Friday Transportation Seminar: At the Intersection of Safety + Race + Transportation
Charlene McGee, Program Manager for REACH (Racial and Ethnic Approaches to Community Health) with Multnomah County, led last Friday's seminar (11/6) discussing the present implications due to transportation for the health of the Black Multnomah County population. She discussed how transportation is a social determinant of health and noted the current priorities held by Multnomah county in prevention and equity while working to readdress existing health challenges in the community.
McGee noted the existing conditions of the community contribute to disparities. In Multnomah County, 1 in 2 Children lives in Poverty (50% compared to 13% for white children). 1 in 4 adults reports physical symptoms from treatment based on race. Toxic stressors associated with poorer health for African Americans/Black adults, including racism and lack of access to safe infrastructure, contribute to the chronic disease disparities within Multnomah County. Severe health conditions are experienced at a higher rate for African Americans/Blacks compared to Whites in the county conditions like Diabetes (17% vs. 7%), Obesity (43% vs. 22%), High Blood Pressure (41% vs. 25%). The country's prevailing inequities come at $442 million in estimated annual economic burden, including the cost of premature mortality and the indirect expense of illness.
The REACH team uses the Ecological Social Model to understand public health issues and the effects of potential prevention strategies.
The Model connects societal factors, the built environment, social and economic factors, interpersonal, and individual factors. These factors have complex interrelationships and impact/influence each level. It is crucial to recognize that it is necessary to act across multiple levels of the Model at the same time to support prevention.
REACH is a federally funded grant of the Centers for Disease and Prevention (CDC). REACH focuses on chronic disease prevention among communities and individuals most impacted. REACH addresses social determinants of health, communication campaigns, policy systems, and environmental change, using participatory and evidence-based approaches that mesh public health, multi-sectoral partners, and community voices. Public health and transportation are strongly correlated. The ability to be physically active and the built environment and whether or not a person has accessibility to transportation, walking, safety, housing, parks, access to healthy food, safe routes, churches, etc. One aspect of her presentation that stood out to me is that an individual's safety impacts the ability to access resources and when they are trying to access various forms/modes of transportation.
My takeaway and conclusion from this seminar are that it simply isn't enough to design "safe" streets because safety could mean many different things. Safety must go beyond the physical space. As McGee puts it, we must incorporate transportation planning that envisions public space where people are free from physical harm, bias behavior, harassment, violence, over-policing. We must also address the disproportionate exposure to injury, air pollution, noise that inequitably burdens marginalized racial groups. Additionally, it is essential to recognize that every decision has a health impact and recognize/examine the possible implicit bias embedded in new technology or even policies. Reassuring that we don't recreate or extend inequalities. Building more bike lanes isn't always the solution. The community must be trusted to create the solutions that work for them by utilizing existing community networks and partnering with those doing similar work. When we design and plan through a racial equity lens, consider distinct abilities (people in wheelchairs or those less able), and think of people from different social classes, we uncover solutions that benefit everyone. Hence the importance of community participation.
I think your ending note points to a key challenge in transportation planning and policy over the coming decades: balancing regional and local planning needs. There are sound reasons for coordinated regional planning (as mandated for urban areas), but it's also a process that has tended to limit diversity of participants, opinions, and policies. It's almost a microcosm of the challenge of balancing federal & state standards (which can be helpful!) with local needs, values, and innovation. It might seem simple, but I think it's a really difficult planning problem to solve in the transportation realm, where network effects amplify outcomes.
ReplyDeleteHi Dr.Joe,
DeleteI appreciate your comments and thoughts on this. I agree that there is a great need to create more balance between regional and local planning needs. I also agree that the current and past engagement process in communities needs a lot of work. I don't think this is ever an easy task, nor is transportation planning or policy decisions made. It is challenging when we have myriad factors influencing people and when we can't fully know the consequences of our choices and often have to compensate for pleasing one network.
Bullard's piece (Introduction) makes me think of and why some inequalities exist in the first place. The fact that transportation racism has been part of our history. Bullard notes that people of color are twice as likely to use commute modes other than cars. Regardless, communities of color and low income are the ones who bear the costs of social and environmental injustice. In the past, transportation systems have been segregated in the planning process. In my perspective, this has only made the issues of inequities even worse. Hand in hand, poor community engagement or neglecting communities of color and low-income planning processes has only created greater segregation. We see this through what Bullard notes as "invisible markers." There are markers in Portland when we look at East Portland, where high populations of low-income or people of color reside, we can see that they lack access not just to a variety of transportation modes. They also lack infrastructure and historically have been disinvested. It is hard to balance the needs of both regional and local plans. Still, I firmly believe we can achieve this through the inclusivity of all the community members who would be impacted by our decisions.
Thanks for your post, Valeria. It sounds like a really interesting presentation. I really take to heart the points bout communities being trusted to create solutions to work for them, but I also struggle with some of its ramifications. Community opposition to the NE7th/9th greenway reflects the Black community's desires, but also means that there isn't a great North-South bikeway option in that area. I'm unsure how to balance these conflicting interests, and I think PBOT is struggling through that as well.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Valeria! I agree with you conclusions regarding how transit planners should address the idea of implementing "safe" streets. Understanding what a community needs to actually be and feel safe is vital to achieving a safe street. Additionally, it's important to look at new and innovative technologies that are transforming how we move around, receive information related to transit services, and how we pay for these services effect marginalized communities. There's a long history of BIPOC, disabled, and low income communities struggling to transition to these new technologies.Ideally, the community is would be at the table from the outset.
ReplyDeleteThank you for sharing this Valeria! I think the Ecological Social Model provides a great perspective for transportation system and operation. During the pandemic, with the initial lockdowns and limitation on public transit services, we heard so many news about people with different essential needs having trouble getting to their destinations. I think in this era with such high mobility, transportation decisions are social decisions in so many different senses. Although it would be impossible to address each one, some effort could be made in building a more resilient system, providing people with more options.
ReplyDelete