Stolze Dario, Klinger Thomas, Haustein Sonja
Department of Technology, Management and Economics, Technical University of Denmark, Kgs Lyngby, Denmark.
ILS - Research Institute for Regional and Urban Development, Dortmund, Germany.
Transp Rev. 2025 Jan 31;45(3):301-332. doi: 10.1080/01441647.2025.2454414. eCollection 2025.
While "Mobility Culture" is an emerging concept in transport science and policy, it is often defined and applied in different ways. We conducted a systematic literature review focusing on the definitions of the concept and how it has been approached empirically. We found that definitions of Mobility Culture are heterogeneous, often indirect and implicit, or missing entirely. We assigned papers to five definition groups based on similarity: (1) characteristics, (2) characteristics, (3) (4) notions of future transportation, and (5) . Among empirical papers, we identified three broader approaches: (e.g. city typologies or pre-and-post relocation studies), (e.g. place-specific mode choice, local discourses) and studies We discuss the suitability of these approaches for different research goals and how they relate to the definition groups. Overall, we observe a lack of conceptual clarity in the Mobility Culture discourse, which is also reflected in the frequent mismatch of definitions and empirical operationalisations. We recommend that future Mobility Culture definitions consistently acknowledge the phenomenon's (i) complexity and multidimensionality, (ii) the relational character among its dimensions and attributes, and (iii) its sensibility for social and geographical differences.
虽然“流动文化”是交通科学与政策领域中的一个新兴概念,但其定义和应用方式往往各不相同。我们针对该概念的定义以及其实证研究方法进行了系统的文献综述。我们发现,流动文化的定义五花八门,常常是间接且隐含的,甚至完全缺失。我们根据相似性将论文分为五个定义组:(1) 特征,(2) 特征,(3) (此处原文缺失内容)(4) 未来交通理念,以及(5) (此处原文缺失内容)。在实证研究论文中,我们确定了三种更广泛的方法: (例如城市类型学或搬迁前后研究)、 (例如特定地点的出行方式选择、地方话语)以及 研究(此处原文缺失内容)。我们讨论了这些方法对不同研究目标的适用性以及它们与定义组的关系。总体而言,我们发现流动文化话语在概念上缺乏清晰度,这也反映在定义与实证操作经常不匹配的情况中。我们建议,未来流动文化的定义应始终承认该现象的 (i) 复杂性和多维度性,(ii) 其维度和属性之间的关系特征,以及 (iii) 对社会和地理差异的敏感性。