EVALUATING TRANSPORTATION EQUITY

By T. Litman. 2002

483 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/19ca0cba6e35030171c1d37e39bd1f531df6b6f8

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Civil rights guidance and equity analysis methods for regional transportation plans: a critical review of literature and practice (2013, background): “Litman (2002) has noted that disaggregate analyses generally will be more accurate than those calculated based on arbitrary requirements for group membership, and several academic studies have relied on disaggregate representations of target populations (Bills et al., 2012; Castiglione et al.,…”
Discussing Equity and Social Exclusion in Accessibility Evaluations (2011, background): “Litman (2002), for example, distinguishes two types of vertical equity (equity related to disadvantaged people, groups of people or regions – in the case of Litman, related to (groups of) people only): (a) vertical equity with regard to income and social class and (b) vertical equity with regard to…”
Social Impacts of Transport: Literature Review and the State of the Practice of Transport Appraisal in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (2009, background): “Population groups are often distinguished by three indicators: social differences (for instance, gender and age), economic differences (income) and spatial differences (geographical) (Jones, 2001; Litman, 2002).”
Uber, Public Transit, and Urban Transportation Equity: A Case Study in New York City (2019, background): “…are allocated equally between individuals and groups that are comparable in wealth and ability, whereas vertical equity centers on the distribution of costs and benefits between income and social class and between people with different mobility needs and abilities (Litman 2002; Blumenberg 2017).”
The impacts of high-speed rail extensions on accessibility and spatial equity changes in South Korea from 2004 to 2018 (2015, background): “Thus, the anticipation of improved accessibility to its service region is related to enhanced dominance of cities benefitting from improved accessibility and diminishes a common goal, equity, in transport development (Litman, 2014).”
Distributive justice and equity in transportation (2016, background): “…between accessibility and general principles of equality and basic needs (Lucas et al., 2015) and raise a variety of ethical principles to guide transport policies (e.g. Litman, 2002; Trinder, Hay, Dignan, & Skorupski, 1991), but without committing to any specific theory of justice (see Section 4).”