Sustainable urban mobility: One definition, different stakeholders' opinions

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F44555601%3A13510%2F20%3A43895537" target="_blank" >RIV/44555601:13510/20:43895537 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11310/20:10416356

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920920306520?via%3Dihub" target="_blank" >https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920920306520?via%3Dihub</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102465" target="_blank" >10.1016/j.trd.2020.102465</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Sustainable urban mobility: One definition, different stakeholders' opinions

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

During recent decades, the debate on how to sustain urban mobility has accelerated. Transport decision-making has been more reflective of sustainability issues and quality of life in cities; this process has especially accelerated with the setting of modern urban mobility planning concepts, substantially focusing on transport demand regulation and management, and Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans taking over the role of cities&apos; primary transport-related strategic documents. The approaches to sustainable mobility visioning and planning differ within cities, as do their key stakeholders&apos; opinions. Our research aims to reveal the main shared viewpoints on the preferred paths towards sustainable urban mobility. We use the Q method, which is a statistical method to study subjectivity. It enables determination of characteristic shared viewpoints on a particular subject. A qualitative analysis assessing subjective opinions is combined with the quantitative approach of a factor analysis of statements ranked by respondents. The study was undertaken on 36 carefully selected stakeholders situated within the Czech Republic. Our results indicate that even stakeholders sharing the same definition of sustainable urban mobility may substantially differ in regard to their ideas on how to achieve it. Furthermore, we show that some of the attitudes expressed and measures appreciated by our respondents would not be recognised as sustainable by environmentalists. There is still a wide gap between sustainable mobility theory and its implementation in practice. All these findings represent barriers to sustainable mobility development in urban areas. Therefore, the paper also conveys relevant policy implications.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Sustainable urban mobility: One definition, different stakeholders' opinions

Popis výsledku anglicky

During recent decades, the debate on how to sustain urban mobility has accelerated. Transport decision-making has been more reflective of sustainability issues and quality of life in cities; this process has especially accelerated with the setting of modern urban mobility planning concepts, substantially focusing on transport demand regulation and management, and Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans taking over the role of cities&apos; primary transport-related strategic documents. The approaches to sustainable mobility visioning and planning differ within cities, as do their key stakeholders&apos; opinions. Our research aims to reveal the main shared viewpoints on the preferred paths towards sustainable urban mobility. We use the Q method, which is a statistical method to study subjectivity. It enables determination of characteristic shared viewpoints on a particular subject. A qualitative analysis assessing subjective opinions is combined with the quantitative approach of a factor analysis of statements ranked by respondents. The study was undertaken on 36 carefully selected stakeholders situated within the Czech Republic. Our results indicate that even stakeholders sharing the same definition of sustainable urban mobility may substantially differ in regard to their ideas on how to achieve it. Furthermore, we show that some of the attitudes expressed and measures appreciated by our respondents would not be recognised as sustainable by environmentalists. There is still a wide gap between sustainable mobility theory and its implementation in practice. All these findings represent barriers to sustainable mobility development in urban areas. Therefore, the paper also conveys relevant policy implications.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50703 - Transport planning and social aspects of transport (transport engineering to be 2.1)

Projekt

<a href="/cs/project/EF17_048%2F0007435" target="_blank" >EF17_048/0007435: Smart City - Smart Region - Smart Community</a><br>

Návaznosti

P - Projekt vyzkumu a vyvoje financovany z verejnych zdroju (s odkazem do CEP)

Rok uplatnění

2020

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment

ISSN

1361-9209

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

87

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

October 2020

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

14

Strana od-do

1-14

Kód UT WoS článku

000581017900004

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85089156592