Knowledge Bank

Why do some American cities appear to be havens of opportunity while others remain stratified? Recent studies illustrate large differences in intergenerational income mobility between American cities, especially for low-income individuals. These differences are difficult to explain through economic productivity alone – for example, some booming cities, like Atlanta, GA and Columbus, OH, exhibit low levels of income mobility. I argue that differences in city policy are at the root of disparities in income mobility. In particular, I examine the effect of accessible public transportation on income mobility. Drawing upon sociologist William Julius Wilson’s “spatial mismatch” hypothesis, I make a case that physical separation from jobs perpetuates intergenerational poverty, and that effective public transportation alleviates this separation. New data allows me to test this nationally. I conduct my analysis in two parts: First, a national statistical study of urban intergenerational income mobility from 1980 to 1996, using public transit accessibility as an explanatory variable. Second, a case study of the politics of public transportation in Columbus, OH, using elite interviews and historical sources. Synthesizing these two parts, I argue that public transit's social efficacy depends on the structure of local institutions: In cities with fewer veto points for regional planning and greater municipal fiscal autonomy, local governments are more likely to prioritize democratic goals in transit planning over technocratic ones. At the same time, citizen support is essential: City governments are more responsive to demands for public transit when there is a confluence of interests between social classes in its favor.