Hunting in a pack? Interrogating the publicness of Mobility as a Service in Brussels

IF 2.9 2区 社会学 Q1 GEOGRAPHY
Mobilities Pub Date : 2026-05-04 Epub Date: 2025-09-09 DOI:10.1080/17450101.2025.2558641
Lucas Lyko , Wojciech Kębłowski
{"title":"Hunting in a pack? Interrogating the publicness of Mobility as a Service in Brussels","authors":"Lucas Lyko ,&nbsp;Wojciech Kębłowski","doi":"10.1080/17450101.2025.2558641","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As policymakers and scholars continue to claim that the future of urban mobility is ‘smart’, the idea of ‘Mobility as a Service’ (MaaS) has been interpreted as a solution to key mobility-related problems. In this paper we identify an urgent need to interrogate diverse scenarios of MaaS to uncover their implications for public transport, as well as broader goals of transport policy. Literature on MaaS to date has considered the potential risks that its diverse forms may pose for accessibility and sustainability when blackboxed within an imperative for technological modernisation. We build on this work through the alternative normative framing of <em>publicness</em>, focusing on the case of the Brussels-Capital Region. Empirically, our research reveals an unstable web of normativities and rationalities that surround MaaS yet do not fall into a private/public dichotomy. Their crystallisation remains hampered by strategies of discursive hedging rather than claims to longer-term goals. We observe that MaaS stakeholders engage in subtle discursive strategies to relativise what counts as public transport, while they avoid overt positioning as its competitors. Methodologically and theoretically, we suggest that combining discourse analysis with a normative claim to publicness can enable purpose-led, critical engagement with transport technologies without foreclosing their potential opportunities.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":51457,"journal":{"name":"Mobilities","volume":"21 3","pages":"Pages 743-764"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2026-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Mobilities","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S1745010125000712","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As policymakers and scholars continue to claim that the future of urban mobility is ‘smart’, the idea of ‘Mobility as a Service’ (MaaS) has been interpreted as a solution to key mobility-related problems. In this paper we identify an urgent need to interrogate diverse scenarios of MaaS to uncover their implications for public transport, as well as broader goals of transport policy. Literature on MaaS to date has considered the potential risks that its diverse forms may pose for accessibility and sustainability when blackboxed within an imperative for technological modernisation. We build on this work through the alternative normative framing of publicness, focusing on the case of the Brussels-Capital Region. Empirically, our research reveals an unstable web of normativities and rationalities that surround MaaS yet do not fall into a private/public dichotomy. Their crystallisation remains hampered by strategies of discursive hedging rather than claims to longer-term goals. We observe that MaaS stakeholders engage in subtle discursive strategies to relativise what counts as public transport, while they avoid overt positioning as its competitors. Methodologically and theoretically, we suggest that combining discourse analysis with a normative claim to publicness can enable purpose-led, critical engagement with transport technologies without foreclosing their potential opportunities.
成群狩猎?在布鲁塞尔对公共交通服务的质疑
随着政策制定者和学者们继续声称城市交通的未来是“智能的”,“交通即服务”(MaaS)的想法被解释为解决关键的交通相关问题。在本文中,我们发现迫切需要对MaaS的各种场景进行调查,以揭示它们对公共交通的影响,以及交通政策的更广泛目标。迄今为止,关于MaaS的文献已经考虑了其多样化形式在技术现代化的必要条件下可能对可及性和可持续性构成的潜在风险。我们通过公共性的另一种规范框架来建立这项工作,重点关注布鲁塞尔-首都地区的案例。从经验上看,我们的研究揭示了围绕MaaS的规范和理性的不稳定网络,但并没有落入私人/公共的二分法。它们的具体化仍然受到话语对冲策略的阻碍,而不是对长期目标的主张。我们观察到,MaaS的利益相关者采用了微妙的话语策略,将什么算作公共交通,同时避免将其公开定位为竞争对手。在方法上和理论上,我们建议将话语分析与公共性的规范性主张相结合,可以在不排除潜在机会的情况下,实现以目的为导向的、批判性的交通技术参与。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Mobilities
Mobilities Multiple-
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
17.90%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: Mobilities examines both the large-scale movements of people, objects, capital, and information across the world, as well as more local processes of daily transportation, movement through public and private spaces, and the travel of material things in everyday life. Recent developments in transportation and communications infrastructures, along with new social and cultural practices of mobility, present new challenges for the coordination and governance of mobilities and for the protection of mobility rights and access. This has elicited many new research methods and theories relevant for understanding the connections between diverse mobilities and immobilities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书