Mobility Mentoring® combineert het onderwerp armoede met de laatste inzichten vanuit de hersenwetenschap over de effecten van schaarste en armoede en de ontwikkelbaarheid van hersenfuncties. Deze nieuwe aanpak helpt mensen bij de aanpak van hun financiële en sociale problemen. Het lectoraat Schulden & Incasso van de Hogeschool Utrecht, Platform31 en Impuls ambiëren een effectievere aanpak van financiële problematiek van huishoudens en zochten naar organisaties die de inzichten uit de Schaarste-theorie op een vruchtbare manier vertalen naar hun dagelijkse praktijk.
DOCUMENT
In the Interreg Smart Shared Green Mobility Hubs project, electric shared mobility is offered through eHUBs in the city. eHUBs are physical places inneighbourhoods where shared mobility is offered, with the intention of changing citizens’ travel behaviour by creating attractive alternatives to private car use.In this research, we aimed to gain insight into psychological factors that influence car owners’ intentions to try out shared electric vehicles from an eHUB in order to ascertain:1. The psychological factors that determine whether car owners are willing to try out shared electric modalities in the eHUBs and whether these factors are identical for cities with different mobility contexts.2. How these insights into psychological determinants can be applied to entice car owners to try out shared electric modalities in the eHUBs.Research was conducted in two cities: Amsterdam (the Netherlands) and Leuven (Belgium). An onlinesurvey was distributed to car owners in both cities inSeptember 2020 and, additionally, interviews wereheld with 12 car owners in each city.In general, car owners from Amsterdam and Leuven seem positive about the prospect of having eHUBs in their cities. However, they show less interest inusing the eHUBs themselves, as they are satisfied with their private car, which suits their mobility needs. Car owners mentioned the following reasons for notbeing interested in trying out the eHUBs: they simply do not see a need to do so, the costs involved with usage, the need to plan ahead, the expected hasslewith registration and ‘figuring out how it works’, having other travel needs, safety concerns, having to travel a distance to get to the vehicle, and a preferencefor ownership. Car owners who indicated that they felt neutral, or that they were likely to try out an eHUB, mentioned the following reasons for doing so:curiosity, attractive pricing, convenience, not owning a vehicle like those offered in an eHUB, environmental concerns, availability nearby, and necessity when theirown vehicle is unavailable.In both cities, the most important predictor determining car owners’ intention to try out an eHUB is the perceived usefulness of trying out an eHUB.In Amsterdam, experience with shared mobility and familiarity with the concept were the second and third factors determining car owners’ interest in tryingout shared mobility. In Leuven, pro-environmental attitude was the second factor determining car owners’ openness to trying out the eHUBs, and agewas the third factor, with older car owners being less likely to try one out.Having established that perceived usefulness was the most important determinant for car owners to try out shared electric vehicles from an eHUB, weconducted additional research, which showed that, in both cities, three factors contribute to perceived usefulness, in order of relevance: (1) injunctive norms(e.g., perceiving that society views trying out eHUBs as correct behaviour); (2) trust in shared electric mobility as a solution to problems in the city (e.g., expecting private car owners’ uptake of eHUBs to contributeto cleaner air, reduce traffic jams in city, and combat climate change); and (3) trust in the quality and safety of the vehicles, including the protection of users’privacy. In Amsterdam specifically, two additional factors contributed to perceived usefulness of eHUBs: drivers’ confidence in their capacity to try out anunfamiliar vehicle from the eHUB and experience of travelling in various modes of transport.Drawing on the relevant literature, the results of our research, and our behavioural expertise, we make the following recommendations to increase car users’ uptake of shared e-mobility:1. Address car owners’ attentional bias, which filters out messages on alternative transport modes.2. Emphasise benefits of (trying out) shared mobility from different perspectives so that multiple goals can be addressed.3. Change the environment and the infrastructure, as infrastructure determines choice of transport.4. For Leuven specifically: target younger car owners and car owners with high pro-environmental attitudes.5. For Amsterdam specifically: provide information on eHUBs and opportunities for trying out eHUBs.
MULTIFILE
At this moment, charging your electric vehicle is common good, however smart charging is still a novelty in the developing phase with many unknowns. A smart charging system monitors, manages and restricts the charging process to optimize energy consumption. The need for, and advantages of smart charging electric vehicles are clear cut from the perspective of the government, energy suppliers and sustainability goals. But what about the advantages and disadvantages for the people who drive electric cars? What opportunities are there to support the goals of the user to make smart charging desirable for them? By means of qualitative Co-design methods the underlying motives of early adaptors for joining a smart charging service were uncovered. This was done by first sensitizing the user about their current and past encounters with smart charging to make them more aware of their everyday experiences. This was followed by another generative method, journey mapping and in-depth interviews to uncover the core values that drove them to participate in a smart charging system. Finally, during two co-design sessions, the participants formed groups in which they were challenged to design the future of smart charging guided by their core values. The three main findings are as follows. Firstly, participants are looking for ways to make their sustainable behaviour visible and measurable for themselves. For example, the money they saved by using the smart charging system was often used as a scoreboard, more than it was about theactual money. Secondly, they were more willing to participate in smart charging and discharging (sending energy from their vehicle back to the grid) if it had a direct positive effect on someone close to them. For example, a retiree stated that he was more than willing to share the energy of his car with a neighbouring family in which both young parents work, making them unable to charge their vehicles at times when renewable energy is available in abundance. The third and last finding is interrelated with this, it is about setting the right example. The early adopters want to show people close to them that they are making an effort to do the right thing. This is known as the law of proximity and is well illustrated by a participant that bought a second-hand, first-generation Nissan Leaf with a range of just 80 km in the summer and even less in winter. It isn’t about buying the best or most convenient car but about showing the children that sometimes it takes effort to do the right thing. These results suggest that there are clear opportunities for suppliers of smart EV charging services to make it more desirable for users, with other incentives than the now commonly used method of saving money. The main takeaway is that early adopters have a desire for their sustainable behaviour to be more visible and tangible for themselves and their social environment. The results have been translated into preliminary design proposals in which the law of proximity is applied.
DOCUMENT
The eleven Universities forming the KreativEU consortium agreed to the common goal of establishing a fully European University, that places the creative potential derived from Europe’s cultural heritage at the heart of its teaching, research and knowledge transfer activities. Committing to a long-term institutional, structural and strategic cooperation the partners will jointly implement an ambitious yet inclusive vision for transforming the study of culture, identity, memory and heritage for the benefit of society. Building upon this strong foundation, KreativEU will provide innovative concepts, methods, and solutions to address both current and future challenges, contributing to a sustainable and harmonious future for communities and the environment alike. KreativEU recognizes the inseparable interconnection of tangible and intangible cultural heritage, as well as the interwoven nature of local and national traditions, crafts, cultural practices, and folklore. The alliance is dedicated to formulating cutting-edge educational and research programmes that reevaluate these elements and their associated ecological surroundings, the lived environment, especially in the context of the digital age. This ecocultural vision serves as the foundational principle guiding KreativEU's efforts, ensuring that a new generation of EU citizens working together across cultures, borders, languages, sectors and disciplines will be educated. Students from the KreativEU are expected to be leaders of change and enablers of societal transformation.To reach this vision, the KreativEU Alliance will work towards the completion of 8 work packages (WP1 - Governance and Management; WP2 - KreativEU Education; WP3 - KreativEU Research; WP4 - KreativEU Culture with and for society; WP5 - KreativEU Knowledge-creation and design network on Smart Sustainability WP6 - KreativEU Heritage European campus; WP7 - KreativEU Mobility; WP8 - Communication and Dissemination).Collaborative partners:Instituto Politécnico de Tomar, Escola Superior de Gestão de Tomar, D.A. Tsenov Academy of Economics, Johoceska Univerzita V Ceskych Budejovicich, Universita Degli Studi di Camerino, Universitaet Greifswald, Pilitechnika Opolska, Universitatae Valahia Targoviste, Trnavska Univerzita V Trnave, Sodestorns Hogskola, Adana Alparslan Turkes Bilim VE Teknoloji University
Despite increasing efforts regarding knowledge valorisation, a significant gap between knowledge development and policy practice remains. Urban Intelligence bridges this gap by bringing cutting edge knowledge to the table, developing new policy concepts and by promoting smart data use.The professorship of Urban Intelligence takes a multimodal and integrated approach by connecting knowledge of transport engineering, urban planning and urban design. Research output encompasses data-driven projects, such as ‘Multimodal Brabant’ and ‘Measurement Weeks Breda‘, which translate big data into knowledge for policy development.Furthermore, data analysis tool and data dashboards for cycling, such as ‘CyclePRINT’ have been developed. To enhance the integration of built environment and transportation, we developed the Bicycle-Oriented Development (BOD) concept. This is currently being integrated into an overarching development philosophy, ‘Multimodal Urban Development’, which integrates the optimisation of multimodal networks, location choices for new urban developments and the provision of shared mobility via mobility hubs.
