{"title":"Towards transformation-oriented planning: what can sustainable urban mobility planning (SUMP) learn from transition management (TM)?","authors":"Richard Hartl , Philip Harms , Markus Egermann","doi":"10.1080/01441647.2023.2239497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The European Commission’s concept of Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning (SUMP) aims to prepare transport planners for the challenge of fundamental transformations to achieve climate-neutral and sustainable cities. While the concept has been widely adopted by European cities over the last decade, it can be asked whether SUMP is able to trigger the required transformative change in mobility systems. This paper critically reflects on the SUMP concept by systematically comparing it with the theoretical governance framework of Transition Management (TM), which is explicitly designed to foster transformative change. Based on a literature review, we examine similarities and differences between these approaches regarding the planning dimensions of context, content and process. Drawing on this comparison, the paper demonstrates how SUMP could learn from TM in practice and research in four main ways: (i) utilising transition theory to better address transition features; (ii) using collaborative formats from TM while taking account of legitimacy concerns; (iii) incorporating backcasting approaches; and (iv) explicitly integrating experiments into the process cycle. The paper exemplifies how insights from transition research can stimulate the further development of procedures, methods and tools towards transformation-oriented planning.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48197,"journal":{"name":"Transport Reviews","volume":"44 1","pages":"Pages 167-190"},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transport Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S0144164723000892","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The European Commission’s concept of Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning (SUMP) aims to prepare transport planners for the challenge of fundamental transformations to achieve climate-neutral and sustainable cities. While the concept has been widely adopted by European cities over the last decade, it can be asked whether SUMP is able to trigger the required transformative change in mobility systems. This paper critically reflects on the SUMP concept by systematically comparing it with the theoretical governance framework of Transition Management (TM), which is explicitly designed to foster transformative change. Based on a literature review, we examine similarities and differences between these approaches regarding the planning dimensions of context, content and process. Drawing on this comparison, the paper demonstrates how SUMP could learn from TM in practice and research in four main ways: (i) utilising transition theory to better address transition features; (ii) using collaborative formats from TM while taking account of legitimacy concerns; (iii) incorporating backcasting approaches; and (iv) explicitly integrating experiments into the process cycle. The paper exemplifies how insights from transition research can stimulate the further development of procedures, methods and tools towards transformation-oriented planning.
期刊介绍:
Transport Reviews is an international journal that comprehensively covers all aspects of transportation. It offers authoritative and current research-based reviews on transportation-related topics, catering to a knowledgeable audience while also being accessible to a wide readership.
Encouraging submissions from diverse disciplinary perspectives such as economics and engineering, as well as various subject areas like social issues and the environment, Transport Reviews welcomes contributions employing different methodological approaches, including modeling, qualitative methods, or mixed-methods. The reviews typically introduce new methodologies, analyses, innovative viewpoints, and original data, although they are not limited to research-based content.