GIS Research Tackles Social Exclusion in Northern England Transport

In Northern England, researchers are using geographic information system (GIS) technology to conduct quantitative research that better addresses the transportation needs of the economically and socially vulnerable.

Stretching from the border with Scotland to the Midlands, the North of England is the country’s second most populous region, home to 15.5 million people—26 percent of England’s population. The region includes a diverse mixture of geographies ranging from major towns and cities such as Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Sheffield, and Newcastle, to sparsely populated rural areas and coastal communities.

Significant pockets of social deprivation are concentrated in areas of the North, and the North East in particular. These areas are often linked to economic change and decline associated with legacy mining and manufacturing industries. More than other regions in England, the North East has a greater diversity of cultures and ethnicities represented in its population.

Take coal mining, for instance: In County Durham, an area of about 860 square miles, there were 304 mines at the peak of production in 1913, employing over 165,000 people. The local dialect is even termed “Pitmatic” and many of the villages on modern maps were the sites of individual mines. The last coal mine closed in 1994, and often all that remains of the shut-down mines are the winding wheels used to lower miners into the ground, now set as monuments to places where men once worked. 

Government support over several decades has enabled regeneration and brought much-needed employment in new industries to the region. However, the nature of change means that there are still a number of relatively isolated communities whose whole economic base no longer exists. Lacking local employment opportunities, residents are often forced to travel for work, education, services such as specialized health care, and even grocery shopping.

In the US, transportation mobility is seen as a major component of escaping poverty and achieving economic well-being. Access to regular, reliable, and affordable transportation opens pathways for those in low-income communities of color to the things that will make a difference: employment opportunities, education, health care, and better-quality retail and leisure facilities.

These patterns are universal, although the precise terminologies may differ. In the United Kingdom, transport-related social exclusion (TRSE) is a term used to refer to those locations where poor mobility and access is a limitation on an individual’s life opportunities.

TRSE was the subject of a recent study from Transport for the North (TfN), with research supported by a team comprising Temple, Social Research Associates, and subject matter experts.

TfN is a statutory subnational transportation body that works alongside local authorities and other agencies to transform the transportation system and enable the infrastructure investment needed to drive economic growth. It is broadly equivalent to a regional or metropolitan planning organization in the US.

The organization was founded in 2018 to ensure that strategic regional transportation plans and policies are developed and then delivered through local action. The scope of the agency’s strategic plan (developed in coordination with local authorities) is both broad and comprehensive: to increase efficiency, reliability, integration, and resilience in the transportation system; transform economic performance; improve inclusivity, health, and access to opportunities for all; and promote and enhance the built, historic, and natural environments. 

TRSE has a broad definition, but it encompasses people who do not have access to transportation resources because of income, socioeconomic status, or physical disability, as well as those with low accessibility to public transportation in particular. TfN had already conducted some of its own research into the topic, as part of what is known in the UK as the “leveling up” agenda. This is a national effort to achieve greater parity between the North of England and more prosperous areas such as the South East. The main purpose of the Temple/Social Research Associates study was to investigate the regional nature and scope of the problem.

As a first step, TfN identified the main social indicators of TRSE. A literature review identified 35 different factors, but these were whittled down to a more manageable 23 core indicators; the choices were driven in part by the quality of available data on each indicator.

The geographic unit of analysis selected for the study was the Middle layer Super Output Areas (MSOAs), which are roughly equivalent to a US census block. They consist of somewhere between 2,000 and 6,000 households and between 5,000 and 15,000 residents. Various demographic datasets were compiled based on the core indicators, which included such variables as age, income, employment, and disability. In total, there are 1,956 MSOAs in the study area with a mean population of 7,200. The volume of data analyzed in the project area required a robust spatial data management system comprising Microsoft SQL Server and ArcGIS Enterprise. 

Once the geodatabase was created for the study area, researchers applied geostatistics. This enabled researchers to calculate standard deviations from the mean. Where there were significant deviations, researchers identified areas where there was a high incidence of TRSE. These were termed vulnerability or risk factors.

Next, the researchers looked at accessibility measures for each MSOA, which consisted of journey times by different modes. The journey time information came from previous modeling carried out by TfN, with the main focus on travel by car and public transport. In the latter case, this meant primarily bus transit, but also included trams and light-rail where it existed: Manchester, Newcastle, and Sheffield. They assigned weights for each MSOA, such as the proportion of car ownership, and they calculated journey times to employment, health, and education facilities. As with the vulnerability analysis, standard deviations from the means were used to identify those areas with good and poor access.

To create easy access to the data, the TfN team developed a web map application, which allows the stakeholders to view the results by MSOA as well as by each indicator—for example, querying accessibility by different modes to employment, health, and higher education facilities. The app also allows comparison between selected pairs of MSOAs, thereby providing a greater understanding of TRSE in specific neighborhoods.

In many respects, there were few surprises associated with the study’s results. For instance, those familiar with the North of England’s geography will know the general location of the more deprived urban areas, which have problems with nearness to transport resources and accessibility. The more sparsely populated rural areas, where life without a car is more difficult, are also readily identifiable. However, much of what was done does serve as a quantitative affirmation of local and intuitive knowledge. This is valuable in identifying concentrations of TRSE in local authorities and determining whether the main causes are correlated with vulnerability risk factors or accessibility factors. Consequently, specific interventionist measures to remedy exposure to TRSE can be implemented where resources allow.

In addition to the quantitative analysis, the TfN group conducted primary research involving interviews with focus groups, individuals, and community leaders. 

This identified additional factors not included in the list of 23 core indicators, such as attitudes about the safety of using public transportation or walking through certain neighborhoods. While these concerns are universal, urban areas in Northern England are denser, and walking and cycling are more common than in the US. Overall, the impact of the research has raised the profile of TRSE among policymakers and provided an evidence base that improves our understanding of the nature and extent of TRSE in the North of England.

The research produced two main outcomes. First, the data and analyses compiled in the geodatabase were passed to Transport for the North staff for inclusion into their Analytical Framework (a suite of geodatabases and models). This data continues to inform the daily analyses of agency staff.

The second and more significant outcome is that the analyses were pivotal in the development of the agency’s strategic plan. TfN presented the specific findings in a separate report on TRSE. The report highlighted that TRSE is indeed an issue in the region—21.3 percent of those living in the North are in high-risk areas, compared to 16 percent of those in the South and Midlands.

Accordingly, TfN’s ambition for 2050 is to reduce by about one-third the number of residents in the North affected by high-risk TRSE areas. This will match the average across the rest of England and ensure that TRSE does not rise as the total population increases. Also, in line with government climate change policy, the decarbonization of the transportation system and the introduction of new transportation technologies should reduce inequality and improve inclusion.

TRSE is identified as a key problem area for action in the strategic plan, which outlines five solutions to deliver a socially inclusive transportation system: prioritize investment in public transport infrastructure and services; promote active travel programs enabling walking, cycling, and wheeling access to facilities including transit hubs; reform the planning system to prioritize transit-oriented developments such as higher-density, mixed-use schemes; improve digital connectivity to tackle the cost and informational barriers to internet access that characterize areas with a high risk of TRSE; and level up opportunities for areas with high TRSE by enhancing their attractiveness through environmental improvements, business investment, and public services, together with targeted pathways to employment and well-being, training, and skills education.

Although the research undertaken was region-specific, the methodology is readily transferrable to other regions of the country, and equally applicable in Scotland and Wales. Indeed, although other regional agencies in England have conducted similar research into TRSE in their own areas, the depth of the work carried out on TfN’s behalf is a clear distinction.

The analysis conducted by the Temple/Social Research Associates team is a part of a larger discussion in the UK, both about how to address regional imbalances—the “leveling up” issue—but also how to provide greater opportunities for social mobility through the provision of transportation services.

Much like transit agencies in the US, public transport agencies in the UK are experimenting with different types of services, all with the goal of providing greater accessibility and more equitable mobility. The type of service conceived will obviously vary widely between urban and rural areas.

Looking toward the future, public transportation should be viewed as just one of several possible solutions within a larger tool kit. This tool kit includes the potential of AI to transform how transportation services are delivered and revolutionize travel (and the need to travel). Additionally, agencies should consider using the kind of quantitative research detailed here to better target services. In the United Kingdom, there are several neighborhood planning initiatives that aim to identify locations with populations large enough to support local services like shops and post offices. These initiatives then share these services with smaller communities in the surrounding areas. This helps to reduce travel to or deliveries from larger urban locations farther away.

It must always be remembered that the policies being enacted in larger urban areas, which are well served by multimodal transportation, will work very poorly in sparsely populated rural areas. Active travel options are fine for journeys of a few hundred yards or small numbers of miles, but anything over that quickly becomes impractical or even impossible.

The research done by TfN and its associates and the solutions suggested are not necessarily unique. However, they do help to better define the application of often scarce resources to service the locations and individuals who most need them.