管理共享交通:比较三个城市追求的公共政策目标

IF 3.5 2区 工程技术 Q1 ENGINEERING, CIVIL
{"title":"管理共享交通:比较三个城市追求的公共政策目标","authors":"","doi":"10.1007/s11116-023-10461-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>Shared mobility services such as shared scooters, bikes, and ridehailing services have transformed the urban mobility landscape in recent years. In this paper we identify the goals that local governments are pursuing when regulating these private services. We also analyse the circumstances and motivations that led to the pursuit of these goals. For this, we carried out three in-depth case studies of cities where private companies had deployed shared mobility services: Bogotá, Colombia; Paris, France; and Los Angeles, USA. We found that there is a wide range of goals (34 distinct goals) that the governments of these cities are pursuing when attempting to regulate shared mobility services. However, only between three and four of these goals tend to dominate most of their actions. We also identified a mix of motivations for the pursuit of these goals: from the public interest of redressing past inequities, to circumstantial motivations such as appeasing the incumbents that have seen their businesses endangered by these new technologies. The academic literature converges on sustainability and equitable access being two of the primary goals to be pursued in transport policy, but our findings suggest that practitioners and policymakers are pursuing a range of other goals that do not fit neatly into these two theoretical categories.</p>","PeriodicalId":49419,"journal":{"name":"Transportation","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Governing shared mobility: a comparison of the public policy goals being pursued in three cities\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11116-023-10461-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3>Abstract</h3> <p>Shared mobility services such as shared scooters, bikes, and ridehailing services have transformed the urban mobility landscape in recent years. In this paper we identify the goals that local governments are pursuing when regulating these private services. We also analyse the circumstances and motivations that led to the pursuit of these goals. For this, we carried out three in-depth case studies of cities where private companies had deployed shared mobility services: Bogotá, Colombia; Paris, France; and Los Angeles, USA. We found that there is a wide range of goals (34 distinct goals) that the governments of these cities are pursuing when attempting to regulate shared mobility services. However, only between three and four of these goals tend to dominate most of their actions. We also identified a mix of motivations for the pursuit of these goals: from the public interest of redressing past inequities, to circumstantial motivations such as appeasing the incumbents that have seen their businesses endangered by these new technologies. The academic literature converges on sustainability and equitable access being two of the primary goals to be pursued in transport policy, but our findings suggest that practitioners and policymakers are pursuing a range of other goals that do not fit neatly into these two theoretical categories.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49419,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transportation\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transportation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-023-10461-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, CIVIL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-023-10461-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, CIVIL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要 近年来,共享滑板车、自行车和打车服务等共享交通服务改变了城市交通格局。在本文中,我们明确了地方政府在监管这些私人服务时所追求的目标。我们还分析了实现这些目标的环境和动机。为此,我们对部署了共享交通服务的私营公司所在城市进行了三项深入的案例研究:哥伦比亚波哥大、法国巴黎和美国洛杉矶。我们发现,这些城市的政府在试图监管共享交通服务时,追求的目标范围很广(34 个不同的目标)。然而,其中只有三到四个目标往往主导着它们的大部分行动。我们还发现了追求这些目标的各种动机:从纠正过去不公平现象的公共利益,到诸如安抚那些看到自己的业务受到这些新技术威胁的现有企业等间接动机。学术文献一致认为,可持续发展和公平使用是交通政策追求的两个主要目标,但我们的研究结果表明,实践者和决策者正在追求一系列其他目标,而这些目标并不完全符合这两个理论范畴。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Governing shared mobility: a comparison of the public policy goals being pursued in three cities

Abstract

Shared mobility services such as shared scooters, bikes, and ridehailing services have transformed the urban mobility landscape in recent years. In this paper we identify the goals that local governments are pursuing when regulating these private services. We also analyse the circumstances and motivations that led to the pursuit of these goals. For this, we carried out three in-depth case studies of cities where private companies had deployed shared mobility services: Bogotá, Colombia; Paris, France; and Los Angeles, USA. We found that there is a wide range of goals (34 distinct goals) that the governments of these cities are pursuing when attempting to regulate shared mobility services. However, only between three and four of these goals tend to dominate most of their actions. We also identified a mix of motivations for the pursuit of these goals: from the public interest of redressing past inequities, to circumstantial motivations such as appeasing the incumbents that have seen their businesses endangered by these new technologies. The academic literature converges on sustainability and equitable access being two of the primary goals to be pursued in transport policy, but our findings suggest that practitioners and policymakers are pursuing a range of other goals that do not fit neatly into these two theoretical categories.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Transportation
Transportation 工程技术-工程:土木
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
4.70%
发文量
94
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: In our first issue, published in 1972, we explained that this Journal is intended to promote the free and vigorous exchange of ideas and experience among the worldwide community actively concerned with transportation policy, planning and practice. That continues to be our mission, with a clear focus on topics concerned with research and practice in transportation policy and planning, around the world. These four words, policy and planning, research and practice are our key words. While we have a particular focus on transportation policy analysis and travel behaviour in the context of ground transportation, we willingly consider all good quality papers that are highly relevant to transportation policy, planning and practice with a clear focus on innovation, on extending the international pool of knowledge and understanding. Our interest is not only with transportation policies - and systems and services – but also with their social, economic and environmental impacts, However, papers about the application of established procedures to, or the development of plans or policies for, specific locations are unlikely to prove acceptable unless they report experience which will be of real benefit those working elsewhere. Papers concerned with the engineering, safety and operational management of transportation systems are outside our scope.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信