Technology-Based Exclusion in Emerging Smart Mobility Systems
A team of researchers led by Aaron Golub are examining the potential exclusion of individuals (particularly minority and low income) in emerging smart mobility systems. Specifically, how individuals pay for transportation services (cash v. cashless systems). The move to cashless payment options is being adopted across the country by more transportation agencies in hopes of increasing efficiency and convenience. Taking a closer look at this issue is especially important, given the history of innovation in transportation catering to predominately white, middle to upper-class individuals. The research project has two phases: 1) identifying individuals who are likely to be negatively impacted by transportation providers moving to cashless systems; and 2) if transportation providers are going to move to cashless systems, what is the cheapest alternative to ensuring universal access to these transportation services? The first phase has been completed, but the second phase is still in the research stage.
The team looked at existing research on banking and digital divides in specific populations as a starting point. Regarding the banking divide, existing research indicates that White and higher income respondents have higher levels of access to banking than minority and low-income respondents. White, Asian, and higher-income respondents have higher levels of access to credit. Regarding the digital divide, Black and Latinx respondents are around twice as likely than Whites to let cell service lapse. Additionally, Black respondents’ access to internet service at home is lower than average. These statistics are important when considering a move to a cashless pay system because these systems overwhelmingly require individuals to have a bank account, access to credit, and access to cellular data (smart phone) or wi-fi.
The team conducted research in Denver, CO, Eugene, OR, and Gresham/Portland, OR. Results were broken down by age, income, and race/ethnicity. A composite of the three research areas indicate that low-income respondents typically have less access to cellular data, internet, and banking. Additionally, older respondents had less access to smartphones or wi-fi. Respondents were generally distrustful of storing personal/payment information on a website or smartphone, but that number was especially high in older respondents. If on-board cash payment was removed, minority respondents are most likely to continue using cash as a payment method, instead having to purchase fare at a retailer or transit vendor.
I think it’s important to look at the bigger issue of transportation innovation favoring affluent white individuals. Golub was part of a research team that looked at the development of the BART (designed 1950s-1960s) in the San Francisco Bay area. While investment was poured into the BART, bus systems throughout the area were ignored, resulting in poorer and reduced service. Not surprisingly, these bus routes served a predominately minority population. BART routes catered to the White suburban population who worked in the core of the metro region. BART was a move forward for transit in the region. However, a study later showed that BART was not being used by minority and low-income populations due to spacing between stops and location of jobs. Ultimately, any innovation made in transit must take into consideration who is being left behind. Innovation is necessary, especially in transit, but options must be made available to those who can not easily or quickly transition to new services.
To view the seminar, go here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LcMcfMkWvvA&feature=youtu.be
Additional Reference(s):
Aaron Golub , Richard A. Marcantonio & Thomas W. Sanchez (2013) Race,Space, and Struggles for Mobility: Transportation Impacts on African Americans in Oakland and the East Bay, Urban Geography, 34:5, 699-728
Thanks, Andrew, for your post. Studies such as this one have been illuminating for me as a person who almost never uses cash. It's a reminder that many people don't walk through the world in the same way as myself. While I understand why transit agencies want to move to cash-free systems, the equity implications are significant. Maybe we can just go to fareless and not have to worry about the issue at all?
ReplyDeleteRob, ironically one of the big motivators behind cashless transit is improving service and reducing boarding times. But if it stops someone from boarding, that's obviously not a great outcome. Also, while I appreciate the effort, stopgaps like pre-loading fare cards with cash (or PayNearMe, becoming common in the bikeshare arena) strikes me as a pretty poor substitute. We often find that even the smallest barrier can be the difference in someone trying a new transportation option or not. For all it's faults, cash was a pretty effortless way to hop aboard for a broad range of users who might hesitate at pre-paying with scarce dollars.
ReplyDeleteHi Andrew,
ReplyDeleteWhen I volunteered with OPAL Environmental Justice (for which Dr. Golub is a board member) as part of my senior capstone awhile back, this policy with Trimet was just in the beginning stages of being implemented, and OPAL was just beginning to strategize ways of responding to it, so this study is quite interesting to me now.
The question of cashless systems making transit less accessible for communities of color is especially relevant in light of the fact that multiple studies conducted over the past few years have shown that Black transit riders tend to be far likelier to be charged with "Interfering with Public Transit" and be subjected to fines, fees, and other punishments on a level 6x their white counterparts (link below). So not only might a cashless system reduce access, it sits atop an existing system that already disproportionately punishes Black transit riders.
Add those two aspects on top of the fact that displacement-driven gentrification (in Portland, in particular) has driven many Black households to areas of the city that have poorer physical access to high-frequency transit, and the transit access inequities multiply to the point where even the most well-meaning technology-forward policy can be the straw that breaks the camel's back in persuading what would be consistent transit users into car dependency.
Here's the link I referenced above: www.invw.org/2017/04/05/black-riders-face-stiffest-transit-penalty/
Delete