Abstract

The South Side of Chicago is known throughout the world for the direct violence that occurs there. However, the direct violence results from the structural violence occurring through institutions and policies that have taken away the lives of thousands of Chicagoans for almost a century. While the existing literature focuses on aspects of structural violence on their own, this paper discusses the intersections between each structural violence and how it further perpetuates the already existing disparities. Using maps and articles from Chicago-based news sources, I explore the relationship between public transit and forms of structural violence. The stigma around the South Side and its direct violence claim that it is “unchangeable,” however, as in Galtung’s Peace Triangle, direct violence results from structural violence. The research suggests that varying accessibility to public transit worsens structural problems such as economic insecurity, food deserts, and school access. 

Introduction

To commute in Chicago means preparing for the worst: to leave thirty minutes early, recognize that your bus might not come, and remember the Red Line’s constant “significant delays.” Chicago’s public transportation remains capricious, even more so when traveling from specific neighborhoods. On the city’s South Side, where the trains do not even reach the city’s Southern border yet extend to the suburbs on the North Side, public transit remains unreliable and often leaves travelers with substantial commute times. Cramped buses, poor coverage, and multiple transfers are just a few of the tribulations residents face. The current access falls short of equity. Nevertheless, as the third-largest city in the United States, Chicago’s transit network faces the reliance of the city’s nearly 2.71 million residents. Although the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) has transportation in nearly every neighborhood, a difference in dependability and accessibility varies depending on one’s location in the city, leaving residents with one question: Who does the CTA really support? The varying access to the CTA dictates more than just commute time but can contribute to the structural violence against members in those communities. 

The question of accessibility within Chicago’s public transportation forms through the vast economic differences between the South Side and North Side of Chicago. A disparity in infrastructure leaves each area resembling different cities, although the areas are just miles apart within the same city. Moreover, the disparities extend beyond infrastructure and into opportunity. Education, community events, recreation centers, and reduced access to affordable and healthy foods are just the beginning of the varying resources that are available on the North Side and lacking in the South Side. As a consequence of the resources allocated to neighborhoods on the South Side, public transportation continues the battle of the inequality that plagues the area. 

The question of how the accessibility of Chicago’s public transportation perpetuates the structural violence within the city guides my research. Motivated by the stigma surrounding the South Side of Chicago and inadequate funding because of that stigma, I aim to provide context to the ongoing conditions on the South Side of Chicago. There remains media attention to the direct violence in the South Side, obscuring the implications of the structural violence that occurs. In turn, the paper attempts to dismantle that focus.

To establish a clear foundation, I first give context and background information regarding public transit within Chicago and its layout . The literature review follows to provide a history of the research already contributed on the topic and solidify past contributions that have influenced my research. After the foundation of the paper is introduced, I articulate the theoretical framework and methods. Both sections aim to clearly explain the framework behind my analysis and the steps I took in collecting and analyzing data. My findings introduce the argument of the paper the data that support and clarify that argument. This section is the longest and is positioned at the end so the solid foundation clarifies much of the analysis. The conclusion wraps up the research and will summarize last thoughts and complete the argument. 

The History of the Chicago Transit Authority and Commuting in Context

The history of the Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) and its original plans devise the substructure for the accessibility of the transit throughout the city. Created in 1945, the Chicago Transit Authority slowly began to govern parts of previously private tracks. By 1947, the CTA had taken over all private L operations in the city and began to construct the system present today. The first few years constituted rapid reform as stations were redone and modernized. The next few decades consisted of the shutting and opening of lines, devising a system that met the needs of riders whilst meeting the profit necessary. In 1986, the Orange Line opened, connecting the Southwest Side of Chicago. However, this area faced inequality for decades as the CTA had promised an extension to the area since its founding in 1945. The new extension only came from President Reagan in 1986 “as a political favor to Representative William Lipinski (D-Ill.) for a vote cast on a critical issue.” Over 70 percent of the Southwest Side is Hispanic , leaving people of color heavily relying on cars and increased commute times with buses¹. For fifty years before the Orange Line was built, residents faced the structural implications of a lack of transit, while other neighborhoods had developments and restructuring to optimize their communities. 

 Rising costs and sinking ridership plagued the 1990s. Consequently, the CTA reorganized the lines and eliminated certain stations to compensate for the failing system. When cuts happen, they hurt the South Side first, as in 1992 when “five L stations were closed . . . and Harvard, which effectively created a two mile gap in stations on the Englewood branch.”² Englewood, a neighborhood on the city’s South Side, remains 94.6 percent Black), with the CTA again hurting people of color.³ 

In 1994, the Green Line suffered from failing infrastructure, and a project to reevaluate and rehabilitate the branch began. The announcement of the line’s closure for two years was made only a month before the closing, leaving short notice for any restructuring in commuter’s plans. When the Green line planned to reopen in 1996, the previous twenty-four-hour service was considered unnecessary to restore. Numbers for late night travel proved low, and the CTA believed the cost benefits were paramount compared to the small number of people inconvenienced. Moreover, problems still arose around the South and West Side as “citizens were still protesting the proposed closing of four stations and the potential demolition of the far east section of the Jackson Park branch.”⁴ Again, the affected neighborhoods were areas of predominantly Hispanic and Black citizens. 

The plans for the improved Green Line featured a new segment, from University to Dorchester, that would connect the line to Metra suburban trains was built and never used. Years of debate followed its completion in 1993, and in 1997, the Cottage Grove – Dorchester portion was destroyed.⁵ The segment would have served the Woodlawn community on the South Side, another Black community facing the demolition of its lines to optimize cost. The CTA continues to adapt every year to meet the needs of its riders, but the cost of continuous change falls on the neighborhoods of the South and West Side, leaving no expansions or better service to these areas.

The history of the CTA only perpetuates the history of segregation within Chicago. From redlining to affordable housing to racial covenants, decades of legislation contribute to the placements of racial groups today and the isolation that exists in those areas. According to a 2021 study at Brown University, “Black residents of Chicago are also among the most isolated of urban dwellers, with an isolation index of 62.8,” meaning Black Residents mostly interact with members of the same race.⁶ Latinos follow with 47.8 score and Asians with 40.4 score.⁷ The divide between communities has also been tested and measured. The Metropolitan Planning Council and Urban Institute reported in 2017 that if segregation was driven down, “the region as a whole would earn an additional $4.4 billion in income” and the “gross domestic product (GDP) would rise by approximately $8 billion,” leaving the city in a much better economic state.⁸ Segregation not only kills economic prosperity but also lives. The annual “homicide rate would drop by 30 percent—the equivalent of saving 229 lives.”⁹ The movement of people of color into Chicago initiated the segregation through racial policies, but the policies from centuries ago continue to contour the barriers of neighborhood and maintain the isolation index. 

Literature Review

The literature on public transportation within Chicago and other major cities follows three main themes: the segregation within the city (Purifoye 2020; Swyngedouw 2013; Graif, Lungeanu, and Yetter 2017; Lee 2009), necessity of public transportation for development (Hong and Ji 2021; Addie 2013; Tribby and Zandbergen 2012) and the effect of public transit on economic opportunities (Lee and Miller 2018; Seetanah, Ramessur, and Rojid 2009; Ascher 2007). Each of these themes is imperative in a cohesive understanding of public transportations effects on underrepresented communities. 

The first theme of segregation within Chicago due to transportation follows a theme of how travel has been consistently differentiated by factors like race and class.¹⁰ Specifically, a 2013 study of Chicago’s Red Line shows that residential segregation not only exists within the neighborhoods it services but on the train as well. As one rides from the southernmost point of the train at 95th St/Dan Ryan to the northernmost stop of Howard, the demographics of people on the train transforms significantly, as the train goes from African Americans in the Southside to whites as the train rides north with little overlap between the two besides the central “Loop” area.¹¹ The disparities of public transportation in Chicago only contribute to centuries of inequity that already exists due to previous systemic issues. The history of segregation has ensured white security through wealth, safety, and education while mental health has been sacrificed for minority communities.¹²¹³

The second theme of public transportation’s necessity in urban centers proves integral in understanding the larger impacts within Chicago. Connecting neighborhoods through public transit elicits an interconnected city, which ultimately leads to positive long-term development. Besides providing an interconnectedness, rail transit also drives industrial development, with jobs and economic opportunities prospering on the rail transit lines. Among other benefits, the promotion of public transit combats urban sprawl, which harmed Chicago during the 1980s.¹⁴ Failed ridership and safety rang high priorities during that time as lawmakers attempted to remake the Chicago Transit Authority into a system that could carry the everchanging population and restructuring of those decades. Yet, many of the problems that existed decades ago still plague the city today— hence, the overwhelming literature advocating for better public transit. Acknowledgment of existent public transit coincides with understanding the service gaps that exist. Even when new bus routes are created, they are not always equitable and stress further issues within the neighborhoods. For example, with the southern additions to the Red Line farther to add buses to the current rail, there were only buses every 30 minutes which proved expansions not equitable and service gaps to continue.¹⁵ Although there has been an influx in new lines and stations, frequency and location still dictate accessibility. 

The literature on public transportation calls for Chicago’s public transit to evolve sustainably. A study in China discussed research for more sustainable developments as“the underground public space and rail transit in the city center plays a vital role.”¹⁶ Plans to expand urban transit networks should prioritize development and “enhancing the ability of public transportation to lead the city’s development.”¹⁷ Moreover, with increased lines and stations also comes resources at these facilities. Supporting facilities remain imperative in this evolution. Last, information technology needs promotion and guidance. Sharing information and resources regarding schedules and delays need better accessibility and accuracy to promote transit.

The third theme of public transportation’s contribution to economic opportunity imparts the importance of public transportation within urban centers. In Columbus, Ohio, another major American city, increasing the speed of transit during the week expanded job accessibility by 8 percent, helping increase low-skill jobs. On the weekends, job accessibility increased by 34 percent, allowing for better transit to garner better job opportunities for employees.¹⁸ Moreover, there is a link between infrastructure, including transit, and poverty alleviation. A broad analysis of research in twenty countries from 1980 to 2005 found“evidence … of the positive effect of infrastructure on urban poverty,” further clarifying that public transit may aid in bolstering economic opportunity.¹⁹ Much of what makes public transit a viable means to fight poverty is the opportunity for mobility. Importantly, “mobility is a key condition of access to employment, housing, education, culture, and leisure and family. The right to work, to have a home, to training involves the right to mobility.”²⁰ When communities lack mobility, they lack opportunity, development, and social capital. Public transportation’s connection to opportunity and accessibility remains integral in understanding how inequities of public transportation contribute to structural violence. 

The lack of access to public transit perpetuates structural violence against communities. When communities lack mobility, the violence of inadequate education, healthy foods, and cultural spaces is exacerbated. The questions that arise through the literature ask how each aspect of structural violence may contribute to others. How does a lack of access to proper schools affect job opportunities? How do food deserts affect a student’s performance? The interrelated problems between each form of structural violence compound, eliciting further violence. 

Theoretical Framework

The term “structural violence” appears frequently in this research as a descriptive term. Structural violence differs from direct violence as it is a preventable harm or damage and the violence lacks an actor.²¹ Direct violence is a better-known type of violence, as there is an actor and a victim. The actor commits the crime against the victim. With structural violence, the violence can occur because of disparities of power and resources 

The concept of structural violence originated in peace studies. Johan Galtung, a Norwegian socialist, claims credit for much of the pioneering in peace studies, such as the notion of a “violence triangle.” Galtung explains violence with “three dimensions; direct violence, structural violence, and cultural violence.”²² Each of the three dimensions forms one side of the triangle, with structural violence on the bottom left, cultural violence is on the bottom right, and direct violence is on the top. Direct violence lies at the top because of its visibility and aggressiveness that are easily visible. Structural violence and cultural violence remain below direct violence because those violences are not as clearly seen, with no specific perpetrator, yet both contribute to direct violence; they are the systems and beliefs that create conflict and lead to direct violence. 

The current literature demonstrates the inequalities that exist in Chicago; the theoretical framework of structural violence allows me to analyze the research in a new way. . Introducing the theoretical framework allows for connections between each type of violence and focuses on their interactions, differing from previous literature that focuses on each violence separately. 

Methodology

The research conducted follows four main topics: (1) varying accessibility to public transit among neighborhoods, (2) impact of transit on economic development, (3) impact of transit for school access, and (4) lack of access to grocery stores. Subtopics include the importance of mobility and equitable access. Within these categories, I organized and coded the data according to each topic or subtopic. The data I used consists of maps, graphs, infographics, news articles, and research articles. 

I begin with data based on varying access to public transit to provide a foundation for the structural violences I later discuss. In order to prove that poor access occurs, I examined various maps that labeled each station on the South and North Sides of Chicago. A study found that the length of track lines on both sides of Chicago is roughly even, but disparities still remain because of the spread of stations on the South Side. By comparing areas on the North and South Side that are half-mile or less to an L stop, the study shows that significantly less of the South Side is within walking distance to the L station. Another resource used in this category is a map that gives each Chicago neighborhood a housing-transit score to demonstrate the varying availability of transit. The map clearly reveals the inequities apparent on the South Side. Furthermore, data in this category also came from an analysis of CTA lines, both those present today and historically. Information regarding the Red Line extension and the length of the present Purple Line aid in the understanding of public transit’s contribution to segregation. The history of the Orange Line also contributes to a history of segregation recently evaluated. I coded data in this section to fit into the topic and followed the pattern of public transit and segregation. 

The discussion of the second topic, transit and economic development, draws largely on maps and articles discussing the transit times for workers within Chicago. The maps used display average commute times throughout Chicago and another map displaying where jobs are located within Chicago. The maps expose the reality of lengthy commute times for Southsiders because of where jobs are located. In support of the maps, articles published by University of Chicago and Bloomberg interpret the data. Bloomberg has also published information that adds up the extra time that Southsiders spend commuting and represents it in terms of the actual monetary value associated with that commute time. As I explored school access and its relation to transit, much of the data came from news articles regarding the Chicago Public School (CPS) system. The CPS had school closures in 2013, and the data about displacement offers insight to the existence of segregation and the extenuating circumstances of relocating students. The data relates as the students’ access to transit prohibited much of the relocation. Other articles exposed the cultural and financial opportunities missing from schools on the South Side because of the lack of funding and economic opportunities from the neighborhood. The data included offers horizontal connections between each type of structural violence and the way they all connect. 

Research on food access includes maps and news articles as well. The maps used display the food insecurity in Cook County and the map of public transit stops and grocery store locations. The former allows for an understanding that much of the food insecurity remains in the South Side, and the latter allows for an explanation of why that is occurring. The maps work hand in hand in supporting each other and the existence of food apartheid on the South Side. A 2016 article in The Chicago Reporter article explains the importance of transit and reinvestment in communities on the South Side. Describing transit as a “lifeline,” the article contributes to the patterns found in the maps.[fn]La Risa Lynch, “Red Line Extension Aims to Improve Transit and Development on the Far South Side,” The Chicago Reporter, October 31, 2016.[/fn] 

The methods used for the subtopics of mobility and equitable access consist entirely of news articles. I labeled mobility and equitable access as subtopics because the concepts are apparent throughout each main topic. The data chosen allows me to analyze how current systemic problems intersect with each other, and thus leads me to different conclusions from previous research. 

Transit Access’s Link to Intersecting Structural Violence 

Introduction

Much of the data collected supports the perpetuation of structural violence through public transit. Public transportation plays a key component in how structural violence remains entrenched in Chicago The history of segregation within Chicago involves much of the Chicago Transit Authority’s historical and current operations. The CTA’s contributions to segregation connect to the other structural problems of economic opportunity, school access, and food deserts. The lack of mobility through inadequate transit further perpetuates them. 

Segregation within Public Transit 

Segregation in Chicago predated the emergence of public transit, however, the CTA has only added to the existing problems. Much of the segregation that exists because of the L is due to the structure. One example from the data exhibits the Red Line in Chicago. Clearly depicted on the CTA L map is the current Red Line track, which runs North-South. The beige bordering outside of the grid represents areas not within the city of Chicago. When looking at the CTA L map, it’s clear that the Red Line extends from the northernmost part of Chicago to the South Side of Chicago. The southern border of the city is not even shown on the map. Although the Red Line extends all the way North, nearly 5.3 miles or forty blocks of the South Side remains isolated from public transit and must find alternate routes to get to the southernmost part of the Red Line. The North Side to where the Red Line extends remains overwhelmingly white, as the last stop in Rogers Park has a population that is 42.9 percent white with no other single racial or ethnic group comprising nearly as large a percentage of the neighborhood’s demographic makeup.²³ Other neighborhoods that the Red Line runs through are overwhelmingly white, such as Lake View, where 80 percent of the population identifies as white.²⁴ The neighborhoods on the South Side of Chicago where the Red Line extends are overwhelmingly Black as Roseland, the neighborhood the Red Line ends in at Ninety-Fifth Street, is 95.9 percent Black.²⁵

Moreover, according to a 2017 article published by South Side Weekly, the area more than a half-mile from an L stop is greater on the South Side. Despite both the North and South Side having the same miles of tracks, because the South Side is much bigger, proportionally the South Side has much less area covered for public transit. 

Over the years, attempts have been made to extend the Red Line, yet little progress has been made. Without the extension, “the line ends abruptly five miles from the city’s southern limits, choking off thousands of poor black Chicagoans on the Far South Side from jobs in the city by limiting their access to steady public transportation.”²⁶ If the city followed through with the extension it would “shave off about 20 minutes from a commute from 130th Street to the Loop.”²⁷ Despite the benefits an extension would provide for South Side residents, the city has refused to expand the line, leaving underprivileged communities isolated from opportunity. The Red Line contributes to the prominent segregation already existent within the city. 

The Red Line is just one example of how the CTA contributes to Chicago’s segregation. A map by designer Anna Grumman offers a representation of the accessibility of each neighborhood to public transportation and affordable housing. The darker the shade, the higher score, meaning better accessibility. The pale hues that dominate much of the South Side display the lower housing-transit scores, translating to worse accessibility. As stated before, much of those areas already suffer from poor socioeconomic status and poor transit only perpetuates the isolation and other structural issues that already exist.

Economic Opportunities 

Mobility remains imperative in accessibility as it “contributes to people’s ability to access work, food, education, leisure, and more.”²⁸ Without mobility, one loses access to general necessities and experiences isolation. As public transportation remains an aspect of mobility, the lack of it affects access to jobs. A map showing the number of jobs available within a thirty-minute commute by neighborhood demonstrates the disparities in job access within Chicago. This map clearly shows that there are more jobs on the North Side, as the areas with the most jobs are concentrated in the North Side. When looking at the South Side on the same map, a thirty-minute commute appears very rare. On this map, two dots signify the proposed 95th Street and 130th Street stations, where the Red Line extension would run. The neighborhoods surrounding those two points have the lowest rate of jobs accessible within thirty minutes on public transit. With the South Side having such poor access to transit, the citizens experience much longer commute times. The time commuters spend on their way to and from work translates into monetary values, further perpetuating the economic disparities. As Emily Badger reported for Bloomberg in 2014, “black low-wage workers spent about seven minutes more one-way on their commutes than white low-wage workers in metropolitan Chicago. That’s about 14 minutes a day, or 70 minutes a week … And now you’ve got to pay for 80 minutes of extra daycare.”²⁹ This is one example of how a long commute is not only a marker of limited access to jobs but can result in extra expenses. Economic opportunities are not equal with longer commute times, as those jobs become inaccessible due to distance and time, leaving people in the South Side struggling to find employment. 

Access to Schools

In U.S. cities, attending school generally requires a commute on public transit. School buses are rare, and students rely on the public transit systems near their homes. However, in Chicago, school closures have left students especially displaced. In 2013, former mayor Rahm Emanuel closed the most public schools in U.S. history to battle a deficit in the city’s budget. More than eleven thousand students were displaced, perpetuating systemic inequality, as “a large majority of the schools closed were on the South and West Side of the city where the students were majority, if not completely, Black or Brown.”³⁰ Englewood, Austin, and Garfield Park had the most instability, all neighborhoods located on the South Side and off the Red Line. Moreover, when students attempted to relocate, the poor transit on the South Side emerged as a factor in choosing their next school. Access to public transit hindered opportunities, whereas on the North Side, the options extended to neighborhoods all across the city. 

Furthermore, the economic issues perpetuated by poor transit leak into the school system as well. When schools attempt to publicly fundraise for their schools, communities on the South Side do not always have the means to donate and support their local schools. The money citizens lose from extended commutes to use on daycare and other priorities become ever apparent with school funding when public fundraising is not available. The gaps widen as schools in greater socioeconomic areas fundraise and gain more resources. 

Food Access

With the stigma of “safety” surrounding the South Side, corporations and other businesses do not place their stores in the area. Yet, now these communities are left without essential resources such as grocery stores and access to healthy foods. A 2020 map published by Active Transportation Alliance depicts the relationship between transit and grocery stores and food pantry locations. Besides a small portion of the far Northwest side of Chicago, almost all of the North Side has access to public transit and grocery stores. However, when looking at the South Side, large gaps appear between where the L lines run and where grocery stores are located. This disparity results in thousands of citizens without access to groceries, forcing them to rely on corner stores and other traditionally unhealthy food sources. This map further illustrates journalist La Risa Lynch’s perspective that “In places – particularly communities of color – that are disinvested still to this day, transit is literally a lifeline to get to the grocery store,” and that residents“need transit to get out of their communities until reinvestment comes to those communities.”³¹ Transit further perpetuates the circumstances within these areas, just as the lack of economic opportunities and poor access to proper schools extenuate the problems that already exist. 

Need for Equitable Access 

Although the differing accessibility in public transit does not act as a direct cause of the structural issues such as segregation within the city, economic opportunities, access to schools, and food deserts, the lack of public transit continues the damage of these disparities. Transit acts as a tool of mobility and without mobility the isolation of these communities continues. Equitable access is the key to uplifting these communities. As the World Economic Forum affirms, “an inclusive system of mobility can help create greater opportunities for advancement for these populations while promoting the overall economic health of communities.”³² Urban planning expert Shauna Brail sees transit as the key to efforts to build just cities: “Provision of equitable access to transport options—particularly for vulnerable communities—makes crucial the role of policymakers and government organizations in creating and sustaining the inclusiveness of cities.”³³ These expert opinions further clarify that in order to dismantle structural violence,, the transit systems in place must face reevaluation.

The Future of Chicago’s Transit and Resource Allocation

My research underscores the structural violence within Chicago and the interactions that exist between each form of violence. The significance of this research aims to deconstruct the stigmas that exist about the South Side and urge a deeper understanding of the realities of the circumstances. Without the proper resources and opportunities allocated to the South Side, the structural violence will continue. The city of Chicago must reevaluate the systems currently in place and designate the proper resources to reinvest in communities that have been ignored for the past century. 

Further research within the current topic would include more personal testimonies. Through interviews and surveys, collecting data based on real experiences would allow for an emotional component of the research to understand the degree of suffering that takes place. The data currently provided exemplifies the issues and their locations, but fails to include the psychological effects. Studies focused on mental health may serve more purpose in understanding the long-term effects of structural violence. The use of primary data within the paper would create an honest reflection of public transit’s effects on citizens, differing from the current secondary data presented. Although the secondary data provides the necessary data for connections, it lacks the emotional aspects of primary data. 

The final purpose of the research targets the misplacement of resources within the city. As the current mayor, Lori Lightfoot, continues to funnel money into the Chicago Police Department, people of color suffer as the police increase patrol and surveillance on their communities. The direct violence that exists results not from “bad people” but the structural problems that elicit violence. With the thorough explanation of structural violence and its example, the future of the South Side must be showered with investment. Not in more night watch patrol, but real resources for real people.

1. “Overview of Chicago, Illinois (City),” The Demographic Statistical Atlas of the United States, Statistical Atlas.
2. “The CTA Reinvents Itself: The ‘L’ Heads Into the 21st Century (1990-present),” Chicago “L”, Chicago-L.org, n.d.
3. “Overview of Chicago, Illinois (City),” The Demographic Statistical Atlas of the United States, Statistical Atlas.
4. “The CTA Reinvents Itself,” Chicago-L.org, n.d.
5. “The CTA Reinvents Itself,” Chicago-L.org, n.d.
6. Heather Cherone, “How Did Chicago Become so Segregated? by Inventing Modern Segregation,” WTTW News, WTTW Chicago, February 24, 2022.
7. Cherone, “How Did Chicago Become so Segregated?”
8. Marisa Novara, Alden Loury, Amy Khare, “The Cost of Segregation,” Metropolitan Planning Council, March 2017.
9. Novara, Loury, and Khare, “The Cost of Segregation.”
10. Gwendolyn Y. Purifoye, “Transit Boundaries: Race and the Paradox of Immobility within Mobile Systems.,” Mobilities 15, no. 4 (2020): 480-499.
11. Eva Swyngedouw, “The Segregation of Social Interactions in the Red Line L-Train in Chicago,”_Symbolic Interaction_ 36, no. 3 (2013): 293-313.
12. Purifoye, “Transit Boundaries: Race and the Paradox of Immobility within Mobile Systems.,”
13. Min-Ah Lee, “Neighborhood Residential Segregation and Mental Health: A Multilevel Analysis on Hispanic Americans in Chicago,” Social Science & Medicine 68, no. 11 (2009): 1975-1984.
14. Addie, “Metropolitics in Motion: The Dynamics of Transportation and State Reterritorialization in the Chicago and Toronto City-Regions.” Urban Geography 34, no. 2, (2013): 188-217.
15. Calvin P. Tribby and Paul A. Zandbergen, “High-Resolution Spatio-Temporal Modeling of Public Transit Accessibility,” Applied Geography 34 (2012): 345-355.
16. Guo-Ling Jia, Rong-Guo Ma, and Zhi-Hua Hu, “Urban Transit Network Properties Evaluation and Optimization Based on Complex Network Theory,” Sustainability 11, no. 7 (2019): 2007.
17. Guo-Ling Jia, Rong-Guo Ma, and Zhi-Hua Hu, “Urban Transit Network Properties Evaluation and Optimization Based on Complex Network Theory,” Sustainability 11, no. 7 (2019): 2007.
18. Jinhyung Lee and Harvey J. Miller, “Measuring the Impacts of New Public Transit Services on Space-Time Accessibility: An Analysis of Transit System Redesign and New Bus Rapid Transit in Columbus, Ohio, USA,” Applied Geography 93, (2018): 47–63.
19. Boopen Seetanah, Taruna Shalini Ramessur, and Rojid Sawkut, “Does Infrastructure Alleviate Poverty in Developing Countries?”_International Journal of Applied Econometrics and Quantitative Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development_ 9, no. 2.
20. François Ascher, “Multimobility, Multispeed Cities: A Challenge for Architects, Town Planners, and Politicians” Places 19, no. 1 (June 2007), 41.
21. Kathleen M. Weigert, “Structural Violence,” _Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace, & Conflict (Second Edition) (Elsevier, 2008).
22. Kalpalata Dutta, “Violence Triangle of Johan Galtung in Context of Conflict Theory,” The Asian Institute for Human Rights, March 31,2020.
23. “Overview of Chicago, Illinois (City),” The Demographic Statistical Atlas of the United States, Statistical Atlas.
24. “Overview of Chicago, Illinois (City),” The Demographic Statistical Atlas of the United States, Statistical Atlas.
25. “Overview of Chicago, Illinois (City),” The Demographic Statistical Atlas of the United States, Statistical Atlas.
26. Lynch, “Red Line Extension Aims to Improve Transit and Development on the Far South Side.”
27. Whet Moser, “Chicago Plans a Red Line Extension-but Could It Be Done Faster and Cheaper?”Chicago Magazine, January 29, 2018.
28. Shauna Brail, “Coronavirus and Engaging Cities: Towards Community Recovery,” Bang the Table, June 2020.
29. Emily Badger, “The Commuting Penalty of Being Poor and Black in Chicago”, Bloomberg News, February 21, 2014.
30. Cherone, “How Did Chicago Become so Segregated?“
31. Lynch, “Red Line Extension Aims to Improve Transit and Development on the Far South Side.”
32. Scott Corwin, “Want a More Inclusive Society? Start with Mobility,” World Economic Forum, January 18,2019.
33. Shauna Brail, “Coronavirus and Engaging Cities Towards Community Recovery,” Bang the Table.