Search

There is an active contemporary debate about how emerging technologies such as automated vehicles, peer-to-peer sharing applications and the ‘internet of things’ will revolutionise individual and collective mobility. Indeed, it is argued that the so-called ‘Smart Mobility’ transition, in which these technologies combine to transform how the mobility system is organised and operates, has already begun. As with any socio-technical transition there are critical questions to be posed in terms of how the transition is managed, and how both the benefits and any negative externalities of change will be governed. This paper deploys the notion of ensuring and enhancing public value as a key governance aim for the transition. It sets out modes and methods of governance that could be deployed to steer the transition and, through four thematic cases explores how current mobility governance challenges will change. In particular, changing networks of actors, resources and power, new logics of consumption, and shifts in how mobility is regulated, priced and taxed – will require to be successfully negotiated if public value is to be captured from the transition. This is a critical time for such questions to be raised because technological change is clearly outpacing the capacity of systems and structures of governance to respond to the challenges already apparent. A failure to address both the short and longer-term governance issues risks locking the mobility system into transition paths which exacerbate rather than ameliorate the wider social and environmental problems that have challenged planners throughout the automobility transition. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To understand the complex meanings of mobility and to engage in transport planning and management processes, a variety of disciplines, skills, and tools are potentially useful. Universities have a limited amount of time and resources to train future professionals though. This poses a problem: where should the teaching priorities be? By means of a web-survey, this study has asked academics based at a number of universities what the disciplines, skills, and tools that — according to their personal viewpoints — are the most relevant for practitioners in the mobility and transport sector. The respondents generally support curricula that facilitate a holistic, non-specialised, understanding of mobility and transport issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The internationalization of policy regimes and the reorganization of the state have provided new opportunities for cities to bypass nation-state structures and work with other cities internationally. This provides greater opportunity for cities to learn from each other and could be an important stimulus to the transfer of policies across the globe. Few studies exist however which focus on the processes that shape the search for policy lessons and how they are affected by the institutional context within which they are conducted. This paper describes research conducted in the field of urban transport and planning policy across eleven cities in Northern Europe and North America which seeks to explore the motivations for and mechanisms supporting learning about new policies. Thirty policies were examined across the eleven sites using document review and interviews with key actors. The paper explores the search for lessons and the learning process and considers the influences of institutional context, organizational behaviour, and individual cognitive constraints. The process of seeking out and learning policy lessons is defined by individuals operating within a particular policy space and exhibits a number of characteristics of strongly bounded rational choice. The search parameters are significantly influenced by preconceptions of the nature of the preferred solutions and the likelihood of cities in other contexts offering meaningful learning opportunities. Trusted peer networks emerge as critical in overcoming information overload, resource constraints, and uncertainty in the potential for policy transfer. The mobility of policies seems also to be linked to the mobility of the key transfer agents. Cities adopt quite different approaches to engaging with the communities of policy mobilizers which seems likely to impact on the pace and pattern of the movement of policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper highlights the extent to which a future mobility system dominated by Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs) poses profound challenges to the 'publicness' of the transport and mobility systems of many cities. This is evident at different policy levels: the regulatory posture of governments, changing notions of the contributions of mobility to wider 'public value', and the underpinning shared experiences of urban life and citizenship or civitas. There is relatively little discussion of how widespread automation might reduce the 'publicness' of transport systems in terms of the range of mobility opportunities they offer, how changing patterns of mobility across neighbourhoods and social groups will contribute to urban restructuring, and the implications of this for public value and the character or civitas of cities. In particular, we note how the huge expansion in mobility choices made possible by CAVs might lead to circumstances in which the outcome of individuals exercising that choice is to change the nature of urban mobility profoundly. We identify a number of key challenges that policy makers will need to address in managing the introduction of CAVs in their cities, and how using the lens of 'publicness' might help them do so. • We explore how the notion of 'publicness' can contribute to debates on how best to manage and govern the impacts of autonomous mobility • Shared and automated mobility could extend or diminish opportunities for citizens, with multiple ramifications for public interests • Policy makers are under intense pressure from varied interests over how best to regulate and govern automated mobility • We conceptualise publicness as existing at three levels of debate: ownership and regulation, public value, and civitas • Effective policy interventions will be required to achieve 'public' goals at each of these levels [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]