A preliminary description of the Chemical Camera

Spinning cryostat, or chemical camera, for sampling supersonic gas stream and recording chemical kinetic

Using Different Approaches to Evaluate Individual Social Equity in Transport

Inequalities not only exist in the field of economics in relation to income and wealth, but also in other areas, such as the transport sector, where access to and use of different transport modes varies markedly across population groups, and which provides the means to access everyday living activities. A key concern within the transport sector is that inequality has extended beyond the traditional measures of travel, and now covers a wide range of effects relating to social exclusion, freedom, well-being and being able to access reasonable opportunities and resources. In order to address the aforementioned issues, an important question to resolve is what type of methods can be used to measure inequalities in transport most effectively. Therefore, this study aims to apply different approaches, including the Capabilities Approach (CA) and a further six inequality indices, namely the Gini coefficient, the Atkinson index, the Palma ratio, the Pietra ratio, the Schutz coefficient and the Theil index, to the case study using the relatively migrant-rich lower-income neighbourhood of Tuqiao, in Beijing, in order to assess individual transport-related social inequity issues. The findings suggest that the CA is useful in assessing transport-related inequalities where there are significant barriers to the take up of accessibility, for example where there are high levels of disadvantaged groups and disaggregated analysis can be undertaken. The Palma ratio appears to have a larger effect than the Gini coefficient and the other inequality indices when measuring transport-related social inequity. In addition, we also found that most income inequality methods adapted from econometrics may be better suited to measuring transport-related social inequity between different regions, cities or countries, or within the same area, but at different points in time, rather than to measuring a single neighbourhood as a whole. Finally, we argue that to what extent politicians or transport planners can use appropriate management tools to measure transport-related social inequalities may be significant in terms of the progress that can be made in the fight against social inequity in the transport field

Car dependence and housing affordability: An emerging social deprivation issue in London?

This paper investigates the combined problem of high car dependence and housing affordability, in view of likely continued volatility in oil prices (and hence higher petrol and diesel prices), and rising house prices. Household budgets are likely to be stretched where there are high levels of car dependency and housing unaffordability – with little flexibility for rising costs in either or both of these. A composite car dependence and housing affordability (CDHA) index is developed, using indices of oil vulnerability related to car travel and housing affordability. Greater London is used as the case study, with 2001 and 2011 data analysed at the level of Lower Super Output Areas, and presented using Geographic Information System and R statistical software. The findings reveal that there are high levels of composite car dependence and housing price vulnerability in many suburban areas across Greater London, adding to the previous areas of social deprivation found mainly in East London. The composite CDHA index illustrates where the most vulnerable areas are spatially. Many neighbourhoods may become less attractive for those on median or even relatively high incomes. The areas most affected may become much more expensive to live in, potentially leading to much greater pressure on travel and housing costs as people could be forced to live further from the centre of London, including beyond the Greater London boundary, which has further implications for travel. Failing to consider these emerging affordability issues represents an oversight in terms of transport planning in London

Urban transport and social inequities in neighbourhoods near underground stations in Greater London

Social equity, and the contribution that transport planning can make to social equity, are increasingly attracting the attention of transport planners and researchers. This perhaps reflects the heightened levels of social inequity in cities and the concern over differential access to transport and participation in activities. This paper considers these issues by applying the Capabilities Approach to transport, in order to examine an individual’s opportunities to travel and engage in activities (capabilities) and their actual day to day travel and engagement in activities (functionings). London is selected as a case study using analysis from three Underground stations on the Jubilee Line Extension. The findings show that there are statistically significant differences in terms of capabilities and functionings across the socio-demographic characteristics of individuals, and also across different neighbourhoods in London. It is argued that unless local residents’ potential travel opportunities and actual activities, and the gaps between them, are better understood and responded to, the problem of transport-related social inequity is likely to persist in London. Therefore, we suggest that the findings from this research, including the multi-dimensional social indicators and understanding of the barriers to accessibility, could be used alongside existing approaches such as accessibility planning

Transport, Social Equity and Capabilities in East Beijing

This chapter utilises the Capabilities Approach to assess different levels of social equity in relation to transport provision in East Beijing. The aim of the analysis is to explore the different levels of social equity relative to gender, age, hukou, personal income and car ownership, specifically in terms of capabilities and functionings, that is, we investigate how the perceived opportunity to travel and access activities as well as actual travel differs across population groups. East Beijing, and in particular the district of Guomao, is used as a case study, to illustrate features of a relatively wealthy area with abundant transport resources. The research analysis shows that capabilities and functionings differ according to an individual’s socio-economic characteristics. In transport planning, in China and beyond, we would argue that transport-related social inequity has been largely overlooked in developing transport systems and is not considered to any significant extent in project appraisal

Euston station redevelopment: regeneration or gentrification?

Euston station, originally opened in 1837, and now the sixth busiest station in the UK, is proposed for major redevelopment. The goal is to provide new platforms for High Speed 2 and, alongside, there will be a refurbishment and upgrade of the old station. Phase One of the redevelopment is expected to be completed in 2026 and Phase Two in 2033. In addition, there will be major impacts to the surrounding area, including noise, traffic and displacement during construction, and redevelopment thereafter. This type of surrounding development is usually considered as a ‘positive’ impact associated with transport investment – new station areas can be dramatically redeveloped and enhanced with new commercial offices, retailing and housing. Yet, there are concerns that gentrification might result, with local communities and businesses being displaced, and the resulting development being unaffordable for many. Transport planning, it is argued, struggles to grapple with this problem, treating all new development as a ‘benefit’, irrespective of quality, and not adequately reflecting local community views. This paper uses Q methodology to develop discourses associated with the proposed High Speed Two project and redevelopment of Euston station and the surrounding neighbourhoods. 28 in-depth surveys are used with local residents, local employees, politicians, local government officers and academics, covering attitudes to the proposed Euston redevelopment. The Q method analysis highlights three major discourses: the ‘Community Activist’, the ‘Rail Promoter’, and the ‘Optimistic Practitioner’. This type of analysis might help us to consider what different solutions and measures are required to support major infrastructure investment in a manner that is more consistent with different actor views and urban planning aspirations. Perhaps different narratives need to be developed to help transport projects respond more effectively to the great challenges of social equity and climate change