Undone science, funding, and positionality in transportation research

References

• Adkins, A., Makarewisz, C., Scanze, M., Ingram, M., & Luhr, G. (2017). Contextualizing walkability: Do relationships between built environments and walking vary by socioeconomic context? Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(3), 296–314.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, C. (2005). On the social relations of contract research production: Power, positionality and epistemology in housing and urban research. Housing Studies, 20(6), 989–1007. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030500291132
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, C., & Marne, P. (2010). In the name of the people?: The state, social science and the ‘public interest’ in urban regeneration. In C. Allen, & R. Imrie (Eds.), The knowledge business: The commodification or urban and housing research (pp. 57–76). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Berger, R. (2013). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15(2), 219–234.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brach, A., & Wachs, M. (2005). Earmarking in the US Department of transportation research programs. Transportation Research Part A, 39, 501–521.
   Google Scholar
• Brinkman, P. A. (2009). The responsibility to ask questions: The case of bias in travel demand forecasting. In F. Lo Piccolo, & A. H. Thomas (Eds.), Ethics and planning research (pp. 107–118). Farnham: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Bullard, R. D., Johnson, G. S., & Torres, A. O. (Eds.). (2004). Highway robbery: Transportation racism and new routes to equity. Boston, MA: South End Press.
   Google Scholar
• Coren, C., & Lowe, K. (2020). Commuting in context: A qualitative study of transportation challenges for disadvantaged job Seekers in Chicago, IL. Metropolitan Planning Council and Equiticity. https://www.metroplanning.org/multimedia/publication/972
   Google Scholar
• Crane, R. (2007). Is there a quiet revolution in women’s travel? Revisiting the gender gap in commuting. Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(3), 298–316.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Deka, D., Brown, C. T., & Sinclair, J. (2018). Exploration of the effect of violent crime on recreational and transportation walking by path and structural equation models. Health & Place, 52; 34–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• England, K. V. L. 1994. Getting personal: Reflexivity, positionality, and feminist research. The Professional Geographer, 46(1), 80–89.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Farthing, S. (2016). Research design in urban planning: A student’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2005). Measuring inaccuracy in travel demand forecasting: Methodological considerations regarding ramp up and sampling. Transportation Research Part A, 39, 522–530.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2007). Cost overruns and demand shortfalls in urban rail and other infrastructure. Transportation Planning and Technology, 30(1), 9–30. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/03081060701207938
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2012). Why mass media matter, and how to work with them: Phronesis and megaprojects. In B. Flyvbjerg, S. Schram, & T. Landman (Eds.), Real social science: Applied phronesis (pp. 133–171). London: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B., Holm, M. K. S., & Buhl, S. L. (2002). Underestimating costs in public works projects: Error or lie? Journal of the American Planning Association, 68, 279–295.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsyth, A. (2012). Commentary: Alternative cultures in planning research—from extending scientific frontiers to exploring enduring questions. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32(2), 160–168.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frickel, S., Gibbon, S., Howard, J., Kempner, J., Ottinger, G., & Hess, D. J. (2010). ) undone science: Charting social movement and civil society challenges to research agenda setting. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 35(4), 444–473.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goetz, A. R. (2006). Viewpoint: Transport geography: Reflecting on a sub-discipline and identifying future trajectories: The insularity issue in transport geography. Journal of Transport Geography, 14, 230–231.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanson, S. (2006). Viewpoint: Imagine. Journal of Transport Geography, 14, 232–233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hess, D. J. (2009). The potential and limitations of civil society research: Getting undone science done. Sociological Inquiry, 79(3), 306–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Imrie, R. (2010). The interrelationships between contract research and the knowledge business. In C. Allen, & R. Imrie (Eds.), The knowledge business: The commodification or urban and housing research (pp. 23–39). Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Ingram, M., Adkins, A., Hansen, K., Cascio, V., & Somnez, E. (2017). Sociocultural perceptions of walkability in Mexican American neighborhoods: Implications for policy and practice. Journal of Transport & Health, 7, 172–180.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koschinsky, J., Talen, E., Alfonzo, M., & Lee, S. (2017). How walkable is Walker’s paradise? Environment and Planning B, 44(2), 343–363.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, T. (2012 [1962]). The structure of scientific revolutions, fourth [50th anniversary] edition. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, R. J., Ipek, N. S., & Jones, S. N. (2016). Understanding the role of equity in active transportation planning in the United States. Transport Reviews, 37(2), 211–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The LSE GV314 Group. (2014). Evaluation under contract: Government pressure and the production of policy research. Public Administration, 91(1), 224–239.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luukkonen, T., & Thomas, D. A. (2016). The ‘negotiated space’ of university researchers’ pursuit of a research agenda. Minerva, 54, 99–127.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyons, G. (2016). Editorial: Transport analysis in an uncertain world. Transport Reviews, 36(5), 553–557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Milner, H. R. (2007). Race, culture, and researcher positionality: Working through dangers seen, unseen, and unforeseen. Educational Researcher, 36(7), 388–400.
   Google Scholar
• Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology. (2018). University transportation centers (UTC) program: FY 2018 notice of funding opportunity for national center for congestion research and national center for infrastructure research. Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation.
   Google Scholar
• Peterson, S. J. (2020). The transportation research board: Everyone interested is invited. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
   Google Scholar
• The Pew Charitable Trusts. (2014). Intergovernmental challenges in surface transportation funding. Philadelphia, PA: Author. Accessed January 7, 2020. http://www.pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2014/09/surfacetransportationintergovernmentalchallengesfunding.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Pickrell, D. H. (1992). A desire named streetcar: Fantasy and fact in rail transit planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58, 158–176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ralph, K., & Delbosc, A. (2017). I’m multimodal, aren’t you? How ego-centric anchoring biases experts’ perceptions of travel patterns. Transportation Research Part A, 100, 283–293.
   Google Scholar
• Rose, G. (1997). Situating knowledges: Positionality, reflexivities and other tactics. Progress in Human Geography, 21(3), 305–320.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwanen, T. (2017). Geographies of transport II: Reconciling the general and the particular. Progress in Human Geography, 41(3), 355–364.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheller, M. (2018). Mobility justice: The politics of movement in an age of extremes. Brooklyn, NY: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Siemiatycki, M. (2012). The role of the planning scholar: Research, conflict, and social change. The Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32(2), 147–159.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thurgood, L., Golladay, M. J., & Hill, S. T. (2006). US doctorates in the 20th century: Special report. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.
   Google Scholar
• Transportation Research Board. (2017). Innovation and research since 1920. Washington, DC: The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine. Accessed January 6, 2020. http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/general/trb_mission_brochure2017.pdf
   Google Scholar
• United States Census Bureau. (2017). American community survey, 5 year estimates. factfinder.census.gov on January 3, 2017 and January 5, 2020.
   Google Scholar
• The Untokening. (2018). Untokening mobility: Beyond pavement, paint and place. Accessed January 3, 2019. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/579398799f7456b10f43afb0/t/5a6cec6341920260cc90dd02/1517087852658/Principles+narrative+final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vigar, G. (2017). The four knowledges of transport planning: Enacting a more communicative, trans-disciplinary policy and decision-making. Transport Policy, 58, 39–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar