Sustainable Cities and Communities

Living Edition
| Editors: Walter Leal Filho, Anabela Marisa Azul, Luciana Brandli, Pinar Gökcin Özuyar, Tony Wall

Urban Mobility and Transportation

  • Filippo PaganelliEmail author
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-71061-7_67-1

Definitions

“Transportation” is the integration of physical and organizational elements with the aim of producing displacement opportunities and demand. Demand is driven by social and economic activities in a target area. Infrastructures, services, control settings, pricing, vehicles, and performances – taken together – make up transportation systems engineering.

“Urban mobility” is divided into collective, individual, and freight transportation. While people’s movements are the outcome of individual decisions, freight movements depend on both the cargo owners and transportation service providers.

“Sustainable mobility” is the ability to meet the needs to move freely, access, communicate, trade, and establish relationships without sacrificing present and future human and ecological values. The traditional definition of mobility has been enriched within the framework of sustainability (declined into economy, society, and environment). When technology is added to this framework, the...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Awasti A, Omrani H, Gerber P (2018) Investigating ideal-solution based multi-criteria decision making techniques for sustainability evaluation of urban mobility projects. Transp Res A 116:247–259Google Scholar
  2. Baidan AM (2016) A brief analysis of the sustainable mobility approach in Bucharest. Environ Sci Procedia 32:168–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Banister D (2008) The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transp Policy 15:73–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Banister D, Kickman R (2006) How to design a more sustainable and fairer built environment: transport and communication. IEEE Proc Intell Transp Syst 153(4):276–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Battarra R, Gargiulo C, Tremiterra MR, Zucaro F (2018) Smart mobility in Italian metropolitan cities: a comparative analysis through indicators and actions. Sustain Cities Soc 41:556–567CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Ben-Akiva ME, Lerman SR (1979) Disaggregate travel and mobility-choice models and measures of accessibility. In: Hensher DA, Storper PR (eds) Behavioural travel modelling. Croom-Helm, London, pp 654–679Google Scholar
  7. Bruhova Foltynova H, Jordova R (2014) The contribution of different policy elements to sustainable urban mobility. Transp Res Procedia 4:312–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bulckaen J, Keseru I, Macharis C (2016) Sustainability versus stakeholder preferences: searching for synergies in urban and regional mobility measures. Res Transp Econ 55:40–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Callegati F et al (2018) Cloud-of-things meets mobility-as-a-service: an insider threat perspective. Comput Secur 74:277–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chowdhury S et al (2018) Public transport users’ and policy makers’ perception of integrated public transport systems. Transp Policy 61:75–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Conticelli E et al (2018) Planning and designing walkable cities: a smart approach. In: Pope R et al (eds) Smart planning: sustainability and mobility in the age of change; Green Energy and Technology. Springer International Publishing, Cham. ISBN: 978-3-319-77681-1Google Scholar
  12. De Olivera Cavalcanti C, Limont M, Dziedzic M, Fernandes V (2017) Sustainability assessment methodology of urban mobility projects. Land Use Policy 60:334–342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Docherty I, Mardsen G, Anable J (2018) The governance of smart mobility. Transp Res A 115:114–125Google Scholar
  14. Gabrielli S et al (2014) Design challenges in motivating change for sustainable urban mobility. Comput Hum Behav 41:416–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Geurs KT, van Wee B (2004) Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. J Transp Geogr 12:127–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goldman T, Gorham R (2006) Sustainable urban transport: four innovative directions. Technol Soc 28:261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hansen WG (1959) How accessibility shapes land-use. J Am Inst Plann 25:73–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hensher DA (2017) Future bus transport contracts under a mobility as a service (MaaS) regime in the digital age: are they likely to change? Transp Res A 98:86–96Google Scholar
  19. Hickman R, Hall P, Banister D (2013) Planning more for sustainable mobility. J Transp Geogr 33:210–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Ibeas A, dell’Olio L, Montequin B (2011) Citizen involvement in promoting sustainable mobility. J Transp Geogr 19:475–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Isaksson K, Antonson H, Eriksson L (2017) Layering and parallel policy making – complementary concepts for understanding implementation challenges to sustainable mobility. Transp Policy 53:50–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Jain D, Tiwari G (2017) Sustainable mobility indicators for Indian cities: selection methodology and application. Ecol Indic 79:310–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jeekel H (2017) Social sustainability and smart mobility: exploring the relationship. Transp Res Procedia 25:4296–4310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kamargianni M et al (2016) A critical review of new mobility services for urban transport. Transp Res Procedia 14:3294–3303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lantieri C, Mantecchini L, Vignali V (2015) Application of noise abatement procedures at regional airports. Proc Inst Civ Eng Transp 169(1):42–52. Thomas Telford LtdGoogle Scholar
  26. Lima JP, da Silva Lima R, Rodrigues da Silva AN (2014) Evaluation and selection of alternatives for the promotion of sustainable urban mobility. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 162:408–418CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lopez-Carreiro I, Monzon A (2018) Evaluating sustainability and innovation of mobility patterns in Spanish cities. Analysis by size and urban typology. Sustain Cities Soc 38:684–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lyons G (2018) Getting smart about urban mobility – aligning the paradigms of smart and sustainable. Transp Res A 115:4–14Google Scholar
  29. Macedo J, Rodrigues F, Tavares F (2017) Urban sustainability mobility assessment: indicators proposal. Energy Procedia 134:731–740CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mantecchini L, Paganelli F (2016) Airport ground access and urban congestion: a paradox of bi-modal networks. Contemp Eng Sci 9:1491–1501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Noland R, Polak J (2002) Travel time variability: a review of theoretical and empirical issues. Transp Rev 22(1):39–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Paganelli F, Mantecchini L, Peritore D, Morabito V, Rizzato L, Nanni Costa A (2018) A network model for the optimal aircraft location for human organ transportation activities. Transplant Proc. ISSN 0041–1345.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.transproceed.2018.04.069
  33. Perra VM, Sdoukopoulos A, Pitsiava-Latinopoulou M (2017) Evaluation of sustainable mobility in the city of Thessaloniki. Transp Res Procedia 24:329–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Persia L, Cipriani E, Sgarra V, Meta E (2016) Strategies and measures for sustainable urban transport systems. Transp Res Procedia 14:955–964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Postorino MN, Mantecchini L (2014) A transport carbon footprint methodology to assess airport carbon emissions. J Air Transp Manag 37:76–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Postorino MN, Mantecchini L, Paganelli F (2017) Green airport investments to mitigate externalities: procedural and technological strategies. In: Sustainable entrepreneurship and investments in the green economy. IGI Global, Hershey, pp 231–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Prati G et al (2017) Cyclists as a minority group? Transp Res F 47:34–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Prati G et al (2018) Evaluation of user behaviour and acceptance of an on-bike system. Transp Res F 58:145–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Priester R, Miramontes M, Wulfhorst G (2014) A generic code of urban mobility: how can cities drive future sustainable development? Transp Res Procedia 4:90–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Rayner J, Howlett M (2017) Introduction: Understanding integrated policy strategies and their evolution. Pol Soc 28(2):99–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schoemaker J, Allen J, Huschebeck M, Monigl J (2006) Quantification of urban freight transport effects I, co-ordination action best urban freight solutions II. Available online at http://www.bestufs.net/download/BESTUFS_II/key_issuesII/BESTUF_Quantification_of_effects.pdf
  42. Shore WB (2006) Land-use, transportation and sustainability. Technol Soc 28:27–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith G, Sochor J, Karlsson MA (2018) Mobility as a service: research in transportation economcis.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.retrec.2018.04.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Stephenson J, Spector S, Hopkins D, McCarthy A (2018) Deep interventions for a suitable transport future. Transp Res D 61:356–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Straatemeier T (2008) How to plan for regional accessibility. Transp Policy 15:127–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Tafidis P, Sdoukopoulos A, Pitsiava-Latinopoulou M (2017) Sustainable urban mobility indicators: policy versus practice in the case of Greek cities. Transp Res Procedia 24:304–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Vagnoni E, Moradi A (2018) Local government’s contribution to low carbon mobility transitions. J Clean Prod 176:486–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Xu J, Qiu R, Lv C (2016) Carbon emission allowance allocation with cap and trade mechanism in air passenger transport. J Clean Prod 131:308–320.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.05.029. ISSN 0959-6526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zijlstra T, Vanoutrive T (2018) The employee mobility budget: aligning sustainable transportation with human resource management? Transp Res D 61:383–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Engineering and Architecture, Department of Civil, Chemical, Environmental and Materials Engineering – Branch: TransportUniversity of BolognaBolognaItaly

Section editors and affiliations

  • Elisa Conticelli
    • 1
  1. 1.University of BolognaBolognaItaly