Refine
Year of publication
- 2020 (4) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (3)
- Working Paper (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (4)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (4)
Keywords
- Behavior change (1)
- Built environment (1)
- Design functions (1)
- Haushalte mit Kindern (1)
- Literature review (1)
- Mobility design (1)
- Mobilität (1)
- Non-motorised travel (1)
- Parking policy (1)
- Parking restrictions (1)
Institute
Mobilität ist eine wesentliche Voraussetzung für soziale Teilhabe. Jedoch ist Mobilität mit Kosten verbunden, sodass die soziale Teilhabe bei geringen finanziellen Mitteln gefährdet sein kann. Das Projekt Social2Mobility begegnet dieser Problematik, indem es das Ziel verfolgt, die soziale Teilhabe von Menschen, die von finanzieller Armut betroffen oder bedroht sind, durch Stärkung ihrer Mobilität zu steigern. Um dieses Ziel zu erreichen, soll im Rahmen des Projektes in der Region Hannover ein Reallabor eingerichtet werden. Das Arbeitspapier begleitet dessen Konzeption und geht der Frage nach, inwiefern in der Region Hannover ein Reallabor zum Thema mobilitätsbezogene soziale Exklusion eingerichtet werden kann. So werden in diesem Arbeitspapier die konzeptionellen Überlegungen zur räumlichen Verortung, zur Zielgruppenauswahl und zu möglichen Themen für das Reallabor dargestellt. Zudem werden die Spezifizierung auf die Zielgruppen Haushalte mit Kindern und ältere Menschen (ab 60 Jahren) sowie die Auswahl der Kommune Ronnenberg als Verortung für das Reallabor begründet.
Support for innovative on-street parking policies: empirical evidence from an urban neighborhood
(2020)
Municipalities and planners often hesitate to implement restrictive parking policies because residents regularly oppose any changes to on-street parking space. Residential parking is one key factor of parking management because its location and availability influence a household's car ownership and use. Moreover, as more residents regularly use other means of transportation that need space and infrastructure in the urban realm, and as parking takes up a vast amount of land, municipalities are considering the reuse of on-street parking space for other purposes. As public acceptability is a precondition for the successful implementation of a proposed policy, our empirical analysis investigates to what extent residents support restrictive and demand-oriented on-street parking policies in the dense, highly urbanized neighborhood of Frankfurt-Bornheim, Germany (N = 1027). Surprisingly, despite some variations, the majority of the residents in our survey are in favor of the policy options suggested. Support for the demand-oriented policies (extension of bicycle infrastructure, improved sharing supply and mobility hubs, neighborhood garages, and improved public transit supply) is higher than the acceptance of the restrictive policies, and of policies that are a combination of restrictive and demand-oriented policies. However, surprisingly, a majority is still in favor of many of these (extension of parking fees and parking restrictions, and reuse of parking space for better livability). Furthermore, we classify residents who live in a household with private cars into the stage model of self-regulated behavior change to analyze their intention towards a reduction in private car use. Results from linear regression analyses indicate that residents who have intentions to change their behavior towards car use reduction assess the policy options more similarly to car-free households and regular bike users, and not like the other car-owning households. The findings suggest that while the residents support financial-related policies the least, they are more receptive towards parking policies than policy makers and planners assume if the reuse of parking lots creates space for other users or if it increases the quality of life, for instance, by adding bike lanes, wider sidewalks or greenery. Hence, a combination of restrictive and demand-oriented on-street parking policies results in high acceptance among residents, and the communication from municipalities regarding the implementation of the different policies needs to vary depending on the kind of household.
Highlights
• Explanation of mobility design and its practical, aesthetic and emblematic effects on travel behaviour.
• Review of recent studies on mobility design elements and the promotion of non-motorised travel.
• Discussion of research gaps and methodological challenges of data collection and comparability.
Abstract
To promote non-motorised travel, many travel behaviour studies acknowledge the importance of the built environment to modal choice, for example with its density or mix of uses. From a mobility design theory perspective, however, objects and environments affect human perceptions, assessments and behaviour in at least three different ways: by their practical, aesthetic and emblematic functions. This review of existing evidence will argue that travel behaviour research has so far mainly focused on the practical function of the built environment. For that purpose, we systematically identified 56 relevant studies on the impacts of the built environment on non-motorised travel behaviour in the Web of Science database. The focus of research on the practical design function primary involves land use distribution, street network connectivity and the presence of walking and cycling facilities. Only a small number of papers address the aesthetic and emblematic functions. These show that the perceived attractiveness of an environment and evoked feelings of traffic safety increase the likelihood of walking and cycling. However, from a mobility design perspective, the results of the review indicate a gap regarding comprehensive research on the effects of the aesthetic and emblematic functions of the built environment. Further research involving these functions might contribute to a better understanding of how to promote non-motorised travel more effectively. Moreover, limitations related to survey techniques, regional distribution and the comparability of results were identified.
In order to encourage a shift from the car to the more sustainable transport mode of cycling, cycle streets have been implemented in cities all over the world in the last few years. In these shared streets, the entire carriageway is designated for cyclists, while motorized traffic is subordinated. However, evidence on the impact of cycle street interventions related to travel behavior change has been limited until now. Therefore, the objective of this study was to evaluate whether cycle streets are an effective measure to facilitate bicycle use and discourage car use, thus contributing to the aim of promoting sustainable travel. For this purpose, we conducted a written household survey in the German city of Offenbach am Main involving participants affected by a cycle street intervention (n = 701). Based on two stage models of self-regulated behavioral change (SSBC), we identified the participants’ level of willingness to use a bicycle frequently and to reduce car use. By means of bivariate and multivariate statistical methods, we analyzed the influence of awareness, use, and perceptions of the cycle street on the willingness to change behavior towards more sustainable travel. The results show that the intervention has a positive impact on frequent bicycle use, while we observed only a limited effect on car use reduction. Traffic conflicts and car speeding within the cycle street adversely affect the acceptance of the intervention. The study’s findings provide new insights into the actual effects of a cycle street and its potential to encourage sustainable travel behavior.