Abstract

The study aims to identify the evolution of perspectives on sustainable urban mobility and the principles that have emerged. Despite the burgeoning of interest in and contributions to sustainable mobility, the debate on its underlying principles has remained peripheral. The overwhelming focus has been on micro-dynamics and the need for comprehensive perspectives has been underestimated. Principles are crucial whenever there are conflicting policy objectives. Indeed, sustainable mobility practices primarily address obvious emergencies, whose priorities are undisputed. However, once these emergencies have passed, heterogeneous stakeholders may express different priorities for secondary problems, so that the priorities themselves need to be defined through a political process. Such a process requires an in-depth thought on principles. Through a systematic literature review on peer-reviewed journal articles and proceedings from 1996 to 2018, this study highlights two main perspectives that have shaped the way sustainability in urban mobility management is conceived today: planning versus strategy oriented. We then identify a set of principles that have gained center-stage in the debate on urban mobility and that, in our view, show how the debate has evolved: socio-centrism, participatory planning, systemic evaluation of financial sustainability, and integrated mobility management. The new perspective privileges a holistic approach. A pivotal role is played by the social dimension, whereas technical and economic evaluations assume a different role in the political process of priority definition.

摘要

该研究旨在确定可持续城市流动性观点的演变以及已经出现的原则。尽管人们对可持续交通的兴趣和贡献日益增长，但对其基本原则的辩论仍然处于边缘地位。压倒性的关注一直在微观动态上，而对综合观点的需求却被低估了。当政策目标相互冲突时，原则是至关重要的。事实上，可持续交通实践主要解决显而易见的问题紧急情况，其优先事项是无可争议的。然而，一旦这些紧急情况过去，不同的利益相关者可能会针对次要问题表达不同的优先级，因此优先级本身需要通过政治过程来确定。这样的过程需要对原则进行深入思考。通过对 1996 年至 2018 年同行评审期刊文章和会议录的系统文献综述，本研究强调了塑造当今城市交通管理可持续性的两个主要观点：规划与战略导向。然后，我们确定了一系列在城市交通辩论中占据中心地位的原则，在我们看来，这些原则表明了辩论是如何演变的：社会中心主义、参与式规划、财务可持续性的系统评估、和综合移动管理。新视角优先采用整体方法。社会层面发挥着关键作用，而技术和经济评估在优先级定义的政治过程中扮演着不同的角色。