Transportation, Gentrification, and Urban Mobility: The Inequality Effects of Place-Based Policies
Transportation, Gentrification, and Urban Mobility: The Inequality Effects of Place-Based Policies
复制标题
交通、绅士化和城市流动性：基于地方的政策的不平等效应
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2020
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
B. Siddiqi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Clare Balboni;G. Bryan;B. Siddiqi
城市中的道路、铁路和其他公共交通都是“基于地点的”，因为它们都建在特定的街区。这些投资是否有利于穷人？如果人们在一个城市内是移动的，那么任何这样的基于地点的投资都可能导致社区的变化，比如租金上涨，这会改变谁能负担得起住在这些投资附近，从而改变谁从这些投资中受益。我们提供了一个易于处理的城市通勤模型来研究城市基础设施改善的分布效应。我们得到直观的“确切的帽子”表达式的初始居民的福利变化后，投资。然后，我们应用该方法来研究达累斯萨拉姆BRT系统，使用原始面板数据跟踪两个维度（以下家庭，如果他们移动和调查所有新居民的建筑物）。初步结果表明，BRT是一项有利于穷人的投资：我们估计，居住在BRT附近的现有低收入居民的福利收益为3.0%，而现有高收入居民的福利收益为2.5%;在整个城市，穷人平均收益为2.4%，富人收益为2.3%。
Roads, rail, and other public transport in a city are “place-based,” in that they are built in specific neighborhoods. Do such investments benefit the poor? If people are mobile within a city, then any such place-based investment can lead to neighborhood changes, such as rent increases, which change who can afford to live near these investments and hence who benefits from them. We provide a tractable urban commuting model to study the distributional effects of urban infrastructure improvements. We derive intuitive “exact hat” expressions for the welfare change of initial residents after investment. We then apply the method to study the Dar es Salaam BRT system, using original panel data tracked on two dimensions (following households if they move and surveying all new residents of buildings). Preliminary results suggest that the BRT was a pro-poor investment: we estimate a welfare gain of 3.0% for incumbent low-income residents living near the BRT, compared with a 2.5% gain to incumbent high-income residents; across the city, poor gained on average 2.4% and rich gained 2.3%.