Sustainable Transport Futures: Analysis of the Selected Methodologies Supporting the Planning Process Towards Achieving Goal 11 Sustainable Cities and Communities

  • Varvara NikulinaEmail author
  • Henrikke Baumann
  • David Simon
  • Frances Sprei
Part of the World Sustainability Series book series (WSUSE)


A quarter of energy-related greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) originate from the transportation sector. Continuously increasing demand for transportation services worldwide is one of the main urban challenges addressed by Sustainable Development Goal 11, target 2. One way to address this issue is to develop an integrated transportation system that can ensure confidence and comfort for the passengers. This will contribute not only to the customers’ experience but also to operators and authorities through sustainable, cost-effective, and profitable services. Conversely, the lack of such a system or a poorly managed system prevents the economy and society from realizing its potential. In the transition towards sustainability, the planning process of complex systems such as transportation often requires supportive tools and methods, such as futures methodologies that assist decision-making by providing information about possible futures. In today’s rapidly changing environment, forecasting tools do not always provide the expected outcomes since it is difficult to predict all the unexpected events. Therefore, there is a demand for alternative methods that not only grasp the constant changes but also create additional value (for example, meeting the needs of multisectoral collaboration and creation of common vision). The present article investigates the usefulness of three such methodologies, namely backcasting, foresighting, and SymbioCity, for the planning process of the bus park and railway station in Kisumu, Kenya, and Centralen in Gothenburg, Sweden. The paper’s contribution is a description of the Kenyan transportation system (which has not been studied in detail before), planning process, and pertinent issues related to the stations both in Kisumu and Gothenburg, located in the sharply contrasting contexts of global South and global North, respectively. On the basis of field research, interviews, and feasibility study of futures methodologies, the paper concludes that backcasting is the most suitable of the methodologies for both places, since it can be applied at a small scale, and provides creative solutions and has a high level of integration of stakeholders. Furthermore, the paper examines the application of the futures methodologies in multisectoral urban transitions apart from transportation and draws conclusion on what can be learnt from it.


Sustainability Development Transition Transportation Planning process Multisectoral collaboration Current state Backcasting Forecasting Bus park Railway station Kisumu Kenya Centralen Gothenburg Sweden 



The authors thank Chalmers University of Technology (Sweden), Maseno University (Kenya), Challenge Lab and Reality Studio in Kisumu for educational materials and support. Special thanks to Mistra Urban Futures, Blekinge Institute of Technology and UN-HABITAT (namely Silas Maujih) for their collaboration and establishment of new partnerships. Finally, financial support from Erasmus Mundus Master’s Program, Trafikverket (Swedish transport administration) and Swedish Secretariat for Environmental Earth Sciences is greatly appreciated.


  1. Agar, M. (1980). The professional stranger. An informal introduction to ethnography. Houston, TX: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  2. Amara, R. (1991). View of futures research methodology. Futures, 23(6), 645–649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arksey, H., & Knight, P. (1999). Interviewing for social scientists. London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baumann, H., & Cowell, S. (1999). An evaluative framework for conceptual and analytical approaches used in environmental management. GMI, 26, 109–122.Google Scholar
  5. Becker, T. (2011). Obstacles for non-motorized transport in developing countries—A case study of Nairobi, Kenya. European Transport Conference, Dresden.
  6. Bratt, C., Hallstedt, S., Robèrt, K.-H., Broman, G., & Oldmark, J. (2013). Assessment of criteria development for public procurement from a strategic sustainability perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 52, 309–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bratt, C., Hallstedt, S., Robèrt, K.-H., Broman, G., & Oldmark, J. (2011a). Assessment of eco-labelling criteria development from a strategic sustainability perspective. Journal of Cleaner Production, 19(14), 1631–1638.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bratt, C., Hallstedt, S., Robèrt, K.-H., Broman, G., & Oldmark, J. (2011b). Eco-labelling criteria development for strategic life cycle management. In Life Cycle Management Conference—LCM 2011—Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Management, Berlin.Google Scholar
  9. BSR. (2011). Stakeholder mapping. Global Social Venture Competition. BSR. November.
  10. Burton, D. (2000). Questionnaire design. In D. Burton (Ed.), Research training for social scientists (pp. 335–347). London: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. City of Gothenburg. (2010a). Gothenburg and the environment. Gothenburg: Sandstens Tryckeri.Google Scholar
  12. City of Gothenburg. (2010b). Year 2020. More people move around in the City. Gothenburg: City of Gothenburg, Traffic and Public Transport Authority.Google Scholar
  13. Conway, M. (2005). An overview of foresight methodologies. Thinking Futures (pp. 1–10). Accessed May 1, 2015.
  14. Cullberg, M., Montin, S., & Tahvlizadeh, N. (2014). Urban challenges, policy and action in Gothenburg. GAPS project baseline study. Gothenburg: Mistra Urban Futures.Google Scholar
  15. Daganzo, C., Li, Y., Gonzales, E., & Geroliminis, N. (2007). City-scale transport modelling: An approach for Nairobi, Kenya (pp. 1–18). Berkeley: UC Berkeley Center for Future Urban Transport; Volvo Center of Excellence.Google Scholar
  16. De Vaus, D. (2013). Surveys in social research. London: Routledge Ltd.Google Scholar
  17. Dreborg, K. (1996). Essence of backcasting (pp. 813–828). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science Ltd.Google Scholar
  18. Driscoll, D. L. 2011. Introduction to primary research: Observations, surveys, and interviews. In C. Lowe & P. Zemliansky (Eds.), Writing spaces: Readings on writing (Vol. 2, pp. 152–174). Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data.Google Scholar
  19. Eising, W., interview by V. Nikulina. (2015). KUP Coordinator, Team Leader of the Technical Assistance Team, Kisumu Urban Project (KUP) Kisumu, March 11.Google Scholar
  20. ESRC. (2015). ESRC Framework for Research Ethics. Swindon: ESRC.Google Scholar
  21. Flowerdew, R., & Martin, D. (2005). Methods in human geography: A guide for students doing a research project (2nd ed.). Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
  22. Godbole, G. (2014). A personal journey. In J. Lunn (Ed.), Fieldwork in the global south: Ethical challenges and dilemmas. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Göteborgs Stad. (2015). Älvrummet—Kom ut Nyfiken på den Nya Staden.
  24. Graeff, J. (2013). The organization, issues and the future role of the Matatu Industry in Nairobi, Kenya. Center for Sustainable Urban Development (CSUD) at Columbia University’s.
  25. Hallstedt, S., Ny, H., Robèrt, K.-H., & Broman, G. (2010). An approach to assessing sustainability integration in strategic decision systems. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(8), 703–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hellberg, S., & Jonsson, P. (2014). Gothenburg 2035: Transport strategy for a Close-Knit City. Gothenburg: City of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
  27. Holmberg, J. (1998). Backcasting: a natural step in operationalizing sustainable development. Greener Management International—The Journal of Corporate Environmental Strategy and Practice, (23), 30–51.Google Scholar
  28. Holmberg, J., & Robèrt, K.-H. (2000). Backcasting from non-overlapping sustainability principles—A framework for strategic planning. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World, 291–308.Google Scholar
  29. Holmberg, J., Robèrt, K.-H., & Eriksson, K.-E. (1996). Socio-ecological principles for sustainability. Getting Down to Earth: Practical Applications of Ecological Economics, 17–48. ISBN-13: 978-1559635035.Google Scholar
  30. Isitt, M., interview by V. Nikulina. (2015). Journalist at Göteborgs-Posten; Dagens Nyheter; Arkitektur Magazine; Residence Magazine; Svenska Mässan (The Swedish Exhibition and Congress Centre); The Stockholm Furniture Fair; Torsten Söderbergs stiftelse; Antonia Ax:son Johnsons stiftelse, Gothenburg, February 18.Google Scholar
  31. James, S., & Lahti, T. (2004). Natural step for communities: How cities and towns can change to sustainable practices. Gabriola: New Society Publisher.Google Scholar
  32. Jernhusen AB. (2011). Om Jernhusen.
  33. Kain, J.-H., interview by V. Nikulina. (2015). Associate Professor/Reader, PhD, Architect, Planner, Department of Architecture, Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, February 18.Google Scholar
  34. KAM. (2016). Kisumu County Government presents Integrated Strategic Urban Development Plan. Kenya Association of Manufacturers. KAM. May 13. Accessed July 12, 2016. Kisumu County Government presents Integrated Strategic Urban Development Plan.Google Scholar
  35. Kawulich, B. (2005). Participant observation as a data collection method. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 6(2), 1–28.Google Scholar
  36. Kuosa, T. (2014). The evolution of strategic foresight: Navigating public policy making. Gower, pp. 1–45. Accessed May 1, 2015.
  37. Larsson, G. (2006). Spatial planning systems in Western Europe: An overview. Amsterdam: IOS Press.Google Scholar
  38. Maylor, H. (2010). Project management (4th ed.). Essex: Pearson Education Limited.Google Scholar
  39. Meijling, J. (2014). Slutstationen. Arkitektur. June 17.
  40. Mikkelsen, B. (2005). Methods for development work and research: A new guide for practitioners (2nd ed.). London: SAGE Publications.Google Scholar
  41. Missimer, M., Robèrt, K.-H., & Broman, G. (2014). Lessons from the field: A first evaluation of working with the elaborated social dimension of the Framework for Strategic Sustainable Development. In Relating systems thinking and design 3. Oslo.Google Scholar
  42. MoLG. (2013). Integrated Strategic Urban Development Plan. Kisumu: Kenyan Ministry of Local Governments, Kisumu County Government, Agence Francaise de Developpement.Google Scholar
  43. Muchangi, J. (2015). Kenya to focus on 5 sustainable development goals at UN summit. September 22.
  44. Mumo, C. (2014). Train back on track as probe clears rail project. Sunday Nation, 35 Accessed August 7, 2017.
  45. Mutambo, A. (2016). Cabinet approves SGR Extension to Malaba, construction of new roads. Daily Nation. DN. March 23. Accessed July 12, 2016.
  46. Mwende, J. (2016). Mombasa-Nairobi Standard Gauge Railway Project Well Underway. Construction Business Review. CBR. May 6. Accessed July 12, 2016.
  47. Ny, H., MacDonald, J. P., Broman, G., & Robèrt, K.-H. (2006). Sustainability constraints as system boundaries. An approach to make life-cycle management strategic. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 10(1–2), 61–77.Google Scholar
  48. Ny, H., Hallstedt, S., Robèrt, K.-H., & Broman, G. (2008). Introducing templates for sustainable product development through an evaluation case study of Televisions at the Matsushita Electric Group. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 12(4), 600–623. doi: 10.1111/j.1530-9290.2008.00061.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Nzomo, P., interview by V. Nikulina and S. Maujih. (2015). Estate Officer—Kenya Railways Kisumu, March 16.Google Scholar
  50. Otieno, E., interview by V. Nikulina and S. Maujih. (2015). City Planner Kisumu, March 18.Google Scholar
  51. Otieno, M., interview by V. Nikulina. (2015). Exchange Student from Maseno University Kisumu, April 07.Google Scholar
  52. Quist, J. N. (2007). Backcasting for a sustainable future. The impact after 10 years. Delft: Eburon Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  53. Ranhagen, U., & Groth, K. (2012). The SymbioCity approach: A conceptual framework for sustainable urban development. Stockholm: SKL International.Google Scholar
  54. Rawinji, R., interview by V. Nikulina. (2015). Planning and environmental consultant, Director of Strevlan Company Kisumu, April 1.Google Scholar
  55. Robèrt, K.-H., Schmidt-Bleek, B., Aloisi de Larderel, J., Basile, G., Jansen, J. L., Kuehr, R., et al. (2002). Strategic sustainable development: Selection, design and synergies of applied tools. Journal of Cleaner Production, 11(5), 197–214.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Scheyvens, R., & Storey, D. (2003). Development fieldwork: A practical guide. London: SAGE.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Simmel, G. (1908). The stranger. In G. Simmel (Ed.), On individuality and social forms (pp. 143–149). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  58. Thompson, R. (2015). Stakeholder analysis: Winning support for your projects. Mind Tools.
  59. UN DESA, Ford Foundation, UN-HABITAT, and FIA Foundation. (2013). Summary of the consultation for decision-makers on implementing sustainable transport. New York. 1–10. Accessed February 11, 2015.Google Scholar
  60. UN. (n.d.). Sustainable development goals. Accessed October 14, 2016.
  61. van der Voorn, T., Pahl-Wostl, C., & Quist, J. (2012). Combining backcasting and adaptive management for climate adaptation in coastal regions: A methodology and a South-African case study. Futures, 44, 346–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Vergragt, P., & Quist, J. (2011). Backcasting for sustainability: introduction to the special issue. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 747–755. doi: 10.1016/j.techfore.2011.03.010
  63. Wainaina, N. (2013). Elevating the Matatu Sector to a Formal Sector status. October 23. Accessed May 25, 2015.
  64. Wolfram, M., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2016). Cities and systemic change for sustainability: Prevailing epistemologies and an emerging research agenda. Sustainability, 8(2), 1–144.Google Scholar
  65. WWF. (2015). Göteborg utsedd till Årets klimatstad 2015. March 16. Accessed November 08, 2016.

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Varvara Nikulina
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Henrikke Baumann
    • 3
  • David Simon
    • 2
  • Frances Sprei
    • 3
  1. 1.Strategic Sustainable DevelopmentBlekinge Institute of TechnologyKarlskronaSweden
  2. 2.Mistra Urban FuturesChalmers University of TechnologyGothenburgSweden
  3. 3.Energy and EnvironmentChalmers University of TechnologyGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations