## 5 Results and Discussion
### Index of Social Transport Needs Covered  
The Index of Social Transport Needs Covered (ISTNC) was calculated and mapped (Figure 6) to assess how adequately SITEUR covers or not social transport needs (STN). Positive values of ISTNC can be interpreted as STN adequately covered by SITEUR in the GS. Negative values refer to GS where STN are not covered by SITEUR. As stated by [PERSON] and [PERSON] [41], most of the population in the periphery of the GMA have a limited choice of quality means of transport. According to current mobility public policy [75], results highlight areas where mass transport lines should address STN, e.g., the BRT line, _MiMacro Periferico_, currently under construction. This future line may serve some of the west and eastern areas identified in this study as not covered by SITEUR. Figure 5: Index of Social Transport Needs. Source: Authors, based on [42; 43; 45; 46; 47; 48; 49; 50]. As shown in Table 4, the proportion of the area where SITEUR exceeds the social needs of transportation is very small. This is due to the scarcity of the mass transportation lines within the system. Despite SITEUR addressing social transport needs in areas where more than half of the GMA population live, it contributes to only 3% of the total modal split. One possible reason is the lack of rare-integration between private buses and SITEUR. The bus network is closer than MPTS to most of the dwellings with higher STN (Figures 3 and 5). It can be assumed that users will prioritize their economy and will sacrifice journey quality and duration, thus not choosing to switch their mode of transport. In this context, target 11.2 SDG is far from being achieved. After analysing data with and without the recent LRT Line 3, results show that it barely increases provision by 2% for the number of inhabitants with high transport needs living in areas already served by the SITEUR. The alignment of the line mainly overlaps areas already over-provided by SITEUR. Surprisingly, the new LRT Line 3 will contribute very little to the difference between SITEUR coverage and the enormous social transportation \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c} \hline \hline \multirow{2}{*}{**ISTNC**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Inhabitants**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Area**} \\ \cline{2-6}  & **Value** & **\%** & **GS** & **Ha** & **\%** \\ \hline IMTP \textless{} ISTN & 1,910,203 & 42\% & 511 & 293,265 & 87\% \\ IMTP \textgreater{} ISTN & 2,588,751 & 58\% & 1323 & 45,032 & 13\% \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Population and Surface related to Social Transport Needs Covered by SITEUR. Figure 6: Index of Social Transport Needs Covered. Source: Authors, based on [42, 43, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50]. needs. This is regrettable, given the large public investment and the social and economic construction costs, i.e., costs of Line 1 exceeded more than one hundred million dollars [76]. Figure 7 describes the percentage of the population with social transport needs. It shows the distribution of the levels of SITEUR's provision and of social transport needs in the 1834 GS, ranged by GS quintiles. Ideally, the transport provision curve is proportional, showing a high percentage of the population at the \"very high\" provision level. In contrast, the ideal curve of the STN starts with a high percentage of the population for the lower levels of the index and a decreasing percentage of the population as it approaches the high levels of the index. However, the findings of this research reveal that the curve of the STN is almost inverse to the ideal. Furthermore, it presents a sharp slope in the last segment. This means that the highest STN are concentrated in the last quintile of geographic sections. These findings confirm the high inequality of the distribution of social transport needs and transport provision in the GMA. Figure 7 also shows that the percentage of inhabitants with less than adequate transport provision is almost double that of people served with very high values of the index.