August 03, 2022 Global Indicators Briefs No. 9 Constraints to Women’s Use of Public Transport in Developing Countries, Part I: High Costs, Limited Access, and Lack of Comfort Girija Borker T his Brief, the rst in a two-part series, provides an overview of the evidence on key features of women’s travel behavior and the barriers they face in accessing public transport in developing countries, including a ordability, frequency, coverage, and comfort (also see Borker 2022, which focuses on safety issues). Women make more frequent, shorter trips with more stops along the way to combine multiple tasks. In contrast, men follow direct and linear routes. ese patterns have important implications. As this Brief shows, the cost and frequency of public transport a ect women more than men, and given women’s income constraints, create trade-o s between travel and other economic opportunities. is Brief also highlights how the current design of public transport does not accommodate the unique needs of women. Notably, coverage issues such as a poorly connected network, including last mile problems, limit women’s use of public transport and increase their reliance on private and informal modes of transport. Infrastructure design does not prioritize women’s comfort. Understanding the evidence on the challenges faced by women is a rst step in identifying policies and interventions that could improve women’s accessibility. Women and men have different mobility needs consider comfort to be an important factor a ecting their travel because and travel patterns they are more likely to “trip chain,” combining multiple tasks and destinations in one trip (Allen et al. 2016) and to be accompanied by Transport is key to promoting development, access to essential children and the elderly (Duchène 2011). Buying numerous single-fare services and social support networks, and economic opportunity. With tickets during chained trips makes public transport costlier for women (Shah et al. 2017), which a ects the distance they cover (Uteng and cities expected to contain more than 5.2 billion people by 2050 (UN Turner 2019). 2018), there is a strong case for developing sustainable and equitable urban transport. One crucial component of this process is developing Women constitute a lower proportion of travelers in public transport that serves women’s mobility needs given that women and men transport but when they do travel, they are more dependent on public travel di erently. transport than men. Expensive multistop trips and more limited access to nancial resources increase women’s reliance on public transport In developing countries, women make frequent, shorter trips with (Gonzalez et al. 2020). In India, two-thirds of female workers in urban more stops, while men follow more direct and linear patterns (Gonzalez areas commute for work, and among women who travel, a higher et al. 2020). is di erence partly re ects sociocultural norms and proportion (67 percent) than men (41 percent) walk and use buses women’s existing roles in the household and economy. Men care more (Tiwari and Singh 2018). In Lima and Buenos Aires, women use public about commute duration and a ordability—perhaps because they make transport more than men: 58 percent of women compared to 54 percent more work-related trips and have higher incomes (Carvajal and Alam of men in Lima and 50 percent of women compared to 37 percent men 2018; Gauvin et al. 2020), while women rank infrastructure quality and in Buenos Aires (Gonzalez et al. 2020). service frequency as major barriers to public transport (Soman et al. Ganesan 2019). Women engage in more travel that is not related to paid Mobility issues are similar across urban and rural regions, while the employment to cater to household duties, caregiving and economic consequences are worse in rural areas (Gauvin et al. 2020). Women responsibilities (CIVITAS 2014). Women share similar roles across across urban and rural areas have inferior access to privatized transport developing and developed countries. For instance, in Bogotá, women modes than men (Peters 2013). Sixty percent of women in India rely on undertake 75 percent of care trips and 42 percent of work trips. buses as their primary transport mode, followed by informal or Similarly, women carry out more than 70 percent of the unpaid work in nonmotorized modes (Shah et al. 2017). Nonmotorized modes (such as countries like Ireland, Italy and Portugal (Vaalavuo 2016). Women also bicycles and rickshaws) and paratransit (such as electric rickshaws) play a Affiliations: Development Impact Evaluation (DIME), World Bank. Acknowledgements: Thanks to Muneeza Mehmood Alam, Theophile Bougna, Aidan Coville, Matias Herrera Dappe, Alice Duhaut, Aram Gassama, Karla Dominguez Gonzalez, Marcus Holmlund, Arianna Legovini, Sveta Milusheva, Binyam Reja, and Nancy Vandycke for their conversations and comments. Devika Kher and Manon Costinot provided exceptional research support. The authors would like to thank Norman Loayza and David Francis for guiding the publication process. Nancy Morrison provided excellent editorial assistance. Financial support from the ieConnect for Impact Program is gratefully acknowledged. Objective and disclaimer: This series of Global Indicators Briefs synthesizes existing research and data to shed light on a useful and interesting question for policy debate. Briefs carry the names of the authors and should be cited accordingly. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions are entirely those of the authors. They do not necessarily represent the views of the World Bank Group, its Executive Directors, or the governments they represent. All Briefs in the series can be accessed via: https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/brief/global-indicators-briefs-series https://www.worldbank.org/en/research/brief/global-indicators-briefs-series DECIG – Global Indicators Briefs No. 9 substantial role in women’s access to employment and other spend a higher proportion of their income on transport because they are opportunities (Uteng and Turner 2019). Ninety-three percent of female less likely to own a private vehicle and more dependent on public garment workers in Dhaka walk or use informal paratransit modes like transport (Baker et al. 2005; Dewita et al. 2020; Gwilliam 2017; Lucas manually pedaled cycle-rickshaws for their work commute (Sikdar at al. 2010). Transit also implies intangible costs like the time spent and 2014). In rural regions, however, women’s limited access reduces their potential consumption sacri ced to meet expenses (Gonzalez et al. health and economic outcomes, especially in time-sensitive cases like 2020). Another important determinant of how economical public childbirth. In fact, a 10 percent increase in distance from a hospital is transport is for passengers is the built environment, consisting of the associated with a 2 percent increase in the mortality rate (Uteng and physical parts of where people live and work such as homes, buildings, Turner 2019). Women also have lower access to automobile-based trips streets, open spaces, and infrastructure (Centers for Disease Control and in rural regions than in urban areas due to constraints on availability and Prevention 2011). Features such as the size of cities, the characteristics income (Adeel 2016). of the passenger transport system, demographic trends, and sociocultural norms also a ect transport costs (Diaz Olvera et al. 2008). Transport infrastructure in most countries is designed to cater to typical commute journeys, characterized by linear, uninterrupted travel e cost of transport a ects women more than men (Dodson et al. between home and the central business district (CBD). is pattern 2004). Women spend a higher share of their income on public transport tends to disfavor women (Allen et al. 2016; Gonzalez et al. 2020). To than men (Lecompte and Bocajero 2017). ey make more multistop address women’s complex travel needs, transport design must be trips, carry additional luggage, and are often accompanied by children gender-aware and serve both linear and nonlinear travel. Women need and the elderly; this forces them to rely on more expensive choices like connections to diverse locations beyond the CBD (Shah et al. 2017), and rickshaws or taxis, which provide the exibility and space required vehicles with ample luggage space, suitable for shopping and buggies. (Mejía-Dorantes and Villagrán 2019). Costly public transport and lack Traveling by public transport goes beyond the transit itself and includes of access to household vehicles also forces women to spend more on walking and waiting (Allen, Vanderschuren, and the University of Cape complementary and informal transport modes (Dodson et al. 2004; Town 2016). To improve women’s access to public transport, stations, Gonzalez et al. 2020; Priye and Manoj 2020). stops, and vehicles must be barrier-free, safe, and well lit (Peters 2013). Investments are needed in even walkways, easier road crossings, and Beyond travel, commuting costs a ect women’s housing decisions. gender-balanced public signage. Facing a trade-o between a ording rent or travel, women forgo economic opportunities outside their neighborhood if transport options e e ciency of a transportation system, de ned by its coverage, seem expensive. For instance, women’s employment rate declined by 26 exibility, and comfort, shapes women’s mobility and economic percent following a large-scale resettlement in Delhi (Abebe et al. 2017; opportunities (Aloul et al. 2019; IFC et al. 2018; Tilley and Houston Kunieda and Gauthier 2007; Munshi 2016). 2016). An increase in bus service has been shown to increase women’s nonfarm employment by 23 percent in India’s rural regions between Transport costs disproportionately constrain lower-income individuals because they a ect access to economic opportunities and 2005 and 2012 (Lei et al. 2019). Women in developing countries travel public spaces. Most low-income women walk or take nonmotorized longer than men and are more dependent on paratransit due to the lack transport for daily travels. In India, walking is the only viable transport of reliable transport services (Lecompte and Bocajero 2017; Peters mode for 87 percent of low-income women. To cover longer distances, 2013). Women also depend on factors like cleanliness, availability of low-income women substitute time for money, while higher-income shelter at bus stops, reliable information systems, and helpfulness of women prioritize comfort over cost (Arroyo-Arroyo and Diallo 2020). personnel to have a comfortable trip (Márquez et al. 2014). Public transport pricing essentially creates an a ordability trap for women. e high cost of traveling to the city center reduces employment is policy Brief reviews the evidence on four key constraints to avenues and market access for women (Tracey-White 2005). An women’s mobility—a ordability, coverage, frequency, and comfort. It inability to access viable options severely impacts women’s living provides an overview of the nature of each of these constraints, the conditions and capacity to save (Uteng and Turner 2019). is factors driving them, and their impact on women’s mobility. Together inequality creates a vicious circle, whereby the lack of public transport with transport safety constraints (see also Borker 2022), these constraints reduces women’s avenues to earn, and in turn makes transport align closely with the widely used 4A’s framework of adequacy of una ordable. Sixty percent of women in the Middle East and North transport that is centered around four attributes: a ordability, Africa believe the lack of transportation reduces their economic choices availability, accessibility, and acceptability (de Avila Gomide et al. (Aloul, et al. 2019; Dodsonet al. 2004). 2005).Within the “A” of a ordability, the Brief discusses direct monetary costs, indirect nonmonetary costs, and the opportunity costs to travel. Within the “A” of availability, it discusses coverage and Inadequate transport coverage perpetuates the frequency. Within the “A’s” of accessibility and acceptability, it discusses gender gap in mobility comfort. e discussion focuses on urban regions in developing countries, considering the fast-paced urbanization in the developing e last mile of travel poses a signi cant constraint (Lenormand et world (EC 2020). However, many challenges women face in urban al. 2020) due to inadequate connectivity between transit stops and the settings in developing countries also apply to rural settings and nal trip destination (Tilahun and Li 2015). Last mile connectivity developed countries. e constraints discussed have broader includes access to provisions like pedestrian walkways, bikeways, transit implications that can be considered by all transport planners. connections, and paratransit options. eir availability depends on the built environment where the last-mile trip takes place. is includes factors such as neighborhood design and distance from public transport Cost of public transport constrains women’s that a ect commuters’ modal choice and travelling time (Fan and mobility and access to economic opportunities Huang 2011). For instance, the presence of pedestrian and cycle infrastructure increases walking/bicycle use (Munshi 2016). A ordability of transport refers to households’ ability to spend on transportation while being able to access basic goods and complete daily Last mile connectivity a ects women’s access to transport, work, chores (Dewita et al. 2020; Fan and Huang 2011; Litman 2020). It is a and a safe environment. Women with better connectivity or those who key concern in transport use because families across developing countries live closer to the center have more job opportunities and better access to spend 10 percent to 20 percent of their income on direct transport costs those opportunities. For instance, better access to public transport (Allen et al. 2016; Gómez-Lobo 2011; Statista 2018). Poorer households allowed women in central zones in Chennai, India, to make 40 percent 2 DECIG – Global Indicators Briefs No. 9 longer work trips than those in the periphery, opening more job avenues and household work, women have less free time and higher trip for them. Moreover, women considered access to buses to be an essential frequencies than men (Duchène 2011). Nonworking women in Buenos factor while choosing a workplace in Chennai (Alberst et al. Baudi 2015; Aires make more trips in a day than their male counterparts because they Srinivasan 2005). Evidence from Pakistan has shown a monotonic are more likely to take care of school runs, household errands, and social relationship between the distance to the nal destination and the money visits (Gonzalez et al. 2020). Similarly, women in Chennai make all trips and time costs. Each additional kilometer between the mass transit stops to fetch water, 85 percent of drop-o trips, and 76 percent of grocery and end destination increases travel cost by 3.2 cents and travel time by trips (Srinivasan 2005). Women’s responsibilities make them time-poor 3.6 minutes (Field et al. 2020). Along with cost, women face safety and a ect their trip patterns. To cater to multiple responsibilities, concerns in the absence of adequate connectivity. is issue is discussed women “trip chain” and ful ll several activities within one journey. A in greater detail in the companion Brief (Borker 2022). Lack of transit higher frequency of transport reduces their wait and allows them to cover stations and appropriate infrastructures such as streetlights and sidewalks several destinations. is is particularly important for women who live further impede women’s ability to travel through these connectivity gaps on the periphery of cities and spend hours commuting to the center (Tilahun and Li 2015). (Khosla 2009; Uteng and Turner 2019). Last mile coverage is also a key determinant of public transport Unreliable and infrequent public transport falls short in serving access among the disabled. To access public transport, disabled women’s needs. Public transport either does not serve internal routes commuters rely on special services such as the feeder system (private or within communities or is available only at limited times (Gonzalez et al. public means of transport used to reach the nearest public transport stop, 2020). Around half of women commuters in India believe public including small-scale, demand-driven mobility services like taxi-buses or transport is unreliable due to its erratic schedule during nonpeak hours carpooling), as well as “dial-a-ride” and door-to-door services in adapted (Shah and Raman 2019). Bus services that tend to not show up, be late, accessible vehicles. While upper-middle-income countries such as Brazil or fail to stop for riders exacerbate the problem (Higgins 2019; Pojani and South Africa have taken measures to address the needs of disabled and Stead 2015). Bus passengers in India face an average waiting time of travelers, such initiatives have found only limited application in 12 minutes, which is double that of informal modes like shared auto low-income countries (Kett et al. 2020). A key issue for disabled rickshaws, regardless of the time of the day (Roy and Basu 2020). commuters is the poor condition of amenities, especially terminal facilities including inadequate shelter against weather conditions, e low frequency of public transport is an outcome of transport insu cient lighting, inappropriate entrances/exits, uncomfortable seats, authorities’ nancial constraints and the focus on catering to inadequate toilets for wheelchair users, and poor security arrangements male-centric travel. Peripheral regions of cities usually have dispersed for female travelers (Kett et al. 2020). Disabled women are further at risk settlements of low-income communities (Libertun de Duren 2018). as they are more often subject to sexual crime and harassment. eir inhabitants, while dependent on cheap public transport for Inaccessible transport systems increase the fear of victimization and limit connectivity, do not create enough tra c to justify investment in cheap their access to work, education, and social activities (Iudici et al. 2017). and frequent public transport (UN-Habitat 2003). e lower frequency Many countries lack adequate travel amenities for disabled women. In of transport reduces the number of trips that can be made in a day. Pakistan, 92 percent of disabled women rated existing terminal facilities Individuals living in the center of Chennai are almost 40 percent more as “poor” and “very poor” when asked about the amenities (Ahmad likely to make two or fewer trips a day, compared to those living in the 2015). Moreover, 60 percent of respondents in a Bangladesh survey periphery (Srinivasan 2005). Another cause for the dip in frequency is reported they could not use buses because of overcrowding and the disregard in transport planning for o -peak-hour tra c. e inaccessibility for users with wheelchairs or crutches (Akter and Rahman planning based on male-centric linear travel patterns does not value 2019). women’s trips to cater to household responsibilities. For instance, women in Turkmenistan have longer waiting times and 10 percent to 15 e absence of a well-connected public transport system and the percent more average total journey time than men (Kunieda and missing feeder system increases dependence on private or informal Gauthier 2007). Cost cutting exercises inevitably involve a reduction in transport modes. e proportion of trips made by public transport (50.2 o -peak services (Khosla 2009). percent) in India is 10 percent less than the desired range, as identi ed by a review of urban transport in India (Singh 2005), while the share of Long waiting times can have serious implications for women. trips made by private vehicles (33.9 percent) is 18 percent higher than Besides safety concerns while waiting for transport (Borker 2022; Shah this range (Dev and Yedla 2015). Women who lack funds or access to a et al. 2017), long waiting times have a nancial cost because they directly personal vehicle and who are underserved by mainstream transit systems a ect people’s working hours and salaries. A study based in Jordan opt for informal paratransit options (Priye and Manoj 2020). ey use showed that the waiting cost for public transport users is 12 percent minibuses, shared taxis, nonmotorized vehicles, and walking for the rst more during non-peak hours than during peak hours, and with women and nal phases of their journey. Places with poor pedestrian traveling most during non-peak hours, they disproportionately bear this infrastructure increase the need for other paratransit options. In Manila, higher cost. Moreover, the average cost of waiting time is higher for the lack of pedestrian infrastructure has forced people to use buses (which have nominally lower fares) than minibuses and taxis paratransit-like jeepneys and motorized cars even for trips that could be (Shtayat et al. 2019). accomplished by a 15-minute walk (Mateo-Babiano 2015; Walton and Sunseri 2010). For women choosing paratransit options, considerations Public transport is not designed to cater to the like comfort, reliability, and driver attitude are paramount and they are comfort of women travelers willing to pay a premium for it (Basu et al. 2017; Fillone and Mateo-Babiano 2018; Ghani et al. 2007). Such paratransit modes International standards de ne rider comfort as usability of facilities, increase users’ safety concerns and nancial costs (Borker 2022; Cervero ambient conditions, complementary facilities, and ergonomics (Imre 2013). ese informal transport modes also create intangible costs by and Çelebi 2017). Travel comfort, as per urban mobility experts, increasing tra c congestion and emission of harmful pollutants (Fried contributes more to making a convenient trip than a better ticketing and Abubaker 2019; Kumar et al. 2016). system, electronic services, and intermodality (Knupfer et al. 2018). Public transport in developing countries, however, often does not The low frequency of public transport when address women’s comfort needs. ree-fourths of riders in India and 67 women travel limits their use percent in Mexico City perceive public transport to be uncomfortable (Sánchez-Atondo et al. 2020; Shah and Raman 2019). Crowding, Waiting times a ect women’s choice of transport modes and routes unscheduled variabilities in transportation time, and ventilation (Chowdhury and Wee 2020). Because they often combine economic problems contribute to making public transport an undesirable option 3 DECIG – Global Indicators Briefs No. 9 (Imre and Çelebi 2017). For women, vehicles’ design and the way they Conclusion are driven makes public transport especially inconvenient (Mahadevia 2015). Public transport shapes how, when, and where most women travel. e need to make complex trips and ful l multiple responsibilities e comfort of a travel mode a ects women’s travel decisions. during their daily activities makes all travel costly for women not only in Forty- ve percent of women in India consider comfort to be a barrier terms of the time it takes but also in the associated monetary costs. while using public transport (Soman, Kaur, and Ganesan 2019). e Unreliable and infrequent public transport imposes a disproportionately current design of public transport does not accommodate women’s higher burden on women than on men, a ecting their access to unique needs. For instance, the height of entry and exit steps and education, health care, jobs, and markets. Women’s inability to actively absence of hold rails create problems for women in a traditional everyday participate in daily activities in uences their role in the global economy dress like sarees (Bhatt et al. 2015; Mahadevia 2015). Women’s comfort also lies in being able to travel with children and/or luggage, which is and concomitantly has long-term consequences for economic growth. why women are more likely to use elevators and escalators while traveling (Metro 2019). In India, women’s travel comfort also depends on having is Brief examines how women’s take-up and usage of public better pedestrian infrastructure and on the walking environment, as 40 transport is a ected by constraints related to a ordability, coverage, to 60 percent of trips are made by walking (Bivina and Parida 2020). frequency, and comfort. Women spend a higher share of their income on public transport than men, and the interaction of income constraints Factors such as transport exibility, reliability, and privacy also that bind more for women makes the cost of public transport a key contribute to women’s comfort. Transport exibility is an important constraint for them. Women face the majority of the costs associated consideration for women given their complicated travel patterns (Bray with limited last mile connectivity, making them more dependent on and Holyoak 2015). Considering time scarcity and safety concerns, paratransit options that are usually unsafe and relatively costly. Women women prefer predictable transport modes like cars and paratransit, seek transport options that provide frequent and reliable travel because which help them conduct complex trips spread across space and time of their time constraints and safety considerations. Women’s travel (Ng and Acker 2018). Women also tend to value transparent bus shelters decisions also rely on the level of comfort and convenience that public for better visibility and lighting (Perez 2019; see also Borker 2022). transport provides. References Abebe, G. T., S. Caria, M. Fafchamps, P. Falco, S. Franklin, S. Quinn, and F. Carvajal, G. K., and M. M. Alam. 2018. “Transport Is Not Gender-Neutral.” Shilpi. 2017. “Job Fairs: Matching Firms and Workers in a Field World Bank blog, January 24, 2018. Experiment in Ethiopia.” Policy Research Working Paper, 8092, World https://blogs.worldbank.org/transport/transport-not-gender-neutral. Bank, Washington, DC. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2011. “Impact of the Built Adeel, M. 2016. “Gender Inequality in Mobility and Mode Choice in Environment on Health.” Fact Sheet Series, June 2011. Pakistan.” Transportation 44 (6): 1519–34. https://www.cdc.gov/nceh/publications/factsheets/impactofthebuilten Ahmad, M. 2015. “Independent-Mobility Rights and the State of Public vironmentonhealth.pdf. Transport Accessibility for Disabled People: Evidence from Southern Cervero, R. 2013. “Linking Urban Transport and Land Use in Developing Punjab in Pakistan.” Administration& Society 47 (2): 197–213. Countries.” Journal of Transport and Land Use 6 (1): 7–24. Akter, A., and M. Rahman. 2019. “Women with Disabilities in Bangladesh: Chowdhury, S., and B. Van Wee. 2020. “Examining Women's Perception of Accessibility in the Built Environment.” Proshikhyan, A Journal of Training Safety during Waiting Times at Public Transport Terminals.” Transport and Development 26 (2): 1–12. Policy 94: 102–08. Alberst, A., K. Pfe er, and I. BaudI. 2015. “Rebuilding Women's Livelihoods Strategies at the City Fringe: Agency, Spatial Practices, and Access to CIVITAS. 2014. “Smart Choices for Cities: Gender Equality and Mobility, Transportation from Semmencherry, Chennai.” Journal of Transport Mind the Gap!” Policy Note. CIVITAS. Geography 55 (July): 142–51. https://civitas.eu/sites/default/ les/civ_pol-an2_m_web.pdf. Allen, H., M. Vanderschuren, and the University of Cape Town. 2016. “Safe de Avila Gomide, A., S. K. Leite, and J. M. Rebelo. 2005. “Public Transport and Sound: International Research on Women's Personal Safety on Public and Urban Poverty: A Synthetic Index of Adequate Service.” In Competition Transport.” FIA Foundation Research Series, Paper 6, FIA Foundation, and Ownership in Land Passenger Transport. 9th International Conference London. ( redbo 9). Lisbon. Aloul, S., R. Na a, and M. Mansour. 2019. “Gender in Public Transportation: Dev, S. M., & Yedla, S. 2015. Cities and Sustainability. Springer, India. A Perspective of Women Users of Public Transportation.” Friedrich-Ebert- Stiftun. Jordan & Iraq. www.fes-jordan.org. Dewita, Y., M. Burke, and B. T. Yen. 2020. “ e Relationship between Transport, Housing and Urban Form: A ordability of Transport and Arroyo-Arroyo, F., and B. Diallo. 2020. “Invisible Travelers”: 3 Lessons from Housing in Indonesia.” Case Studies on Transport Policy 8 (1): 252–62. Freetown to Transform Urban Transport—and Your City.” World Bank blog, February 27, 2020. Diaz Olvera, L., D. Plat, and P. Pochet. 2008. “Household Transport https://blogs.worldbank.org/ppps/invisible-travelers-3-lessons-freetown- Expenditure in Sub-Saharan African Cities: Measurement and Analysis.” transform-urban-transport-and-your-city. Journal of Transport Geography 16 (1): 1–13. Baker, J., R. Basu, M. Cropper, S. Lall, and A. Takeuchi. 2005. “Urban Poverty Dodson, J., B. Gleeson, and N. G. Sipe. 2004. “Transport Disadvantage and and Transport: e Case of Mumbai,” Policy Research Working Paper Social Status: A Review of Literature and Methods.”. Urban Policy 3693, World Bank, Washington, DC. Program. Research Monograph 5. Basu, R., V. Varghese, and A. Jana. 2017. “Comparison of Traditional and Duchène, C. 2011. “Gender and Transport.” International Transport Forum Emerging Paratransit Services in Indian Metropolises with Dissimilar Discussion Paper 2011-11. Service Delivery Structures.” Asian Transport Studies 4 (3): 518–35. www.internationaltransportforum.org/jtrc/DiscussionPapers/jtrcpapers. Bhatt, A., R. Menon, and A. Khan. 2015. “Women’s Safety in Public html. Transport: A Pilot Initiative in Bhopal.” WRI Ross Center for Sustainable EC (European Commission). 2020.). Developments and Forecasts on Continuing Cities, World Resources Institute, Washington, DC. Urbanization. European Commission. Bivina, G. R., and M. Parida. 2020. “Prioritizing Pedestrian Needs Using a https://knowledge4policy.ec.europa.eu/foresight/topic/continuing- Multi-criteria Decision Approach for a Sustainable Built Environment in urbanisation/developments-and-forecasts-on-continuing-urbanisation_en. the Indian Context.” Environment, Development and Sustainability 22 (5): Fan, Y., and A. Huang. 2011. “How A ordable Is Transportation? A 4929–50. Context-Sensitive Framework.” Report No. CTS 11-12, Center for Borker, G. 2022. “Constraints to Women’s Use of Public Transport in Transport Studies, University of Minnesota. Developing Countries II: Safety.” Research & Policy Briefs No. 10, World Bank Group, Washington, DC. Field, E., S. U. Junaid, A. Majid, A. Shahid, and K. Vyborny. 2020. Transport and Urban Labor Market Integration: Evidence on Travel Time and Bray, D., and N. Holyoak. 2015. “Motorcycles in Developing Asian Cities: A Congestion from a Mass Transit Quasi-experimental Evaluation and Evidence Case Study of Hanoi.” In 37th Australasian Transport Research Forum, on Firms from a Randomized Control Rrial in Pakistan. 3ie Grantee Final unpublished conference paper. Report. New Delhi: International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie). 4 DECIG – Global Indicators Briefs No. 9 Fillone, A. M., and I. Mateo-Babiano. 2018. “Do I Walk or Ride the Rickshaw? Munshi, T. 2016. “Built Environment and Mode Choice Relationship for Examining the Factors A ecting First- and Last-Mile Trip Options in the Commute Travel in the City of Rajkot, India.” Transportation Research Historic District of Manila (Philippines).” Journal of Transport and Land Part D: Transport and Environment 44: 239–53. Use 11 (1): 237–54. Ng, W. S., and A. Acker. 2018. “Understanding Urban Travel Behaviour by Fried, T., and I. Abubaker. 2019. “In African Cities, Mapping Paratransit Gender for E cient and Equitable Transport Policies.” International Makes for Smarter Mobility.” e City Fix (blog), May 27, 2019. Transport Forum Discussion Paper. https:/ thecityfix.com/blog/african-cities-mapping-paratransit-makes-smarter-mobility-travis-fried-iman-abubaker/. https://thecity x.com/blog/african-cities-mapping-paratransit-makes- smarter-mobility-travis-fried-iman-abubaker/. Perez, C. C. 2019. Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men. Random House. Gauvin, L., M. Tizzoni, S. Piaggesi, A. Young, N. Adler, S. Verhulst, and C. Cattuto. 2020. “Gender Gaps in Urban Mobility.” Humanities and Social Peters, D. 2013. Gender and Sustainable Urban Mobility. Global Report on Sciences Communications 7 (1): 1–13. Human Settlements. UN Habitat. doi:10.13140/RG.2.1.4746.9287. Ghani, M. N. N., M. Z. Ahmad, and S. H. Tan. 2007. “Transportation Mode Pojani, D., and D. Stead. 2015. “Sustainable Urban Transport in the Choice: Are Latent Factors Important?” In Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Developing World: Beyond Megacities.” Sustainability 7 (6): 7784–805. Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 6, 2007. Eastern Asia Society for Priye, S., and M. Manoj. 2020. “Exploring Usage Patterns and Safety Transportation Studies. Perceptions of the Users of Electric ree-Wheeled Paratransit in Patna, Gómez-Lobo, A. 2011. “A ordability of Public Transport: A Methodological India.” Case Studies on Transport Policy 8 (1): 39–48. Clari cation.” Journal of Transport Economics and Policy 45 (3): 437–56. Roy, S., and D. Basu. 2020. “An Approach towards Estimating Critical Value Gonzalez Dominguez, K., A. L. Machado, B. Alves, V. Ra o, S. Guerrero, and of Waiting Time at Transit Stops.” Journal of Tra c and Transportation I. Portabales. 2020. Why Does She Move? A Study of Women’s Mobility in Engineering 8 (2): 257–66. Latin American Cities. Washington, DC: World Bank. Sanchez-Atondo, A., Garcia, L., Calderon-Ramirez, J., Gutiérrez-Moreno, J. Gwilliam, K. 2017. “Transport Pricing and Accessibility.” Moving to Access, M., & Mungaray-Moctezuma, A. 2020. Understanding Public Transport Brookings Institution, Washington, DC. Ridership in Developing Countries to Promote Sustainable Urban Mobility: A Case Study of Mexicali, Mexico. Sustainability, 12(8), 3266. Higgins, B. 2019. “Understanding How Women Travel.” Metro, Los Angeles, CA. https://calcog.org/understanding-how-women-travel/. Shah, S., Viswanath, K., Vyas, S., & Gadepalli, S. 2017. “Women and Transport in Indian Cities”. Institute for Transportation and Development IFC (International Finance Corporation), Uber, and Accenture. 2018. Driving Policy,10-1. toward Equality: Women, Ride-Hailing, and the Sharing Economy. Washington, DC: IFC. Shah, S., and A. Raman. 2019. “What Do Women and Girls Want from Urban Imre and Çelebi. 2017. İmre, Ş., & Çelebi, D. 2017. “Measuring comfort in Mobility Systems?” Ola Mobility Institute, New Delhi. public transport: a case study for İstanbul”. Transportation Research Shtayat, A., M. Abu Alfoul, S. Moridpour, N. Al-Hurr, K. Magableh, and I. Procedia, 25, 2441-2449. Harahsheh. 2019. “Waiting Time of Public Transport Passengers in Jordan: Kett, M., E. Cole, and J. Turner. 2020. “Disability, Mobility and Transport in Magnitude and Cost.” e Open Transportation Journal 13 (1): 227–35. Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A ematic Review.” Sustainability 12 Sikdar, M. M. H., M. S. K. Sarkar, and S. Sadeka. 2014. “Socio-economic (2): 589. Conditions of the Female Garment Workers in the Capital City of Khosla, R. 2009. “Addressing Gender Concerns in India’s Urban Renewal Bangladesh.” International Journal of Humanities and Social Science 4 (3): Mission.” United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) India. 173–79. Knupfer, S. M., V. Pokotilo, and J. Woetzel. 2018. Elements of Success: Urban Singh, Sanjay K. 2005. “Review of Urban Transportation in India”. Journal of Transportation Systems of 24 Global Cities. New York: McKinsey& Public Transportation, Volume 8 (2005): 1. Company. Soman, A., H. Kaur, and K. Ganesan. 2019. How Urban India Moves: Kumar, M., S. Singh, A. T. Ghate, S. Pal, and S. A. Wilson. 2016. “Informal Sustainable Mobility and Citizen Preferences. New Delhi: Council on Public Transport Modes in India: A Case Study of Five City Regions.” Energy, Environment and Water (CEEW). IATSS Research 39 (2): 102–09. Srinivasan, S. 2005. “In uence of Residential Location on Travel Behavior of Kunieda, M., and A. Gauthier. 2007. “Gender and Urban Transport: Women in Chennai, India.” In Research on Women’s Issues in Transportation, Fashionable and A ordable.” Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Report of a Conference, Vol. 2, 4–13. Zusammenarbeit (GTZ). Statista Research Department. 2018. “Cost for public transport in cities Lecompte, M. C., and J. P. Bocarejo. 2017. “Transport Systems and their worldwide”. Statista. Impact on Gender Equity.” Transportation Research Procedia 25: 4245–57. https://www.statista.com/statistics/275438/public-transport-cost-cities/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/275438/public-transport-cost-cities/ Lei, L., S. Desai, and R. Vanneman. 2019. “ e Impact of Transportation Tilahun, N., and M. Li. 2015. “Walking Access to Transit Stations: Evaluating Infrastructure on Women's Employment in India.” Feminist Economics 25 Barriers with Stated Preference.” Transportation Research Record 2534 (1): (4): 94–125. 16–23. Lenormand, M., J. M. Arias, M. San Miguel, and J. J. Ramasco. 2020. “On the Tilley, S., and D. Houston. 2016. “ e Gender Turnaround: Young Women Importance of Trip Destination for Modelling Individual Human Mobility Now Travelling More than Young Men.” Journal of Transport Geography Patterns.” Journal of the Royal Society Interface 17 (171), 20200673. 54: 349–58. Libertun de Duren, N. R. 2018. “ e Social Housing Burden: Comparing Tiwari, G., and N. Singh. 2018. “Travel to Work in India: Current Patterns Households at the Periphery and the Centre of Cities in Brazil, Colombia, and Future Concerns.” Transport Research & Injury Prevention Program. and Mexico.” International Journal of Housing Policy 18 (2): 177–203. Indian Institute of Technology Delhi. Litman, T. 2020. Transportation A ordability Evaluation and Improvement Tracey-White, J. D. 2005. Rural-Urban Marketing Linkages: An Infrastructure Strategies. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. Identi cation and Survey Guide, Vol. 161. Food & Agriculture https://www.vtpi.org/affordability.pdf. https://www.vtpi.org/a ordability.pdf. Organization. Lucas, K. 2010. “Making the Connections between Transport Disadvantage UN (United Nations). 2018. “Around 2.5 Billion More People Will Be Living and the Social Exclusion of Low-income Populations in the Tswane Region in Cities by 2050, Projects New UN Report.” United Nations. https:/ www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-world-urbanization-prospects.html. of South Africa.” Journal of Transport Geography 19 (6): 1320–34. https://www.un.org/development/desa/en/news/population/2018-world- Mahadevia, D. 2015. “Promoting Low Carbon Transport in India: Gender urbanization-prospects.html. Sensitive Transport Planning for Cities in India.” CEPT University. UN-Habitat. 2003. e Challenge of Slums: Global Report on Human Márquez, L., V. Cantillo, and J. Arellana. 2014. “How Are Comfort and Safety Settlements. UNHP. https://www.un.org/ruleo aw/ les/Challenge%t20of Perceived by Inland Waterway Transport Passengers?” Transport Policy 36: %20Slums.pdf. 46–52. Priya Uteng, T., & Turner, J. 2019. “Addressing the linkages between gender Mateo-Babiano, I. 2015. “Pedestrian's Needs Matter: Examining Manila's and transport in low-and middle-income countries”. Sustainability, 11(17), Walking Environment.” Transport Policy 45: 107–15. 4555. Mejía-Dorantes, L., and P. S. Villagrán. 2020. “A Review on the In uence of Vaalavuo, M. 2016. “Women and Unpaid Work: Recognise, Reduce, Redistribute!” Barriers on Gender Equality to Access the City: A Synthesis Approach of European Commission. Mexico City and Its Metropolitan Area.” Cities 96, 102439. Metro (Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority). 2019. https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=2492&furtherNews=yes. https://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId= 2492&furtherNews=yes. “Understanding How Women Travel”. Walton, D., and S. Sunseri. 2010. “Factors In uencing the Decision to Drive http:/ libraryarchives.metro.net/DB_Attachments/20190294/UnderstandingHowWomenTravel_FullReport_FINAL.pdf. http://libraryarchives.metro.net/DB_Attachments/20190294/ UnderstandingHowWomenTravel_FullReport_FINAL.pdf. or Walk Short Distances to Public Transport Facilities.” International Journal of Sustainable Transportation 4 (4): 212–26.