2026/07/25 by Anna Plyushteva, Sherin Francis
Medicine · Social Sciences · #Patient Dignity and Privacy #Urban Transport and Accessibility #Ethics and Social Impacts of AI
paper · doi:10.1177/00420980261465235
Debates on transport and mobility justice would be enriched by a more thorough and critical engagement with dignity. As dignity is a complex, contested and multi-faceted concept which has been theorised across multiple disciplines, its various dimensions and their applications to urban mobility justice frameworks require gradual unpacking. In this article we focus on one dimension: the tension between externally defined notions of dignity, presented as universal criteria to be fulfilled for a ‘threshold’ of justice to be met; and a relational and situated notion of dignity, grounded in moral emotions. We understand moral emotions as emerging between people as a result of someone (in this case, transport users) being treated in particular ways. We argue that, similarly to dominant understandings of urban mobility justice, a universalist and seemingly objective definition of dignit`y risks imposing rigid framings on marginalised groups, erasing their own experiences and perspectives, and thus the possibility of them substantively shaping policy and planning decisions. A dignity framework presents an opportunity to feature the moral emotions of transport users, and particularly those who are marginalised on the basis of income, disability, gender and race/ethnicity, among others, more prominently in urban mobility justice. This is especially relevant in the context of transport modes such as urban buses, a historically under-funded and stigmatised mode of transport. Drawing on data gathered through focus group discussions and analysed inductively, we develop these ideas based on experiences of people living in and around Blackburn, an urban area in the North-West of England, UK.