Accessibility and Transport Appraisal Roundtable
Completed Output
Videos
Conventional transport appraisal methods focus on connectivity or mobility-based measures (travel time, safety). There are increasing calls from professionals for the broader objective of accessibility to be reflected in appraisals, however. Increasingly, national planning guidelines mention accessibility. Despite this, there is a lack of standard metrics for measuring accessibility or methods to link assessment results to transport system design.
The Roundtable's scope was to:
- Clarify the roles of accessibility metrics in the planning, modelling and transport appraisal processes.
- Explore approaches to monetising accessibility benefits.
- Explore approaches to incorporating accessibility in transport appraisal (with and without monetised value of accessibility benefits), and wider public policy choice.
Papers and presentations
Papers and presentations
Measuring Accessibility: Methods and Issues
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (3.82 MB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
University of Toronto
Measuring Accessibility
View Discussion Paper (PDF) (2.96 MB)
Discussion Paper, 23 November 2020
University of Toronto, Canada
This paper discusses the current state of transport accessibility measurement. It demonstrates that all commonly used measures are special cases of a generic accessibility model that conforms to a few fundamental axioms. The paper also shows that accessibility measures are fundamentally tied to travel behaviour. These ties should be explicitly recognised and exploited to construct theoretically defensible and practically useful measures.
A People-Centred Approach to Accessibility
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (1018.01 KB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
Technion - Israel Institute of Technology
A People-Centred Approach to Accessibility
View Discussion Paper (PDF) (3.1 MB)
Discussion Paper, 19 November 2020
Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa
This paper discusses two variants of the accessibility paradigm for transport planning. The extensive paradigm aims to radically overhaul transport planning to incorporate issues of environmental quality, urban sprawl, safety and health. Its adoption is unlikely in the medium term and raises questions about the role of the transport planner. The limited paradigm calls for transport planning to adopt accessibility indicators in place of mobility indicators. However this will not meet the underlying goals of the accessibility critique. A change in the focus of transport planning is needed from the functioning of transport networks to the service that differently placed people receive from the transport system.
The Accessibility Shift: Conceptual Obstacles and how to Overcome (one of) them
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (1.99 MB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
University of Michigan
The Accessibility Shift
View Discussion Paper (PDF) (3.14 MB)
Discussion Paper, 19 November 2020
The University of Michigan, Michigan
This paper explores conceptual barriers to shifting the foundation of transport planning from mobility to accessibility. These barriers include an implicit belief that accessibility must bring other benefits to be of value, the idea that individuals’ failure to minimise costs in their transport choices somehow challenges the derived nature of transport demand; and a lack of techniques for project-level accessibility analysis. The paper also presents a technique for overcoming the latter barrier.
Purposes and Practical Application of Accessibility Measures
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (2.48 MB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
Department for Transport, UK
Accessibility Planning versus Accessibility in Transport Appraisal
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (3 MB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
University of Oporto
Dimensions of Accessibility Benefits
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (1.6 MB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Dimensions of Accessibility Benefits
View Discussion Paper (PDF) (3.5 MB)
Discussion Paper, 23 November 2020
Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain
Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain
This paper addresses the problem of involuntary social exclusion resulting from mobility constraints by proposing a conceptual model for the interaction between transport and wellbeing. Providing accessibility for all yields widely shared benefits that are largely overlooked by traditional appraisal methods. While some see the ultimate aim of transport policy as increasing wellbeing, an agreed model of how these two interact does not currently exist.
Accessibility and Social Inclusion in the UK
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (964.91 KB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
University of Leeds, UK
Accessibility and Transport Appraisal: Approaches and Limitations
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (1.04 MB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
University of Twente, the Netherlands
Accessibility and Transport Appraisal
View Discussion Paper (PDF) (3.23 MB)
Discussion Paper, 19 November 2020
University of Twente, Enschede
This paper describes the different approaches to measuring accessibility benefits and the limitations of their application in practice. It argues that a broader perspective on accessibility measurement and valuation beyond the current focus on time savings will improve transport appraisal. Notably the better utilisation of land use and transport interaction models will benefit transport investment appraisal.
Accessibility: A Universal Tool?
View Presentation, slides, speech (PDF) (1.48 MB)
Presentation, slides, speech, 21 October 2019
Laboratoire Ville Mobilité Transport (LVMT), France
PSE-École des ponts ParisTech
Reconciling Accessibility Benefits with User Benefits
View Discussion Paper (PDF) (3.23 MB)
Discussion Paper, 12 November 2020
Linköping University, Sweden
This paper asks whether transport policy assessments should use accessibility benefits as a key measure instead of user benefits. It argues that both measures are equivalent if accessibility measures are based on transport users’ own preferences and if the same principle is used to aggregate benefits. The paper also addresses how distributional questions can be addressed within this approach.