Explaining Unequal Transportation Outcomes
in a Gentrifying City:
The Example of Portland, Oregon
by
Eugenio Arriaga Cordero
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
in
Urban Studies
Dissertation Committee:
James Strathman, Chair
Amy Lubitow
José Padín
Liming Wang
Portland State University
2017
Abstract
This dissertation examines unequal outcomes of urban transportation policies in the neoliberal era. It focuses on inequalities in the Portland, Oregon metro area between 1994 and 2011 as measured in three key areas: 1) access to public transit; 2) the journey-towork; and 3) “household-serving” trips. Growing concern over the harmful impacts from an increasing dependence on cars has led planners in the U.S. to encourage a modal shift from private car to public transit, bicycling, and walking. The required policies to make this modal shift possible, however, might inadvertently be benefiting ‘choice’ riders at the cost of transport disadvantaged groups. Other contributing factors to this unequal benefit appear to be the suburbanization of poverty, an ongoing gentrification of central areas, and market forces that make it difficult for low income groups to afford housing in transit-rich neighborhoods. The Oregon Household Activity and Travel surveys are used to answer the three major research questions in this dissertation: what has been the effect of neoliberalism on access to public transit?; how do gender, race/ethnicity, and income inequality affect the journey-to-work in Portland?; and how do household-serving trips vary by gender in Portland? Six hypotheses are tested in answering these questions. Those related to access to transit draw on Fred Block’s theory of the capitalist state and the “urban growth machine” concept, both of which predict spatially unequal outcomes from neoliberal policies. Hypotheses about the journey to work draw on a rich body of literature around social relations in the household and the job market, as well as residential location. The final question, about household-serving trips, draws on theories of gender socialization. Findings showed that: (i) individuals in the Portland metro area had less access overall to bus public transit in 2011 than in 1994; (ii) impoverished dependent riders have lost access to transit service over time, as compared to choice dependent riders; (iii) low income groups have been ‘forced’ into greater car-ownership, in part due to their reduced access to public transit; (iv) women in Portland have shorter journey-to-work trips than men; (v) Blacks have longer journey-to-work trips than Whites and Latinos; (vi) low-income individuals have shorter journey-to-work trips than higher income individuals; and (vii) women with children make more household-serving trips than men in similar family structures.
Table of Contents
Abstract ............................................................................................................................... i
Dedication .......................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv
List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... vi
List of Figures....................................................................................................................vii
Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................1
1.1 The problem ...................................................................................................................1
1.2 Unequal outcomes related to transportation ..................................................................2
1.3 Research questions and hypotheses ...............................................................................6
16.4 Why Portland (Oregon)? ..............................................................................................6
1.5 Overview of dissertation ..............................................................................................11
Chapter 2. Literature Review .............................................................................................13
2.1 Transportation and inequality in the U.S. ....................................................................14
2.2 Transportation and inequality in Portland....................................................................15
2.3 Explaining inequality in access to transit in the U.S. ..................................................20
2.4 Explaining inequality in the journey-to-work ..............................................................32
2.5 Explaining inequalities in household-serving trips ......................................................48
Chapter 3. Research Design: Questions, Hypotheses, Data and Methodology .................53
3.1 Research questions and hypotheses .............................................................................53
3.2 Data Sources ................................................................................................................57
3.3 Variables and methods of analysis ...............................................................................60
Chapter 4. Analysis ............................................................................................................72
4.1 Analyzing access to public transit................................................................................72
4.2 Analyzing the journey-to-work ....................................................................................81
4.3 Analyzing “Household-serving” trips ..........................................................................90
Chapter 5. Findings and Discussion...................................................................................96
5.1 Access to transit findings .............................................................................................96
5.2 Journey-to-work findings .............................................................................................98
5.3 Household serving trips findings ...............................................................................101
Chapter 6. Conclusions and Recommendations ...............................................................103
References ........................................................................................................................111
Appendix. Socio-Demographic Trends in the Portland Metropolitan Area……...……. 123
Chapter 1. Introduction
1.1 The problem
Growing concern over the harmful environmental and social impacts from an increasing dependence on cars has led transportation planners in the U.S. to encourage a shift from private car use to public transit, bicycling, and walking. These efforts aim to turn drivers into “choice riders” (i.e., individuals who could drive but choose to ride transit instead), which means the city must provide an effective substitute for the private car. However, rather than improving the quality of bus service, many cities have placed more focus on rail transit infrastructure. Two key reasons for the focus on rail transit investment are that it is considered more attractive to choice riders (Giuliano, 2005), and it helps to attract private investment, which cities in the neoliberal era actively seek. Research by Glaeser et al. (2008) and Baum-Snow et al. (2005) found that rail transit expansion in major cities in the U.S. was explicitly designed to connect central city areas to richer suburbs – thus serving many choice riders - and not to improve access in poor areas.
At the same time, as shown by Grengs (2005), many cities are experiencing a changing residential pattern in which low-income residents are being priced out of central cities while higher-income residents increasingly occupy the core. Since public transit investment has focused on the core (and wealthier suburbs), one would expect that the new, higher-income residents in the central city would have greater levels of access than the growing number of low-income, suburban residents. Further, lower levels of transit investment in outer neighborhoods and low-income suburbs – particularly in bus systems – have increasingly forced many residents to own a car. This includes individuals who were transit-dependent in the core, but are no longer served by public transit in the suburbs, and thus have to purchase a car. Therefore, this dissertation argues that neoliberal transit policies in such cities, heavily focused on rail infrastructure investments and other means of shifting drivers to public transit, succeed largely at the cost of those who rely on transit the most.
1.2 Unequal outcomes related to transportation
This study of the Portland metropolitan area seeks to investigate some of the unequal outcomes of transportation policies in the neoliberal era. Specifically, it looks at inequalities in: 1) access to public transit; 2) the journey-to-work; and 3) “householdserving” trips
Inequality in access to public transit
Access to transit is analyzed through two political economic frameworks that are critical of neoliberal policy: namely, Logan and Molotch’s concept of “city as a growth machine,” and Fred Block’s theory of the capitalist state. The analysis focuses particularly on inequalities among different income groups in their access to public transit.
Neoliberal ideology, which advocates for the extension of market-based principles in order to reduce state “inefficiencies,” has shaped public transit in significant ways.
Beginning sometime in the 1980s, a neoliberal turn accelerated the shift in transit policy from its original purpose of providing transportation as a public service toward a narrower, economic-based purpose of relieving traffic congestion while increasing efficiency (Grengs, 2005). Farmer (2013) shows in detail how mass transit’s original purpose - to provide a public good for those left out by the market – has been undermined under neoliberalism by this new logic of monetary efficiency.
While neoliberal ideology might explain this shift to economic efficiency on a policy scale, it is important to look at the agents behind the policies. Fred Block’s capitalist state theory (1977) focuses on state managers as the key actors in designing and implementing neoliberal policies, which largely benefit business interests. Public agency leaders have few incentives to pursue anti-capitalist policies in part because they see their own continued power as dependent on a “healthy business climate” (p.8). This means maintaining economic and political order. Since extending the state´s role (such as by expanding public services) would likely increase the corporate tax burden and lead to a decline in business confidence, agency heads and other “state managers” become averse to such a goal.
With respect to transit, therefore, we would expect public officials to avoid investing tax dollars in bus infrastructure, particularly in low-income, outer neighborhoods and suburbs, since it would mean a larger governmental role - with associated higher operating costs and more employees, and a potential negative reaction by businesses. The only circumstance preventing local governments from completely privatizing or neglecting transit systems is that special characteristics of the transportation sector force the government to own most of the fixed infrastructure. Since the private sector will not (or can not) provide public transit – which is generally indispensable to people without access to a car – the government is expected to provide this public good (Deen, 2003).
While Block’s state theory (and other political theories of the state) help explain the disinvestment in public transit in general, there is another mechanism at work that is useful in understanding geographically unequal transportation outcomes within a city (as well as between cities). In “The City as a Growth Machine” (1976) Harvey Molotch posits that elites who make money off land will act to promote urban investments that increase the attractiveness of a place for further investment. He identifies a central conflict in cities between elites, or “rentiers” – who are pursuing exchange value from land and form a consensus called a “growth machine” – and residents, who are more concerned with use values. Along with his collaborator John Logan, he argues that this conflict “closely determines the shape of the city, the distribution of people, and the way they live together” (Logan and Molotch 1987, p.2). In terms of public transportation, the growth machine concept would explain why light rail infrastructure is implemented in some areas – where elites have a vested interest in real estate development – and not others. This idea in general helps explain how inequalities within and between cities are established and maintained.
Inequality in the journey-to-work The commute to work can serve as a good indicator of inequalities in job and housing markets in a city. Differences in the “journey-to-work” variable by race/ethnicity, income, and gender offer a lens to explore the forces at work that lead to unequal outcomes. Since neither state theory nor the growth machine concept directly address gender, race, and income inequality, it was necessary to extend the theoretical framework used in analyzing access to transit in order to explore journey-to-work differences. Particularly relevant in this case are the bodies of theory around “social relations in the household and job market,” “residential location,” and “social exclusion” (MacDonald, 1999; Lucas, 2010; Massey, 1996). These will be described in the literature review.
Inequalities in “household-serving” trips
The third indicator used in this dissertation to examine urban inequality from the lens of transportation was “household-serving” trips – errands and other non-work trips that benefit members of a household. Differences in the number, duration, and distance of such household-serving trips among different groups can reveal much about the forces at work in producing uneven outcomes in a city. Gender differences are particularly relevant when looking at household-serving trips because they can illuminate inequalities within the household.
Similar to the journey-to-work analysis, the analysis of household-serving trips required going beyond the political-economic theories of place in order to incorporate a gender lens. The analysis therefore draws on the literature around gender inequality and transportation. In particular, it examines theories about “gender socialization.” These concepts will be explored further in the next chapter.
1.3 Research questions and hypotheses
The three major research questions in this dissertation relate to the three key transportation metrics described above. The first question is related to access to transit, and asks: “What has been the effect of neoliberalism on access to public transit in metropolitan Portland?” Two hypotheses are tested here (which will be described in the research design chapter). They are based on Block’s theory of the capitalist state and Molotch’s concept of the city as a growth machine.
The second research question, related to the journey-to-work, asks: “How do gender, race/ethnicity, and income inequality affect the journey-to-work?” Three hypotheses are tested here (described in the research design chapter), each drawing on one of the following bodies of theory: a) social relations in the household and job market, b) residential location, and c) social exclusion, as described in the literature review.
The final research question is: “How does gender inequality affect household-serving trips in Portland?” The hypothesis tested for this question draws on theory around “gender socialization,” as described in the literature review and research design chapters.
1.4 Why Portland (Oregon)?
The metropolitan area of Portland, Oregon was selected for case study analysis for a number of inter-related reasons.
First, in Portland, neoliberal ideology and the workings of the growth machine have been clearly manifested in the city's urban renewal program over the past two decades (this program is described in detail in the literature review chapter). Rising land values in Portland’s urban core in the 2000’s were actively bolstered by, if not a direct outcome of, city policies and programs. Portland now finds itself on the leading edge of a housing affordability crisis, exacerbating spatial inequalities.
Rising rents and home prices have been pushing low-income, transit-dependent people toward outer neighborhoods and suburbs. Transit agencies have been unwittingly contributing to this process through their focus on improving transit service in the urban core, where density is greatest and ridership is high, at the cost of service in outer neighborhoods and suburbs. These improvements include enhanced bus service as well as new rail transit.
The result in Portland is a geographic marginalization of the city's lower income and minority populations, who find themselves living in the urban periphery where transit service is more limited and expensive. As in other cities, transit services in Portland are not following lower-income groups to the suburbs. Instead, as this dissertation will show, Portland’s growth machine elites remain focused on increased service in places where ridership is high (i.e., politically connected inner neighborhoods). While “choice riders” (who take transit by choice, not by need) are increasing in number in Portland due to explicit policies that favor them, the needs of transit-dependent populations are being ignored. The city therefore offers a good case study of the consequences of urban policies that drive up land values in the core.
A second reason for selecting Portland for analysis is that it was one of the earliest cities in the U.S. to adopt a sustainable transportation approach; so there has been sufficient time to observe the consequences, both intended and unintended. In fact, this early adoption of sustainable transportation goals and policies is a key factor behind Portland’s identity as a sustainable, vibrant, and walkable city – a topic explored below. And with a regional population growing at well above the U.S. metropolitan average, the consequences of Portland’s policies, plans, and programs are likely to be evident sooner than would be the case elsewhere.
Third, and related to the above, years of local research and analysis of transportation outcomes in the city and region have resulted in abundant data being available. This research tapped into some of that data, described in the research design chapter.
A fourth and final reason for studying Portland is that while the city is often considered a quirky, outlier, it has also become a role model for an increasing number of cities. Cities throughout the country have been looking to Portland as a sustainable urban development leader (tied into its identity, discussed below), and are seeking to emulate its focus on building a vibrant, livable core. Portland has been a national leader in the coordination of transportation and land use, with land use policies that encourage higher development densities, and urban renewal programs that integrate redevelopment with transit. Other
cities can learn from Portland’s successes and mistakes as they seek to imitate its compact, mixed-use core and transit-oriented development.
The Portland identity
As indicated above, Portland’s urban identity is an important reason why other U.S. cities are looking to learn from its example. Portland is a very special place. It is in fact difficult to find a similar city within the United States: It has the highest bicycle rates for a city of its size; it has an unusually large urban park and park system; and it is the only place in the country with an elected regional government. It is well known for its urban growth boundary, mandated by a statewide system for land use planning. Portland is even the subject of a TV show, Portlandia, that gently mocks its eccentricities.
For many years Portland has been at the top of urban life quality rankings in the USA. It is one of the few U.S. cities that makes regular appearances on lists of the nation’s best managed cities (Abbott 2001: 4). Portland has been continuously praised by planners, geographers and architects who have portrayed the city in their books as an example of successful urban development and metropolitan planning. Vice President Al Gore described Portland as “the best of all possible worlds, where quality-of-life planning has stimulated rather muffled economic growth” (Abbott, 2001: 6). The reason for all this praise, according to local urban scholar Carl Abbott, is that “Portland comes close to matching an emerging model of good urban form: it assigns high value to the maintenance of strong downtowns in order to nurture cultural vibrancy, promote social cohesion, and support nationally competitive advance service industries” (2001: 5).
That said, not all outcomes are positive: Abbott noted as early has 2001 how Portland had transformed, losing a number of interesting social features over time. He lamented the displacement of artists to the periphery of the city as property values rose.
Portland’s civic engagement and urban planning reputation
Portland has been recognized since the 1970s for its strong civic engagement. According to Abbott, the city has a history of “strong public involvement in both grassroots environmentalism and neighborhood conservation” (2001:4). The tremendous success in planning experienced by the city of Portland would probably not exist if it were not for its culture of public involvement. As noted by Abbott, the Portland area “benefits from more than seventy-five ‘Friends of…’” organizations – i.e., civic organizations monitoring development matters and advocating for restoration projects. Portland also holds nearly 25 community development corporations and more than 100 neighborhood associations that are community-controlled but city-sponsored (Abbott, 2001: 4). According to Abbott, the city´s “eclectic urbanists” have borrowed theoretical components from other urbanists and intellectuals, such as Jane Jacobs, William S. Whyte and John Stuart Mill, to emphasize the values of civic action in public spaces, and social and cultural diversity.
In terms of political culture, metropolitan Portland is also well known for treating “land use planning, with its restrictions on private actions, as a legitimate expression of the community interest.” The city has a strong interest in environmental design as a planning goal, borrowing from Frederick Law Olmsted’s and Lewis Mumford’s visions of “cities and towns interlacing with the natural and cultivated environments.” In terms of cityscape and urban form, Portland has been able to “bring environmentalism and urbanism together in a coherent package of mutually supportive planning and development decisions” (Abbott, 2001: 6). This includes its public transportation and land use decisions. Abbott argues that the progressive core and many suburbs have united around the idea of a compact city (2001: 211), which has contributed to Portland’s recognition for the importance its citizens place on the physical environment.
All of these factors have combined to give Portland its identity as a “green city,” a “progressive city,” and a successful example of urban planning. Of course, as in many other cities, Portland’s current success is the cause of multiple planned and unplanned processes. Paradoxically, Portland’s slow economic growth in the 1960s and 1970s, and stability in the economically depressed 1980s, allowed it to preserve elements from each decade, giving it a unique urban character. Nevertheless, the city is undergoing great social and economic changes, and experiencing a tension between the growing industrial, technological and innovation sectors and a steadier, greener lifestyle (Abbott, 2001: 206). 1.5 Overview of dissertation
This introductory chapter is followed by a literature review that explores the relationships between transportation and inequality in the U.S. and reviews a number of explanatory theories, especially those focused on differences in access to transit, the journey-to-work, and household-serving trips. This is followed by a chapter on research design, which reviews the three main research questions and lays out the related hypotheses for each, along with the theories they draw on. It then introduces the data and variables used in the study and articulates the research methodology and methods of analysis. Next, an analysis chapter describes how the hypotheses were tested using statistical methods and discusses the findings and their meaning in the context of the relevant theories. The dissertation ends with a summary of key findings and conclusions in answering the research questions.
Chapter 2. Literature Review
This chapter examines the literature on concepts and theories related to unequal outcomes of transportation policies and urban planning. It focuses on three aspects of transportation: 1) Access to public transit, 2) Journey-to-work, and 3) “Householdserving” trips. Specifically, it reviews the research relevant to answering the three key questions of this dissertation:
1. What has been the effect of neoliberalism on access to public transit in metropolitan Portland?
2. How do gender, race/ethnicity, and income inequality affect the journey-to-work in Portland?
3. How does gender inequality affect household-serving trips in Portland?
To understand the first question – the effect of neoliberalism on inequalities in access to public transit – this chapter examines the literature on neoliberal ideology, theories of the capitalist state, and city-as-growth-machine. These concepts are used in later chapters to interrogate two hypotheses on inequality in access to public transit among different income groups in Portland. Other relevant concepts, such as the role of poverty in transportation, and the concepts of “transportation disadvantage” and “forced-car ownership,” are also examined here.
For the second topic – differences in the journey-to-work by gender, race/ethnicity, and income – this chapter reviews the literature on bodies of theory around: “social relations in the household and in the job market,” “residential location,” and “social exclusion.”
These theories are used in the analysis chapter to test three hypotheses about differences in the journey-to-work in Portland based on gender, race/ethnicity, and income level.
For the last research question – how gender inequality affects household-serving trips in Portland – the literature around “gendered socialization” is reviewed, as it is later used to investigate a key hypothesis related to this question.
Before delving into the literature on specific research questions, this chapter begins with a review of transportation and inequality in the U.S. in general, and in Portland, since these contexts are central to answering all three research questions. It includes a look at the literature on gentrification and displacement in the Portland metropolitan area, especially with respect to how it may be exacerbating the challenges for transportdisadvantaged groups.
Full Text
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق