Transport Reviews ( IF 10.185 ) Pub Date : 2020-05-18 , DOI: 10.1080/01441647.2020.1762795 Felix Creutzig 1, 2 , Aneeque Javaid 2 , Zakia Soomauroo 1, 3 , Steffen Lohrey 1 , Nikola Milojevic-Dupont 1, 2 , Anjali Ramakrishnan 1, 2 , Mahendra Sethi 1, 2 , Lijing Liu 1 , Leila Niamir 2 , Christopher Bren d’Amour 1, 2 , Ulf Weddige 2 , Dominic Lenzi 2 , Martin Kowarsch 2 , Luisa Arndt 1 , Lulzim Baumann 1 , Jody Betzien 1 , Lesly Fonkwa 1 , Bettina Huber 1 , Ernesto Mendez 1 , Alexandra Misiou 1 , Cameron Pearce 1 , Paula Radman 1 , Paul Skaloud 1 , J. Marco Zausch 1
ABSTRACT
Urban street space is increasingly contested. However, it is unclear what a fair street space allocation would look like. We develop a framework of ten ethical principles and three normative perspectives on street space – streets for transport, streets for sustainability, and streets as place – and discuss 14 derived street space allocation mechanisms. We contrast these ethically grounded allocation mechanisms with real-world allocation in 18 streets in Berlin. We find that car users, on average, had 3.5 times more space available than non-car users. While some allocation mechanisms are more plausible than others, none is without disputed normative implications. All of the ethical principles, however, suggest that on-street parking for cars is difficult to justify, and that cycling deserves more space. We argue that ethical principles should be systematically integrated into urban and transport planning.
中文翻译:
公平的街道空间分配:道德原则和实证见解
摘要
城市街道空间的竞争日益激烈。但是,尚不清楚公平的街道空间分配是什么样子。我们开发十大道德原则和街道空间中的三个规范性观点的框架-街道交通,可持续性的街道,并为地方街道–讨论14种派生街道空间分配机制。我们将这些基于道德的分配机制与柏林18条街道中的实际分配进行了对比。我们发现,汽车使用者的平均可用空间是非汽车使用者的3.5倍。虽然某些分配机制比其他分配机制更为合理,但没有任何机制存在争议的规范含义。但是,所有道德原则都表明,在路边停车很难证明是合理的,而且自行车应有更多的空间。我们认为,道德原则应系统地纳入城市和交通规划。