Transportation Apartheid
From Digital Culture & Society
Contents |
[edit] Article Reference
Wellman, G. C. (2014). Transportation Apartheid: The Role of Transportation Policy in Societal Inequality. Public Works Management & Policy, 19(4), 334-339. https://doi-org.proxy.library.brocku.ca/10.1177/1087724X14545808
[edit] Find Article Online
https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.library.brocku.ca/doi/full/10.1177/1087724X14545808
[edit] Context
This article emphasizes the historical significance of transportation policy in the US and emphasizes how it shaped social and economic policies at significant historical times like the Civil Rights struggle. According to the research, certain groups may be disproportionately favoured by present transportation governing methods, especially car owners and suburban commuters, which could marginalize urban minorities and impoverished populations that depend on public transportation. An uneven distribution of costs and benefits in public policy is the root cause of this perceived social unfairness, which could have detrimental effects on the effectiveness of democracy. The study makes the case that public administrators must play a significant role in correcting these inequities and provide strategies for all public agencies and their staff to help foster a fairer environment for transportation decisions.
[edit] Overview
This article explores the significant historical influence of transportation policy in the US, highlighting how important it was in forming the social and economic fabric of the country, especially during landmark occasions like the Civil Rights Movement. According to the research, there may be a bias in current transportation governance approaches that disproportionately benefits some groups, such as suburban commuters and automobile owners. Concerns over the marginalization of urban minorities and economically disadvantaged groups who depend on public transit are raised by this possible partiality. This apparent social injustice is mostly caused by an unequal allocation of costs and benefits within the existing frameworks of public policy. This imbalance has consequences that go beyond personal preferences and may even jeopardize democracy as a whole. According to the study, these differences in transportation policy might have a negative impact on democratic processes by giving certain groups disproportionate advantages while excluding others, especially those who depend on public transportation. Acknowledging the importance of changes, the study places public officials in the lead of reducing these inequalities. The report not only emphasizes how critical it is to recognize and address these differences, but it also provides public agencies and their employees with doable tactics to help foster more equitable conditions in the transportation decision-making process. The article offers a road map for public administrators to actively engage in promoting equality within transportation policies and contribute to a more inclusive and democratic societal system by outlining concrete actions.
[edit] Strengths & Weaknesses
By pointing out the preferential treatment of some groups, such as automobile owners and suburban commuters, the research successfully identifies potential inequities in the current transportation governance. Understanding social gaps in transportation requires this recognition. The paper provides an insightful analysis that goes beyond the specific transportation context by connecting the unequal distribution of costs and benefits in transportation policy to potentially harmful impacts on democracy. Realizing their ability to impact and correct injustices in transportation policy, the authors of the paper urge public administrators to take a proactive approach to resolving the differences. This call to action gives the study a more practical perspective. The article's concentration on American transportation policy may restrict the applicability of its conclusions in other situations. Stronger relevance could come from a more detailed examination of the research's applicability in various national settings or on a worldwide scale. Although the study notes potential variations, it might benefit from a stronger empirical base to support its conclusions, such as specific examples or statistical analysis. This would raise the research's legitimacy. The article can have a bias in favour of emphasizing differences without fully examining opposing viewpoints or potential difficulties in the formulation of transportation policy.
[edit] Assessment
The historical significance of transportation policy in the US is highlighted in this article's conclusion, especially during crucial eras like the Civil Rights struggle. It draws attention to possible inequalities in the governance of modern transportation, highlighting the preferential treatment of some groups over others. One source of social injustice that may have an impact on democratic processes is the unequal allocation of costs and rewards in the current policies. The study is noteworthy for its advocacy of public administrators' proactive participation in easing these disparities, providing pragmatic approaches for creating a more equitable environment for transportation decision-making. The paper adds to conversations on how transportation policy, social justice, and democracy connect by tying in historical context, pointing out inequalities, and suggesting practical solutions.
Ns19yk 01:50, 08 December 2023 (EDT)
Please consider the environment before
printing this page.