Everyday mobility and citizenship: a living lab approach

References

• Aldred, R. (2010). ‘On the outside’: Constructing cycling citizenship. Social & Cultural Geography, 11(1), 35–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649360903414593
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anantharaman, M. (2017). Elite and ethical: The defensive distinctions of middle-class bicycling in Bangalore, India. Journal of Consumer Culture, 17(3), 864–886. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540516634412
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Botkyrka kommun. (2020a). Ett hållbart Botkyrka.
   Google Scholar
• Botkyrka kommun. (2020b). Riksten friluftsstad.
   Google Scholar
• Brohmer, H., Munz, K., Röderer, K., Anzengruber, C., Wendland, M., & Corcoran, K. (2023). How attractive is the participation in a living lab study? Experimental evidence and recommendations. Discover Sustainability, 4(1), 23. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-023-00138-6
   Google Scholar
• Bulkeley, H., Marvin, S., Palgan, Y. V., McCormick, K., Breitfuss-Loidl, M., Mai, L., von Wirth, T., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2019). Urban living laboratories: Conducting the experimental city? European Urban and Regional Studies, 26(4), 317–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0969776418787222
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camilleri, R., Attard, M., & Hickman, R. (2022). Understanding barriers to modal shift in Malta: A practice-theoretical perspective of everyday mobility. Journal of Transport Geography, 104, 103446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2022.103446
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cass, N., & Faulconbridge, J. (2016). Commuting practices: New insights into modal shift from theories of social practice. Transport Policy, 45, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cass, N., & Faulconbridge, J. (2017). Satisfying everyday mobility. Mobilities, 12(1), 97–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2015.1096083
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, C. F., & Lee, C. H. (2023). Investigating shared e-scooter users’ customer value co-creation behaviors and their antecedents: Perceived service quality and perceived value. Transport Policy, 136, 147–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.03.015
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cresswell, T. (2013). Citizenship in worlds of mobility. Critical Mobilities, 2013(February), 105–124.
   Google Scholar
• Evans, J., & Karvonen, A. (2014). ‘Give me a laboratory and I will lower your carbon footprint!’—Urban laboratories and the governance of low‐carbon futures. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(2), 413–430. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.12077
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fox, M. (1995). Transport planning and the human activity approach. J. O.Transport Geography, 3, 105–116.
   Google Scholar
• Freudendal-Pedersen, M., Hartmann-Petersen, K., Friis, F., Rudolf Lindberg, M., & Grindsted, T. S. (2020). Sustainable mobility in the mobile risk society—designing innovative mobility solutions in Copenhagen. Sustainability, 12(17), 7218. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12177218
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guell, C., Ogilvie, D., & Green, J. (2023). Changing mobility practices. Can meta-ethnography inform transferable and policy-relevant theory? Social Science & Medicine, 337, 116253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116253
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansson, L., Sørensen, C. H., & Rye, T. (2023). What is public participation in transport in times of change? In L. Hansson, C. H. Sørensen, & T. Rye (Eds.), Public participation in transport in times of change (Vol. 18, pp. 3–12). Emerald Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Hesselgren, M., Hasselqvist, H., & Eriksson, E. (2015). A car-free year: Providing vehicles for change. In Design ecologies: Challenging anthropocentrism in the design of sustainable futures, 7–10 June 2015, Stockholm.
   Google Scholar
• Hine, J., & Scott, J. (2000). Seamless, accessible travel: Users’ views of the public transport journey and interchange. Transport Policy, 7(3), (July 2000) pp. 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0967-070X(00)00022-6
   Google Scholar
• Jensen, O. B., Sheller, M., & Wind, S. (2015). Together and apart: Affective ambiences and negotiation in families’ everyday life and mobility. Mobilities, 10(3), 363–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2013.868158
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson, F., Henriksson, G., & Envall, P. (2019). Moving to private-car-restricted and mobility-served neighborhoods: The unspectacular workings of a progressive mobility plan. Sustainability, 11(22), 6208. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11226208
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kębłowski, W., & Bassens, D. (2018). “All transport problems are essentially mathematical”: The uneven resonance of academic transport and mobility knowledge in Brussels. Urban Geography, 39(3), 413–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/02723638.2017.1336320
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent, J. L. (2022). The use of practice theory in transport research. Transport Reviews, 42(2), 222–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2021.1961918
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kesselring, S., Simon-Philipp, C., Bansen, J., Hefner, B., Minnich, L., & Schreiber, J. (2023). Sustainable mobilities in the neighborhood: Methodological innovation for social change. Sustainability, 15(4), 3583. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043583
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kronsell, A., & Mukhtar-Landgren, D. (2018). Experimental governance: The role of municipalities in urban living labs. European planning studies, 26(5), 988–1007. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2018.1435631
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law, S. F., & Karnilowicz, W. (2015). ‘In our country it’s just poor people who ride a bike’: Place, displacement and cycling in Australia. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 25(4), 296–309. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2215
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lennon, B., Dunphy, N., Gaffney, C., Revez, A., Mullally, G., & O’Connor, P. (2020). Citizen or consumer? Reconsidering energy citizenship. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 22(2), 184–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2019.1680277
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu, Q., & Browne, A. L. (2023). Lifestyle mobilities and urban environmental degradation: Evidence from China. Mobilities, 18(3), 489–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2022.2109985
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manderscheid, K. (2014). Criticising the solitary mobile subject: Researching relational mobilities and reflecting on mobile methods. Mobilities, 9(2), 188–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2013.830406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maxwell, S. A. (2001). Negotiating car use in everyday life. In C. Cultures & D. Miller (Eds.) (pp. 203–222). Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Mock, M. (2023). Making and breaking links: The transformative potential of shared mobility from a practice theories perspective. Mobilities, 18(3), 374–390. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2022.2142066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rau, H., & Sattlegger, L. (2018). Shared journeys, linked lives: A relational-biographical approach to mobility practices. Mobilities, 13(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2017.1300453
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310222225432
   Google Scholar
• Reid-Musson, E. (2018). Shadow mobilities: Regulating migrant bicyclists in rural Ontario, Canada. Mobilities, 13(3), 308–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2017.1375397
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryghaug, M., Skjølsvold, T. M., & Heidenreich, S. (2018). Creating energy citizenship through material participation. Social Studies of Science, 48(2), 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312718770286
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salonen, M., Broberg, A., Kyttä, M., & Toivonen, T. (2014). Do suburban residents prefer the fastest or low-carbon travel modes? Combining public participation GIS and multimodal travel time analysis for daily mobility research. Applied Geography, 53, 438–448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.06.028
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SCB. (2022). Valdeltagande i Sverige.
   Google Scholar
• Schäfer, M., Hielscher, S., Haas, W., Hausknost, D., Leitner, M., Kunze, I., & Mandl, S. (2018). Facilitating low-carbon living? A comparison of intervention measures in different community-based initiatives. Sustainability, 10(4), 1047. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10041047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T. R. (2001). Introduction: Practice theory. In T. R. Schatzki, K. K. Cetina, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The practice turn in contemporary theory (pp. 1–14). Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E., & Pantzar, M. (2005). Consumers, producers and practices: Understanding the invention and reinvention of Nordic walking. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(1), 43–64.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The Dynamics of social practice – Everyday life and how it changes. Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Sjöman, M., & Hesselgren, M. (2022). Designerly living labs: Design-driven experimentation. In O. Kelsey, I. Karolina, & M. Greg (Eds.), Experimentation for sustainable transport: Risks, strengths, and governance implications (pp. 139–154). Linnefors förlag.
   Google Scholar
• Sopjani, L., Stier, J. J., Hesselgren, M., & Ritzén, S. (2020). Shared mobility services versus private car: Implications of changes in everyday life. Journal of Cleaner Production, 259, 120845. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.120845
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinney, J., Aldred, R., & Brown, K. (2015). Geographies of citizenship and everyday (im) mobility. Geoforum; Journal of Physical, Human, and Regional Geosciences, 64, 325–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2015.04.013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Urry, J. (2012). Sociology beyond societies: Mobilities for the twenty-first century. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Vaddadi, B., Ringenson, T., Sjöman, M., Hesselgren, M., & Kramers, A. (2022). Do they work? Exploring possible potentials of neighbourhood telecommuting centres in supporting sustainable travel. Travel Behaviour and Society, 29, 34–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tbs.2022.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Brussel, S., & Huyse, H. (2019). Citizen science on speed? Realising the triple objective of scientific rigour, policy influence and deep citizen engagement in a large-scale citizen science project on ambient air quality in antwerp. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 62(3), 534–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2018.1428183
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Waes, A., Nikolaeva, A., & Raven, R. (2021). Challenges and dilemmas in strategic urban experimentation. An analysis of four cycling innovation living labs. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 172, 121004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Von Wirth, T., Fuenfschilling, L., Frantzeskaki, N., & Coenen, L. (2019). Impacts of urban living labs on sustainability transitions: Mechanisms and strategies for systemic change through experimentation. European Planning Studies, 27(2), 229–257. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2018.1504895
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wahlund, M., & Palm, J. (2022). The role of energy democracy and energy citizenship for participatory energy transitions: A comprehensive review. Energy Research & Social Science, 87, 102482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102482
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, M. (2012). How theories of practice can inform transition to a decarbonised transport system. Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 488–496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar