Are network planning guidelines based on equal access equitable?

Abstract

Public transport network planning principles include simplicity, legibility, frequency and spatial coverage. These principles are normally translated into a series of “Guidelines” setting out the specific standards for network design within a jurisdiction. In practice such guidelines usually concentrate on creating a bus network or on the role of buses within a multimodal network as rail-based routes are regarded as fixed in location and separate planning processes are typically used to design rail frequencies and stopping patterns. The outcome of the network planning gives rise to trade-offs between the economic and institutional environments and is conditioned by historical legacy. Bus routes often continue because historically this is where they operated. This paper offers a case study based on Sydney, Australia where the network planning guidelines still place emphasis on equality of spatial coverage despite moving towards a more ‘integrated’ approach to network planning. This paper identifies that guidelines focusing on equal spatial coverage may inadvertently promote inequity through not taking account of the difficulties (and therefore higher cost) of serving challenging topographical areas. This paper therefore examines the equity impacts of the implementation of service planning guidelines based on equal spatial coverage using Sydney as a case study. Criteria relating to equity will be established which are then measured using bus supply data, journey to work and socio-economic data. The conclusions of the paper are a contribution to network planning implementation with many cities both in Australia and elsewhere implementing similar guidelines to Sydney.