Inclusive Transport Infrastructure? Good, Bad and Ugly

In this qualitative study, an aspect of Inclusive Transport Infrastructure (ITI) is questioned and explored through the lens of Transformative Service Research (TSR) (Rosenbaum, 2007; Anderson, 2010; Anderson et al., 2013; Anderson and Ostrom, 2015; Ostrom et al., 2021) with a focus on positive and negative perceptions of Disabled people, to consider more Transformative Transport Services (TTS). It aims to addresses inequities in service and provision outcomes (Field et al., 2021) and represents the voices of Disabled people regarding their lived experiences of public transport across the United Kingdom (UK). Due to ongoing inequality and lack of reasonable adjustments and/or new provision, this TSR continues ongoing debate for greater change needed for a more ITI. Field et al. (2021:466-467) introduce a number of Service Research Priorities (SRP) for designing Sustainable Service Ecosystems (SSE), one being SRP7 with themes/topics: ‘addressing inequities in service and provision outcomes’ and ‘putting people first’, and top stakeholder wants (in this case Disabled people): ‘accessibility, dignity, fairness and well-being’, and guiding questions (adapted and used via a JISC Online Survey): ‘How can we develop new and update existing service systems to be inclusive and culturally responsive, considering the needs and interests not only of the dominant populations […]’, ‘What are some ways in which access can be improved […]’, ‘While there are several initiatives related to responsible scholarship and practice currently underway (e.g., Fisk et al. 2020), how do we raise even more awareness of what reasonably should be viewed as the unjust treatment of some groups in our society?’, and ‘How can services […] be accessed in a manner that maintains human perceptions of dignity and fairness and reduces inequities?’. Responses from participants are to be analysed using qualitative data analysis software (QSR International, 2022) alongside manual content analysis (Silverman, 2020) to explore key concepts and themes to inform policymakers and action planning for evidence-based plans for consideration to innovate on ITI. Jeekel (2019:151-197) highlights the salience of ‘realising a transport system that does not lead to social exclusion’ and the democratisation of ‘transport for all via the power of joint experiences, dialogue and creating community via transport and transport services’; going on to highlight expected outcomes of social cohesion and more creative communities. Beckiaris et al. (2020) state that mainstreaming disabled users’ needs in the innovation, development and evaluation of every new opportunity and impact on accessibility and seamless inclusive transportation services from the outset through to implementation, including adaptability and personalisation aspects is a research priority. There are major discrepancies for Disabled people across urban, rural, developed and developing transport provision (ibid.). Representation and voice of Disabled people are far from heard. There is a desperate cry for positive, transformative services with equity and efficacy of service and provision at the crux of this important aspect of ITI policy which deals with the needs and expectations of Disabled people. Related strategic decision making, plans and developments, should first and foremost be informed by Disabled people, hence this vital TSR for positive, impactful change.