Why do sustainable shared mobility practices not proliferate more widely? Insights from digital mobility diaries

被引:1
作者
Mock, Mirijam [1 ]
Wankat, Katharina [1 ]
机构
[1] Vienna Univ Econ & Business, Vienna, Austria
关键词
Sharing economy; Shared mobility; Sustainable mobility; Practice theories; Digital ethnography; Mobility diaries; NICHE;
D O I
10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.143582
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Sharing instead of owning consumer goods should significantly reduce their production and the associated environmental damages. However, this ecological promise has yet to be fulfilled, even in mobility, where sharing practices have become mainstream. This is because the most widespread mobility-sharing practice (free-floating carsharing) has the lowest ecological benefit. This study asks why the adoption of more ecologically beneficial shared mobility practices remains lower, addressing this question through digital ethnography. Using digital mobility diaries for three weeks, 21 respondents documented their mobility practices (including various shared mobility practices and private car travel) by uploading pictures, videos and text notes on a dedicated smartphone application. The data show that free-floating carsharing has proliferated because it can leverage the 'system of automobility' as its users are relatively monomodal. Other shared mobility services function well; however, we found that they have not proliferated as widely because the overall multimodal mobility mix (e.g. walking, cycling, public transport, on-demand sharing) associated with this form of shared mobility is highly demanding. Better conditions for multimodal mobility, created through appropriate infrastructure, are crucial for sustainable shared mobility practices to spread. However, space limitations mean this will likely come at the expense of carcentred infrastructure and necessitate its exnovation.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 59 条
[1]   From niche to mainstream: the dilemmas of scaling up sustainable alternatives [J].
Augenstein, Karoline ;
Bachmann, Boris ;
Egermann, Markus ;
Hermelingmeier, Verena ;
Hilger, Annaliesa ;
Jaeger-Erben, Melanie ;
Kessler, Alexandra ;
Lam, David P. M. ;
Palzkill, Alexandra ;
Suski, Paul ;
von Wirth, Timo .
GAIA-ECOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY, 2020, 29 (03) :143-147
[2]   The Foundational Economy as a Cornerstone for a Social-Ecological Transformation [J].
Baernthaler, Richard ;
Novy, Andreas ;
Plank, Leonhard .
SUSTAINABILITY, 2021, 13 (18)
[3]  
Bamford C., 2001, Transport Economics
[4]  
Blue S, 2017, NEXUS OF PRACTICES: CONNECTIONS, CONSTELLATIONS, PRACTITIONERS, P24
[5]  
BMK, 2023, Sharing Strategie im Personen-Mobilitatsbereich
[6]   A Systematic Literature Review. Relationships between the Sharing Economy, Sustainability and Sustainable Development Goals [J].
Boar, Andrei ;
Bastida, Ramon ;
Marimon, Frederic .
SUSTAINABILITY, 2020, 12 (17)
[7]   Sharing for people, planet or profit? Analysing motivations for intended sharing economy participation [J].
Bocker, Lars ;
Meelen, Toon .
ENVIRONMENTAL INNOVATION AND SOCIETAL TRANSITIONS, 2017, 23 :28-39
[8]  
Breidenstein Georg., 2013, Ethnografie. Die Praxis der Feldforschung
[9]   Commuting practices: New insights into modal shift from theories of social practice [J].
Cass, Noel ;
Faulconbridge, James .
TRANSPORT POLICY, 2016, 45 :1-14
[10]   Food practices as part of daily routines: A conceptual framework for analysing networks of practices [J].
Castelo, Aricia F. M. ;
Schaefer, Martina ;
Silva, Minelle E. .
APPETITE, 2021, 157