People, Cities, and (Smart) Transport

In our new paper with Maarten Kroesen and Bert van Wee, we explore the extent to which experts’ views change over time, focusing on the case of AVs. Experts from Europe ( WISE-ACT COST Action ) participated in our panel survey (2018-2021). We conclude that: Expert opinions towards AVs are generally favourable (e.g. about effects on congestion, greenhouse gas emissions and traffic accidents).  Experts become less optimistic about AVs over time (particularly about the effects on traffic capacity). Two clusters of experts with diverging views on AVs (positive vs negative) were identified. Experts are not quite confident in assessing systemic, particularly indirect (land use, economic and public health), societal relevant impacts of AVs. Factors that could explain these outcomes include: Experts, especially those taking a specialist rather than a generalist approach, might not be confident in assessing multiple AV impacts simultaneously that cross the boundaries of their expertise. Experts

In our new paper we review, conceptualize and suggest future directions for research and policy development on the diverse environmental and energy-related dimensions of automated mobility for road, rail, water, and air passenger transport.   Our conclusions suggest the automation-connectivity-electrification-sharing-multimodality nexus as the only way forward for vehicle automation to reach its pro-environmental and resource-saving potential. Other findings include: The literature tends to narrow down the terms CAVs and AVs to car-equivalents. Simulations and early AV stage experiments have generated conflicting results that do not reach a clear consensus on whether automation can yield genuine benefits for the environment. In all likelihood, the uptake of vehicle automation in isolation, and with an emphasis on autonomous cars, will result in moderate reductions in GHG emissions per mile that would be critically outweighed by a potentially high growth in VMT. The nexus-based transiti

Assessment of transport investments relies primarily on travel time savings and monetary values. The subjective travel experience of the traveller is rarely accounted for.   Our new paper in Transport Reviews introduces the conceptual framework of worthwhile travel time that is grounded on the traveller’s perception of three forms of value emerging from existing literature: enjoyment, productivity, and health.   Our conceptual framework suggests that experience factors (i.e. travel conditions as experienced by the traveller) can enable travel activities (i.e. the trip itself or activities on-the move), which in turn unlock the values of enjoyment, productivity and fitness that influence the perceived worthwhileness of a trip to a different degree each.   Initial evidence suggests that bicycle, walking, train travellers and car passengers experience the highest levels of travel time worthwhileness. Car drivers, users of other forms of public transport (e.g. subway, local bus) and plane

In our new paper "Have a good trip! Expanding our concepts of the quality of everyday travelling with flow theory", we explore how flow theory could enrich and deepen our understanding of the positive value of travel/being on the move. Flow is an experience that occurs when a person is fully immersed in doing something that provides, level of challenge enough to keep the person concentrated, avoiding boredom or distraction. This experience is profoundly enjoyable, even if mundane, and valuable in its own right.    Here is a nice video by FightMediocrity summarizing flow theory in 5 minutes. And Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi talking about flow in a TED Talk.     In our paper, we conclude that:  Most modes offer the potential for experiencing flow in different degrees by triggering mental states of awareness, increased creativity, concentration, disregard for the sense of self, and slowing down on time.  Everyday travelling offers rich challenges and feedback mechanisms that indiv

Automated vehicles (AVs) are often presented by popular media, automotive and technology companies as an inevitable reality of the near future associated with a positive revolution in individual mobility (e.g. increased road safety, reduced congestion, less travel time cost). However, thus far, research has focused predominantly on technical and operational aspects as well as on short-term implications (e.g. traffic flow) of the automated vehicles transition. An introduction of AVs driven solely by the technology and business development might ignore the socio-technical nature of the transport system and thus be in conflict with planning objectives such as the promotion of public and non-motorized transport, the reduction of negative externalities of motorized transport and the development of a healthy and socially inclusive transport system. Our new paper presents a research agenda on the societal dimension of the AVs transition. We identify key research shifts from the mainstream tra

Natural and technical sciences were funded 770% higher than social sciences and humanities (SSH) for climate change related issues between 1990 and 2018 at a global level. Social science research on climate change mitigation in particular, received only 0.12% of all funding during the same period (Overland & Sovacool, 2020). However, responding to climate emergency will require fundamental changes at individual and societal level (i.e. attitudes, norms, incentives, politics), which are the main focus of social science research (e.g. anthropology, economics, education, international relations, human geography, development studies, legal studies, media studies, political science, psychology, and sociology). The misallocation of funding regarding social sciences and humanities is also reflected in the transport field, which is one of the main contributors to climate change. Together with 23 SSH experts on transport and mobility from across Europe, encompassing diverse SSH disciplines,

Is micro-mobility (MM) sustainable? In our new book chapter in the Handbook of Sustainable Transport (edited by Carey Curtis) we provide an overview of MM implications for accessibility, air pollution, safety, physical activity and subjective wellbeing. We conclude that MM sustainability potential should not be automatically assumed and could vary among the different MM modes. We suggest a set of regulatory actions with regards to permission, operation and monitoring of MM systems that could enhance their social sustainability.  Abstract: This chapter first defines and then explores the social sustainability potential of MM by providing an overview of MM implications for accessibility, air pollution, safety, physical activity and subjective wellbeing. Our results show that MM could enhance accessibility, yet costs, physical ability and technical skills might exclude certain social groups from using such modes. MM modes have no or limited direct CO2 emissions but environm