IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v20y2023i4p3196-d1065633.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Exploring the Intention to Adopt Sustainable Mobility Modes of Transport among Young University Students

Author

Listed:
  • Carlos J. Rodríguez-Rad

    (Department of Business Administration and Marketing, Universidad de Sevilla, 41004 Sevilla, Spain)

  • María-Ángeles Revilla-Camacho

    (Department of Business Administration and Marketing, Universidad de Sevilla, 41004 Sevilla, Spain)

  • María-Elena Sánchez-del-Río-Vázquez

    (Department of Business Administration and Marketing, Universidad de Sevilla, 41004 Sevilla, Spain)

Abstract

This research arises from the need to accelerate the diffusion of sustainable mobility and the call for research on this topic. The Sustainable Development Goal 11 of the 2030 Agenda, the scientific articles on sustainable mobility systems and the advance of micro-mobility, shared mobility, Mobility on Demand (MOD) or Mobility as a Service (MaaS) in recent years manifest the importance of sustainable urban development. Given this reality, this paper explores the elements and factors that condition the adoption of a sustainable mobility mode of transport. An empirical study was carried out in the city of Seville through an electronic questionnaire delivered to university students. Our exploratory approach is an innovative point of view that can help us to better understand the reasons for the successful adoption of sustainable mobility modes of transport. The most relevant results of this study indicate that the user’s perceived impacts on sustainability and customer forces influence the adoption of a mode of transport by citizens, whereas the product forces seem not to influence thTABLEis. Therefore, cities and companies that have put their emphasis exclusively on improving mobility products and services, without taking citizens into account, are less likely to succeed. Additionally, governments should consider that economic issues or environmental concerns of citizens act as drivers of innovation in urban mobility.

Suggested Citation

  • Carlos J. Rodríguez-Rad & María-Ángeles Revilla-Camacho & María-Elena Sánchez-del-Río-Vázquez, 2023. "Exploring the Intention to Adopt Sustainable Mobility Modes of Transport among Young University Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(4), pages 1-16, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3196-:d:1065633
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3196/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/20/4/3196/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Böcker, Lars & Anderson, Ellinor & Uteng, Tanu Priya & Throndsen, Torstein, 2020. "Bike sharing use in conjunction to public transport: Exploring spatiotemporal, age and gender dimensions in Oslo, Norway," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 389-401.
    2. Reibstein, David J, 1978. "The Prediction of Individual Probabilities of Brand Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 5(3), pages 163-168, December.
    3. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    4. Luis F. Luque-Vega & Miriam A. Carlos-Mancilla & Verónica G. Payán-Quiñónez & Emmanuel Lopez-Neri, 2020. "Smart Cities Oriented Project Planning and Evaluation Methodology Driven by Citizen Perception—IoT Smart Mobility Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    5. Cayetano Medina-Molina & Noemí Pérez-Macías, 2022. "The Identification of Causal Mechanisms in Sustainable Urban Transitions—A Systematic Approach to Case Selection," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 10(14), pages 1-16, July.
    6. Gary C. Moore & Izak Benbasat, 1991. "Development of an Instrument to Measure the Perceptions of Adopting an Information Technology Innovation," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 2(3), pages 192-222, September.
    7. Mariano Gallo & Mario Marinelli, 2020. "Sustainable Mobility: A Review of Possible Actions and Policies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-39, September.
    8. Andrzej Bąk & Elżbieta Nawrocka & Daria E. Jaremen, 2022. "“Sustainability” as a Motive for Choosing Shared-Mobility Services: The Case of Polish Consumers of Uber Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-21, May.
    9. Ho, Chinh Q. & Mulley, Corinne & Hensher, David A., 2020. "Public preferences for mobility as a service: Insights from stated preference surveys," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 70-90.
    10. Goldman, Todd & Gorham, Roger, 2006. "Sustainable urban transport: Four innovative directions," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 261-273.
    11. Wang, Yacan & Douglas, Matthew & Hazen, Benjamin, 2021. "Diffusion of public bicycle systems: Investigating influences of users’ perceived risk and switching intention," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 1-13.
    12. María-Elena Sánchez del Río-Vázquez & Carlos J. Rodríguez-Rad & María-Ángeles Revilla-Camacho, 2019. "Relevance of Social, Economic, and Environmental Impacts on Residents’ Satisfaction with the Public Administration of Tourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-15, November.
    13. Deakin, Elizabeth, 2001. "Sustainable Development & Sustainable Transportation: Strategies for Economic Prosperity, Environmental Quality, and Equity," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt8mf1z8mh, University of California Transportation Center.
    14. Marko Sarstedt & Jun-Hwa Cheah, 2019. "Partial least squares structural equation modeling using SmartPLS: a software review," Journal of Marketing Analytics, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(3), pages 196-202, September.
    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. Swathi Palanichamy & Priyakrushna Mohanty & James Kennell, 2024. "Shared Mobility and India’s Generation Z: Environmental Consciousness, Risks, and Attitudes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(12), pages 1-17, June.
    2. Mariusz Korzeń & Maciej Kruszyna, 2023. "Modified Ant Colony Optimization as a Means for Evaluating the Variants of the City Railway Underground Section," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(6), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Raziye Peker & Mustafa Sinan Yardim & Kadir Berkhan Akalin, 2024. "Factors Influencing Transportation Mode Preferences for Educational Trips Among Dormitory Resident University Students in Kütahya, Türkiye," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(22), pages 1-13, November.

    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. Medina-Molina, Cayetano & Pérez-Macías, Noemí & Fernández-Fernádez, José Luis, 2023. "The use of micromobility in different contexts. An explanation through the multilevel perspective and QCA," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    2. Hyeongjin Ahn & Eunil Park, 2022. "For sustainable development in the transportation sector: Determinants of acceptance of sustainable transportation using the innovation diffusion theory and technology acceptance model," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(5), pages 1169-1183, October.
    3. Paul Juinn Bing Tan, 2013. "Applying the UTAUT to Understand Factors Affecting the Use of English E-Learning Websites in Taiwan," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(4), pages 21582440135, October.
    4. Hajiheydari, Nastaran & Delgosha, Mohammad Soltani & Olya, Hossein, 2021. "Scepticism and resistance to IoMT in healthcare: Application of behavioural reasoning theory with configurational perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    5. Wang, Guoqiang & Tan, Garry Wei-Han & Yuan, Yunpeng & Ooi, Keng-Boon & Dwivedi, Yogesh K., 2022. "Revisiting TAM2 in behavioral targeting advertising: A deep learning-based dual-stage SEM-ANN analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    6. Riffat Ara Zannat Tama & Md Mahmudul Hoque & Ying Liu & Mohammad Jahangir Alam & Mark Yu, 2023. "An Application of Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) to Examining Farmers’ Behavioral Attitude and Intention towards Conservation Agriculture in Bangladesh," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-22, February.
    7. Petschnig, Martin & Heidenreich, Sven & Spieth, Patrick, 2014. "Innovative alternatives take action – Investigating determinants of alternative fuel vehicle adoption," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 68-83.
    8. Sanjeev Verma, 2015. "Harnessing the Benefit of Social Networking Sites for Intentional Social Action: Determinants and Challenges," Vision, , vol. 19(2), pages 104-111, June.
    9. Queiroz, Maciel M. & Fosso Wamba, Samuel, 2019. "Blockchain adoption challenges in supply chain: An empirical investigation of the main drivers in India and the USA," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 70-82.
    10. Sarv Devaraj & Ming Fan & Rajiv Kohli, 2002. "Antecedents of B2C Channel Satisfaction and Preference: Validating e-Commerce Metrics," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 13(3), pages 316-333, September.
    11. Bierstaker, James & Janvrin, Diane & Lowe, D. Jordan, 2014. "What factors influence auditors' use of computer-assisted audit techniques?," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 67-74.
    12. Dalal Bamufleh, 2023. "Modelling the Acceptance and Use of Electronic Medical Records from Patients’ Point of View: Evidence from Saudi Arabia," International Journal of Business and Management, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 16(7), pages 1-12, February.
    13. Gansser, Oliver Alexander & Reich, Christina Stefanie, 2021. "A new acceptance model for artificial intelligence with extensions to UTAUT2: An empirical study in three segments of application," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    14. Keen, C. & Wetzels, M., 2001. "Exploring the Preference Structure for Online and Traditional Retail Formats," Working Papers 01.18, Eindhoven Center for Innovation Studies.
    15. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2006_032 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Sabi, Humphrey M. & Uzoka, Faith-Michael E. & Langmia, Kehbuma & Njeh, Felix N., 2016. "Conceptualizing a model for adoption of cloud computing in education," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 183-191.
    17. Guych Nuryyev & Yu-Ping Wang & Jennet Achyldurdyyeva & Bih-Shiaw Jaw & Yi-Shien Yeh & Hsien-Tang Lin & Li-Fan Wu, 2020. "Blockchain Technology Adoption Behavior and Sustainability of the Business in Tourism and Hospitality SMEs: An Empirical Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-21, February.
    18. Donmez, Birsen & Matson, Zannah & Savan, Beth & Farahani, Ellie & Photiadis, David & Dafoe, Joanna, 2014. "Interruption management and office norms: Technology adoption lessons from a product commercialization study," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 741-750.
    19. Attié, Elodie & Meyer-Waarden, Lars, 2022. "The acceptance and usage of smart connected objects according to adoption stages: an enhanced technology acceptance model integrating the diffusion of innovation, uses and gratification and privacy ca," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    20. Viswanath Venkatesh, 2000. "Determinants of Perceived Ease of Use: Integrating Control, Intrinsic Motivation, and Emotion into the Technology Acceptance Model," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(4), pages 342-365, December.
    21. Gao, Tao (Tony) & Rohm, Andrew J. & Sultan, Fareena & Pagani, Margherita, 2013. "Consumers un-tethered: A three-market empirical study of consumers' mobile marketing acceptance," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 66(12), pages 2536-2544.

    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:gam:jijerp:v:20:y:2023:i:4:p:3196-:d:1065633. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.