One and a half page will be acceptable
Below is requirement and an example of my classmate.
For this part of the project, you will need to utilize the library database of scientific journal articles to:
a.search for 2 primary research papers regarding one of the topics listed below,
b.obtain a copy of the FULL paper (NOT just the abstract),
c. read it, and
d. summarize the research papers in a way that would make sense to the general public
You must use 2 different primary research papers (not review articles) as references. The two papers should be on the same topic so as to compare the two.
Summarize your findings in 250-500 words (excluding references). Cite all of your references using appropriate citation style such as APA, MLA, or AMA within the summary and your references at the end (see book references for examples).
IMPORTANT: Please use original words and be careful not to plagiarize. You must include your summary in this document AND post it on the ‘Iron project’ forum on the discussion board for full credit. (You can copy and paste into a discussion posting). ). If you have questions about what peer reviewed primary research papers are, please ask. The purpose is for you to find two different papers that did an experiment on the same topic. And give me your conclusions based on these two papers. What is your take home message?
Topics to choose from:
· Iron deficiency during pregnancy
· Iron and cognitive function in children
· Iron status in vegans
· Most effective form of oral iron supplementation
Grading Guidelines:
· Primary research paper appropriately chosen (i.e., primary research paper, published in scientific journals, NOT review articles, etc). No credit
if papers are not primary research.
· 2 pts: appropriate reference within summary and citations
· 1: posting on discussion board
· 4 pts: quality of summary. This should be adequately summarized so that the general public could understand the implications.
Example :
The purpose to the Prevalence of Iron Deficiency Anemia among Iranian Pregnant Women was to detect the average iron status for women who were in their 20- 40’s living in Iran. The study was limited to healthy individuals who were not refugees, had cancer, or were undergoing hemodialysis as these groups would stand as outliers and skew the data. A total of 11,037 participants were entered into the analysis (Barooti, et al., 2010). Of these, 42% regularly saw a physician to be tested every month while pregnant. The other 58% had regular house visits from the physician. Hematocrit tests and urine samples were taken for each visit. The maximum percent of pregnant women who had anemia was 95%. Out of those, 67% were in their second or third trimester. The percentage of anemia in Iranian women during pregnancy is considerably highter than that of most EMRO countries (Barooti, et al., 2010).
The second article, Screening for Iron Deficiency Anemia-Including Iron Supplementation for Children and Pregnant Women was a case study based on a 25 year old female who has a family history of anemia and is currently in her first trimester of pregnancy. Regular checkups were done throughout the entire pregnancy. Regular iron testings were done. During the first trimester, the iron levels based on the hematocrit testings were at a normal range of 40%. By the second trimester, the numbers have dropped significantly to 26%. Iron supplements were added to the diet and increased the iron level to 54% by the end of the third trimester (Mabry-Hernandez, 2017).
To summarize for patients, during the first trimester of pregnancy, iron levels remained relatively steady. The body is able to store enough eaten iron for
the body and the growing fetus. Begining the second and third trimesters, the fetus is growing and is in need of a larger iron supply which promotes normal
development. The iron input is less than the iron required which causes anemia. Anemia is the most common hematological disorder during pregnancy which causes complications for the mother and fetus (Barooti, et al., 2010). Eating a well balanced diet, including lean meats, beans, and fresh vegetables are a good source of iron. Iron supplements are also recommended to aquire enough iron to sustain the mother and fetus.
Works Cited
Barooti, E., Rezazadehkermani, M., Sadeghirad, B., Motaghipisheh, S., Tayeri, S., Arabi, M., et al. (2017, June). Prevalence of Iron Deficiency Anemia among
Iranian Pregnant Women. Retrieved June 26, 2017, from US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of Health: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3719272/
Mabry-Hernandez, I. R. (2016, May 15). Screening for Iron Deficiency Anemia-Including Iron Supplementation for Children and Pregnant Women. Retrieved June
26, 2017, from American Family Physician: http://www.aafp.org/afp/2016/0515/p897.html
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Write three answers to the questions below. Each answer should be between 250-500 words
*Choose one of the tales from Boccaccio’s work and highlight what you see as the “moral” of the story.
-What does the Wife of Bath say about marriage? How does her philosophy hold up today?
-How does the knight in the Wife’s tale “learn” to respect women?
-How does the Renaissance interest in the achievements of man interact with religion and the Catholic Church? Where do you see obvious problems arising?
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
The key to the research assignment is to demonstrate your understanding of the topics, not to re-word the text or reference material. Constant site reference is a no go.Use these sites if possible
Use at least three (3) quality references Note: Wikipedia and other related websites do not qualify as academic resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Reports information from three relevant sources, at least one of which is a text source.
paper has a two part thesis statement that takes a stand or expresses an opinion. argue position through evidence. must have topic sentences and transitions.
Use at least three (3) quality references Note: Wikipedia and other related websites do not qualify as academic resources.
Your assignment must follow these formatting requirements:
Be typed, double spaced, using Times New Roman font (size 12), with one-inch margins on all sides; citations and references must follow APA or school-specific format. Check with your professor for any additional instructions.
Include a cover page containing the title of the assignment, the student’s name, the professor’s name, the course title, and the date. The cover page and the reference page are not included in the required assignment page length.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
question four
what are the necessary elements that must be present for a person to be classified as a trespasser? consider the context of a homeowner with unruly guests, or a business with unruly patrons. apply the trespass to property act in your answer.
question 5
explain with reference to decided cases, what a person must do to establish negligence. expand on the tests which may be applied and discuss what remedies and defence are available. how does negligence relate to professional liability?
question 6
explain the types of mistake and the types of misrepresentation which can give rise to a court being required to interpret a contract. what remedies are appropriate to each type?
question7
distinguish among duress, undue influence, and unconscionability and give two examples of each. describe the remedies available for each type.
question8
describe the types of assignments which may occur. give two examples of each. consider what requirements are necessary to make an enforceable assignments.
SAMPLE ANSWER
Commercial Law Essay Questions
Trespass is the invasion of another person’s possession without his consent thus interfering with his property rights. The main elements of trespass are unlawful intrusion to the property, the use of force, intent of intrusion, and the subsequent injury to the owner. For one to enter into someone’s property, the law requires that he or she should first seek the consent of the owner in order to avoid violating the other person’s rights. The failure to inform the owner would amount to trespass, leading to possible prosecution in the courts of law (Sealy & Hooley, 2008).
For negligence to occur, the defendant must owe a duty recognized by the law to the plaintiff, failure by which would lead to possible harm as was the case in Bolton v. Stone. Negligence are highly related to professional practice, such as medical profession, where the doctors are expected to observe a high code of professional conduct. The remedies that are available for negligence are refund of the fees paid, compensation for the lost property, and compensations.
There are several mistakes that are concerned the commercial law such as the unilateral mistakes, mutual mistake, and collateral mistake among others. Mutual mistake occurs from the misrepresentation of the material fact in relation to a subject matter in discussion whereas the collateral mistake does not afford the right of rescission. The remedies that are available for both mistakes are rescission where the contract is fully cancelled or reformation where a written agreement is changed to reflect the interest of both parties.
In the context of commercial law, duress has been defined as a threat of harm made to compel a person act against his will whereas undue influence is the act of taking advantage of the other person due to your position in power. On the other hand, unconditionally is the act providing inconvenience to others by disobeying the law (Sealy & Hooley, 2008).
Challenges facing juveniles in the American criminal justice system
Analysis of challenges facing juveniles in the American criminal justice system
Order Instructions:
Instruction are on the file named “final project”
The other files are class material that includes discussion posts and papers just to situate you and give you an idea of what to focus on. You can incorporate these to the final paper but not with the exact words, of course. This paper also needs an abstract that does NOT count as page 1 out of the 12.
Please work carefully on the introduction and conclusion to this paper, as the professor gives great importance to them and takes out points if they are not satisfactory. The professor wants the introduction to give the reader a clear idea of what the paper will focus on and the conclusion to show what the writer has tried to do with the paper, as in what you tried to transmit to your readers, as well as your final thoughts on the subject.
SAMPLE ANSWER
Analysis of challenges facing juveniles in the American criminal justice system
Abstract
Juveniles in society face a myriad of challenges ranging from family abuse, neglect, social media influences, and the unjust criminal system. Juvenile victimization is one of the precipitators of juvenile violence, yet it common practice for risk factors of juvenile victimization to go unnoticed or unattended. Many juvenile offenders are subjected to harsh conditions in detention facilities which only worsen their situation and increase their chances of re-offending. This paper discusses in detail the challenges facing juveniles and the ways in which they can be mitigated. It proposes alternative approaches to incarceration such as community-based programs and intensive collaboration among different stakeholders. It also recommends the establishment of juvenile mental health courts which have specialized personnel that can use a therapeutic approach to point out the emotional disturbances experiencing by adolescents and eliminate them to avoid future offending or re-offending.
Analysis of challenges facing juveniles in the American criminal justice system
Introduction
Adolescence is a stage of transition from childhood to adulthood. Juveniles are minors in their pre-adolescence and adolescence stage of life, where their brains have not properly developed to the extent that they can be considered as rational and autonomous individuals to make choices like adults as to anticipate their consequences. Juvenile victims such as those experiencing parental neglect and abuse or harassment from the social media are likely to commit crime due to lack of an emotionally supportive environment. Juvenile offenders, on the other hand, when subjected to harsh punishments that they do not comprehend, can easily develop serious mental health disorders that may be too expensive and involving to repair. The punishment becomes worse when the juvenile offenders are placed in detention facilities which are improperly staffed and equipped. The juvenile justice system has put in place specialty courts, early intervention programs and various rehabilitative services to deal with juvenile delinquency. The juvenile justice system aims at helping juveniles realize that they have a second chance. This paper explores the various challenges facing juveniles within the criminal justice system and proposes various solutions.
Challenges facing the juvenile justice system with regard to juvenile offenders, victims, and professionals
Juvenile offenders
Due to the United States putting too much prominence on rehabilitation and the empowerment of the state to carry out its functions in line with the best interests of children, juvenile delinquency has overwhelmingly grown into a complex topic (Lipsey, 2009). Juvenile delinquency is caused by very many factors including: truancy, abuse and neglect, gangs, drugs, and poverty. Adolescents are in a period of discovery and definition of personality and character. Most of adolescents engage in these risky behaviors as a way of winning the attention of family, friends, authorities, and people around them. Several studies indicate that adolescence is a transitional stage into adulthood involving a constant change in emotions, judgment and self-control. During adolescence, the cerebellum which plays the role of controlling impulses is still underdeveloped. Additionally, the prefrontal cortex, whose function is to influence judgment and reasoning, is still not existent during the adolescence stage. These features clearly distinguish adolescents from adults. This is partially attributable to the poor-decision making and certain behaviors exhibited by adolescents. Evidence has proven that this is the stage where intervention can play a very positive role in the lives of juveniles. Thus, it is not necessary that criminal behavior exhibited during adolescence can be carried on to adulthood if intervention and prevention are effectively implemented (Richards, 2011).
The alarming increase in acts of violence perpetrated by juveniles within the past few years has raised varied public opinion with regard to the efficacy of the current juvenile justice system. From the time when the first juvenile court was set up in Chicago in 1899, numerous reforms have been adopted with the aim of addressing the issues facing juvenile offenders. Clearly, the issues facing the youth are growing larger in line with the complexities and mobility our society. It has become a common norm in the juvenile justice system to solve issues of drug abuse, running away, smoking, suicide, and teen pregnancy. In addition, juveniles resolve to more advanced ways of solving their disputes by using dangerous weapons such as knives and guns. It is unfortunate that the juvenile justice system is the venue for dumping these overwhelming adolescence challenges (Richards, 2011).
According to a report by the United States Surgeon General, 10% of children in the US suffer from mental health disorders. Out of these, seven out of ten are children of color whose access to mental health services can only be obtained through the criminal justice system. At least $13 billion is spent annually in treatment of these mental health problems. In most cases, most of these issues are not usually addressed or even noticed until incarceration or detention of the child takes place. Therefore, the juvenile justice system plays the major function of detaining children, even though it has been discovered that detention alone cannot help.
Harsh conditions in the overcrowded detention facilities are attributed to the alarming reports of psychiatric problems, stress-related illnesses, and suicide attempts. Many juvenile offenders tend to fall into depression after facing long periods of stress and anxiety following violent crimes. This is capable of affecting the offenders for the rest of their lives (Piquero, 2010). Research shows that the youths who have previously been detained have higher chances of using cigarettes, alcohol, or illicit drugs than those who have never been jailed. The children who were sentenced to juvenile were 37 times more likely to be sentenced again as adults, compared to similarly misbehaved children who were not subjected to imprisonment.
In addition to detention facilities being overcrowded, they are also understaffed. The beds and supportive and therapeutic resources are limited to the extent that they cannot properly address the needs of juvenile offenders. While the cost of operating detention facilities is overwhelmingly burdensome to taxpayers, it is even more frustrating to imagine that most of these facilities only play the role of warehousing children without providing the various services required to address the specific needs of these children. Various states such as Nevada, South Carolina, Florida, and West Virginia have taken steps to address the issue of incarceration of youth. These states are attempting to come up with ways of ameliorating the many problems faced by youth in detention facilities, with the aim of providing community-based alternatives so that the troubled youths do not end up in detention from the outset (Moll, 2011).
The alarming increase in the rate of children coming to contact with the juvenile justice system every day and the limited resources have resulted into challenges related to effectual placement of juvenile offenders. Laws that govern juvenile justice systems in the US oblige the court to place the delinquent juvenile into the least restrictive environment possible, even though the actual offense committed by the minor is the guiding issue. In reasonable circumstances, the laws require the juvenile to be placed to their residential surroundings and given services based on communal programs.
Juvenile mental health problems pose a great challenge to the criminal justice system due to the fact that there are no proper and suitable mental health services, including inadequate community-based services for those juveniles who have not been detained. In addition, most detention facilities do not have proper mental health services for juvenile offenders (Lipsey, 2009).
Another issue with juvenile criminal justice is that a higher percentage of juvenile delinquents comprise of school drop-outs or minors whose attendance records are very poor. The criminal justice system experiences a deficiency in the provision of educational experiences and programming (Moll, 2011).
Mandatory minimum sentences and lack of judicial discretion have also been a great challenge in the juvenile criminal justice system. 15 states allow prosecutors the discretion to prosecute juvenile cases in adult criminal courts, while 15 states provide for juvenile court judges to cause automatic transfers children cases to an adult criminal court with regard to certain offenses or the age or previous history of the juvenile. Furthermore, 29 states provide for automatic transfer of juvenile cases to adult cases basing on the juvenile’s alleged crime or age or both. These states do not consider the fact that adolescents have special problems and need to be addressed in a special way. Thus, the criminal justice system subjects the minors to harsh penalties that are intended for adults (Richards, 2011).
Juvenile victimization
Today, there are high rates of juvenile victimization due to several patterns among this population. Juvenile victims may be categorized into:
Juvenile victims drawn into prosecutions and prosecutions: This category comprises of children who are victims of sexual assault and abduction, as well as those children subjected to victimization by other children. This category may also involve child witnesses to crimes, that is, vicarious victims. These children usually get involved in investigations and sometimes they are called upon to testify, which exposes them to publicity and stigma.
Juveniles victimized by domestic violence and custodial abductions: Many juveniles tend to have experienced a series of abuse at home that ultimately led to resentment and early independence so that when they become adolescents, they run away as a way to escape the abuse suffered at home. Several studies have been carried out that show the damaging effects of abuse on homeless or runaway youth, including mental and physical health problems. These youth record higher rates of attempted suicide compared to juveniles who do not have an abuse history (Ferguson, 2009). Abducted children become victimized by being deprived of contact with their family, friends, and neighbors.
Juvenile victims within child protection suits: This category comprises of juveniles who have been abused or neglected, although there is also an overlap with criminal justice system victims. The criminal justice system significantly influenced the family and living situation of such children. There is little data showing the impact of the investigatory process on children, the services they are given, the actions pursued in court, and the filing of criminal cases, in addition to the outcomes of such cases. The data on abused children reported is not still sufficient for policy analysis purposes.
Juvenile victims implicated in status offenses: This category involves juveniles handpicked by law enforcement officers and adjudicated by the court for curfew violations, disobedience, malingering, and running away. Most of these juveniles have a past history of being victimized within their family and community.
Juvenile victims implicated in criminal offenses: Most of the juveniles subjected to arrest and adjudication for criminal offenses also record previous victimization histories which play a very important role in offending. The criminal justice system does not indicate to what extent it puts these victimization histories into account while deliberating and adjudicating on juvenile offenses.
Social media sites on computers, the internet and other technology have brought up new venues for victimization. Digital crimes affecting juveniles include cyber-hate, cyber-stalking and cyber-bullying. These crimes can be perpetrated to anyone including a child’s home, thus leaving no safe place for children. Many juveniles are victims of digital crimes. Today, the society is majorly confronted with the challenge of mitigating digital juvenile victimization. For instance, there is a case of a thirteen-year old juvenile who ended up committing suicide after experiencing a cyber-bullying incident from his classmates. There are many challenges faced by the criminal justice system with regard to mitigating the effects of social media on juvenile victimization. A recent research found that there is a close connection between children suffering from alienation from parents and their potential to involve themselves in strange relationships on the internet (Wells & Mitchell, 2008).
The influences of neglect, abuse, and social media are capable of easily leading to criminal behavior and the use of dangerous drugs in the bid to survive and ease pain. Accordingly, victimized juveniles tend to disobey rules and challenge authorities, and they ultimately become offenders as part of this vicious victimization cycle. The lack of reporting makes it difficult to gauge the real extent of juvenile victimization. This is attributed to the fact that school administers and parents are not able to control all that happens in the lives of their children and the intimidation that victims feel keep them from reporting. In addition, the fact that digital crimes and domestic abuses are widely varied and that they can go from inappropriate to morally reprehensible makes it very difficult to create specific laws to mitigate this issue (Meredith, 2010). It is very disturbing that the reporting rate for offences against children is lower than the reporting rate for offenses against adults (Richards, 2011). In fact, police rarely receive reports involving victims under the 12. The crimes that have high chances of being reported include those involving families with previous contact with the police, adult or multiple offenders, and serious injuries. Incidences of reporting juvenile victimization are also low due to the fact that most schools prefer handling episodes of involving juvenile victims on their own rather than reporting to the police.
Juvenile justice professionals
Traditionally, the role of the juvenile court was to intervene with wayward and criminal minors under the theory of parens patriae which empowers the state to stand in place of parents and substitute its authority for that of the family. Basically, court decisions were left to judicial discretion rather than the need to observe due process rights. Recent developments now recognize the right of juveniles to be represented by a counsel as was held by the Supreme Court in Re Gault. Nevertheless, research still indicates a failure in the juvenile justice system to fulfill guarantees of fairness envisioned by the Supreme Court. Inadequate legal representation of juveniles often results in the juveniles being transferred to the adult system and possibilities of life without parole (Lipsey, 2009).
The staffs in the detention facilities tend to lack adequate training and experience to deal with juvenile delinquents suffering from mental problems. This, in addition to the ill-equipped county facilities, often exacerbates mental illness, leading to escalation in symptoms and problem behavior.
Possible changes to address challenges faced by juveniles
In most instances, police, teachers, caretakers and parents often view the juvenile justice system as a means for juveniles to access treatments and services that are not available in the community. This is disheartening because most of the juveniles detained with mental health problems are rarely treated. The problem is that the juvenile justice system lacks adequate expertise and/or resources to effectively act as a mental health service provider for all juveniles. In addition, developing these resources within the juvenile justice system will not appropriately resolve this crisis. Nevertheless, there are changes that need to be adopted in order to mitigate these challenges.
The reduction of reliance on incarceration and other programs which lead to the concentration of juveniles together is necessary. The juvenile justice system should focus on providing proper juvenile options within the community as an option to detention. Preference should be placed on community-based referral sources over residential placement. This is because community-based services provide a better venue for family members to be involved with juvenile justice and treatment providers. In addition, these services furnish the family with educational services to put them in an appropriate position to understand and manage the behavior of their child. Community-based interventions are also less costly and they are more effective than incarceration. These collaborative interventions help families to be independent and self-sufficient as they acquire skills required for successful access and navigation of services independently (Lipsey, 2009).
Similarly, instead of majorly focusing on the crime committed, it is important to shift focus on the individual risk factors for criminal behaviors and their need. Due to the fact that juvenile offenders exhibiting risk factors have higher chances of becoming recidivists, early intervention can be very beneficial to them as it will have a positive impact on their lives and decrease the rates of crime within the communities. Rehabilitative programs comprise of various ways of addressing the problem of juvenile offenders.
With regard to specialty courts, Jordan and Myers (2011) observe that subjecting juveniles in adult jails or detention facilities merely increases their chances of recidivism. Thus, the move to have juvenile prisons, jails, and courts, is very effective in terms of rehabilitative services. Early intervention programs play a very vital role in providing a venue for juveniles transform their lives and become productive in the society.
The local and federal government, as well as various rights-based organizations have been advocating for community-based programs to address juvenile victimization (Shufelt, Skowyra & Cocozza, 2010). There is great emphasis on family support and preservation, as well as independent living where appropriate. These programs aim at providing early intervention and assistance to the victims. These programs have proven to be a success in places where they have been implemented as they instill youth with resilience and coping skills, thus helping them to overcome victimization. Resilience is very important in ensuring that intervention programs are effective. Resilience is the capacity of a person to adjust to hardship and distressing situations. People react to these situations differently in line with their respective physical and emotional restraints. However, still there are loopholes in different state laws which lead unnecessary injustices being occasioned on the children. These laws need to be reformed in order to help in bringing about children in the best way so as to reduce their chances of offending in future (Moll, 2011).
To enhance the determination of juvenile issues, it is important for juvenile justice professionals to make well-reasoned judgments with regard to the risk of adolescents causing future harm and the likelihood of adolescents to benefit from the interventions. Since the courts have a very great potential to separate children from their family, friends, and neighbors, judges need to receive proper and adequate training, information, and workable facilities. There is need for adequate representation of juvenile offenders and juvenile victims in court proceedings. In addition, it is important for communities to have adequate, safe and effective programs and placements for juvenile offenders and victims.
Criminal justice professionals also need to educate and act as spokespersons on behalf of neglected and abused children in their communities. They need to spearhead advocacy for adequate resources and community systems in response to child neglect and abuse.
Possible resources, organizations, policies, procedures, or processes that can be used to promote fairer treatment of juveniles
Rather than punitive policies, policy makers should completely shift to rehabilitation programs which are evidence-based juveniles can be referred to specific programs which meet their needs. According to Piquero and his colleagues (2010), punishment has the potential to do more harm than good. Victimizing juveniles through punishment potentially results to future offending and a continuing victimization cycle all through adulthood. Effective rehabilitation programs can help in breaking this vicious victimization cycle. Rehabilitation and alternative programs also help in preparing juveniles to reintegrate society through the development of individual responsibility and accountability necessary for the achievement of better outcomes. Rehabilitative programs are also relatively cheaper compared to incarceration.
Proper implementation of the above changes requires adequate collaboration between the juvenile justice system, parents, and the community as a whole. Children need a sufficiently supportive environment in order to grow up in the right manner. The environments with which children interact on a daily basis include the school, friends, the family, the neighbors and the internet (Ferguson, 2009). Thus, the juvenile justice system should collaborate with all community stakeholders to help in ameliorating the neglect and abuse of children. The criminal justice alone cannot cater for all the needs of juveniles. Collaborating with different organizations such as ACLU and community based organizations as well as mental health providers will go a long way in grappling with the risk factors for juvenile delinquency and preventing juvenile victimization.
Local governments should collaborate with state governments to establish juvenile mental health courts such as the Harris County Juvenile Mental Health Court. Juvenile mental health courts have judges who have adequate training and resources for addressing the causal mental element of delinquent behavior in mentally ill juvenile offenders, while putting emphasis on personal accountability and public safety (Children’s Mental Health in Harris County, 2006). In addition, through the creation of community-based alternatives to institutional placements, juvenile mental health courts will greatly help in developing mental health services. The accessibility of services has the potential of allowing families an alternative to reliance on the juvenile justice system for treatment, a practice that leads to the criminalization of mentally ill juveniles. The mental health court adopts a therapeutic approach that empathizes with the emotional disturbances experienced by youth which mostly cause them to offend. The mental health court places preference on rehabilitation rather than punishment.
The federal and state governments need to implement policies that put emphasis on collaboration. For instance, the Juvenile Accountability Block has made attempts to encourage the setting up of information sharing systems for purposes of facilitating effectiveness and efficiency in decision making in the juvenile justice system with regard to the procedures of identifying, supervising and treating the youth (Shufelt, Skowyra & Cocozza, 2010).
Conclusion
The best way to mitigate the challenges facing juveniles is by adopting a rehabilitative approach and other alternatives to incarceration. These will involve collaboration among different stakeholders in the society, including all community members and community-based institutions such as schools and the juvenile justice system. Community-based programs will have a positive impact on the society as a whole due to the fact that they are less expensive and more effective to manage. In addition, the minors will be molded and taught proper values such as resilience and independence, which will eventually make them responsible members of society. These reforms might bring social change because they will reduce re-offending by juvenile offenders. In addition, cases of juvenile victimization will be reduced, thus making the youth to grow up in the right way with minimal possibilities of committing crime.
References
“Children’s Mental Health in Harris County”. (2006). A Report of the Mental Health Needs Council, Inc.
Ferguson, K. M. (2009). Exploring family environment characteristics and multiple abuse experiences among homeless youth. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 1875–1891.
Jordan, K. L., & Myers, D. L. (2011). Juvenile transfer and deterrence: Reexamining the effectiveness of a get-tough policy. Crime & Delinquency, 57(2), 247-270.
Lipsey, M. W. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims & Offenders, 4(2), 124-147.
Meredith, J. P. (2010). Combating cyberbullying: Emphasizing education over criminalization. Federal Communications Law Journal, 63(1), 311–340.
Moll, J. (2011). Ten truths about juvenile justice reform. Texas Public Policy Foundation.
Piquero, A. R., Cullen, F. T., Unnever, J. D., Piquero, N. L., & Gordon, J. A. (2010). Never too late: Public optimism about juvenile rehabilitation. Punishment & Society, 12(2), 187– 207.
Richards, K. (2011). What makes juvenile offenders different from adult offenders? Trends & Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice.
Shufelt, J. L., Cocozza, J. J., & Skowyra, K. R. (2010). Successfully collaborating with the juvenile justice system: benefits, challenges and key strategies. Juvenile Justice Resource Series.
Improvement of transportation networks in California
The socio-economic effects of the people as a result of improvement of transportation networks in California
Order Instructions:
Topic Question
The Concept Paper (CP) should include average of 60 pages, about 100 references (I already have the prevailing wage references, probably over 50 references need for material regarding transportation projects), and annotated bibliography.
I incorporated prevailing wage laws into the body the produced questions to use 50+ researches and work in the past. The Chair liked the three topics. The Chair was just concerned whether can be achievable. I must Report to the Chair frequently therefore, I need to have the writer to email me his/her progress every two days and the end the final CP. I will constantly report back with the feedback from the Chair until the approval. Example of questions forwarded to the chair is illustrated below. I personally like the number two question, what is your opinion and suggestion?
1. What are the likely environmental aspects that require consideration in the improvement of transportation in California considering the prevailing wage laws?
2. What are the economic benefits associated with improvement of transportation facilities in California and the magnitude of its effects on the daily lives of people with the respect to the prevailing wage laws?
3. Is opening up new transportation corridors in California in any way beneficial to food and agriculture industry allowing for the prevailing wage laws?
I will forward (to Bonnie at support) the CP template that should be written exactly according to the template guidelines and headings must be exactly the same without alteration. Supporting material will be sent too. The writer shall ask me any material needed for completing the CP.
Thanks,
Shahram Fahim
SAMPLE ANSWER
Improvement of transportation networks in California
NORTHCENTRAL UNIVERSITY
ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET
Student: Shahram Fahim
THIS FORM MUST BE COMPLETELY FILLED IN
Follow these procedures: If requested by your instructor, please include an assignment cover sheet. This will become the first page of your assignment. In addition, your assignment header should include your last name, first initial, course code, dash, and assignment number. This should be left justified, with the page number right justified. For example:
DoeJXXX0000-1 1
Save a copy of your assignments: You may need to re-submit an assignment at your instructor’s request. Make sure you save your files in accessible location.
Academic integrity: All work submitted in each course must be your own original work. This includes all assignments, exams, term papers, and other projects required by your instructor. Knowingly submitting another person’s work as your own, without properly citing the source of the work, is considered plagiarism. This will result in an unsatisfactory grade for the work submitted or for the entire course. It may also result in academic dismissal from the University.
DIS9504B-6
Dr. Julia Watkins
Doctoral Dissertation Research I
6 Concept Paper Introduction
Socio-economic Effects Associated with Transportation Facilities’ Improvement in California, United States
Concept Paper
Submitted to North central University
Graduate Faculty of the School of BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT
As demand for effective travel continues to increase, this trend has prompted transportation projects investments to improve transportation infrastructure and network (Cooper, 2012). Bell (2013) notes that the response of both federal and state governments to this increased demand has been through ambitious projects to improve transportation infrastructure. Transportation involves the movement of goods and human beings from one location to another, which is enabled by different modes of transportation including road, air, water, and rail (Alstadt, 2012). According to “The Theory of Transportation”, as proposed by Cooley (1894), the development or improvement of transportation requires involvement of general agencies such as political, associations or private, instead of individuals, subsequently resulting to fundamentalism and generalized degree of organization of transportation process as pertains to the society. Therefore, transport projects should be carried on bearing in mind that, their general aims are under considerations through uniform methods and unified instruments (Cooley, 1894).
According to Carrion and Levinson (2013), the articulation of transportation theory provides an explanation of how traffic contributes to mechanical and geographical concepts of transportation, the relationship between air, waterways and land transport with regards to naturally prevailing conditions. The contribution of transportation to socio-economic effects within a population focuses on the society organization, political organization, economic organization, the spatial location of towns, markets, as well as cities in a region (Alstadt, 2012). The transportation industry is constituted by different modes of transportation, operations, as well as physical facilities and infrastructure, which play an imperative role in enabling of socio-economic growth, especially by increasing inter-trade between people and regions (Levinson & Huang, 2012).
Improvement of the transportation infrastructure is fundamental in the enhancement of socio-economic outcomes, particularly through increased level of income arising from opened up markets for both labor and consumer goods (Banister, 2012). According to McDermott (2011), transport infrastructure improvement is attributable to different socio-economic benefits such as reduced travel delays, improved mobility of goods and people as well as increased accessibility of distinct locations that are geographically dispersed. As a result, transportation infrastructure improvement through increased government investment is attributable to improved quality of life, which automatically linked to people’s occupation, healthiness, teaching, and recreational activities among other roles that are directly related to socio-economic activities within a population (Bell, 2013; Carrion & Levinson, 2013).
In particular, the State of California is engaged in transportation improvement just like other states across the country, even though with the envisaged economic expansion, its transportation improvement program seems inadequate to cope with the anticipated demand (Kernohan & Rognlien, 2011). This is because the expected rate of economic expansion in the State of California is not likely to match that of transport expansion, and this necessitates an investigation of how the two relate to each other, and determine the specific socio-economic effects likely to accrue from the observed relationship (Cooper, 2012). As such, there is need for a more ambitious approach of improving transportation in order for the socio-economic status improvement among California population to be achieved (Saunders & Dalziel, 2014).
Statement of the Problem
The relationship between transportation and socio-economic growth and physical activity has been the pivotal focus of various key studies (Cooley, 1894; Banister, 2002; Banister & Berechman, 2012; Durant et al., 2016). Over the last two centuries since considerable investments in transportation improvement began, there has been inadequate information on the relationship between economic development and the transportation services. The issue has been subject to debate by government agencies, development partners and scholars. Investment in the transport sector is seen as a boost or catalyst for economic growth (Stillwell, Geertman, & Openshaw, 2013). In regions across the world, transport infrastructures have been seen as an imperative sector and are significant drivers in the promotion of balanced and sustainable development socially because they improve opportunities and accessibility of less developed regions or disadvantaged social groups. The fundamental aim of the current paper is to unearth if there is any relationship between the transport systems in the society and the socio-economic development. Specifically, the study aims to come up with socio-economic effects associated with the increased transport infrastructural systems (Weisbrod, 2011; Banerjeey, Dufloz & Qian, 2012; Bell, 2013). The problem addressed in this study is that there has been significant investment dedicated to the Gold Line Foothill Extension project, which is a light rail line that was opened in March 5, 2016 at Los Angeles, California State (Nelson, 2016), however, the relationship between the extent of investments in the transport sector and the cost of travel and income level effects is yet to be evaluated (Weisbrod, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012; Bell, 2013).
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this qualitative longitudinal cohort research design study is to examine if there is relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased travel accessibility, increased transit use as well as increased physical activity in a sample of transport workers in the State of California. The study population for the proposed study is comprised of a sample of employees working at Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) in the State California who have lived in the State of California for more than three years that have knowledge, experience, or ability to provide data to answer the research questions. A random sample of 200 participants will be recruited from the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) employees’ database who meets the following inclusion criteria: transport sector workers, residents of California and at least 3 years working experience in the transport sector. Considering that the State of California is study area, primary data will be collected using Modifiable Activity Questionnaire (S-MAQ) and Multi-Context Sitting Time Questionnaire (MSTQ) research instruments to evaluate the services offered by the transportation projects (Durand et al., 2016). The primary data gathered through the administration of the questionnaires will be coded or processed; subsequent to using SPSS in order to allow testing of the hypotheses. The analytic plan to be used include both correlation and regression analysis to determine the relationships between variables. Therefore, the study will be carried out to determine the socio-economic impacts that are likely to be accrued as a result of development of transportation network in Los Angeles city, in the state of California.
Research Questions
In this study, particular research questions will enable collection of quantitative primary data in order to test the proposed hypotheses. The research questions will be in tandem with research constructs or variables associated with transportation improvement and socio-economic impacts. The interview questions were be formulated in a manner that ensures the desired data is collected.
The research questions for this study are:
Q1. What is the relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased accessibility, in Los Angeles, California?
Q2. What is the relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased transit use, in Los Angeles, California?
Q3. What is the relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased physical activity, in Los Angeles, California?
Hypotheses
The hypotheses for this study are:
H10. There is no relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased accessibility, in Los Angeles, California.
H1a.There is a relationship transportation infrastructure improvement and increased accessibility, in Los Angeles, California.
H2a. There is no relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased transit use, in Los Angeles, California.
H20. There is a relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased transit use, in Los Angeles, California.
H2a. There is no relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased physical activity, in Los Angeles, California.
H20. There is a relationship between transportation infrastructure improvement and increased physical activity, in Los Angeles, California.
Definition of Key Terms
Transportation: This are the means through which people and goods move from one location to the other through various modes such as road, air, water, rail, air, as well as pipeline (Carrion & Levinson, 2013; Junge & Levinson, 2012; Litman, 2014).
Transportation facilities: This involves the infrastructure and modes utilized to facilitate movement of people and goods (Anderson, Levinson & Parthasarathi, 2013).
Economic benefits: This involves the positive outcomes associated with improved of the socio-economic conditions due enhancement of transportation (Levinson, Xie & Montes de Oca, 2012).
Economic growth: This is the improvement and/or development of economic conditions of people in a particular region (Fan, Guthrie & Levinson, 2012).
Increased mobility: This is the ease with which people are able to move from one location to the other (Carrion & Levinson, 2013).
Theoretical Framework
Transport systems and infrastructures have a very close relationship with socio-economic changes among a population of people living within a particular region (Rodrigue, 2013). Different groups of people in California (in terms of cultural influence, marital status, income level and level of education) have varied socio-economic needs and tend to differentially utilize transportation facilities subsequently leading to economic expansion (Gomben et al., 2012). Improved transport network has an impact on the socio-economic expansion of California residents because it improves mobility and market accessibility, creates job opportunities, and increases income levels (Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013). According to Cooper (2012) despite significant levels of public transportation investment in California, there has not been matching socio-economic status satisfaction levels. Hence, there is need for ensuring that the actual investment in the public transportation sector about socio-economic status is done to ensure that transportation facilities are at par with commuter needs (Cooper, 2012). As noted by Bell (2013) the socio-economic advantages resulting from transportation infrastructure improvements are often regarded to be location-specific, and this is growth in economy that subsequently benefits individuals within a particular region socio-economically. Using the socio-economic expansion analysis approach would enable collection of the required information in order to investigate this relationship (Bell, 2013). Therefore, by succinctly determining the relationship that exists between improvement of public transportation infrastructure and socio-economic impacts among Californians, the study will be able to scientifically prove the need to improve the transport networks for improved socio-economic status of the people within the society. As a result, the findings obtained from this study would be fundamental in contributing to the transportation because costs of travel and income level changes due to improvement of transportation infrastructure are constructs of a transportation theory. Due to the lack of a study that scientifically links the socio-economic benefits accrued from improvement in the transportation facilities, the current study endeavors to establish the correlation between investment in transportation systems and the possible socio-economic benefits that can emanate from the process. According to Rodrigue and Notteboom (2013), the ease of people to move from one region to another as well as levels of accessibility to modes of transportation is at the core of the dynamics that determines the behavior of the relationship observed between transport systems and the socio-economic effects among a population of people living within a particular region. The socio-economic changes are likely to vary from one region to another as well as between individuals and businesses. In particular, there is a very high likelihood of the arising of new economic opportunities where transportation infrastructures and systems have been improved and are able to provide effective solutions and/or alternatives to the residents’ mobility needs and insuring accessibility to resources and markets (Henderson, Shalizi & Venables, 2012; Lakshmanan & Chatterjee, 2015; Limao & Venables, 2011; Rodrigue & Notteboom, 2013).
Since the 19th century industrial revolution through economic integration and globalization processes of the recent past, particularly towards the end of 20th century and at the onset of the 21st century, socio-economic effects attributable to improvements in transportation systems and infrastructures have been differently affected across various regions of the world (Harrington & Warf, 2015; Hargroves & Smith, 2015; Helling, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). In particular, Rodrigue and Notteboom (2013) noted that local, regional, and global/international transportation systems and infrastructures have all become fundamental drivers of economic activities. These authors further notes that, a growing share of wealth created through these economic activities, which involve trade and distribution, is linked to improvements in transportation systems and infrastructures at local, regional and global/international levels (Afraz, 2014; Banister & Berechman, 2012). However, it is imperative to note that despite the positive impacts of improved transportation infrastructures and systems on socio-economic systems, some negative outcomes are also reported such as increased accidents, congestion, and mobility gaps (Banister & Berechman, 2012; Brueckner, 2013; Berry, 2011).
According to Henckel and McKibbin (2011), transportation has a variety of conceptual variables and a succinct understanding of its relationship with socio-economic effects, which forms the basis of the conceptual framework of this study, can be achieved by considering transportation as a commercial activity deriving benefits from the inherent operational attributes such as reliability, efficiency, capacity, costs, and speed. Henderson, Shalizi, and Venables (2012) reiterate the importance of improving transportation systems and infrastructures, which have continued to evolve within a set of relationships that are relatively complex between transport demand, transport supply, the transport network’s operational capacity, and an economy’s mobility requirements.
There are significant investments which have being going on in the state of California towards improving transport infrastructures and systems without succinctly assessing the ensuing socio-economic benefits first, something which makes it imperative to undertake this study for the determination of the relationship that exist between the two scenarios (Cooper, 2012; Delorme, Thompson & Warren, 2013). This implies that an information gap exists which ought to be timely and effectively addressed, since if left undetermined then the state of California may continue to take risk that is not strategically evaluated through continued dedication of significant investments towards improvement of transport infrastructure and systems without matching socio-economic effects (Federal Highway Administration, 2012). On the other hand, the State may also fail to prioritize significant levels of investments in transport infrastructure and systems improvement and also risk to harness the inherent potential and economic opportunities if the socio-economic effects attributed to such actions are significant and satisfactory (Banister & Berechman, 2012; Brueckner, 2013; Berry, 2011; Mullen, Williams & Moowaw, 2012). Levinson (2012) emphasizes that transportation facilities’ improvements do not directly result in economic growth, but merely plays a supporting role, and this information gap is evident in California State, which means that a study is necessary to establish the specific socio-economic benefits that accrue from improvements on transportation facilities and infrastructure. Furthermore, according to El-Geneidy and Levinson (2011), the economic benefits that results from improvements in transportation facilities are often considered location-specific, and this implies that it results to economic growth through benefits such as its positive effects on accessibility, income, and employment. However, considering that these effects are location-specific, the manifestation of economic growth potential is primarily considered to occur at the local level (Banister & Berechman, 2012; Berry, 2012; Brueckner, 2013; Helling, 2011; Hilling, 2013; McDermott, 2012; Tilahun & Levinson, 2011).
According to Cooper (2012), the need to determine the variety and composition of transportation facilities in California State is greatly important since this would subsequently enable an assessment of the specific economic benefits that result from these improvements in transportation facilities. Moreover, there is the need to determine the effects of improvements in transportation facilities on daily lives of California State citizens both socially and economically (Berry, 2012; Cooper, 2012; Morrison & Schwartz, 2012).
According to Ruyssen, Everaert and Rayp (2014), transportation improvement is a portrayal of market ease of accessibility by associating manufactures as well as end users and intermediaries or distributors to facilitate transactions. As Carrion and Levinson (2013) mentioned in the theory of transportation, economic transactions does not occur with lack of transportation facilities. The existing transportation projects in the state of California are not adequate to compare to the forecasted economic development and followed population growth (Kernohan & Rognlien, 2011). Transportation agencies have in history been focusing on major construction as well as expansion of roads, bridges, and other transport infrastructure (Banerjeey, Dufloz & Qian, 2012; Coleman, 2014; Graham, Gibbons & Martin, 2011; Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; Gui & Russo, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). However, there has been drastic shift of the emphasis from development of new transportation infrastructure to intelligent maintenance of the existing ones. In recent years, the tightening of budget and increased demands has both impacted on funds allocation in transportation infrastructure improvement. Coleman (2012) notes that this situation has resulted to heightened focus on asset management systems development.
A strong system of asset management has been critical in providing a solid basis, which has led to the optimization of cost effectiveness and performance of the operation and maintenance of transportation facilities (Brueckner, 2013; Helling, 2011; Nadiri & Manuneas, 2014). From this perspective, the provision of this study’s theoretical framework reiterates on the best practices, which have been adoption by different agencies of the transportation not only in the United States but globally. Cooper (2012) points out that the asset management system front-runners globally with regards to improvements in transportation facilities and infrastructure based on best practices review, a conceptual framework is proposed.
According to Williamson, Philbin, and Sanderson (2012) the tremendous increase in the number of cars on the streets over time in big cities, more and more people have been deliberately making decisions to leave their personal cars behind and use public transport facilities such as metro, tram or bus as a means of movement from one location to another. Hence this has necessitated continuous improvement of transportation facilities as well as infrastructure not only in California, but also in many other regions across the United States and globally. Ideally, these improvements in public transport facilities are aimed at making sure that users are provided with detailed information concerning transport network connections, and theoretically, it should also guarantee effective and reliable means of movement directly proportional to the investment made for improvements (Brueckner, 2013; Helling, 2011; Vickerman, 2012). Therefore, through the improvements in transportation facilities as well as infrastructure plan journeys have gained significant popularity in services offered by the public transport facilities. Vogel (2012) state that people who use public transport facilities have increased their interest in knowing how catch up with them as quick as possible from a particular location to a specified destination, which has been made possible by the improvements caused by investment in transportation facilities and infrastructure.
The conceptual framework guiding the support of improvement in transportation facilities, as well as infrastructure in California, argues that the economic benefits and subsequent economic development objective of such interventions aims at contributing to the improvement of socio-economic conditions for the population in the target region (including improvement in economic potential as well as improvement in the access to health services and education). According to Williamson, Philbin and Sanderson (2012) this assertion is in turn given certain assumptions, envisaged to be attained through several other immediate objectives that include provision of an improved access of rural areas to social services as well as administrative centers and economic opportunities. This imminent objective is undoubtedly measurable through a consideration of the repair, improvement or building of transportation infrastructure as well as facilities such as roads, bridges etc., in addition to the associated increase in access roads’ traffic both motorized and non-motorized (Anderson, Levinson & Parthasarathi, 2013; Brueckner, 2013; Helling, 2011; Hilling, 2013).
The relation between transportation facilities and improvement in welfare has been examined in various studies; however, it is imperative to note that this has been noted by way of introducing the problem of attribution been the central concern for investments in rural infrastructure. According to Alstadt (2012) many welfare related factors are to a significant extent influenced by a multiple of factors other than transportation infrastructure. Secondly, the endogeneity problem implies that many impacts and effects originally associated with improvement in transportation facilities are also to a greater extent influenced by an initial set of factors resulting to road allocation to be the area of key interest (Anderson, Levinson & Parthasarathi, 2013). To guide the analysis of the collected data in this research, a differentiation will be made between impact and effects. Effects are expected to occur before, and with greater certainty than, impacts (Brueckner, 2013; Helling, 2011; Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; Gui & Russo, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012).
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework Diagram
On the other hand, the modeling as well as measurement of transport facilities and/or infrastructure improvement investments on economic development requires conceptual framework to be specified which underlies the potential causes linking the two key phenomena (Berry, 2012; Brueckner, 2013; Helling, 2011; Todaro & Smith, 2011). It is undoubtedly evident that historically the fundamental outcome of investing in transport facilities improvement has been the imminent relative changes in prices for the accessibility of different locations within the area under consideration (Banerjeey, Dufloz & Qian, 2012; Coleman, 2014; Graham, Gibbons & Martin, 2011). This is attributable to the fact that transport systems’ network structure results to non-uniformity in the spatial accessibility, an investment in new transportation facilities, improvement of the existing transportation facilities which eventually lead to alteration of the existing equilibrium structure mainly due to changes in the prices of accessing two locations.
In turn, these changes in prices imply variations in the relative advantage with regards to activities that are spatially located as well as economic opportunities both for consumption and production sectors. The reason that is attributable to these changes in prices is because the inputs costs (e.g. labor) and outputs prices (e.g. housing) at spatial locations change as a function of accessibility costs between the two spatial locations. Furthermore, Coleman (2012) reiterated that the strength and extent of various scale, network and scope economies, which affects companies’ location decisions, may often become insignificant as there are improvements in relative accessibilities between spatially located regions.
According to Cooper (2012), it is necessary to understand that the extent to which transportation facilities and/or infrastructure improvement affects economic growth is also dependent on the demographic and economic characteristics of the region where the improvements in transportation facilities and/or infrastructure are taking place. For instance, a given accessibility change will differentially affect consumption and location decisions for households with two employees than it will affect such decisions in households with a single employee (Coleman, 2014; Graham, Gibbons & Martin, 2011; Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; Gui & Russo, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). Similarly, the reaction of retailers to accessibility improvements will differs with that of industrial firms with respect to their use of labor as well as their location. Hence, from an economic perspective, the analysis of how investments in improvements of transportation facilities and/or infrastructure affects economic development must put into consideration the nature of the region’s local economy as well as the various stakeholders that participate in policy formulation and the decision making process (Banerjeey, Dufloz & Qian, 2012; Coleman, 2014; Graham, Gibbons & Martin, 2011; Hilling, 2013; Porter, 2012; Rietveld, 2014).
The basis of this argument is on three fundamental premises. First, investing on improvement of transportation facilities and/or infrastructure is an effective investment. This is attributable to the fact that such investments results to tangible effects on transport networks’ performance. Alstadt (2012) stated that this is attributed to the fact that investments in transportation facilities and/or infrastructure whose magnitude, composition, location and type do not lead to considerable alteration of the transport networks’ performance are considered to be non-effective since they do not have the potential of generating economic benefits which subsequently result to economic development. On the other hand, any investments in the improvement of transportation facilities and/or infrastructure that results to transport organization improvement as well as increased efficiency in provision of transport services in a region, even if such investments do not include actual construction of new transportation facilities, is considered to be effective investments if measurable economic and social effects are generated (El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011; Hilling, 2013; Porter, 2012; Rietveld, 2014).
Second, the casual link that exists between investments aimed at improving transportation facilities or infrastructure and economic benefits that subsequently result to economic growth must be manifest in transport-economic behavior changes in the region. According to Vickerman (2012), the implication of this premise is that, in order for economic development to ensue as a result of investments to improve transportation facilities or infrastructure, other agents of economic growth such as firms and households as well as markets must synergistically act to cause substantial changes in the transport network performance. A consideration of this scenario from a short and medium term perspective, it is of essence to make sure there is confinement of the aforementioned reaction to travel variable such as travel volumes, trip generation rates as well as choice of routes (Button & Reggiani, 2011; Porter, 2012). On the other hand, when the scenario is considered from the long-term perspective, there must be manifestation of this reaction in the location decisions for firms as well as households and in property and land prices’ changes. In overall, accessibility changes that ensue from improvements in transportation facilities or infrastructure need to be linked with economic prices and behavior changes in order to make sure that it subsequently constitutes a fundamental component of economic development (Button, 2012; Hilling, 2013; Porter, 2012).
Third, improvements in transportation facilities or infrastructure which directly influence transport markets and travel behavior must subsequently translated into economic benefits that are measurable (Banerjeey, Dufloz & Qian, 2012; Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). These economic benefits should include increased demand for inputs, larger output, improved factor productivity, increased property, and land values as well as greater consumer goods’ demand (Brueckner, 2013; Helling, 2011; Hilling, 2013; Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012).
After the above three crucial premises have been stated, it must also be noted that the extent to which improvements in transportation facilities or infrastructure will influence economic development is explicitly dependent on the performance and level of the existing transportation facilities or infrastructure in terms of the in-place capital (El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011). This implies that in areas where the transport infrastructure or facilities (e.g. roads, rail systems, access roads, airports, seaways) is highly developed, even a sizeable investment for improvement of transportation facilities or infrastructure is not likely to significantly affect travel markets and behavior, and consequently economic development (Anderson, Levinson & Parthasarathi, 2013; Hilling, 2013).
Therefore, it can be generally envisaged that, economic development effect is subject to marginal decline irrespective of additional investment for improvement of transportation facilities or infrastructure (Berry, 2012; Button, 2012). This implies that at extreme, when there is full development of the transportation facilities or infrastructure in region to an extent that no accessibility improvements would ensue from additional investment, there would not be any additional economic benefits that will accrue from the investments to improve transportation infrastructure as well as facilities, with exception of the multiplier effects (Berry, 2012; Button & Reggiani, 2011; Helling, 2011).
Transport systems and infrastructures have a very close relationship with socio-economic changes among a population of people living within a particular region (Rodrigue, 2013). According to Rodrigue and Notteboom (2013), the ease of people to move from one region to another as well as levels of accessibility to modes of transportation is at the core of the dynamics that determines the behavior of the relationship observed between transport systems and the socio-economic effects among a population of people living within a particular region. The socio-economic changes are likely to vary from one region to another as well as between individuals and businesses. In particular, there is a very high likelihood of the arising of new economic opportunities where transportation infrastructures and systems have been improved and are able to provide effective solutions and/or alternatives to the residents’ mobility needs and insuring accessibility to resources and markets (Henderson, Shalizi & Venables, 2012; Lakshmanan & Chatterjee, 2015; Limao & Venables, 2011; Rodrigue & Notteboom, 2013).
Since the 19th century industrial revolution through economic integration and globalization processes of the recent past, particularly towards the end of 20th century and at the onset of the 21st century, socio-economic effects attributable to improvements in transportation systems and infrastructures have been differently affected across various regions of the world (Harrington & Warf, 2015; Hargroves & Smith, 2015; Helling, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). In particular, Rodrigue and Notteboom (2013) noted that local, regional, and global/international transportation systems and infrastructures have all become fundamental drivers of economic activities. These authors further notes that, a growing share of wealth created through these economic activities which involve trade and distribution is linked to improvements in transportation systems and infrastructures at local, regional and global/international levels. However, it is imperative to note that despite the positive impacts of improved transportation infrastructures and systems on socio-economic systems, some negative outcomes are also reported such as increased accidents, congestion, and mobility gaps (Banister & Berechman, 2012; Berry, 2011).
According to Henckel and McKibbin (2011), transportation has a variety of conceptual variables and a succinct understanding of its relationship with socio-economic effects, which forms the basis of the conceptual framework of this study, can be achieved by considering transportation as a commercial activity deriving benefits from the inherent operational attributes such as reliability, efficiency, capacity, costs, and speed. Henderson, Shalizi, and Venables (2012) reiterate the importance of improving transportation systems and infrastructures, which have continued to evolve within a set of relationships that are relatively complex between transport demand, transport supply, the transport network’s operational capacity, and an economy’s mobility requirements.
Fan, Guthrie and Levinson (2012), noted that the direct effects of transportation improvements are to reduce transport costs and time achieved through reduced congestion, decreased transportation operations costs as well as enhanced accessibility and connectivity of spatially dispersed destinations within the region. Transportation improvements through increased investment have the potential of mitigating any economic disbenefits, especially when the transport projects results to reduced congestion (Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). These incremental socio-economic benefits attributed to transportation improvement projects can be measured through cost-benefit analysis (Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013). Also there should be consideration of other indirect socio-economic effects of transport improvement when attempting to evaluate transportation projects in their entirety. Parthasarathi, Levinson, and Hochmair (2013) noted that, the socio-economic effects caused by improvement of transportation are specifically attributed to increased productivity and the spatial connectivity. In the long term, investments on transportation infrastructure improvements contribute to socio-economic development by catalyzing a variety of economy-wide processes that are inter-connected, which subsequently lead to regional and spatial effects that augment overall productivity (Kernohan & Rognlien, 2011; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014).
In particular, enhanced accessibility and lower transportation or travel costs, as a result of improved transport services and systems, enhanced accessibility to suppliers and inputs; and expanded markets for businesses. According to Lakshmanan (2011), increased spatial connectivity and accessibility generates more opportunities for trade deals, specialization and fair competition, which subsequently result to productivity gains in the longer-term. These changes are attributed to benefits that ensue from lowered barriers to trading and the expanded business opportunities arising from such actions (Kernohan & Rognlien, 2011; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). Therefore, having a succinct understanding of these circumstances that influence the socio-economic impacts of transportation improvement is an imperative in gaining deeper insights on the socio-economic benefits likely to accrue from transportation systems and facilities improvements (Parthasarathi, Levinson & Hochmair, 2013).
Market accessibility is undoubtedly among the most imperative characteristics of active economies since it plays a vital role of facilitating movement of people from one location to another, a fundamental need shared by businesses, passengers, and transport employees (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). Different regions and economies have varied levels of mobility due to their different stages of mobility transition with regards to transportation using various motorized forms (Levinson & Huang, 2012; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). According to Saunders and Dalziel (2014), economies in possession of greater market accessibility often have high potential to achieve greater socio-economic benefits compared to those with scarce mobility. This is because little mobility due poor transportation networks hinders socio-economic growth, whereas greater market accessibility catalyzes an increased rate of socio-economic growth. Cooper (2012) noted that, the level of mobility in a region is a fundamental socio-economic growth indicator. This means that, provision of mobility through improved transportation offers businesses and individuals an opportunity to increase their level of income generation, which results to creation of employment opportunities, increased wages as well as government revenue through taxation (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012).
With regards to market accessibility, transportation improvement plays a fundamental role of providing connectivity as well as accessibility between spatially distant locations where businesses are saturated (commercial hubs) as well as household regions (residential areas) in order to enable movement of persons and commodity (freight). For instance, the business sector is heavily relied on transportation which involves connecting different businesses and their sources of inputs as well as between varied locations of different businesses and also connecting businesses to their respective target markets (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). On the other hand, the household sector is also heavily dependent on transportation network mainly because it enables accessibility by people living within a particular region to education facilities and workplaces, shopping centers or markets, as well as recreational, social, medical and community facilities (Levinson & Huang, 2012; Bell, 2013).
To summarize this theoretical and conceptual framework discussion, it can be clearly noted that the discussion has suggested that there is need to have an overall view of the transportation system in all its modes as a constraint to the attainment of the potential economic benefits and opportunities within a region by industrial, commercial and households’ activities. However, Gui and Ruuso (2011) noted that an additional investment to improve transportation facilities as well as infrastructure lessens this constraint, subsequently resulting to the achievement of higher economic benefits and eventually higher economic growth. On the other hand, the transportation facilities as well as infrastructure in a region becomes highly developed with regards to the ease of travel as well as cost of travel, the less the transportation facilities as well as infrastructure has a binding effect on economic benefits and subsequently economic development (Banerjeey, Dufloz & Qian, 2012; Coleman, 2014; Graham, Gibbons & Martin, 2011). Hence, the conceptual framework of this study suggests that prior to actual analysis of the effect of additional investment to improve transportation facilities as well as infrastructure on the region’s local economy, it is essential to initially assess its relative contribution to accessibility in the region, through determination of its effect on the region’s travel markets and behavior.
A fundamental conceptual question that arises from the above discussion of theoretical and conceptual framework of the study is whether improvement in transportation facilities as well as infrastructure constitutes to sufficient and necessary conditions for economic benefits and subsequent economic development locally (i.e. California State). Furthermore, it is crucially important to note that if improvements in transportation facilities and infrastructure can be considered a constraint towards economic opportunities’ attainment in the area, then it can also be considered as a necessary condition for enabling economic opportunities’ attainment in the area (El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011; Helling, 2011; Hilling, 2013). This discussion highlights one of the main objectives of this study, which is to determine whether and when investment to improve transportation facilities as well as infrastructure becomes a sufficient condition for economic benefits as well as subsequent economic development.
Brief Review of the Literature
This chapter reviews the existing literature in the context of the subject matter of the research study, which is to investigate the socio-economic effects of the people as a result of improvement of transportation networks in California. To address the concept, this chapter will review the existing literature on the key issues and concepts regarding the central theme as well as generally existing ideas on the concept as a foundation for developing the ideas of the researcher on the general focus of the current study. The review of the literature will attempt to provide a detailed account of how earlier studies viewed the concept of transportation and socio-economic growth. The review will assist to identify the existing gap within the literature and which the dissertation will attempt to fill. This chapter of the conceptual paper focuses on reviewing existing academic literature from previous studies, particularly those that consist of relevant information about this area of study in order to gain meaningful insights that form the background of the study. The intention of conducting this literature review is ensure that conclusions are drawn from the research findings with regards to the research problem and questions. The main objective of the literature review chapter is to find relevant information that is vital to act as the study background and determine the extent to which the phenomenon under consideration in this study has been researched.
Background of the study
The contemporary view sees economic development as less dependent on the direct relationships with the environment and focuses on the dependence or the relations across space. Although resources have been viewed as the major foundations of economic development, transport system, which is one of the commoditized assets in the economy, has been greatly linked with increasing the levels of flow of materials of all types (Bocarejo, Portilla, Velásquez, Cruz, Peña, & Oviedo, 2014). This is because, capital, resources and labor are able to experience higher rates of mobility. Transportation provides a smooth platform over which producers are able to efficiently link up with the consumers to enhance transactions to take place. There is a common fallacy of people trying to assess the significance of transportation from one perspective; reduction of transportation costs. However, if the economy based on transport is limited to the costs, a lot of significances will be left out. The economy based on the transport costs only accounts for approximately 5-10% of the value that goods and services hold (Abdallah, Belloumi, & De Wolf, 2013). Transportation can be viewed as an economic factor of production and it is a fundamental factor in the exchange or delivery of goods and services. Irrespective of the costs involved, economic activities may not take place without the involvement of transport services. Any changes in the costs, performance and capacity incurred in transportation have tremendous impacts on economic activities. Any efficient system equipped with modern infrastructure tends to favor a lot of positive economic changes. For instance, a region that has the capability to produce a certain aspect of a commodity will be able to specialize and capitalize on the fact that the product incurs a higher advantage and a lower disadvantage if they realize that the transport systems support the movement of their goods and services. The transport system will be used to enhance the trading activities. In addition, a reliable transport system will enable goods to be transported over large distances. This can be able to support mass production and therefore economies of scale. This increased production and efficiency in the transit of goods from one place to another may ultimately become a springboard of enhancing socio-economic development and consequently growth.
Resources and transportation are vital factors that enhance both physical and economic development of regions across the world (Abdallah, Belloumi, & De Wolf, 2013). Population growth, rise in housing and economic growth are usually experienced in regions that have developed transport networks. There could be very little development that could have been achieved around the world if there was limited development in terms of transportation. Socio-economic growth and transportation are interdependent factors.
Transportation Investment and Socio-Economic Impact
Largely due to the work of Alstadt (2012), numerous studies have so far been carried out in order to explore the direction and extent of correlations between variables of public transportation improvement investments and the socio-economic effects that ensue. The socio-economic effects ensuing from public transportation improvement investments are measured by considering a variety of variables such as value-added GDP, output, productivity, as well as employment levels (for example, Banerjeey, Dufloz & Qian, 2012; Coleman, 2014; Graham, Gibbons & Martin, 2011; Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; Gui & Russo, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). Similar studies have been carried out previously on the basis on data obtained from varied sources in order to succinctly investigate and explain the interactions as well as the relationship between variables of this imperative research phenomenon (e.g., El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011; Junge & Levinson, 2011; Levinson, Xie & Montes de Oca, 2012; Litman, 2014; Schone & Levinson, 2014).
According to Carrion and Levinson (2013), a major finding from many previously conducted studies was that, the variables of these two phenomena indicate a positive relationship that is statistically significant even though very few studies have investigated and reported small effect of public capital on transportation improvement output on socio-economic effects. Carrion and Levinson (2013) further noted that, irrespective of the significance structural changes in the improvement of transportation projects its relation to transport infrastructure has not attracted sufficient research attention and limited information exist of this specific aspect in the literature. The relevant structural changes that are fundamental in transportation improvement projects’ investments with regards to the envisaged socio-economic benefits concerns differentiation of economic linkages between particular industry sectors of the economy with their specific type of transportation infrastructure (Brooks, Pallis, & Perkins, 2014). According to Carrion and Levinson (2013), the role of investment on transportation infrastructure and systems improvement is entrenched in the derivation of public transport services’ demand by different economy stakeholders, and the relationship between types of transport infrastructure or facilities and varied extents of socio-economic effects. The review of the literature indicates that research on relative productivity with regards to different modes of transport has given substantially varied socio-economic effects (Berry, 2012; Helling, 2011; Hilling, 2013; Tilahun & Levinson, 2011).
According to Alstadt (2012), there is need to focus the study on transportation projects in the view of how the investments on transportation facilities and systems improvements influence socio-economic status of a population in a particular region. There has been various techniques used to evaluate the socio-economic benefits arising from transportation improvement projects at microanalysis and macro-analysis levels mainly including cost functions and production functions methods for the microanalysis level as well as case studies and cost-benefit analysis for macro-analysis level (El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011; Hickman et al., 2015). In an attempt towards finding the impact of transportation improvement investments on economic productivity, the macro analysis methods are concerned with comparing national trends in economic status and the extent of socio-economic activity with levels of investment to improve public transportation infrastructure (Hilling, 2013; Coleman, 2012; Cooper, 2012). According to El-Geneidy and Levinson (2011), the major limitation of macro analysis methods on investigating the impact of transportation improvement investments on socio-economic status do not elucidate the existence of observed casual relationships, but only simply highlight different relationships or associations between various data series. On the other hand, the focus of microanalysis methods, particularly the cost and production functions is directed on socio-economic effects arising from a particular or several transportation projects by providing meaningful insights into how individuals and businesses responds to changes in transportation infrastructure and systems (El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011; Hickman et al., 2015; Lakshmanan & Chatterjee, 2015).
Alstadt (2012) presented a substantially influential proposition on how socio-economic effects are influenced by improvements of transportation infrastructure and facilities through increased investment. The study posits that, there varied levels of impact on socio-economic effects ensuing from transportation improvement at national level as well as regional and local level. Furthermore, highway capital investment to improve transportation systems seems to complementarily substitute private capital in various economic sectors across different regions globally (Helling, 2012; Hickman et al., 2015; Hilling, 2013; Struglia, Winter & Meyer, 2013).
This means that the studies focusing on ensuring that research is carried out to examine the socio-economic effects of improvements in transportation facilities in California utilizing both primary and secondary data collected from research participants and secondary sources on financial and non-financial perspectives of the phenomenon. As a result, it is imperative to ensure that there is a review of the existing literature on improvement of transportation facilities as well as examining its impact on socio-economic not only in California, but also across other various research scenarios across the world. The improvements of transportation infrastructure and systems has the potential to play an imperative role in the facilitation of socio-economic development through the ensuing socio-economic benefits as well as utilization of socio-economic effects to uplift the living standards of the people (El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011; Struglia, Winter & Meyer, 2013). According to Alstadt (2012), improvements in transportation infrastructure are without any doubt the factor linking between the socio-economic effects and the overall economic benefits attributed to improvements in transport. The relationship to be considered in this study is about the aforementioned aspects of transport infrastructures and systems improvement including specific socio-economic effects on people and the overall economic benefits to determine whether adequate rewards/outputs are obtained from continued capital investments towards transportation infrastructure and systems improvement.
Transport systems have a close relationship with social as well as economic changes (Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; Gui & Russo, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). This is attributable to the fact that, mobility of people as well as levels of accessibility across various regions is without any doubts at the centre of the aforementioned relationship (Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). Due to this interconnection there is a possibility of economic opportunities to arise where transportation infrastructural facilities have a potential of fulfilling the mobility needs in order to guarantee accessibility of resources as well as markets by the people living within a particular region. From agrarian as well as industrial revolution in the 18th and early 19th centuries to processes of economic integration and globalization both in 20th as well as 21st centuries, different regions across the world have been differentially affected by economic growth and development attributable to transportation improvement and increased connectivity. Transportation systems at local, national, regional, as well as international levels alike have without any dispute expanded to become imperative components of connectivity as well as economic activities (Gomben, Lilieholm & Gonzalez-Guillen, 2012; Gui & Russo, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012).
According to Williamson, Philbin, and Sanderson (2012), a continuously growing proportion of the wealth generated by individuals, corporate as well as governments is attributed to trade and distribution facilitated by the connectivity as well as accessibility of different regions through transportation infrastructural facilities and networks. However, despite the fact that improvement of transportation systems is associated to a significant number of positive effects on socio-economics of the people living within a region, there are also a considerable number of negative impacts that can be attributed to increased levels of transportation including mobility gaps, accidents, air pollution as well as congestion (Berry, 2012; Hilling, 2013; Vickerman, 2012; Vogel, 2012). According to Lakshmanan (2011), transportation can also be considered as a commercial activity that may arise from operational attributes, including efficiency, capacity, transportation costs, speed, as well as reliability. Cooper (2012) noted that there has been a continuous evolution of transportation systems within a complex set of interconnections as well as relationships between variable such as transport supply, including a transport network’s operational capacity as well as the demand for transport within a particular region, including an economy’s mobility requirements. According to Vogel (2012), transportation can be viewed as an imperative component of movement of goods and people through interconnected networks of various modes of transport and usually have an obvious impact on the social, cultural as well as economic activities carried out by a population of people living within a particular region. Hazledine, Donovan and Bolland (2013) emphasized that the role of improved transportation’s infrastructural facilities as well as networks either occurs directly or indirectly whereby direct the direct effects occur through heightened levels of investment in transport facilities and infrastructure. As a result, increased purchases of vehicles and other transportation modes, increased physical capital, improved logistical systems are attributed to the direct impacts; whereas improved efficiency of transportation systems and facilities are usually attributed to most of the indirect impacts of improvement of transportation infrastructure and facilities subsequently stimulating further socio-economic growth in the particular area or region under consideration (Huang & Levinson, 2011; Kernohan & Rognlien, 2011; Vickerman, 2012; Vogel, 2012).
A consideration of the transportation sector and the associated infrastructure as well as facilities and network, the most important issue worthy critical evaluation is with regards to whether transportation infrastructure as well as facilities’ improvements have a significant potential of greatly influencing the growth of total factor productivity (TFP) through heightened incentives for innovative strategies towards improving efficiency of the transportation sector as a whole (Huang & Levinson, 2011; Lakshmanan, 2011; Vickerman, 2012). According to Hazledine, Donovan and Bolland (2013), the main outcomes of long-run economic growth are productivity growth and continued capital investment. Therefore, if transport improvement is to be attributed to some extent of socio-economic benefits it must achieve this milestone either indirectly or directly due to effects resulting from decisions made by businesses and individual households. Vogel (2012) and Vickerman (2012) emphasize that, historically the fundamental impact of transportation improvements has been a reduction in the movement of goods and services over both short- and long-distance trade, which contribute to significant integration of geographically disperse markets. As a result, this is perhaps what makes transport infrastructure improvement special because it has the potential to achieve this through efficient transportation networks and infrastructure instead of concentrating on individual transport schemes (Alstadt, 2012; Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012; Vogel, 2012). In contrast, Cooper (2012) noted that, when the transport-intensive economic sectors are characterized by imperfect competition, this may be attributed to imperative economic effects not likely to be captured in the cost-benefit analysis done conventionally. According to Kernohan and Rognlien (2011), improvement in transportation and the growth in economy are strongly related and commonly exhibit a two-way relationship, meaning that a change in the transportation networks or systems and infrastructure has a subsequent impact on the economic activity level and, on the other hand, the demand for transportation can be affected by the economic activity level.
Parthasarathi, Levinson, and Hochmair (2013) through their study the significance of transportation improvement in economic productivity and growth reported that, a compelling link exists historically between improvements in transportation infrastructure and economic growth. Connectivity through improved transportation infrastructure and systems has in the recent past received significant attention, and is commonly associated with new and advanced transportation technologies, especially those concerned with communications that have played a fundamental role in transportation improvement (Alstadt, 2012; Bell, 2013; Helling, 2011; Hilling, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). According to Levinson and Huang (2012), there is has been several changes that can be taken to increase connectivity through transport, including increased opening up of regions through various transportation routes across the world, improved impact on domestic production through canals, increased mobility through inter-state highway and motorways networks, and heightened role of railways in mass transit of goods in the United States. Through these international and inter-urban connections by transport networks, there has been introduction of radically efficient and new production processes enabling nations and regions to increase their trading levels subsequently allowing them to reap the ensuing socio-economic benefits (Huang & Levinson, 2011; Lakshmanan, 2011; Vickerman, 2012). This means that it is clear that, from the perspective of a developing economy it is fundamental to establish basic connectivity as a vital driver of a rapid rate of economic growth. According to Levinson and Huang (2012), the demand for transport services is attributed to the increased movement and mobility of people to and from work, education institution, shopping centers, markets and social or recreational facilities. According to Kernohan and Rognlien (2011), it is imperative to note that despite the evidence provided in academic literature concerning the impact transport systems or networks improvement on economic growth, there are varied magnitudes of these impacts at different places and in different times. However, although public transportation improvement impacts can attract significant attention, longer-term benefits that arise from increased connectivity through improved transportation justify that public transportation improvement can lead to fundamentally important socio-economic effects irrespective of the prevailing wages (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). Direct benefits that are experienced by travelers are categorized into four main parts: (1) saving of travel time, (2) reducing travel costs, (3) improvement in reliability; as well as (4) improvement of safety (Lakshmanan, 2011; Levinson & Huang, 2012; Vickerman, 2012). All these forms of benefits have the potential of providing significant monetary savings on public transportation costs among travelers and businesses (Berry, 2012; Bell, 2013; Hilling, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012).
Mobility
Mobility is undoubtedly among the most imperative characteristics of active economies since it plays a vital role of facilitating movement of people from one location to another, a fundamental need shared by businesses, passengers, and transport employees (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). Different regions and economies have varied levels of mobility due to their different stages of mobility transition with regards to transportation using various motorized forms (Levinson & Huang, 2012; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). According to Saunders and Dalziel (2014), economies in possession of greater mobility often have high potential to achieve greater socio-economic benefits compared to those with scarce mobility. This is because little mobility due poor transportation networks hinders socio-economic growth, whereas greater mobility catalyzes an increased rate of socio-economic growth. Cooper (2012) noted that, the level of mobility in a region is a fundamental socio-economic growth indicator. This means that, provision of mobility through improved transportation offers businesses and individuals an opportunity to increase their level of income generation, which results to creation of employment opportunities, increased wages as well as government revenue through taxation (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012).
With regards to mobility, transportation improvement plays a fundamental role of providing connectivity as well as accessibility between spatially distant locations where businesses are saturated (commercial hubs) as well as household regions (residential areas) in order to enable movement of persons and commodity (freight). For instance, the business sector is heavily relied on transportation that involves connecting different businesses and their sources of inputs as well as between varied locations of different businesses and also connecting businesses to their respective target markets (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). On the other hand, the household sector is also heavily dependent on transportation network mainly because it enables accessibility by people living within a particular region to education facilities and workplaces, shopping centers or markets, as well as recreational, social, medical and community facilities (Levinson & Huang, 2012; Bell, 2013). According to Cooper (2012), transportation may on its own be considered an imperative component of a region’s economy, mainly because improvement of transportation infrastructure and network or systems is attributable to about 5 per cent the GDP of the State of California (Cooper, 2012). Considering the imperativeness of transportation economically, there is a likelihood of increased level of transportation improvement through higher investments and expenditure in transportation operational efficiency would lead to a wider array of positive socio-economic effects such as increased levels of income as well as a decline in household expenses on consumer goods and services.
In the State of California, transportation improvement projects are largely self-funded, in which most transportation investment costs as well as costs associated with maintenance and operation of such projects are either initially financed by the government and subsequently recovered from the money collected from the users of the transportation facilities or the projects may be directly paid for by users at onset. According to Cooper (2012), it is without any doubt that there are various other ways through which public transportation improvement projects, including partially funded public transport services as well as roads network improvement through local or regional rates. The overall effect of these programs is the improvement of socio-economic status among the population within a particular region (Levinson & Huang, 2012).
The improved or added value to living standards and employment effects that ensue from transport services are extensive and stretches beyond increased financial status generated by the improvement of transportation infrastructure to include indirect effects are socio-economically salient. According to Zhang and Levinson (2011), transportation improvement projects are directly involved in promoting socio-economic benefits during and after the projects because the concerned companies tend to buy project inputs (including supplies, fuel, and maintenance) from suppliers located around the projects. As a result, additional employment and value addition to living standards are generated by these projects in the local economy. Levinson and Huang (2012) further reiterates that, suppliers to these projects in turn create more wealth and subsequently improve their purchase power which is reflected through increased economic growth locally. Similarly, there is also increased levels of income from the money received from employment in transportation improvement activities meaning their level of spending in purchasing goods and services from local businesses is also increased (Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013). Consequently, more socio-economic benefits are felt because the increased purchasing power results to additional local jobs and further improvement of income levels, which can be attributed to continued positive socio-economic effects locally or regionally (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). As a result, these successive rounds of increased spending due to improvement in transportation results to an overall improvement in the socio-economic status of the residents (Bell, 2013; Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012).
Further changes in economic productivity may be attributed to improvements in public transportation subsequently causing the population’s socio-economic well-being as a consequence of both reduced traffic congestion as well as expanded public transportation service (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). With regards to improvement in transportation, the specific socio-economic effects that ensue are as follows: increased market access and mobility because of the benefits of business productivity arising from access to more diverse and broader labor market characterized by a better fit of workers skills, and spatial agglomeration economies; as well as access to a wider customer market attributed to the benefits of business productivity including clustering or agglomeration of complementary and similar activities (Levinson & Huang, 2012). Mobility is very imperative for any considerable socio-economic benefits to be achieved from enhanced public transportation terminal facilities and services.
Mobility is without any doubt among the most imperative characteristics of active economies since it plays a vital role of facilitating movement of people from one location to another, a fundamental need shared by businesses, passengers, and transport employees (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). Different regions and economies have varied levels of mobility due to their different stages of mobility transition with regards to transportation using various motorized forms (Levinson & Huang, 2012; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). According to Saunders and Dalziel (2014), economies in possession of greater mobility often have high potential to achieve greater socio-economic benefits compared to those with scarce mobility. This is because little mobility due poor transportation networks hinders socio-economic growth, whereas greater mobility catalyzes an increased rate of socio-economic growth. Cooper (2012) noted that, the level of mobility in a region is a fundamental socio-economic growth indicator. This means that, provision of mobility through improved transportation offers businesses and individuals an opportunity to increase their level of income generation, which results to creation of employment opportunities, increased wages as well as government revenue through taxation (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). In the context of socio-economic effects modeling, the increased access to places of work, markets, recreational facilities, education institutions and shopping centers are among the most vital benefits that ensue from increased mobility and consequently translate to improved socio-economic effects (Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). This is because there is increased economic productivity which commonly takes two forms: (1) economies of scale that result from increased access to a vast pool of customers; and (2) increased employees’ productivity caused by improved access to a more diverse and vast labor market, which offers an effective balance between available and desired workforce skills (Bell, 2013; Weisbrod, 2011). The impact of transportation on labor market is particularly notable on the changes in prevailing wages, which are directly influenced by the status of transportation networks (Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013).
As noted by Hazledine, Donovan and Bolland (2013), transport systems and infrastructures are a fundamental part of societies mainly because of their support to complex social and economic interactions. Mobility is one of the most fundamental and important characteristics of economic or social activities as it satisfies the basic need of going from one location to the other, a need shared by passengers, freight and information (Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). Rodrigue and Notteboom (2013) stated that, locations don’t share the similar levels of mobility as most are in a different stage in their mobility transition towards motorized forms of transport. Economies that possess greater mobility are often those with better opportunities to develop than those with scarce mobility (Rodrigue, 2013). Reduced mobility impedes development while greater mobility is a catalyst for development. Mobility is thus a reliable indicator of development. Rodrigue (2013) emphasized that, provision of mobility is an industry offering services to its customers, while employing a considerable number of people and disbursement wages, invests capital, generates income and provides taxation revenue. Mobility is therefore the recurring aspect where transportation has its most significant societal impacts. Zhang & Levinson (2011) state, mobility is a multi-dimensional concept because it simultaneously shows the potential for a movement and the movement itself. Rodrigue (2013) emphasized that; it is at the beginning a choice to be exercised or that is not dependent on social and economic goals. For economic activities such as businesses, transportation enables to access a workforce, reach suppliers and service customers. With improvements in transportation, interactions with the workforce are more effective and the costs of distribution usually decline with the derived competitive benefits. For individuals, transportation is the mean to access employment, goods, services, leisure, and social networks. Thus, a share of the societal consumption is allocated to satisfy mobility needs. However, in a paradoxical manner higher income levels are in most cases associated with a higher share of transportation in consumption, a trend particularly attributed to automobile ownership and air travel (Lakshmanan, 2011; Levinson & Huang, 2012; Vickerman, 2012). According to Zhang and Levinson (2011), mobility is an activity that is affected by a number of constraints. For an individual, the lengths as well as the number of trips is usually influenced by time limits. These constraints are however economically, socially, and technologically articulated since more efficient modes of transport are supportive of more wide spread mobilities as well as higher levels incomes (Alstadt, 2012; Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012; Vogel, 2012). Thus, an individual would have a mobility contingent to physical capabilities, available budget, transport supply and the spatial distribution of activities such as residential, commercial and production areas. Further, the social context of mobility is changing in part because of its impacts (Alstadt, 2012; Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012; Vogel, 2012).
Market Accessibility
According to Saunders and Dalziel (2014), transportation improvement allows increased market accessibility through the crucial connectivity and linkage it provides between producers or manufactures and consumers. However, a common fallacy that has been widely perpetuated on the assessment of the impact and importance of improvement of transportation on the economy has been emphasis on transportation costs incurred on transit goods, which fall in the range of 5 to 10% of the total value of a the transit goods and this is relatively low (Levinson & Huang, 2012). Considering that transport is an economic factor in process of producing goods and services, this implies that it is an imperative determinant of the level of achievable socio-economic effects, even if it accounts for a smaller proportion of input costs (Parthasarathi, Levinson & Hochmair, 2013). This means that despite the cost, most the production processes cannot occur without the transportation aspect. Thus, changes of relatively low extent in transport costs, performance, and capacity can substantially influence socio-economic effects and activities in a region (Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014).
Transport systems and infrastructures have a very close relationship with socio-economic changes among a population of people living within a particular region (Rodrigue, 2013). As expressed by Rodrigue and Notteboom (2013), the ease of people to move from one region to another as well as levels of accessibility to modes of transportation is at the core of the dynamics that determines the behavior of the relationship observed between transport systems and the socio-economic effects among a population of people living within a particular region. The socio-economic changes are likely to vary from one region to another as well as between individuals and businesses. In particular, there is a very high likelihood of the arising of new economic opportunities where transportation infrastructures and systems have been improved and are able to provide effective solutions and/or alternatives to the residents’ mobility needs and insuring accessibility to resources and markets (Henderson, Shalizi & Venables, 2012; Lakshmanan & Chatterjee, 2015; Limao & Venables, 2011; Rodrigue & Notteboom, 2013).
Since the 19th century industrial revolution through economic integration and globalization processes of the recent past, particularly towards the end of 20th century and at the onset of the 21st century, socio-economic effects attributable to improvements in transportation systems and infrastructures have been differently affected across various regions of the world (Harrington & Warf, 2015; Hargroves & Smith, 2015; Helling, 2011; MacKinnon, Pine & Gather, 2012). In particular, Rodrigue and Notteboom (2013) noted that local, regional, and global/international transportation systems and infrastructures have all become fundamental drivers of economic activities. These authors further notes that, a growing share of wealth created through these economic activities which involve trade and distribution is linked to improvements in transportation systems and infrastructures at local, regional and global/international levels. However, it is imperative to note that despite the positive impacts of improved transportation infrastructures and systems on socio-economic systems, some negative outcomes are also reported such as increased accidents, congestion, and mobility gaps (Banister & Berechman, 2012; Berry, 2011).
Conforming to Henckel and McKibbin (2011), transportation has a variety of conceptual variables and a succinct understanding of its relationship with socio-economic effects, which forms the basis of the conceptual framework of this study, can be achieved by considering transportation as a commercial activity deriving benefits from the inherent operational attributes such as reliability, efficiency, capacity, costs, and speed. Henderson, Shalizi, and Venables (2012) reiterate the importance of improving transportation systems and infrastructures, which have continued to evolve within a set of relationships that are relatively complex between transport demand, transport supply, the transport network’s operational capacity, and an economy’s mobility requirements.
Fan, Guthrie and Levinson (2012), noted that the direct effects of transportation improvements are to reduce transport costs and time achieved through reduced congestion, decreased transportation operations costs as well as enhanced accessibility and connectivity of spatially dispersed destinations within the region. Transportation improvements through increased investment have the potential of mitigating any economic disbenefits, especially when the transport projects results to reduced congestion (Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). These incremental socio-economic benefits attributed to transportation improvement projects can be measured through cost-benefit analysis (Hazledine, Donovan, & Bolland, 2013). In addition, there should be consideration of other indirect socio-economic effects of transport improvement when attempting to evaluate transportation projects in their entirety. Parthasarathi, Levinson, and Hochmair (2013) noted that, the socio-economic effects caused by improvement of transportation are specifically attributed to increased productivity and the spatial connectivity. In the long term, investments on transportation infrastructure improvements contribute to socio-economic development by catalyzing a variety of economy-wide processes that are inter-connected, which subsequently lead to regional and spatial effects that augment overall productivity (Kernohan & Rognlien, 2011; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014).
In particular, enhanced accessibility and lower transportation or travel costs, because of improved transport services and systems, enhanced accessibility to suppliers and inputs; and expanded markets for businesses. According to Lakshmanan (2011), increased spatial connectivity and accessibility generates more opportunities for trade deals, specialization and fair competition, which subsequently result to productivity gains in the longer-term. These changes are due to benefits that ensue from lowered barriers to trading and the expanded business opportunities arising from such actions (Kernohan & Rognlien, 2011; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). Therefore, having a succinct understanding of these circumstances that influence the socio-economic impacts of transportation improvement is an imperative in gaining deeper insights on the socio-economic benefits likely to accrue from transportation systems and facilities improvements (Parthasarathi, Levinson & Hochmair, 2013).
Market accessibility is undoubtedly among the most imperative characteristics of active economies since it plays a vital role of facilitating movement of people from one location to another, a fundamental need shared by businesses, passengers, and transport employees (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). Different regions and economies have varied levels of mobility due to their different stages of mobility transition about transportation using various motorized forms (Levinson & Huang, 2012; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). Pursuant to Saunders and Dalziel (2014), economies in possession of greater market accessibility often have high potential to achieve greater socio-economic benefits compared to those with scarce mobility. This is because little mobility due poor transportation networks hinders socio-economic growth, whereas greater market accessibility catalyzes an increased rate of socio-economic growth. Cooper (2012) noted that, the level of mobility in a region is a fundamental socio-economic growth indicator. This means that, provision of mobility through improved transportation offers businesses and individuals an opportunity to increase their level of income generation, which results to creation of employment opportunities, increased wages as well as government revenue through taxation (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012).
With regards to market accessibility, transportation improvement plays a fundamental role of providing connectivity as well as accessibility between spatially distant locations where businesses are saturated (commercial hubs) as well as household regions (residential areas) in order to enable movement of persons and commodity (freight). For instance, the business sector is heavily relied on transportation that involves connecting different businesses and their sources of inputs as well as between varied locations of different businesses and also connecting businesses to their respective target markets (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). On the other hand, the household sector is also heavily dependent on transportation network mainly because it enables accessibility by people living within a particular region to education facilities and workplaces, shopping centers or markets, as well as recreational, social, medical and community facilities (Levinson & Huang, 2012; Bell, 2013). According to Cooper (2012), transportation may on its own be considered an imperative component of a region’s economy, mainly because improvement of transportation infrastructure and network or systems is attributable to about five per cent the GDP of the State of California (Cooper, 2012). Considering the imperativeness of transportation economically, there is a likelihood of increased level of transportation improvement through higher investments and expenditure in transportation operational efficiency would lead to a wider array of positive socio-economic effects such as increased levels of income as well as a decline in household expenses on consumer goods and services.
In the State of California, transportation improvement projects are largely self-funded, in which most transportation investment costs as well as costs associated with maintenance and operation of such projects are either initially financed by the government and subsequently recovered from the money collected from the users of the transportation facilities or the projects may be directly paid for by users at onset. According to Cooper (2012), it is without any doubt that there are various other ways through which public transportation improvement projects, including partially funded public transport services as well as roads network improvement through local or regional rates. The overall effect of these programs is the improvement of socio-economic status among the population within a particular region (Levinson & Huang, 2012).
The improved or added value to living standards and employment effects that ensue from transport services are extensive and stretches beyond increased financial status generated by the improvement of transportation infrastructure to include indirect effects are socio-economically salient. As stated by Zhang and Levinson (2011), transportation improvement projects are directly involved in promoting socio-economic benefits during and after the projects because the concerned companies tend to buy project inputs (including supplies, fuel, and maintenance) from suppliers located around the projects. As a result, additional employment and value addition to living standards are generated by these projects in the local economy. Levinson and Huang (2012) further reiterates that, suppliers to these projects in turn create more wealth and subsequently improve their purchase power which is reflected through increased economic growth locally. Similarly, there is also increased levels of income from the money received from employment in transportation improvement activities meaning their level of spending in purchasing goods and services from local businesses is also increased (Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013). Consequently, more socio-economic benefits are felt because the increased purchasing power results to additional local jobs and further improvement of income levels, which can be attributed to continued positive socio-economic effects locally or regionally (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). As a result, these successive rounds of increased spending due to improvement in transportation results to an overall improvement in the socio-economic status of the residents (Bell, 2013; Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012).
Further changes in economic productivity may be attributed to improvements in public transportation subsequently causing the population’s socio-economic well-being as a consequence of both reduced traffic congestion as well as expanded public transportation service (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). With regards to improvement in transportation, the specific socio-economic effects that ensue are as follows: increased market access and mobility because of the benefits of business productivity arising from access to more diverse and broader labor market characterized by a better fit of workers skills, and spatial agglomeration economies; as well as access to a wider customer market attributed to the benefits of business productivity including clustering or agglomeration of complementary and similar activities (Levinson & Huang, 2012). Mobility is very imperative for any considerable socio-economic benefits to be achieved from enhanced public transportation terminal facilities and services.
Mobility is without any doubt among the most imperative characteristics of active economies since it plays a vital role of facilitating movement of people from one location to another, a fundamental need shared by businesses, passengers, and transport employees (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012). Different regions and economies have varied levels of mobility due to their different stages of market accessibility transition with regards to transportation using various motorized forms (Levinson & Huang, 2012; Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). Pursuant to Saunders & Dalziel (2014), economies in possession of greater accessibility often have high potential to achieve greater socio-economic benefits compared to those with scarce accessibility of different parts. This is because little mobility due poor transportation networks hinders socio-economic growth, whereas greater mobility catalyzes an increased rate of socio-economic growth. Cooper (2012) noted that, the level of market accessibility in a region is a fundamental socio-economic growth indicator. This means that, provision of accessibility through improved transportation offers businesses and individuals an opportunity to increase their level of income generation, which results to creation of employment opportunities, increased wages as well as government revenue through taxation (Bell, 2013; Levinson & Huang, 2012).
Spending Impact
According to Lakshmanan (2011) and Weisbrod (2011) public transportation investments in the attempts of improving the infrastructure, facilities as well as systems and network has a direct impact on a population’s socio-economic dynamics. However, there are different ways through which these impacts occur such as: 1) by injecting spending on buying materials and services as well as wages for the workers; and 2) by saving costs as well as benefits of increased business productivity that ensue from improvement in transportation facilities.
Kernohan and Rognlien, (2011) note that, the spending impact that ensue from improvement of public transportation systems, facilities and infrastructure through deliberate increased investment directly influence a region’s population socio-economic dynamics through indirect, direct as well as induced effects. According to Hazledine, Donovan and Bolland (2013), the capital investments directed to the improvement of public transportation systems and facilities are done in order to accomplish any one of these three objectives: 1) adoption of new and advanced transportation systems; 2) modernization and standardization of transportation networks and networks; as well as 3) expansion of the transportation facilities and infrastructure.
As stated by Alstadt (2012), there is need to focus the study on transportation projects in the view of how the investments on transportation facilities and systems improvements influence socio-economic status of a population in a particular region. There has been various techniques used to evaluate the socio-economic benefits arising from transportation improvement projects at microanalysis and macro-analysis levels mainly including cost functions and production functions methods for the microanalysis level as well as case studies and cost-benefit analysis for macro-analysis level (El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011; Hickman et al., 2015). In an attempt towards finding the impact of transportation improvement investments on economic productivity, the macro analysis methods are concerned with comparing national trends in economic status and the extent of socio-economic activity with levels of investment to improve public transportation infrastructure (Hilling, 2013; Coleman, 2012; Cooper, 2012). According to El-Geneidy and Levinson (2011), the major limitation of macro analysis methods on investigating the impact of transportation improvement investments on socio-economic status do not elucidate the existence of observed casual relationships, but only simply highlight different relationships or associations between various data series. On the other hand, the focus of microanalysis methods, particularly the cost and production functions is directed on socio-economic effects arising from a particular or several transportation projects by providing meaningful insights into how individuals and businesses responds to changes in transportation infrastructure and systems (El-Geneidy & Levinson, 2011; Hickman et al., 2015; Lakshmanan & Chatterjee, 2015).
Alstadt (2012) presented a substantially influential proposition on how socio-economic effects are influenced by improvements of transportation infrastructure and facilities through increased investment. The study posits that, there varied levels of impact on socio-economic effects ensuing from transportation improvement at national level as well as regional and local level. Furthermore, highway capital investment to improve transportation systems seems to complementarily substitute private capital in various economic sectors across different regions globally (Helling, 2012; Hickman et al., 2015; Hilling, 2013; Struglia, Winter & Meyer, 2013).
In the context of socio-economic effects modeling, the increased access to places of work, markets, recreational facilities, education institutions, and shopping centers are among the most vital benefits that ensue from increased accessibility and consequently translate to improved socio-economic effects (Saunders & Dalziel, 2014). This is because there is increased economic productivity which commonly takes two forms: (1) economies of scale that result from increased access to a vast pool of customers; and (2) increased employees’ productivity caused by improved access to a more diverse and vast labor market, which offers an effective balance between available and desired workforce skills (Bell, 2013; Weisbrod, 2011). The impact of transportation on labor market is particularly notable on the changes in prevailing wages, which are directly influenced by the status of transportation networks (Hazledine, Donovan & Bolland, 2013).
Relationship between improved transportation and socio-economic development
Most of the impacts that come with the development of the transportation systems are ‘externalities’ and contribute indirectly to the economic growth of the immediate users of the transport networks (Ferdous, Das, Ahmed, Farzana, Kaur, Chisti, & Faruque, 2013). The benefits of the improved transport network can be broadly termed as social and economic impacts of the transportation systems. Looking at the socio-economic benefits from a larger lens, the community impacts can be taken as the localized benefits that concentrate on the people living within a local area and are usually more qualitative in nature. In many instances, community impacts are less calculated or assessed in terms of their monetary measures in terms of cost-benefit analysis.
Improvement in the transportation system may contribute towards great economic benefits towards the community. Some of the benefits include; increased property values, increased business activities, investment as well as tax revenues (Ferdous, Das, Ahmed, Farzana, Kaur, Chisti, & Faruque, 2013). Transportation systems usually increase the ability of businesses to provide both goods and services. In addition, it provides the platform for people to access services such as education and employment. At the same time, a good transport network works to minimize the costs that can be incurred during any kind of transportation. Reduction in the costs of transportation, pollution and accident expenses result to increased development and productivity within a given region.
There are both negative and positive impacts of improved transportation systems. When roads have been upgraded to highways, more cars and motorists will be able to access the region as they seek to carry out their business ventures (Karou & Hull, 2014). On the one hand, it is an economic benefit. However, the process may pose a big threat to the people living in the local area since some of them like the pedestrians may view the move as limiting their movement space (Heesch, Giles-Corti, & Turrell, 2014). Furthermore, when there are more improved transport facilities in a region, the area will be opened up for more competition to the existing business activities.
Any development activity is usually linked with its capability to improve the welfare of the people it directly touches. For the development activity to be effective there should be appropriate political, economic and social conditions. Development in transportation systems requires that the networks be placed at convenience points so as to give rise to both qualitative and quantitative improvement in aspects such as human capital as well as physical capital. Human capital targets facets such as education and income (Ghimire, 2013). Transport in itself as a physical capital maintains the necessary infrastructure that enables proper maintenance and operations. This is because the infrastructure acts as the platform for facilitating economic activities necessary for development of the community. Transport has been regarded as one of the most significant sector of the economy and a very vital tool that aids the development in any society. In a global economy, economic opportunities have been closely related with the mobility of the people, information and goods. Development is therefore interplay of how the aforementioned factors are able to move with ease (Ferdous, Das, Ahmed, Farzana, Kaur, Chisti, & Faruque, 2013). The quality and quantity of transport infrastructure and the level of development of economic activities is usually closely related. Highly connected networks and high density infrastructure is usually associated with high level of economic development. This is because, when transport systems are very efficient, in terms of reliability and capacity, they usually provide the relevant social and economic benefits and opportunities, which ultimately result to more employment, investments and accessibility to markets. Poor transport systems lead to missed opportunities and lowers the quality of life of the people within the region that they serve.
Efficient transport systems usually reduce the costs that can be incurred in carrying out activities. Inefficient systems increase these costs. Impacts brought about by the transport systems however, are not intended and may bring about unintended or unforeseen consequences. For instance, there are times when low levels of transport systems bring congestion. From another point of view, congestion can be used to indicate high level of development. This happens when a very fast growing economy experiences challenges in keeping up with the rising demands brought about by the mobility. Transport systems usually assist in environmental and social developments and cannot be taken for granted. The impacts brought about by the improved transport network can be categorized into several major categories. First is the core. From this dimension, transport systems offer the fundamental function of facilitating movement of goods and people from one place to another; thereby enabling the interactions of economic entities or strengthening the existing interactions to create further chances of economic development. Transport also enhances the development of operations. In this case, transport systems usually assist to improve in time performance thereby enhancing reliability. This means that there will be reduced damages and losses that are brought about by slow or inefficient transport networks. Transportation of assets between the distributors or producers can take place with ease while at the same time minimizing their ‘perishability’ (Giljum, Dittrich, Lieber, & Lutter, 2014). Furthermore, goo transport systems give rise to opened market opportunities that could hitherto be impossible under undeveloped or poor network systems. Good transport systems can also facilitate wider market base and can consequently enable the improvement of consumption, production and distribution of goods. Transport systems do not only offer direct benefits. The importance of transport systems usually extend beyond the obvious ones. For instance, there are indirect benefits that are supported by the transport systems such as the goods and services offered by the local suppliers. Maintenance services, supplies and fuel are provided by the local sellers and therefore give the local people employment and consequently the growth of the economy. The local economy consequently benefits in terms of employment as well as the addition of value to the activities that they carry out. From a more in-depth perspective, the local suppliers will be able to buy goods from other local suppliers or producers. There will be further local re-spending actions that usually results to the generation of additional value and creation of employment. There will be people who will have invested in the transport sectors. They usually receive their income from the transport sector through transportation activities. They may spend some of their income on local goods and services. The purchases may result to increased goods and services as well as value-addition (Giljum, Dittrich, Lieber, & Lutter, 2014). The successive activities involving spending and re-spending ultimately results in improved overall economy of the region or country which exceeds the initial input, employment and income. Generally, the economic impacts of the transportation sector can be seen as direct, indirect and induced.
Transportation works to link together the different factors involved in the production and transit of goods in a complex system of relationship between the consumers and producers. Economic growth is usually linked with a good transport network. When the transportation systems are working in an efficient manner, the business people will have ample time to invest in other key areas of business operations and not overspend time in working out costs on logistics. It will be easier for the business operators to calculate the costs involved in transportation of goods and services as opposed to the case when they are needed to find alternative sources of transport if transport systems are challenging.
Heesch, Giles-Corti, and Turrell (2014) assert that the growing economic opportunities that have been present since the industrial revolution can be partly attributed to the transportation development that has taken place over the years. Every stage of human societal development has been linked with a certain technological development in the transport sector, thus producing a series of impacts especially in the economic sphere of the society. New social, market and economic opportunities emerge with the increased technology in the transportation sector. For instance, during the age of exploration, in the 16th and the 18th century, seaports brought a lot of development in the business activities across different parts of the world (Heesch, Giles-Corti, & Turrell, 2014). International trade was made easier during the time. Containerization and globalization of business activities brought an unprecedented revolution in the way business activities would consequently be carried out in the diverse parts of the world. Railways in the 19th century made it possible for high capacity and flexible transport systems to be achieved. Railway line systems made it possible for complex and heavy goods to be carried in the inland. Substantial social and economic opportunities were opened up through the extraction and movement of goods in addition to the settlement of regions occupied by the system and the growth of mobility for both the cargo and the passengers. Airways and information technology can be intertwined factors that also brought quicker means of moving goods from one place to another. The overall effects of the developed transportation networks have greatly brought about the increased economic growth. Therefore there is no single transport mode has been responsible for the economic development. The overall economic growth can be attributed to the overall effects that have been brought about by the diverse changes that have taken place within the society.
From another insightful perspective, the major flows of international migration that took place in the 18th century can be heavily linked with the continental and international transport systems, which worked to shape the emerging economies such as the Australia and North America. The improved transportation system worked to provide the needed catalytic effect to these migrations. As a result, the social and economic geography of many people was transformed. Proper transportation links have been known to provide a tool for exploitation and territorial control. For instance, during the colonial era, resource-based transport systems were used to enhance the growth of economic activities. For instance, the transport systems could be able to support the extraction of commodities in the developing world and later taken to the industrializing nations. The growth of reliable and better transport networks was a major impetus that facilitated the exchange of ideas, goods and services for the two sides. The development of ports, especially containerization, creates a strategic plan that eventually assists countries to be integrated in the global economy and therefore more development has been witnessed as a result. Containerization has presented a great platform of capturing the opportunities that have been presented by the globalization process. Lack of transport systems in any region can be seen as one of the major constraints towards the economic development of that region. In developing economies, limitation caused by the regulatory impediments and transport infrastructures jointly impacts the economic development by increasing the transportation costs and delays which renders the management of supply chain unreliable. Poor transport networks can negatively affect the competitive capability of regions and businesses as well as employment rates, thus lowering the economic fortunes.
Efficient transportation systems ensure that there is increased potential market for a given product. This in turn increases competition. Many goods and services will be available to the consumers owing to the competition and this tends to reduce the price, alongside promoting innovation and increased quality of goods and services. Competition is further increased through globalization. Values of factors of production such as land are likely to increase with improved transport facilities. For instance, the pieces of land that are adjacent to the improved transport facility in many cases acquire a higher value than it was originally. In addition, the land tends to acquire more utility with increased benefits since the transportation of any physical outcome becomes cheaper (Abdallah, Belloumi, & De Wolf, 2013). Willing customers can be able to access a wide variety of products and services while the residents can access employment opportunities. However, there are other instances where the value of the land reduces following improved transport services. Such instances include land near airports and some highways where there is noise and pollution. In the modern society, most of the economic decisions that producers and consumers make are usually based on the availability of transport facilities within the society.
The benefits offered by a good transportation network are often underestimated despite the major socio-economic benefits the system offers to the society. Transportation network offers greater weight to the growth of the economy through different mechanisms. From a social perspective, the transport network works to create as well as stimulate social integration and cohesion among the people using it; thereby allowing them to access similar opportunities (Karou & Hull, 2014) asserts that the transportation networks are the heart of social and economic development through the provision of the required mobility that enhances trading activities and consequently socio-economic development. Transport networks work to support diverse sectors of the economy to develop.
One of the major effects of investments on transport network is the Kansas state of the United States. Approximately FRF 845.16 million was spent on construction of highways between the year 1991 and 1994. This investment in the road network produced an output impact of FRF 2,201.43 million (Karou & Hull, 2014). During the work of construction of transport networks, people are usually hired to carry out various tasks. This means that the construction activities offer direct employment to the people. This creates a direct impact to the economy of the region where the construction activities are being carried out. This acts to improve the socio-economic status of the people. Many activities usually rely on individual mobility. Individuals are expected to move from one place to another to carry out diverse socio-economic activities that are relevant to their own development. Mobility is an essential facet of economic growth. Developed transport systems usually accommodate improved socio-economic conditions. Modes of transport are essential components of development since development depends on communication and exchange of goods and services. Through developing exchanges and facilitating mobility, transportation enhances social and economic cohesion, a factor that is very instrumental towards achieving a sustainable and a balanced social and economic development.
Transportation services are heavily linked with the alleviation of poverty. For instance, lack of transportation services may limit the poor populace from capitalizing on the available job opportunities as well as the basic social services that can lead to development of their socio-economic status. Sustainable poverty alleviation requires the development of good transportation systems. This is because the individuals can be able to access health and school facilities that form the basis of human capital especially in the contemporary society.
Economic growth of a region is highly dependent on well developed transportation systems. The transportation systems open up the region which allows efficient performance of activities. In itself, transportation is a wealth creating sector (Abdallah, Belloumi, & De Wolf, 2013). Additionally, Lack of adequate transportation systems usually limits the ability of the nation to utilize the natural resources as well as integrate social development activities in areas that need to be developed within the society in an attempt to create social equality. To attain national wealth, there is a need to maintain and improve the existing transportation networks.
From another dimension, it is significant to note that transportation infrastructure plays a very critical role in sustaining economic growth. First, individuals in a specific region may want to improve their standards of living. As a result, they may aspire to increase their levels of income as one if the techniques of achieving the goal. Transportation networks support the people to maintain and improve economic opportunities, their income and consequently their social living standards. Transport services are very crucial aspects that contribute towards modernized business activities as well as economic growth. The development of transport infrastructure is a significant tool that determines the success a country is likely to achieve through the diversification of its production, trading activities, and its ability to link up all the present resources in the market in order to achieve an integrated economy at the end (Karou & Hull, 2014). Transportation also assists to link people together from the grassroots and help them to market their products and services. In this case, the developing regions are able to get connected with one another, a process that opens up remote areas to assist in increasing productivity while at the same time lowering production costs. There are various actions that are aimed at reducing poverty in the different areas of the society. These activities may not be successful if there are no good transport systems.
Summary
In summary, literature review covered in the preceding sections is a clear indication that the focus of most of previously conducted studies was on government investment in public transportation impacted economic development. In fact, most of the past studies were particularly directed on the highway capital effects and/or impacts on both social and economic in the population. As a result, there has been little attention on the extent business focused transportation investment, and the economic impact which is attributable to it, as well as its interaction or relation with government investment on public transportation; and other modes. In addition, as pointed out in the scholarly or journal articles considered in the literature reviewer, there is need for more work to be carried out with regards to the exploration of the structural impact of various transportation investment projects that are characteristically distinct on the economy. This is mainly because these structural impacts are likely to influence a population through impacts that fall within the form of geographical, demographic, as well as industrial changes within an economy of a particular region.
Therefore, as highlighted in the literature review various transportation investments that are characteristically different, it is likely for inclusion of a broad range of characteristics capable of differentiating one form of investment from others particularly in terms of asset type, transportation mode, sector of investors, technology embedded in the transportation projects, the nature of investment as well as the source of funding. In contrast, there are also a number of previous studies mentioned in the literature review carried out to study the impacts of transportation investment on socio-economic development, especially on how economic development both in terms of industrial restructuring and economic growth stimulates or enhances continued investments in the improvement of transportation in terms of both increased funding sources as well as growing demand for transportation services. This form of study is imperative in ensuring helpful insights are gained.
There are significant investments which have being going on in the state of California towards improving transport infrastructures and systems without succinctly assessing the ensuing socio-economic benefits first, something which makes it imperative to undertake this study for the determination of the relationship that exist between the two scenarios (Cooper, 2012; Delorme, Thompson & Warren, 2013). This implies that an information gap exists which ought to be timely and effectively addressed, since if left undetermined then the state of California may continue to take risk that is not strategically evaluated through continued dedication of significant investments towards improvement of transport infrastructure and systems without matching socio-economic effects (Federal Highway Administration, 2012). On the other hand, the State may also fail to prioritize significant levels of investments in transport infrastructure and systems improvement and also risk to harness the inherent potential and economic opportunities if the socio-economic effects attributed to such actions are significant and satisfactory (Banister & Berechman, 2012; Brueckner, 2013; Berry, 2011; Mullen, Williams & Moowaw, 2012).
Furthermore, recommendations from most of the studies considered in the literature review indicate that there is an urgent need for initiatives aimed at developing new data in order to ensure it is broader and more detailed towards supporting a vast range of future research on a wide variety of issues. Similarly, through provision of comparable findings throughout most of the transportation modes, the literature review has provided helpful insights on this topic as well as highlighting areas of controversy and also the existing research gaps. Thus, there has been suggestion to broaden research on the impacts of public transportation improvements through government investment from its primary focus on spending in highway transportation to cover other areas of transportation. Through this approach, a comprehensive and wholesome view of the transportation and its resulting socio-economic impacts with regards to prevailing wages will be obtained. This is attributable to the fact that, this approach to future research will bring together data for equipment and infrastructure investment and government investment as well as the extent of impact on different households and industry sectors.
Research Method
The research methods focus on making sure that the study aim is achieved, which in this case is to examine the socio-economic effects of improvements in transportation infrastructure and systems by collecting information data on non-financial and financial perspectives of research respondents with regards to improvements in transportation infrastructure and systems as well as examining its socio-economic effects among Californians. The improvements in transport facilities is likely to play a significant role in fostering economic development through the economic benefits that ensue as well as utilizing socio-economic effects on daily lives of people living in California.
According to Moballeghi and Moghaddam (2012), improvements in transportation facilities and infrastructure are without any doubts the linking factor between the overall economic benefits and the socio-economic effects on Californian residents. The causal relationship to be investigated in this dissertation concerns these two perspectives of improvements in transport facilities such as the economic benefits and socio-economic effects on Californian residents in order to determine if people living in California are receiving sufficient outputs/rewards from continuous improvements in transport infrastructure and facilities and systems.
This section aims provides a clear map through which a realization of the research questions and objectives would be achieved. This section covers all the aspects underpinning the current study as and also provides the empirical methods forming the basis of the research study. Further, there is also demarcation of the section in the scope of the process of study as well as the limitations, which ensures that the study is situated among the current traditions with respect to investigation of the impact of improvement in transport facilities on socio-economic well-being of Californian residents.
Research Design
This section is involved in elucidating the process of data collection and covers how both primary and secondary data will be to be collected. It will be concerned with explaining the approach to be adopted as well as the requirements under which the different stages of collecting the data and investigations will be done. Moballeghi and Moghaddam (2012) emphasize that the most imperative elements in the construction of a research design should prioritize the issues of consistency in the research questions that ought to be answered. Research design constitutes the blueprint for the process of collecting, measuring, and analyzing the research data (Kasim, Alexander & Hudson, 2011; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011). As a result, the research design is considered to be the plan of helping in the process of investigating the phenomenon under study in order to provide valid and reliable answers to the research questions proposed in the study. Moballeghi and Moghaddam (2012) also emphasize that identifying appropriate variables in a research problem situation subsequent to developing a theoretical framework is very important in devising a research design, and the next step is to embark on designing the research in a way essential in enabling the gathering of required data as well as its analysis for the purpose of ensuring that conclusive solution are attained.
This means that a credible research design is crucial in providing a conceptual structure through which the study will be based on conducted and it is used as the reference point to deal with important aspects of the research including research questions under investigations; the relevant data to be gathered; and the appropriate method of analyzing the collected data to achieved the envisaged results to ensure desired conclusions are made (Kasim, Alexander & Hudson, 2011; Matusov & Brobst, 2013). This implies that the main purpose of developing an effective research design is to ensure that evidence-based findings obtained from the collected data is appropriate to enable the researcher in answering the research questions as succinctly as possible. In this dissertation, a quantitative research design will be used to study how improvements in transport facilities and infrastructure have impacted socio-economic well-being of Californian residents. The reason for choosing the correlational research design is attributed to the fact that there is need for developing a valid study for the description and investigation of the phenomena under study (Paltridge & Starfield, 2011; Rocco, Hatcher & Creswell, 2011).
According to Moballeghi and Moghaddam (2012) correlational study is an important research method involving in-depth, comparative analysis of scenario that are similar in various organizations within the same sector, where the nature in which the research problem is defined happen to be universal irrespective of who carry out the study. The most imperative features of a correlational study are its scientific credentials as well as professional applications that are evidence-based. Therefore, correlational study enables the study of a phenomenon in a timely manner within the settings which are by allowing researchers to embark on retaining the meaningful and holistic characteristics of events that are real and touching on organizations as well as individuals (Hunter & Leahey, 2013; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011; Rocco, Hatcher & Creswell, 2011).
A correlational study mainly concentrates on a particular situation and is useful for utilization when the complexity and uniqueness of a phenomenon is to be studied and it in-depth understanding achieved. Hunter and Leahey (2013) further asserts that the correlational research design should always be consisting of various fundamental components such as the research question(s), the devised propositions, reliable and quantifiable unit(s) of measurement and analysis, ability to determine the link the research data and propositions as well as the proposed criteria of interpreting the research findings. However, in correlational study it is possible to either use single or multiple-case studies in the attempts to succinctly elucidate the phenomenon under study (Kasim, Alexander & Hudson, 2011; Matusov & Brobst, 2013). Thus, the researcher may choose to focus on a particular or multiple aspects of the phenomenon under investigation depending on the proposed research questions. As a result, the researcher may opt to delve on a single aspect or multiple aspects. However, despite the fact that correlational research design is to be used in this study; a quantitative research approach will be adopted to enable collection of quantitative data for analysis (Matusov & Brobst, 2013; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011).
Operational Definition of Variables
The operational definition of variables provides a description of the variables included for measurement in this study whereby the description is provident for both the independent and dependent variables as shown below:
Improvement of transportation facilities. This construct/variable concerns the extent to which the transportation facilities have moved from one status/situation to a better one ( Yang, Li, & Cao, 2015). The study will consider the varieties of transportation facilities in relationship to the average earnings of the people within the study area.
Employment opportunities: This variable concerns the increase in the number of job openings with a region (Hopcraft, Bigurube, Lembeli, & Borner, 2015). Average amount of job opportunities will be considered.
Income level: This variable concerns the level of earnings among individuals or households within a region (Hopcraft, Bigurube, Lembeli, & Borner, 2015). Average income of the households will be noted.
Accessibility: This variable concerns the ease of access of one location from another within a region through increased mobility by reducing congestion among all the transportation modes (Hopcraft, Bigurube, Lembeli, & Borner, 2015). This will take into account the number of road networks present within a locality.
Transport expenses: This variable concerns the costs people have to pay when traveling from one location to another within a region (Hopcraft, Bigurube, Lembeli, & Borner, 2015). The average of the amount of money the residents pay to move from one market area to another will be estimated.
Consumer goods’ prices: This variable concerns the costs people have to pay when purchasing consumer goods, that is, goods that are domestically used in households (Yang, Li, & Cao, 2015). The study will seek to find out the average amount of money that household use as their daily expenses.
Measurement
The measurement will be conducted on basis of the data collected on the independent variable and dependent variables using the appropriate data collection tools. The independent variable is the improvement in transport facilities while the dependent variables are: employment opportunities, income level, accessibility, transport expenses as well as consumer goods’ prices. In order to ensure the objectives of the study are achieved, the instruments to be used as means of measurement must also be outlined and described particularly those to be utilized in gathering data from the target population. In this study quantitative data shall be gathered in order to examine whether improvements in transport facilities has impact on economic development as well as socio-economic effects on daily lives of Californians. According to Hunter and Leahey (2013), several measurement instruments as well as methods of data collection exist which have been developed for specific measurement of the assessment outcomes.
Prior to engaging in the data collection process, there is need for the researcher to be familiar with the factors that inform the utilization of the measurement instruments chosen as well as the mode of determining if the instrument should be created or a commercially designed instrument should be utilized. According to Hunter and Leahey (2013), there must be consideration of several factors prior to selecting a measurement instrument, including methodology, purpose of measurement, type of measurement outcomes, available resources, as well as audience expectations. Moballeghi and Moghaddam (2012) further contend that when a researcher begins with outlining the purpose of the measurement obviously leads to identification other factors that are best suited to address the research questions. Furthermore, for the sake of clearly understanding the phenomena which is being investigated there is need to use quantitative research methods that emphasize more on making sure that there is succinct understanding of both the meaning as well as gaining an in-depth understanding of data collected through quantitative research methods such as focus groups, observations, interviews, or analysis of written material (Kasim, Alexander & Hudson, 2011; Matusov & Brobst, 2013; OECD, 2012). Pursuant to Moballeghi and Moghaddam (2012), quantitative methods are used for deductive examination of greater details of the phenomenon under investigation, which may sometimes go beyond the quantitative measurements’ scope.
Conducting interviews whether structured or semi-structured is one of the best ways through which quantitative primary data can be collected from the sample respondents chosen from the target population (Hunter & Leahey, 2013; Matusov & Brobst, 2013). However, one-on-one interviews can be conducted through emails or through telephone. Nevertheless, Moballeghi and Moghaddam (2012) asserts that face-to-face interviews is the best mode mainly because it allows a clear notice of interviewees’ facial expressions by the researcher during interviews which is critical in providing insights into some vital information concerning the study topic. However, the interviews in this study will be conducted through administration of questionnaires in order to make sure that the interview questions are answered in a structured format (Matusov & Brobst, 2013; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011).
Population and Sample
The targeted population for this study is the Californians working in the transport sector. The transport sector employees will be categorized into the following: lower cadre employees, middle level managers and top-level managers. The sampling frame for transport sector employees will be the computerized list from the transport organizations both public and private. The list for employees will be stratified by cadre/working levels and then further stratified by geographic locations. A mixture of probability and non-probability samples will be used and probability sampling will be conducted for content analysis of employees’ records.
Geographical Location
Los Angeles, the capital city of California State will be selected as the study site for most of the top-level managers, middle level managers, and employees working in the transport sector. However, in order to avoid biased sampling participants will also be randomly selected from other regions of California State who will be picked randomly in order to make sure that there is a balanced representation of the target population which in this case the California State population.
Pilot Study
Prior to designing the final questionnaire, face-to-face interviews will be conducted on randomly selected respondents from the target population in order to gain insights into the understanding level of respondents towards the questionnaire. This plays an essential role in identifying which questions that proven difficult for the selected respondents to answer, either by not being well framed or failure of respondents to understand them. During the interviews the researcher will use digital recorder to record the responses of those chosen to participate in the pilot study to each questions asked during the interview (Paltridge & Starfield, 2011; Rocco, Hatcher & Creswell, 2011). Subsequent to data collection from all the chosen participants, the recorder will be played in order to make sure that all the responses are noted down with respect to each research question asked. The analysis from the pilot study will help the researcher to make amendments into the questionnaire questions that prove to be difficult for a majority of respondents in order to ensure that in the actual questionnaire administration there will be high response rate with fully filled questionnaires (Given, 2012; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011).
Data collection and data analysis
The main methodology for data collection that will be applied is survey questionnaires. This is the best method for this kind of study because it is less time consuming and does not require a lot of personnel. In addition, it is affordable. The participants will be brought in one venue during the delivery of the questionnaires so that they can be directed together (Moballeghi & Moghaddam, 2012; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011; Rocco, Hatcher & Creswell, 2011). In order to stimulate research participants response, the questionnaires will be designed accommodate both open-ended and closed ended questions. The researcher will distribute one 111 questionnaires, which will be administered using survey approach. Surveys are a research instrument that is common in correlational studies due to the flexibility they offer during interviews (Babbie, 2012). Hunter and Leahey (2013) defined surveys as research instruments that systemically attempt to collect information to describe and explain values, attitudes, behavior and beliefs of selected groups of people. Similarly, in spite the fact that surveys are conventional, this ensures that they confer tremendous benefits in the process of conducting non-experimental studies whose intention is to investigate the reality of a situation (Gauch, 2013; Hunter & Leahey, 2013; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011). For instance, during surveys it is possible to determine the prevalence of a certain aspect in the situation under investigation using the selected research participants. This study seeks to provide insights into the situation of transportation in California: the impact of improvement in transport facilities on economic development and socio-economic effects on daily lives among Californians.
The designed questionnaires will be delivered by the researcher, assisted by a team of five research assistants. The researcher will use pre-existing questionnaires because they have been devised by experts; therefore, they are very comprehensive. Data to be collected will be both primary and secondary (Paltridge & Starfield, 2011; Rocco, Hatcher & Creswell, 2011). The data to be used in the study will be gathered via questionnaires which will be delivered to the area under study and distributed to the selected research participants. This will span for duration of ten days. Filled-in questionnaires will be presented to the researcher in order to sort and store them followed by the cleaning and processing of the collected awaiting statistical analysis (Babbie, 2012; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011).
Secondary data collection will be carried out from sources that exist such as websites, publications electronic and print as well as historical literature on other studies related to the research topic. The stages of collecting and analyzing data are classified as either “integrated” or “disconnected” (Moballeghi & Moghaddam, 2012). Questionnaires from one set of research respondents will be handled prior to handling the next set. The refined or processed data will then be analyzed using SPSS.
Human Participants and Ethics Precautions
A research study involving participation of human subjects is required to adequately address all ethical considerations prior to the beginning of the study (Gauch, 2013; Hunter & Leahey, 2013; Rocco, Hatcher & Creswell, 2011). Armstrong and Sperry (2014) particularly stated the fundamental ethical considerations that must be dealt with sufficiently prior to beginning the research process at levels include: obtaining consent from the human subjects envisaged to be enrolled in research, providing an assurance of safety and security to all research participants to be involved, as well as giving a guarantee of privacy of gathered of data to be obtaining by maintaining confidentiality. According to Cohen and Arieli (2011), the highest ethical standards should always be adhered to in order to make sure that there are no violations of the rights of human participants taking part in the study. As a result, ethical considerations as outlined in the university guidelines will be regarded with the highest level of imperativeness during this study. This is attributable to the fact that research will be carried out in compliance with the ethical guidelines stipulated in the California Intercontinental University’s research guide. In order to ensure full compliance, the researcher will undertake a thorough process of reviewing the ethics checklist to ensure it is fully complete as well as gain succinct insights of the ethical policy and guidelines provided by the university and other authorities prior to obtaining approval to begin the study. This is highly imperative since it will help in the preparation of the researcher towards addressing the ethical challenges that have a high likelihood of occurrence during the research process and devise a contingency plan while making sure there is strict compliance to the ethical policy and research guidelines of the University as well as the other relevant standards guiding the research process.
Research Validity and Reliability
In social research, the researcher must ensure that the instruments development to measure the variables are accurate and of good fit (Cohen & Arieli, 2011). Moballeghi and Moghaddam (2012) states that, “it is imperative to ensure that the developed research instrument precisely measures a particular concept of the variables (p.157)”. For social sciences research, it is common to estimate the reliability and validity in order to ensure that the measures developed are reasonably good and will produce dependable measurements (Kara, 2012; Liu, 2015; Paltridge & Starfield, 2011).
Reliability will be an important element in this research. Measurements in a research are termed reliable if they can be replicated with minimal variations and in case randomness, then the measurement error should be arising from a particular source. As expressed by Hunter and Leahey (2013), the measurement reliability is an indication of absence of biasness, which is essential in making sure that consistency, is maintained. In quantitative research, reliability is an indication of the research findings trustworthiness (Creswell, 2012; Given, 2012). In order to make sure that the research findings are valid, the research will ascertain the accuracy of the measurement methods to determine whether they precisely capture what ought to be measured in variables (Soeters, Shields & Sebastiaan, 2014).
Summary
In summary, the current research faces a number of limitations that ought to be delimited in order for it to be successful. These limitations include: The area of study under consideration is to some extent limiting in a manner that the findings obtained from the study area cannot be generally applied. This is attributable to the fact that, since the California State is area of study it cannot be assumed that the research findings obtained shall have the possibility universal application globally. However, as mentioned earlier in the discussions of this conceptual paper, different styles and modes of transportation exist in different countries across various regions worldwide in the management of transport sector. This fact poses a limitation or challenge on how to conclusively study the phenomenon considering the feasibility of studying all transportation systems globally is not attainable. Finally, there will also be a limitation of the study with regards to the research participants to be included in the sample size, which shall be relatively small on the basis of available resources i.e. money and time both of which are scarce meaning that the researcher is not privileged to expand the study coverage.
References
Abdallah, K. B., Belloumi, M., & De Wolf, D. (2013). Indicators for sustainable energy development: A multivariate cointegration and causality analysis from Tunisian road transport sector. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 25, 34-43.
Afraz, N. (2014). Impact of Transport Infrastructure on Economic Growth – Annex 6 to Final Report of COMPETE Analysis of the Contribution of Transport Policies to the Competitiveness of the EU Economy and Comparison with the United States. European Commission – DG TREN, Karlsruhe.
Alstadt, B. (2012). A generalized approach for assessing the direct user impacts of transportation projects. Transportation Research Board, Annual Conference Proceedings.doi: 10.3141/2079-15.
Anderson, P., Levinson, D., & Parthasarathi, P. (2013). Accessibility futures. Transactions in GIS, 17, 683-705. doi: 10.1111/tgis.12024
Babbie, E. (2012). The Practice of Social Research, (12th ed.). Wardsworth: Cengage Learning.
Banerjeey, A., Dufloz, E., & Qian, N. (2012).On the road: Access to transportation infrastructure and economic growth in China. Retrieved from The National Bureau of Economic Research website: http://www.nber.org/papers/w17897
Banister, D. (2002). Transport Planning, (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Banister, D., & Berechman, J. (2012). Transport Investment and Economic Development. London: Routledge.
Beaverstock, J.V., Taylor, P., & Smith, R.G. (2011). A Roster of World Cities. Cities, 16, 445-458.
Bell, M. (2013). Macroeconomic Analyses of the Linkages between Transportation Investments and Economic Performance. National Cooperative Highway Research Program Project 2-17(3), American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials, Washington, D.C.
Berry, B.J.L. (2011). Long-wave Rhythms in Economic Development and Political Behavior. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Bocarejo, J. P., Portilla, I. J., Velásquez, J. M., Cruz, M. N., Peña, A., & Oviedo, D. R. (2014). An innovative transit system and its impact on low income users: the case of the Metrocable in Medellín. Journal of Transport Geography, 39, 49-61.
Brooks, M. T., Pallis, T., & Perkins, S. (2014). Port investment and container shipping markets. International Transport Forum, Discussion Paper No. 2014-03.
Brueckner, K. (2013). Airline traffic and urban economic development. Urban Studies, 40(8), 1455-1469.
Button, K. (2012). Transport Economics, (3rd ed.). Aldershot: Edward Elgar.
Button, K., & Reggiani, A. (eds) (2011). Transportation and Economic Development Challenges. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Carrion, C., & Levinson, D. (2013).Valuation of travel time reliability from a GPS-based experimental design. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 35, 305-323. doi: 10.1016/j.trc.2012.10.010
Cohen, N. & Arieli, T. (2011). Field research in conflict environments: Methodological challenges and snowball sampling. Journal of Peace Research, 48(4), 423–436.
Coleman, A., (2012). Transport infrastructure, lock-out and urban form highway development in Auckland and the United States. Policy Quarterly, 6, 23–27. Retrieved from: http://ips.ac.nz/publications/files/90e7fc24eeb.pdf
Combes, F. & Leurent, F. (2013). Improving road-side surveys for a better knowledge of road freight transport. European Transportation Research Review, 5(1), 41-51. doi:10.1007/s12544-012-0083-8
Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-613550-1
Delorme, C.D., Thompson, H.G., & Warren, R.S. (2013). Public Infrastructure and Private Productivity: A Stochastic Frontier Approach. Journal of Macroeconomics, 21(3), 563-576.
Durand, C.P., Oluyomi, A.O., Gabriel, K.P., Salvo, D., Sener, I.N., Hoelsher, D.M., Knell, G., Tang, X., Porter, A.K., Robertson, M.C. & Kohl III, H. W. (2016). The Effect of Light Rail Transit on Physical Activity: Design and Methods of the Travel-Related Activity in Neighborhoods Study. Frontiers in Public Health, under the Transportation and Public Health Topic,http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2016.00103
El-Geneidy, A., & Levinson, D. (2011). Place Rank: Valuing spatial interactions. Networks and Spatial Economics, 11, 643-659. doi: 10.1007/s11067-011-9153-z
Fan, Y., Guthrie, A., & Levinson, D. (2012). Impact of light rail implementation on labor market accessibility: A transportation equity perspective. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 5, 28-39. doi: 10.5198/jtlu.v5i3.240
Federal Highway Administration, US Department of Transportation (2011). Financing Freight Improvements, Publication #FHWA-HOP-06-108.
Ferdous, F., Das, S. K., Ahmed, S., Farzana, F. D., Kaur, G., Chisti, M. J., & Faruque, A. S. G. (2013). The impact of socio-economic conditions and clinical characteristics on improving childhood care seeking behaviors for families living far from the health facility. Science Journal of Public Health, 1(2), 69-76.
Gauch, Jr., H.G. (2013). Scientific method in practice. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-81689-0
Ghimire, K. B. (2013). The native tourist: Mass tourism within developing countries. Routledge.
Giljum, S., Dittrich, M., Lieber, M., & Lutter, S. (2014). Global patterns of material flows and their socio-economic and environmental implications: a MFA study on all countries world-wide from 1980 to 2009. Resources, 3(1), 319-339.
Given, L. M. (2012). The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Los Angeles, Calif.: Sage Publications.ISBN1-4129-4163-6.
Gomben, P., Lilieholm, R. & Gonzalez-Guillen, M. (2012).Impact of Demographic Trends on Future Development Patterns and the Loss of Open Space in the California Mojave Desert. Environmental Management, 49, 305–324. doi: 10.1007/s00267-011-9749-6
Gui, L., & Russo, A.P. (2011). Cruise ports: a strategic nexus between regions and global lines—evidence from the Mediterranean. Maritime Policy & Management, 38(2), 129-150.
Hargroves, K., & Smith, M. (2015). The Natural Advantage of Nations: Business Opportunities, Innovation and Governance in the 21st Century. The Natural Edge Project. London: Earthscan.
Harrington, J.W., & Warf, B. (2015). Industrial Location: Principles, Practice & Policy. London: Routledge.
Hazledine, T., Donovan, S., & Bolland, J. (2013). The contribution of public transport to economic productivity (Report 514). Retrieved from the New Zealand Transport Agency website: http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/research/reports/514/
Heesch, K. C., Giles-Corti, B., & Turrell, G. (2014). Cycling for transport and recreation: associations with socio-economic position, environmental perceptions, and psychological disposition. Preventive medicine, 63, 29-35.
Helling, A. (2011). Transportation and Economic Development: A Review. Public Works Management & Policy, 2(1), 79-93.
Henckel, T., & McKibbin, W. (2011). The Economics of Infrastructure in a Globalized World: Issues, Lessons and Future Challenges. Washington: The Brookings Institution.
Henderson, J.V., Shalizi, Z., & Venables, A.J. (2012). Geography and Development. Journal of Economic Geography, 1, 81-106.
Hickman, R., Givoni, M., Bonilla, D. & Banister, D. (eds.) (2015). Handbook on Transport and Development. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Hilling, D. (2013). Transport and developing countries. London: Routledge.
Hopcraft, J. G. C., Bigurube, G., Lembeli, J. D., & Borner, M. (2015). Balancing conservation with national development: a socio-economic case study of the alternatives to the Serengeti road. PloS one, 10(7), e0130577.
Huang, A., & Levinson, D. (2011). Why retailers cluster: An agent model of location choice on supply chains. Environment and Planning, 38, 82-94. doi: 10.1068/b36018.
Hunter, L., & Leahey, E. (2013). Collaborative Research in Sociology: Trends and Contributing Factors.The American Sociologist,39(4), 290–306.doi:10.1007/s12108-008-9042-1.
Jones, S., Tefe, M., & Appiah-Opoku, S. (2012). Development of a Localized Sustainability Score for Screening Urban Transport Projects in Developing Countries: A Case Study of Accra, Ghana. Conference CODATU IX, The role of urban mobility in (re) shaping cities; 22 to 25 October 2012, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Junge, J., & Levinson, D. (2012).Financing transportation with land value taxes: Effects on development intensity. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 5, 49-63. doi: 10.5198/jtlu.v5i1.148.
Kara, H. (2012). Research and Evaluation for Busy Practitioners: A Time-Saving Guide. Bristol: The Policy Press.
Karou, S., & Hull, A. (2014). Accessibility modelling: predicting the impact of planned transport infrastructure on accessibility patterns in Edinburgh, UK. Journal of Transport Geography, 35, 1-11.
Lakshmanan, T.R. (2011). The broader economic consequences of transport infrastructure investments. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(1), 1-12.
Lakshmanan, T.R., & Chatterjee, L.R. (2015). Economic Consequences of Transport Improvements. Access, 26, 28-33.
Levinson, D., & Huang, A. (2012). A positive theory on network connectivity. Environment and Planning Part B, 39, 308-325. doi: 10.1068/b37094
Levinson, D., Xie, F., & Montes de Oca, N. (2012). Forecasting and evaluating network growth. Network and Spatial Economics, 12, 239-262. doi: 10.1007/s11067-009-9113-z
Limao N., & Venables, A.J. (2011). Infrastructure, Geographical Disadvantage, Transport Costs, and Trade. The World Bank Economic Review, 15, 451-479.
Litman, T. (2014). Land use impacts on transport. Considering the impacts, benefits and costs of different land use development patterns. Retrieved from Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Canada, website: http://www.vtpi.org/landuse.pdf
MacKinnon, D., Pine, G. & Gather, M. (2012). Transport and Economic Development. In R. Knowles, J. Shaw and I. Docherty (eds.) Transport Geographies: Mobilities, Flows and Spaces. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 10-28.
Matusov, E., & Brobst, J. (2013). Radical experiment in dialogic pedagogy in higher education and its centaur failure: Chronotopic analysis. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
Morrison, C.J., & Schwartz, A.E. (2012). State Infrastructure and Productive Performance. American Economic Review, 86, 1095-1111.
Mullen, J.K., Williams, M., & Moowaw, R.L. (2012). Public Capital Stock and Interstate Variations in Manufacturing Efficiency. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 15(3), 51-67.
Nadiri, M.I., & Manuneas, T.P. (2014). The Effects of Public Infrastructure and R&D Capital on the Cost Structure and Performance of U.S. Manufacturing Industries. Review of Economics and Statistics, 76, 22-33.
OECD (2012). Frascati Manual: proposed standard practice for surveys on research and experimental development, (6th ed.). Retrieved 27 May 2016 from www.oecd.org/sti/frascatimanual.
Paltridge, B., & Starfield, S. (2011). Thesis and Dissertation writing in a Second Language: a handbook for supervisors. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
Parthasarathi, P., Levinson, D., & Hochmair, H. (2013). Network structure and travel time perception. PLOS One, 8, e77718. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077718
Porter, M.E. (2012). Location, Competition and Economic Development: Local Clusters in a Global Economy. Economic Development Quarterly, 14(1), 15- 34.
Rietveld, P. (2014). Spatial Economic Impacts of Infrastructure Supply. Transportation Research Part A, 28(4), 329-341.
Rocco, T.S., Hatcher, T., & Creswell, J.W. (2011). The handbook of scholarly writing and publishing. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-0-470-39335-2
Rodrigue, J.-P. (2013). The Geography of Transportation Systems, (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge. ISBN 978-0-415-82254-1
Rodrigue, J.-P., & Notteboom, T. (2013). The Geography of Cruises: Itineraries, not Destinations. Applied Geography,38, 31-42.
Ruyssen, I., Everaert, G., & Rayp, G. (2014). Determinants and Dynamics of Migration to OECD Countries in a Three-Dimensional Panel Frameworks. Empirical Economics, 46, 175-197.
Schone, J.E., & Levinson, D. (2014). The missing link: Bicycle infrastructure networks and ridership in 74 US cities. Transportation, 41, 1187-1204. doi: 10.1007/s11116-014-9538-
Shields, P., & Rangarjan, N. (2013). A Playbook for Research Methods: Integrating Conceptual Frameworks and Project Management. Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press.
Stillwell, J., Geertman, S., & Openshaw, S. (Eds.). (2013). Geographical Information and Planning: European Perspectives. Springer Science & Business Media.
Struglia, R., Winter, P. L. & Meyer, A. (2013). Southern California socioeconomic assessment: Socio-demographic conditions, projections, and quality of life indices. USDA Forest Service General Technical Report PSW-GTR-187. Albany, CA: Pacific Southwest Research Station, Forest Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; 418 p. www.fs.fed.us/psw
Thai, V. V. (2008). Service quality in maritime transport: conceptual model and empirical evidence. Asia Pacific Journal of Marketing and Logistics, 20(4), 493-518.
Tilahun, N.J., & Levinson, D. (2011). Work and home location: Possible role of social networks. Transportation Research Part A, 45, 323-331. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2011.01.004
Trochim, W.M.K, (2012). Research Methods Knowledge Base. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. ISBN 0-13-613550-1
Vickerman, R. (2012). Recent Developments in the Economics of Transport, London: Edward Elgar Publishing.
Vogel, H.L. (2012). Travel Industry Economics: A Guide for Financial Analysis, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Weisbrod, G. (2011). Models to predict the economic development impact of transportation projects. Annals of Regional Science, 42, 519-543. doi: 10.1007/s00168-007-0184-9
Williamson, J., Philbin, S., & Sanderson, K. (2012).The economic and land use impacts of transformational transport investment (Report 479). Retrieved from the New Zealand Transport Agency website: http://www.nzta.govt.nz/resources/research/reports/479/
Yang, W., Li, T., & Cao, X. (2015). Examining the impacts of socio-economic factors, urban form and transportation development on CO 2 emissions from transportation in China: A panel data analysis of China’s provinces. Habitat International, 49, 212-220.
Zhang, L., & Levinson, D. (2011). Ramp metering and freeway bottleneck capacity. Transportation Research: A Policy and Practice, 44, 218-235. doi: 10.1016/j.tra.2010.01.004
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Week 8 Journal & IDP
Leadership Journal
ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:
1. Provide the scores for your Turning Point self-assessment questionnaire. Identify at least one insight you gained from your results of the Collaborative Leadership self-assessment questionnaire that you think can help you be a more effective collaborator in your group work in this course.
The six self-assessment questionnaires are:
• Assessing the Environment – MY SCORE: 62
• Creating Clarity: Visioning and Mobilizing – MY SCORE: 65
• Building Trust – MY SCORE: 68
• Sharing Power and Influence – MY SCORE: 67
• Developing People – MY SCORE: 68
• Self-Reflection – MY SCORE: 68
2. What are the implications of the Turning Point self-assessment on your IDP?
3. How can you leverage your leadership strengths to foster collaboration with external partners?
USE THIS Websites
•Turning Point http://www.turningpointprogram.org
The Turning Point program was developed to transform and strengthen the public health system in the United States. It is no longer active, although the Web site provides archived resources available for download and use.
•Collaborative Leadership Self-Assessment Questionnaire http://www.collaborativeleadership.org/pages/pdfs/CL_self-assessments_lores.pdf
This Web site provides you access to the self-assessment assignment you are required to complete this week. You will report on your findings in your Leadership Journal. Print out the documents to fill out.
Please apply the Application Assignment Rubric when writing the Paper.
I. Paper should demonstrate an excellent understanding of all of the concepts and key points presented in the texts.
II. Paper provides significant detail including multiple relevant examples, evidence from the readings and other sources, and discerning ideas.
III. Paper should be well organized, uses scholarly tone, follows APA style, uses original writing and proper paraphrasing, contains very few or no writing and/or spelling errors, and is fully consistent with doctoral level writing style.
IV. Paper should be mostly consistent with doctoral level writing style.
Scores for Turning point self-assessment questionnaires are as follows
Assessing the environment:-62
Creating Clarity: Visioning and mobilizing:-65
Building trust:-68
Sharing power and influence:-67
Developing people:-68
Self-reflection:-68
Turning point program was insightful as it increased self-awareness on leadership skills and attitude and how they impact to my surrounding collaborative leadership. For instance, the least scored in assessment was environment assessment and creation of clarity; both of which are integral aspects for a collaborative leader (Turning point, 2011).
The assessment indicated that revision of my IDP was necessary to achieve the set objectives. From the assessment, it was evident that working solely will present avoidable complexities. Therefore, it is important to routinely communicate with involved stakeholders (supervisors, colleagues and mentors) to ensure the expectations are attained and to reduce future unprecedented uncertainties. From the assessment, it is clear that collaboration enhances pooling of power; and through diversified thinking proficiency, grid blocks realized are overcome; thereby increasing the abilities to manage demanding issues (Turning point, 2011).
Collaborative leadership refers to the shared mutual relationship by two or more authorities with a shared concern. Some of the issues leveraged for collaborative leadership include egoism and great self-control (intolerance to wastage of resources) especially when dealing with urgent complicated matters. Secondly, sharing of information because is an open process could be challenging. This challenge is brought forth due to lack of trust. It is important to value and incorporate diversity. From the assessment, a collaborative leader should have high tolerance even when things seem to be out of control. The leader should be willing to share the glory with subordinates. He/she is diplomatic when solving conflicts and supports or critics diverse opinions. Collaborative leaders are ready to give each member space to contribute and do what they like to. In summation, they “listen, learn and lead” (Lash, 2012).
The Advantages of Strategic Intent Thinking
Many people fulfill lifelong goals when they become a member of a certain profession. Perhaps you had a dream of being a business professor or operating your own business from a young age. You may have admired a teacher or a business owner who kindled your ambition. Despite having an idea of what you wanted to accomplish early on, you likely had little knowledge of the steps you would take to achieve your goal. As you learned about what was required to reach your ultimate goal, you set short-term and medium-range goals that aligned with your long-term goals. Short-term goals may have included getting good grades each year while medium-range goals might have included getting into a good college or saving money for tuition. You likely adjusted short-term and medium-range goals to take advantage of new opportunities that may not have existed when you set your long-term goals, such as attending the DBA program at Walden. Organizations that operate with strategic intent employ a similar approach often with substantial benefit. However, adopting a strategic intent approach can also present challenges for organizations that have relied on more traditional strategies. As a scholar-practitioner in the modern global business environment, it is important that you understand the benefits and challenges of strategic intent and how the approach differs from traditional strategies.
To prepare, consider the similarities and differences between conventional strategic planning and strategic intent thinking.
By Day 4 of Week 3, post a 2–3 paragraph response that compares traditional strategic planning to strategic intent thinking. Explain how the concepts are similar and how they are different. Also explain the impact of strategic intent thinking on business strategy. Finally, explain the implications of expanding business strategy to include different types of stakeholders and their viewpoints and relationships. Extend the conversation by identifying implications for practice or research, as well as for your own research agenda, where appropriate. Be sure to integrate one or two new related, and engaging, questions that will extend the discussion about your post in constructive ways. Try to think of a question(s) that will engage your peers in critical analysis and thinking about your organization, which may provide insight for your use as you continue preparing your sections of the major Weeks 4 and 7 Sustainable Solutions Paper (SSP) due in this course.
SAMPLE ANSWER
The traditional strategic planning determines how an organization can effectively allocate resources to its functions to improve its profitability by exploring the internal and external opportunities. The traditional strategic planning begins by setting an attainable goal then identifying the steps and the resources that are needed to make the goal a success (Hill & Jones, 2012). Thereafter, the management becomes responsible in controlling and maximizing the utility of resources to ensure that the goal of the strategic plan is effectively achieved. On the other hand, strategic intent differs from the traditional strategic planning in that the former operates towards increasing an organizations knowledge base with the aim of leveraging an organization’s resource towards the achievement of impossible goals. Whereas strategic intent thinking is surrounded with the notion of expectancy theory, the traditional strategic planning is concerned with reaching attainable goals using the available resources.
Both the traditional strategic planning and strategic intent are similar in the sense that they both place value on the available resources in order to reach organizational goal. Strategic intent and strategic planning are similar in the sense that both of them require critical thinking in addition to aligning an organization’s mission statement with the vision. Whereas strategic planning focuses on the available resources and the current environment to develop achievable goals, strategic intent looks above the realm of what is possible through inspired innovation to push the current resources beyond the production possibility frontier (Hill & Jones, 2012).
Strategic intent has an impact on strategy in that it inspires innovation and business strategies as the management works towards the strategic business goals. In addition, strategic intent improves the clarity of an organization’s mission and vision, which in turn improves the operational strategies within the company and the overall improvement in business strategy. When the viewpoints of all stakeholders are taken care of, the business strategy can greatly be expanded to add value to the organization. When the viewpoints from all stakeholders are taken into consideration, an organization is able to work in unison in achieving the strategic business objectives by allowing more flexibility and maximum exploitation of available opportunities (Hill & Jones, 2012). It thus becomes a topic worth exploring in research to determine to what extent strategic intent results in the achievement of impossible goals do
Reference
Hill, C.W & Jones, G.R. (2012). Strategic Management Theory: An Integrated Approach. Cengage Learning; 10 edition.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
Drawing on the readings and lectures for this topic, identify and discuss the tensions inherent in the public representation of complex issues. Answer with reference to any one event or issue of current significance.
* Berger, J. (1972) Ways of Seeing, BBC and Penguin Books: London, pp. 7-34.
Langton, B. (1993) Well, I Heard it on the Radio and I Saw it on the Television, Australian Film Commission: North Sydney, pp. 23-44.
Pinter, H. (2005) ‘Art, truth and politics’, Nobel Lecture, 7 December, The Nobel Foundation, pp. 1-12.
Kovach, B. & Rosenstiel, T. (2001) The Elements of Journalism: What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect, pp. 35-50.
Morris, T. & Goldsworthy, S. (2008) PR—A Persuasive Industry: Spin, Public Relations and the Shaping of the Modern Media, Palgrave Macmillan: New York, pp. 97-111.
Oreskes, N. & Conway, E. M. (2010) Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming, pp. 10-35.
Howell, G. & Miller, R. (2006) ‘Spinning out the asbestos agenda: How big business uses public relations in Australia’, Public Relations Review, 32 (3), pp. 261-266.
SAMPLE ANSWER
Truth and Representation
There is speculation that over the past years, philosophers of different ages have had a hard time in dealing with the basic concept of truth. It is quite evident that as we go on about our daily lives, we often meet a given thing that is a representation of another: For instance, it is a basic idea that a flag is a representation of a particular country (Parr, p1).
From a general point of view, the idea and form of representation have been developed by humans or nature to serve a particular function. Based on the idea that one thing represents another and truth and meaning may be interpreted differently, over the years, there have been issues that have arose and raised concern but their representation has been disguised to reduce significance and impact.
Most of the studies done in the current world are done from a scientific point of view, thus, their representation will be scientific. However, given that most are theories, they leave room for doubt and their validity is questionable. This in turn impacts the basic concept of truth and representation. There are given cases where scientific research can be geared to be represented in a given manner that would sway the interested parties from the truth.
The current global issue that has gripped the world and caused distress is the issue of global warming in particular to climate change. Global Climate change may be defined as any change or alteration which may be accredited or linked to human activities directly or indirectly. There are various factors that are attributed to global warming, the primary one being the emission of gases that have over the years been destroying the ozone layer (Capoor, 57-65).
Back in the late 1970s to early 1980s, there was research conducted based on the idea that smoking of tobacco had a significant effect on global warming (Warner, 289). Although there is speculation that smoking has a negative impact on the ozone layer, the representation of the truth was that it had very minimal influence if any on the ozone layer. Different theories over time have been raised in relation to the effect of smoking, but there has never been a solid case where it has been simply put that smoking has a negative impact on the atmosphere.
Although this can be contributed to the basic idea that the tobacco industries would not want to be shut down as a result of their products leading to global warming (Buelens, Sinding and Waldstrom, 30), their truths have not been represented in the correct manner. Furthermore, there are also concerns raised on the issue of health as a result of tobacco. Their effect may be well known to the people; however, it is still represented as a cause that may have little significance in part to lung cancer. This has been the same representation from the onset of the 1950s, despite the fact that then there was little evidence on whether smoking led to lung cancer or not (‘Meaning, Truth, And Reference In Historical Representation’ 40-45).
Conclusion
It is evident that the idea of truth and representation may be correlated but at times, it may be presented in a manner that may be confusing. This is in particular to hiding the truth indirectly.
Works Cited
Buelens, M. Sinding and Waldstrom C., Organisational Behaviour. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education. (2011). Print
Capoor, K. and P. Ambrosi State and Trends of the Carbon Market 2009. Washington, D.C., The
World Bank. (2009).Print.
‘Meaning, Truth, And Reference In Historical Representation’. Choice Reviews Online 50.04 (2012): 50-2207-50-2207. Web.
Parr, Hector. “Hector Parr’s Essays on Cosmology, Physics, Philosophy and organ Music”. Hectorparr.freeuk.com. N.P., 2015. Accessed Web. 2 Feb. 2015.
Warner, K. E. ‘Global Warning Comes to Tobacco Control’. Tobaco Control 22(5) (2013): 289-290.
We can write this or a similar paper for you! Simply fill the order form!
