Search results

The aim of this chapter is to analyse how the governing capacity of current policy instruments might be affected in futures of smart mobility. In order to explore this issue, the authors make use of the so-called NATO (nodality, authority, treasure, organisation) framework for analysing two contrasting scenarios. The analyses show that the overall governing capacity of many of the policy instruments is strengthened or maintained in both of the scenarios. However, the governing capacity of some policy instruments is reduced, and some seem to need calibration, not least because authorities’ access to and control over data are under question. Future governing capacity hinges on access to data, although all resources are, in one way or another, affected.

A general global wave of public participation is occurring. Students and researchers as well as civil servants, policy-makers, and NGO representatives are encouraged to study, propose, and engage in public participation. New innovative forms of participation are suggested, and experiments in participation are ongoing locally and nationally. Within the transport sector, most studies of participation focus on road infrastructure and other land use changes. However, for other areas within transport, studies are limited and fragmented. Based on this, we see a need for a volume on public participation in transport, aimed at practitioners, students, and researchers, in what are unarguably times of change. The overall aim of the volume is to provide examples of different forms of public participation in transport, which can work as a setting for further analyses and discussions of public participation in transport. Drawing on different cases, eight empirical chapters are presented covering three main themes: grass-roots participation initiatives, participation in unconventional areas, and public participation that throws up unexpected results. In this introductory chapter, we set the scene for later discussions and analyses of public participation in transport. This chapter also provides an overview of the structure and content of the volume.

The point of departure of this book is that smart mobility will only be developed in a desired direction and fulfil societal objectives if it is steered in that direction. The market, left to itself, will most certainly not deliver on these objectives. This message has been conveyed extensively in recent literature, but this book aims to take this discussion one step further by focussing on what governance of smart mobility looks like today and in the future. In this introductory chapter, the authors provide a framework of different understandings of policy instruments, how they are selected, developed and used. After the array of policy instruments within the transport sector has been extensively discussed, the authors turn to discussing a broader understanding of policy instruments found within political science and political sociology. In doing so, this book contributes to the critical scholarship on policy instruments, while exploring the why, the how and the what of policy instruments in relation to smart mobility. The chapter closes with a brief introduction to the structure of the book as well as a description of the content of each chapter.

Public participation is sometimes suggested as a way to establish legitimacy for contentious policies needed to realise a transformation in the transport sector to meet sustainability and climate goals. In this chapter, we first aim to summarise and draw conclusions from each part of the book, not least in relation to the transformative potential of public participation in the sector. The chapter also suggests recommendations for further research in the field. Important topics discussed are the diversity of public participation in transport; limits to participation; the specifics of participation in the field of transport; and the issue of consensus and dissensus. As regards transformation of the sector, public participation is considered a prerequisite, but the book also includes several cases where public participation does not seem to possess a transformational potential. We suggest representative, deliberative forms of participation as a possible solution to overcome dilemmas of representativeness, (lack of) knowledge, and the participation burden. We conclude that public participation is not easy, it has to be prepared and designed carefully to avoid unexpected consequences, and there is currently a need for more experiments and pilot projects on public participation in the field of transport.

In this chapter, the authors will summarise the entire book and look ahead. The aim of this book has been to take the calls for governance of smart mobility one step further by analysing and discussing current and future policy instruments to govern smart mobility. The task has been carried out by discussing the why, how and what of policy instruments. So far, the policy instruments governing smart mobility to a large extent are focussed on understanding this new field of mobility, establishing relations and roles between companies and authorities, and making the field governable. What is lacking in this equation are policy instruments that establish the population as citizens with rights, voices and roles. In order to align the smart mobility transition and the transition towards a sustainable society, the authors consider the development of deliberative citizen participation an important initiative and the authors suggest it as an important field for future research.

After a technocratic period predominating in mobility literature and practice, the rhetoric of participation has been incorporated as a vital condition for the sustainable mobility agenda and, more recently, for achieving transport and mobility justice. Considering the social significance of mobility beyond simple movement and participation as a term that can accommodate a wide range of motivations and implications, this chapter explores the complex interplay of participation and mobility in the global south context. To this end, this study adopts the spaces for participation framework to investigate the multiple roles of participation in urban mobility. With a focus on the Brazilian context, this chapter uncovers the nature, dynamics, and reach of invited and claimed spaces for participation in mobility planning. Using Rio de Janeiro as the case study site, the chapter examines the invited spaces for participation enabled by the city's mobility plan and analyses whether marginalised populations engage with and/or create further spaces for participation. This was achieved through document analysis, online photo-elicitation interviews with residents of Favela Santa Marta as well as semi-structured interviews with municipal government professionals and representatives of non-government organisations involved in the development of Rio's mobility plan. The chapter discusses the interconnectedness or lack of, within invited and claimed spaces for participation and the multiplicity of meanings attributed to participation and mobility by different actors. The chapter closes with a reflection on what this means for participatory mobility planning in Brazil but which may apply to similar regions in the global south.

Unprecedented levels of investment in transit and transit-oriented development in Los Angeles County have not resulted in gains for transit-dependent populations or overall higher ridership for that matter. They have instead saddled them with inordinate cost burdens and displacement pressures. Yet racialised, low-income communities that rely on transit are far from passive victims. Rather, they are participating in advocacy campaigns that penetrate decision-making venues and procedures and co-create institutional practices, policy priorities, and public and private investments that serve their interests and build a Los Angeles that is more widely accessible and affordable. This chapter presents a case study of the Alliance for Community Transit-Los Angeles (ACT-LA), a regional coalition of over 40 community-based organisations at the helm of direct-action policy campaigns and participatory planning initiatives to advance transit justice and equitable transit-oriented communities (TOC). After examining ACT-LA's origins in the LA-based movement for community benefits agreements, the analysis focuses on how ACT-LA has combined political mobilisation for ballot-box measures with participatory policy-making and planning processes to advance just, equitable, sustainable transit systems, and TOC. The concluding discussion considers the implications of the ACT-LA case for reformulating participatory policy-making and planning around transportation and land use to further equity and climate goals.

Modelling has been a mainstay of conventional planning support tools (PSTs) since the 1960s and is instrumental in transport and land use planning decision-making. Numerous studies have been conducted to model the potential impacts of emerging vehicle automation and sharing technologies. A systematic review of recent modelling studies of autonomous and shared vehicles in the research literature examines the extent of their contribution to ‘smart’ mobility knowledge. The findings suggest a limited knowledge base from which to support future planning. PSTs that can offer more pluralistic, discursive, and transparent methods in order to understand and proactively shape a transition to a planned urban future are also needed.