Growing poverty in America’s suburbs challenges their image as single-family residential communities for middle class, predominantly white families. Research shows that suburban areas now have the largest share of households under the poverty line. Since these areas have lower density development and lower levels of public transit service compared to urban areas, living in the suburbs may pose accessibility challenges for low-income households, particularly those without a personal vehicle. To explore housing and transportation issues associated with the suburbanization of poverty, we combined U.S. Census data from Contra Costa County, which has the highest rates of suburban poverty in the San Francisco Bay Area, and online and in-person surveys with individuals who earn less than 80% of the Area Median Income (AMI), around $75,000. This research identifies demographic and external factors that lead low- and moderate-income households to move to suburban areas, accessibility barriers faced by low- and moderate-income suburban households, and how transportation use and transportation and housing costs differ between urban and suburban low-income residents in the Bay Area.
The California High-Speed Rail (HSR) project aims to transform transportation in the state. To understand the impact of this project as it “rolls out” across the state, we analyzed its economic benefits across each of its plannedphases, complementing official projections from the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA). Our analysis is based on a spatial economic model of the rail system model previously developed by members of our team. This model captures the direct potential travel benefits of the HSR project, such as quicker and sometimes cheaper transportation, for commuters, business travelers, and leisure travelers. It also captures wider economic benefits such as higher wages and land values stemming from greater concentration of employment in more productive areas.
The California High-Speed Rail (HSR) project stands to significantly change transportation across the state, but questions remain about who will benefit most from this massive infrastructure investment. While previous analyses have focused on the aggregate economic benefits of HSR in California, we provide a more nuanced understanding of these benefits for communities across California using a spatial economic model previously developed by members of our team. This model captures the direct potential travel benefits of the HSR project (such as quicker and sometimes cheaper transportation) for commuters, business travelers, and leisure travelers. It also captures wider economic benefits such as higher wages and land values stemming from greater concentration of employment in more productive areas. We examine how these benefits would be distributed across California regions and socioeconomic and income groups. By understanding the potential disparities in the impact of the HSR project, policymakers can develop complementary policies to promote more balanced economic development across regions in the state.
The State of California has increasingly considered the housing and environmental crises together by encouraging affordable housing development in transit rich areas. As such, municipalities are encouraging the creation of affordable housing near transit lines and metropolitan planning organizations are being called on to preserve transit-accessible affordable housing at the regional level. While much effort has gone into advocating for affordable housing in transit rich areas, research has yet to evaluate the experience of low-income residents at such sites. In turn, we surveyed 192 residents at six affordable housing sites geographically spread throughout San Diego County to understand their transportation experiences. All the developments were 100 percent affordable, contained at least 50 units, and provided both multifamily and senior
housing.
Automobiles can greatly enhance access to employment and other opportunities. However, many households do not have the resources to purchase a vehicle outright and must rely on automobile loans. This increases the total cost of owning a vehicle, particularly for non-white consumers who may have to pay higher purchase prices and/or higher interest rates due to discriminatory lending practices. The effects of high household debt—of which automobile loans are one component—are magnified in lower income neighborhoods, leaving residents with fewer resources to invest in the local economy. Our team used the University of California Consumer Credit Panel, a dataset from Experian, which tracks every loan and borrower in California, to examine how and why automobile loan debt varies from place to place in the state and its consequences. We specifically tested whether total automobile debt, debt burden (the ratio of automobile debt to income), and automobile loan delinquencies in 2021 disproportionately affected non-white neighborhoods.
California is committed to transitioning heavy-duty vehicles (HDVs) from diesel to zero-emission vehicles (ZEVs) like battery electric vehicles (BEVs) or hydrogen fuel cell electric vehicles (HFCEVs) by 2045, and in certain cases much sooner. Achieving this goal requires substantial efforts from various sectors, including vehicle manufacturers, infrastructure developers, and governments. It is particularly important to understand the perspectives of HDV fleet operators, as their viewpoints and willingness to adopt ZEVs will be critical to California’s success in this transition. To better understand the perspective of fleet operators, we conducted in-depth interviews with 18 California HDV fleet operators, across various sectors and fleet sizes, on the viability of zero-emission fuels and vehicles over the next 10 to 20 years and the main motivators for, and barriers to, procuring ZEVs.
Drayage trucks (i.e., heavy-duty trucks that move containers and bulk freight between ports and rail facilities, distribution centers, and other nearby locations) are a critical part of port operations, however, they also adversely affect air quality. In California, drayage fleets are facing strict regulatory pressure under the Advanced Clean Fleets (ACF) regulations. Starting in January 2024, all newly registered drayage trucks in the CARB Online System must be zeroemission vehicles (ZEVs), so either a battery electric truck (BET) or hydrogen fuel cell electric truck (HFCET). By 2035, every drayage truck operating in California must be zeroemission.
California must build, operate, and maintain transportation infrastructure while ensuring that the health of communities and the planet are not compromised. In addition to vehicleemissions, supply chain inputs and energy use from constructing and maintaining transportation projects (e.g., roads, airports, bridges) result in pollution that contributes to climate change and impacts the health of local communities. Project-specific air and noise pollution can further burden vulnerable populations. By assessing transportation projects using a life-cycle perspective, all relevant emission sources and activities from raw material production, supply chain logistics, construction, operation, maintenance, and end-of-life phases of a project can be analyzed and mitigated.
Reducing air pollution from automobiles is a climate and public health imperative. Transportation is the “single largest source of CO2 emissions” in California and the second largest source nationwide. State leaders recognize the need for zero-emission vehicles to achieve statewide carbon neutrality. Millions of electric vehicles (EVs) are expected on American roads in the coming decade. California alone will require over two million publicly accessible EV chargers to support over 15 million EVs by 2035, and nationwide over 28 million total chargers will be needed by 2030. To date, public charging infrastructure investment has not prioritized lower-income and black and brown communities, and electrification has mostly benefitted higher-income, whiter communities. Federal and state funding programs for charging infrastructure have begun directing vehicle and charging investment to lower-income communities, rural communities, and areas at greatest risk of environmental harm, but this investment must be met with equity-oriented decision-making tools.
The Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017 (Senate Bill 1 or SB 1) aims to improve and enhance California’s transportation infrastructure. Like many infrastructure programs, however, there are concerns with project cost overruns, delays, and cancellations, as these can undermine program goals and negatively impact quality of life in California. To better understand SB 1 program performance thus far, we analyzed quarterly Caltrans SB 1 project reports between 2018 and 2023 to provide insights into project costs, delays, and cancellations.
