Designing Cooperation for Sustainable Mobility: Mobile Methods in Ridesharing Contexts

  • Johanna MeurerEmail author
  • Martin Stein
  • Volker Wulf
Conference paper


Motivated by rising global energy demands and a growing awareness of the scarcity of natural resources sustainable mobility concepts are more in demand than ever before. One solution is offered by ridesharing concepts, realized with ICT-supported mobile interaction systems. However, current systems mainly address issues of comfort and efficiency and thus refer to mobility widely in functional terms of transport. We argue in this paper for a praxis-based exploration that refers to personal ridesharing experiences embedded in people’s daily mobility and life world. We will show that a phenomenological inquiry provides added value in understanding practical challenges in a ridesharing context, and we will identify methods used to address practical challenges that can provide new starting points for design.


Shopping Trip Sustainable Mobility Logistical Concern Daily Mobility Mobile Method 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We thank all interviewees for their participation, our student assistants for transcription work and discussions, our local partners for their support in addressing participants and University Heidelberg. Further we thank the BMBF for funding this project.


  1. 1.
    Brereton M, Roe P, Foth M, Bunker JM, Buys L (2009) Designing participation in agile ridesharing with mobile social software. In: Proceedings of the 21st annual conference of the Australian computer-human interaction special interest group: design: open 24/7, ACM, pp 257–260Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Büscher M, Urry J (2009) Mobile methods and the empirical. Eur J Soc Theory 12(1):99–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Büscher M, Urry J, Witchger K (2010) Mobile methods. Taylor & FrancisGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Button G, Dourish P (1996) Technomethodology: paradoxes and possibilities. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, ACM, pp 19–26Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Crabtree A (2004) Taking technomethodology seriously: hybrid change in the ethnomethodology—design relationship. Eur J Info Syst 13(3):195–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dourish P, Anderson K, Nafus D (2007) Cultural mobilities: diversity and agency in urban computing. In: Human-computer interaction–Interact 2007, Springer, pp 100–113Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Garfinkel H (1963) A conception of and experiments with‚ trust as a condition of concerted stable actions. The production of reality: essays and readings on social interaction: pp 381–392Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Garfinkel H (1967) Studies in ethnomethodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ghelawat S, Radke K, Brereton M (2010) Interaction, privacy and profiling considerations in local mobile social software: a prototype agile ride share system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd conference of the computer-human interaction special interest group of Australia on computer-human interaction, OZCHI ’10. New York, NY, USA: ACM. pp 376–379 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Handke V, Jonuschat H (2012) Flexible ridesharing: new opportunities and service concepts for sustainable mobility. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ihde D (2002) Bodies in technology. U of Minnesota Press, Mineapolis (Bd. 5)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Laurier E, Lorimer H, Brown B, Jones O, Juhlin O, Noble A, Perry M et al (2008) Driving and ‘passengering’: notes on the ordinary organization of car travel. Mobilities 3(1):1–23Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Luff P, Heath C (1998) Mobility in collaboration. In: Proceedings of the 1998 ACM conference on computer supported cooperative work, ACM pp 305–314Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Massey D (1999) Space-Time, ‘science’ and the relationship between physical geography and human geography. Trans Inst Br Geogr 24(3):261–276CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meurer J, Stein M, Randall D, Rohde M, Wulf V (2014) Social dependency and mobile autonomy—supporting older adults mobility with ridesharing. In: Proceedings of the ICT 2014 ACM annual conference on human factors in computing systems CHI, TorontoGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mirisaee SH, Brereton M, Roe P (2011) Bridging the representation and interaction challenges of mobile context-aware computing: designing agile ridesharing. In: Proceedings of the 23rd Australian computer-human interaction conference, ACM, pp 221–224Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ozenc FK, Cranor LF, Morris JH (2011) Adapt-a-ride: understanding the dynamics of commuting preferences through an experience design framework. In: Proceedings of the 2011 conference on designing pleasurable products and interfaces, 61Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Radke K, Brereton M, Mirisaee S, Ghelawat S, Boyd C, Nieto JG (2011) Tensions in developing a secure collective information practice-the case of agile ridesharing. In: Human-computer interaction–interact 2011, Springer, pp 524–532Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Schütz A (1967) The phenomenology of the social world. Northwestern University Press, EvanstonGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sheller M, Urry J (2003) Mobile transformations of ‘public’ and ‘private’ life. Theory, Cult Soc 20(3):107–125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sherlock K (2001) Revisiting the concept of hosts and guests. Tourist Stud 1(3):271–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Steger-Vonmetz DC (2005) Improving modal choice and transport efficiency with the virtual ridesharing agency. In: Proceedings of Intelligent transportation systems, 2005, IEEE, pp 994–999Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tamminen S, Oulasvirta A, Toiskallio K, Kankainen A (2004) Understanding mobile contexts. Pers Ubiquit Comput 8(2):135–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Teodorović D, Dell’Orco M (2008) Mitigating traffic congestion: solving the ride-matching problem by bee colony optimization. Transp Plan Technol 31(2):135–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Urry J (2004) The ‘system’ of automobility. Theory, Cult Soc 21(4–5):25–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Urry J (2007) Mobilities. Cambridge, UK; Malden, MA: PolityGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wash R, Hemphill L, Resnick P (2005) Design decisions in the ridenow project. In: Proceedings of the 2005 international ACM siggroup conference on supporting group work, ACM pp 132–135Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wessels R, Pueboobpaphan R, Bie J, van Arem B (2011) Integrating online social networks with ridesharing systems: effects of detour and level of friendGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Winch P (2002) The idea of a social science: and its relation to philosophy. RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Witzel A, Reiter H (2012) The problem-centred interview. SageGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wulf V, Rohde M, Pipek V, Stevens G (2011) Engaging with practices: design case studies as a research framework in CSCW. In: Proceedings of the ACM 2011 conference on computer supported cooperative work, ACM pp 505–512Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Information Systems and New MediaUniversity of SiegenSiegenGermany

Personalised recommendations