Identifying the sociodemographic profile of workers according to home-to-work travel time in Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region Rafaela Soares Bueno (ENCE/IBGE) Luiz Sá Lucas (MC15 Consultants) 28 th International Population Conference of the International Union for the Scientific Study of Population (IUSSP) – 29 October to 4 November 2017 ABSTRACT Daily urban mobility is one of the main challenges facing by large urban conglomerates around the world nowadays. Brazilian researches indicate work as main reason of daily displacement. Therefore, the indicator "time of home-work travel" has become quite useful in socioeconomic inequality and social spatial organization studies. The present work aims to identify sociodemographic profile of workers in Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region according to their mobility conditions, which will be measured by home-to-work travel time. Descriptive analysis and a Constrained Cluster Analysis Genetic Algorithm were performed based on 2010 Brazilian Demographic Census data. As result, five different groups were found: rich-educated, informal jobs, commuting at the same city, commuting between cities, and recent migrants groups. The last two groups showed the largest home-to-work travel time (over 1 hour). The spatial configuration of urban territory of Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region is one of the main reasons that explains this time. Other sociodemographic features also characterize the profiles. Key words: Daily urban mobility; Home-to-work travel time; Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region. 1
1. INTRODUCTION Throughout the twentieth century, some social phenomena – such as cities territorial expansion, transportation system technological advances, society transformation (through demographic transition process), and increase of individual transport, among others – have happened in Brazil, changing the types of urban displacements. Those reasons have contributed to become daily urban mobility more complex, since there was a spatial dissociation between home and work. Nowadays, big cities and urban agglomerates in diverse developed and in developing countries in the world face the daily urban mobility as a challenge, since they have passed for the same phases during their growing. In general, the Brazilian metropolis have a good infrastructure and urban equipment in their downtown area, such as transportation services and, for this reason, those parts in the cities are more valued and are also more expensive, being occupied by upper-middle and rich classes. Inversely, there is a dearth of State attention in the peripheral areas and, consequently, services and urban infrastructure are worse than central areas. This results in low price of the distant lands and housing and appropriation by low-income people. However, in big Brazilian cities, a plenty of upper-middle classes and high level of education people have preferred to live in distant areas – in residential condominiums – in search for better quality of life, safety and privacy, but they have also preferred to reside in valued areas of the city. Thus, different profiles of Brazilian population have different mobility conditions. Rich and poor people, white or non-white ones, young or old-aged have spent different home-to-work travel time, due to, for example, distance between the places, transportation mode and road conditions. These reasons have conditioned daily urban mobility and, mainly, well-being of people. Therefore, the main objective of this paper is identify profile of workers in Rio de Janeiro Metropolitan Region (RJMR) more likely to spend shorter and longer time on daily travels between home and work, according to sociodemographic features (such as gender, age, color/ race, occupation, average income, level of education, etc.). For this, 2010 Brazilian Demographic Census data were used to perform the quantitative analyzes. This research is based on hypothesis that the recent migrants in RJMR have worse mobility conditions than non-recent migrants, that is, native people and migrants who live 2
in RJMR over five years. According to Breheny (1999, apud Axisa, Scott, Newbold 2012), recent migrants travel longer distances than residents/ people already established for the longest time, due to period of adaptation that recent migrant requires to settle down himself in the new place. In this research, worse mobility conditions will be measured by home-to-work travel time over 1 hour. Moreover, people who lived in some city of RJMR less than 5 years (2010 Brazilian Demographic Census is the reference) were defined as recent migrants. Beside this introductory section, the paper is divided in other four parts. The next section presents an overview about the link among industrialization, urbanization and daily urban mobility in RJMR, since its origin. In addition, it shows up the daily urban mobility according to some sociodemographic features. The third section briefs source of data and methodology used to reach the objective of the research. The fourth section presents the results. Finally, the conclusions are in the fifth and last part. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW The pace of urbanization in upper-middle-income countries have happened quickly in the second half of the twentieth century (UN 2015), such as the Brazilian urbanization process. As a reflection of this fast urbanization process, in the 1960s, the Brazilian urban population had already exceeded, numerically, the rural population, what might be explained through two facts occurred in Brazil in twentieth century: the urban and demographic transitions (Ojima 2016). The urban transition is characterized by rural exodus, owing to agricultural technological advances established in the rural areas, and due to industrialization, especially in Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo cities (Faria 1991; Baeninger 2012). Industrialization has also attracted people from other Brazilian regions, such as Northeast, to both cities until the end of 1960s, approximately. From 1970 on, however, the migration flow towards Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo have decreased due to implement of federal public policies to develop Northeast region through establishment of industries and owing to industrial deconcentrate beyond the Rio-São Paulo axis (Martine 2015). Those public policies have caused the reconfiguration of the Brazilian industry and economy: they have increased the job opportunities to the population and have avoided people to migrate to the Southeast region. Nevertheless, it is important to 3
mention that, although migration flow in direction to Southeast region had decreased, it is still the main region of Brazil, where there are the biggest and most important cities of the country. The demographic transition, defined, in general, by the decrease of mortality and fertility rates, in different phases, has contributed to increase the Brazilian population size. At the first moment, the mortality rates have decreased due to urban improvements, but the fertility rates have kept high in that time. After, the fertility rates have also decreased. Because of this gap between both rates, the Brazilian population size has increased in, approximately, 3% per year, in 1950s, one of the biggest growth rates in history of the country. Some cities have reached 7% per year of population growth. Over later three decades (1980s), the fertility rates have also fallen, and in the twenty-first century, this rate is considered low (less than the reposition level – 2.1 children/ woman). Thus, the fast Brazilian population growth has caused the urbanization and metropolization process, which have occurred at the same time in Brazil (Brito 2006), since more areas were occupied far away from downtown, also implying in the formation of other cities. Transport system technological advances have also contributed to urban sprawl and to process of formation of metropolis, metropolitan areas, and big urban agglomerations. Miralles-Guasch (2002) affirms that the growing of the cities causes changes in their forms and functions and increases the distance between places (such as home and work) and, consequently, time duration to reach these places. Large urban conglomerates in developed and developing countries face this problem nowadays. According to Ojima (2016), urban growth has, essentially, three characteristics: urban population growth, urban area growth, and daily urban mobility integration between urban areas. The two first features can be denominated as urban sprawl, which occurs from expansion of peripheral areas on, since cities’ downtown are denser (Dematteis 1996). This expansion might occur through occupation of new areas with building in real estate expansion zone, and by the incorporation of urban cores (Ojima 2016). As an example, in the peripheral areas, it has been common to note residential condominiums, which contributes to build and settle down centers with several kinds of services, such as malls, education institutes, and business centers. However, these real estate developments 4
Recommend
More recommend
