Advertisement

The Paradigm of Sustainable Transport and Mobility in Modern Transport Policy—A Case Study of the Mobility of the Creative Class in Poland

  • Barbara KosEmail author
  • Grzegorz Krawczyk
  • Robert Tomanek
Chapter
  • 16 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems book series (LNNS, volume 124)

Abstract

This chapter is dedicated to the problems of sustainable urban mobility. Sustainable urban mobility is the basic instrument for improving the quality of urban natural environment by reducing the emission of air pollutants, noise and consumption of non-renewable natural resources by transport. In this paper, the authors present their observations concerning the paradigm of sustainable development in the formation of urban mobility based on the research on mobility preferences and behaviours of representatives of the creative class carried out at the University of Economics in Katowice. First of all, the paper presents issues related to the essence of the paradigm of sustainable urban mobility, particularly in terms of its inclusiveness. The existing literature on the relationships between the development level of urbanised areas and mobility was also reviewed. Furthermore, the legal acts of the European Union concerning the mobility policy framework were inventoried and characterised. The purpose of the article is to identify and analyse the transport behaviours and postulates of representatives of the so-called creative class in Poland. The paper presents the results of surveys conducted in three Polish metropolitan areas, in the total group of 450 creative sector workers.

Keywords

Sustainable urban mobility Public transport Polish metropolitan areas 

References

  1. 1.
    Florida R (2003) Cities and the creative class. City Community 2(1):7–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Engel JR, Engel JG (1990) Ethics of environment and development: global challenge, international response. University of Arizona Press, TucsonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bossel H (1999) Indicators for sustainable development: theory, method, applications. A Report to the Balaton Group, International Institute for Sustainable DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Constitution of the Republic of Poland, Act of 2 April 1997Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Environmental Protection Law of 27 April 2001 (Journal of Laws of 2001, no 62, item 627)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    UN (1987) Report of the world commission on environment and development: our common futureGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rokicka E, Woźniak W (2016) W kierunku zrównoważonego rozwoju. Koncepcje, interpretacje, konteksty, Uniwersytet Łódzki, pp 63–96 [In Polish: Towards sustainable development. Concepts, interpretations, contexts, University of Lodz]Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jędrak J, Konduracka E, Badyba AJ, Dąbrowicki P (2017) Wpływ zanieczyszczeń powietrza na zdrowie. Krakowski Alarm Smogowy, Kraków. [In Polish: Impact of air pollution on health. Krakow Smog Alarm, Krakow]Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Starowicz W (2011) Zarządzanie mobilnością wyzwaniem polskich miast. Transport Miejski i Regionalny 1:42–47. [In Polish: Managing the challenge of Polish cities]Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Szołtysek J (2011) Kreowanie mobilności mieszkańców miast, pp 126–128. Wolters Kluwer Polska, Warszawa. [In Polish: Creating mobility of city dwellers]Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Brdulak H, Kauf S, Szołtysek J (2016) Miasta dla pieszych. Idea czy rzeczywistość, pp 140–146. Texter, Warszawa. [In Polish: Cities for pedestrians. Idea or reality]Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Haupt P (2014) Nowy Jork—miasto pieszych? Amerykański sen XXI wieku. Środowisko Mieszkaniowe 13:60–65. [In Polish: New York—a city of pedestrians? American dream of the 21st century]Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    High Level Sales and Marketing. https://highlevelestate.pl/
  14. 14.
    Pifczyk S (2016) Ceny mieszkań w miastach szaleją: zobacz gdzie już dziś mógłbyś mieć własne M. Gazeta Wyborcza 25 July 2016. [In Polish: Prices of apartments in cities are rampant: see where you could have your own M]Google Scholar
  15. 15.
  16. 16.
    Szpakowska E (2011) Architektura miasta idealnego, wprowadzenie. Przestrzeń i Forma 16:121–154. [In Polish: The architecture of an ideal city, introduction]Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kisiała W, Weltrowska J (2014) Obszary koncentracji ubóstwa w strukturze przestrzennej miasta (na przykładzie Poznania). Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu. 331:235–245. [In Polish: Areas of concentration of poverty in the spatial structure of the city (on the example of Poznań)]Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Proost S, Van Dender K (2010) What sustainable road transport future? Trend and poliy options. OECD/ITF Joint transport research centre discussion paper, No 2010–14Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rydzkowski W (ed) (2017) Współczesna polityka transportowa. Warszawa: PWE. [In Polish: Contemporary transport policy]Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grzelec K, Okrój D (2016) Perspektywy obsługi miast autobusami elektrycznymi na przykładzie Sopotu. Autobusy. 11:26–32. [In Polish: Prospects for servicing cities with electric buses on the example of Sopot]Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Woźniak A (2019) Dopłaty to za mało, by na drogach był milion elektryków. https://moto.rp.pl/tu-i-teraz/22695-doplaty-to-za-malo-by-na-drogach-byl-milion-elektrykow. [In Polish: Surcharges are not enough for a million electric cars to be on the roads]
  22. 22.
    Dania: Ostra krytyka norweskich ulg na auta elektryczne (2019) Rzeczpospolita. 9 Nov 2019.https://www.rp.pl/Ekologia/191109394-Dania-Ostra-krytyka-norweskich-ulg-na-auta-elektryczne.html. [In Polish: Denmark: A sharp criticism of Norwegian concessions on electric cars]
  23. 23.
    Boner B (2018) To może być przełom. Rząd zapowiada aż 25 tys. zł dopłaty do elektrycznego auta. http://moto.pl/MotoPL/7,88389,23396132,to-moze-byc-przelom-rzad-zapowiada-az-25-tys-zl-doplaty-do.html. [In Polish: This could be a breakthrough. The government announces as many as 25,000 PLN extra for an electric car]
  24. 24.
    Śliwa M (2018) Samochody elektryczne—wszyscy o nich mówią, ale niewiele osób chce je kupować. Przynajmniej na największym europejskim rynku motoryzacyjnym. https://moto.rp.pl/tu-i-teraz/16469-niemcy-chca-aut-elektrycznych-nawet-doplatami [In Polish: Samochody elektryczne—wszyscy o nich mówią, ale niewiele osób chce je kupować. Przynajmniej na największym europejskim rynku motoryzacyjnym]
  25. 25.
    Banister D (2008) The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transp Policy 15:73–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Naun M, Haubold H (2016) The EU cycling economy. Arguments for an integrated cycling policy. European Cyclists’ Federation, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Held M, Schindler J, Litman T (2015) Cycling and active mobility—establishing a third pillar of transport policy. In: Gerike R, Jarkin P (eds) Cycling and active mobility—establishing a third pillar of transport policy, pp 214–217, Ashgate PublishinGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Tomanek R (2018) Zeroemisyjna mobilność miejska na przykładzie systemu rowerowego w aglomeracji górnośląskiej. Transport Miejski i Regionalny. 10:28–33. [In Polish: Zero-emission urban mobility on the example of a bicycle system in the Upper Silesian agglomeration]Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Sutton M (2019) 33 key cities where cycling id growing its modal share. Cycling Indystry News. https://cyclingindustry.news/five-key-cities-where-cycling-is-taking-modal-share-from-cars/
  30. 30.
  31. 31.
    Tomanek R (2017) Free-fare public transport in the concept of sustainable urban mobility. Transp Probl 12(Special Edition):95–105Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Witte A, Macharis C, Mairesse O (2008) How persuasive is ‘free’ public transport? A survey among commuters in the Brussels Capital Region. Transp Policy 15:216–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gallez C, Motte-Baumvol B (2017) Inclusive mobility or inclusive accessibility? A European perspective. Cuadernos Europeos de Deusto, Governing Mobility in Europe: Interdisciplinary Perspectives, pp 79–104Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dąbrowska A, Janoś-Kresło M (2018) Collaborative consumption as a manifestation of sustainable consumption. Problemy Zarządzania—Management Issues 16(3):137–140. (part 1)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Barycki P (2018) Elektryczne hulajnogi opanowały centrum Wrocławia. Sprawdziliśmy jak z nich skorzystać. https://www.spidersweb.pl/2018/10/hulajnogi-elektryczne-wroclaw-lime.html. [In Polish: Electric scooters have mastered the center of Wrocław. We checked how to use them]
  36. 36.
    Duszczyk M (2019) Hulajnogi od Mercedesa i BMW jadą do Polski. Rzeczpospolita 26 Feb 2019, pp A19. [In Polish: Scooters from Mercedes and BMW are going to Poland]Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Duszczyk M (2019) Wypełniają się nisze w transporcie. Rzeczpospolita 13 Sep 2019, pp A20. [In Polish: Niches in transport fill up]Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Korolczuk M (2019) Mevo: zerwana umowa z operatorem. System zawieszony. https://www.trojmiasto.pl/wiadomosci/Zerwana-umowa-z-operatorem-Mevo-System-zostanie-zawieszony-n139245.html. [In Polish: Mevo: broken contract with the operator. Suspended system]
  39. 39.
    Gehlert T, Kröling S, Schreiber M, Schleinitz K (2018) Accident analysis and comparison of bicycles and pedelecs. In: Framinng the third cycling century. Bridging the gap between research and practice, pp 77–85. German Environment AgencyGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Encyklopedia PWN. Urbanizacja. https://encyklopedia.pwn.pl/encyklopedia/urbanizacja.html. [In Polish: PWN Encyclopedia. Urbanization]
  41. 41.
    Szymańska D (2007) Urbanizacja na świecie. Warsaw: PWN. [In Polish: Urbanization in the world]Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Lorens P, Martyniuk-Pęczek J (eds) (2014) Wprowadzenie do projektowania urbanistycznego. Gdańsk: Akapit-DTP. [In Polish: Introduction to urban design]Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Giffinger R, Fertner C, Kramar H, Kalasek R, Milanoviü N, Meijers E (2007) Smart citeis ranking of European medium-sized cities. Centre of Regional Science (SRF), Vienna UTGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kos B, Krawczyk G, Tomanek R (2018) Modelowanie mobilności w miastach. Katowice: Wyd. Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Katowicach. [In Polish: Modeling of urban mobility]Google Scholar
  45. 45.
  46. 46.
    Nijkamp P (2008) XXQ factors for sustainable development: a systems economic view. RomIan J RegNal Sci 2(1):1–34Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Mierzejewska L (2011) W poszukiwaniu nowych modeli rozwoju miasta. Studia Miejskie 4:81–92. [In Polish: In search of new models of city development]Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Turkoglu H (2015) Sustainable development and quality of urban life. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 202:10–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Morais P, Camanho AS (2011) Evaluation of performance of European cities with the aim to promote quality of life improvements. Omega 39(4):398–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Dissart JC, Deller SC (2000) Quality of life in the planning literature. J Plan Lit 15(1):135–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Szymańska D, Biegańska J (2011) Fenomen urbanizacji i procesy z nim związane. Studia Miejskie 4:13–38. [In Polish: The phenomenon of urbanization and related processes]Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Eberhardt P (2010) Procesy megaurbanizacyjne w świecie. Roczniki Nauk Społecznych. 2(38):17–38. [In Polish: Megaurbanization processes in the world]Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Encyklopedia PWN. Megalopolis. https://encyklopedia.pwn.pl/encyklopedia/Megalopolis.html. [In Polish: PWN Encyclopedia. Megalopolis]
  54. 54.
    United Nations (2019) World urbanization prospects, the 2018 revision, Department of Economic and Social Affairs Population Division. https://population.un.org/wup/Publications/Files/WUP2018-Report.pdf
  55. 55.
    Definicja pojęcia: aglomeracja miejska. https://www.ekologia.pl/wiedza/slowniki/leksykon-ekologii-i-ochrony-srodowiska/aglomeracja-miejska. [In Polish: Definition of the term: urban agglomeration]
  56. 56.
    Resolution adopted by the UN General Assembly on 25 September 2015. Transforming our world: 2030 agenda for sustainable development. http://www.unic.un.org.pl/files/164/Agenda%202030_pl_2016_ostateczna.pdf
  57. 57.
  58. 58.
  59. 59.
  60. 60.
    Najbardziej zakorkowane miasta świata. Największe korki w Polsce wcale nie w Warszawie. http://moto.pl/MotoPL/7,88389,24862418,najbardziej-zakorkowane-miasta-swiata-najwieksze-korki-w-polsce.html. [In Polish: The most congested cities in the world. The biggest traffic jams in Poland are not in Warsaw at all]
  61. 61.
    Kos B (2018) Mobility in European transport policy. In: Proceedings of the 4th international conference on European integration 2018. ICEI 2018. 17–18 May 2018 Ostrava. VSB—Technical University of Ostrava, pp 798–805Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Treaty of Rome (EEC) Treaty establishing the European Economic Community. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PL/TXT/?uri=LEGISSUM%3Axy0023
  63. 63.
    Janic M (2001) Integrated transport systems in the European Union: an overview of some recent developments. Transp Rev 21(4):469–497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
  65. 65.
    European Union (2017) European urban mobility, policy context, European Commission, Brussels. https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/2017-sustainable-urban-mobility-policy-context.pdf
  66. 66.
    COM (1992) 46. Green paper on the impact of transport on the environment. A community strategy for “sustainable mobility”, Brussels 20 Feb 1992Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    COM (1998) 716. Communication from the commission the common transport policy. Sustainable mobility: perspectives for the future, Brussels 21 Dec 1998Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    COM (2004) 394. Commission Working Document. Integrating environmental considerations into other policy areas—a stocktaking of the Cardiff process. Brussels, 1 June 2004. https://ec.europa.eu/transparency/regdoc/rep/1/2004/EN/1-2004-394-EN-F1-1.Pdf
  69. 69.
    COM (2001) 370. White Paper. European transport policy for 2010: time to decide. Commission of the European Communities. Brussels, 12 Sep 2001Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    COM (2007) 551. Green Paper. Towards a new culture for urban mobility (presented by the Commission), Brussels, 25 Sep 2007. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52007DC0551&from=EN
  71. 71.
    Low N (2013) Transforming urban transport, the ethics, politics and practices of sustainable mobility. Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Woldeamanuel MG (2016) Concepts in urban transportation planning: the quest for mobility, sustainability and quality of life. McFarland & Company Inc, Jefferson, North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    COM (2009) 490. Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social, Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Action Plan on Urban Mobility. Brussels 30 Sep 2009. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52009DC0490&from=PL
  74. 74.
    COM (2010) 2020. Europe 2020: the European Union strategy for growth and employment, Commission of the European Communities, Brussels. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=LEGISSUM:em0028&from=PL&isLegissum=true
  75. 75.
    COM (2011) 144. White paper, roadmap to a single European transport area—towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system, Brussels. https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/themes/strategies/doc/2011_white_paper/white-paper-illustrated-brochure_pl.pdf
  76. 76.
    COM (2013) 913. Commission of the European Communities, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social, Committee and the Committee of the Regions “Towards a Competitive and Resource Efficient Transport System”, European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Opinion of the committee of the regions, urban mobility package, (2014/C 271/04). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/PL/TXT/?uri=CELEX%
  78. 78.
    European Union (2013) Planning for people, GUIDELINES developing and implementing a sustainable urban mobility plan (2013), BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Nosal K, Starowicz W (2010) Wybrane zagadnienia zarządzania mobilnością. Transport Miejski i Regionalny 3:26–31 [In Polish: Selected issues of mobility management]Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Ungemah DH, Dusza CM (2009) Transportation demand management benchmark: results from 2008 TDM program survey. J Transp Res Board 2118(1):55–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Murray G, Koffman D, Chambers C (1997) Strategies to assist local transportation agencies in becoming mobility managers. National Academy Press, Transport Research Board, WashingtonGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    COM (2016) 501. Communication from the European Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee, as well as the Committee of the Regions—European Strategy for Low-Carbon Economy, Brussels, 20 July 2016Google Scholar
  83. 83.
    Directive 2010/40/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 July 2010 on the framework for the deployment of Intelligent Transport Systems in the field of road transport and for interfaces with other modes of transportGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Kos-Łabędowicz J (2017) Telematics in sustainability of urban mobility. European perspective. Arch Transp Syst Telemat 103:8–15Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Agenda miejska dla UE. https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/panorama/pdf/mag58/mag58_pl.pdf. [In Polish: Urban agenda for the EU]
  86. 86.
  87. 87.
  88. 88.
  89. 89.
  90. 90.
    COM (2017) European Commission, White Paper on the Future of Europe. Reflections and scenarios for the EU27 by 2025, Brussels, 1 Mar 2017Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Towards a common framework for urban development in the European Union. Informal Meeting of EU Ministers Responsible for Urban Matters Declaration of Ministers. Bucharest, 14 June 2019. https://ec.europa.eu/futurium/en/system/files/ged/2019-06-14_bucharest_declaration_en.pdf
  92. 92.
    COM (2019) 22. European Commission, Reflection paper towards a sustainable Europe by 2030, Brussels of 30 Jan 2019Google Scholar
  93. 93.
    Annex I: The Juncker’s Commission’s contribution to the sustainable development goals. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/reflection_paper_sustainable_annexi_en.pdf
  94. 94.
    Annex II: The EU’s performance on the sustainable development goals. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/reflection_paper_sustainable_annexii_en.pdf
  95. 95.
    Annex III: Summary of the contribution of the SDG multi-stakeholder platform to the reflection paper “towards a sustainable Europe by 2030”. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/reflection_paper_sustainable_annexiii_en.pdf
  96. 96.
    Zrównoważona Europa do 2030 r. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/publications/reflection-paper-towards-sustainable-europe-2030_pl. [In Polish: Sustainable Europe by 2030]
  97. 97.
    The Future of Cities Report (2019) EC/JRC. https://www.era.gv.at/mobile/news/4978
  98. 98.
    Debyser A (2014) Urban mobility, Shifting rowards sustainabke transport systems. EPRS—European Parliamentary Research Service, pp 25–26Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    ELTIS: The urban mobility observatory. https://www.eltis.org/in-brief/about-us
  100. 100.
    Florida R (2002) The rise of creative class: and how it’s transforming work, leaisure, community and everyday life. Basic Book, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Boschma R, Fritsch M (2007) Creative class and regional growth—empirical evidence from eight European countries. Jena Economic Research Paper. 2007–066, pp 1–33Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Mellander CH, Florida R, Rentfrow J (2011) The creative class, post-industrial and happiness of nations. Cambirdge J Regions Econ Soc 1–13Google Scholar
  103. 103.
    Florida R, Mellander Ch, Stolarick KM (2010) Talent, technology and tolerance in Canadian regional development. Can Geogr 3:277–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Florida R, Mellander Ch, Stolarick K (2008) Inside the Black Box of Regional Development—human capital, the creative class and tolerance. J Econ Geogr 8(5):615–649CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Clifton N (2008) The “creative class” in the UK: an initial analysis. Geogr Ann 90(1):63–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Mellander Ch, Florida R (2011) Creativity, talent, and regional wages in Sweden. Ann Reg Sci 46(3):637–660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Lorenzen M, Vaarst Andersen K (2007) The Geography of the European creative class a rank-size analysis. DRUID Working Papers 2007, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, pp 25–28Google Scholar
  108. 108.
    Stryjkiewicz T, Męczyński M (2015) Klasa kreatywna w dużym mieście. Rozwój Regionalny i Polityka Regionalna. 31:97–109. [In Polish: Creative class in a big city]Google Scholar
  109. 109.
    Sektor nowoczesnych usług biznesowych (2019) Związek Liderów Sektora Usług Biznesowych. Warszawa. https://absl.pl/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/raport_absl_2019_PL_190602_epub.pdf. [In Polish: Modern business services sector]
  110. 110.
    Beauchamp M, Krysztofiak-Szopa J, Skala A (2018) Polskie startupy. Warszawa: Fundacja Startup Poland. http://www.citibank.pl/poland/kronenberg/polish/files/raport_startup_poland_2018.pdf. [In Polish: Polish startups]
  111. 111.
    Bank Danych Lokalnych GUS. https://bdl.stat.gov.pl/BDL/start. [In Polish: GUS Local Data Bank]

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Kos
    • 1
    Email author
  • Grzegorz Krawczyk
    • 1
  • Robert Tomanek
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of TransportUniversity of Economics in KatowiceKatowicePoland

Personalised recommendations