Transportation Camp: Don’t Think of an App
If I had to pick one important lesson I took away from the thought-provoking Transportation Camp this weekend — and I’m glad that I don’t really have to, because there were piles of good ideas and people, and I was only there for day 2 — it would be this idea that Kevin Webb articulated before the (un)conference began (some of which i’ve posted in his words at the bottom): technology is only a part of the solution, especially with a real-world experience like getting from point a to point b, and especially when some people still don’t use smart phones (crazy, huh!).
But as the (I think only) session on civic-mindedness pointed out, that’s much easier said than done (to wit: the session’s technology bias was clear in the title, “Rosa Parks, is there an app for that?” Though it may have been named with the same kind of cheekiness I used at the end of the last paragraph).
But we acknowledged just how much work and thinking and questioning and inclusion we needed to do. It’s a lesson I think many of us intuit when we’re working on improving any system. But it’s one I’ve also been learning firsthand since we started working on Weeels: no app is an island. Digital software and hardware has to integrate and work in tandem with analog software and hardware — the people and the streets and the steel vehicles that move through them. Conferences like Transportation Camp are crucial and vital gatherings of ideas and thinkers who take this lesson to heart. But, as Benjamin de la Pena said at the start of the great “Rosa Parks” discussion, the first question one must ask when sitting down around a table is “who’s not at the table?” Who was at the table? Dan Latorre called all of us ”spoiled, privileged elites,” and we laughed and knew he was only half joking.
Someone suggested we organize a “Transportation Equity Camp,” where technological literacy might be taught. Many people liked this idea. Hands were shaken, and I walked away the way one crosses a busy intersection after leaving a good meeting of thoughtful people — cautiously, optimistic.
- Alex Pasternack (@pasternack, @weeels)
We’re still far from a moment when access to transportation is seen as a fundamental right and there have both been significant gains and losses made on this front over the last several decades. The rise of car-centric transport and suburbanization—in some places a response to integration—moved us further from the dream of universally accessible communities. More recently we have seen a return to the city center and a reinvestment in transit infrastructure. It remains, however, an open question whether this renaissance can help address inequalities or only further exacerbate them.
Information technology presents new opportunities and challenges for improving transportation access. Web-based mapping solutions and the proliferation of mobile applications allow us to rethink the very nature of our transportation infrastructure. All of a sudden highways and the single-occupancy vehicles that travel them become platforms for ad hoc, point-to-point transit networks [and Weeels, I might add ;-]; interactive trip planning tools simplify and advertise traditional fixed-route transit systems; and, information networks themselves allow us to reconsider how we connect with one another and define the boundaries of our communities.
These advances are without question positive changes. They help reduce complexity and expand the visibility of transportation options. They also play a role in defining who uses various forms of transportation—particularly, increasing the desirability of shared transit options among users that might otherwise choose a different means.
At the same time, however, it is worth considering the consequences of our design choices. Just as sprawling pedestrian unfriendly streets limit suburban access to those that can afford cars, transportation options that depend upon Internet access, smart phones or even literacy, can present significant challenges for certain populations. Riders that might otherwise rely on transit for their primary means of mobility may not have the luxury of “choosing” the latest mobile-enabled transportation platform ether because of price or familiarity with technology. Without thoughtful design we run the risk of adding new tiers to an already exclusionary hierarchy of transportation options.
As we work to design the future of transportation it’s useful to reflect on its history of inequality and to recognize the universal importance of mobility. In the conversations to come at Transportation Camp and within the burgeoning community of transit hackers let’s look for ways to leverage new technology while at the same time building a more accessible and equitable transportation system. The first step is remembering that the challenges we face are more than technical.
(Thanks to Nick Grossman and Open Plans for organizing the conference.)
