ABSTRACT

In 2013 the Dutch Minister for Infrastructure and Water Management initiated a policy programme that aimed to develop a transition towards smart mobility. A Roadmap was developed to support the policy innovation programme because previous initiatives have failed due to the lack of a strategic document. The Roadmap’s first transition pathway (policy goal) called for a development of a user-centric smart mobility. We analysed how this policy goal has been enacted. We conducted 32 semi-structured interviews with relevant smart mobility practitioners, which we have analysed through our theoretical framework consisting of three boundary concepts: boundary work, boundary objects and boundary organisations. Additionally, we have drawn from the literature on user-involvement. The boundary concepts have led us to identifying two main challenges that led to an unsuccessful realisation of the policy goal. One, the responsibilities for involving users have been transferred to numerous actors, who renegotiated the goals assigned to them by the Ministry, resorting to their old techno-centric innovating ways. The dominance of the techno-centric perspective acted as a barrier and inhibited a successful implementation of a more user-centric approach. Two, a key criterion for successful realisation of the pathway – namely, the support of an organisation specifically held accountable for realising the pathway – was absent. In our conclusion we provide recommendations for a more successful user-inclusion, as well as reflections on the state of the smart mobility policy in The Netherlands.

摘要

2013年，荷兰基础设施和水管理部长启动了一项政策计划，旨在实现向智能出行的过渡。制定了路线图以支持政策创新计划，因为先前的举措由于缺乏战略文件而失败。路线图的第一个过渡途径（政策目标）要求开发以用户为中心的智能移动性。我们分析了该政策目标是如何制定的。我们对相关的智能出行从业者进行了32次半结构化访谈，并通过我们的理论框架对这些访谈进行了分析，该理论框架包括三个边界概念：边界工作，边界对象和边界组织。另外，我们从有关用户参与的文献中得出。边界概念使我们确定了两个主要挑战，这些挑战导致未能成功实现政策目标。第一，使用户参与的责任已经转移给众多参与者，这些参与者重新采用了该部以技术为中心的创新方式，重新确定了该部分配给他们的目标。以技术为中心的观点的主导地位成为障碍，并阻碍了以用户为中心的方法的成功实施。第二，缺少成功实现该途径的关键标准，即没有专门负责实现该途径的组织的支持。在我们的结论中，我们为更成功地包容用户提供了建议，并对荷兰智能出行政策的现状进行了反思。