Accessibility
Can less be better?
Elias Willberg (University of Helsinki)
Henrikki Tenkanen (Aalto University)
Bert van Wee (TU Delft - Technology, Policy and Management)
Tuuli Toivonen (University of Helsinki)
More Info
expand_more
Other than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download, forward or distribute the text or part of it, without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license such as Creative Commons.
Abstract
In recent decades, spatial accessibility provision has gradually become a core objective of urban and transport policies due to its many benefits for individuals and societies. While the minimum levels of accessibility have received significant attention in research recently, the upper end of the spectrum has rarely been addressed. Almost always, higher levels of accessibility are implicitly assumed to be better. In this perspective, we ask whether this view is justified. Or can more accessibility in some cases and contexts, be negative, or even excessive, especially given the deep unsustainability of our current transport systems? Can less be better? We begin by distinguishing between the main approaches to providing accessibility – by speed and by proximity – and examining evidence on when higher levels of accessibility may become negative. We then consider some reasons for these avenues not having been pursued this far. We conclude our perspective by suggesting that to support sustainability, transport research and planning should place greater emphasis on balancing societal benefits and trade-offs of accessibility, rather than only increasing individual choice. To this end, we have suggested some directions for further research.
help_outline