分享还是不分享,这是谁的问题。弱势群体对共享交通服务的接受程度

IF 9.5 1区 工程技术 Q1 TRANSPORTATION Transport Reviews Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1080/01441647.2023.2185314
Leen De Paepe , Veronique Van Acker , Frank Witlox
{"title":"分享还是不分享,这是谁的问题。弱势群体对共享交通服务的接受程度","authors":"Leen De Paepe ,&nbsp;Veronique Van Acker ,&nbsp;Frank Witlox","doi":"10.1080/01441647.2023.2185314","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>It is believed that shared transport services (STSs) can reduce transport poverty and social exclusion. This paper proposes a definition of “social acceptability” and “social acceptance” and examines whether vulnerable groups accept STSs. The notions “acceptability” and “acceptance” were distinguished and four necessary conditions, especially for vulnerable groups, or the 4As were identified: “availability”, “accessibility”, “affordability”, and “attractability”. In the context of STSs, “social acceptability” is defined as the degree to which an individual intends to use a STS before experiencing it in everyday travel based on the expected availability, accessibility, affordability, and attractability of the service, while “social acceptance” also incorporates the use of a STS after experiencing it in everyday travel based on a minimum level of perceived availability, accessibility, affordability, and attractability. This paper further reviews the scientific literature in transport research regarding the “acceptability” or “acceptance” of STSs by vulnerable groups. While several studies include socio-economic and demographic variables (e.g. age, gender) to explain the “acceptability” of STSs, only a few studies specifically focus on vulnerable groups. More research on the “social acceptance” of STSs, especially shared scooters, ride-sharing, and apps and Mobility as a Service (MaaS), by vulnerable groups is needed.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48197,"journal":{"name":"Transport Reviews","volume":"43 5","pages":"Pages 935-969"},"PeriodicalIF":9.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"To share or not to share, by whom is the question. Acceptability and acceptance of shared transport services by vulnerable groups\",\"authors\":\"Leen De Paepe ,&nbsp;Veronique Van Acker ,&nbsp;Frank Witlox\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/01441647.2023.2185314\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>It is believed that shared transport services (STSs) can reduce transport poverty and social exclusion. This paper proposes a definition of “social acceptability” and “social acceptance” and examines whether vulnerable groups accept STSs. The notions “acceptability” and “acceptance” were distinguished and four necessary conditions, especially for vulnerable groups, or the 4As were identified: “availability”, “accessibility”, “affordability”, and “attractability”. In the context of STSs, “social acceptability” is defined as the degree to which an individual intends to use a STS before experiencing it in everyday travel based on the expected availability, accessibility, affordability, and attractability of the service, while “social acceptance” also incorporates the use of a STS after experiencing it in everyday travel based on a minimum level of perceived availability, accessibility, affordability, and attractability. This paper further reviews the scientific literature in transport research regarding the “acceptability” or “acceptance” of STSs by vulnerable groups. While several studies include socio-economic and demographic variables (e.g. age, gender) to explain the “acceptability” of STSs, only a few studies specifically focus on vulnerable groups. More research on the “social acceptance” of STSs, especially shared scooters, ride-sharing, and apps and Mobility as a Service (MaaS), by vulnerable groups is needed.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48197,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Transport Reviews\",\"volume\":\"43 5\",\"pages\":\"Pages 935-969\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":9.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Transport Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S0144164723000168\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"TRANSPORTATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transport Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/org/science/article/pii/S0144164723000168","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: 1

摘要

摘要人们认为,共享交通服务可以减少交通贫困和社会排斥。本文提出了“社会可接受性”和“社会接受性”的定义,并考察了弱势群体是否接受STSs。区分了“可接受性”和“接受性”的概念,并确定了四个必要条件,特别是对弱势群体或4A而言:“可用性”、“可获得性”、《可负担性》和“可吸引性”。在STS的背景下,“社会可接受性”被定义为个人在日常旅行中体验STS之前,基于服务的预期可用性、可及性、可负担性和吸引力,打算使用STS的程度,而“社会接受”也包括在日常旅行中体验STS后,基于感知的可用性、可及性、可负担性和吸引力的最低水平使用STS。本文进一步回顾了运输研究中关于弱势群体对STSs的“可接受性”或“接受性”的科学文献。虽然一些研究包括社会经济和人口统计学变量(如年龄、性别)来解释STSs的“可接受性”,但只有少数研究专门关注弱势群体。需要对弱势群体对STS的“社会接受度”进行更多研究,尤其是共享滑板车、拼车、应用程序和移动即服务(MaaS)。
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
To share or not to share, by whom is the question. Acceptability and acceptance of shared transport services by vulnerable groups

It is believed that shared transport services (STSs) can reduce transport poverty and social exclusion. This paper proposes a definition of “social acceptability” and “social acceptance” and examines whether vulnerable groups accept STSs. The notions “acceptability” and “acceptance” were distinguished and four necessary conditions, especially for vulnerable groups, or the 4As were identified: “availability”, “accessibility”, “affordability”, and “attractability”. In the context of STSs, “social acceptability” is defined as the degree to which an individual intends to use a STS before experiencing it in everyday travel based on the expected availability, accessibility, affordability, and attractability of the service, while “social acceptance” also incorporates the use of a STS after experiencing it in everyday travel based on a minimum level of perceived availability, accessibility, affordability, and attractability. This paper further reviews the scientific literature in transport research regarding the “acceptability” or “acceptance” of STSs by vulnerable groups. While several studies include socio-economic and demographic variables (e.g. age, gender) to explain the “acceptability” of STSs, only a few studies specifically focus on vulnerable groups. More research on the “social acceptance” of STSs, especially shared scooters, ride-sharing, and apps and Mobility as a Service (MaaS), by vulnerable groups is needed.

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
Transport Reviews
Transport Reviews TRANSPORTATION-
CiteScore
17.70
自引率
1.00%
发文量
32
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.
期刊最新文献
Forecasting travel in urban America: the socio-technical life of an engineering modeling world Spatial factors associated with usage of different on-demand elements within mobility hubs: a systematic literature review Measuring transport-associated urban inequalities: Where are we and where do we go from here? Human factors affecting truck – vulnerable road user safety: a scoping review A survey on reinforcement learning-based control for signalized intersections with connected automated vehicles
×
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