从“我”到“我们”:探索合作理论如何为围绕可持续旅行行为的政策制定提供信息

IF 1.8 Q2 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Global Discourse Pub Date : 2023-09-21 DOI:10.1332/204378921x16886283502537
Brendan Donegan, Natalie Gold, Pete Dyson, Caroline Bartle
{"title":"从“我”到“我们”:探索合作理论如何为围绕可持续旅行行为的政策制定提供信息","authors":"Brendan Donegan, Natalie Gold, Pete Dyson, Caroline Bartle","doi":"10.1332/204378921x16886283502537","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article considers how theories of social cooperation might be helpful in developing policy levers for changing travel behaviours towards environmentally beneficial outcomes, especially in reducing private car use. ‘Theories of cooperation’ can be described as a shift away from a ‘traditional’ economic focus on selfish individuals to one where individuals care what those around them are doing and even sometimes identify with, and think as, groups. We use a simplified ‘game’ to show how game theory offers a very constrained backdrop to thinking about cooperation in a transport setting: it neglects important social factors, both strategic ones and the general social interactions and ease that may be required as a backdrop to cooperation in real life. We then apply this to ‘use cases’ (lift sharing, on-site travel planning, safe cycle storage and peer-to-peer information sharing) that bridge the gap between the abstractions of theories of cooperation, on the one hand, and the practicalities of policymaking and lived reality, on the other. In doing this, we show how cooperation in travel behaviour can develop in two different ways: as emergent social phenomena (for example, the informal-economy approach to car or bicycle repair) and purposeful policy initiatives (for example, rail-fare discounts for two people travelling together, such as the UK’s ‘two together’ railcard). Somewhat reductively, these could be described as ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ elements within behaviour-change processes. The article shows that: (1) cooperation exists ‘naturally’ in the ‘travel-behaviour policy space’; (2) there is a wealth of opportunities for policy to help make cooperation happen more and/or work better; and (3) this includes opportunities to create the conditions required for cooperation to exist and flourish.","PeriodicalId":37814,"journal":{"name":"Global Discourse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"From ‘I’ to ‘we’: an exploration of how theories of cooperation might inform policymaking around sustainable travel behaviour\",\"authors\":\"Brendan Donegan, Natalie Gold, Pete Dyson, Caroline Bartle\",\"doi\":\"10.1332/204378921x16886283502537\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article considers how theories of social cooperation might be helpful in developing policy levers for changing travel behaviours towards environmentally beneficial outcomes, especially in reducing private car use. ‘Theories of cooperation’ can be described as a shift away from a ‘traditional’ economic focus on selfish individuals to one where individuals care what those around them are doing and even sometimes identify with, and think as, groups. We use a simplified ‘game’ to show how game theory offers a very constrained backdrop to thinking about cooperation in a transport setting: it neglects important social factors, both strategic ones and the general social interactions and ease that may be required as a backdrop to cooperation in real life. We then apply this to ‘use cases’ (lift sharing, on-site travel planning, safe cycle storage and peer-to-peer information sharing) that bridge the gap between the abstractions of theories of cooperation, on the one hand, and the practicalities of policymaking and lived reality, on the other. In doing this, we show how cooperation in travel behaviour can develop in two different ways: as emergent social phenomena (for example, the informal-economy approach to car or bicycle repair) and purposeful policy initiatives (for example, rail-fare discounts for two people travelling together, such as the UK’s ‘two together’ railcard). Somewhat reductively, these could be described as ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ elements within behaviour-change processes. The article shows that: (1) cooperation exists ‘naturally’ in the ‘travel-behaviour policy space’; (2) there is a wealth of opportunities for policy to help make cooperation happen more and/or work better; and (3) this includes opportunities to create the conditions required for cooperation to exist and flourish.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37814,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Discourse\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Discourse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1332/204378921x16886283502537\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1332/204378921x16886283502537","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

本文考虑了社会合作理论如何有助于制定政策杠杆,以改变对环境有益的旅行行为,特别是在减少私家车使用方面。“合作理论”可以被描述为一种转变,从“传统的”经济关注自私的个人转向个人关心周围的人在做什么,甚至有时认同并以群体的方式思考。我们使用一个简化的“游戏”来展示博弈论如何提供了一个非常有限的背景来思考交通环境中的合作:它忽略了重要的社会因素,包括战略因素和一般的社会互动和易用性,这些可能是现实生活中合作的背景。然后,我们将其应用于“用例”(电梯共享、现场旅行规划、安全循环存储和点对点信息共享),这些用例弥合了合作理论的抽象与政策制定和生活现实的实用性之间的差距。在此过程中,我们展示了旅行行为中的合作如何以两种不同的方式发展:作为新兴的社会现象(例如,汽车或自行车修理的非正式经济方法)和有目的的政策举措(例如,两人一起旅行的铁路票价折扣,例如英国的“两人一起”铁路卡)。在某种程度上,这些可以被描述为行为改变过程中的“自下而上”和“自上而下”元素。研究表明:(1)合作“自然”存在于“出行行为政策空间”中;(2)有大量的政策机会有助于促进合作和/或更好地运作;(3)这包括为合作的存在和繁荣创造必要条件的机会。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
From ‘I’ to ‘we’: an exploration of how theories of cooperation might inform policymaking around sustainable travel behaviour
This article considers how theories of social cooperation might be helpful in developing policy levers for changing travel behaviours towards environmentally beneficial outcomes, especially in reducing private car use. ‘Theories of cooperation’ can be described as a shift away from a ‘traditional’ economic focus on selfish individuals to one where individuals care what those around them are doing and even sometimes identify with, and think as, groups. We use a simplified ‘game’ to show how game theory offers a very constrained backdrop to thinking about cooperation in a transport setting: it neglects important social factors, both strategic ones and the general social interactions and ease that may be required as a backdrop to cooperation in real life. We then apply this to ‘use cases’ (lift sharing, on-site travel planning, safe cycle storage and peer-to-peer information sharing) that bridge the gap between the abstractions of theories of cooperation, on the one hand, and the practicalities of policymaking and lived reality, on the other. In doing this, we show how cooperation in travel behaviour can develop in two different ways: as emergent social phenomena (for example, the informal-economy approach to car or bicycle repair) and purposeful policy initiatives (for example, rail-fare discounts for two people travelling together, such as the UK’s ‘two together’ railcard). Somewhat reductively, these could be described as ‘bottom-up’ and ‘top-down’ elements within behaviour-change processes. The article shows that: (1) cooperation exists ‘naturally’ in the ‘travel-behaviour policy space’; (2) there is a wealth of opportunities for policy to help make cooperation happen more and/or work better; and (3) this includes opportunities to create the conditions required for cooperation to exist and flourish.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Discourse
Global Discourse Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Global Discourse is an interdisciplinary, problem-oriented journal of applied contemporary thought operating at the intersection of politics, international relations, sociology and social policy. The journal’s scope is broad, encouraging interrogation of current affairs with regard to core questions of distributive justice, wellbeing, cultural diversity, autonomy, sovereignty, security and recognition. All issues are themed and aimed at addressing pressing issues as they emerge.
期刊最新文献
‘What do we exactly have the power to decolonise?’ A reply to ‘(Un)Doing performative decolonisation in the global development “imaginaries” of academia’ by Two Convivial Thinkers Black feminist political ecologies: a reply to ‘Questioning development from Black feminisms in Ecuador and moving towards a Black feminist political ecology in the Americas’ by Sofia Zaragocin et al Introduction: New perspectives on development A reply to ‘Human security, sustainable livelihoods and development: the case of the Niger Delta region in Nigeria’ by Benita Ebindu Siloko Human security, sustainable livelihoods and development: the case of the Niger Delta region in Nigeria
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1