Notice: WP_Scripts::localize was called incorrectly. The $l10n parameter must be an array. To pass arbitrary data to scripts, use the wp_add_inline_script() function instead. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 5.7.0.) in /var/www/clients/client230/web630/web/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5663

Provision of access is the ultimate goal of mobility.

To develop a sustainable and open mobility ecosystem products and services must address accessibility spheres in design as well as deployment. Access encompasses physical accessibility to enable independent travel by mobility restricted individuals as well as spatial and economic considerations, such as provision of transport services in underserved locations, time to reach destinations and price. [1] Access can also be applicable in terms of digital accessibility. A technology based mobility solution might see challenges for adoption in locations with low digital inclusion rates if they depend upon on mobile internet and smart device access, or the digital adoption progress of local government administrations, businesses or other relevant organisations.

Access aims to provide ubiquitous safe, reliable and comfortable mobility opportunities for all segments of the public. What is needed to address access depends on local demographics, transit shortfalls and aims, both quantitative i.e. transit modes, infrastructure, frequency; and qualitative i.e. journey experience, perceptions of safety, cultural associations with ownership or public transport. Generally low-income groups are disadvantaged in multiple ways by transport inaccessibility. [2] For example those areas with low levels of public transport (or none) might have more affordable housing, but living in these locations limits resident’s accessibility to employment, education institutions, open spaces and public services, as well as limiting the ability to undertake active transport modes (walking and cycling) which is an important aspect of urban life quality, as highlighted by the World Health Organisation (WHO) Healthy Cities movement.

Best practice:

[1] For example: UN Habitat (2013) Planning and Design for Sustainable Urban Mobility.

[2] Institute for Transport and Development Policy (ITDP) (2017) This is What Urban Equity Looks Like: The TOD Standard 3.0.