ArticlePDF Available

Brace for impacts: Perceived impacts and responses relating to the state of connected and autonomous vehicles in Gothenburg

December 2023
Case Studies on Transport Policy 15:101140

December 2023
15:101140

DOI:10.1016/j.cstp.2023.101140

License
CC BY 4.0

Authors:

Ella Rebalski

Chalmers University of Technology

Marco Adelfio

Chalmers University of Technology

Frances Sprei

Chalmers University of Technology

Daniel J.A. Johansson

Chalmers University of Technology

DPSIR framework diagram, adapted from Ness et al., 2010. Fig. 2. The Transition Management (TM) framework. Re-drawn from Loorbach (2010).

…

DPSIR chain as part of the strategic sphere.

…

DPSIR chains with examples of different responses to the impact of Increased Transportation Demand.

…

DPSIR chains with examples of different responses to the impact of Increased Transportation Demand.

…

Interviewees and Quadruple Helix categories.

…

Figures - uploaded by Marco Adelfio

Content may be subject to copyright.

Content uploaded by Marco Adelfio

Content may be subject to copyright.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

Available online 23 December 2023

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Brace for impacts: Perceived impacts and responses relating to the state of

connected and autonomous vehicles in Gothenburg

Ella Rebalski

, Marco Adelo , Frances Sprei , Daniel J.A. Johansson

Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden

ARTICLE INFO

Keywords:

Socio-technical transition

Connected and autonomous vehicles

DPSIR

Transition management

Reexive policy

ABSTRACT

It is anticipated that Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs) will be introduced for public use in the coming

decade. Thus, it is important to consider how ready cities are to integrate them into the urban environment. To

address this question, this article frames the introduction of CAVs within the context of a socio-technical tran-

sition. We use the Drivers, Pressures, State, Impact and Response (DPSIR) framework to identify the impacts and

responses of the introduction of CAVs in cities, with a specic emphasis on Gothenburg, Sweden. The results of

the DPSIR analysis are then analyzed through the lens of transition management, in which the responses are

related to strategical, tactical, operational and reexive governance strategies. It was found that the reexive

component is likely to be critical for a successful introduction of CAVs in cities, so that policies can be adjusted as

the uptake of the technology changes. Many issues that could arise from CAVs, such as increased car trafc and

physical barriers to mobility, are already addressed in the City of Gothenburg’s ofcial transportation strategy,

but there is room for clearer policy with regard to CAV technology.

1. Introduction

Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs) are at the forefront of

emerging transportation technologies. The introduction of this tech-

nology has seen challenges in recent years, but many vehicles already

have functions that makes it possible for the driver to enter some form of

automated driving mode. On a system-wide scale, one can consider the

introduction of CAVs to be a socio-technical transition (Geels, 2004),

implying multiple transitions to CAV technology use that take place at

different levels – e.g. cultural, structural and practical levels – that have

different time frames and scales (Loorbach, 2010).

Business models for CAV technology are being explored by many

companies around the world, but governments have been slower to

devise ways to incorporate CAVs into everyday life, particularly at the

city and regional levels (Grindsted et al., 2022). The City of Gothenburg

in western Sweden is an especially interesting example of this lack of

CAV planning, since the city has historically been closely connected with

the car manufacturing industry, and has a strong engagement with CAV

pilot projects (Rebalski et al., 2022; Urban Transport Administration

(Trakkontoret), 2020). CAV technology has already been tested in and

around Gothenburg for many years, but the focus so far has been largely

on the technical aspects of CAVs, as opposed to the broader society-wide

consequences. This has created gaps in the research concerning the

consequences of the implementation of this technology, and ensuing

policies or strategies that address those consequences.

This study seeks to ll these research gaps by using the Drivers,

Pressures, State, Impact and Response (DPSIR) framework to analyse

interview data. In a previous article, we focused on the drivers and

pressures components, and analysed factors stated by the interviewees

that could affect the introduction of CAVs in cities (Rebalski et al.,

2022). This article aims to make an empirical contribution to the

emerging literature on CAV governance by identifying impacts (ways in

which CAVs can be implemented, or the consequences of their imple-

mentation), and responses (strategies that respond to both positive and

negative drivers, pressures, or impacts). Since the interviewees are dis-

cussing a technology that is not yet widely used, we consider the plau-

sibility of the impacts and responses by comparing them to the ndings

in academic literature. We also identify stakeholders who are affected by

the impacts and are associated with the responses. Finally, we make a

methodological contribution to the literature by testing the combination

of DPSIR and Transition Management (TM) as a way to analyse future

scenarios.

* Corresponding author at: Division of Physical Resource Theory, Department of Space, Earth and Environment, Chalmers University of Technology, SE-412 96

Gothenburg, Sweden.

E-mail address: rebalski@chalmers.se (E. Rebalski).

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Case Studies on Transport Policy

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cstp

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2023.101140

Received 13 February 2023; Received in revised form 7 November 2023; Accepted 20 December 2023

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

We focus on the city of Gothenburg as a case study, but the context

and the results of this research are applicable in many mid-sized Euro-

pean cities. Much research has been done on the need for more urban

planning and governance related to CAVs (Hopkins and Schwanen,

2018; Milakis and Müller, 2021; Miloˇ

s N Mladenovi´

c et al., 2020;

Mukhtar-Landgren and Paulsson, 2021). This study can hopefully be

useful for future research on sociotechnical transitions, especially in

cases where the analysis could be improved by combining frameworks

such as DPSIR and TM.

The following research questions were used to direct this study:

RQ1: How are potential future Impacts of CAVs in cities perceived by

local stakeholders in Gothenburg?

RQ2: How can the complexity of the responses identied in the in-

terviews be captured and interpreted for policy interventions using the

transition management framework?

The rst question paves the way for a better understanding of the

stakeholders’ attitudes towards and concerns about the possible impacts

of CAVs, which is a prerequisite for successful implementation in cities.

The second relates to aspects of governance and management of the

transition towards the implementation of CAVs.

The remainder of this article is structured as follows: Section 2 is a

literature review of relevant societal effects and potential governance

implications with CAVs. Section 3 explains the theoretical and analytical

frameworks behind the methodology, and the methods used in this

study. Section 4 reports the ndings from the application of the DPSIR

model to interview data. Section 5 discusses the results, and Section 6

presents our conclusions.

2. Literature review

This literature review details recent research regarding the effects

that CAVs may have on different aspects of society, especially within

cities, and the ways in which CAV governance is envisioned. Based on

themes that emerged during the literature review process, the infor-

mation presented here is divided into subsections entitled: Travel

Behaviour and the Value of Travel Time, Shared CAVs, Land Use, Energy

Savings, Sociopolitical Effects, and Governance. This information also

helped to inform the impacts and responses identied in Section 4.

2.1. Travel behaviour and the value of travel time

Wadud et al. (2016) examined the potential energy demand of

different levels of CAV adoption based on various mechanisms that were

identied through research and organised using the Activity, modal

Share, energy Intensity, Fuel carbon content (ASIF) formula. They found

that CAVs could reduce or increase the CO2 emissions related to trans-

portation, depending very much on the use case in question and the level

of automation. Wadud et al. (2016) opened the door for a broad range of

studies on the effects of CAV adoption. Wadud (2017) examined the

effects of changes in the value of travel time (VoTT) on energy use from

CAVs in the UK for private vehicles, taxis, and trucks, nding that there

were signicant economic advantages for CAV adoption in the trucking

sector. Taiebat et al. (2018) did a study modelling CAV adoption and use

based on certain changes in VoTT, using the US National Household

Travel Survey as a baseline, and found that a net rise in energy use could

be possible among higher income groups.

It is important to point out that the study of VoTT is an entire branch

of transport research, and the methods for estimating how CAV could

impact VoTT is outside the scope of this article. But VoTT tends to have

an outsized effect on travel demand and energy use in CAV models

(Soteropolous et al., 2018), and thus it is also important to acknowledge

that our understanding of how VoTT will change in CAVs is still very

limited, largely due to a lack of empirical evidence. Put simply, since we

do not use CAVs yet, we do not know how convenient they are. Singleton

(2019) has argued that the use of time in CAVs might not be as pro-

ductive as many models suggest, although utility may be gained from

subjectively valued activities like relaxing, as opposed to doing paid

work while travelling in a CAV (which is one common reason for a

higher VoTT).

2.2. Shared CAVs

Using shared rides to limit transportation growth, and thereby limit

greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, has been examined in the

Swedish context for some time (Åkerman and H¨

ojer, 2006). In terms of

CAVs, there have been studies done in other countries of users’ potential

willingness to share; for example, Lavieri and Bhat (2019) found that

users might be more willing to share commuting than leisure trips, and

Rahimi et al. (2020) found that attitudes can be inuential on the choice

to share, sometimes more so than demographic variables.

In England, Wadud and Chintakayala (2021) used discrete choice

modelling to nd that women put a higher value on owning a CAV than

men do, and more than 75 % of respondents, regardless of gender,

attribute a negative value (or monetary cost) to using a shared auto-

mated ride service. Wadud and Mattioli (2021) published a article that

used a combination of Total Cost of Ownership use analysis and multi-

nomial probit modelling to look at adoption rates of various shared and

private CAVs. They found that ownership is more affordable for up to 30

% of the UK population, even in a test case that emphasized mobility

services, and that individual rides were cost-effective for more cases

compared to pooled, on-demand automated ride services.

2.3. Land use

CAV scenarios are also relevant in relation to potential increases in

urban sprawl or other land use changes that could result from wide-

spread CAV adoption. Soteropoulos et al. (2019) reviewed modelling

studies on CAV travel behaviour and resulting land use effects and found

that while private CAVs could lead to scattered urban sprawl, much of

that growth could be mitigated through sharing measures. More

importantly, the authors caution that many studies do not have high

spatial detail, and oversimplications could be hiding more complex

travel patterns, especially in rural areas and in specic contexts (i.e., a

limited area within a city, as opposed to widespread adoption

throughout a city). Gelauff et al. (2019) found in their study of car and

public transportation automation scenarios in the Netherlands that

depending on how much public transportation was automated, larger

cities might become more popular, and smaller cities and rural areas

could see a reduction in population. Zhang and Guhathakurta (2021),

used an agent-based model to examine how shared CAVs could affect

land use in Atlanta, a city in the USA. They found that when there was a

reduction in the cost of commuting due to shared CAV use, residents

chose to move to areas that were further from their place of work, but

closer to better schools or cheaper housing.

2.4. Energy savings

The component of CAVs that removes humans from the equation has

also been studied to look at how energy could be saved per unit of dis-

tance driven. Vahidi and Sciarretta (2018) examined the energy-saving

potential of various driving patterns, and found that, due to the ability to

share information and related eco-driving, CAVs could save anywhere

from 3 to 20 % of energy use per unit distance, depending on the level of

CAV market penetration and the driving situation (highway driving,

arterial roads, intersections, etc.).

2.5. Sociopolitical effects

While many studies have been devoted to examining the quantitative

aspects of CAV use, such as VoTT, willingness to pay for the technology,

energy use, travel demand, land use, and the interactions between these

aspects, research has emerged in recent years that takes a qualitative

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

view of CAV use. An example of this is Fraedrich et al. (2021), who used

group discussions to gather data about participants’ perceptions of

CAVs, and to study the “collective frames of knowledge” of the group,

otherwise known as implicit knowledge. Group participants were con-

nected with a university, research institution or were personal contacts

of the researchers in the study. In this case, the collective frame of

knowledge supported conventional car ownership, even though most

participants stated at the beginning of the discussions that they were

skeptical towards car use, car ownership. and autonomous driving.

Fraedrich et al. found that because of this underlying support for car

ownership, alternative mobility options “could be only of short rele-

vance within [the participants] lives” (2021, p. 264).

Issues related to equity, or freedom from bias, are inherently con-

nected to the introduction of CAVs in cities due to the inequalities that

exist in transportation systems today. VoTT and models based on VoTT

are a one good example of this; those with a higher VoTT, usually based

on a higher income, often see a larger reduction in overall travel costs

associated with CAVs (Chen and Kockelman, 2016). Cohn et al. (2019)

model different scenarios of CAV use in the Washington DC area to

better understand potential job accessibility, trip duration, trip distance,

mode share, and emissions in different neighbourhoods, which have

been previously identied as “Equity-Emphasis Areas” (concentrations

of people with lower income and minority populations) and “Non-Equity

Emphasis Areas”. They found that high-occupancy CAVs and CAV public

transportation could reduce inequalities in terms of job accessibility, trip

duration, travel costs. Vehicle miles traveled did not decrease in any

scenario, but Cohn et al. point out that with electried vehicles and

increased safety due to CAVs this might be acceptable. Wu et al. (2021)

also did a study on the impacts of CAVs on marginalized social groups,

and make a series of policy recommendations relating to public trans-

portation, infrastructure, car and ride-sharing, and inclusion at various

stages of introduction and with various specic groups in mind.

In terms of more specic segments of the population who might

stand out in terms of public health, Curl and Fitt (2019) describe CAVs as

a tempting panacea “drug”, that could cure issues like loneliness by

bringing mobility to a larger segment of the population. But they warn

that urban planners should also think about alternatives like creating

walkable communities and take an approach that prioritizes communi-

cation with health professionals. Dianin et al.(2021) have reviewed CAV

literature and analysis based on what they describe as the four main

areas where CAVs could inuence accessibility: accessibility polariza-

tion, accessibility sprawl, exacerbation of social accessibility inequities,

and alleviation of social accessibility inequities. They also point out that

the assumptions used in studies, and the way that impacts are analysed,

are both very important to consider in relation to accessibility.

2.6. Governance

Mladenovi´

c et al. (2020) set the tone for describing CAV-related

governance approaches by stating that governing CAV technology is a

classic example of the Collingridge dilemma on guiding technology

regulation, where there is currently a lack of useful information about

the technology in question, but in the future when we have that infor-

mation the technology may already be rmly embedded in society, and

all attempts to steer its regulation and use will be more expensive and

difcult (Collingridge, 1980). Mladenovi´

c et al. (2020) compare policy

documents in Germany, Finland, and the UK to examine country-specic

approaches to CAV governance, and the cultural and social context of

each. They found that all three countries were working with more

traditional, liability-related methods of governance, while also actively

developing strategies to incorporate data management and public

experimentation (for example, pilot projects) into ongoing governance

efforts.

Mukhtar-Landgren and Paulsson (2021) examined administrative

practices of governing in relation to CAVs, focusing specically on the

categories of pilots, standards, scenarios and collaboration. They argued

that the creation of scenarios, use of pilot projects and collaboration

between government and stakeholders generates new information

(which in turn can inform standards), but also that all these processes

serve to further “create and delimit” smart mobility. Thus, there is a

form of iteration occurring between the governance processes, and the

use and understanding of smart mobility technology.

Hopkins and Schwanen (2018) used Transition Management (TM) as

a basis for examining the CAV transition in the UK within the context of

a global race towards automation. They nd that while there is much

learning happening within the industry in the UK, the lessons are not

being spread to the public. Milakis and Müller (2021) use the multilevel

perspective to identify three research areas within a CAV transition that

are important to consider from a societal perspective: societal accep-

tance, societal implications and governance of AVs. They make more

specic recommendations within each of these areas, including moving

from “forward-looking exploratory scenario-based analysis to partici-

pative anticipatory analysis of desirable urban and transport futures

exploring the role and societal implications of AVs within those futures”

(Milakis and Müller, 2021, p. 8).

Some academic research has been carried out using analysis that

focusses on citizen (as opposed to expert-only) participation. Gonz´

alez-

Gonz´

alez et al.(2023) use a combination of Q-methodology and back-

casting to involve 30 people in a participatory visioning exercise

focussed on urban planning for a driverless city. They found that their

approach resulted in dened areas of divergence and consensus on

urban planning and CAVs that could be useful when considering public

acceptance of CAV policy. Lyons (2022) classies the introduction of

CAVs as a wicked problem, and uses a novel participative foresight

technique entitled “Emulsion Methodology” to bring together people

with opposing views, and have them confront unconscious biases

through dialogue and shared learning about different aspects of CAVs.

This research involved over 100 participants and found that mechanisms

such as constructive conict resulted in more individual learning and

even a collective ability to better understand and address wicked

problems. Acheampong (2023) used similar methodology to that of

Lyons in that participants discussed with one another, but they recruited

mainly policymakers, practitioners, and academic experts for their

multi-criteria analysis visioning exercise. They found that their method

was useful for envisioning and deliberating on the issues with a future

transportation system that included CAVs, and they suggest that their

methodology could be used in the future by academics and practitioners

who wish to encourage public participation.

3. Methodology

Methodologically, this article applies a combination of the Drivers,

Pressures, States, Impact and Responses (DPSIR) and Transition Man-

agement (TM) frameworks to a concrete case study, which is the City of

Gothenburg in Sweden. The following sub-sections accordingly describe

frameworks and local context, which is intended methodologically as a

case study of application. Finally, the focus returns to the interviews as

the main operational method used in the research process to engage with

local stakeholders.

3.1. Theoretical and analytical framework

This section explains the analytical tools and theoretical un-

derpinnings used to process the interview data. The DPSIR framework,

explained in the next sub-section, is a methodology used to analyse the

raw interview data by identifying impacts and responses. Transition

Management has both a theoretical and analytical value: theoretical in

the sense that it acknowledges the stages of a socio-technical transition;

and analytical since these stages (or spheres) can be used to further

explain the impacts and responses in the context of a sociotechnical

transition to CAVs.

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

3.1.1. DPSIR

This article focuses on the State, Impact and Response (SIR) com-

ponents of DPSIR (Rebalski et al., 2022). The entire DPSIR chain is

explained in detail below, so that the reader can situate the S, I, and R

components within the broader context. This understanding may be

helpful when reading the Discussion section, which links together

different parts of different potential DPSIR chains.

Drivers: These are positive or negative, and are represented by broad

driving or restraining forces, e.g., environmental concerns.

Pressures: They are related to each driver and emerge in the in-

terviews as expressions of interests from different stakeholders, entailing

a higher level of specicness compared to drivers. For instance, some

pressures related to the driver of environmental concerns could be the

need for less fuel use, shared cars easing CAV acceptance, and CAVs

marketed as reducing the number of cars.

State: Projected into the future, is intended as the introduction of

CAVs in cities.

Impacts: These refer to the potential effects, as expressed in the in-

terviews, of future scenarios that might arise due to CAVs, e.g., increased

suburban sprawl or facilitated transport of societal groups that are not

able to drive.

Responses: These can be related to the drivers, pressures, and impacts.

Responses can strengthen the positive drivers and pressures, tackle the

negative restraining drivers and pressures, or be expressed as strategies

that respond to the impacts. We relate the responses to the TM spheres to

better explain the time scale and stakeholders involved in the response.

DPSIR was rst developed by the European Environment Agency as a

method to give “structure within which to present the indicators needed

to enable feedback to policy makers on environmental quality” (Kris-

tensen, 2004, p. 1). Two key differences between that denition and the

use of the DPSIR terms in this study are that the feedback is aimed at

academics and policymakers, as this article and its companion article

(Rebalski et al., 2022) will hopefully further the research in this eld;

and that, of course, we focus on the introduction of CAVs, rather than

environmental quality. Selected DPSIR chains are detailed in the Dis-

cussion section, using a format adapted from Ness et al. (2010a), shown

in Fig. 1.

There are some criticisms of DPSIR; the most common being that it

does not address the complexity of the processes that it attempts to

analyze (Niemeijer and De Groot, 2008). In this study the simplication

is helpful for the initial stages of DSPIR component categorization. We

then attempt to include a degree of complexity by considering the

cyclical nature of DPSIR (Ness et al., 2010b; Niemeijer and De Groot,

2008), and by combining DPSIR with TM. In Fig. 1 it is possible to see

theoretically how the different components can form a cycle or many

iterative cycles. The solid black arrows in Fig. 1 represent the “forward”

moving, causal relationship between components, and the dotted arrows

represent reactive relationships, where a result has caused changes in

the system.

3.1.2. Transition management

This study is based on the idea that the introduction of CAVs will

imply a socio-technical transition that “not only entail[s] new technol-

ogies, but also changes in markets, user practices, policy and cultural

meanings” (Geels, 2010, p. 508). Taking this starting point into account,

Transition Management (TM) (Loorbach, 2010) was chosen as a theo-

retical tool for categorising and contextualising impacts and responses

relating to the introduction of CAVs into cities.

TM is a governance framework that attempts to include complex

systems theory as well as practical experience by involving practitioners

in the iteration of a policy goal. In this research, we use the four stra-

tegical, tactical, operational and reexive governance spheres from TM

(see Fig. 2) to categorise the responses. The strategic sphere involves

long-term cultural aspects including the development of a long-term

vision and what is known as the transition arena, comprised of stake-

holders who have relevant competencies, interests and backgrounds.

The tactical sphere focusses on governance structures, regimes and in-

stitutions, and barriers to an established vision. Scenario creation can be

a key part of the tactical sphere. The operational sphere contains prac-

tices such as transition experiments, which we suggest could be pilot

projects in the context of a CAV introduction. Finally, the reexive

sphere includes monitoring, evaluating, and learning about the progress

of the other spheres, specically regarding established goals, strategies,

and actions.

The circular arrow in Fig. 2 demonstrates that these spheres are

connected and related but does not dictate that they must take place in a

certain order. It is important to realise that the spheres can take place in

any order that is relevant to the given context (Loorbach, 2010).

3.1.3. Combining TM and DPSIR

We combine TM and DPSIR by categorising responses and their

associated DPSIR chains into TM spheres. By applying the TM spheres to

the responses that were identied in interviews, we are not aiming for a

measure of the strength of the RESPONSE (as in for example (Berg et al.,

2015)), but rather a characterisation that can help suggest where the

Fig. 1. DPSIR framework diagram, adapted from Ness et al., 2010.

Fig. 2. The Transition Management (TM) framework. Re-drawn from Loor-

bach (2010).

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

response ts into the larger transition process. Further, by identifying

types of responses that are underrepresented or missing in the research

literature, we can contribute to the literature on CAV transitions (such as

Hopkins and Schwanen, 2018) in the Gothenburg or similar contexts.

We elaborate on stakeholder involvement in the transition process in the

Discussion section since this analysis was a step beyond the identica-

tion of the DPSIR components in the Findings section.

3.2. Gothenburg as a case study: rationale

Gothenburg is the second-largest city in Sweden, with a population

of approximately 600,000 (City of Gothenburg, 2023a). The city has

ambitious climate-related goals where transportation is concerned,

many of which are laid out in the City of Gothenburg’s transportation

planning strategy document Gothenburg 2035: Transport Planning for a

Close-Knit City (Hellberg et al., 2014). These include reducing the

emissions of carbon dioxide equivalents from transportation in Goth-

enburg by at least 90 percent compared to 2010 levels, and reducing the

volume of motorized trafc by at least 25 percent compared to 2020

levels, both by 2030 (City of Gothenburg, 2021).

The city has strong connections to the automobile industry. In 2017,

Volvo Cars and AB Volvo were the largest employers in the Gothenburg

Region, and those companies reported the largest turnover in 2016

(Business Region G¨

oteborg, 2018). Volvo’s impact on the city goes

beyond the production of vehicles, as Volvo Cars sponsors the Gothen-

burg Symphony Orchestra, numerous sporting events, and supports ac-

ademic research at both of the city’s major universities, including a

professorship (Berk, 2018). Interviewees from Gothenburg have the

potential to be relatively more knowledgeable regarding CAVs, since it is

difcult to be involved in any civil, industrial, academic or government

activity and not have a basic understanding of the automobile industry.

3.3. Use of interviews to engage with local stakeholders: method and

process

Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were used as the main source

of data for this article. Seven of the eleven interviewees were based in

the Gothenburg area, three in Stockholm and one interviewee was from

outside of Sweden (this person was chosen because they had relevant

experience in transportation planning and CAVs). Due to the restrictions

caused by COVID-19, all interviews took place via video chat.

We used contingent purposive sampling of quadruple helix cate-

gories to select interviewees (Bryman and Bell, 2015; Hasche et al.,

2020), and looked for people who had a position within industry, civil

society, academia or government, and had some professional knowledge

of or connection to CAVs. The interviewees answered questions from an

interview guide, but the interviewers also followed up on topics that

were uniquely salient in specic interviews. In order to reduce bias as

much as possible (Cohen et al., 2011), we were sure to seek clarication

if we were every unsure of a point that an interviewee was making, and

we also gave interviewees ample opportunity to ask clarifying questions

so that they could fully understand what was being asked.

The strength of this sample of interviewees lies in its diversity; as can

be seen in Table 1, interviewees came from all parts of the quadruple

helix. One person came from civil society, six from industry, two from

government, one from academia, and one person was an academic

involved with City government and civil society, so that person covered

parts of three categories. There was also a degree of diversity within the

quadruple helix categories, for example the government-related in-

terviewees came from different City departments, and the industry in-

terviewees were from the automobile industry and the real estate and

architecture industry. There is a limitation to the sample in that only one

interviewee came from a civil society organisation. We felt that this was

acceptable, however, since at the time of the interviews there was not a

widespread understanding of CAVs within the public at large. Finally,

practically speaking, the interview recruitment was slightly curtailed

due to the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, which coincided with

interview invitations being sent out.

Directed content analysis (Hsieh and Shannon 2005) was used to

analyse the interview transcripts and extract impacts and responses.

Information from the literature review was useful for providing a basic

level of understanding of impacts or responses that were mentioned in

the interviews, but not explained in detail. Additionally, the background

information helped to place the interview data in a wider research

context.

The nal step of the process was to use TM to categorize and place

certain responses in a relevant theoretical context.

4. Findings from the application of the DPSIR model

In this section, we present the Impacts and Responses that were

explicitly or implicitly referred to in the interviews.

4.1. Impacts

The impacts represent the consequences perceived by the in-

terviewees of introducing CAVs in cities that are. The impacts are

explained in more detail with quotations from the interviews. Here is the

full list of impacts:

•Better public transportation especially in low density areas

•Increased transportation demand

•New infrastructure and use of limited urban space

•Parking companies losing revenue

•More individual decision-making power related to transportation

•Replacing people with technology

•Changes in vehicle to cyclist/pedestrian communication

4.1.1. Better public transportation especially in low density areas

The economic benet of not needing to pay wages to a public

transportation driver came up quickly in the interviews. It was pointed

out that “Once you don’t need to pay the driver, instead, you might be

able to buy several shuttles that come every ten minutes and that’s a real

game-changer. That’s also in terms of [improved service] frequency and

people wanting to use it, but it’s also a real game-changer for… I think,

it’s actually the areas that do not, currently, have public transport

because they’re low density.” (Interviewee 3, Academia).

This impact is closely related to the state of CAVs in cities but is

considered an impact in this category here since it implies changes to the

existing system. Removing drivers from buses would lower operating

costs for public transportation providers, and this could help facilitate

more frequent and widespread transportation options.

Others were very optimistic about the possibilities for increased

public transport services in currently underserved areas, for example “…

you can start your own [public transport system] with your neighbours,

if you live in a small village, but it doesn’t have to be location-based, it

could be like Google run services for their employees, you can have all

the people who live there and work there, you can have this communal

service set up.” (Interviewee 9, Government).

Table 1

Interviewees and Quadruple Helix categories.

Number of Interviews Quadruple Helix category

6 Industry

2* Academia

2* Civil Society

3* Government

*One interviewee is an academic who is also active on a regional government

committee and with civil society, so they accounted for three quadruple helix

categories.

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

4.1.2. Increased transportation demand

One interviewee directly stated how single-person transport could

increase simply due to convenience, saying “I also see a big risk that

autonomous self-driving vehicles could lead to extensive use of single-

person transport because it becomes very convenient, and you don’t

lose any more working time or leisure time while being in transit.”

(Interviewee 5, Academia, Government, and Civil Society).

This type of impact was echoed in another interview, where the

interviewee also highlighted the potential zero-sum situation where

CAV users see increased convenience, and non-users see increased

congestion that could affect their mobility.

“… if we see massive adoption of private AVs; if, as several studies

show, that might double congestion, and they’re just going to be

driving through existing communities and adding to the problems of

congestion without providing benets to those existing commu-

nities’ (Interviewee 3, Academia)

4.1.3. New infrastructure and use of limited urban space

The creation of new infrastructure for CAVs was expressed as a re-

sponsibility for everyone developing the technology: “We do know that

the cars can certainly bring safety for anyone in the car or outside of the

car, but so can infrastructure. Roads need to be built or developed in a

way, that, if there is an accident, there is a smaller risk of fatalities. It’s a

shared responsibility that needs to be taken very seriously, and we do.”

(Interviewee 11, Industry).

Changes to the built environment were brought up as an impact in

terms of the way that CAVs will be used as compared to conventional

vehicles, since CAVs will not need to be parked close to users workplaces

when they are not in use during the day: “Urban planners will also have

to deal with the fact that, okay, maybe we will be in need of fewer

parking spaces in the city, but where should we store cars when they’re

not in use?”.

(Interviewee 6, Industry).

Another interviewee built on this, suggesting that it is crucial to start

planning the construction of parking facilities that only hold CAVs and

are too small for conventional vehicles.

“We’re working quite a bit with urban planners and property de-

velopers and people that plan parking, where I’m quite clear, if you

develop, let’s say, a parking facility, you should already, now, pre-

pare for oors that can accommodate cars that park themselves”

(Interviewee 4, Civil Society).

4.1.4. Parking companies losing revenue

The impact of the revenue stream from parking fees disappearing

relates to the changes in urban space: “…the City owns, also, our own

parking company, I think that’s where my mind thought about affected,

that they will perhaps not have any parking anymore and then they are

more affected…” (Interviewee 7, Government). While this may seem

contradictory in relation to the above impact, it is important to consider

that there may be a different payment scheme resulting in less revenue

for parking if humans are no longer involved in the parking activity.

4.1.5. More individual decision-making power related to transportation

This impact is based around the idea that new forms of ‘personalised

democracy’ will be created because people will have the ability to use

transportation-related technology in a more decentralised manner, as

compared to the way that taxi companies, public transport companies

and car companies hold the balance of power in transportation today.

“I think the new, technological developments – and you can compare

this to social media, for instance – will very much impact, then it will

open the way for a more… you could call it, ‘personalised de-

mocracy.’ At least, as an individual, you can have your say, so I think,

unless the solutions are monopolised, then the power, it will be more

shifted towards the consumer, to the individual, to the citizen, to the

citizen of Gothenburg.”

(Interviewee 9, Government).

4.1.6. Replacing people with technology

A clear impact arose when one interviewee responded to a question

about who would be affected by CAVs by saying “First, of course, all the

people you’re replacing…” meaning those who currently work as drivers

of taxis or public transport services. The interviewee added “… but to a

certain extent, that’s the normal way, we’ve been replacing people with

technology throughout the development of technology” (Interviewee 4,

Civil Society).

Another interviewee was blunter, simply stating that “…if the driver

isn’t vigilant, the car will be.” (Interviewee 11, Industry).

4.1.7. Changes to vehicle to pedestrian/cyclist communication

If the driver is removed from the vehicle, other road users lose a part

of their traditional communication method. For example, pedestrians

will no longer have a driver to make eye contact with as they navigate

pedestrian crossings.

“Pedestrians and cyclists and kids, that group, they would be affected

in many ways…today, you can interact in some way, at least with the

driver in the car, there is really no one to interact with in the future.”

(Interviewee 6, Industry).

4.2. Responses

The responses can be related to the drivers, the pressures (Rebalski

et al., 2022) and the impacts. They can enhance or dampen the positive

driving forces, tackle the negative restraining forces, or be expressed as

strategies that respond to the impacts. The responses are further

explained below in the context of quotations from interviews. Here is the

full list of responses:

•A step-by-step introduction of CAVs

•Flexibility during city planning

•Barriers in cities

•Encouraging non-car forms of transportation

•Ridesharing programs

•New jobs in a new transportation system

•Cooperation between industry, government, and academia to better un-

derstand how CAVs will be used

•Policy harmonisation between different levels of government

•Cities becoming more powerful

4.2.1. A step-by-step introduction of CAVs

It was expressed in the interviews that there could be a negative

reaction to the abrupt introduction of CAV technology. The interviewee

stressed that “It has to come step by step … in that case, I don’t think that

they feel affected by it, but on the other hand, if this is not introduced in

a good way, maybe if people do feel affected by the new technology”.

(Interviewee 8, Industry).

This thought was echoed by another person from the industry cate-

gory, who also related a gradual introduction to safety concerns:

“I think we need to have systems in the car that really safeguard the

safety. I think it’s sort of mind-blowing, the whole concept of the car

taking over. For us, it’s really a matter of taking it step by step.”

(Interviewee 11, Industry)

4.2.2. Flexibility during city planning

It was brought up during interviews that transportation infrastruc-

ture can be based on current or even past transportation systems, and

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

that infrastructure will be in place for a long period of time.

“You need to have that kind of basic, physical planning that comes

with the change of behaviour, you have to take that into account

when you plan infrastructure that will stay there for 20/30/50

years.” (Interviewee 4, Civil Society)

In addition, infrastructure can be based on rigid requirements that

give rise to large, expensive projects when there might be alternative

possibilities that would still meet customers’ needs or societal needs in

general, in terms of parking spaces for example.

“One municipality could say you need 32 parking spaces here. But if

our budget is going to be met, we can only t 31. Then we must have

[the parking lot with 32 spots] underground. So, we are pretty rigid,

we have to start to think more exibly.“ (Interviewee 10, Industry)

4.2.3. Barriers in cities

One interviewee suggested that to “simplify” the introduction of

CAVs, that cities begin to be built around CAVs, which creates a response

that we refer to here as Barriers in cities. This could take the form of large

corridors that pedestrians and other forms of trafc cannot pass through,

effectively blocking off parts of the city to those who are not CAV users.

In the interviews, barriers were expressed as follows:

“… one extreme is, basically, that they should dedicate transport

corridors with fences which simplify all the actions for the autono-

mous vehicles to optimise their ow. This will create large barriers in

the cities, at least for the main roads, I think that is a great risk. It will

soon look like some parts of the tram lines, also for these vehicles,

with fences.” (Interviewee 5, Government, Academia, and Civil

Society)

4.2.4. Encouraging non-car forms of transportation

One interviewee suggested that the priority should be more equitable

mobility options, focusing on pedestrians and cyclists, and then intro-

ducing CAVs as the next level of mobility prioritization.

“I would say transition the cities into walkable and bikeable transit-

oriented cities rst, then we can introduce autonomous vehicles.”

(Interviewee 1, Industry)

A specic response that was outlined by more than one interviewee

was to reduce speed limits so that CAV introduction could be easier. This

measure is also generally associated with making non-car forms of

transportation more attractive to use.

“I think that, already now, we can start preparing our cities by

reducing speeds in general for vehicles. That’s one way of already

starting to adapt the cities for autonomous vehicles.”

(Interviewee 5, Academia, Government and Civil Society).

4.2.5. Ridesharing programs

It was recognized that, for some users, adopting the idea of a car-

sharing service and using that service to supplement or replace a pri-

vate vehicle can be a big step. But once an individual or household has

become familiar with the notion and practice of car-sharing, the tech-

nological jump to a shared CAV might seem less intimidating. The net-

works of car-sharing users could thus be potential early adopters of CAVs

if the CAVs are introduced through the car-sharing services, as one

interviewee suggested:

“The phase that we are in right now, we are trying to get people to

relinquish their own cars and embrace car-sharing. That’s a journey

in itself. But if you have started that journey, maybe it’s easier to

share a self-driving vehicle. If you do not make that journey, then I

think you will go from having your own car, to having your own car

and now everyone in the family can use it because they don’t need to

have a driving license. I think we all need to think more sharing,

sharing, sharing.” (Interviewee 10, Industry)

Car-sharing and ridesharing were also brought up in the interviews

as an important way to achieve energy efciency goals.

“How many are in the car at the same time, how many cars are on the

market, how many people use them, compared to how many people

own them? So, I think the sharing issue and the mobility service

issue, it’s a much more important thing than the autonomous vehicle

part.” (Interviewee 6, Industry)

Note here that it was not clear from the interview if the interviewee

meant shared cars, like self-driving taxis or shared rides, were different

concepts. Shared cars, including self-driving taxis, might decrease car

ownership, but would not necessarily decrease the number of cars on

streets and related issues such as congestion (Eldsj¨

al, 2021). Rideshar-

ing, on the other hand, means using more of the capacity of vehicles on

the road, as more people share each ride and thereby increase the

average occupancy rate. Therefore, ridesharing could contribute to

fewer vehicle kilometers travelled and help lessen issues such as

congestion.

4.2.6. New jobs in a new transportation system

It came up in more than one interview that it will be important to

adapt to new opportunities and systems that will be created because of

CAVs. One example of this is through new jobs that will be created in the

form of both technology development and business model development.

“I think, on a European level, on a political level, you will see that it’s

a lot about jobs, new jobs and they realise we will lose some ‘old

jobs’. And when we need to be in a good position in order to compete

for the new jobs that will arise… ” (Interviewee 9, Government)

These new jobs could also be as simple as attendants on CAV public

transportation vehicles who ensure that passengers feel safe and receive

relevant information about, for example, trip planning. In this case the

job itself is not new, but the context for it is.

4.2.7. Cooperation between industry, government, and academia to better

understand how CAVs will be used

The importance of cooperation was brought up in multiple in-

terviews when the respondents were asked what is needed to prepare for

CAVs. Some interviewees suggested that they could contribute experi-

ence and expertise to this cooperation:

“The industry can contribute [to the CAV transition] by bringing

technology out there. If we cooperate with academia and govern-

ments, then we will get there. And anyone, including myself, rep-

resenting the OEM, can be the ambassador, both for the company and

for new technologies, new trends … trying to explain benets and

why this will happen, also pointing out the challenges, trying to be

realistic, and being open about the things we need to do better or

improve or do more of. One of the things we need to do more of is

maybe projects where we cooperate.” (Interviewee 11, Industry)

Others felt that their industry needed to be part of this cooperation so

that they could learn more:

“I would welcome more discussion about how [CAVs] will affect us

in the future, with the municipalities, and with us, who are building

apartment buildings. I would say we do not talk so much about that

today.” (Interviewee 10, Industry).

4.2.8. Policy harmonisation between different levels of government

Policy harmonisation in relation to CAVs has been reected in

literature discussing both national (Legacy et al., 2019) and interna-

tional (Lee and Hess, 2020) harmonisation. Transportation is particu-

larly interesting since one vehicle can be in different jurisdictions

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

(municipal, regional, national, global) and cross between jurisdictions

quickly.

“One of the problems or challenges is that there’s no harmonised

regulation or policy. We have the Vienna convention,

but not all

countries have signed. There are European initiatives … And then we

have the national level of course, where Member States in the EU, or

outside of the EU for that matter, they need to nd a common way of

speaking to each other.” (Interviewee 11, Industry)

One interviewee had a more cynical view of the idea of harmonised

CAV policy at the local level when they stated that: “I think less strategic

planning will happen at municipal level; it will be more like putting out

res and giving permits for different communities outside of cities.”

(Interviewee 1, Industry).

4.2.9. Cities becoming more powerful

Cities tend to have jurisdiction over CAV-related issues, such as

parking and local trafc regulations (Freemark et al., 2019). Thus cities

are gaining more bargaining power when it comes to policies that could

be related to or affected by CAVs. One interviewee, when discussing the

role of industry, remarked that “It might be that we don’t need to build

up parking spaces anymore. It’s not up to us really, it’s up to the mu-

nicipalities. More and more we are having a dialogue about what can we

offer, and how they can reduce the [minimum number of parking

spaces].” (Interviewee 10, Industry).

Another interviewee had very proactive suggestions when it came to

the role of the city in a CAV introduction:

“Maybe, on the political level, we should step up a little bit with

these questions and not just leave it to the civil servants and to

research projects, but also maybe demand a plan, a strategy and a

policy for introducing autonomous vehicles in Gothenburg, for

instance.” (Interviewee 5 Academia, Government and Civil Society)

4.3. Analysis of selected impacts and responses through the lens of

transition management

In the next step, we used the four governance spheres from TM to

better understand how certain impacts and responses reect issues that

emerged in the literature review, and to suggest where those impacts

and responses t into the larger transition to CAVs in cities as part of a

complete DPSIR chain.

Not all impacts and responses are examined here. We used the DPSIR

chain shown in Fig. 3, which starts with the driver Politics and Policy,

then the more specic pressure Economic Interests of Car Manufacturers,

leading to the state CAVs in Cities. The main impact that is examined is

Increased Travel Demand. This was chosen because it is one of the main

consequences of CAV introduction that arises in the literature. Many

studies examine the idea that CAVs could lead to increases in travel

demand due to decreased VoTT, (see for example (Soteropoulos et al.,

2019; Taiebat et al., 2019; Wadud, 2017). The interviewees echoed

these ideas, suggesting that convenience might make it easier for pas-

sengers to spend more time in a CAV as compared to a regular car, and

thus contribute to negative effects such as congestion.

Increased Travel Demand can be addressed in a variety of different

ways, making it the ideal impact to use when examining different re-

sponses. We used the TM spheres, starting with the strategic sphere, to

categorise and further analyse the responses and the DSPIR chains of

which they could be a part.

4.3.1. The strategic sphere

The strategic sphere of TM requires a long-term vision. In much of

the CAV governance-related literature (Acheampong et al., 2023; Hop-

kins and Schwanen, 2018; Lyons, 2022; Milakis and Müller, 2021; Miloˇ

N. Mladenovi´

c et al., 2020; Mukhtar-Landgren and Paulsson, 2021),

authors stressed the importance of collaboration between government,

industry and users, and the use of participatory pilot projects. This is

captured by the response Cooperation between industry, government and

academia to better understand how CAVs will be used. In addition, a sus-

tainable socio-technical transition to CAVs will require policies that deal

with congestion, emissions, and increases in transportation demand

(Milakis et al., 2017; Taiebat et al., 2019). Such issues span various

regional, national, and international government jurisdictions, thus

matching the response Policy harmonisation between different levels of

government.

In both cases, these responses are overarching and could target all

the different parts of the DPSIR chain directly through policy or regu-

lation (see Fig. 4). This inuence is characteristic of the strategic sphere,

which focusses on the culture that underpins a transition.

The most likely target would, however, be the driver level, in this

case Politics and Policy, since political and bureaucratic processes tend to

be slow, and create incremental changes. Loorbach emphasizes the

importance of implicit knowledge and information that is created

through discussions within the transition arena at the beginning of a

transition. The actors in who could be involved in these responses would

likely be more institutional than what is suggested for a transition arena,

but the processes of cooperation and harmonisation match the transition

arena task of creating shared, long-term basic principles for sustainable

development (Loorbach, 2010).

Fig. 3. A DPSIR Chain example.

The Vienna Convention on Road Trafc of 1968 is an international treaty

that attempts to organize international trafc. The EU does not have its own

trafc legislation, and thus the Vienna Convention is most often referred to as a

means of bridging trafc policy between EU countries.

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

4.3.2. The tactical sphere

The tactical sphere focusses on governance structures, regimes and

institutions, and barriers towards an established vision. The Creation of

Barriers response was taken from the interviews and explained as the

idea that a new road system, where certain roads would be CAV-only,

would exclude road users who do not have access to CAVs (Fig. 5).

This could lead to increased economic benets for car manufac-

turers, who would sell more cars or car-related services, leading to the

impact Increased Transportation Demand. Here we assume that barriers

could exacerbate the transportation accessibility inequities discussed by

Dianin et al. (2021) and Wu et al. (2021). This can be categorised as part

of the tactical sphere of TM, because it describes the creation of physical

infrastructure barriers that hinder a sustainable introduction of CAVs.

An example of a very different response to the impact Increased

Transportation Demand could be Policies that Encourage Non-Car Forms of

Transportation (see Fig. 6). This response would be at the level of the

tactical sphere because it involves action on the part of a governing

institution, which is already happening in Gothenburg. The City has the

goal that 23 % of trips within the city should be made on foot, and 12 %

by bicycle, by 2035 (as compared to 2011) (City of Gothenburg, 2023b).

Currently pedestrian trips are at 22 % and cycling trips at 7 % of total

trips. Since this response involves government action, it would likely

target the driver stage of the DPSIR chain.

4.3.3. The operational sphere

The response Ridesharing Programs ts into the operational sphere as

these programs can be considered transition experiments. Loorbach

(2010) notes that transition experiments can take as long as 5–10 years

which, depending on the intended scale and usage of a ride-sharing

program, could be possible. Loorbach also points out that this level of

TM should create many transition experiments that “complement and

strengthen each other” (p. 176). This could be an example of other

Mobility as a Service (MaaS) components, such as rental cars, e-bikes,

and larger rental vehicles. Ridesharing with CAVs has been modelled

using data from Gothenburg travel surveys. A research project called

Eldsj¨

al recently used computer simulations to show that total vehicle

kilometres driven could decrease by 17 % if ride-sharing was introduced

in Gothenburg and its nearest suburbs (Lorig et al., 2023).

It was brought up in the interviews that ride-sharing programs could

act as a less intimidating way to introduce people to CAVs. There are

examples in the literature which show that when people envision future

transportation systems, they carry forward a vision of how they use the

transportation system today, even if they are aware of its drawbacks,

such as those of an increase in privately owned vehicles (Fraedrich,

Fig. 4. DPSIR chain as part of the strategic sphere.

Fig. 5. DPSIR chains with examples of different responses to the impact of

Increased Transportation Demand.

Fig. 6. DPSIR chains with examples of different responses to the impact of

Increased Transportation Demand.

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

2021). While there are many factors that inuence willingness-to-share

(Rahimi et al., 2020), ride-sharing is perceived as being both more

inconvenient, and in some cases more costly than a private vehicle

(Wadud and Chintakayala, 2021; Wadud and Mattioli, 2021). Thus, a

shift to ridesharing could represent a broader change in behavior that

could be connected to societal drivers, hence being a response that could

in fact target the entire DPSIR chain (see Fig. 7).

4.3.4. The reexive sphere

In some cases, the timing or speed of the impact is crucial, for

example the response Step-by-Step Introduction of CAVs, which focusses

on the speed at which the technology is introduced (Fig. 8). The in-

terviewees from industry stated the importance of viewing CAV tech-

nology as a system of many Operational Design Domains (ODDs). The

EU denes ODDs as: “operating conditions under which a given auto-

mated driving system is specically designed to function, including, but

not limited to, environmental, geographical, and time-of-day re-

strictions, and/or the requisite presence or absence of certain trafc or

roadway characteristics” (European Union, 2022).

One example of a Step-by-Step Introduction of CAVs is introducing a

type of ODD with each step, similar to how the UN and EU have recently

adopted regulations for certain types of roads (European Commission,

2022; UNECE, 2022). This process could in fact be viewed as many new

states each time a new ODD is introduced, each causing a new impact on

user behaviour, with each one potentially requiring a response in the

form of more technology testing to address safety or HMI issues, new

trafc legislation, or other measures. Hence, this would be a reexive

technology adoption process, and part of the reexive TM sphere. This

response would primarily target the state of CAVs in Cities, since it re-

lates directly to the CAVs.

The reexive TM sphere could also be connected to the response

Flexibility in City Planning. This could mean that the development and

role of CAVs are regularly monitored and evaluated, potentially

affecting policies so that the role of CAVs in the transportation system is

aligned with the overall long-term goals for the city as an urban system.

This is similar to how goals from the Gothenburg 2035 strategy plan are

revisited in yearly reports from the City’s Trafc Committee (City of

Gothenburg, 2023c; Hellberg et al., 2014). This response would target

the driver stage of the DPSIR chain (Fig. 9).

5. Discussion

In this section, we address the research questions posed at the

beginning of the article.

RQ1: How are potential future impacts of CAVs in cities perceived by local

stakeholders in Gothenburg?

The stakeholders in question here are the interviewees and the

people who the interviewees discussed in the context of Gothenburg. In

Fig. 7. An example of a DPSIR chain with the response Ridesharing Programs.

Fig. 8. DPSIR chains in the reexive sphere. Fig. 9. DPSIR chains in the reexive sphere.

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

answering this question, we also discuss the plausibility of the in-

terviewees’ perceptions and opinions by comparing them to the ndings

in the literature.

As was mentioned in Section 4.3, an impact that came up constantly

in the interviews and that is also present in the literature is Increased

Travel Demand. When we apply this to the context of Gothenburg, it

should be noted that the City has a goal to reduce car trafc by 25 % by

2035 compared with 2011 levels. Car trafc is falling by about 0.5 % per

year, thanks in part to congestion charges, but this is not a fast enough

rate to meet the 2035 target (City of Gothenburg, 2023b). If measures

like congestion charges that make car travel more expensive have

contributed to a decrease in car travel, CAVs that make car travel

cheaper and more convenient could cause more travel demand. In this

regard, the interviewees’ perceptions match the ndings in much of the

literature, and of the policies and statistics in the City of Gothenburg

(Milakis et al., 2017; Taiebat et al., 2019; Wadud, 2017).

Not all impacts matched the literature in a straightforward way. The

interviewees named changes in urban planning and building (classied

as the impact New infrastructure and use of limited urban space) such as

parking garages that allow cars to park more closely together. They also

brought up the impact of Parking companies losing revenue. Parking so-

lutions are a hot-button issue in Sweden, not least in Gothenburg. But

there were some discrepancies in the way that interviewees perceived

the loss or adaption of parking spaces, and how these changes are pre-

sented in the literature. The interviewees were mostly focussed on the

idea that parking or space for cars will still be necessary, though the

garages could be smaller. In the literature, there is more focus on the

connection between parking spaces and car ownership, and a reduction

in the latter (Johansson et al., 2022; McAslan and Sprei, 2023).

Another example where interviewee perceptions and literature

didn’t quite match was around the impact Changes in vehicle to pedes-

trian/cyclist communication. As Dey et al. (2020) point out, there are

many different physical and communications aspects that can create

confusion even before users are part of the system. In a more recent

review of external Human Machine Interface (eHMI) literature, Brill

et al. (2023) found that there are still many gaps in the scientic liter-

ature, including a taxonomy of the different types of shared spaces that

CAVs and other users will be interacting within, because in such spaces it

is often unclear who has priority. The discrepancy between the literature

and interviewees’ perceptions here is that there was an implication in

the interviews that it might be more difcult for pedestrians and cyclists

to communicate with CAVs than with regular cars. While this was not

rejected by ndings in the literature, Brill et al. (2023) point out that this

communication is currently awed even with conventional trafc.

One impact that has less uniform support in the academic literature

is the suggestion that CAVs could be introduced through the existing

public transportation system (UITP, 2017) i.e. Better Public Trans-

portation, especially in low density areas. While this is a common sug-

gestion in the literature, Legacy et al. (2019) argue that strategic

planning needs to happen for CAVs to be integrated into public trans-

portation, and highlight Docherty et al.’s (2018) warning that it could be

advantageous for corporate actors to benet from individual travel.

Thus, it could be possible that the interviewees had a rather naïve view

of the rollout of CAV technology that overlooked the interests of auto-

mobile industry incumbents.

In general, the interviewees identied impacts that were also present

in the literature. But the nuances of certain impacts were lacking, such as

the difculties surrounding CAV integration into public transportation,

and the current difculties in communication between pedestrians, cy-

clists, and car drivers. This could suggest that while the interviewees’

perceptions regarding the impacts of CAVs are plausible, these impacts

require comparison with the literature and further analysis in order to

produce results that are contextually grounded. The analysis in Section

4.3 is an example of such research.

RQ2: How can the complexity of the responses identied in the interviews

be captured and interpreted for policy interventions using the Transition

Management framework?

The strategic sphere of TM emphasizes the creation of a long-term

vision. The responses that we have connected to this sphere are Coop-

eration between industry, government and academia to better understand

how CAVs will be used and Policy harmonisation between different levels of

government, both of which could benet from a common vision for CAV

introduction. The City of Gothenburg does not include CAVs in its cur-

rent transportation strategy goals, although the technology is briey

mentioned, and the City is involved in multiple research projects on CAV

use. If there was a clear CAV strategy to complement existing transport

planning, these diverse testing and research projects could be working

towards one long-term vision (albeit from different perspectives).

Gothenburg is not unique in not having stated planning goals related to

CAVs. Grindsted et al. (2022) show in their review of various European

capitals that even cities that mention CAVs explicitly in planning doc-

uments lack more specic standards, visions, or planning goals.

Regarding the tactical sphere of TM, the rst response that we

focussed on in the discussion was the Creation of Barriers. This could

create a more socially unsustainable transportation system where

stakeholders without access to a CAV have less convenient trans-

portation options. Barriers to accessibility are already acknowledged as

an issue in conventional trafc planning in Gothenburg: “Creating a

denser and more interconnected network of streets without barriers” is

one of the sub-goals of the City of Gothenburg’s transportation planning

strategy document Gothenburg 2035 (Hellberg et al., 2014). This relates

in turn to the second response that fell within the tactical sphere, Policies

that Encourage Non-Car Forms of Transportation. Gothenburg is also

already working on this response in many ways, one of which is the

recent creation of a guideline stating that vehicle speeds should be

reduced to 30 km per hour based on the presence of pedestrians or cy-

clists (this is in addition to existing low speed limits for schools and other

special zones) (City of Gothenburg, 2023b).

Both of these responses in the tactical sphere highlight the fact that

the same policies can be useful for conventional and CAV trafc. Iden-

tication of such policies, in addition to monitoring and evaluation,

could be very useful, because then CAV planning can be built into

existing regulatory structures.

Another current phenomenon that could have implications for the

introduction of CAVs is Ride Sharing Programs. This was placed within

the operational sphere as a transition experiment. As was mentioned in

the previous section, it could be necessary to address the fact that

ridesharing might not be affordable and convenient enough to be

adopted at a sufcient rate to offset the congestion, emissions, and other

effects from Increased Transportation Demand. If we consider that Ride-

sharing Programs are part of the operational sphere, then perhaps a

policy intervention is necessary at the tactical stage. This policy inter-

vention could be part of a broader effort to acknowledge both a lack of

interest in, or discomfort with, ridesharing and to make it a more viable

option for potential users.

Finally, when considering the reexive sphere, we examined the

responses A Step-by-Step Introduction of CAVs and Flexibility in City

Planning. This need for adaptive governance regarding the introduction

of CAVs can also be placed in the national context of a sustainable socio-

technical transition. Swedish policy documents on reaching long-term

climate targets often stress that exible regulatory approaches are

required to meet long-term goals. If the system is moving faster towards

carbon neutrality and transport efciency, or if various possibilities or

obstacles emerge, policies may be revised so that the long-term targets

remain attainable. See for example Hunhammar et al., (2021) and

Nohr´

en et al., (2022). At the European level, the EU now has Regulation

2022/1426, which regulates certain automated driving functions such

as speed and braking, as well as the number of fully autonomous vehicles

allowed on EU roads. The EU plans to introduce new measures in the

Regulation in 2024 and 2029 (European Commission, 2022).

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

6. Conclusion

6.1. Limitations

The most blatant limitation of this study, and most studies that focus

on CAVs, is that all the data (both interview data and the literature re-

view) is based on a future vision of a technology that is not widely used

today. Thus, there is likely a gap in terms of how both the scientic

literature and the interviewees view CAVs, and what will happen in

reality. There are also fewer interviewees representing civil society than

other parts of the quadruple helix structure, which puts a limitation on

the perspectives represented in the interview data. This limitation is,

however, quite tempered by the broadness of perspectives in the liter-

ature review, and by the comparisons between literature and inter-

viewee perceptions in the Discussion section.

6.2. Conclusions

By categorizing DPSIR chains into TM spheres, we can give an

indication of the scale of potential impacts of and responses to CAV

technology. This also suggests the scale on which policy interventions

could be made in the future, and thus this research could act as a base

condition for future policy research. Certainly, actual CAV use remains

almost non-existent, but there are global regulations in place, and plans

to continue monitoring and adapting to the technology. Additionally,

many pilot projects that test user behaviour and address other urban

planning issues are being carried out, and research into CAVs is being

updated constantly.

This article builds on studies that call for more research into the

social dimension of CAVs (Cohen et al., 2020; Hopkins and Schwanen,

2018; Milakis and Müller, 2021). There are a group of interrelated im-

pacts including Replacing people with technology, New infrastructure and

use of limited urban space, and Changes in vehicle to cyclist/pedestrian

communication that can act as starting points for new research into the

social effects of removing people from the driver’s seat, where humans

might still be needed and why; and the most equitable and efcient way

to use limited urban space.

After examining the different spheres of the TM framework in rela-

tion to perceived impacts of and responses to CAVs, it is clear that there

is already a great deal of research and practical experimentation

happening in the strategic, tactical and operational spheres. In the re-

exive sphere, the passage of EU Regulation 2022/1426 represents an

exciting opportunity for monitoring, evaluation, and reexive change

when the Regulation is updated between 2024 and 2029.

In the short term, the next step will be to see how individual Member

States choose to implement the Regulation. In the longer term, activities

in each sphere of the TM framework should be examined, and new goals

agreed upon. In Gothenburg, there are already examples of policies that

could help address impacts such as Increased Transportation Demand. If,

for example, the 2035 goals for reduced car trafc and increased

pedestrian and cycling trafc are to be met, then ride-sharing programs

and non-car forms of transportation will require continuous support.

Funding

This study was funded by Mistra Carbon Exit and the Chalmers

University Area of Advance Transport. These bodies did not have any

role in the collection or analysis of data, in the writing of the report, or in

the decision to submit this article for publication.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Ella Rebalski: Conceptualization, Data curation, Writing – original

draft, Writing – review & editing. Marco Adelo: Conceptualization,

Data curation, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing.

Frances Sprei: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing. Daniel J.

A. Johansson: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing.

Data availability

Data sharing of a quantitative nature is not applicable to this article

as no quantitative datasets were generated or analysed during the cur-

rent study. Interview data, including names of interviewees and inter-

view transcripts, is condential.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Gavin McCrory for helpful discus-

sions, and to thank the two anonymous reviewers for insightful and

constructive review comments.

Brace for Impacts

Perceived Impacts and Responses relating to the State of Connected

and Autonomous Vehicles in the City of Gothenburg.

References

Acheampong, R.A., Legacy, C., Kingston, R., Stone, J., 2023. Imagining urban mobility

futures in the era of autonomous vehicles—insights from participatory visioning and

multi-criteria appraisal in the UK and Australia. Transp. Policy 136, 193–208.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.03.020.

Åkerman, J., H¨

ojer, M., 2006. How much transport can the climate stand?—Sweden on a

sustainable path in 2050. Energy Policy 34, 1944–1957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

enpol.2005.02.009.

Berg, T., Fürhaupter, K., Teixeira, H., Uusitalo, L., Zampoukas, N., 2015. The marine

strategy framework directive and the ecosystem-based approach – pitfalls and

solutions. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 96, 18–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

marpolbul.2015.04.050.

Berk, B., 2018. This swedish town is to volvo what detroit is to ford. Departures.

Brill, S., Payre, W., Debnath, A., Horan, B., Birrell, S., 2023. External human-machine

interfaces for automated vehicles in shared spaces: a review of the human-computer

interaction literature. Sensors 23, 4454. https://doi.org/10.3390/s23094454.

Bryman, A., Bell, E., 2015. Business research methods, Fourth edition. ed. Oxford

University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom ; New York, NY, United States of

America.

City of Gothenburg, 2021. Environment and Climate Programme for the City of

Gothenburg 2021–2030.

City of Gothenburg, 2023a. Månadsstatistik - Befolkningen.

City of Gothenburg, 2023b. Trafc and Travel Development 2022.

City of Gothenburg, 2023c. Annual Report 2022. G¨

oteborgs Stads Parkering AB.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., Morrison, K., 2011. Research methods in education, 7th ed.

Routledge, London, New York.

Cohen, T., Stilgoe, J., Stares, S., Akyelken, N., Cavoli, C., Day, J., Dickinson, J., Fors, V.,

Hopkins, D., Lyons, G., Marres, N., Newman, J., Reardon, L., Sipe, N., Tennant, C.,

Wadud, Z., Wigley, E., 2020. A constructive role for social science in the

development of automated vehicles. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 6, 100133

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100133.

Cohn, J., Ezike, R., Martin, J., Donkor, K., Ridgway, M., Balding, M., 2019. Examining

the equity impacts of autonomous vehicles: a travel demand model approach.

Transp. Res. Rec. 2673, 23–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/0361198119836971.

Dey, D., Habibovic, A., L¨

ocken, A., Wintersberger, P., Peging, B., Riener, A.,

Martens, M., Terken, J., 2020. Taming the eHMI jungle: A classication taxonomy to

guide, compare, and assess the design principles of automated vehicles’ external

human-machine interfaces. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 7, 100174 https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100174.

Dianin, A., Ravazzoli, E., Hauger, G., 2021. Implications of autonomous vehicles for

accessibility and transport equity: a framework based on literature. Sustainability

13, 4448. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084448.

Docherty, I., Marsden, G., Anable, J., 2018. The governance of smart mobility. Transp.

Res. A Policy Pract. 115, 114–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2017.09.012.

European Commission, 2022. New Rules on Vehicle Safety and Automated Mobility.

European Union, 2022. COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2022/1426.

Fraedrich, E., 2021. How collective frames of orientation toward automobile practices

provide hints for a future with autonomous vehicles. Applied Mobilities 6, 253–272.

https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2018.1501198.

Freemark, Y., Hudson, A., Zhao, J., 2019. Are cities prepared for autonomous vehicles?:

planning for technological change by U.S. local governments. J. Am. Plann. Assoc.

85, 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2019.1603760.

Geels, F.W., 2004. From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems. Res.

Policy 33, 897–920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2004.01.015.

Geels, F.W., 2010. Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the

multi-level perspective. Res. Policy 39, 495–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

respol.2010.01.022.

E. Rebalski et al.

Case Studies on Transport Policy 15 (2024) 101140

Gonz´

alez-Gonz´

alez, E., Cordera, R., Stead, D., Nogu´

es, S., 2023. Envisioning the

driverless city using backcasting and Q-methodology. Cities 133, 104159. https://

doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.104159.

Business Region G¨

oteborg, 2018. FACTS & FIGURES ABOUT DOING BUSINESS IN THE

GOTHENBURG REGION 2018.

Grindsted, T.S., Christensen, T.H., Freudendal-Pedersen, M., Friis, F., Hartmann-

Petersen, K., 2022. The urban governance of autonomous vehicles – In love with AVs

or critical sustainability risks to future mobility transitions. Cities 120, 103504.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103504.

Hasche, N., H¨

oglund, L., Linton, G., 2020. Quadruple helix as a network of relationships:

creating value within a Swedish regional innovation system. J. Small Bus. Entrep. 32,

523–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2019.1643134.

Hellberg, S., Bergstr¨

om Jonsson, P., J¨

aderberg, M., Sunnemar, M., Arby, H., 2014a.

Gothenburg 2035: Transport Strategy for a Close-Knit City.

Hopkins, D., Schwanen, T., 2018. Automated mobility transitions: governing processes in

the UK. Sustainability 10, 956. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040956.

Hunhammar, S., Pucher, M., Jernb¨

acker, E., Lindblom, H., Jonsson, L., Andersson, P.,

2021. I en v¨

arld som st¨

aller upp: Sverige utan fossila drivmedel 2040.

Regeringskansliet, Stockholm.

Johansson, F., Åkerman, J., Henriksson, G., Envall, P., 2022. A pathway for parking in

line with the Paris Agreement. Case Studies on Transport Policy 10, 1223–1233.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2022.04.008.

Lavieri, P.S., Bhat, C.R., 2019. Modeling individuals’ willingness to share trips with

strangers in an autonomous vehicle future. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 124,

242–261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.03.009.

Lee, D., Hess, D.J., 2020. Regulations for on-road testing of connected and automated

vehicles: Assessing the potential for global safety harmonization. Transp. Res. A

Policy Pract. 136, 85–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2020.03.026.

Legacy, C., Ashmore, D., Scheurer, J., Stone, J., Curtis, C., 2019. Planning the driverless

city. Transp. Rev. 39, 84–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2018.1466835.

Loorbach, D., 2010. Transition management for sustainable development: a prescriptive,

complexity-based governance framework. Governance 23, 161–183. https://doi.

org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2009.01471.x.

Lorig, F., Persson, J.A., Michielsen, A., 2023. Simulating the impact of shared mobility on

demand: a study of future transportation systems in gothenburg. Sweden. Int. J. ITS

Res. 21, 129–144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13177-023-00345-5.

Lyons, G., 2022. The driverless cars emulsion: using participatory foresight and

constructive conict to address transport’s wicked problems. Futures 136, 102889.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102889.

McAslan, D., Sprei, F., 2023. Minimum parking requirements and car ownership: an

analysis of Swedish municipalities. Transp. Policy 135, 45–58. https://doi.org/

10.1016/j.tranpol.2023.03.003.

Milakis, D., Müller, S., 2021. The societal dimension of the automated vehicles transition:

towards a research agenda. Cities 113, 103144. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

cities.2021.103144.

Milakis, D., van Arem, B., van Wee, B., 2017. Policy and society related implications of

automated driving: a review of literature and directions for future research. J. Intell.

Transp. Syst. 21, 324–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/15472450.2017.1291351.

Mladenovi´

c, Miloˇ

s N., Stead, D., Milakis, D., Pangbourne, K., Givoni, M., 2020.

Governance cultures and sociotechnical imaginaries of self-driving vehicle

technology: Comparative analysis of Finland, UK and Germany, in: Advances in

Transport Policy and Planning. Elsevier, pp. 235–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.

atpp.2020.01.001.

Mukhtar-Landgren, D., Paulsson, A., 2021. Governing smart mobility: policy

instrumentation, technological utopianism, and the administrative quest for

knowledge. Administrative Theory & Praxis 43, 135–153. https://doi.org/10.1080/

10841806.2020.1782111.

Niemeijer, D., De Groot, R.S., 2008. Framing environmental indicators: moving from

causal chains to causal networks. Environ Dev Sustain 10, 89–106. https://doi.org/

10.1007/s10668-006-9040-9.

Nohr´

en, E., Burwick, M., Rickard, N., Christofer, F., Kjell-Arne, O., Joar, F., Amanda, P.,

Martin, K., Elin, S., Magnus, M., 2022. Sveriges globala klimatavtryck.

Rahimi, A., Azimi, G., Jin, X., 2020. Examining human attitudes toward shared mobility

options and autonomous vehicles. Transp. Res. Part F: Trafc Psychol. Behav. 72,

133–154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2020.05.001.

Rebalski, E., Adelo, M., Sprei, F., Johansson, D.J.A., 2022. Too much pressure? Driving

and restraining forces and pressures relating to the state of connected and

autonomous vehicles in cities. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 13, 100507 https://

doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100507.

Soteropoulos, A., Berger, M., Ciari, F., 2019. Impacts of automated vehicles on travel

behaviour and land use: an international review of modelling studies. Transp. Rev.

39, 29–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2018.1523253.

Taiebat, M., Stolper, S., Xu, M., 2019. Forecasting the impact of connected and

automated vehicles on energy use: a microeconomic study of induced travel and

energy rebound. Appl. Energy 247, 297–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

apenergy.2019.03.174.

UITP, 2017. Autonomous Vehicles: A Potential Game Changer for Urban Mobility.

Unece, 2022. Proposal for the 01 series of amendments to UN Regulation No. 157

(automated Lane Keeping Systems).

Urban Transport Administration (Trakkontoret), 2020. Innovation och utveckling f¨

framtidens smarta trak i G¨

oteborg.

Wadud, Z., 2017. Fully automated vehicles: a cost of ownership analysis to inform early

adoption. Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 101, 163–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

tra.2017.05.005.

Wadud, Z., Chintakayala, P.K., 2021. To own or not to own – That is the question: The

value of owning a (fully automated) vehicle. Transportation Research Part c:

Emerging Technologies 123, 102978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2021.102978.

Wadud, Z., Mattioli, G., 2021. Fully automated vehicles: A cost-based analysis of the

share of ownership and mobility services, and its socio-economic determinants.

Transp. Res. A Policy Pract. 151, 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

tra.2021.06.024.

Wu, X., Cao, J., Douma, F., 2021. The impacts of vehicle automation on transport-

disadvantaged people. Transp. Res. Interdiscip. Perspect. 11, 100447 https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.trip.2021.100447.

E. Rebalski et al.

ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.

External Human–Machine Interfaces for Automated Vehicles in Shared Spaces: A Review of the Human–Computer Interaction Literature

Article

Full-text available

May 2023
SENSORS-BASEL

Given the rise of automated vehicles from an engineering and technical perspective, there has been increased research interest concerning the Human and Computer Interactions (HCI) between vulnerable road users (VRUs, such as cyclists and pedestrians) and automated vehicles. As with all HCI challenges, clear communication and a common understanding—in this application of shared road usage—is critical in order to reduce conflicts and crashes between the VRUs and automated vehicles. In an effort to solve this communication challenge, various external human–machine interface (eHMI) solutions have been developed and tested across the world. This paper presents a timely critical review of the literature on the communication between automated vehicles and VRUs in shared spaces. Recent developments will be explored and studies analyzing their effectiveness will be presented, including the innovative use of Virtual Reality (VR) for user assessments. This paper provides insight into several gaps in the eHMI literature and directions for future research, including the need to further research eHMI effects on cyclists, investigate the negative effects of eHMIs, and address the technical challenges of eHMI implementation. Furthermore, it has been underlined that there is a lack of research into the use of eHMIs in shared spaces, where the communication and interaction needs differ from conventional roads.

Imagining urban mobility futures in the era of autonomous vehicles—insights from participatory visioning and multi-criteria appraisal in the UK and Australia

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2023
TRANSPORT POLICY

Autonomous Vehicles (AVs) present enormous uncertainties and challenges for future urban transport and mobility. While urban and transportation planning have significant roles to play in shaping these futures, a critical challenge is identifying and reconciling divergent values and competing visions in relation to this potentially disruptive transport technology and the associated mobility services. In this paper, we demonstrate the use of a participatory multi-criteria visioning and appraisal framework and methodology to enable stakeholders to envision, identify and interrogate essential tensions between imagined AV futures and long-term transport and mobility imperatives. Based on workshops with stakeholders at the forefront of policy and practice, and academia in Greater Manchester (UK) and Melbourne (Australia), we reveal several insights. Regarding the prospects of AVs, our participants are neither ‘opponents’ nor ‘evangelists’, but instead, manifest the contrasting attitudes and perspectives of excitement, optimism, ambivalence, scepticism and uncertainty all at the same time. In the visions outlined and appraised, our stakeholders identify AVs prospects in various use cases, such as public transport, personal and shared-use and urban freight and delivery applications, while at the same time recognising the inherent contradictions between automated driving futures outlined and imperatives such as reversing auto-mobility and creating safe and inclusive urban environments. Finally, the study brings to the fore the significant role of governance in mediating the politics and resolving contestations in critical areas including data management and privacy, cybersecurity and implementing viable business models and ownership arrangements.

Minimum parking requirements and car ownership: An analysis of Swedish municipalities

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2023
TRANSPORT POLICY

Transportation is a major contributor to anthropogenic climate change driven primarily by private automobility and for nearly a century, cities have enacted a suite of policies and regulations that reinforce high rates of car ownership. One such regulation is minimum parking requirements, enacted to ensure that private properties can accommodate the storage of private vehicles. In recent years, cities have begun to reevaluate these parking requirements, with some municipalities reducing them, others providing opportunities for flexible parking, and some even removing parking requirements in part or all of the city. This article explores the relationship between parking requirements and car ownership by analyzing a survey of 56 municipalities across Sweden. In this paper, we develop two methods for comparing different parking metrics that municipalities use (parking spaces per apartment and parking spaces per building area). Our analysis examines variation between different sizes and classifications of municipalities. We find that across all municipalities, there is a positive relationship between minimum parking requirements and car ownership, meaning that higher minimum parking requirements are associated with higher rates of car ownership. City size is an important factor in rates of car ownership, but our analysis shows that even among similarly sized municipalities, minimum parking requirements tend to be associated with higher rates of car ownership. These findings show that reducing parking minimums can be an effective policy to reduce car ownership, but it is important to consider that these changes only impact new development and repurposing parking areas in existing housing areas may be an equally effective policy to curb car ownership.

Simulating the Impact of Shared Mobility on Demand: a Study of Future Transportation Systems in Gothenburg, Sweden

Article

Full-text available

Jan 2023

Self-driving cars enable dynamic shared mobility, where customers are independent of schedules and fixed stops. This study aims to investigate the potential effects shared mobility can have on future transportation. We simulate multiple scenarios to analyze the effects different service designs might have on vehicle kilometers, on the required number of shared vehicles, on the potential replacement of private cars, and on service metrics such as waiting times, travel times, and detour levels. To demonstrate how simulation can be used to analyze future mobility, we present a case study of the city of Gothenburg in Sweden, where we model travel demand in the morning hours of a workday. The results show that a significant decrease of vehicle kilometers can be achieved if all private car trips are replaced by rideshare and that shared vehicles can potentially replace at least 5 private cars during the morning peak.

A pathway for parking in line with the Paris Agreement

Article

Full-text available

Apr 2022

Current European parking policies do not seem to steer towards a future where urban transport meets the climate goals. Prominent in current housing and parking policies are the so-called minimum parking standards. Recent research has shown that they contribute to increased car use and consequently to higher CO2 emissions. This is because they contribute to urban sprawl, extensive land use, increased housing and infrastructure construction costs, and that they restrict the number of flats per urban land unit. Other recent research shows that the construction of underground garages causes considerable CO2 emissions. This paper is based on previous research on the development of the transport sector to be in line with climate targets (i.e., the Paris Agreement). It intends to fill a research gap regarding how parking management can be designed to be consistent with these targets. Through a future study approach with Stockholm as a case example, this paper illustrates a policy shift in parking policies considered to be in line with national climate targets. The article presents concrete indicators to quantify the scope of change needed (e.g., removing 60,000 residential parking spaces and providing vehicle sharing with 7,500 cars and at least 7,500 bikes). The focus shift goes from providing physical parking spaces to providing satisfactory mobility and accessibility. We outline a pathway towards a future scenario of parking and mobility in Stockholm, with a combination of mobility services, parking restrictions (e.g., cap on parking spaces, removal of minimum parking standards), and citizen participation. The pathway is also analysed regarding equity, feasibility, and acceptance.

Too much pressure? Driving and restraining forces and pressures relating to the state of connected and autonomous vehicles in cities

Article

Full-text available

Mar 2022

Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs) are predicted by many analysts to transform the transport system over the coming decades. Which direction and path this transformation will take remains highly uncertain, as do the related environmental effects. In the present study we examine the introduction of CAVs in cities in terms of the indirect or underlying processes (drivers) and the direct expressions of interest that are related to specific actions, events or processes (pressures). The drivers and pressures are identified in interviews with stakeholders from across the quadruple helix (academia, industry, government and civil society). We then use an analytical framework that combines the drivers and pressures of the DPSIR (Driving forces, Pressures, States, Impacts, Responses) model and force field analysis. This framework is used to map survey data on the strength of the driving and restraining forces and pressures behind the introduction of CAVs in cities, and to identify which stakeholders are involved in this socio-technical transition. Results showed that there was a strong belief across stakeholder groups that CAVs should be connected with mobility planning strategies. This need for planning has been discussed at length in other contexts, and now our results show that respondents find this need is also present in the Swedish context. An unexpected finding was that those who are sceptical to CAVs may form unique groups with a broad range of stakeholder types, for example elderly people, cyclists, people who are concerned because of conspiracies related to new technology, and those who are concerned about environmental effects.

Envisioning the driverless city using backcasting and Q-methodology

Article

Feb 2023
CITIES

Despite the expected future introduction of autonomous vehicles in cities, very few studies have analysed the needs and challenges facing urban planning. This paper employs a combination of backcasting and Q-methodology to carry out participatory visioning for a future driverless city. This novel approach was used to elaborate shared visions of the desirable city among a group of 20 citizens and 10 practitioners. Views on 41 statements were analysed relating to urban design, society, environment, transport and mobility needs. Three main visions were identified. The first focuses on high-quality urban spaces and active mobility. The second vision is more futuristic and pro-social, consistent with the more imaginative and innovative stance of young people. The third vision is more conventional and closer to business-as-usual. The results suggest that there is some agreement on the future conditions and policies, especially on the need for environmentally friendly urban development and safe urban design. The article is premised on the belief that engaging stakeholders from different backgrounds, including citizens of various ages, can be enriching for urban planning since there is a wide variety of heterogeneous preferences across society. This requires a search for common ground when designing policy measures that satisfy multiple interests.

The Driverless Cars Emulsion: Using participatory foresight and constructive conflict to address transport’s wicked problems

Article

Dec 2021
FUTURES

Glenn Lyons

This paper introduces a novel methodology to the transport sector to foster dialogue between actors holding different perspectives on issues pertinent to the future of mobility that might be termed ‘wicked’. The case of driverless cars is considered. The paper points to a dearth of interaction between actors holding different and sometimes polar opposite views on what driverless cars could mean for the future of transport and society. It examines the role of bringing diverse perspectives together in a collaborative setting to address this wicked problem. The importance of creating task conflict is highlighted in the facilitation of engagement and achievement of shared learning. The Emulsion Methodology brings together into constructive dialogue (the emulsion) people with alternative perspectives on driverless cars (evangelists, opponents and agnostics) that may not typically mix (oil and water). The one-day workshop format (the emulsifier) involves co-creation, in mixed-perspective groups, of plausible utopias and plausible dystopias for a driverless cars future in 2050. The Three Horizons method is then used to identify significant issues at play in the transition to such futures. In turn, this enables guiding principles for present day policy to be identified. Application of the methodology to driverless cars resulted in new learning, changed perspectives and specific insights of relevance to policymaking.

The urban governance of autonomous vehicles – In love with AVs or critical sustainability risks to future mobility transitions

Article

Nov 2021
CITIES

Increasingly guided by the use of ICT, the flow of humans and materials, smart cities and autonomous mobility amalgamate into a game changer in urban planning. This paper critically explores the role of autonomous (driverless) vehicles in plans for urban futures. By looking into the urban plans of 10 European capitals, we investigate the anticipated promises and hazards of autonomous vehicles. Theoretically, the paper draws upon critical urban mobilities studies that invite interlinking carbon reduction, smart cities and mobility planning. By examining these plans, the paper critically evaluates current urban planning for autonomous vehicles by asking whether one can identify any links to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals of sustainable cities and communities. A practice-based view on automation is then suggested as a pathway to promote a thorough sustainable mobility transition. It is concluded that none of the plans of the 10 capitals studied require AVs to integrate with public means of transport or to be fuelled by renewable energy sources. Hence, AVs are likely to individualise and intensify the existing automobility regime further and emissions are likely to increase, according to the comparative urban analysis. We therefore conclude that urban policy-making needs to contest the existing techno-centric conception of autonomous vehicles if these are to support the sustainable development goals of cities.

The impacts of vehicle automation on transport-disadvantaged people

Article

Sep 2021

As an emerging technology, vehicle automation will have profound impacts on various aspects of society. Although recent studies have examined the impacts of the proliferation of vehicles with high/full-level automation, few have emphasized the implications for social equity. To better understand how autonomous vehicles (AVs) may influence equity, this study explores the potential influence of AVs on eight groups of transportation-disadvantaged people. Specifically, we synthesize prominent travel behaviors of the identified groups and explore possible impacts of AVs on these groups. We found that AVs tend to bring more benefits than harm to some people but may have mixed effects on others. Based on the findings, we provide policy recommendations for future policy decision-making, which will likely to play an essential role in maximizing AVs’ benefits and mitigating their challenges.

Brace for impacts: Perceived impacts and responses relating to the state of connected and autonomous vehicles in Gothenburg

Figures

Recommended publications

Too much pressure? Driving and restraining forces and pressures relating to the state of connected a...

Automated Vehicles: Changes in expert opinions over time

Will public transport be relevant in a self-driving future? A demand model simulation of four scenar...

Transitional behavioral intention to use autonomous electric car-sharing services: Evidence from fou...