Speaker
Description
What does it mean to have “enough” accessibility in transport? The concept of sufficiency has been central to debates in transport justice, often framing justice as the provision of a baseline level of access necessary for individuals to reach key destinations (Geurs & Van Wee 2004, Martens 2017). However, the meaning of “enough” remains underexplored, and current sufficiency-based approaches risk perpetuating durable inequalities and social hierarchies within societies.
This paper critically examines three influential interpretations of sufficiency in accessibility:
- Enough to meet basic needs, which ensures access to essential
services such as healthcare, education, and employment (Koutsopoulos,
1980; Stanley & Farrington, 1981; Nutley, 1984; Hay, 1991; Khisty,
1996; Denmark, 1998; Vigar, 1999). - Enough to prevent social exclusion, which aims to distribute
accessibility to guarantee a level of participation in the normal
activities of society (Church et al., 2000; Kenyon, 2002; Lucas,
2004; Cass et al., 2005; Preston & Rajé, 2007; Lucas, 2012) - Enough to develop central capabilities, as advocated by the
capability approach (Beyazit, 2011; Pereira et al., 2017; Vecchio &
Martens, 2021; Luz & Portugal, 2022).
While each of these approaches provides a valuable foundation for defining sufficiency, they fail to address the relational dimensions of justice (Wolff, 1998; Anderson, 1999; Scheffler, 2003; Schemmel, 2011; Fourie, 2012; Rosanvallon, 2013; Schuppert, 2015; Lippert-Rasmussen, 2018) This paper argues that these interpretations of “enough” do not sufficiently disrupt the durable hierarchies and inequalities that underpin social exclusion and marginalization.
To address these shortcomings, this paper introduces a relational egalitarian theory of transport justice. Relational egalitarianism reframes sufficiency not as a fixed threshold but as the level of access necessary for individuals to relate as equals within society. In this framework, “enough” is defined relationally, requiring accessibility levels that actively prevent marginalization, second-class status, and group-based disadvantages. By prioritizing equal social relationships, relational egalitarianism transforms the concept of sufficiency from a minimal guarantee into a tool for achieving a society of equals.
We explore how this redefined notion of sufficiency can inform transport policy and planning. Practical implications include adopting comparative measures of accessibility to ensure that no group is significantly disadvantaged, disaggregating transport data to address inequalities across population groups and modes, and rethinking how accessibility metrics are defined and measured. These insights aim to guide the development of urban mobility systems that are inclusive, resilient, and sustainable.
This relational approach to transport justice aligns with the AESOP 2025 Congress theme, “Planning as a Transformative Action in an Age of Planetary Crisis.” By challenging traditional sufficiency-based approaches and emphasizing the importance of relational equality, this paper offers a bold framework for reimagining transport systems that advance equity, reduce environmental impacts, and support vulnerable communities in the face of growing urban and planetary challenges.
References
Anderson, E. S. (1999). What is the point of equality? Ethics, 109(2), 287–337.
Beyazit, E. (2011). Evaluating social justice in transport: Lessons to be learned from the capability approach. Transport Reviews, 31(1), 117–134.
Cass, N., Shove, E., & Urry, J. (2005). Social exclusion, mobility and access. The Sociological Review, 53(3), 539–555.
Church, A., Frost, M., & Sullivan, K. (2000). Transport and social exclusion in London. Transport Policy, 7(3), 195–205.
Denmark, D. (1998). The outsiders: Planning and transport disadvantage. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 17(3), 231–245.
Fourie, C. (2012). What is social equality? An analysis of status equality as a strongly egalitarian ideal. Res Publica, 18(2), 107–126.
Geurs, K. T., & Van Wee, B. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, 12(2), 127–140.
Hay, A., & Trinder, E. (1991). Concepts of equity, fairness, and justice expressed by local transport policymakers. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 9(4), 453–465.
Kenyon, S., Lyons, G., & Rafferty, J. (2002). Transport and social exclusion: Investigating the possibility of promoting inclusion through virtual mobility. Journal of Transport Geography, 10(3), 207–219.
| Keywords | Transport Justice; Sufficiency; Relational Egalitarianism; Accessibility; Durable Inequalities |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
