Search results

The dominance of road transport, both on passenger and freight movements, has reached alarming levels in what concerns their negative environmental impacts as well as societal and economic costs. To reverse this trend, a technology-driven approach and a behavioral change attitude need to be pursued. Promising results have been reported in Europe in the reduction of vehicle ownership, due to the introduction of an alternative transport mode known as car sharing. This work evaluates the contribution of car sharing to sustainable transport, based both in a technological shift and a potential behavioral change.

The state of the art on car sharing and policies presents the effects of these systems and how they have been promoted. As those effects can vary according to the geographical area, the users profile, and service characteristics, a worldwide analysis on car sharing systems covering more than 400 cities was performed. Average service indicators were quantified and characterization variables were accounted to those cities’ urban areas. Considering those normalized values, the authors performed an analysis of the car sharing system in Lisbon (Portugal). An initial assessment was made to estimate its current energy and environmental impacts. This outcome was then compared with the environmental and economic effects of using alternative vehicle technologies in car sharing. The results obtained enable a discussion of the more important variables for the success of the system and, consequently, to choose what policy instruments can help car sharing to succeed.

The results of the existing car sharing schemes reveal the positive contribution of car sharing to fill a “mobility gap” in sustainable transport. It works as a complement to other sustainable transport options and it impacts positively both society and car-sharers in terms of mobility costs, environmental, and energy implications. These results are more significant if a technology shift to electric mobility is promoted. Within the case study in Lisbon, the adoption of electric mobility would allow decreases up to 47% and 65% in energy consumption and CO₂ emissions, respectively. Moreover, the present value economic analysis revealed that, these systems will only be economically viable after approximately 7 years. A sensitivity analysis to the economic model was performed showing that the variables having higher influence were cost-related variables (reducing the break-even timeframe from 36% to 57%), such as vehicle purchase cost, insurance, maintenance and tax costs, and fuel cost.

Car sharing systems generally present social benefits to society as it leads to the reduction of car ownership, with all the positive effects that has on a lower demand for parking space, less congestion, reduced local pollutants and emissions. If the technology used by car sharing vehicles shifts from conventional to another type of technology, the effects both for society and car sharers are even more appealing from a social point of view. In the particular case study approached in the chapter, given the small scale of the car sharing network and low usage patterns, the local results have a low social impact at the city scale. A larger promotion of the system either with a more aggressive marketing campaign targeting specific population niches (e.g., environmentally conscious people), larger vehicle and parking availability, or better integration with the city’s public transport system could foster the deployment of the system, similarly to other cities.

Overall, the results obtained from this research work quantify the contribution of car sharing to sustainable transport and highlights the positive effects of promoting a technological shift. These facts reinforce the need for public policies to support the integration of car sharing within the city’s solutions to promote a more sustainable mobility. The successful deployment of car sharing systems can be influenced by policies targeting features such as allocation of parking, the fees and complementarity with public transport, signage and markings, and marketing of social and environmental benefits.

When will individuals accept or reject systems that subordinate them, when will they take actions that will challenge these status hierarchies, and when will such challenges be more intense, overt, and non-normative? Research suggests that individuals often justify and maintain systems that subordinate them, yet we suggest that there are certain boundary conditions that predict when individuals will no longer accept their place in such systems. We propose a model that examines how multiple factors: A sense of power, emotions associated with power, and perceptions of the system's legitimacy and stability – predict when those in low power will act against authority or when they will act to justify and maintain such systems. We also suggest that the level and type of action taken against a hierarchy changes as more of the elements (i.e., sense of power, emotions, perceptions of the status hierarchy) of our model are present. We predict that the actions taken against hierarchies become more overt and non-normative as more of these factors are present.

The construct of global mindset is one that has gained greater attention recently. This chapter focuses on contextual factors that impact the development of a global mindset. Specifically, the focus is on the cultural context of Canada and the factors in the Canadian context that bridge the gap between the theoretical and the practical, and provide both opportunities and challenges related to developing a global mindset in this context. Developing a global mindset on the part of leaders takes place in particular contexts. In this chapter, the distinguishing aspects of the Canadian cultural context are reviewed. Specifically, the Canadian values of (1) individualism/collectivism balance; (2) egalitarianism; (3) caution, diffidence, dependence and non-violence; (4) consensus building; (5) regionalism; (6) multiculturalism; (7) particularism and tolerance; and (8) deference to authority are shown to be important in this cultural context to the development of a global mindset on the part of leaders. While these factors provide many benefits to supporting such development, they also represent unique cultural challenges for leaders.

This essay examines a common assertion among middle-class shoppers in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam, that place of manufacture, rather than brand markers, largely determines the quality of goods. For shoppers in Ho Chi Minh City, unity of place, people, raw materials, and trade secrets at the source – a corporation’s home country – is essential to the production of high quality goods. This stands in contrast to the brand logic through which corporations outsource their production presumably without compromising product quality. By privileging production sites over brands, shoppers in Ho Chi Minh City interpret the recent increase of famous foreign brand name goods in Vietnam as an increase of domestic, rather than foreign goods.

The title of this chapter was inspired by Martin, a prisoner the author met while conducting fieldwork. Martin remarked that, despite the common rhetoric around prisoners ‘maintaining’ their family ties, the reality was that during imprisonment it became more about trying to cling on to them. Imprisonment is perhaps one of the most brutal disruptions a family can undergo, leaving them little choice but to adapt to this enforced transition. Immediately, the spaces where family life can happen narrow severely and become dictated by the prison environment and the plethora of rules that regulate it. The immediate physical separation, onerous restrictions on physical contact and the heavily surveilled nature of family contact during imprisonment constricts space for emotional expression, often rendering romantic relationships clandestine and fatherhood attenuated. Further, the temporal space for family is reduced as limited opportunities for visits lead prisoners to eschew contact with wider family members and prioritise their ‘nuclear’ family. Drawing on empirical research conducted at two male prisons in England and Wales, this chapter then, will detail the complexities of how families navigate this transition and the limitations on what family can mean in the prison environment. The chapter will conclude with the implications of these restrictions for the ultimate transition when prisoners return ‘home’.