Impact of Transportation on Social-Economic Development:

A Case Study of Jaipur City

Vikas Meena
Research Scholar, Department of Geography
University of Rajasthan

Dr. Dharmendra Singh Chouhan

HOD, Department of Education
University of Rajasthan

Abstract
The importance of transport for economic development results from its multilateral links with
different forms of human activity. So far, the focus has been on the impact of investments in the transport
infrastructure on economic growth, whereas the importance of other elements of the transport system has
been overlooked. In this article the concept and components of the transport system have been analysed,
indicating the important role of the soft transport infrastructure and innovation. The main objective of the
article is to analyse the role played by transport in the modern economy and indicate the mechanisms
affecting the socio-economic development.
Keywords: transport system, transport infrastructure, economic growth

Introduction
Climate change and environmental degradation are the most compelling challenges facing the world.
Combustion of fossil fuels contributes heavily to emission of greenhouse gases, which bring about a rise in
global temperature (NASA, 2020). The transport sector facilitates trade (Stopford, 1997) and increases
urbanization (Li et al., 2018). It is not only the fastest growing energy-consuming sector worldwide but also
is a major contributor to global climate change (Alkhathlan & Javid, 2015; Birago et al., 2017; Jain &
Tiwari, 2016). According to the estimates of the World Health Organization, every year, air pollution kills
seven million people worldwide (WHO, 2014). A study by Harris (2014) reports that India has the highest
death rate due to air pollution. Brundtland Commission (1987) defines sustainable development as the
development which ‘meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs’. ‘The goal of sustainable transportation is to ensure that environment, social and
economic considerations are factored into decisions affecting transportation activity’ (Transport Canada,
1999). Litman and Burwell (2006) list the environmental costs created by the transportation sector, such as
air and water pollution, habitat loss, hydrologic impacts and depletion of non-renewable resources. In line
with the definition of sustainable development by Brundtland Commission (1987), this study defines
sustainable mode of transport as that mode of transport that emits the lowest carbon per person, such as
walking, cycling or using public transport, as compared to the other available modes, such as motorized two-
wheelers, motorized four-wheelers or hired taxis, and thereby compromises the least with the needs of the
future generations. Worldwide, the most commonly used mode of transport is a private car (European
Commission, 2013). In India, approximately 81% of the total automobile domestic sales in 2018–2019 were
of motorized two-wheelers (Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers, 2018). According to Wilbur Smith
and MoUD (2008), the modal share in Jaipur was walking (26%), cycle (13%), motorized two-wheeler
(26%), public transport (22%), motorized four-wheeler 4% and intermediate public transport (4%).

The burden of multiple responsibilities and other cultural and economic factors demand women to
travel short distances, use cheaper means of transport along with possessing low transport demand (Anand &
Tiwari, 2007; Mahadevia & Advani, 2016). This is true not only for the developed countries but also for the
developing countries. Because of existing gender differences in transport demand services, there is a need to
study the choice of different modes of transport separately for these two groups of population. Existing
studies conducted in developed and developing economies conclude that with better socio-economic
conditions, individuals tend to be more dependent on non-motorized modes of travel and are less dependent
on public transport or walking and cycling. To the best of our knowledge, any similar study examining the
gender differences in impact of socio-economic factors on choice of travel mode has not been conducted in
Jaipur. Jaipur is not only one of the most populous highest rates of crimes against women (Narayan, 2020).

1
The objective of the present study is to examine the impact of socio-economic factors on choice of
sustainable mode of transport and, if at all, to find if these factors affect men and women separately.

Findings of the current study call attention to the need to integrate the socioeconomic factors such as
level of educational attainment, work status, socioeconomic status and also gender along with other crucial
factors while formulating policies to effectively mitigate the global soaring temperatures or swelling climate
change. It highlights that women, at present, contribute lesser to environmental degradation than men, given
their environment-friendly choice of mode of transport. However, if the climate policies require that at least
the ecological footprints by women be maintained, this will stand in the way of their empowerment due to
the restrictions imposed on their mobility by slow and less efficient means of transport. This article proposes
the need for development of an efficient and secured infrastructure for less polluting modes of transportation,
such as public transport, walking and cycling, in Jaipur to not only maintain the low carbon footprints of
women but also reduce the carbon footprint of men by a significant amount. Section II discusses review of
literature on the topic. Section III introduces the city followed by Section IV that highlights description of
data and methodology used. Section V presents the major findings. Section VI concludes and reflects on
policy implications.

Literature Review
In Mumbai's complex traffic patterns, Jaikishan Damani et al. (2020) examined the risk factor for
motorised two-wheeler safety. The poll indicates that two-wheeler ownership has grown in a variety of
nations throughout the world. In recent years, there has been a consistent rise in the number of registered
motorised two-wheelers. The basic forces behind development haven't changed in growing nations like India,
where motorised two-wheelers made up 73.5% of all registered vehicles in 2015 while increasing at a rate of
10.1%. The research claims that concerns with general traffic have increased as a result of growing
motorised two-wheeler rights rates. One of the key problems is the rise in death rates. Even though they only
represent roughly 54% of all registered cars globally, developing nations are responsible for up to 90% of all
traffic deaths (WHO 2015).

Devagappanavar (2019) focused on assessing helmet use among two-wheeler riders in a significant
South Indian metropolitan. According to the data, 87.8% of all injuries sustained in road accidents in India
occurred in 31 states in 2016. However, among cities with a population of over 50 million, Delhi had the
highest number of deaths, followed by Chennai and Bangalore. The paper states that while road traffic
accidents are now the ninth-leading cause of disability-adjusted life years lost globally, they are predicted to
rise to the third-leading cause by the year 2020. They've gathered information from a cross-sectional study in
which, at selected traffic junctions, 920 pilions and 1471 two-wheeler riders were observed using an
observation checklist at varied time intervals. Estimating two motorised vehicles' compliance is the study's
main objective.

Mohd et al. studied the opinions of two-wheeler riders toward customer satisfaction in Hyderabad
(2018). It is obvious that the car industry is one of the most crucial economic sectors both worldwide and in
India due to large forward and backward links. This study demonstrates that the Indian two-wheeler industry
attracted attention on a worldwide scale after undergoing major changes from 1991. Despite the fact that it
all began in the late 1950s when Enfield built its plant to make "bullet" bikes. Significant technical
advancements have been made, such as the development of four-stroke motorcycles, fuel injection engines,
and enhanced features, power, mileage, environmental compliance, performance, comfort, and two-wheel
electric vehicles. The lack of adequate public transit, improved financing, the availability of models, growing
urbanisation, an increase in the number of skilled young people, and rising per capita income, according to
the author, are all contributing to the sector's yearly growth. When a product's performance is compared to
the expectations of the consumer, a person's emotional response to an object, such as good or poor or
like/dislike, is what is being measured. Its main perceptions are built on the attitudes of the customers, the
performance of the products, and the quality of the services. The results of the study show that customer
satisfaction is essential for all concepts, but the importance of it varies depending on the good or service and
the person.

Meenakshi (2018) conducted a theoretical analysis of consumer satisfaction with motorbikes in

India. The study found that the relationship between a customer's expectations and how effectively a product
functions defines customer happiness. According to the report, bikes weren't initially popular. Pushing was
2
required to start the engine. Kick starters, clutches, gearboxes, chain drives, and springs have all been added
to motorcycles from around 1907, eventually transforming them into practical, inexpensive modes of
transportation. In addition to these, the research also examined certain general Indian variables, such as
affordability, access to jobs, high rates of youth, etc., that led to the growth of this division. Customer
satisfaction, according to the study, is a measure of how effectively a company's products and services meet
or surpass a customer's expectations. It is one of the four aspects of the balanced scorecard and is recognised
as a significant performance indicator in the business sector. In a market where firms compete for clients,
customer happiness is considered as a major differentiator and has increasingly become a fundamental
component of corporate strategy. Customer happiness is the key to successful private sector business. The
survey found that a motorbike's speed, design, mileage, pricing, dependability, style, brand image, and
attractiveness were its most attractive qualities to potential consumers. Customers who are pleased with the
features of a product are also more inclined to buy it.

Study Area
Jaipur is the capital of the Rajasthan and ranks eleventh largest (in terms of population) in India. The
Jaipur has maintained its glory and charm through ages and is well-known even today throughout the world
as. The place was named Jainagar after its ruler Sawai Jai Singh II and eventually it went onto to acquire the
present name (Government of Rajasthan, 1987). The district is situated in the eastern part of Rajasthan and
lies between 26032’ and 27051’ north latitudes and 74055’ and 76050’ east longitudes. The district has a
geographical area of 14068 sq.km which is 3.23 % of the total area of the state (Government of India, 2020-
2021). Jaipur city has a population of 3.1 million (2011) making it the tenth largest urban agglomerations of
India. Jaipur district has apopulation of 6,663,971 in 2011. The district has a population density of 598
inhabitants per square km. Its population growth rate for the decade 2001-2011 was 26.91 percent. Jaipur has
a sex ratio of 910 females for every 1000 males and literacy rate of 76.44 percent (Directorate of Economics
and Statistics, Rajasthan, Jaipur, 1961-2011). Jaipur district is situated in north-eastern part of Rajasthan.
Jaipur district is surrounded by Alwar in North, Sikar in north-west and Bharatpur and Dausa in East. Ajmer,
Sikar, Alwar and Tonk districts around Jaipur share an inter dependent role in terms of the development
process. The city is regarded as one of the fast growing metropolitan in our country and has recorded
exponential growth of population in last four decades. Jaipur is the commercial and administrative head of
the state. It is also one of the important tourist attraction in India and hence is also draws good amount of
revenue to our country. It lies on one of the most popular travel packages of India ‘Golden triangle’
connecting tourist spots like Delhi, Jaipur and Agra. The Jaipur also attracts a large number of international
tourists to our country (Macwan and Kapadia, 2015). Thus; road connectivity plays an important role in
easing a smooth flow of goods, services as well as human resource.

Census of India (2011) reports a growth rate of 32.3% in the population as against 2001. The average
literacy rate of the city is 83.33%, and there are approximately 900 females for every 1000 males (Census of
India, 2011). Hinduism is the majority religion of the city. Jaipur is also one of the earliest planned cities of
modern India. The city makes a popular tourist destination in the country by framing a part of the west
Golden Triangle tourist circuit and is a United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
(UNESCO) World Heritage Site. The economy of Jaipur is triggered by tourism, gemstone cutting,
manufacturing jewellery and luxury textiles, and information technology. Jaipur Municipal Corporation is
divided into 8 zones comprising 91 wards. The city buses in Jaipur are operated by Jaipur City Transport
Services Limited of Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation. The service operates more than 400 regular
and low-floor buses. According to the estimates by Wilbur Smith and MoUD (2008), the total number of
government and private city buses was 327 in 2007.

The 150-km six-lanes ring road encircling Jaipur city and Jaipur Rapid Bus Transit System (BRTS)
is proposed to solve the problem of traffic. Though Jaipur Metro has commenced its operation, our study
finds limited use of the same in the city. Usage of the Metro reduces carbon emission per person by a
significant amount. A report by Times News Network (2019) finds that approximately 72% of the roads in
the city do not have a footpath and the remaining roads where footpaths existed were mostly parked with
vehicles. The usage of bicycles is minimal in the city. In India, approximately 81% of the total automobile
domestic sales during the 2018–2019 period are of motorized two-wheelers (Society of Indian Automobile
Manufacturers, 2018). We observe a similar trend in Jaipur, where the use of motorized two-wheelers is
ample and frequent.
3
Source of Data and Methods
The study uses primary data collected from 600 individuals in Jaipur city. Stratified random
sampling is used to select the respondents of the sample, and the strata are created on the basis of sex ratio
and literacy rate in the city. Within the strata, individuals are chosen randomly to minimize selection bias.
Each individual who is a part of the sample is between 18 years and 60 years of age. The questionnaire,
which was used as a tool to collect data, is divided into two sections. The first section collects information
related to respondent’s socio-economic characteristics, while the second section intends to compute the
travel behaviour of individuals. A pilot study was conducted in the city with 60 respondents. After
suggestions and modifications, a final questionnaire was prepared.The study defines a trip as a one-way
intra-city trip made by an individual between 18 years and 60 years of age, within the boundaries of the city.
Access and egress trips are considered part of the main trip. The mode of transport used to travel the longest
distance within the trip is considered the mode of the whole trip.

We categorize the modes of transport used by the individuals into sustainable modes such as
walking, cycling or using public transport, and unsustainable modes such as motorized two-wheelers,
motorized four-wheelers or hired taxis. The reason why we use the term ‘sustainable’ is the existing
differences in carbon footprint of the two types. The modes which emit the lowest carbon per person are
considered to be the ones that compromise the least with the needs of the future generations. The socio-
economic factors, which are also the explanatory variables of the study, are the factors on which the data are
further divided. These include work status of individuals, their socio-economic status and educational
attainment. The data in our study are also analysed separately for the two groups of gender to clearly
highlight the different impacts of these socio-economic factors on travel mode choice of men and women.
We use Census of India (2011a) definition of work, which defines it as participation in any economically
productive activity with or without compensation, wages or profit. This definition of work also differentiates
between workers and non-workers. The non-workers include unemployed, students, and housewives or
homemakers who are attending to daily household chores. Workers, on the other hand, include those who are
self-employed in non-agricultural activities, earning regular wage/salary or working as casual labours.
Individuals are also divided based on the education attained by them. Those having no formal schooling or
having studied till Class 4 make the first category, individuals having studied till Class 5–12 comprise the
second category and those who have attained education above class 12 comprise the third category.

The socio-economic groups are defined as follows:

SEG1: We categorize the individuals belonging to low socio-economic background in this group. The
monthly per capita consumption expenditure of people belonging to this group is less than or equal to `2,500.
In case of missing values for consumption expenditure, individuals who live in houses which they have
occupied without paying for any rent or own a kutcha house are adjusted in SEG1.
SEG2: This group corresponds to individuals belonging to middle socioeconomic background, where
monthly per capita consumption expenditure is within the range from `2, 501 to `7,000. Individuals where
the consumption expenditure data are missing, ownership of semi-pukka houses or where the household lives
in rented houses are considered in SEG2.
SEG3: Individuals belonging to this group classify as those belonging to a high socio-economic background.
The monthly per capita consumption expenditure of individuals in this group is above `7,000. For missing
values, individuals whose household owns a pukka house
are considered to be a part of SEG3.

Choice of mode of transport is considered to be significantly influenced by certain other factors like
cost of travel (Sharma, 2019; Vrtic et al., 2010) and some sociodemographic factors like age (Sharma, 2019;
Ji et al., 2017; Singh & Vasudevan, 2018) and marital status. These variables are incorporated as control
variables in the study. This study has the following limitations: (a) it does not take into account the actual per
capita income values for calculating the socio-economic categories. (b) It fails to calculate the combined
effect of two or more socio-economic factors on choice of travel modes. (c) It does not take into account the
impact of distance or purpose of travelling on choice of travel modes. Several studies have used discrete
choice models for travel mode choice determination (Li et al., 2018; Liu, 2007; Nesheli et al., 2016; Ng et
al., 2013; Omrani, 2015; Singh & Vasudevan, 2018; Srinivasan & Rogers, 2005; Szeto et al., 2017). Logit
models estimate the probability of a certain event for a linear combination of variables. This study uses logit
model to identify the impact of socio-economic variables on sustainable mode choice of men and women
4
separately. The dependent variable is a binary response variable having sustainable mode choice
(walking/cycle/public transport) and unsustainable mode choice (motorized two-wheelers/motorized four-
wheelers/hired taxi) as the two categories. For the respondent’s travel decision of sustainable mode choice,
this model takes a value of 1 with a probability of p, and when the choice is made for an unsustainable mode,
a value of 0 with probability 1 − p is assumed. Socioeconomic variables, which are the explanatory variables
of the study, have been used as categorical variables. The equation of the binary logistic model can be as
follows:

where S is the probability of outcome variable equal to 1, that is, choosing a sustainable mode of
transport for frequent travelling purposes, β0 is the model constant, Xi is a categorical explanatory variable
and βi is the coefficient of regression, which is estimated.

Results and Discussion

Descriptive Statistics
Figure 1 displays disparities in sustainable travel mode choices of men and women. It shows how a
majority of women, approximately 70%, choose sustainable modes and a majority of men, approximately
60%, choose unsustainable modes as the most frequent modes of travelling. A study conducted in the
Chinese city of Shenyang finds that men are more likely to use non-low- carbon modes for shopping than
women (Li et al., 2018).

Figures 2–4 study disparities in sustainable mode choice segregated by various socio-economic
factors and gender. Figure 2 shows how choice of mode of transport differs by work status between men and
women. While only 35% working males use sustainable modes of transport for frequent travelling purposes,
it is true for 65% working women. The picture is no different for non-working population, where proportion
of women users of sustainable modes still surpass that of men. In general, it is found that it is the working
population that chooses more unsustainable modes for frequent travelling as compared to the non-working
people, irrespective of gender.

5
 Choice of most commonly used modes of transport is also divided based upon the educational
attainment of people in Figure 3. While thde maximum proportion of people choosing unsustainable modes
of transport includes the most educated population, the group which chooses sustainable modes the most
includes the least educated. This finding defies the convention that sustainability can increase by increasing
the general years of educational attainment. The proportion of women switching over from sustainable to
unsustainable modes increases with increase in the years of educational attainment. However, their choice of

6
unsustainable modes never exceeds their choice of sustainable modes, irrespective of their educational group.
This is not true for men.

Figure 4 depicts the existing differences in modes of transport used between different categories of
socio-economic groups and between men and women. The choice of sustainable modes is substituted with
the choice of unsustainable modes, as the socio-economic status improves. It is the population of the lowest
socioeconomic status, which makes the most of its travel by sustainable modes. With improvement in socio-
economic status, people switch over from walking, cycling or using public transport to motorized vehicles
for frequent purposes. While for men, irrespective of their socio-economic status, the use of unsustainable
modes always surpasses the use of sustainable modes, the opposite is true for women.

7
 Table 1 presents a summary of sample characteristics. The sample comprised 55% male and 45%
female respondents, approximately. Their average age was around 32 years. Table 1 displays the percentage
of male and female respondents in each socio-economic category. Approximately 5% of data for monthly per
capita consumption expenditure was missing on an average. The details of their house ownership and house
type are presented in Table 1. The maximum proportion of the population either lives in houses which are
owned by them or for which they pay rent. Majority of them also reside in pukka houses. We notice gender
disparities in the proportion of working and non-working people. While the proportion of non-working men
is one-fourth of the proportion of working men, the proportion of working women is only two-thirds of the
proportion of non-working women. The sample consists primarily of individuals whose educational
attainment is above Class 12 and the least of individuals having attained either no formal schooling or up to
Class 4.

Logit Model of Sustainable Mode Choice

The descriptive statistics presented in the previous section depict existing relationship between travel
mode choice and socio-economic variables. An explanatory model of choice probabilities may complement
the exploratory analysis. Tables 2 and 3 display the results of logit model of sustainable mode choice of men
and women. This model attempts to analyse the impact of socio-economic factors on sustainable mode
choice, separately for men and women. The reference category for work status in our model is non-working.
Working men have 68% lower odds of choosing a sustainable mode of transport than nonworking men.
Working women, on the other hand, have 41% lower odds of choosing a sustainable mode of transport than
non-working women. One possible explanation why working people are less likely to choose sustainable
modes of transport for frequent travelling purposes is the psychology of choosing more convenient and time-
saving modes.

Educational attainment is one variable that has a significant impact on choice of sustainable travel
mode for both men and women. Men having no formal education or having studied till Class 4 have more
than four times the odds of choosing a sustainable mode of transport for frequent purposes than those having
attained education above Class 12. Similarly, those of them having attained education between Class 5 and
Class 12 have three times the odds of opting for a sustainable mode than those having attained education
above Class 12. The same is true for women where the least educated have 14 times the odds of choosing a
sustainable mode, and those having attained education between Class 5 and Class 12 have 4 times the odds
of choosing a sustainable mode than those having the highest education. This indicates that the most
educated are the least likely to choose a sustainable mode. Simple increase in the years of schooling has less
to do with concern and attitude towards environment. In fact, as the years of educational attainment increase,
the concern for environment is likely to fall. This can be because more educated people are more likely to
work, and working individuals tend to use faster modes of transport that helps save time. In addition, the
curriculum of schooling in the region has less to do with awareness and concern for environment. Existing
literature on the issue depicts contradictory findings. While a study conducted in Nigeria concludes that well-
educated people in the USA finds the walking and cycling rates to be highest among well-educated prefer
private mode of travel (Nkeki & Asikhia, 2019), another study conducted in the USA finds the walking and
cycling rates to be highest among well-educated population (Buehler et al., 2020).

Men in low and medium socio-economic groups have two times the odds of choosing a sustainable
mode of transport for frequent travelling than men in the high socio-economic group. Similarly, women in
low and medium socio-economic groups have 2.2 and 1.3 times the odds of opting for a sustainable mode,
respectively, than women in the high socio-economic group. Improvement in socio-economic status is linked
with lower odds of choosing sustainable modes, and implicitly lower odds of concern for environment. This
behaviour can be attributed to higher levels of affordability among individuals in higher socio-economic
groups. With greater affordability comes greater willingness to ride owned, faster and more-convenient
motorized modes. It is in accordance with the findings of Mahadevia and Advani (2016) but in contrast with
that of Li et al. (2018). The study by Mahadevia and Advani (2016) finds that as the socio-economic status
improves, the use of non-motorized means of transport, like walking and cycling, and the use of public
transport, reduces by both men and women in Rajkot. The study by Li et al. (2018) finds that lower-income
residents are more likely to choose non-low-carbon modes while making shopping trips in China. Age does
not display a significant relationship with mode choice. An increase in age of both men and women by 1 year
is reported to reduce their odds of choosing a sustainable mode by 1%. The odds of choosing a sustainable
mode is approximately 13% lower for married men than for men in the ‘other’ category. Similarly, the odds
8
of married women making the same choice is 67% significantly lower than women in the ‘other’ category.
While increase in cost of travel by a rupee decreases the odds of sustainable mode choice by 0.7% for men, it
reduces significantly by 4.6% for women.

9
10
Conclusion
This study uses survey data to analyse the impact of socio-economic factors on sustainable mode
choice of men and women in a developing country city and finds the following. One, majority of the men in
the city choose unsustainable modes of transport, while majority of the women choose sustainable modes,
irrespective of any socio-economic characteristic. Two, it is the working population which chooses more
unsustainable modes for travelling for frequent purposes as compared to the non-working population. Three,
majority of the users of unsustainable modes fall in the most educated category of our study. Four, with an
improvement in the socio-economic status, the choice of sustainable modes is replaced with the choice of
unsustainable modes. The results of the study highlight that the proportion of female users of unsustainable
modes never surpasses the proportion of men, given any socioeconomic category. This offers the notion of
lower carbon footprint of women belonging to a developing city. However, mobility is a crucial factor that
determines all other indicators of women empowerment. Therefore, if the climate policies require that at
least the current levels of carbon footprints by women be maintained, adequate arrangements need to made to
ensure slower switching over to motorized vehicles. Some of these changes include increased reservation of
a collection of seats for women in public transport, running special women-only public transport and
increase in number of women drivers and conductors. These changes in infrastructure will not only solve the
issue of overcrowding but also harassment of women in public transport (Tripathi et al., 2017).

It is also important to note how simple increase in the years of schooling does no good to issues
concerning the environment. What is also hinted at is the goal of equal distribution of income because the
ones with higher socio-economic status only contribute to destruction of environment. The study proposes to
take into account the varying behaviours of different socio-economic groups while formulating policies and
programmes promoting the use of sustainable modes of
transport. The primary survey conducted as a part of the study also reveals how majority of the users of
polluting modes use private vehicles, especially motorized twowheelers, for short distances because the cost
incurred is almost at par with that of public transport. If the fare for the minimum distance is lowered, this
can create an influential difference on the carbon footprint per person. Improvement in the nfrastructure and
regulations in the use of pedestrian lanes can also be considered as a possible solution.

Future studies should also consider the changes in impact of socio-economic factors on choice of
mode of transport with changes in distance and purpose travelled. Time also plays an important role in the
choice of mode of transport. Therefore, the impact that it has should also be studied in further research. The
combined effect of various socio-economic and sociodemographic factors should also be examined.

Summary
Expenditures on development of transport are very high, and their share in overall state spending
significantly. The rationale for the decision-making in the field of transport policy, including investments in
infrastructure are the positive effects of economic and social character. Identification of these effects is not
an easy task. Furthermore, the development of transport is determined not only by the development of
infrastructure but also the same transport service, which also lies in the field of transport policy (collective
passenger transport). As for the need to take into account the social effects of transport development there
are at least two reasons for doing so: first, transport has a significant impact on quality of life (both positive
and negative), and secondly, this impact may be significant. Therefore, there is a postulate to achieve a
balance between benefits of transport users and the effects felt by the other members of society. However,
due to the fact that not all the effects are easy to measure, and not all are strictly economical in traditional
meaning, conducting of economic calculation, that allows to calculate the effectiveness of these actions, is
very difficult. Although the scientific material on the benefits of transport development is relatively
abundant, it is very difficult to reach conclusions of a general nature. The effects are different for both kinds
of effects and its scope, direction and strength in individual cases.

References
1. Ahmad, S., & Puppim de Oliveira, J. A. (2016). Determinants of urban mobility in India: Lessons for
promoting sustainable and inclusive urban transportation in developing countries. Transport Policy,
50, 106–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.014
2. Anand, A., & Tiwari, G. (2007). A gendered perspective of the shelter—Transport– livelihood link:
The case of poor women in Delhi. Transport Reviews, 26(1), 63–80.
https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640500175615
11
3. Census of India. (2011). Jaipur city census 2011 data. Ministry of Home Affairs, The Registrar
General and Census Commissioner. https://www.census2011.co.in/census/city/77-jaipur.html
4. Census of India. (2011a). Main workers, marginal workers, non-workers and those marginal
workers, non-workers seeking/available for work classified by age and sex, 2011. Ministry of Home
Affairs, The Registrar General and Census Commissioner. https://data.gov.in/resources/main-
workers-marginal-workers-non-workers-and-thosemarginal- workers-non-workers-27
5. Census of India. (2011b). Other workers by distance from residence to place of work and mode of
travel to place of work. Ministry of Home Affairs, The Registrar General and Census Commissioner
Census of India. https://data.gov.in/resources/main-workersmarginal- workers-non-workers-and-
those-marginal-workers-non-workers-27
6. Duchène, C. (2011). Gender and Transport. International Transport Forum.
7. Harris, G. (2014). Cities in India among the most polluted, W.H.O. says. New York Times.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/09/world/asia/cities-in-india-among-the-mostpolluted- who-
says.html
8. Jain, D., & Tiwari, G. (2019). Explaining travel behaviour with limited socio-economic data: Case
study of Vishakhapatnam, India. Travel Behaviour and Society, 15(October), 44–53.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2018.12.001
9. Jain, M., Korzhenevych, A., & Hecht, R. (2018). Determinants of commuting patterns in a rural-
urban megaregion of India. Transport Policy, 68(May), 98 106. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2018.04.018
10. Korzhenevych, A., & Jain, M. (2018). Area- and gender-based commuting differentials in India’s
largest urban–rural region. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 63(July),
733–746. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2018.07.013
11. Litman, T., & Burwell, D. (2006). Issues in sustainable transportation. International Journal of
Global Environmental Issues, 6(4), 331–347.
12. Mahadevia, D., & Advani, D. (2016). Gender differentials in travel pattern—The case of a mid-sized
city, Rajkot, India. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 44, 292–302.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2016.01.002
13. NASA. (2020, June). The casues of climate change. https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/Nesheli, M. M.,
Ceder, A. A., & Estines, S. (2016). Public transport user’s perception and decision assessment using
tactic-based guidelines. Transport Policy, 49, 125–136.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.04.007
14. Saha, S., Roy, P., & Kar, S. (2014). Public and private sector jobs, unreported income and
consumption gap in India: Evidence from micro-data. North American Journal of Economics and
Finance, 29, 285–300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.najef.2014.07.002
15. Singh, N., & Vasudevan, V. (2018). Understanding school trip mode choice—The case of Kanpur
(India). Journal of Transport Geography, 66(May 2017), 283–290. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.12.007
16. Smart Cities India, (2016). Smart city profile Jaipur. Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs,
Government of India. India Smart City Profile. Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers. (2014).
Automobile domestic sales trends. http://www.siam.in/statistics.aspx?mpgid=8&pgidtrail=14
17. Times News Network (2019). 72% of city roads devoid of footpath: Study. https://
timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/jaipur/72-of-city-roads-devoid-of-footpaths-
study/articleshow/67518477.cms
18. Tripathi, K., Borrion, H., & Belur, J. (2017). Sexual harassment of students on public transport: An
exploratory study in Lucknow, India. Crime Prevention and Community Safety, 19(3–4), 240–250.
https://doi.org/10.1057/s41300-017-0029-0
19. Wilbur Smith Associates, & Ministry of Urban Development (MoUD) (2008). Study on traffic and
transportation policies and strategies in urban areas in India. Government of India.
20. World Health Organization (WHO). (2014). 7 million premature deaths annually linked to air
pollution. https://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2014/air-pollution/en/

12