An approach for prioritizing types of TA-knowledge for long-term governance of mobility

Jens Schippl

doi:10.14512/tatup.7220

Authors

Jens Schippl Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, Karlsruhe (DE) https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3169-6365 jens.schippl@kit.edu

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14512/tatup.7220

Keywords:

mobility, innovation, directionality, categories of knowledge, responsible governanve

Abstract

Several new technologies are expected to unfold their transformative potential in the mobility sector in the coming decades. Examples include electric vehicles (EVs), automated vehicles (AVs), or blockchain technology. Long-term governance must take these innovations into account, supported by knowledge from technology assessment (TA). A transparent and comprehensible choice of TA methods is of utmost importance, especially when it comes to long-term strategic decisions that may influence the direction of socio-technical transitions. This article proposes a typology of innovations in the mobility sector that helps justify and legitimize the prioritization of TA knowledge and methods.

References

BMDV – Bundesministerium für Digitales und Verkehr (2024): Die Zukunft fährt autonom. Bundesministerium für Digitales und Verkehr. Available online at https://bmdv.bund.de/SharedDocs/DE/Publikationen/DG/die-zukunft-faehrt-autonom.html, last accessed on 11.04.2025.

BMK – Bundesministerium für Mobilität und Infrastruktur (2021): Mobilitätsmasterplan für Österreich. Available online at https://www.bmimi.gv.at/themen/mobilitaet/mobilitaetsmasterplan/mmp2030.html, last accessed on 11.04.2025.

Czada, Roland (2016): Planen und Entscheiden als Steuerungsaufgabe und Interaktionsproblem. In: Georg Kamp (ed.): Langfristiges Planen. Zur Bedeutung sozialer und kognitiver Ressourcen für nachhaltiges Handeln. Berlin: Springer, pp. 215–249. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-42004-7_8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-42004-7_8

Cohen, Tom; Cavoli, Clémence (2019): Automated vehicles. Exploring possible consequences of government (non)intervention for congestion and accessibility. In: Transport Reviews Routledge 39 (1), pp. 129–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2018.1524401 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2018.1524401

Drexler, Corinna; Verse, Björn; Hauslbauer, Andrea; Lopez, Julia; Haider, Sajjad (2022): Framing the mobility transition. Public communication of industry, science, media, and politics in Germany. In: Energy, Sustainability and Society 12 (1), p. 50. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-022-00374-0 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13705-022-00374-0

Fraedrich, Eva; Beiker, Sven; Lenz, Barbara (2015): Transition pathways to fully automated driving and its implications for the sociotechnical system of automobility. In: European Journal of Futures Research 3 (1), pp. 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40309-015-0067-8 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40309-015-0067-8

Fuenfschilling, Lea; Truffer, Bernhard (2014): The structuration of socio-technical regimes. Conceptual foundations from institutional theory. In: Research Policy 43 (4), pp. 772–791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.010 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2013.10.010

Geels, Frank (2011): The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions. Responses to seven criticisms. In: Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 1 (1), pp. 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002

Gösele, Martin; Sandner, Philipp (2019): Analysis of blockchain technology in the mobility sector. In: Forschung im Ingenieurwesen 83 (4), pp. 809–816. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10010-019-00315-y DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10010-019-00315-y

Groth, Sören; Hesping, Henrike; Klinger, Thomas; Eggebrecht, Rafael; Flamm, Eusebia; Groicher, Noa (2023): Nachhaltige Mobilitätswende. Mobilität in den Medien. Umweltbundesamt: Dessau-Roßlau.

Grunwald, Armin (2020): The objects of technology assessment. Hermeneutic extension of consequentialist reasoning. In: Journal of Responsible Innovation 7 (1), pp. 96–112. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1647086 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2019.1647086

Grunwald, Armin (2018): Technology assessment in practice and theory. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429442643

Grunwald, Armin (2014): The hermeneutic side of responsible research and innovation. In: Journal of Responsible Innovation 1 (3), pp. 274–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.968437 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2014.968437

Holden, Erling; Gilpin, Geoffrey; Banister, David (2019): Sustainable mobility at thirty. In: Sustainability 11 (7), p. 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11071965 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su11071965

Horn, Burkhard; Kiel, Thomas; Lojewski, Hilmar von (2018): Nachhaltige städtische Mobilität für alle. Agenda für eine Verkehrswende aus kommunaler Sicht. Available online at https://www.staedtetag.de/files/dst/docs/Publikationen/Positionspapiere/Archiv/nachhaltige-staedtische-mobilitaet-2018.pdf, last accessed on 11.04.2025.

Karger, Erik; Jagals, Marvin; Ahlemann, Frederik (2021): Blockchain for smart mobility. Literature review and future research agenda. In: Sustainability 13 (23), p. 13268. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313268 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313268

Lyons, Glenn (2022): The driverless cars emulsion. Using participatory foresight and constructive conflict to address transport’s wicked problems. In: Futures 136, p. 102889. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102889 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2021.102889

Mögele, Michael; Rau, Henrike (2020): Cultivating the “car state”. A culturally sensitive analysis of car-centric discourses and mobility cultures in Southern Germany. In: Sustainability: Science, Practice and Policy 16 (1), pp. 15–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2020.1756188 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15487733.2020.1756188

OECD – The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (2018): OECD-Wirtschaftsberichte. Deutschland 2018. https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_surveys-deu-2018-de DOI: https://doi.org/10.1787/eco_surveys-deu-2018-de

Parks, Darcy (2022): Directionality in transformative innovation policy. Who is giving directions? In: Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions 43, pp. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2022.02.005 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2022.02.005

Rip, Arie; Kemp, René (1998): Technological change. In: Steve Rayner and Elizabeth Malone (eds.): Human choice and climate change. Resources and technology. Columbus, OH: Battelle Press, pp. 327–399.

Schippl, Jens (2024): Technology assessment and the governance of automated vehicles. A Collingridge-dilemma or a lack in normative orientation? In: Journal of Responsible Innovation Routledge 11 (1), p. 2342594. https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2024.2342594 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/23299460.2024.2342594

Schippl, Jens; Fleischer, Torsten (2012): A problem-oriented categorisation of FTA-methods for transport planning. In: Foresight – The journal of future studies, strategic thinking and policy 14 (4), pp. 282–293. https://doi.org/10.1108/14636681211256071 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/14636681211256071

Schippl, Jens; Truffer, Bernhard; Fleischer, Torsten (2022): Potential impacts of institutional dynamics on the development of automated vehicles. Towards sustainable mobility? In: Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives 14, p. 100587. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2022.100587 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2022.100587

Schlaile, Michael et al. (2017): Innovation systems for transformations towards sustainability? Taking the normative dimension seriously. In: Sustainability Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute 9 (12), p. 2253. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122253 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su9122253

Sprinz, Detlef (2009): Long-term environmental policy. Definition, knowledge, future research. In: Global Environmental Politics 9 (3), pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.2009.9.3.1 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1162/glep.2009.9.3.1

Stirling, Andy (2009): Direction, distribution and diversity! Pluralising progress in innovation, sustainability and development. Available online at https://steps-centre.org/wp-content/uploads/stirling-paper-32.pdf, last accessed on 11.04.2025.

Urry, John (2004): The ‘system’ of automobility. In: Theory, Culture & Society 21 (4–5), pp. 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276404046059 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276404046059

Wanzenböck, Iris; Wesseling, Joeri; Frenken, Koen; Hekkert, Marko; Weber, Matthias (2020): A framework for mission-oriented innovation policy. Alternative pathways through the problem–solution space. In: Science and Public Policy 47 (4), pp. 474–489. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaa027 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scaa027

Weber, Matthias; Rohracher, Harald (2012): Legitimizing research, technology and innovation policies for transformative change. Combining insights from innovation systems and multi-level perspective in a comprehensive ‘failures’ framework. In: Research Policy 41 (6), pp. 1037–1047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.015 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.015

Yap, Xiao-Shan; Truffer, Bernhard (2019): Shaping selection environments for industrial catch-up and sustainability transitions. A systemic perspective on endogenizing windows of opportunity. In: Research Policy 48, pp. 1030–1047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.002 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.10.002