Tuesday, October 26, 2010

Public Goods

Few of us engaged in the fight for better public transportation would disagree with author Malcolm Gladwell when he says, “There is enormous power in the concept of the public good.” But would we really expect that power to show up tangibly in the heart health of a small Pennsylvania town?

Those of us who had the chance to hear Gladwell speak at the 2010 Annual Meeting of the American Public Transportation Association certainly see the connection. Delivering the keynote address for the October 3-6 event, the bestselling author of The Tipping Point, Blink and Outliers: The Story of Success brought a unique and powerful perspective on public transportation to the table – and made his most compelling points though the story of Roseto, PA.

As Gladwell explained, Roseto was settled in the late 19th century by immigrants from Italy and, for decades, thrived economically and socially as close-knit Italian-American community. A chance conversation among area physicians in the late 1950’s led to the discovery that the town experienced extremely low rates of heart disease as compared to surrounding communities. An academic study comparing Roseto with neighboring towns found that the key factor in keeping residents healthy was not diet, exercise, low tobacco use or genetics. Instead, it credited community cohesion and civic-mindedness with the community’s heart strength.

Isolated during its beginnings from older, surrounding communities by anti-immigrant discrimination, Roseto developed a community strongly focused on familial loyalty, civic institutions and social equality. Roseto’s citizens disapproved of overt displays of wealth and status, participated in social clubs, revered their elders and observed rituals and traditions. It was noted that they often went out on walks in the town, patronized local businesses and ate meals with extended family and friends. In other words, Roseto treasured communal life and public resources. The study’s authors state that “the community was their base of operations and each inhabitant felt a responsibility for its welfare and quality.”

Having first studied the town in 1960, the study’s authors returned in 1985 to re-examine heart disease rates and attitudes toward community. They found that younger generations had moved from the town center to suburban areas, walked less, drove more, and stopped going to church as much. They patronized large supermarkets rather than neighborhood groceries, placed their elderly parents in nursing homes instead of their own, and more earnestly pursued material wealth.

Did this communal change of heart have an impact on the residents’ hearts? Apparently, yes. During the same timeframe, rates of heart disease, hypertension and deaths from heart attacks rose to close the gap between Roseto and surrounding areas. The study authors attributed this to the social change in the community. As Roseto lost its unique sense of communal life, it also lost its uniquely high level of public health.

What does this have to do with public transportation? Think about the makings of a close-knit community like Roseto. Members of the older generations had abundant opportunities to develop relationships with one another. They walked more than they drove, so they apparently had safe places to walk through the town. They came together in clubs and churches, so there must have been plentiful public space available for those types of activities. Businesses were small and locally owned, meaning that customers routinely interacted both with owners and fellow patrons.

Now think about what public transportation is, and what it can achieve. It is a public good in which the entire community invests and which all are entitled to use. It is a resource that can enable us to forgo the expense of private car ownership and feel secure in our ability get to where we need to go. It enhances social equality by providing transportation opportunities to the poor and the disabled. It goes hand-in-hand with pedestrian-friendly business and residential districts. It provides us with a venue for becoming familiar with our neighbors, if only because we see the same faces day in and day out. It decreases congestion, pollution and wear-and-tear on our streets. And, as in Roseto, public transportation can even enhance our physical health – a notion further supported by the weight lost by commuters in Charlotte, N.C., who switched from their cars to a new rail line.

During his address, Mr. Gladwell asked his audience to think about what it would be like to be billionaires. With access to every private good conceivable, what more would we want? His answer? Plenty… of public goods. We’d still want clean air to breathe, safe water to drink, adequate protection from disaster or crime, less time spent in traffic and more time spent at home with our families. In other words, he suggests that we’d want more of the sorts of things the good citizens of Roseto valued … and the sorts of things that, judging by the evidence, did their hearts good.

The question then becomes, how strong a link do you see between the public good and your own personal well-being, and how are you willing to invest in that link?

Thursday, October 14, 2010

A Transit User With A Choice

By Christy Campoll, Program Liaison

I joined CIRTA as its Program Liaison in June. As an employee, I can choose either a free monthly parking garage permit or a free monthly IndyGo pass. When I started at CIRTA, in order to economize, my husband (who works on the east side of Indianapolis) and I commuted together in our pick-up truck and utilized the parking permit. We were temporarily residing in Danville (Hendricks County) during my first two months on the job and travelled a 40-mile round-trip to and from Indianapolis. My household’s options for transportation include:
-- the pick-up truck, which has about 65,000 miles and gets 20 mpg;
-- my husband’s motorcycle, which I am too chicken to ride;
-- several bicycles; and
-- an old broke-down Toyota Echo that got over 40 mpg and probably will again if we ever get around to fixing it.

The only good thing I have to say about losing two hours of our lives each day to that drive is that we became more informed about current events, listening to hours of news on the radio. When I started working for CIRTA, we began to look for a house to buy. We placed high priority on finding a home in closer proximity to our jobs, preferably on a bus line or within walking/bicycling distance. We found a house on the east side with a stop for IndyGo’s downtown-bound Route 10 within steps of the end of the driveway. Even better, we are only two miles from my husband’s place of employment. I now ride the bus and my husband cycles to work.

The change in our commutes has improved the quality of our lives in several ways. Riding the bus saves me ten miles of driving each day – that’s a gallon of gasoline every other day. I also avoid the likelihood of experiencing a vehicle collision in congested rush-hour traffic. We’ve already had one crash during my husband’s morning commute from Danville earlier this year – hence the broke-down Toyota sitting in our garage. While I don’t save any time by riding the bus instead of driving, I do save myself a lot of stress. When I started commuting on IndyGo, I noticed that I felt much more relaxed when I arrived at the office in the morning and especially when I got home at night. Personally, I find that more rewarding than the financial and safety benefits. One other benefit that came as a pleasant surprise was getting to know a few of my neighbors by interacting them daily on the bus. I sometimes eat lunch with a fellow Route 10 rider who works two blocks from my building. As for my husband, he has enjoyed having more free time with a pared-down 15-minute commute that gives him a daily cardiovascular workout. Between the two of us, we save 68 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions per week by bicycling and using transit.

Riding the bus and adopting a lifestyle that is more independent of our car has spurred me to think critically about the transportation system and other city infrastructure. While I am pleased enough with IndyGo to continue to using it, I understand why so many other commuters stick with their cars. Common complaints that even I utter myself at one time or another include:
-- routes that run as infrequently as once per hour;
-- the need to transfer to get most places that are not downtown, necessitating additional fares and more waiting at stops;
-- operating hours that don’t accommodate non-traditional work shifts or later-evening activities;
-- stops with inebriated, overly sociable individuals or bad smells; or
-- lack of shelters, seating or even sidewalks at stops. My stop is simply a sign stuck into a patch of weeds and grass.

I’m glad that the Indy Connect transportation initiative is addressing the quality and efficiency of our local public transit system. Unlike me, most mass transit users in the Indy metro area today do not have a choice between driving and riding the bus. They are likely unable to afford to own or insure a vehicle, are elderly, or have a disability that makes them unable to drive. Most commuters who do have a choice will choose transit only if our system is made more convenient, efficient and attractive. It will cost taxpayer dollars to make these improvements, but the returns will pay us back in the form of a less congested, less polluted region that attracts jobs and high-quality development.

What do you think it will take to get more commuters to leave their cars at home and choose transit? Your comments are appreciated both here and at the Indy Connect comment page, where you can make suggestions for transit system improvements and fill out brief questionnaires about your transportation preferences.