Access to transportation reduces barriers to employment, educational opportunities, health care, and child care, which can lead to economic success, a sense of power and autonomy, and feelings of belonging.

Evidence on the Relationship between Transportation Access and Upward Mobility Outcomes

As of December 2021, researchers have documented the following connections between this predictor and upward mobility. Asterisk (*) indicates primary reference. 

• Research shows a negative relationship between distance from transit access points and employment. Kaufman and colleagues (2015) find that limited access to public transit in New York City neighborhoods is associated with higher levels of unemployment: the unemployment rate was 12.6 percent in neighborhoods with some but insufficient transit access, compared with 8.1 percent in neighborhoods that are highly ranked in terms of transit access. The authors argue that lack of transit access can limit physical mobility as well as economic mobility, which can contribute to income inequality. Other research also identifies transportation access as a key barrier to employment (Fletcher et al. 2010). Additionally, Sanchez, Shen, and Peng (2004) find that, looking across cities, transit access is negatively related to the likelihood of a household being on public assistance.
• The availability of public transit influences job accessibility, commute times, and overall economic outcomes. Even if public transit is generally accessible, it may not run to the desired destination or operate at the times needed by users (Sanchez 1999). A study of people receiving public benefits found that they tend to work in entry-level jobs that often have nonpeak-hour work shifts, such as evening shifts or weekend shifts, when public transportation services may be limited or unavailable (Sanchez 2008*). The study references a report (GAO 1998), which found that 70 percent of entry-level jobs across the nation (defined as those in the manufacturing, retail, or wholesale sectors) are in the suburbs, and only 32 percent are within a quarter mile of a transit stop. Along with inadequate routes and times, affordability can be a barrier to transportation access. Some argue that although commuter rail may provide transport to jobs outside a city center, it is too expensive for low-income workers (Sanchez 2008*).
• Many studies find that vehicle ownership improves job accessibility (Andersson et al. 2018; APTA 2019). One study found that access to automobiles had a strong positive relationship to employment outcomes, although public transit access did not (Blumenberg and Pierce 2017).
• Chetty and Hendren (2018) draw a connection between transportation-related factors and long-term economic outcomes. In their Equality of Opportunity Project, they included a variable indicating the share of commuters who could get to work in less than 15 minutes. They conclude that workers with a very short commute have a larger presence in communities where children grow up to be better off. Children raised in commuting zones with shorter average commute times earn higher incomes in adulthood. Reducing commute times by one standard deviation in the areas in which a child is raised is associated with a 7 percent increase in income in adulthood.
• Transportation is important for access to education. Access to safe, affordable, and convenient transportation shapes the “geography of opportunity” for many children and young people (Vincent et al. 2014). It affects which schools they attend, which extracurricular activities they join, and what internships or work-based learning opportunities they take advantage of. Transportation barriers that cause children and young people to be isolated translate into an “opportunity gap” that is mirrored in student achievement gaps (Vincent et al. 2014).
• A study of the Student Pass program in Minneapolis, Minnesota, which enabled high school students to take unlimited rides on regular-route buses and light rail from 5 a.m. to 10 p.m. during the school year, found that the pass helped students attend school more regularly: absenteeism was 23 percent lower for pass users. Furthermore, students with a pass were able to access off-site after-school learning opportunities, and they had GPAs that were 0.28 higher than students without a pass (Fan and Das 2015). 
• Studies have concluded that access to transportation can affect health outcomes. An analysis of the 2002 National Health Interview Survey estimated that 3.6 million people miss at least one nonemergency medical appointment a year because of transportation constraints. The researchers discuss how this statistic is disproportionately worse in neighborhoods with large populations of people of color, who rely more heavily on transit than white people (Wallace et al. 2005).
• Access to reliable and affordable transportation can be particularly beneficial for households headed by single parents. Wang and Xu (2020) find that in Maryland—holding demographic, socioeconomic, and transportation variables constant—being a single parent is associated with more public transit use. Single parents face greater economic hardship as well as added strain on their time and capacity, making viable transit options more important for accessing child care, grocery stores, and work. The inability to access child care services affects single parents’ employment decisions and stress levels. Furthermore, lacking money for public transit can diminish parents’ willingness and ability to be involved in their children’s education and put families at higher risk for social exclusion. Anther analysis finds that living in vehicle-centric communities leaves low-income households in a precarious situation, putting them one car breakdown away from poverty (Smart Growth America 2019).

Promising Local Policy Interventions

Research from both Urban and others in the field suggests the following policies could help communities improve this predictor. These suggestions are not exhaustive, and communities should work with residents and leaders to identify solutions that are best suited to their local contexts.

• Expanding transportation options, including public transportation, such as buses and light rails, and active transportation, such as bike lanes and sidewalks. (This may also improve the Environmental Quality and Safety from Trauma predictors.)
• Improving the quality and frequency of public transportation. 
• Reducing barriers to using public transportation, including by providing fare subsidies, making systems easy to navigate (e.g., having clear signage and route maps in multiple languages), and centralizing fares across different modes of transportation. 
• Improving transportation accessibility for people with mobility challenges, including by creating paratransit systems and ensuring existing transit is accessible to people with disabilities.
• Encouraging housing development near transit, including affordable housing and housing for people with disabilities. (This may also improve the Environmental Quality predictor.)

Mobility Dimensions Engaged

• Economic success
• Power and autonomy
• Dignity and belonging