Thread by @giulio_mattioli

New book chapter out at sciencedirect.com/science/articl… - pretty happy with this one.

It talks about how Europe is actually pretty car dependent, how that explains a lot of inequalities in transport, and how some use those as excuses to preserve the (car-dependent) status quo

THREAD

There's a lot of American (or Australian) literature presenting Europe as a car-free paradise, but that's just because they're *so* car dependent, and Europe less than them.

But actually in most of Europe, it's not that easy to get by without a car.

The evidence shows that:

▶️ most travel in Europe is by car
▶️ large accessibility advantage from having a car in most places
▶️ most people in most countries see cars as a "necessity no one should do without"

At the same time, quite a lot of Europeans don't have one

Even in cities with a sustainable reputation like Amsterdam or Stockholm, public transport outperforms cars *only* for short trips to the city center at rush hour. Otherwise, it takes typically twice as long.

https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1235158601070673921

This situation gives rise to a multitude of inequalities.

The first type is reduced accessibility among people without cars.

There's quite a lot of evidence showing constrained access & participation to employment, leisure, social activities among the carless in Europe.

At the same time, this is *very* variable through space.

In large & dense cities the accessibility penalty from not having a car is small, so there's a large & diverse group of people without cars, including for example working parents with kids.
doi.org/10.1080/152390…

In sparsely-populated car-dependent areas, the disadvantage from not having a car is such that pretty much everyone who can physically / legally drive a car does.

But this means that many people who can't really *afford* to own & use a car do. Creating an affordability problem.

This is sometimes called 'forced car ownership' and I've spent quite a lot of time researching it. Here some findings for the UK and Germany

https://twitter.com/TranspPoverty/status/932933018553118720

It also means that there's a group of low-income households [though not all!] who spend lots on motoring and are not able to reduce car use when the fuel price rise.

So they're quite vulnerable to that. Which we tend to note when fuel taxes are raised

https://twitter.com/TranspPoverty/status/990919828310515712

This is also linked to housing affordability. In many places in Europe, high housing prices push the poor towards the car-dependent 'peri-urban', leading them to spend lots on transport.

But not everywhere (see England for a counterexample)

https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1134050596879831041

There are also issues with the affordability of *public transport* across Europe, this is what a recent EU report had to say about it op.europa.eu/en/publication…

And issues of public transport affordability are particularly pronounced in countries that perhaps you would not expect ⬇️

In Germany PT fares have increased fast since the 1990s, while fuel taxes were freezed. Something similar happened in the UK.

https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1368883892120395778

There are also inequalities related to *time poverty*. Some people spend so much time travelling that they miss out on other important things.

That's a quite diverse group, including both carless people in urban areas (where you can get to places by PT, but it takes a while)..

...and relatively well-off people in car-dependent places who have (chosen?) very long commutes.

Long commutes are associated with all kinds of negative consequences including divorce, stress, lower quality of life, lack of friends, etc.

There's another side to the transport inequality question though, and it's got to do with who's affected more by the *negative environmental impacts* of car dependence.

Take traffic-related air pollution. Typically more deprived groups are more exposed mdpi.com/523278

That means that *precisely those groups who have fewer cars, use them less & contribute the least to pollution are also those who are the most affected by it*.

That's often because they live closer to busy roads (again housing affordability) & their health is more vulnerable

So long story short: there's plenty of important inequalities related to transport, and most have got to do with car dependence in one way or another.

The problem is: only *some* of them ever reach the public/political/media debate. And that's a problem.

Take debates on air pollution and urban vehicle access regulations, which are common all through Europe.

The pollution side is presented as an *environmental* issue, where everyone is equally affected. Except that's not the case, there are important inequalities there.

And of all other inequalities, the only one that is discussed is how *low-income people with (old) cars* will be affected by charges & regulations.

That's a problem but only *one among many* (a lot of poor people don't own cars at all, notably in cities)

https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1306581371058610182

The thing is, if you introduce urban vehicle access regulations, that will affect *several* inequalities related to transport (see slide below) in many different ways.

Now I know which one I would emphasise over the others *if I wanted to preserve the car-dependent status quo*.

Which brings us to another problem with these debates: the framing in terms of 'winners & losers', which implicitly assumes that the status quo is fair.

Except no, the car-dependent status quo is not fair, some groups lose out already (this argument is from @karel_martens!)

BTW this selective consideration of inequalities is a manifestation of what we've called the 'appeal to social justice' variant of 'discourses of climate delay'

The pattern is the same: use inequalities as excuses to preserve the (unfair) status quo

https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1278800790728122379

So, sorry for the monster thread but this is quite a dense chapter (& topic).

It's from an upcoming book edited by the brilliant @UrbanDemog & @BoisjolyGen (thank u!) on 'Social issues in transport planning' - looking forward to read the other chapters

https://twitter.com/UrbanDemog/status/1420473740442361856

Usual disclaimers apply ⬇️ / END

https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1394993342031798275