Ensuring sustainable mobility in urban periphery, rural areas and remote regions,European Transport Research Review

当前位置： X-MOL 学术 › Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. › 论文详情

Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)

Ensuring sustainable mobility in urban periphery, rural areas and remote regions
European Transport Research Review ( IF 4.3 ) Pub Date : 2023-04-14 , DOI: 10.1186/s12544-023-00584-3
Takeru Shibayama , Guenter Emberger

Transport and mobility planning has been going through a fundamental paradigm change, from conventional approaches focusing on physical and economic dimensions to minimize generalized cost of travel towards more sustainable approaches also incorporating social dimensions (e.g., Banister [2]). Regarding urban areas, the European initiative of Sustainable Urban Transport Planning (SUMP), which incorporates good practices mainly in Europe but also around the world (Rupprecht et al., [8]), is to a certain extent recognized as a state-of-the-art planning approach. In urban areas, available policy instruments for sustainable mobility are well known, and the density of cities and the concentration of knowledge and planning competence accelerate their implementation. For example, active means of transport are relatively frequently deployed as travel distances in dense urban areas tend to be short. Public transport can offer high-frequency services, and various New Mobility Services such as car sharing (cf., Shibayama & Emberger [8]) can also be introduced relatively easily due to the agglomeration of travel demand. Moreover, urban density makes it relatively straightforward to integrate land-use and transport planning, as most of the transit-oriented developments (TODs) takes place in urban areas .

However, the landscape of sustainable transport planning changes completely when it comes to urban peripheries, rural areas, and remote regions. Mobility in such areas is still predominantly supported by motorized private vehicles, whereas the existent supply of public transport and New Mobility Services are not sufficient to cover present and future travel demand. Travel distance tend to be longer compared to urban areas, and this makes the context of active modes as a mean for door-to-door travels different. Rural and remote regions often depend on a single or a few industries: the primary sector of industry is often one of the most important industries, while tourism is an industry that is increasingly gaining importance in many of such regions. Adverse socio-economic and demographic developments such as ageing, and depopulation makes it more difficult to simply apply urban approaches in these peri-urban, rural and remote regions (ITF, [8]).

Sustainable transport planning in urban peripheries, rural areas, and remote regions areas is receiving increasing attention in transport and mobility research. In parallel to our preparation of a workshop, which eventually led to this topical collection, ITF [8] gathered international experience with innovations in the field of rural mobility. In this report, ITF recommends “a profound rethink of current transport provision” in rural areas for sustainable mobility that reflects current socio-economic and demographic developments in rural areas. In transport research, intercity transport has attracted much attention; however, everyday mobility in suburban, rural and remote regions remains a rather unexplored area of transport research that receives less attention.

With this background, this topical collection (TC) is planned and realized jointly by ETRR and World Conference in Transportation Research Society’s Special Interest Group (WCTRS SIG) G2 National and Regional Transport Policy and Planning. Seven papers in this TC stem from WCTR SIG G2 Mid-term Workshop held on 27–29 September 2021. The WCTRS SIG G2 Mid-term Event was held fully online due to the COVID-19 pandemic and consequent uncertainties about international travel restrictions. It was set to cover a wide range of time zones to accommodate presenters from the Asia-Pacific Region to Americas, with 19 presentations from Australia, Japan, China, many European countries, and to Brazil. Two papers in this TC were submitted directly to ETRR in response to a specific call for papers.

Topically, the papers in this TC can be categorized into three groups. Three papers in this TC deal with policies and future scenarios of rural mobility, ranging from a national-level policy approach to local scenario building. Three papers deal with the policy instruments (measures) for sustainable rural mobility. While one deals with a concrete measure (transit-oriented development), the other two analyzes and discusses gaps between available tools and mobility needs, and implementation barriers of them. The remaining three papers deal with the topic of policy and planning of specific transport modes in rural areas, namely public transport, demand-responsive transport (DRT) with the Mobility as a Service as its variation, and regional biking.

Laa et al. [6] presents an analysis of the existing legal framework and developed scenarios for an Austrian context towards a “Nationwide Mobility Guarantee”. A Sustainable Mobility Guarantee is an approach adopted in some countries in Europe. While the paper by Laa et al. [6] is motivated by the Austrian national governmental programme of 2020, the German Federal State (Land) of Baden-Württenberg also manifested a similar concept in 2021 in its regional governmental programme. This is understood as a top-down approach to ensure a certain level of services of public transport in rural areas, demand responsive transport and other complementary modes of transport. As their research as well as the practical approaches are still in their infancies, further developments could be expected in this domain.

Nelson and Caulfield [7] analyze the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the transport sector and travel behavior in the rural peripheries. They utilized the results of the aforementioned ITF [8] works and additional literature to understand how COVID-19 has affected rural mobility, to gain implications for how to plan for sustainable rural mobility in the post-COVID world, and to understand the longer-term impacts of COVID-19. Despite negative short-term impacts of the pandemic in rural areas, they identified opportunities for changes in mobility behavior in the post-COVID era. Together with public transport, community-led transport services will potentially be strengthened as an essential “lifeline” in rural areas. Demand-responsive forms of rural mobility services and solutions, including but not limited to taxis and ride-hailing, will potentially gain more attentions in addressing mobility needs which has been covered by private cars. They consider the digital alternatives as a way to manage travel demands in rural areas, allowing goods and service delivered rather than individuals traveling for long distances. They also consider working-from-home as a potential for rural areas if this can stimulate migration to rural areas.

The pandemic is a kind of “wildcard” event, which has low probability of occurrence but high impacts on the society. Tori et al. [8] developed a participatory methodology for developing mobility visions with such embedded wildcard events and tested them it in a Belgian village to design mobility scenarios for the village for 2050. In the vision development process, they observed the primary role of wildcard events being an incentive to step out of participant’s comfort zones to think more freely and openly. As the authors imply in the paper, it is more difficult in rural areas than in urban areas to think about mobility options flexibly and freely because of the dominance of the cars in everyday mobility and the unavailability of alternatives to cars. This could also potentially hinder participatory planning process because, for rural residents, business-as-usual deems to be an only available mobility option. In this sense, this research opens up a potential method to address this problem underlying in rural area, while further developments will be needed to establish it as a part of the participatory approach in rural area for sustainable mobility.

Agriesti et al. [1] analyze the social, technological, economic, environmental and policy challenges faced by rural areas and the applicability of available innovative solutions for rural areas to address these identified challenges. Their analysis results, based on surveys and workshops with Estonian municipalities, highlights that no single innovative solution will be able to address all challenges that low-density area faces. There are various hinderance factors in social, technological, economic, environment and policy domains to implement innovative mobility solutions. They also identify an “policy void” in this domain, which leads to less or hardly existent support to overcome such hinderances.

Poltimäe et al. [8] confirms the conclusion by Agriesti et al. [1] as they state “single novel mobility solutions are seldom applicable for all rural travellers” in their extensive literature review onto innovative mobility solutions in rural areas. They clearly recognize the issues of research gaps between everyday mobility of rural inhabitants and mobility needs of visitors, such as tourists and owners of second homes. The ten theses that they discuss in the paper will potentially serve as an important guidance for future research onto the topic of rural mobility to fill this research gap.

Hrelja et al. [5] present their three cases studies in Sweden onto transit-oriented development (TOD) in low-density and peri-urban contexts. Their key finding is that enablers and barriers for TODs in the low-density contexts are largely similar to the ones in cities. Their analysis implies that TOD may work also in low-density peri-urban regions as a potential mid- to long-term strategy to overcome the general difficulty of public transport in such regions, but only when the value of real estate property is increased and attractive living conditions in close proximity of urban areas can be offered.

Three papers in this TC focus on specific modes of transport or planning approaches in rural contexts. Some of them could be contextualized as innovative mobility solutions, but largely they are based on the classical means of transport. Hansson et al. [3] analyze the wider effects on overall railway patronage arising from filling interval gaps of local railway services in off-peak hours. They analyzed the effect on public transport usage in four cases in southern Sweden, where at least hourly all-day rail or bus services were newly introduced, filling interval gaps. Such additional services address the difficulties of rural public transport as pointed out by Poltimäe et al. [8] that public transport supply it is often not flexible enough to respond to the diverse travel needs of the users. Hansson et al. [3] demonstrate that such improved coverage of longer hours leads to overall patronage growth throughout the day. This is an important addition to the knowledge to understand the benefit of systematic and regular public transport services in rural contexts, which would enhance the opportunities of its use and results in higher ridership.

Heinitz [4] tested his assessment method for shared and on-demand mobility services in rural areas. With his framework, he assessed two scenarios about regulatory options, one being that ride-sourcing services do not directly compete against public transport and serve as a complimentary service to it, and the other being that sharing of rides are liberalized and compete against public transport while incentivized to shift from single-person car use. With a case study in Germany, he estimates the ranges of revenues, extra vehicle kilometres, and necessary public budgets.

Scappini et al. [8] presents their approach for a regional bike network on the island of Sardinia, Italy. Their planning results are of course local to the island’s context, but more importantly they demonstrate how a systematized planning approach for regional bicycle network could look like, as well as how to estimate potentials of cycling in a regional context where cycling has not played a significant role in the transport system.

The wide range of research outcomes are included in this Topical Collection. At the same time, many of them pose further research questions that will have to be addressed in the future. Although rural mobility is gaining more attention in policy-making and scholarly research, it is still a far less studied domain especially when it is compared to the urban counterparts. How can policy goals for rural mobility in light of both accessibility and sustainability look like? What kind of mobility needs will have to be prioritized to be covered publicly by existing and emerging mobility services to deliver sustainable mobility in rural contexts, and what else may have to remain covered by cars? How can transport policy instruments be effectively implemented in rural areas? It is also important to address how the digital transformation of the society will change rural mobility needs, too. Despite the ongoing agglomeration to urban areas, rural areas will continue to accommodate a significant number of people, industries, and facilities. Therefore, major research efforts will be required in the future to make rural mobility sustainable.

Agriesti, S. A. M., Soe, R. M., & Saif, M. A. (2022). Framework for connecting the mobility challenges in low density areas to smart mobility solutions: The case study of estonian municipalities. European Transport Research Review, 14, 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00557-y
Article Google Scholar
Banister, D. (2008). The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy, 15, 73–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005
Article Google Scholar
Hansson, J., Pettersson-Löfstedt, F., Svensson, H., & Wretstrand, A. (2022). Patronage effects of off-peak service improvements in regional public transport. European Transport Research Review, 14, 19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00543-4
Article Google Scholar
Heinitz, F. (2022). Sustainable development assessment of incentive-driven shared on-demand mobility systems in rural settings. European Transport Research Review, 14, 38. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00565-y
Article Google Scholar
Hrelja, R., Olsson, L., Pettersson-Löfstedt, F., & Rye, T. (2022). Challenges of delivering TOD in low-density contexts: The swedish experience of barriers and enablers. European Transport Research Review, 14, 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00546-1
Article Google Scholar
Laa, B., Shibayama, T., Brezina, T., Schönfelder, S., Damjanovic, D., Szalai, E., & Hammel, M. (2022). A nationwide mobility service guarantee for Austria: Possible design scenarios and implications. European Transport Research Review, 14, 25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00550-5
Article Google Scholar
Nelson, J. D., & Caulfield, B. (2022). Implications of COVID-19 for future travel behaviour in the rural periphery. European Transport Research Review, 14, 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00547-0
Article Google Scholar
Poltimäe, H., Rehema, M., Raun, J., & Poom, A. (2022). In search of sustainable and inclusive mobility solutions for rural areas. European Transport Research Review, 14, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00536-3
Article Google Scholar
Rupprecht, S., Brand, L., Böhler-Baedeker, S., & Brunner, L. M. (2019). and Rupprecht Consult - Forschung & Beratung GmbH. Guidelines for developing and implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (2nd edition). URL: https://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/sump_guidelines_2019_interactive_document_1.pdf.
Scappini, B., Zucca, V., Meloni, I., & Piras, F. (2022). The regional cycle network of Sardinia: Upgrading the accessibility of rural areas through a comprehensive island-wide cycle network. European Transport Research Review, 14, 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00533-6
Article Google Scholar
Shibayama, T., & Emberger, G. (2020). New mobility services: Taxonomy, innovation and the role of ICTs. Transport Policy, 98, 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.05.024
Article Google Scholar
Tori, S., Pappers, J., & Keserü, I. (2022). Developing disruptive mobility scenarios for rural areas. Participatory mobility scenario building in a belgian village for the year 2050. European Transport Research Review, 14, 33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00555-0
Article Google Scholar
ITF (2021). Innovations for Better Rural Mobility. International Transport Forum,. Research Report. Paris. URL: https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/innovation-rural-mobility.pdf.

Download references

Authors and Affiliations

Research Unit of Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering, Institute of Transportation, TU Wien, Vienna, Austria
Takeru Shibayama & Guenter Emberger

Authors

Takeru ShibayamaView author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Guenter EmbergerView author publications
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Both authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takeru Shibayama.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

Reprints and Permissions

Cite this article

Shibayama, T., Emberger, G. Ensuring sustainable mobility in urban periphery, rural areas and remote regions. Eur. Transp. Res. Rev. 15, 11 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-023-00584-3

Download citation

Received: 22 December 2022
Accepted: 13 February 2023
Published: 14 April 2023
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-023-00584-3

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

中文翻译：

确保城市周边、农村地区和偏远地区的可持续交通

交通和流动性规划一直在经历根本性的范式变化，从侧重于物理和经济维度的传统方法，以最大限度地减少旅行的一般成本，转向更可持续的方法，同时纳入社会维度（例如，Banister [2]）。关于城市地区，欧洲的可持续城市交通规划 (SUMP) 倡议在一定程度上被认为是一个国家的-最先进的规划方法。在城市地区，可持续交通的可用政策工具是众所周知的，城市的密度以及知识和规划能力的集中加速了这些政策的实施。例如，由于密集城市地区的出行距离往往较短，因此相对频繁地使用主动交通工具。公共交通可以提供高频服务，并且由于出行需求的集聚，也可以相对容易地引入各种新移动服务，例如汽车共享（参见Shibayama＆Emberger [8]）。此外，城市密度使得整合土地使用和交通规划变得相对简单，因为大多数以公交为导向的开发 (TOD) 都发生在城市地区。

然而，当涉及到城市周边、农村地区和偏远地区时，可持续交通规划的格局就完全改变了。这些地区的机动性仍然主要由机动私家车提供支持，而现有的公共交通和新移动服务供应不足以满足当前和未来的出行需求。与城市地区相比，出行距离往往更长，这使得主动模式作为门到门出行方式的背景有所不同。农村和偏远地区往往依赖于单一或少数几个产业：第一产业往往是最重要的产业之一，而旅游业是许多此类地区日益重要的产业。不利的社会经济和人口发展，如老龄化、

Nelson 和 Caulfield [7] 分析了 COVID-19 大流行对农村周边地区交通部门和出行行为的影响。他们利用上述 ITF [8] 工作的结果和其他文献来了解 COVID-19 如何影响农村流动性，获得对如何规划后 COVID 世界可持续农村流动性的影响，并了解更长期的 - COVID-19 的长期影响。尽管大流行病在农村地区产生了短期负面影响，但他们发现了在后 COVID 时代改变流动行为的机会。与公共交通一起，社区主导的交通服务将有可能得到加强，成为农村地区必不可少的“生命线”。农村交通服务和解决方案的需求响应形式，包括但不限于出租车和叫车服务，在解决私家车已经满足的出行需求方面，可能会获得更多关注。他们将数字替代方案视为管理农村地区旅行需求的一种方式，允许交付商品和服务，而不是个人长途旅行。如果可以刺激向农村地区迁移，他们还认为在家工作是农村地区的一种潜力。

大流行是一种“不确定”事件，发生概率低，但对社会影响大。托里等人。[8] 开发了一种参与式方法，用于开发具有此类嵌入式通配符事件的移动愿景，并在比利时村庄对其进行了测试，以设计 2050 年村庄的移动场景。在愿景开发过程中，他们观察到通配符事件的主要作用是鼓励走出参与者的舒适区，更自由、更开放地思考。正如作者在论文中所暗示的那样，由于汽车在日常出行中占据主导地位，而且没有汽车替代品，农村地区比城市地区更难灵活、自由地考虑出行选择。这也可能会阻碍参与式规划过程，因为对于农村居民来说，一切照旧被认为是唯一可用的移动选项。从这个意义上说，这项研究开辟了一种解决农村地区潜在问题的潜在方法，同时需要进一步发展以将其确立为农村地区可持续流动参与方法的一部分。

阿格里斯蒂等人。[1] 分析农村地区面临的社会、技术、经济、环境和政策挑战，以及农村地区现有创新解决方案的适用性，以应对这些已确定的挑战。他们的分析结果基于与爱沙尼亚市政当局的调查和研讨会，强调没有任何单一的创新解决方案能够解决低密度地区面临的所有挑战。在社会、技术、经济、环境和政策领域存在各种阻碍因素来实施创新的移动解决方案。他们还确定了该领域的“政策空白”，这导致很少或几乎没有支持来克服这些障碍。

Poltimäe 等人。[8] 证实了 Agriesti 等人的结论。[1] 因为他们在对农村地区创新移动解决方案的广泛文献综述中指出“单一的新颖移动解决方案很少适用于所有农村旅行者”。他们清楚地认识到农村居民的日常流动性和游客（例如游客和第二套房主）的流动性需求之间的研究差距问题。他们在论文中讨论的十个论点可能会成为未来研究农村流动性主题以填补这一研究空白的重要指导。

Hrelja 等人。[5] 展示了他们在瑞典的三个关于低密度和城市周边环境中的公交导向发展 (TOD) 的案例研究。他们的主要发现是，TOD 在低密度环境中的推动因素和障碍与城市中的情况大体相似。他们的分析表明，TOD 也可能在低密度的城市周边地区发挥作用，作为克服这些地区公共交通普遍困难的潜在中长期战略，但前提是房地产价值增加并且可以提供靠近市区的有吸引力的生活条件。

本 TC 中的三篇论文侧重于农村环境中的特定交通方式或规划方法。其中一些可以作为创新的移动解决方案进行上下文化，但它们主要基于传统的交通工具。汉森等人。[3] 分析了填补非高峰时段地方铁路服务间隔空缺对整体铁路客运量的更广泛影响。他们分析了瑞典南部四个案例对公共交通使用的影响，那里新引入了至少每小时一班的全天铁路或公共汽车服务，填补了间隔空白。正如 Poltimäe 等人指出的那样，此类额外服务解决了农村公共交通的困难。[8] 公共交通供应往往不够灵活，无法响应用户多样化的出行需求。汉森等人。[3] 表明，这种对更长工作时间的改进覆盖会导致全天的总体赞助量增长。这是对了解系统和定期公共交通服务在农村环境中的好处的知识的重要补充，这将增加其使用的机会并导致更高的乘客量。

Heinitz [4] 测试了他对农村地区共享和按需移动服务的评估方法。在他的框架下，他评估了两种有关监管选择的情景，一种是拼车服务不直接与公共交通竞争，而是作为一种免费服务，另一种是共享乘车被放开，与公共交通竞争同时受到激励从单人汽车使用转变。通过在德国进行的案例研究，他估算了收入范围、额外的车辆公里数和必要的公共预算。

斯卡皮尼等人。[8] 介绍了他们在意大利撒丁岛建立区域自行车网络的方法。他们的规划结果当然是针对该岛的当地情况，但更重要的是，他们展示了区域自行车网络的系统化规划方法可能是什么样子，以及如何在自行车没有发挥重要作用的区域背景下估计骑自行车的潜力在交通系统中的作用。

广泛的研究成果包含在该专题合集中。同时，其中许多提出了未来必须解决的进一步研究问题。尽管农村流动性在政策制定和学术研究中越来越受到关注，但它仍然是一个研究较少的领域，尤其是与城市同行相比。考虑到可达性和可持续性，农村流动性的政策目标如何？现有和新兴的出行服务必须优先考虑什么样的出行需求，以在农村地区提供可持续的出行服务，还有什么可能需要被汽车覆盖？如何在农村地区有效实施交通政策工具？解决社会的数字化转型将如何改变农村流动性需求也很重要。尽管不断向城市地区集聚，但农村地区将继续容纳大量人口、工业和设施。因此，未来需要开展重大研究工作，以实现农村流动性的可持续发展。

Agriesti、SAM、Soe、RM 和马萨诸塞州赛义夫 (2022)。将低密度地区的交通挑战与智能交通解决方案联系起来的框架：爱沙尼亚市政当局的案例研究。欧洲运输研究评论， 14、32。https ://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00557-y
谷歌学术文章
Banister, D. (2008)。可持续流动性范式。运输政策， 15，73-80。https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005
谷歌学术文章
Hansson, J.、Pettersson-Löfstedt, F.、Svensson, H. 和 Wretstrand, A. (2022)。区域公共交通非高峰期服务改善的赞助效应。欧洲运输研究评论， 14、19。https ://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00543-4
谷歌学术文章
海尼茨 F.（2022 年）。农村环境中激励驱动的共享按需移动系统的可持续发展评估。欧洲运输研究评论， 14、38。https ://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00565-y
谷歌学术文章
Hrelja, R.、Olsson, L.、Pettersson-Löfstedt, F. 和 Rye, T. (2022)。在低密度环境中交付 TOD 的挑战：瑞典的障碍和推动因素经验。欧洲运输研究评论， 14、20。https ://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00546-1
谷歌学术文章
Laa, B.、Shibayama, T.、Brezina, T.、Schönfelder, S.、Damjanovic, D.、Szalai, E. 和 Hammel, M. (2022)。奥地利的全国移动服务保障：可能的设计场景和影响。欧洲运输研究评论， 14、25。https ://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00550-5
谷歌学术文章
JD 尼尔森和 B 考尔菲尔德 (2022)。COVID-19 对农村周边地区未来旅行行为的影响。欧洲运输研究评论， 14、22。https ://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00547-0
谷歌学术文章
Poltimäe, H., Rehema, M., Raun, J., & Poom, A. (2022). In search of sustainable and inclusive mobility solutions for rural areas. European Transport Research Review, 14, 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00536-3
Article Google Scholar
Rupprecht, S., Brand, L., Böhler-Baedeker, S., & Brunner, L. M. (2019). and Rupprecht Consult - Forschung & Beratung GmbH. Guidelines for developing and implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (2nd edition). URL: https://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/sump_guidelines_2019_interactive_document_1.pdf.
Scappini, B., Zucca, V., Meloni, I., & Piras, F. (2022). The regional cycle network of Sardinia: Upgrading the accessibility of rural areas through a comprehensive island-wide cycle network. European Transport Research Review, 14, 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00533-6
Article Google Scholar
Shibayama, T., & Emberger, G. (2020). New mobility services: Taxonomy, innovation and the role of ICTs. Transport Policy, 98, 79–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2020.05.024
Article Google Scholar
Tori, S.、Pappers, J. 和 Keserü, I. (2022)。为农村地区开发颠覆性的流动场景。2050 年比利时村庄的参与式移动情景构建。欧洲交通研究评论， 14、33。https ://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-022-00555-0
谷歌学术文章
国际乒联 (2021)。改善农村流动性的创新。国际交通论坛，。研究报告。巴黎。网址：https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/innovation-rural-mobility.pdf。

下载参考资料

作者和隶属关系

交通规划与交通工程研究单位，交通研究所，维也纳工业大学，维也纳，奥地利
柴山健 & Guenter Emberger

作者

Takeru Shibayama查看作者出版物
也可以在PubMed Google Scholar中搜索此作者
Guenter Emberger查看作者的出版物
也可以在PubMed Google Scholar中搜索此作者

投稿

两位作者都阅读并批准了最终手稿。

通讯作者

与 Takeru Shibayama 的通信。

利益争夺

作者声明他们没有竞争利益。

出版商的说明

施普林格·自然 (Springer Nature) 对已出版地图和机构隶属关系中的管辖权主张保持中立。

开放存取本文已根据 Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License 获得许可，该许可允许以任何媒体或格式使用、共享、改编、分发和复制，只要您对原作者和来源给予适当的信任，提供链接到 Creative Commons 许可证，并指出是否进行了更改。本文中的图像或其他第三方材料包含在文章的知识共享许可中，除非在材料的信用额度中另有说明。如果材料未包含在文章的 Creative Commons 许可中，并且您的预期用途不被法律法规允许或超出允许的用途，您将需要直接从版权所有者那里获得许可。要查看此许可证的副本，请访问 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/。

转载和许可