Refine
Year of publication
- 2023 (3) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (2)
- Working Paper (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- Acceptability (1)
- Cycling network (1)
- Financial poverty (1)
- Mobility (1)
- Parking management (1)
- Practice theory (1)
- Road closures (1)
- Transport affordability (1)
- Transport policy (1)
- Transport poverty (1)
Institute
- Geographie (3)
Mobilität ist eine Grundvoraussetzung, um am gesellschaftlichen Leben teilhaben zu können. Ist der Möglichkeitsraum potenzieller Ortsveränderungen eingeschränkt – beispielsweise durch räumliche, finanzielle oder körperliche Barrieren oder Ängste –, wird von Mobilitätsarmut gesprochen. Wie Mobilitätsarmut auf der Verwaltungsebene verhindert werden kann, zeigt dieser Policy Brief des Projektes Social2Mobility. Diese Handlungsempfehlungen basieren auf Erkenntnissen des Projektes Social2Mobility und adressieren insbesondere Verwaltungsmitarbeitende der Fachplanungen Verkehrs-, Raum- und Sozialplanung von der Kommunal- bis zur Landes- und Bundesebene. Ziel des Projektes Social2Mobility war es, die soziale Teilhabe armutsgefährdeter Personen durch eine Steigerung ihrer Mobilitätsoptionen zu stärken. Der Policy Brief erläutert die Problematik von Mobilitätsarmut, thematisiert deren Relevanz und zeigt verschiedene Facetten von Mobilitätsarmut auf. Er beinhaltet fünf verschiedene Handlungsfelder zur Verhinderung von Mobilitätsarmut. Der Policy Brief soll zu einer dezernats- und abteilungsübergreifenden Zusammenarbeit der Fachplanungen Sozial-, Raum- und Verkehrsplanung zur Lösung von Mobilitätsarmut anregen. Synergieeffekte und gegenseitige Potentiale bei einer Zusammenarbeit werden dabei herausgestellt. Hierzu gehören beispielsweise die Anwendung von Verkehrsnachfragemodellen in der Sozialplanung oder die Berücksichtigung vielfältiger unterschiedlicher Lebenslagen und der daraus hervorgehenden Mobilitätsbedarfe in der Verkehrsplanung.
Financial poverty, mobility and social participation are interrelated. This nexus makes old-age poverty a highly relevant issue in terms of transport-related social exclusion in an ageing society. To understand how financial poverty affects older people’s travel practices and how they cope with their limited financial resources, we conducted qualitative interviews with low-income older people (aged 60 and above) in Ronnenberg (Hanover region, Germany). Although all the respondents have comparably limited financial resources, using a practice theory perspective along the elements of materials, competences and meanings (Shove et al., 2012), we identified three different types of low-income older people by their travel practices: (i) active older people with multifaceted social interactions, (ii) neighbourhood-oriented older people with local interactions and (iii) home-centred older people with few social interactions. From our analysis, we conclude that financial poverty shapes each element of low-income older people’s travel practices and thereby increases the risk of transport-related social exclusion: (i) certain materials have to be financed, which is challenging or even impossible due to financial poverty; (ii) meanings of travel practices are strongly linked to other practices, thus, if (also for financial reasons) no or a limited range of destinations are mentioned, travel practices are restricted in their frequency and distance; and (iii) necessary competences to be mobile and engage in social activities despite low financial means seem to be differentially available or - more cautiously formulated – less often utilised by low-income older people, which may lead to them abandoning travel practices and related social activities.
Facing the challenges of motorised traffic, many cities around the globe started implementing measures to transform their urban transport systems. One of the major challenges for the success of adequate policies is not only their effectiveness but also whether they are accepted by city residents. With a quantitative case study in four neighbourhoods in Frankfurt am Main (N = 821), this article investigates the acceptability of three measures: (i) parking management, (ii) the conversion of car lanes into cycle lanes and (iii) the closure of an inner city arterial road to car traffic. The results show a surprisingly high acceptability for all measures if the benefits for local residents are tangible. Thus, successful policy packages may combine push measures with either pull measures, as suggested frequently in the literature, or with improvements for other land uses (e.g. re-using former car-parking spaces for non-transport purposes, such as greenery or seating areas). Furthermore, the perceived effectiveness, daily travel practices and intentions to reduce car use, the built environment and, to a lesser degree, socio-demographics explain differences in acceptability by population group.