Metro pdf?la=en&hash=8879086EF3027AB1C2979AA9BFB0D51BD9ABB225. Vancouver’s Low-Income SkyTrain Corridor. Research Paper 237. Toronto, Ontario: Translink. 2019. “Shaping Our Transportation Future, Together Transport 2050: Neighbourhood Change Research Partnership. http://neighbourhoodchange.ca/ Phase 1 Report.” Vancouver, Canada: Translink. https://view.publitas.com/translink/ documents/2015/07/vancouvers-skytrain-corridor.pdf. transport-2050-phase-1-report-stakeholders/page/1. Klein, Nicholas J., and Michael J. Smart. 2017. “Car Today, Gone Tomorrow: The Transports Québec. 2018. POLITIQUE DE MOBILITÉ DURABLE – 2030. Ephemeral Car in Low-Income, Immigrant and Minority Families.” Transportation 44 Montreal, Canada. https://www.transports.gouv.qc.ca/fr/ministere/role_ministere/ (3): 495–510. DocumentsPMD/politique-mobilite-durable.pdf. Ley, David, and Nicholas Lynch. 2012. Divisions and Disparities in Lotus- Winnipeg Transit. 2019. “Low Income Transit Pass.” Winnipeg (blog). 2019. https:// Land: Socio-Spatial Income Polarization in Greater Vancouver, 1970- winnipegtransit.com/en/major-projects/low-income-transit-pass/. 2005. Research Paper 223. Toronto, Ontario: Cities Centre, University of Toronto. http://neighbourhoodchange.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/ d5c3c1b62f243959bac02c874c633852.pdf. LimeBike. 2019. “Lime Access.” 2019. https://www.li.me/community-impact. Lo, Lucia, Amer Shalaby, and Baha Alshalalfah. 2010. “Immigrant Settlement and Transit Use in Canada: Patterns and Policy Implications.” Manconi, John. 2019. “Report to Transportation Committee and Council 12 June 2019.” https://app05.ottawa.ca/sirepub/cache/2/ ghmmnzb3cmw0z2inqhdunb4k/59295111282019015549122.PDF. Miller, Eric J. 2018. “Accessibility: Measurement and Application in Transportation Planning.” Transport Reviews 38 (5): 551–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.201 8.1492778. Mobility Pricing Independent Commission. 2018. “Metro Vancouver Mobility Pricing Study.” Vancouver, Canada: Mobility Pricing Independent Commission. https://www. translink.ca/-/media/Documents/plans_and_projects/mobility_pricing/mpic_full_ report.pdf?la=en&hash=10B57CB516171C75542226E76B9B7066F65D86B5. Nguyen-Hoang, Phuong, and Ryan Yeung. 2010. “What Is Paratransit Worth?” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice 44 (10): 841–53. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tra.2010.08.006. Phillips, David C. 2014. “Getting to Work: Experimental Evidence on Job Search and Transportation Costs.” Labour Economics 29 (August): 72–82. https://doi.

36 37