Despite the growing literature on equity and accessibility, little attention is placed on the shortcomings of the transport planning process in bridging the gap between research and practice. Urban mobility plans are usually not oriented towards increasing accessibility and reducing inequalities, and transport projects are traditionally selected based on utilitarian approaches that disregard the distributional effects of proposed actions and policies. This is problematic due to several reasons, including the legitimization of political choices that perpetuate existing inequalities. In this paper, we aim to analyze how different distributive principles in ex-ante evaluations may result in quite distinct conclusions in the policy decision-making process, highlighting the many limitations of the most commonly used transport planning toolkits. To do so, we use data from Sao Paulo's mass transit network expansion projects, which shows disparities among the proposed lines regarding their impacts on inequality levels. While some lines consistently contribute to reducing the difference in accessibility between rich and poor or between white and black populations, others increase the city's average, but at the expense of worsening inequalities. The systematic use of inequality metrics in planning procedures might represent significant progress in reducing transport-related inequalities compared to the predominant utilitarian criteria.

中文翻译：

---

公共交通项目和公共交通规划是否忽视了不均匀的分配效应？来自巴西圣保罗的经验证据

尽管关于公平性和可达性的文献越来越多，但很少有人关注交通规划过程在弥合研究与实践之间差距方面的缺点。城市交通计划通常不以增加可达性和减少不平等为导向，交通项目传统上是基于功利主义方法选择的，忽视了拟议行动和政策的分配效应。这是有问题的，原因有几个，包括使现有不平等永久化的政治选择的合法化。在本文中，我们旨在分析事前评估中的不同分配原则如何在政策决策过程中产生截然不同的结论，强调最常用的交通规划工具包的许多局限性。为此，我们使用了圣保罗公共交通网络扩建项目的数据，该项目显示了拟议线路对不平等程度影响的差异。虽然一些线路始终有助于缩小富人和穷人之间或白人和黑人之间的可达性差异，但另一些线路则提高了城市的平均水平，但代价是不平等现象加剧。与主要的功利主义标准相比，在规划程序中系统地使用不平等指标可能代表着在减少与交通相关的不平等方面取得了重大进展。