Next Article in Journal
Observed Risk and User Perception of Road Infrastructure Safety Assessment for Cycling Mobility
Previous Article in Journal
A Machine Learning Framework for Predicting Bridge Defect Detection Cost
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Scoping Study on Driver’s Perspective of Distracting Factors
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Infrastructures
Volume 6
Issue 11
10.3390/infrastructures6110153
infrastructures-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Citizens’ Perceptions in Relation to Transport Systems and Infrastructures: A Nationwide Study in the Dominican Republic

by
Francisco Alonso
1,2,
Mireia Faus
1,
Boris Cendales
3 and
Sergio A. Useche
1,2,*
1
DATS (Development and Advising in Traffic Safety) Research Group, INTRAS (Research Institute on Traffic and Road Safety), University of Valencia, 46022 Valencia, Spain
2
Faculty of Psychology, University of Valencia, 46010 Valencia, Spain
3
Faculty of Economic and Administrative Sciences, El Bosque University, Bogota 110121, Colombia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Infrastructures 2021, 6(11), 153; https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6110153
Submission received: 23 September 2021 / Revised: 13 October 2021 / Accepted: 21 October 2021 / Published: 25 October 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Transport Systems: Safety Modeling, Visions and Strategies)
Browse Figures
Review Reports Versions Notes

Abstract

:
One of the challenges currently faced by emerging countries is to get their citizens to decide to use sustainable transport for their regular trips, in order to reduce the current vehicular pollution rates. The objective of this descriptive research is to examine the perceptions of Dominicans regarding the state of the country’s transport systems and road infrastructure. For this purpose, a nationwide survey procedure was performed. This cross-sectional research used the data retrieved from a sample of 1260 citizens aged over 18, proportional in gender, age, habitat, and province of the Dominican Republic. The results showed how Dominicans believe that, compared to other road features, pedestrian roads and public transport vehicles remain in a very poor condition. Further, citizens report to be more interested about the improvement of road infrastructures than in the implementation of any other set of measures performed to promote sustainable road mobility, including those related with alternative transport means. Finally, this study claims for the need of fostering educational, communicative and participative actions and measures aimed at increasing the value given to sustainable transportation, and the relevance of integrate potential structural and vehicular improvements with those related to human behavior in mobility.

1. Introduction

Given the recently released Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), many governmental authorities around the world are developing action plans to encourage sustainable transport as an essential part of their regional development plans [1]. In brief, it is a fact that the present and future of cities is bound to be greener [2]. Therefore, it is necessary to reduce the pollution rates produced by the high concentrations of vehicles on the roads [3,4]. One of the main measures in this regard is the implementation of actions to improve mobility in cities and, thus, avoid traffic jams [5,6].
Over the last two decades, transport mobility problems have turned in a particularly concerning phenomenon worldwide, but especially in emerging countries, whose resources and capability remain more limited to face several problems present in many spheres, including those other than mobility [7]. The idiosyncrasies of these countries exacerbate this situation due to several factors [8]. On the one hand, the existing infrastructures are deficient, and there is a lack of technological systems [9,10]. Further, technical reports frequently show how inadequately constructed sidewalks and roads with obstacles hinder the flow of traffic, endangering users’ urban trips. In addition, on many occasions, public roads are not prepared or adapted to the needs of city dwellers [11]. Dangerous road scenes occur due to the lack of traffic lights, pedestrian crossings or level crossings in areas with a high concentration of population and frequency of travel. Thus, poor planning of road construction has a direct impact on the road safety of citizens [12]. On the other hand, another aspect that should be emphasized is that the quality of public transport service is not optimal because of the condition of vehicles and the planning of transport routes [13].
All these elements modify the way citizens move around. In fact, many studies indicate that a large number of people do not commute on foot or use a bicycle because their towns and cities do not have an efficient infrastructure for this purpose, even though these would be their preferred modes of transportation [14].
Some recent studies have been systematically showing how, in addition to socioeconomic factors, there are other issues greatly influencing the quality of infrastructure of countries. These factors include, e.g., the region’s size, tourism density, the degree of urbanization and motorization, and government strategies [15,16]. In the particular case of the Dominican Republic, the large annual volume of tourists is, in fact, one of the reasons that have allowed the wider development of the road network, as well as the conditions and coverage of public transport services [9].
However, perceptions in these regards may vary among users, especially when compared to objective data. Indeed, users’ perceptions of road infrastructures also tend to substantially differ across countries. Azik et al. (2021) found that road systems tend to be positively evaluated in Russia and Estonia, highlighting its adequacy for pedestrians and cyclists, while Turkish citizens stated that the infrastructural adequacy for driving in their country was rather unsafe for users [17]. Similarly, a study performed in the UK reported that sidewalk and traffic conditions were commonly perceived barriers to pedestrians and key factors in the choice of travel route [18]. In other research conducted in the United States, citizens perceived an improvement in road conditions compared to two decades ago, even though not to a very extensive extent. Still, most respondents agreed with a moderate tax increase to improve the road infrastructure in their area [19]. Overall, all these studies show how important it is for the population to have adequate and safe road networks in constant development [20].

1.1. Study Area

The situation in the Dominican Republic is framed within the aforementioned particularities. The country has 4,842,367 private vehicles registered in its national vehicle fleet as of 2020, representing an increase of 4.5% over the previous year [21]. This number of vehicles, together with the state of the road infrastructure, has an impact on the country’s mobility problems and its high accident rate, which is one of the highest in the world [22]. Although the Dominican Republic has multiple means of public transport, the quality of these means that citizens choose to travel by private car or motorcycle [23]. The public transport supply is mainly composed of motorcycles, cabs, and urban buses, although there are also metro and metropolitan buses in the major cities of Santo Domingo and Santiago [24].
Additionally, in recent years national and local authorities have tried to promote sustainable transport through communication campaigns, but they have not been assessed as very effective [25]. Data from 2018 indicate that only 21% travel by foot regularly, 36% by public transport, and less than 1% make regular trips by bicycle [26].
In regard to economic settings, most trade in the Dominican Republic is carried out by land transport, with the country’s road network being the main facilitator of the distribution of goods and services [27]. In addition, the existing literature in the field generally agrees on the importance of counting on adequate development and maintenance actions of roads, routes, and public transport vehicles, given that all them constitute potential engines to invigorate many other important dynamics of the country’s economy, including tourism and regional development [28].

1.2. Objectives

The present study aims to examine the perceptions of the population of the Dominican Republic regarding the state of their road infrastructure, public transport, and the degree to which they believe their cities are prepared for the travel needs of their citizens. In addition, opinions regarding future measures that the government plans to implement were also analyzed, in order to assess the degree of peoples’ predisposition to partake in such changes, and to suggest some practical guidelines for transport-related policymakers in the region.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Participants

This study analyzed the information provided by a nationwide sample of n = 1260 Dominican Republic residents from different cities of the country. It was a completely voluntary and anonymous process and corresponded to the main features of the general Dominican population. According to the ONE census (National Statistics Office of Dominican Republic), the sample distribution was proportional to the population by gender, age (over 18), habitat, and province [18] (Table 1 and Figure 1). If we assume a degree of confidence of 99 percent, a maximum margin of error of 5 percent (=0.05), and a beta of 0.20, which allows for an 80 percent power, the minimum sample size should be around n = 680 (Table 1).

2.2. Design, Procedure and Instruments

The data used in this study came from the Dominican Republic’s National Survey on Mobility, which was conducted in 2019 [29]. The questionnaire covered topics such as institutional knowledge and traffic rules, public transportation, private transportation, on-foot movements, bike use, ITS systems and measures, and the variables studied in this study. It is a first-of-its-kind questionnaire in Latin America, where such comprehensive instruments had never been used. It was first administered in 2018 to examine the situation in the country and detect changes in the way Dominicans move as a result of INTRANT’s different programs.
Personal, in-person interviews were used to administer the survey. The sample was collected between 24 November and 7 December of this year. The information was gathered using a CAPI system (Computer Assisted Personal Interviews) on tablets, which recorded and geo-referenced the interviews in order to shorten the interview time and eliminate any recording errors.
In order to achieve the proposed objectives, the following variables were taken into account:
  • Sociodemographic variables and driving data: gender, age group, habitat, Do you habitually drive? Are you a professional driver? Do you currently hold have a driving license?
  • Perceptions of road infrastructure: aspects such as street lighting, traffic density and speed, the distance of pedestrians from vehicles, safety or the condition of sidewalks are evaluated. In addition, a general evaluation of the degree to which the Dominican Republic is prepared for walking. All on a Likert scale of 0–10.
  • Perceptions of public transport: elements such as comfort, pre-fare, accessibility, cleanliness and punctuality, evaluated on a 10-point Likert scale.
  • Assessment of possible future measures in the field of transit mobility: various concrete actions such as the construction of bridges and tunnels, the improvement in the prioritization of transport, the improvement of sidewalk and road conditions or the development of road education programs and traffic communication campaigns scored on a Likert scale ranging between 0 and 10.

2.3. Data Processing

The goal of this study was to describe and characterize the general memory of the Dominican public on traffic campaigns through descriptive (frequency) analysis. ANOVA tests were also run to see whether there were any statistical correlations with sociodemographic factors. Following the collection of these data, statistical analyses were conducted using IBM SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences), version 23.0.

2.4. Ethics

The Ethics Committee of Research in Social Science in Health of the University of Valencia was consulted before the study, and it confirmed that the research met general ethical criteria and was in agreement with the Declaration of Helsinki (IRB approval number: HE0001251019). After the team had given them a detailed description of the research goal and all preceding considerations, participants gave their informed consent to participate in the study. It is important to remark that the administration of personal information was carried out in compliance with current data protection regulations and ethical standards (including their full anonymity and the blinding of any potential identification information, except for generic demographic features), as it was also explained to each one of the participants before starting the survey.

3. Results

The general perception of Dominicans is that their country does not have streets sufficiently prepared for walking (M = 5.20; SD = 3.69). Such assessment is determined by the state of the roads and the road infrastructures linked to pedestrian displacements. Figure 2 shows the scores given to various specific aspects of public roads in the Dominican Republic. The perception that there are few places to cross the street (M = 4.78; SD = 3.57), the short green time at traffic lights when pedestrians are crossing (M = 4.67; SD = 3.78), and the lack of separation between pedestrians and other road users, particularly with vehicles on the road (M = 4.98; SD = 3.61) stand out among them. In addition, citizens point out the low level of safety they perceive when walking (M = 4.59; SD = 3.69). This situation has repercussions for pedestrians, who relatively frequently have to avoid certain streets due to the danger they perceive (M = 6.15; SD = 3.94), as well as having to change sidewalks because of parked vehicles or other obstacles in the road (M = 6.38; SD = 3.88).
The evaluation of public transport is relatively positive, especially in relation to accessibility (M = 7.08; SD = 3.19) and frequency (M = 6.99; SD = 3.08). However, there are some aspects that present insufficient scores. Especially comfort (M = 5.11; SD = 3.56), price (M = 6.27; SD = 3.40), and cleanliness (M = 5.42; SD = 3.67) (see Figure 3).
In general, there was observed a favorable predisposition towards the possible new measures that could be adopted by the Dominican government in terms of road mobility, as none of them were rated, on average, below 7.5 out of 10 possible points (see Figure 4). The improvement of public transport priority (M = 8.93; SD = 2.03), the improvement of sidewalks for pedestrians (M = 8.92; SD = 2.24), and the improvement of roads, highways, and connectors (M = 8.85; SD = 2.24) stand out over the other possible issues presented in relation to transportation system features. In other words, this shows how, overall, there is a perceived priority for improving road conditions and traffic infrastructure over other more educational or transportation planning measures over other relevant issues, such as transport cleanness (especially if the impact of the current COVID-19 pandemic is considered) and transport security.
It should be also noted that most of the measures were more highly rated by women than by men. However, there were only significant differences between these two groups in a total of four items, all of them related to public transport. Therefore, it was determined that females are more willing than males to adopt measures that encourage shared transport, allow greater priority to be given to public transportation, generate specific routes for public transport, and improve modal interchange between different modes of transport. Although there were no significant differences between provinces, there were differences according to habitat. Some measures showed differences between people with a driver’s license and those without one. However, given the characteristics of Dominican citizens, it is curious that there were no such significant differences between regular and nonregular drivers. Table 2 presents the mean comparison test scores and significance levels of all the variables analyzed.

4. Discussion

This manuscript aims to examine the perceptions of the citizens of the Dominican Republic regarding the state of the national road infrastructure and transport vehicles. This is a first approximation of the travel needs of Dominicans, which has direct practical implications for the development of future measures affecting road construction and transportation mobility planning in the country.
There is a general perception that the state of the roads is not entirely adequate. Respondents are clearly dissatisfied with the road conditions, which even forces them to change some of their routes. The proximity to vehicles, the density and speed of traffic, and the obstacles on the sidewalks are some of the problems pedestrians have in their daily lives. Additionally, this is a problem that not only affects mobility and travel, but also has direct repercussions on the road safety of users [30,31]. Factors such as the absence of pedestrian infrastructure [32], poor lighting [33], or the type of street [34] are linked to road accidents. In addition, it has been proven that walking on a street in poor conditions affects pedestrians and makes them more prone to jaywalking or other risky behaviors [35].
This situation undoubtedly makes pedestrians in emerging countries, where pedestrian protection is less developed, particularly vulnerable [36,37,38]. Data indicate that more than 40% of the annual deaths caused by traffic accidents involve pedestrians in Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean. In comparison, this figure is less than 20% in Europe and the United States [39]. Therefore, it is necessary to develop actions specifically aimed at the protection and safety of pedestrians [40,41]. In fact, one of the measures most highly valued by Dominicans is the improvement of sidewalks as well as roads. In any case, and until an increase in the quality of these road infrastructures is designed and implemented, pedestrians should be aware of the risks of the road and try to protect themselves to the best of their ability [42]. Avoiding being distracted by a phone and being aware of the road circumstances can be crucial to prevent a crash [43].
In this sense, a second group harmed by road conditions is the cyclists. In the Dominican Republic, they are a tremendously reduced road group. In fact, the latest data indicate that only 1% use bicycles on a daily basis [25]. In countries such as Denmark, the United Kingdom, or Australia, infrastructure improvement for cyclists led to a substantial increase in this type of user [44,45]. Therefore, it is very likely that the Dominican Republic would substantially increase its cycling population if appropriate actions are taken.
It is important to promote walking and cycling to reduce pollution rates and increase the sustainability of the country [46]. In addition to this, citizens should also be encouraged to use public transport [47]. The vehicular circumstances and conditions in which the public transport fleet of many emerging countries is in, among other factors, cause citizens to tend not to use them as much as desirable [48]. In these places, public transport tends to have poorer planning and service [49,50]. In particular, the Dominican Republic has several transportation systems but with poorly defined routes that are not adapted to the needs of citizens [51]. In fact, the most commonly used public means of transport are urban buses and motorcycle cabs, which generally do not have established stops but pick up passengers at points of high passenger density that are not defined in the metropolitan bus routes [52]. This leads to some road chaos, traffic jams, and mobility problems [53].
In this sense, it is not surprising that measures focused on improving public transport routes are among the most highly valued. In addition, it should be noted that these types of actions are the ones in which the most significant differences are found according to gender, with females being the ones who prioritize them the most. This is logical given the dynamics of displacement in the country, where there are practically no women drivers [25]. Therefore, they especially demand conditions that are more appropriate to the characteristics of their trips [27].
The lack of safety perceived by users is another element to be mentioned. For both on foot and public transport, security is poorly rated. In these scenarios, robberies, violent actions, or harassment can occur, which also determines the consumption level of public transport services [54,55]. This is undoubtedly an important problem, as it indicates that improving road infrastructure conditions may not be enough to change travel dynamics [56]. Not feeling safe and comfortable is sufficient motivation to avoid traveling in the area or vehicle that causes such insecurity [57].
This context is especially important with women [58]. Figures indicate that public roads, and more specifically, public transport, are areas where harassment situations frequently occur [59,60,61]. In addition, they have the problem that, even if they do not want to use any particular transport, they are often forced to do so because they have no other travel options [62]. This occurs especially in countries such as the Dominican Republic, where it is very rare to find women drivers [25]. Harassment in transportation is a common phenomenon worldwide, so in recent years specific actions have been developed to reduce the insecurity of female users [63]: from basic measures such as the installation of security cameras [64] or education and social awareness campaigns [65] to major actions such as “pink” vehicles or cars for females only [66], or specific mobile applications [67].
In short, if the authorities intend to change the dynamics of travel of Dominicans in favor of more sustainable mobility, concrete actions must be developed to improve road infrastructure and the conditions of public vehicles [68]. Only this way will it be possible to initiate a change that increases walking, cycling, and public transport in the country [69].

5. Conclusions

After analyzing the perceptions of Dominican users regarding the conditions of their country’s transportation and infrastructure, the results of this study allow to describe a considerably low valuation of these key transport-related spheres.
On the other hand, citizens tend to support the implementation of new measures to improve these conditions, in order to adapt them to their actual needs. In this regard, these measures should be aimed at improving the public transport fleet, as well as planning routes that meet the needs of the population. In addition, it is necessary to improve the condition of sidewalks and pedestrian walkways, in order to both enhance walkability and active transport, thus fostering sustainable mobility.
The results of this study may be of great use to the authorities of the Dominican Republic and other emerging countries with similar contexts and characteristics [9]. This is the first step before the planning, design, and implementation of concrete actions to improve mobility and, consequently, the pollution levels produced by the large number of trips in private transport.

Author Contributions

For this study, F.A., S.A.U. and M.F. conceived and designed the research, and performed the data collection; S.A.U. and M.F. analyzed the data; F.A. and S.A.U. contributed with reagents/materials/analysis tools; M.F., B.C. and S.A.U. wrote and revised the paper. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was funded by the National Institute of Transit and Land Transportation (INTRANT) and its Permanent Observatory in Road Safety (OPSEVI; public agency of the Dominican Republic)-Grant number: 20170475. Additionally, this work was supported by the research grant ACIF/2020/035 (MF) from “Generalitat Valenciana”. Funding entities did not contribute to the study design or data collection, analysis and interpretation, or writing of the manuscript.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Committee of Research in Social Sciences in Health” from the University Institute on Traffic and Road Safety of the University of Valencia (Spain) (protocol code HE000125101, approved on 25 October 2019).

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The data will be available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank Mayte Duce for the revisions and Arash Javadinejad for the professional edition of the final version of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest or potential disclosures.

References

  1. Sofia, D.; Gioiella, F.; Lotrecchiano, N.; Giuliano, A. Mitigation strategies for reducing air pollution. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2020, 27, 19226–19235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Reisi, M.; Aye, L.; Rajabifard, A.; Ngo, T. Transport sustainability index: Melbourne case study. Ecol. Indic. 2014, 43, 288–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Jacyna, M.; Wasiak, M.; Lewczuk, K.; Karoń, G. Noise and environmental pollution from transport: Decisive problems in developing ecologically efficient transport systems. J. Vibroeng. 2017, 19, 5639–5655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Sicard, P.; De Marco, A.; Agathokleous, E.; Feng, Z.; Xu, X.; Paoletti, E.; Diéguemez, J.J.; Calatayud, V. Amplified ozone pollution in cities during the COVID-19 lockdown. Sci. Total Environ. 2020, 735, 139542. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Mueller, N.; Rojas-Rueda, D.; Khreis, H.; Cirach, M.; Andrés, D.; Ballester, J.; Bartoll, X.; Daher, C.; de Luca, A.; Echav, C.; et al. Changing the urban design of cities for health: The superblock model. Environ. Int. 2020, 134, 105132. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. De Gruyter, C.; Currie, G.; Rose, G. Sustainability measures of urban public transport in cities: A world review and focus on the Asia/Middle East Region. Sustainability 2017, 9, 43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  7. Pojani, D.; Stead, D. The urban transport crisis in emerging economies: An introduction. In The Urban Transport Crisis in Emerging Economies; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; pp. 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Marotti De Mello, A.; Valsecchi Ribeiro De Souza, J.; Marx, R. Public Transport in Emerging Countries: From Old Dilemmas to Opportunities for Transition to Sustainable Mobility Through the Case of Brazil. In The Robomobility Revolution of Urban Public Transport; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 167–179. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Alonso, F.; Faus, M.; Esteban, C.; Useche, S.A. Is There a Predisposition towards the Use of New Technologies within the Traffic Field of Emerging Countries? The Case of the Dominican Republic. Electronics 2021, 10, 1208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kateja, A. Building infrastructure: Private participation in emerging economies. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 37, 368–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Silva FN, D. Urban mobility: The challenges of the future. Cadernos. Metrópole 2013, 15, 377–388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Gitelman, V.; Balasha, D.; Carmel, R.; Hendel, L.; Pesahov, F. Characterization of pedestrian accidents and an examination of infrastructure measures to improve pedestrian safety in Israel. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2012, 44, 63–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Jaramillo, C.; Lizárraga, C.; Grindlay, A.L. Spatial disparity in transport social needs and public transport provision in Santiago de Cali (Colombia). J. Transp. Geogr. 2012, 24, 340–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Chinchayán, M.J. Política Nacional de Transporte Urbano y Su Impacto en El Uso de la Bicicleta Como Transporte Alternativo en Chiclayo. 2020. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12692/47375 (accessed on 10 September 2021).
  15. Statistical Office of the European Communities. EUROSTAT: Road Safety Statistics at Regional Level; Eurostat: Luxembourg, 2017; Available online: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Road_safety_statistics_at_regional_level (accessed on 8 July 2021).
  16. World Health Organization. Key Facts: Road Traffic Injuries. 2018. Available online: http://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/road-traffic-injuries (accessed on 8 July 2021).
  17. Azık, D.; Solmazer, G.; Ersan, Ö.; Kaçan, B.; Fındık, G.; Üzümcüoğlu, Y.; Özkan, T.; Lajunen, T.; Öz, B.; Pashkevich, A.; et al. Road users’ evaluations and perceptions of road infrastructure, trip characteristics, and daily trip experiences across countries. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 2021, 11, 100412. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Anciaes, P.R.; Stockton, J.; Ortegon, A.; Scholes, S. Perceptions of road traffic conditions along with their reported impacts on walking are associated with wellbeing. Travel Behav. Soc. 2019, 15, 88–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Fogg, L.M.; Hamilton, L.C.; Bell, E.S. Views of the Highway: Infrastructure Reality, Perceptions, and Politics. SAGE Open 2020, 10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Blom, C.M.; Guthrie, P.M. Surveying customer perceptions of road infrastructure comfort. Infrastruct. Asset Manag. 2015, 2, 173–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. DGII. Boletín Estadístico. Parque Vehicuar 2020; Dirección General de Impuestos Internos: Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, 2020.
  22. Nazif, J.I.; Pérez, G. Revisión del Desempeño de la Seguridad vial en la República Dominicana. 2018. Available online: http://hdl.handle.net/11362/44211 (accessed on 8 September 2021).
  23. Mazzucco, E.J.F.; Eusebio, M.P.; Vidal, E.; Mejía, V.B. Manejo de lesiones del talón infantil por rayos de motocicleta en República Dominicana. Serie de casos. Rev. Mex. Ortop. Ped. 2020, 22, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Simmons, D. Structural violence as social practice: Haitian agricultural workers, anti-Haitianism, and health in the Dominican Republic. Hum. Organ. 2010, 69, 10–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Alonso, F.; Faus, M.; Fernández, C.; Useche, S.A. “Where Have I Heard It?” Assessing the Recall of Traffic Safety Campaigns in the Dominican Republic. Energies 2021, 14, 5792. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. INTRANT (Instituto Nacional de Tránsito y Transporte Terrestre). National Mobility Survey of the Dominican Republic. Results Report 2018; INTRANT: Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  27. Del Rosario Brito, A.A. Plan de Mantenimiento para Infraestructuras Viales en República Dominicana. Aplicación a la Carretera El Seibo-Hato Mayor. 2018. Available online: https://riunet.upv.es/handle/10251/103062 (accessed on 8 September 2021).
  28. Agüera, F.O. Geografía turística de Republica Dominicana: Comportamientos de la demanda, gestión sostenible y propuesta de estudio. Cuad. Geográficos Univ. Granada 2019, 58, 141–156. [Google Scholar]
  29. INTRANT (Instituto Nacional de Tránsito y Transporte Terrestre). National Mobility Survey of the Dominican Republic. Results Report 2019; INTRANT: Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  30. Mukherjee, D.; Mitra, S. Impact of road infrastructure land use and traffic operational characteristics on pedestrian fatality risk: A case study of Kolkata, India. Int. J. Transp. Econ. 2019, 5, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Useche, S.A.; Alonso, F.; Montoro, L. Validation of the walking behavior questionnaire (WBQ): A tool for measuring risky and safe walking under a behavioral perspective. J. Transp. Health 2020, 18, 100899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Yasmin, S.; Eluru, N.; Ukkusuri, S.V. Alternative ordered response frameworks for examining pedestrian injury severity in New York City. J. Transp. Saf. 2014, 6, 275–300. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Loukaitou-Sideris, A.; Liggett, R.; Sung, H.G. Death on the crosswalk: A study of pedestrian-automobile collisions in Los Angeles. J. Plan. Educ. Res. 2007, 26, 338–351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Morency, P.; Cloutier, M.S. From targeted “black spots” to area-wide pedestrian safety. Inj. Prev. 2006, 12, 360–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  35. Adinarayana, B.; Mir, M.S. Development of pedestrian safety index models for safety of pedestrian flow at un-signalized junctions on urban roads under mixed traffic conditions using MLR. Innov. Infrastruct. Solut. 2021, 6, 54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Zegeer, C.V.; Bushell, M. Pedestrian crash trends and potential countermeasures from around the world. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2012, 44, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Amoh-Gyimah, R.; Aidoo, E.N.; Akaateba, M.A.; Appiah, S.K. The effect of natural and built environmental characteristics on pedestrian-vehicle crash severity in Ghana. Int. J. Inj. Control Saf. Promot. 2017, 24, 459–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Tulu, G.S.; Washington, S.; Haque, M.M.; King, M.J. Investigation of pedestrian crashes on two-way two-lane rural roads in Ethiopia. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2015, 78, 118–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  39. Ribbens, H. Strategies to promote the safety of vulnerable road users in developing and emerging countries: South African experience. Transp. Res. Rec. 2003, 1846, 26–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lam, W.W.; Yao, S.; Loo, B.P. Pedestrian exposure measures: A time-space framework. Travel Behav. Soc. 2014, 1, 22–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Damsere-Derry, J.; Ebel, B.E.; Mock, C.N.; Afukaar, F.; Donkor, P.; Kalowole, T.O. Evaluation of the effectiveness of traffic calming measures on vehicle speeds and pedestrian injury severity in Ghana. Traffic Inj. Prev. 2019, 20, 336–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Pinna, F.; Murrau, R. Age factor and pedestrian speed on sidewalks. Sustainability 2018, 10, 4084. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Schwebel, D.C.; Stavrinos, D.; Byington, K.W.; Davis, T.; O’Neal, E.E.; De Jong, D. Distraction and pedestrian safety: How talking on the phone, texting, and listening to music impact crossing the street. Accid. Anal. Prev. 2012, 45, 266–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  44. Pucher, J.; Dill, J.; Handy, S. Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: An international review. Prev. Med. 2010, 50, S106–S125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Félix, R.; Moura, F.; Clifton, K.J. Maturing urban cycling: Comparing barriers and motivators to bicycle of cyclists and non-cyclists in Lisbon, Portugal. J. Transp. Health 2019, 15, 100628. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Russo, F.; Comi, A. City characteristics and urban goods movements: A way to environmental transportation system in a sustainable city. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 39, 61–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Ma, Z.; Koutsopoulos, H.N.; Liu, T.; Basu, A.A. Behavioral response to promotion-based public transport demand management: Longitudinal analysis and implications for optimal promotion design. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2020, 141, 356–372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Willoughby, C. How much can public private partnership really do for urban transport in developing countries? Res. Transp. Econ. 2013, 40, 34–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sietchiping, R.; Permezel, M.J.; Ngomsi, C. Transport and mobility in sub-Saharan African cities: An overview of practices, lessons and options for improvements. Cities 2012, 29, 183–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Hickman, R.; Hall, P.; Banister, D. Planning more for sustainable mobility. J. Transp. Geogr. 2013, 33, 210–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Montañez, M.R. Un nuevo modelo de transporte para el gran Santo Domingo. Cienc. Soc. 2016, 41, 337–359. Available online: https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/870/87046120005.pdf (accessed on 9 September 2021). [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  52. González, P.D. Propuesta para la Mejora del Transporte Público en el Distrito Nacional, Santo Domingo. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Cartagena, Cartagena, Spain, 2015. Available online: https://repositorio.upct.es/handle/10317/5101 (accessed on 11 September 2021).
  53. Santana, E.A.; Marte, J.C. Propuesta Estratégica para la Mejora en la Calidad del Servicio de Transporte Público: Caso Transporte Expreso Tarea, Ruta Santo Domingo-Bonao, República Dominicana. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Madre y Maestra, Santiago de los Caballeros, Dominican Republic, 2017. Available online: http://investigare.pucmm.edu.do:8080/xmlui/handle/20.500.12060/1861 (accessed on 12 September 2021).
  54. Neupane, G.; Chesney-Lind, M. Violence against women on public transport in Nepal: Sexual harassment and the spatial expression of male privilege. Int. J. Comp. Appl. Crim. Justice 2014, 38, 23–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Tripathi, K.; Borrion, H.; Belur, J. Sexual harassment of students on public transport: An exploratory study in Lucknow, India. Crime Prev. Community Saf. 2017, 19, 240–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Lubitow, A.; Abelson, M.J.; Carpenter, E. Transforming mobility justice: Gendered harassment and violence on transit. J. Transp. Geogr. 2020, 82, 102601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Gardner, N.; Cui, J.; Coiacetto, E. Harassment on public transport and its impacts on women’s travel behaviour. Aust. Plan 2017, 54, 8–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Alonso, F.; Useche, S.A.; Faus, M.; Esteban, C. Does urban security modulate transportation choices and travel behavior of citizens? A national study in the Dominican Republic. Front. Sustain. Cities 2020, 2, 42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Mazumder, H.; Pokharel, B. Sexual violence on public transportation: A threat to women’s mobility in Bangladesh. J. Aggress. Maltreat. Trauma 2019, 28, 1017–1019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Quinones, L.M. Sexual harassment in public transport in Bogotá. Transp. Res. Part A Policy Pract. 2020, 139, 54–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lubitow, A.; Carathers, J.; Kelly, M.; Abelson, M. Transmobilities: Mobility, harassment, and violence experienced by transgender and gender nonconforming public transit riders in Portland, Oregon. Gend. Place Cult. 2017, 24, 1398–1418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Gekoski, A.; Gray, J.M.; Adler, J.R.; Horvath, M.A. The prevalence and nature of sexual harassment and assault against women and girls on public transport: An international review. J. Criminol. Res. Policy Pract. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Ceccato, V. Women’s transit safety: Making connections and defining future directions in research and practice. Crime Prev. Community Saf. 2017, 19, 276–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Orozco-Fontalvo, M.; Soto, J.; Arévalo, A.; Oviedo-Trespalacios, O. Women’s perceived risk of sexual harassment in a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system: The case of Barranquilla, Colombia. J. Transp. Health 2019, 14, 100598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Naik, M.N. Ensuring Safety for Women at Public Space: Need and Approaches. In Building Sustainable Communities; Palgrave Macmillan: Singapore, 2020; pp. 733–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Bolaños, I.G.M.; Terán, M.; Paspuezán, R.A.P. Revisión del impacto de la movilidad urbana. Visión Empresarial 2019, 9, 128–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  67. Ruman, M.R.; Badhon, J.K.; Saha, S. Safety assistant and harassment prevention for women. In Proceedings of the 2019 5th International Conference on Advances in Electrical Engineering (ICAEE), Dhaka, Bangladesh, 26–28 September 2019; pp. 346–350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Abufares, L.; Awadallah, F. Sustainable Civil Infrastructures Utilization and Regulations of Innovative Technology to Improve Road Safety via Drivers’ Warnings and Enforcement. In Proceedings of the Civil Infrastructures Confronting Severe Weathers and Climate Changes Conference, Nanchang, China, 19–21 July 2021; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 110–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Useche, S.A.; Alonso, F.; Sanmartin, J.; Montoro, L.V.; Cendales, B. Well-being, behavioral patterns and cycling crashes of different age groups in Latin America: Are aging adults the safest cyclists? PLoS ONE 2019, 14, e0221864. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Infrastructures 06 00153 g001 550
Figure 1. Distribution of the study sample by provinces or regions.
Figure 1. Distribution of the study sample by provinces or regions.
Infrastructures 06 00153 g001
Infrastructures 06 00153 g002 550
Figure 2. Assessment of roadway features by Dominican pedestrians.
Figure 2. Assessment of roadway features by Dominican pedestrians.
Infrastructures 06 00153 g002
Infrastructures 06 00153 g003 550
Figure 3. Assessment of public transportation conditions in the Dominican Republic.
Figure 3. Assessment of public transportation conditions in the Dominican Republic.
Infrastructures 06 00153 g003
Infrastructures 06 00153 g004 550
Figure 4. Assessment of future mobility measures by Dominican citizens.
Figure 4. Assessment of future mobility measures by Dominican citizens.
Infrastructures 06 00153 g004
Table
Table 1. Sociodemographic data of the sample.
Table 1. Sociodemographic data of the sample.
FeatureCategoryTotalMaleFemale
n%n%n%
Age range18–2426020.6%13621.6%12419.7%
25–3431124.7%14623.2%16526.2%
35–4936629.0%19330.6%17327.5%
50–6422117.5%10817.1%11317.9%
>651028.1%5717.1%558.7%
Total1260100%630100%630100%
Do you drive a motor vehicle?Yes58046.0%45872.7%12219.4%
No68054.0%17227.3%50880.6%
Total1260100%630100%630100%
Do you have a driver’s license? Yes27321.7%24438.7%294.6%
No98778.7%38661.3%60195.4%
Total1260100%630100%630100%
Do you normally drive?Yes47037.3%39262.2%7812.4%
No79062.7%23837.8%55287.6%
Total1260100%630100%630100%
Type of driverProfessional20235.1%19041.5%129.8%
Private37364.9%26457.6%10989.3%
Total685100%454100%121100%
Table
Table 2. Differences in the assessment of mobility measures according to citizens’ genders.
Table 2. Differences in the assessment of mobility measures according to citizens’ genders.
Mobility Measures and ImprovementsGenderANOVA
MaleFemale
nMSDnMSD
Generating lanes to prioritize public transportation *6208.142.586148.512.30F(1,1233) = 6.924; p = 0.009
Improving priority pass public transportation *6258.762.216269.101.82F(1,1250) = 8.832; p = 0.003
Encouraging shared cars *6047.952.675958.312.43F(1,1198) = 6.058; p = 0.014
Potentiating intermodal transportation *6108.032.433028.302.44F(1,1211) = 3.804; p = 0.050
HabitatANOVA
UrbanRural
nMSDnMSD
Building tunnels *10208.013.102267.043.50F(1,1245) = 17.423; p < 0.01
Generating lanes to prioritize public transportation *10128.402.412227.992.61F(1,1232) = 5.158; p = 0.023
Establishing fixed stops public transportation *10218.722.392298.312.50F(1,1248) = 5.465; p = 0.020
Regulating spaces to park *10238.832.232288.482.37F(1,1249) = 4.323; p = 0.038
Communications campaigns *10218.412.522287.982.66F(1,1247) = 5.320; p = 0.021
Driving LicenseANOVA
YesNo
nMSDnMSD
Building tunnels *2728.282.689747.713.31F(1,1245) = 6.782; p = 0.009
Regulating spaces to park *2729.011.939798.692.34F(1,1249) = 4.187; p = 0.041
Promoting the use of non-fossil fuels *2698.572.219678.162.65F(1,1235) = 5.309; p = 0.021
Encouraging walking *2708.822.049778.322.77F(1,1245) = 7.623; p = 0.006
* All study variable comparisons appended in the table correspond to significant differences (p < 0.050).
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Alonso, F.; Faus, M.; Cendales, B.; Useche, S.A. Citizens’ Perceptions in Relation to Transport Systems and Infrastructures: A Nationwide Study in the Dominican Republic. Infrastructures 2021, 6, 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6110153

AMA Style

Alonso F, Faus M, Cendales B, Useche SA. Citizens’ Perceptions in Relation to Transport Systems and Infrastructures: A Nationwide Study in the Dominican Republic. Infrastructures. 2021; 6(11):153. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6110153

Chicago/Turabian Style

Alonso, Francisco, Mireia Faus, Boris Cendales, and Sergio A. Useche. 2021. "Citizens’ Perceptions in Relation to Transport Systems and Infrastructures: A Nationwide Study in the Dominican Republic" Infrastructures 6, no. 11: 153. https://doi.org/10.3390/infrastructures6110153

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop