An article in the New York Times discusses a recent study at Harvard on how reliable, efficient transportation is more influential than crime, test scores, or a two-parent family in determining whether low-income families can escape poverty. Transportation affects access to jobs and affordable shopping, and it limits the selection of housing locations, often creating areas with higher unemployment and lower incomes than others. The article lists urban areas such as Atlanta, Boston, Dallas, Denver, Los Angeles, and New York as examples of this commute-poverty correlation.
Investments ensuring that efficient public transportation is accessible to everyone reduces transportation emissions and opens up economic opportunity.
Climate Protection: Public transportation decreases use of personal vehicles, lowering CO2 emissions
Energy & Mobility: Creates a system that allows less dependence on cars
Food & Water: Allows people to reach supermarkets with more nutritious food
Jobs & Assets: Gives families more choices in employment, education, and accessing services
Health, Well-Being, & Safety: Enables people to consider preferences and safety when selecting where to reside
This post is part of a series on examples of multisolving, or climate-smart policies that simultaneously work to mitigate climate change while providing co-benefits such as the ones described above. The multiple benefits analysis was done using the FLOWER framework.