Search

This paper discusses three uses of modal split indicators, and illustrates how it evolved from a technical, intermediate step in transport analysis, over a measure of transport system efficiency to a symbolic urban sustainable mobility indicator. A framework which includes 11 factors is presented and applied to the different uses of the modal split indicator. Besides the comparison of the three main uses of modal split in research and practice, this contribution focuses on a citizen science project (Straatvinken) in the region of Flanders, Belgium. In this project thousands of citizens carry out traffic counts. While the project was initially set up to monitor modal split targets in the urban area of Antwerp, the emphasis shifted towards street liveability. This is visible in the fact that the citizen science project added a narrative-based liveability survey to capture experiences with and evaluations of the liveability at street level. The case illustrates that citizen science is, besides a tool to address data gaps, also an approach to increase the validity of indicators. The reason is that citizen science, which seems to be underexplored in transport studies, differs in what gets measured, how it is measured and why. This approach has proven to provide a fine-grained, integrated assessment of street-level changes in the composition and intensity of the traffic and their effects on the perceived liveability. We argue that it strengthens and complements traditional modal split measurements at the regional or urban level, which typically rely on the modelling of individual mobility behaviour based on household travel surveys. Traditional approaches allow observing broad trends in mobility choices at the regional level, but they do not provide insights in how those individual choices translate into effects at street level. Although often initiated out of certain sustainability concerns, existing modal split models do not reveal how an observed modal shift at the regional level affects the perceived liveability or sustainability at street level. • A framework is presented to compare different uses of modal split indicators. • Modal split is regularly used as an urban sustainability indicator. • Citizen science deserves more attention in transport research and policy. • The validity of modal split indicators is not clear. • The concept of liveable streets corresponds well with citizen concerns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study explores the potential impact of smart urban technologies used in smart city projects on three dimensions of urban sustainability (economic, environmental and social). Although the literature notes that smart urban technologies and their capabilities are potential saviours when it comes to urban and sustainability challenges in cities, there is a lack of studies exploring the impact of smart urban technologies on urban sustainability. Thus, we address this literature gap by conducting structural topic modelling on smart city projects retrieved from the Smart Territory call for projects. In these projects, city managers' report extensively on how smart urban technologies can support urban sustainability. Our results show nine groups of smart urban technologies that will support at least two urban sustainability dimensions. Smart mobility systems can support all three dimensions of urban sustainability. Technology benefits will be realised by smart urban technology capabilities and through the involvement of the city's community in the use of technology. • City managers may adopt smart urban technologies to achieve urban sustainability goals. • The results link different urban sustainability impacts to different smart urban technologies. • This paper provides a list of smart urban technologies that will support at least two urban sustainability dimensions. • Results provide a basis to measure smart urban technologies' impacts through different sustainability indicators. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]