IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v99y2020icp175-185.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Smartness-induced transport inequality: Privacy concern, lacking knowledge of smartphone use and unequal access to transport information

Author

Listed:
  • Zhang, Mengzhu
  • Zhao, Pengjun
  • Qiao, Si

Abstract

In the context of continuous worldwide practices in building smart cities and promoting smart mobilities, the literature on the reproduction of transport inequality caused by unequal access to smartphone use is gradually increasing. In addition to physical access to smartphone use, this study contributes a new perspective from the privacy concern on (motivational access) and lack of knowledge (skill access) in using location-based service (LBS) to the understanding of unequal access to transport information during the transition to a smart city. Using a two-stage modelling approach to a dataset collected from two Chinese cities, the study found that women are vulnerable to restricted access to smart transport information due to the privacy concern on and lack of knowledge of using LBS. People aged over 50 tend to be restricted to the traditional source of transport information due to the lack of knowledge of using LBS. Moreover, city-sensitive factors should be considered. Muslims in Urumqi are vulnerable to restricted access to smart transport information compared with Han Chinese because of the lack of knowledge of using LBS. In Wuhan, manual workers/attendants are vulnerable to restricted access to smart transport information compared with those working in offices for the same reason. The lack of knowledge affects the transformation from a traditional source user to a smart source user, whereas the privacy concern restrains individuals from using multiple smart sources. From these findings, policy recommendations for mitigating the smartness-induced unequal access to transport information are proposed.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhang, Mengzhu & Zhao, Pengjun & Qiao, Si, 2020. "Smartness-induced transport inequality: Privacy concern, lacking knowledge of smartphone use and unequal access to transport information," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 175-185.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:99:y:2020:i:c:p:175-185
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.08.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X20300202
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.08.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sendy Farag & Glenn Lyons, 2010. "Explaining public transport information use when a car is available: attitude theory empirically investigated," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(6), pages 897-913, November.
    2. Nyblom, Åsa, 2014. "Making plans or “just thinking about the trip”? Understanding people’s travel planning in practice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 30-39.
    3. Groth, Sören, 2019. "Multimodal divide: Reproduction of transport poverty in smart mobility trends," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 56-71.
    4. Bob Jessop & Ngai-Ling Sum, 2000. "An Entrepreneurial City in Action: Hong Kong's Emerging Strategies in and for (Inter)Urban Competition," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 37(12), pages 2287-2313, November.
    5. Rayle, Lisa & Dai, Danielle & Chan, Nelson & Cervero, Robert & Shaheen, Susan PhD, 2016. "Just A Better Taxi? A Survey-Based Comparison of Taxis, Transit, and Ridesourcing Services in San Francisco," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt60v8r346, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    6. Mulley, Corinne & Clifton, Geoffrey Tilden & Balbontin, Camila & Ma, Liang, 2017. "Information for travelling: Awareness and usage of the various sources of information available to public transport users in NSW," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 111-132.
    7. Varghese, Varun & Jana, Arnab, 2019. "Interrelationships between ICT, social disadvantage, and activity participation behaviour: A case of Mumbai, India," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 248-267.
    8. Johanna Kopp & Regine Gerike & Kay Axhausen, 2015. "Do sharing people behave differently? An empirical evaluation of the distinctive mobility patterns of free-floating car-sharing members," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 449-469, May.
    9. Martin, Elliot W & Shaheen, Susan A, 2011. "Greenhouse Gas Emission Impacts of Carsharing in North America," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt6wr90040, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    10. Trencher, Gregory, 2019. "Towards the smart city 2.0: Empirical evidence of using smartness as a tool for tackling social challenges," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 117-128.
    11. Rayle, Lisa & Dai, Danielle & Chan, Nelson & Cervero, Robert & Shaheen, Susan, 2016. "Just a better taxi? A survey-based comparison of taxis, transit, and ridesourcing services in San Francisco," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 168-178.
    12. Susan Shaheen & Nelson Chan & Helen Micheaux, 2015. "One-way carsharing’s evolution and operator perspectives from the Americas," Transportation, Springer, vol. 42(3), pages 519-536, May.
    13. Shaheen, Susan PhD & Chan, Nelson & Micheaux, Helen, 2015. "One-Way Carsharing's Evolution and Operator Perspectives from the Americas," Institute of Transportation Studies, Research Reports, Working Papers, Proceedings qt83s1z8j4, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Berkeley.
    14. Lucas, Karen, 2012. "Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 105-113.
    15. Costain, Cindy & Ardron, Carolyn & Habib, Khandker Nurul, 2012. "Synopsis of users’ behaviour of a carsharing program: A case study in Toronto," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 46(3), pages 421-434.
    16. Jinwei Cao & Andrea Everard, 2008. "User Attitude Towards Instant Messaging: The Effect of Espoused National Cultural Values on Awareness and Privacy," Journal of Global Information Technology Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 30-57, April.
    17. Zhao, Pengjun & Li, Shengxiao, 2017. "Bicycle-metro integration in a growing city: The determinants of cycling as a transfer mode in metro station areas in Beijing," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 46-60.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Mora, Luca & Gerli, Paolo & Ardito, Lorenzo & Messeni Petruzzelli, Antonio, 2023. "Smart city governance from an innovation management perspective: Theoretical framing, review of current practices, and future research agenda," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    2. Qiao, Si & Yeh, Anthony Gar-On, 2021. "Is ride-hailing a valuable means of transport in newly developed areas under TOD-oriented urbanization in China? Evidence from Chengdu City," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Kwok-kin Fung & Shirley Suet-lin Hung & Daniel W. L. Lai & Michelle H. Y. Shum & Hong-wang Fung & Langjie He, 2023. "Access to Information and Communication Technology, Digital Skills, and Perceived Well-Being among Older Adults in Hong Kong," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(13), pages 1-11, June.
    4. Zhang, Mengzhu & Zhao, Pengjun, 2021. "Literature review on urban transport equity in transitional China: From empirical studies to universal knowledge," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    5. Butler, Luke & Yigitcanlar, Tan & Paz, Alexander & Areed, Wala, 2022. "How can smart mobility bridge the first/last mile gap? Empirical evidence on public attitudes from Australia," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    6. Lythreatis, Sophie & Singh, Sanjay Kumar & El-Kassar, Abdul-Nasser, 2022. "The digital divide: A review and future research agenda," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    7. Mwesiumo, Deodat & Halpern, Nigel & Bråthen, Svein & Budd, Thomas & Suau-Sanchez, Pere, 2023. "Perceived benefits as a driver and necessary condition for the willingness of air passengers to provide personal data for non-mandatory digital services at airports," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 171(C).
    8. Qiao, Si & Zhang, Mengzhu & Yeh, Anthony Gar-On, 2023. "Mind the gender gap in ride-hailing from the demand side," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    9. Sikai Chen & Shuya Zong & Tiantian Chen & Zilin Huang & Yanshen Chen & Samuel Labi, 2023. "A Taxonomy for Autonomous Vehicles Considering Ambient Road Infrastructure," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-27, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Groth, Sören, 2019. "Multimodal divide: Reproduction of transport poverty in smart mobility trends," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 56-71.
    2. Pan, Alexandra Q. & Martin, Elliot W. & Shaheen, Susan A., 2022. "Is access enough? A spatial and demographic analysis of one-way carsharing policies and practice," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 103-115.
    3. Golalikhani, Masoud & Oliveira, Beatriz Brito & Carravilla, Maria Antónia & Oliveira, José Fernando & Antunes, António Pais, 2021. "Carsharing: A review of academic literature and business practices toward an integrated decision-support framework," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    4. Kent, Jennifer & Dowling, Robyn & Maalsen, Sophia, 2017. "Catalysts for transport transitions: Bridging the gap between disruptions and change," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 200-207.
    5. Tyndall, Justin, 2019. "Free-floating carsharing and extemporaneous public transit substitution," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 21-27.
    6. Maria Juschten & Timo Ohnmacht & Vu Thi Thao & Regine Gerike & Reinhard Hössinger, 2019. "Carsharing in Switzerland: identifying new markets by predicting membership based on data on supply and demand," Transportation, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 1171-1194, August.
    7. Zijlstra, Toon & Durand, Anne & Hoogendoorn-Lanser, Sascha & Harms, Lucas, 2020. "Early adopters of Mobility-as-a-Service in the Netherlands," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 197-209.
    8. Circella, Giovanni & Alemi, Farzad & Tiedeman, Kate & Handy, Susan & Mokhtarian, Patricia, 2018. "The Adoption of Shared Mobility in California and Its Relationship with Other Components of Travel Behavior," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt1kq5d07p, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    9. Weibo Li & Maria Kamargianni, 2020. "Steering short-term demand for car-sharing: a mode choice and policy impact analysis by trip distance," Transportation, Springer, vol. 47(5), pages 2233-2265, October.
    10. Xiaowei Chen & Hongyu Zheng & Ze Wang & Xiqun Chen, 2021. "Exploring impacts of on-demand ridesplitting on mobility via real-world ridesourcing data and questionnaires," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1541-1561, August.
    11. Sweet, Matthias N. & Scott, Darren M., 2021. "Shared mobility adoption from 2016 to 2018 in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area: Demographic or geographic diffusion?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    12. Rotaris, Lucia & Danielis, Romeo & Maltese, Ila, 2019. "Carsharing use by college students: The case of Milan and Rome," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 239-251.
    13. Wen, Xiao & Ranjbari, Andisheh & Qi, Fan & Clewlow, Regina R. & MacKenzie, Don, 2021. "Challenges in credibly estimating the travel demand effects of mobility services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 224-235.
    14. Li, Shengxiao(Alex) & Zhai, Wei & Jiao, Junfeng & Wang, Chao (Kenneth), 2022. "Who loses and who wins in the ride-hailing era? A case study of Austin, Texas," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 130-138.
    15. Lyons, Glenn, 2018. "Getting smart about urban mobility – Aligning the paradigms of smart and sustainable," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 4-14.
    16. Quirós, Cipriano & Portela, Javier & Marín, Raquel, 2021. "Differentiated models in the collaborative transport economy: A mixture analysis for Blablacar and Uber," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    17. Ganjar Alfian & Jongtae Rhee & Yong-Shin Kang & Byungun Yoon, 2015. "Performance Comparison of Reservation Based and Instant Access One-Way Car Sharing Service through Discrete Event Simulation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-25, September.
    18. Sörensen, Leif & Bossert, Andreas & Jokinen, Jani-Pekka & Schlüter, Jan, 2021. "How much flexibility does rural public transport need? – Implications from a fully flexible DRT system," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 5-20.
    19. Aguilera-García, Álvaro & Gomez, Juan & Antoniou, Constantinos & Vassallo, José Manuel, 2022. "Behavioral factors impacting adoption and frequency of use of carsharing: A tale of two European cities," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 55-72.
    20. Teng Yu & Yajun Zhang & Ai Ping Teoh & Anchao Wang & Chengliang Wang, 2023. "Factors Influencing University Students’ Behavioral Intention to Use Electric Car-Sharing Services in Guangzhou, China," SAGE Open, , vol. 13(4), pages 21582440231, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:99:y:2020:i:c:p:175-185. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.