When the clock strikes 8 o’clock, Americans all over the United States leave their homes, frantically tying their laces, starting their cars, and hopping on buses. Regardless of their preferred method of transportation, people are routinely traveling longer distances, and faster, than ever before. In light of this reality, public transportation has become an even more essential aspect of metropolitan living, with the potential to offer residents accessible, affordable, sustainable, and socially cohesive mobility.
The city of Minneapolis’s Metro Transit System provides residents with a range of transportation options, including buses and its light rail system–the latter of which being the focus of this research. In 2023, Metro Transit provided almost 45 million rides, with light rail transit (LRT) accounting for about 15 million of these (Jason 2024). While these statistics are somewhat encouraging, Minneapolis’s LRT mirrors national trends regarding ridership demographics following the COVID-19 pandemic, wherein white, educated, and high-income individuals are less likely to utilize the system than previously, contributing to a plummet in overall ridership, accordingly (Hu and Chen 2021; Roth 2024). Safety precautions at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic may have explained this trend at the time, yet overall ridership remains low and relatively stagnant despite the return to business as usual since then (Roth 2024), suggesting a broader sociological shift in attitudes on public transportation.
Increased safety concerns are certainly one plausible explanation. Indeed, perceptions of safety may be very influential in terms of individuals’ likelihood of opting for the use of the LRT following disruptions associated with COVID-19. The actual safety of the system is not the primary concern for this research, due to the fact that it is merely one’s personal appraisal of safety that influences their decision making in terms of whether or not to utilize LRT. Although actual safety may play a role in such appraisals, other aspects, such as affiliation with certain groups or the media, also play a primary role. Students at the University of Minnesota, located in the heart of Minneapolis, offer an interesting case for the examination of these variables, due to their diverse student body and high rate of mobility. Survey and interview data reveal an overwhelming consensus that user perceptions of safety greatly influence students’ decision as to whether or not to utilize LRT at the University of Minnesota. Thus, the primary goal of this research study is to gain a better understanding of the specific characteristics and user experiences that determine individual appraisals of safety on the system.
At large, this research was guided by the primary research question, “What characteristics influence young peoples’ perceptions of safety on Minneapolis Metro Transit, and how does this influence their daily commuting decisions?”. The research was supplemented by six secondary research questions: (a) “Is perceived safety-level a factor that young people consider when deciding whether or not to use Minneapolis LRT?”; (b) “How does gender intersect with perceptions of safety on Minneapolis LRT?”; (c) “To what extent do media representations of crime and safety on public transportation influence young people’s perceptions of safety on Minneapolis LRT?”; (d) “To what extent do past experiences of discomfort on public transportation influence young people’s perceptions of safety on Minneapolis LRT?”; (e) “To what extent do situational characteristics influence peoples’ perceptions of safety on Minneapolis LRT?”; and, (f) “What ideas do young people have in terms of increasing their perception of safety on the Minneapolis LRT?”. The hope is that this data may be used to improve the system such that more individuals perceive Minneapolis’s LRT as a legitimate option for transportation.
Ultimately, this research underscores a variety of characteristics which influence safety appraisals and, in turn, contribute significantly to rates of ridership. Such characteristics include, but are not limited to, transit-use frequency, affordability, time of day, level of ridership, news outlet preferences, and amount of distasteful past experiences one has had on the system. On average, our participants rated the safety of LRT a seven, with a rating of one indicating that the system was ‘completely safe’ and a rating of 10 indicating that the system was ‘not safe at all’. Additionally, participants shared many ideas regarding specific improvements and implementations which would increase their perceptions of safety, and, therefore, their likelihood of using the LRT.
Literature Review
To be sure, public transportation is a critical aspect of metropolitan living, providing mobility, economic, environmental, and social benefits (Benevolo et al. 2015). Nevertheless, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, public transit systems in the U.S. have faced the dual challenge of declining ridership and an increased number of reported crimes (Wilbur et al. 2023). Simultaneously, despite its safety relative to the crash-risk associated with automobile transit, studies cite an increase in safety-related concerns on light rail transit nationally (Litman 2022). Unfortunately, Minneapolis’s public transportation system reflects these nationally trends. In 2019, the Minneapolis transit system provided 77,927,642 rides to the public. In 2022, however, this number had decreased by almost half, at 38,794,249 (Roth 2024). Additionally, aside from crime which results in police reports, interview data reveals that many Minneapolis LRT riders report feeling uneasy as a result of crimes that are not reported, especially those related to drug use, aggression, and vandalism–an experience which results in many individuals opting for alternate forms of transportation (Roth 2024). At large, the simultaneous decrease in ridership and increase in safety concerns on public transportation systems underscores both the complexities of public transit usage, and the critical need for an understanding of these dynamics such that Minneapolis light rail transit usage can increase once more.
Interestingly, the interplay between level of ridership and public perceptions of safety on public transportation systems may represent a symbiotic relationship, where improvements in one dimension lead to improvements in another. For example, while crime rates may have increased, it is also possible that their increased prominence for individual riders is a reflection of the lack of diffusion which occurs when a more diverse set of populations are represented on the system (Calatayud, Jornet, and Mateu 2023). Further, an increase in ridership among diverse sets of populations may initiate a sort of snowball effect in which small increases continue to result in larger ones. Indeed, studies suggest that approximately 10% of the population would reconsider using public transportation if a few of their primary safety-related fears were addressed (Delbosc and Currie 2012). Evidence for a positive feedback loop is optimistic, suggesting that a focus on a few key issues may have the power to elicit positive change in other aspects.
Such a finding that only a few of individuals’ safety-related concerns need to be addressed in order to increase comfortability on the system reinforces the idea that crime is not a precise reflection of actual risk–a phenomenon which is not new. In fact, fear of crime has been identified as separate from actual crime rates since the 1960’s (Concern Crime 2002). In conjunction with this idea, it is also essential to acknowledge that no one factor is solely and directly the cause of one’s perception of safety. Rather, safety appraisals are a product of the interaction between many factors, including those which are situational and those which are based on the appraiser’s demographic characteristics (Rijswijk et al. 2016).
Situationally, there are a variety of factors which may be likely to influence one’s perception of safety on public transportation. Namely, having experienced a traumatic event while using public transportation may lead to heightened anxiety, fear, and hypervigilance when using it in the future, thereby impacting one’s overall perception of safety (Gossling 2022). Similarly, the presence of legitimate security personnel may be a situational factor which influences perceptions of safety. The addition of security guards to public transportation may offer riders with assurance, deter crime, and increase the system’s ability to respond to emergency crises (Smith and Clarke 2000). These effects however, may represent a double edged sword. With the addition of increased security personnel comes the risk of over-policing, in which members of marginalized groups are disproportionately targeted.
Social identity is yet another factor which may contribute to one’s perception of safety in utilizing public transportation. Evidence suggests that individuals from marginalized groups are far more in tune to social and environmental cues that signal the presence of judgements, stereotypes, restrictions, and treatments based on other’s perceptions of their social identity (Purdie-Vaughns et. al 2008). Unfortunately, this hypervigilance for threat based on one’s social identity, especially race, not only often well-founded, but also may explain the presence of safety-related concerns regarding public transportation. In the same vein, cross-national evidence suggests that those who make do with a group membership that is the socially powerful majority may develop conscious or unconscious biases which depict those from the minority as a threat, ultimately contributing to their own safety-related concerns (Gerk 2023).
Nationally, concerns regarding womens’ safety on public transportation, and in cities as a whole, are commonly reported in the media (Mowri and Bailey 2022). A multitude of research indicates that these concerns may be justified; according to one study, women were 10% more likely than men to feel unsafe while utilizing metro transit (Ouali et. al 2020). Given womens’ difference in safety compared to mens’, it may be true that they require improvements in different aspects in order to feel more comfortable utilizing public transportation. Furthermore, members of the LGBT and queer communities may experience the dual effects of sexism and homophobia, making them another group requiring further study (Costa et al. 2012).
Marked by rising safety concerns and declining ridership, Minneapolis light rail transit reveals a slew of nuanced, complex, and multifaceted insights about its population. Only through the investigation of the factors which contribute to these trends, can the system be revived. Fortunately, addressing a few key safety concerns may have the potential to lead to a significant increase in ridership.
Research Methods
This research study focused on students attending the University of Minnesota between the ages of 18 and 29 to explore young peoples’ perceptions of safety on Minneapolis LRT and its influence on their daily commuting decisions. Data was collected in a variety of ways, including a literature review, survey, and one-on-one interviews. Survey and interview participants were recruited via social media and word of mouth. Because the research at hand sought to understand only the attitudes and experiences of young people living in Minneapolis, responses from those outside of this group were excluded. Although the burden was minimal, participants were not compensated for their time.
In the end, 49 young people residing in Minneapolis completed the survey. The specific questions asked can be found in Appendix A. The table below outlines the participant demographics for the survey questionnaire:
Table 1. Survey Participant Demographics
The survey contained two parts. The first section collected demographic information from participants. Participants were asked to answer questions regarding their age, gender, race, level of education, employment status, and about their news consumption. This information was used to ensure that participants qualified for the study and to identify demographic-based patterns in the data. The second section of the survey focused specifically on participant perceptions of safety and experience using Minneapolis LRT. Although none of the questions in the second part were required, enough information was gathered to provide meaningful insights. Participants were asked close-ended questions about the regularity of their use of LRT, their preferred method of transportation, and the frequency of which they have felt unsafe or uncomfortable when utilizing LRT, and, perhaps most importantly, to provide an overall rating of their perception of safety on the system on a scale from 1-10. Additionally, participants were asked open-ended questions about why or why not they have used LRT, to describe their experience using the system, and about their ideas of what might be done to increase their comfortability or use of the system. The purpose of these questions was most significantly to understand the relationship between perceptions of safety and the factors which contribute to it.
Upon assessment of the results of the survey, it became clear that more information was necessary regarding three major topics: (a) the impact of time of day, (b) the impact of ridership, (c) preference for alternative forms of transportation, and (d) the ideas that young people have for improvement of Minneapolis’s LRT. Interviews were conducted based on these knowledge gaps. The specific questions asked can be found in Appendix B. In order to get a more generalizable data set, the interviewees which were selected had vastly different experiences with Minneapolis LRT, ranging from individuals with years of experience to individuals who had never stepped foot on the system. Data was collected from a total of 15 young people residing in Minneapolis. The table below outlines the participant demographics for the survey questionnaire:
Table 2. Interviewee Participant Demographics
Findings
Survey results regarding people’s perceptions of safety on Minneapolis LRT reveal several key insights. Firstly, a whopping 93.8% of respondents reported their perception of safety as a key element in their decision-making as to whether or not to utilize LRT. This finding legitimized safety perception as a worth-while issue for research in the field of public attitudes towards public transportation. Later, survey participants were asked to rate their perceived level of safety on LTR, with a rating of one denoting a perception of ‘completely safe’, and a rating of 10 denoting a perception of ‘not safe at all’. A rating of seven received the most support, accounting for 30.6% of participant responses, but the median rating was a six. As illustrated in Figure 1 below, while responses were more concentrated in the upper-middle end of the distribution, the responses at large were widely distributed.
Figure 1. Percentage of Respondents for Each Safety Rating
Participant responses regarding safety ratings on this scale were compared to their distribution within participant responses to a range of other questions. Interestingly, while gender differences are a hot topic regarding public perceptions of safety in the research community, our data did not reveal a significant association between gender and safety ratings of LRT. As highlighted in Figure 2 below, females rated LRT with an average safety rating of 5.8 and males rated it with an average rating of 5.9. Because none of the participants identified as transgender female, transgender male, or non-binary, these groups of individuals are not represented.
Figure 2. Participant Gender and Associated LRT Safety Ratings
In consideration of the influence that media coverage has in shaping individuals’ appraisal of safety on public transportation, the survey asked participants to share which media outlets they primarily use. Figure 3 illustrates this data by comparing it to respondents’ associated safety ratings. Although differences in average safety ratings for individual media outlets were minor, Figure 3 uncovers these differences. In order to gain a better understanding of if the political affiliations of individuals’ preferred news outlets influenced perception of safety, each news outlet was color coded as either generally right-leaning (red), generally left-leaning (blue), or central (purple). This research’s findings reveal no significant effect of political affiliation of preferred news outlets on individuals’ perception of safety on light rail transit.
Figure 3. Participant Preferred News Outlet and Associate LRT Safety Ratings
Additionally, the survey asked participants about how frequently they use LRT. Of the respondents, 49% reported using it rarely, 12.2% reported using it on a monthly basis, 22.4% reported using it weekly, and 16.3% reported using them nearly every day. Figure 4 below depicts this data as it relates to associated safety ratings. The figure supports the idea that there is a positive relationship between utilizing LRT more frequently and rating the system as safer. That is, the more frequently one uses LRT, the more comfortable they seem to be doing so.
Figure 4. Participant Transit Use Frequency and Associated Safety Ratings
Of the participants who reported utilizing Minneapolis LTR ‘rarely’ or ‘not at all’, 69.7% reported instead opting for a personal vehicle for transportation, 3% reported opting instead for a ride services (Uber, Lyft, etc.), 21.2% reporting opting for walking instead, and 3% reporting opting for biking.
The final participant characteristic question asked was the amount of incidents individuals had experienced using LRT that left them feeling uneasy or unsafe. As displayed in Figure 5 below, there seems to be a positive relationship between having experienced more instances of feeling uneasy or unsafe, and rating the overall safety of LRT as less safe. Put another way, the more negative experiences one has had utilizing LRT, the more likely they are to perceive it as unsafe.
Figure 5. Amount of Incidents Experiences and Associated Safety Ratings
Despite the existence of some meaningful data, the survey data identified only minor significant correlations among varying characteristics and associated safety appraisals for LRT. When it came to the survey’s open-ended questions, however, an assortment of themes were especially prominent, which may be used to shape perceptions of safety. These themes included (a) the time of day, (b) rate of ridership, (c) ownership of a personal vehicle, and (d) mentions of security measures. Given these findings, interviews were conducted to further explore the listed themes.
When it came to time of day, 93.3% of interviewees shared that they were much more likely to perceive LRT as more safe during daylight hours and less safe during the night. Participants most frequently attributed this to their perception that the opportunity for crime increases at night, due to less people and security personnel present. Likewise, 93.3% of interviewees shared that they were much more likely to perceive LRT as more safe when the level of ridership was higher. Participants most frequently attributed this to their perception of the idea of “safety in numbers”, which is a reference to the diffusion of criminal activity when a more diverse population of people are present. As depicted in Figure 4, when asked about how they prioritize these two situational characteristics, 73.3% of interviewees reported that they were more likely to rate the safety of LRT as more safe during periods of higher ridership at night, than during periods of lower ridership during the day. This statistic uncovers the primacy of high ridership in shaping safety perceptions within the sample.
The third theme studied through interviews was the reasoning behind individuals’ decision to use forms of transportation outside of public transportation, such as personal vehicles, ride services, or bikes. 40% of the interviewees reported that they exclusively used these alternative modes of transportation. They reported opting out of LRT for reasons including safety concerns, convenience, and mere ownership of a personal vehicle or bike. Of the interviewees who exclusively used alternative modes of transportation, 66.7% shared that they would be much more likely to consider the use of LRT if they were to perceive it as safer. In conjunction with this statistic, the fourth theme with special prominence in the survey data regarded the implementation of further security measures on LRT, such as increased police presence or security cameras. Similarly to those who opt exclusively for alternate forms of transportation, 66.7% of the entire interviewed sample reported that an increase in such security measures would cause them to appraise LRT as more safe.
Discussion
Data from this research study can be leveraged to explore opportunities for growth in LRT, such that young people may become more likely to utilize the service after the COVID-19 pandemic. At the height of shutdowns related to the pandemic, individuals with the resources to do so may have opted to avoid Minneapolis public transportation as a form of social distancing. As vaccines continue to be administered, and as the city endeavors to transcend the effects of the novel virus on metropolitan living, Minneapolis’s LRT system should seek to both restore and expand its rate of ridership. Given public transportation’s capacity to provide accessible, affordable, and sustainable mobility, and to moderate social cohesion within cities, such an accomplishment is critical in efforts to better support residents and visitors.
Importantly, this research finds that safety appraisals are a key element in young people’s decision making in terms of whether or not to utilize LRT. Were such safety appraisals among residents and visitors to increase, LRT ridership would likely increase as well–thus making safety appraisals a worthwhile issue to consider. While the sample’s responses leaned closer to ‘not safe at all’ than to ‘completely safe’, the distribution was concentrated primarily in the upper-middle end, meaning that few people had incredibly strong feelings in one direction or the other. This discovery is hopeful, indicating a complete overhaul of the system is likely not necessary.
The study’s survey data yielded a few notable insights worth discussing. Although the literature had suggested that females would appraise LRT as less safe than males, our data did not support this conclusion. Rather females appraised the safety as 0.1 safer than males. Similarly, the research found only a minor correlation between the political affiliation of individuals’ preferred news outlet and their perception of safety on LRT. The condition of preferring a news outlet of a particular political affiliation may be a reflection of individuals’ personal political identity, which may come with preconceptions about crime. The data suggests that those who preferred news outlets which were more conservative were more likely to perceive LRT as less safe, but this correlation was relatively weak. Both these findings suggest that other factors, such as race or situational characteristics, may be more influential than gender or preferred news outlets in informing individuals’ perceptions of safety on LRT.
The remainder of correlations examined through the survey data were fairly self-explanatory. For example, the data found a positive correlation between having experiences on LRT that made them feel unsafe, and having a lower perception of safety. Additionally, those who used LRT more frequently were more likely to perceive it as more safe. This discovery underscores the idea that a small increase in one’s likelihood of perceiving LTR as safe enough to use may have a compounding effect in which one’s comfortability on the system continues to increase as they use it more frequently. Additionally, this data supports the idea that actual safety of LRT is not necessarily equivalent to individuals’ perceived safety.
Because the proportions of effect were more significant when it came to questions related to the four major themes examined in interviews, the data supports the idea that specific situational characteristics play a more influential role in shaping safety perceptions than characteristics related to participant characteristics and life experiences. Participant prioritization of certain situational aspects, such as time of day and level of ridership should be used to help shape initiative for increasing ridership. The identification of high ridership as more important than daylight in encouraging people to utilize LRT is optimistic because ridership is something that policy makers can target, while daylight is not.
As Minneapolis moves into its post-pandemic era, ownership of and preference for personal vehicles and ride services are likely to continue to suppress LRT ridership. The data provided in this research, therefore, is crucial for resident utilization of public transportation to reach it’s full potential, thereby increasing environmental sustainability and transportation accessibility for all residents.
Referenences
Benevolo, Clara, Renata Dameri, and Beatrice D’Auria. 2015. “Smart Mobility in a Smart City.” Action Taxonomy, ICT Intensity and Public Benefits. Retrieved February 14, 2024.
Calatayud, Julia, Marc Jornet, and Jorge Mateu. 2023. “Spatial Modeling of Crime Dynamics: Patch and Reaction-Diffusion Compartmental Systems.” Wiley Online Library. Retrieved March 28.
Costa, Angelo, Rodrigo Peroni, Denise Bandeira, and Henrique Nardi. 2021. “Homophobia or Sexism? A Systematic Review of Prejudice Against Nonheterosexual Orientation in Brazil.” International Journal of Psychology 48. Retrieved April 3, 2024.
Delbosc, Alexa and Graham Currie. 2012. “Modeling the Causes and Impacts of Personal Safety Perceptions on Public Transport Ridership.” ScienceDirect. Retrieved March 27, 2024.
Gerk, Felix. 2023. “Fear Factor: A Cross-national Analysis of Fear of Crime Construction Among Majority and Minority Populations.” DiVA. Retrieved April 3, 2024.
Gossling, Stefan. 2022. “Extending the Theoretical Grounding of Mobilities Research: Transport Psychology Perspectives.” Taylor and Francis Online 18. Retrieved MArch 20, 2024.
Hu, Songhua and Peng Chen. 2021. “Who Left Riding Transit? Examining Socioeconomic Disparities in the Impact of COVID-19 on Ridership.” ScienceDirect. Retrieved March 25, 2024.
Litman, Tod. 2022. “A New Transit Safety Narrative.” Journal of Public Transportation. Retrieved March 21, 2024.
Mowri, Seama and Ajay Bailey. 2022. “Framing Safety of Women in Public Transport: A Media Discourse Analysis of Sexual Harassment Cases in Bangladesh”. Sage Journals 45. Retrieved Apr 3, 2024.
Nelson, Peter. 2022. “Federal Data Shows Twin Cities Light Rail Is the Most Dangerous in America.” American Experiment. Retrieved March 28, 2024.
Ouali, Laila, Daniel Graham, Alexander Barron, and Mark Trompet. 2020. “Gender Differences in the Perception of Safety in Public Transport”. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. 183. Retrieved April 3, 20204.
Purdie-Vaughns, Valerie, Claude Steele, Paul Davies, and Jennifer Randall. 2008. “Social Identity Contingencies: How Diversity Cues Signal Threat or Safety for African Americans in Mainstream Institutions.” APA PsycNet. Retrieved April 13, 2024.
Rantala, Jason. 2024. “Metro Transit Ridership Grows in 2023, but Officials Say They Need Help to Continue the Trend.” CBS News. Retrieved March 10, 2024.
Rijswijk, Leon, Gerrit Rooks, and Antal Haans. 2016. “Safety in the eye of the beholder: Individual susceptibility to safety-related characteristics of nocturnal urban scenes.” ScienceDirect 45. Retrieved March 3, 2024.
Roth, Madison. 2024. “As Metro Transit Crime Continues to Rise, Twin Cities Community Members Call on Officials to Take Action.” MinnPost. Retrieved March 25.
Smith, Martha and Ronal Clarke. 2000. “Crime and Public Transport”. Chicago Journals. Retrieved March 3, 2024.
Wilbur, Micheal, Afiya Ayman, and Abhishek Dubey. 2023. “Impact of COVID-19 on Public Transit Accessibility and Ridership.” Sage Journals. April 15.