11.4 Sustainable transportation: accessibility, mobility, and  (Page 7/12)

Traffic congestion is an example of what economists call externalities , the costs of an activity that aren't paid by the person doing the activity. Suburbanites who drive into the city every day don't breathe the polluted air produced by their cars; urban residents suffer that externality. People around the country who use gasoline derived from oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico didn't experience oil washing up on their beaches after the BP disaster in 2010. By charging the full cost of travel via taxes on gas or insurance, we could, for example, pay for children's hospitalization for asthma caused by the cars speeding past their neighborhoods. Or we could purchase and preserve wetland areas that can absorb the floodwaters that run off of paved streets and parking lots, keeping people's basements and yards drier. Not only would this help to deal with some of the externalities that currently exist, but the higher cost of gas would probably lead us to focus on accessibility rather than mobility, reducing overall demand.

Planning better for accessibility

The other way we can produce more sustainable transportation is to plan for accessibility, not mobility. Many transportation planners say that we've been using the predict and provide model for too long. This means we assume nothing will change in terms of the way we travel, so we simply predict how much more traffic there is going to be in the future and provide roads accordingly. Instead, we should take a deliberate and decide approach, bringing in more people into the planning process and offering different options besides more of the same. Some of the decisions we can make to try and change travel patterns include installing bike lanes instead of more parking, locating retail development next to housing so people can walk for a cup of coffee or a few groceries, or investing in transit instead of highways.

For example, the school district in Champaign, Illinois, is considering closing the existing high school next to downtown, to which many students walk or take public transit, and replacing it with a much larger facility on the edge of town, to which everyone would have to drive or be driven. The new site would require more mobility on the part of nearly everyone, while many students and teachers would see their accessibility decrease. As gas prices continue to rise, it will cost the school district and parents more and more to transport students to and from school, and students will be more likely to drive themselves if they have access to a car and a driver's license. Putting the new school in a more accessible location or expanding the existing one would keep the school transportation system from becoming less sustainable.

You may have noticed that these proposed changes to increase transportation sustainability aren't really things that one person can do. We can certainly make individual choices to drive less and walk or bike more, to buy a more fuel-efficient car, or to use telecommunications instead of transportation. In order to make significant changes that can reduce overall energy usage and emissions production, however, the system itself has to change. This means getting involved in how transportation policy is made, maybe by attending public meetings or writing to city or state officials about a specific project. It means contacting your Congressional representatives to demand that transportation budgets include more money for sustainable transportation modes and infrastructure. It means advocating for those who are disadvantaged under the current system. In means remembering that transportation is connected to other activities, and that focusing on how the demand for transportation is derived is the key to making and keeping it sustainable.

Review questions

References

Appleyard, B. S. 2005. Livable Streets for School Children: How Safe Routes to School programs can improve street and community livability for children. National Centre for Bicycling and Walking Forum, available online: (External Link)

Banister, D. and Berechman, Y. 2001. Transport investment and the promotion of economic growth. Journal of Transport Geography 9:3, 209-218.

Black, W. 2010. Sustainable Transportation: Problems and Solutions . New York: Guilford Press.

Deffeyes, K. 2002. Hubbert's Peak: The Impending World Oil Shortage . Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

DOE (Department of Energy). 2009. Emissions of greenhouse gases report. DOE/EIA-0573, available online: (External Link)

Downs, A. 1992. Stuck in Traffic: Coping With Peak-Hour Traffic Congestion . Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

IMF (International Monetary Fund). 2010. Impact of high food and fuel prices on developing countries. Available online: (External Link)

Maring, G. 2007. Surface transportation funding issues and options. Presentation to the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission. Available online: (External Link)

Marsh, B. 2011. Kilowatts vs. Gallons. New York Times , May 28. Available online: (External Link)

UPI (United Press International). 2011. Global biofuel land area estimated. Available online: (External Link)

Urry, J,. 2004. The 'System' of Automobility. Theory Culture and Society 21:4-5, 25-39.

Usón, A.A., Capilla, A.V., Bribián, I.Z., Scarpellini, S. and Sastresa, E.L. 2011. Energy efficiency in transport and mobility for an eco-efficiency viewpoint. Energy 36:4, 1916-23.

Xu, J., Kochanek, K., Murphy, S., and Tejada-Vera, B. 2010. Deaths: Final Data for 2007. National Vital Statistics Reports, 58:19, available online: (External Link)