IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i8p2836-d162934.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Indicators for Promising Accessibility and Mobility Services

Author

Listed:
  • Tina Ringenson

    (Strategic Sustainability Studies, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Peter Arnfalk

    (The International Institute for Industrial Environmental Economics, Lund University, 221 00 Lund, Sweden)

  • Anna Kramers

    (Strategic Sustainability Studies, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

  • Liridona Sopjani

    (Integrated Product Development, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, 100 44 Stockholm, Sweden)

Abstract

Cities are increasingly facing major transportation challenges, and new sustainable solutions are needed. New ICT-enabled services can be part of solving the problems, including both improving and finding new transportation services and providing digital access to different services. It is important to identify which services have the best potential for environmental benefits (e.g., travel reduction leading to lesser emissions), economic viability and spread. Such identification can be carried out with the help of indicators. This article uses four types of new accessibility services to test out a previously formulated set of indicators and suggest changes to make them more useful. Using common indicators for transportation and digital accessibility services seem to support collecting and condensing information about the services and simplifies understanding their benefits and challenges. However, a challenge for this approach is finding indicators that are both specific and broad enough to be useful.

Suggested Citation

  • Tina Ringenson & Peter Arnfalk & Anna Kramers & Liridona Sopjani, 2018. "Indicators for Promising Accessibility and Mobility Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-19, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2836-:d:162934
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2836/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/8/2836/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Martin, Chris J., 2016. "The sharing economy: A pathway to sustainability or a nightmarish form of neoliberal capitalism?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 149-159.
    2. Geels, Frank W., 2012. "A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 471-482.
    3. Lu-Yi Qiu & Ling-Yun He, 2018. "Bike Sharing and the Economy, the Environment, and Health-Related Externalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-10, April.
    4. Jens Malmodin & Dag Lundén & Åsa Moberg & Greger Andersson & Mikael Nilsson, 2014. "Life Cycle Assessment of ICT," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 18(6), pages 829-845, December.
    5. O’Brien, Oliver & Cheshire, James & Batty, Michael, 2014. "Mining bicycle sharing data for generating insights into sustainable transport systems," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 262-273.
    6. Mingyang Du & Lin Cheng, 2018. "Better Understanding the Characteristics and Influential Factors of Different Travel Patterns in Free-Floating Bike Sharing: Evidence from Nanjing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-14, April.
    7. Banister, David, 2011. "Cities, mobility and climate change," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(6), pages 1538-1546.
    8. Peraphan Jittrapirom & Valeria Caiati & Anna-Maria Feneri & Shima Ebrahimigharehbaghi & María J. Alonso González & Jishnu Narayan, 2017. "Mobility as a Service: A Critical Review of Definitions, Assessments of Schemes, and Key Challenges," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 2(2), pages 13-25.
    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. Bhavana Vaddadi & Xiaoyun Zhao & Yusak Susilo & Anna Pernestål, 2020. "Measuring System-Level Impacts of Corporate Mobility as a Service (CMaaS) Based on Empirical Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-18, August.
    2. Todor Stojanovski, 2019. "Urban Form and Mobility Choices: Informing about Sustainable Travel Alternatives, Carbon Emissions and Energy Use from Transportation in Swedish Neighbourhoods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(2), pages 1-28, January.
    3. Lopez-Carreiro, Iria & Monzon, Andres & Lopez, Elena & Lopez-Lambas, Maria Eugenia, 2020. "Urban mobility in the digital era: An exploration of travellers' expectations of MaaS mobile-technologies," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    4. Cavallaro, Federico & Dianin, Alberto, 2022. "Combining transport and digital accessibilities in the evaluation of regional work opportunities," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    5. Alfred Andersson & Lena Winslott Hiselius & Jessica Berg & Sonja Forward & Peter Arnfalk, 2020. "Evaluating a Mobility Service Application for Business Travel: Lessons Learnt from a Demonstration Project," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, January.

    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. Radzimski, Adam & Dzięcielski, Michał, 2021. "Exploring the relationship between bike-sharing and public transport in Poznań, Poland," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 189-202.
    2. Ruhrort, Lisa, 2020. "Reassessing the Role of Shared Mobility Services in a Transport Transition: Can They Contribute the Rise of an Alternative Socio-Technical Regime of Mobility?," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 12(19), pages 1-1.
    3. Pangbourne, Kate & Mladenović, Miloš N. & Stead, Dominic & Milakis, Dimitris, 2020. "Questioning mobility as a service: Unanticipated implications for society and governance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 35-49.
    4. Xiaojia Guo & Chengpeng Lu & Dongqi Sun & Yexin Gao & Bing Xue, 2021. "Comparison of Usage and Influencing Factors between Governmental Public Bicycles and Dockless Bicycles in Linfen City, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-14, June.
    5. Ma, Xinwei & Ji, Yanjie & Yuan, Yufei & Van Oort, Niels & Jin, Yuchuan & Hoogendoorn, Serge, 2020. "A comparison in travel patterns and determinants of user demand between docked and dockless bike-sharing systems using multi-sourced data," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 148-173.
    6. Michael Martin & David Lazarevic & Charlie Gullström, 2019. "Assessing the Environmental Potential of Collaborative Consumption: Peer-to-Peer Product Sharing in Hammarby Sjöstad, Sweden," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-19, January.
    7. Michaël Distelmans & Ilse Scheerlinck, 2021. "Institutional Strategies in the Ridesharing Economy: A Content Analysis Based on Uber’s Example," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-25, July.
    8. Lyons, Glenn & Hammond, Paul & Mackay, Kate, 2019. "The importance of user perspective in the evolution of MaaS," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 22-36.
    9. Kinigadner, Julia & Büttner, Benjamin & Wulfhorst, Gebhard & Vale, David, 2020. "Planning for low carbon mobility: Impacts of transport interventions and location on carbon-based accessibility," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    10. Kinigadner, Julia & Büttner, Benjamin, 2021. "How accessibility instruments contribute to a low carbon mobility transition: Lessons from planning practice in the Munich region," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 157-167.
    11. Kfir Noy & Moshe Givoni, 2018. "Is ‘Smart Mobility’ Sustainable? Examining the Views and Beliefs of Transport’s Technological Entrepreneurs," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-19, February.
    12. Tomasz Bieliński & Agnieszka Ważna, 2020. "Electric Scooter Sharing and Bike Sharing User Behaviour and Characteristics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-13, November.
    13. Orozco-Fontalvo, Mauricio & Moura, Filipe, 2023. "Refocusing MaaS approach: A brief," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 340-342.
    14. Haotian Ma & Xinlu Chen & Zhilei Zhen & Qian Wang, 2023. "Bicycle-sharing in Beijing: An Assessment of Economic, Environmental, and Health Effects, and Identification of Key Drivers of Environmental Performance," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 285-316, March.
    15. Hoffmann, Sebastian & Weyer, Johannes & Longen, Jessica, 2017. "Discontinuation of the automobility regime? An integrated approach to multi-level governance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 391-408.
    16. Stefan Bakker & Kathleen Dematera Contreras & Monica Kappiantari & Nguyen Anh Tuan & Marie Danielle Guillen & Gessarin Gunthawong & Mark Zuidgeest & Duncan Liefferink & Martin Van Maarseveen, 2017. "Low-Carbon Transport Policy in Four ASEAN Countries: Developments in Indonesia, the Philippines, Thailand and Vietnam," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-17, July.
    17. Douglas Mitieka & Rose Luke & Hossana Twinomurinzi & Joash Mageto, 2023. "Smart Mobility in Urban Areas: A Bibliometric Review and Research Agenda," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(8), pages 1-23, April.
    18. Ross-Perez, Antonio & Walton, Neil & Pinto, Nuno, 2022. "Identifying trip purpose from a dockless bike-sharing system in Manchester," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    19. Akse, Ruben & Veeneman, Wijnand & Marchau, Vincent & Ritter, Simone, 2023. "Governance of uncertainty in implementing mobility innovations: A comparison of two Dutch cases," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    20. Wang, Jueyu & Lindsey, Greg, 2019. "Neighborhood socio-demographic characteristics and bike share member patterns of use," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 1-1.

    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:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:8:p:2836-:d:162934. 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.