The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Distributive justice and equity in transportation
Abstract
Over the past decades, transport researchers and policy-makers have devoted increasing attention to questions about justice and equity. Nonetheless, there is still little engagement with theories in political philosophy to frame what justice means in the context of transport policies. This paper reviews key theories of justice (utilitarianism, libertarianism, intuitionism, Rawls’ egalitarianism, and Capability Approaches (CAs)) and critically evaluates the insights they generate when applied to transport. Based on a combination of Rawlsian and CAs, we propose that distributive justice concerns over transport disadvantage and social exclusion should focus primarily on accessibility as a human capability. This means that, in policy evaluation, a detailed analysis of the distributional effects of transport policies should take account of the setting of minimum standards of accessibility to key destinations and the extent to which these policies respect individuals’ rights and prioritise disadvantaged groups, reduce inequalities of opportunities, and mitigate transport externalities. A full account of justice in transportation requires a more complete understanding of accessibility than traditional approaches have been able to deliver to date.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
A Theory of Justice: Revised Edition
Rawls, J. (1999) · doi:10.4159/9780674042582 · Cited by 9,455
Justice as Fairness: A Restatement
Rawls, J. (2001) · doi:10.2307/j.ctv31xf5v0 · Cited by 5,761
Creating Capabilities: The Human Development Approach
Nussbaum, M. C. (2011) · doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674061200 · Cited by 5,664
Sen, A. (2005) · Journal of Human Development · doi:10.1080/14649880500120491 · Cited by 1,966 · cited 4×
“It ought to take into account each society’s particular values and material conditions, and may even change across time as societies develop and reassess their political positions (Sen, 2005, 2009).”
BackgroundInfluentialKaufmann, V., Bergman, M. M., & Joye, D. (2004) · International Journal of Urban and Regional Research · doi:10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00549.x · Cited by 1,214
Cited by
Transport and mobility justice: Evolving discussions
Verlinghieri, E., & Schwanen, T. (2020) · Journal of Transport Geography · doi:10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2020.102798 · Cited by 319
Self-citationFrom Transportation Equity to Transportation Justice: Within, Through, and Beyond the State
Karner, A., London, J., Rowangould, D., & Manaugh, K. (2020) · Journal of Planning Literature · doi:10.1177/0885412220927691 · Cited by 259
(2021) · Advances in Transport Policy and Planning · doi:10.1016/bs.atpp.2020.08.002 · Cited by 84
Metadata
- Authors
- Pereira, R. H. M., Schwanen, T., & Banister, D.
- Venue
- Transport Reviews
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2016-11-22
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 170-191
- ISSN
- 0144-1647 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5327
- OpenAlex
- W2555509407
- Cited by
- 1,035
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 157.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Distributive justice and equity in transportation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01441647.2016.1257660
- The paper
- Pereira, R. H. M., Schwanen, T., & Banister, D. (2017). Distributive justice and equity in transportation. Transport Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2016.1257660
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.