1

Source Document on

Behaviour in Sustainable Mobility and Logistics

synthesis of the position papers and discussion notes of the conference “Captain for one Day”,

26 and 28 September 2016, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

The Hague, December 6, 2016

2

this page intentionally left blank

3

Table of Contents

Introduction ...................................................................(S. Halbesma, A. van Binsbergen, G. Lyons)

1. Behaviours of the different actors in the transport system ............................................................................................................................................................................................................ .....................................................................(S. Krautsack, F. Liesa, S. Protic, L. Tavasszy)

The transport system consists of different type of actors (travellers, institutions, transport service providers, etc.) and it is in addition influenced by different type of factors (trends, policies, etc.) and external stakeholders (shippers, retailers, etc.). They all have different types of interests, act in different timescales and interact by exhibiting and triggering different kinds of transport and mobility behaviour.

2. Social groups..................................................................(J. Berveling, S. Halbesma, R. Jüriado)

People have a powerful ‘need to belong’ and tend to copy the behaviour and choices of their peers. We are all part of social networks, and those networks can have a major impact on the ultimate success of policies and innovations.

3. Major contextual trends that influence mobility and logistics behaviour................................. ...........................................................................................................(R. Jüriado, D. O’Reilly)

Major intertwined contextual trends that influence mobility and logistics behaviour through demand and supply as well as broader lifestyles include demographic trends, the urban-rural divide, environmental considerations and changing attitudes to mobility and consumption, (disruptive) technology enabled societal trends, and security concerns.

4. Innovation and behaviour in mobility and transport ...........(W. Wasner, G. Grimm, G. Lyons)

Considering both the promising outcomes and risks of contemporary innovations calls for a responsible, creative and agile approach to how we research and develop ways of improving the transport system in a safe and sustainable way to achieve our policy goals.

5. Policy Implementation and behavioural insights (M. Kansen, S. Halbesma, E. Reiding)

New insights in behaviour of individuals, groups and institutes, including knowledge on behavioural aspects of the policy making process itself, should be used for developing policies better tailored to behaviour, rendering effective policies.

4

this page intentionally left blank

5

Introduction

Policy makers in various European regions, countries as well as in the European Commission recognise the need to have better insight in mobility and logistics1,2 behaviour as to design and implement effective policies for sustainable transport, also to respond to new, emerging developments – often from within or outside the traditional transport sector.

As a follow-up to the Dutch presidency of the European Union (2016), the Netherlands Ministry for Infrastructure and the Environment, together with representatives from ministries in member states and the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research took the initiative to organise the Conference on Behaviour in Sustainable Mobility and Logistics. In Rotterdam, 27 and 28 September 2016, invited experts from all over Europe discussed thematic position papers (as drafted by the members of the Steering Committee for the Conference) on existing insights as well as knowledge gaps regarding behavioural aspects of sustainable mobility and logistics.

This “Source document on Behaviour in Sustainable Mobility & Logistics” is a synthesis of the position papers prepared for the conference and the reports on the discussions held. It presents an overview of relevant themes in behaviour in mobility and transport and proposes research questions recommended to be taken up in future research programmes. The Source Document is summarised in the “General Directions Paper on Behaviour in Sustainable Mobility and Logistics”, that is a source for inspiration for the agenda setting for research and development initiatives on regional, national and international level. This includes the final Horizon 2020 Work Programme 2018-2020 “Smart, green and integrated transport” and the future framework programme, as well as regional and national mobility and logistics knowledge agendas aimed at strengthening the knowledge base that helps to craft effective policies with horizons of ten to twenty years.

The Source Document highlights the notion that there are different relevant actors, groups of actors and institutions that have different interests and show different types of interrelated behaviour (contribution by Sarah Krautsack, Fernando Lies, Sonja Protic and Lori Tavasszy).

Individuals and decision makers have also a powerful ‘need to belong’, social groups emerge, and these groups have a significant impact on behaviour as people tend to copy the behaviour and choices of their peers (contribution by Jaco Berveling, Sieds Halbesma and Rein Jüriado).

1 i.e. the organisation and the accommodation of the flow of physical items between points of origin and points of consumption in order to meet requirements of customers and corporations.2 mobility and logistics are portrayed in a combined way throughout. This recognises that the movement of people, goods (and information) in support of society are increasingly intertwined. This is not to suggest that distinction between them is not important and indeed acting upon the questions set out in this paper should ensure this distinction is made.

6

Further, behaviour is influenced by intertwined contextual trends, such as demographic trends, the urban-rural divide, (disruptive) technology enabled societal trends, and changing attitudes to environmental impacts, mobility, consumption, safety and security (contribution by Rein Jüriado, Deirdre O’Reilly).

These insights are most relevant when aiming to bring about changes in the transport and mobility system: considering innovation and behaviour together is indispensable (contribution by Walter Wasner, Gabriele Grimm, Glenn Lyons), and behavioural insights are needed for helping to design and implement effective transport policies (contribution by Jaco Berveling, Sieds Halbesma and Emiel Reiding).

Sieds Halbesma (Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, The Netherlands)Chairman of the Steering Committee

Arjan van Binsbergen (Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands)Secretary to the Steering Committee; editor

Glenn Lyons (University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom)Editor

7

1. Behaviours of the different actors in the transport system

Sarah Krautsack, Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology, Austria Fernando Liesa, Alliance for Logistics Innovation through Collaboration in Europe (ETP ALICE),

BelgiumSonja Protic, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Austria Lori Tavasszy, Delft University of Technology, The Netherlands

The transport system consists of different type of actors (travellers, institutions, transport service providers, etc.), is influenced by different type of factors (trends, policies, etc.) and external stakeholders (manufacturers, retailers, etc.). They all have different types of interests, act in different timescales and interact by exhibiting and triggering different kinds of transport and mobility behaviour. One major topic to address in further research is how to build-on existing experiences and results gained in projects which focused on behavioural change. A second topic is how to address and reach the different stakeholder groups. A third topic is how to define the future role of government despite of the existence of diverging interests. Collecting and using existing knowledge should lead to recommended transferability paths. The development of common indicators and control mechanisms for projects, interventions or actions on the behaviour of different (groups of) actors and stakeholders could serve as a starting point for further research.

A variety of actors playing roles in a ‘system of systems’

Transport today is characterized by a highly interdependent ‘system of systems’, operating on a global level and in interconnected transportation chains. Mobility and logistics form the backbone of our societies being a service to all the population and industry sectors in today’s economies and societies. A lot of different actors and stakeholders in the transport systems interact in different ways, defining their behaviour. Their behaviour is typically influenced by specific interests in the transport system, which could be very different from one to another stakeholder. For example, the aggregated choices (behaviour) of individuals, groups of individuals and organisations define mobility and consumption patterns shaping transport demand. Other actors, implementing policies or providing services may indeed try to shape the demand (behaviour) of users in different directions to create specific demands. Overall, the behaviour and its interdependencies impact the evolution of the transport system, most of the time missing a clear direction.

Policy making is seeking a balance and resolve potential conflicts in interests, being aware of its own role

In order to achieve successful policy interventions and actions in mobility and logistics, policy making has to (1) balance the interest of the different actor and stakeholder groups, (2) has to solve conflict of interests among those and (3) has to be aware that public bodies are also important actors in the

8

transport systems themselves. Transport can be compared to a mobile. If you set one part (sub-system) in motion all other parts (sub-systems) of the mobile start moving and need to adapt to the new position. Experiences of transition management also underline the importance of co-production of a common language and future orientation by a network of diverse relevant actors when dealing with complex societal problems and their governance (Loorbach and Rotmans, 2010).

Valuable knowledge available, lack of knowledge on transferability and standardized assessment of results

There is a lot of knowledge available on behavioural change from mobility projects like the European Platform on Mobility Management (EPOMM). Unfortunately, knowledge about the transferability of results is missing as well as a standardized impact-oriented evaluation of results and their communication in order to apply existing knowledge from one policy action to another. There are best practices from the Netherlands like Verkeersonderneming (‘Marketplace for Mobility’) on how a public problem can be made a private chance. It shows that positive incentives lead to better results than negative ones and that gamification works.

Knowledge and application gaps on addressing specific actors and stakeholder groups

Apart from transferability of existing knowledge and their evaluation, there are knowledge gaps about addressing and reaching the behaviours of different actors and stakeholder groups. Often they are unknown or it is unknown how to motivate them and gain their trust for transition. There is a lack of knowledge regarding the next generation and how their behaviour will influence mobility and logistics in future. This would help to act according to their needs. Knowledge is also missing about whether group behaviour is the sum of individual behaviour (individual vs. social collectives) and on how to make use and handle group thinking and group thinking in a community of multiple groups. In terms of further policy interventions the future role of government in transport policy making is essential. Best practices need to be identified how to cope with the diverging interests of public bodies (national, regional or local) in relevant transport related policy areas. Despite, the future role of the government and its bodies in the triangle of government, science and industry needs to be redefined. Government may focus less on transport problems, but on the reasons transport occurs.

Further research needed on transferring results, addressing specific stakeholder groups and defining appropriate government roles

One major topic to address is how to build-on existing results gained in projects which focused on behavioural change. - What can be learned from existing knowledge gained from different projects or interventions or

policies and how can it be used to create new knowledge (method toolbox, transferability methods and approaches, definition of hard and soft indicators, standardisation of mid- and long-term project evaluation regarding actual behavioural change etc.)?

A second topic is how to address and reach the different stakeholder groups. - Who is involved (relevant groups of today and the future generation)? Who are those who

address/confront change and who are those who should change their behaviour and how can those groups be addressed the best way (stakeholders vs. actors / users)? How to manage their different interests and reconcile different stakeholders goals (and how to build trust)? How could

9

the dynamics of belonging to different groups at the same time (private life, business, family, colleague etc.) influence communication strategies?

- Given the fact, that mobility itself is rarely the goal, but means to an end, how could transport and mobility thinking gain importance in other (not primarily transport related) sectors in order to decrease transport needs (addressing stakeholders)?

A third topic is how to define the future role of government despite of the existence of diverging interests:

- How to organise mobility management goals by reviewing overlapping / aligning views of different public bodies to feedback into coherent strategies?

- How can mobility add value to other policy fields and vice versa?- How can public bodies define transport related goals and control mechanism to ensure the

quality, quantity and long term sustainability of a public good like transport? (public responsibility vs. private interests) What are the right criteria and control mechanism?

New approaches for collecting and transferring experiences and common indicators and control mechanisms needed

Collecting and using existing knowledge like best practices and cases in which behavioural aspects have been managed in transition processes should lead to recommended transferability paths. The development of common indicators and control mechanisms for projects or interventions or actions on the behaviour of different (groups of) actors and stakeholders could serve as a starting point for further research. Actors and stakeholders of the system are sometimes the ones who change the system and sometimes the ones who are impacted because of a change. They have to be addressed in a different way depending on their role in changing behaviours.

References

Loorbach, D. & Rotmans, J. (2010), The practice of transition management: Examples and lessons from four distinct cases. In Futures 42 (2010) 237-246

http://www.verkeersonderneming.nl/ EPOMM - http://www.epomm.eu/index.php

10

this page intentionally left blank

11

2. Social groups

Jaco Berveling, Sieds Halbesma, Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, the NetherlandsRein Jüriado, Swedish Transport Administration, Sweden

We are all part of social groups and social networks, and those groups and networks can have a major impact on the ultimate success of policies and innovative technologies. More prominent recognition of the influence of social contexts on human behaviour in research and innovation projects will result in more successful and effective innovations. Further research is needed regarding (the behavioural effects of) long term changes in social norms, monetary and social rewards, the acceptance of innovations, transcending individual interests and life changing events.

Social norms, and the networks to which people belong, have great impact on the various aspects of behaviour in mobility and transport

Policymakers too often neglect to acknowledge that people are social animals. People have a powerful "need to belong", and social exclusion makes them unhappy (Baumeister et al, 1995). We are sensitive to what others expect from us, we identify with certain groups and people, and we act according to a sense of shared identity.

We tend to copy the behaviour and choices of our peers. If a friend has done something, gone somewhere or bought something, we are inclined to do the same. Indirect relations – the friends of our friends – also determine how we behave. Consequently, social norms, and the networks to which people belong, have great impact on the various aspects of behaviour in mobility and transport. We (as individuals and as decision makers in companies and institutions) are all part of social networks, and those networks can have a major impact on the ultimate success of policies and innovative technologies. Moreover, we must account for the diversity within society. In addition to generational differences, cultural differences also exist between (sub)groups and segments of society.

The art of effective policymaking lies in using the networks to which people belong

People closely observe what others do and tend to follow certain codes of behaviour. They are part of social networks, and the art of effective policymaking lies in using these networks. Policy can be specifically focused on certain key players (informal leaders) capable of promoting certain measures and thus garnering the support of others (by "word-of-mouth").

This is a key starting point for broadening the acceptance of policy that encourages people to make sustainable mobility choices (Sunitiyoso et al., 2010) that include consumption choices and are supported by new types of services, sophisticated travel information, sustainable transport modes (electric cars and bikes, car sharing, etc.) and new technological breakthroughs (self-driving cars).

Available knowledge in terms of (social) psychological theories and from empirical data

Explanations of behaviour benefit from having a solid theoretical foundation. There is no shortage however, of (social) psychological theories, and there is often sufficient empirical material even

12

though it is sometimes focused on other policy areas. A lot can be learned from research and interventions in other sectors, like energy, health, education, labour and the environment. Policy areas can learn much from one another as some policy areas are more advanced in the experimental application of behavioural interventions. The main challenge is to translate the theories and findings to the field of mobility and logistics. A careful approach is needed here because, what works for Policy A does not necessarily work for Policy B as well.

Lack of knowledge on interconnectedness of policies, social norms and behaviour, and specific topic areas

Knowledge about the interconnectedness of policies, social norms and behaviour "...is only beginning to accumulate, and a great deal more research is needed" (World Bank Group, 2015). The following knowledge gaps can be identified:

Long-term changes. Changing behaviour sometimes requires a lot of time, such as (refrain from) smoking. Smoking was almost universally seen as a matter of course, as “normal” behaviour. That image has completely changed. Non-smoking has become the norm in most Western societies. It is obvious that we refrain from smoking in public spaces, such as public transport. What the drivers have been behind this normative and behavioural change is not fully clear.

Monetary and social rewards. People respond to rewards. It can be a powerful tool for behavioural change. The field of transport and traffic still suffers from a lack of experience in using the power of various types of social rewards, status and recognition. The focus remains on monetary rewards and information campaigns. We are inclined to think of financial rewards, but a growing literature also shows the (potentially) huge influence of social rewards. Getting insight in the effects to various types of social rewards is necessary.

Acceptance of innovations. Even though it may take years, or even decades, new innovations are emerging. Think of the self-driving car, the ‘Hyperloop’ or digital innovations with regard to travel information. What determines the acceptance of such innovations? How are the use and acceptance of such innovations diffused/spread between people and different social groups?

Sustainable logistics. The field of transport and logistics contains many parties with conflicting interests. Many, especially small, companies are focused on survival in a highly competitive market and are not able or willing to change their behaviour. How can the power of social influence be used in order to promote sustainable logistics?

Life events. Life changing events break habitual behaviour and can be used for behavioural change because it makes people think about their situation in a conscious way. Life events are seen as ‘windows of opportunity’ (Schäfer et al., 2012). A growing literature shows that there are indeed opportunities in this research area.

Further research needed on (behavioural effects of) long term changes in social norms, reward systems, the acceptance of innovations, transcending individual interests and life changing events.

Long-term changes. More insight into long-term (socialization) processes, such as (non) smoking, can help advance issues in the field of traffic and transport, such as driving without drinking, biking with

13

helmets, promote car sharing or the choice of a sustainable travel mode (e.g, cycle for short distances).- What changed the social norm, what contribution made legislation and policies, which groups led

the way, et cetera?- What lessons can be learned for mobility and logistics?Monetary and social rewards. - How can the lessons learned in other domains be implemented, evaluated and adopted? - When can (monetary or social) rewards best be applied and aimed at what social group or

network?- How can we eliminate ‘crowding out’ effects? Acceptance of innovations.- What can we learn from the breakthrough of earlier technologies, like the telephone? How did

that process develop? Which groups or networks embrace innovations (early adopters), when does this happen and under what circumstances? What role play idols, informal leaders and peer groups in this? What can we learn from marketing techniques?

Sustainable logistics. - How can cooperation, transcending individual interests and stimulation of sustainable solutions

(electric driven vans and trucks, avoiding unnecessary transport movements, etc.) be promoted within the logistics sector? How can a more sustainable image be built?

Life events. - How can knowledge of the influence of life events on behavioural change be practically used in

the field of mobility and logistics?- What are crucial actors and policy measures and to what extent are policies transferable to other

countries and situations?

References

Baumeister, R.F. en Leary, M.R. (1995). The Need to Belong: Desire for Interpersonal Attachments as a Fundamental Human Motivation. Psychological Bulletin 117 (3): 497-529.

Schäfer, M., Jaeger-Erben, M., et al. (2012). Life events as windows of opportunity for changing towards sustainable consumption patterns? Journal of Consumer Policy 35 (1): 65-84.

Sunitiyoso, Y., Avineri, E., et al. (2010). Complexity and Travel Behaviour: Modelling Influence of Social Interactions on Travellers' Behaviour Using a Multi-Agent Simulation. A Planner's Encounter with Complexity. Silva, E. en de Roo, G. . Ashgate: Aldershot: 209-226.

World Bank Group (2015). World Development Report 2015: Mind, Society and Behavior. Washington, DC: World Bank.

14

this page intentionally left blank

15

3. Major contextual trends that influence mobility and logistics behaviour

Rein Jüriado, Swedish Transport Administration, SwedenDeirdre O’Reilly, Highways England, United Kingdom

Mobility behaviour of individuals, groups and organisations is influenced by wider contextual trends, many of which stretch beyond the borders of transport. Some of the trends that influence mobility and logistics behaviour through demand and supply and broader lifestyles include demographic trends, changing attitudes to mobility and consumption, (disruptive) technology enabled societal trends, and public acceptability issues e.g. security concerns. One major topic to address in further research is the behavioural aspects of automation. Another major topic to address relates to accessibility to different demographic/social groups. Simulation, scenarios, toolkits and living labs are required to integrate such contextual and behavioural perspectives into policy development and programme delivery.

Demographic, land-use, societal and technological trends affect behaviour

Mobility and logistics behaviour depends on and is influenced by trends beyond the transport sector. Main contextual trends that affect demand and supply for transport, as well as broader lifestyles include but are not limited to:

- demographic trends, e.g. ageing population and varying travel behaviour of different age groups, (regional) growth or decline in population, migration within and to Europe. This includes accessibility and equity issues around whether some groups/places are excluded from access to goods and services for whatever reason (cost/lack of coverage);

- urban-rural divide, e.g. (sub)urbanisation, emergence of mega cities and large urban conurbations, consequences on travel behaviour of the availability and affordability of transport infrastructure and services in areas with low population density;

- environmental considerations such as climate change and air quality and concerns on depletion and dependability of non-renewable resources , inducing the development and market uptake of e.g. energy efficient vehicles, electric vehicles, smart grids;

- technology enabled societal trends, e.g. sharing economy, changes in the labour market that influence travel behaviour (flexi-time, teleworking), new shopping habits (e-commerce), mobility as a service;

- disruptive technologies, e.g. automation/connectivity of transport, 3D printing and other new manufacturing techniques, drones;

- changing attitudes to mobility and consumption, e.g. peak car, increasing popularity of non-motorised modes such as cycling or walking, local sourcing; and

- safety, security, and privacy issues, e.g. digital security and data ownership, but also the impact of terrorist acts on travel behaviour and tourism.

16

Societal trends affect policies as well

All of the above trends are present in policy making. The trends that arguably have been the most pronounced in European policy making are environmental considerations and air quality. The EU has set an ambitious goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions from transport by 60% (European Commission 2011). Furthermore, there are European safety targets, such as cutting the number of deadly road casualties by 50% by 2020 (European Commission 2010). Security is a global issue – in terms of keeping individual and freight transport safe and secure from incidents. Policies are increasingly addressing digital safety and the commercialisation of vehicle and personal data.

Knowledge available on specific effects of trends

The trends listed and their impact on the transport system have been subject to numerous research projects. National and European programmes have addressed cross-cutting issues, including broader societal and technological trends that impact transport and mobility behaviour. Research and innovation on vehicles technologies has involved studies into human-machine interface, notable research effort has been made in traffic psychology and other topics.

Knowledge and application gaps on the exact effects of trends of demand and supply of transport, adaptation of new technologies and the combined relevance of trends

Current population trends, socio demographic and lifestyle changes are well evidenced but the exact effects on demand and supply of transport is yet uncertain. In all probability, those effects will be different for different regions and circumstances and therefore best be viewed through a number of scenarios (e.g. rise of mega cities of dispersed urban sprawl, developments in rural areas).

During the last decades, considerable research effort has been made on developing transport technologies across Europe. Given the systemic nature of change that the transport sector is now experiencing due to digitalisation, automation, climate change and security, stronger emphasis on behavioural aspects will be necessary in the future. Also, while technology readiness is increasingly measured by research programme owners (e.g. through TRL assessments), adopter readiness is yet to be addressed to the same degree.

Since the contextual trends are intertwined, assessing their combined relevance to future mobility and logistics is a complex task. The maturity, permanence, public acceptability and affordability of many trends is uncertain and may change over time. Building scenarios and segmentation is an established approach to help policy makers understand the combined impact of contextual trends. Exploring other methods to give policy makers better tools for analysing and assessing contextual trends is still needed.

17

Further research needed on behavioural aspects of automation and accessibility for different demographic/social groups

One major topic to address is behavioural aspects of automation. In recent years, national and European research programmes have been launched on automation. To date, these have to a large degree focused on technology and less on the behavioural dimension. Some of the detailed research questions to be addressed include:

- how will automation and digitalisation affect mobility and traffic behaviour, in particular demand, human-machine as well as systems-systems interaction in real or near-real environment;

- How can automation and digitalisation address the challenges of specific groups and behaviours;- how will automation, connectivity, integration and digitalisation influence logistics services, e.g.

public acceptability and feasibility of self-driving delivery vehicles.

Another major topic to address relates to accessibility for different demographic/social groups. European societies are becoming increasingly diverse (ageing, migration and urban, sub-urban and rural divide). In order for public policy to understand and meet the needs of the different demographic groups, following research questions could be addressed:

- what will be in the impact on equity and ethical issues for accessibility requirements of particular people and places (digitally disenfranchised; inaccessible/limited transport provision for certain groups or certain places);

- what are the impacts (costs and benefits, intended and unintended) of policies e.g. land-use, health, economy, transport on accessibility and transport for individuals and communities societal impacts.

New radical scenario, simulations, tools and experimental approaches needed

Scenarios are largely based on incremental changes over the medium/long term. This will be important. Consideration could also be given to more radical scenarios which could help with understanding the likely impacts of more disruptive changes in society/social contexts.

Simulation, scenarios, toolkits and living labs are required to integrate such contextual and behavioural perspectives into policy development and programme delivery.

References

- European Commission (2010), Towards a European road safety area: policy orientations on road safety 2011-2020. COM(2010) 389 final.

- European Commission (2011), Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area – Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system. COM(2011) 144 final.

18

this page intentionally left blank

19

4. Innovation and Behaviour

Walter Wasner, Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology, AustriaGabriele Grimm, Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure, GermanyGlenn Lyons, University of the West of England, Bristol, United Kingdom

Innovation shapes our futures. Its degree of influence is determined by the nature, extent, process and pace of its diffusion into society. Responsible research and innovation in transport (RRIT) that can help ensure harmonisation between supply and demand in a safe and sustainable way calls for understanding of how behaviour of transport system users is changing and can be changed. Advanced methodologies and practices have to be developed on how to approach, (ex-ante) examine, guide and transform innovation and technology in order to derive the most promising outcomes.

The need for new policy paradigms in the ‘digital age’

The digital age has brought with it remarkable technological advances that have massively increased connectivity and the creation, management, processing and distribution of data, information and knowledge. This has created a fertile environment in which technological and social innovation has the prospect to thrive. Inventiveness and associated collaboration can be enabled, encouraged and promoted. New possibilities are transformed into mass market products, services and approaches as they become adopted within social and business practices. Further possibilities continue to emerge and can be rapidly ‘hyped’ by different media channels. It is important to remind ourselves that while prospective technical solutions may mark out what is possible to achieve, the innovation that marks what is actually achieved depends upon the motivations and behaviours of users and the nature and extent of their capacity and willingness to engage with what technology has to offer. These issues call for a responsible, creative and agile approach to how we research and develop ways of improving the transport system in a safe and sustainable way to achieve our policy goals. From a policymaking perspective, while it may be attractive to create the right market conditions for innovation to thrive, of central importance is a need to encourage responsible innovation (Stilgoe et al., 2013) – namely, socio-technical change that is sustainable for society while being beneficial for different stakeholders.

Innovation challenges and pitfalls

There is a paradox we face: just as we look to science and technology to save us from the major challenges to sustainability, we realise that such challenges are significantly the result of how science and technology are being employed and affecting our systems (Atkinson, 2006). The motivations that drive innovation are not necessarily aligned. Pursuit of shareholder return, economic prosperity, social wellbeing and environmental sustainability by different actors and stakeholders can be in conflict leading to sub-optimal outcomes. Policymakers have the opportunity to shape if not define the framework conditions in a socially responsible way so as to enable the best that innovation has to offer to be realised and the worst to be avoided. This includes acknowledging the significance of sufficiency and not only efficiency in shaping our future.

We know from past prospects of innovation in transport that a number of pitfalls to expectations being realised arise (Geels and Smit, 2000): unconscious biases; a rear-view mirror mentality; oversight of changing pools of social practice; functional thinking; over-promising; and slower than

20

anticipated diffusion. Such pitfalls point substantially to a ‘technology-fix’ perspective underestimating or ignoring the significance of understanding human behaviour. Encouragement can nevertheless now be taken from a greater wealth of interest and expertise within the social sciences in relation to understanding the movement of people and goods. What remains the challenge is that of fostering stronger socio-technical approaches to research and innovation involving greater collaboration between disciplines and engagement of users.

Knowledge gaps and new ways to address transport innovation in a more comprehensive and responsible way

In order to assert greater stewardship over responsible research and innovation in transport (RRIT), policymakers would benefit from enhanced insights into the following: (i) the motivations of different actors in pursuing and encouraging innovation (including not only individuals but crucially public and private sector organisations); (ii) the prospects of innovation in terms of the nature and extent of influence on transport and society that could potentially arise; (iii) the processes and timescales of diffusion of the innovation from niche development to mainstream (including and understanding of the heterogeneity of (end) users (and of social cultures) and their varying ability to engage and participate with new developments); and (iv) the consequences of innovation diffusion (both intended, unintended and unanticipated). The last of these is especially significant – epitomised by contemporary preoccupation with autonomous vehicles which hold the promise for many of beneficial outcomes while for others represent the prospect of creating future pathways that run counter to sustainable development (Chase, 2016). Movement of people and goods is a derived demand. Within scope of knowledge advancement outlined above should be ‘upstream innovation’ – developments that can shape the activity behaviour that gives rise to mobility (for instance innovation in flexible working practices). Similarly, rethinking mobility as an activity (MaaA) as opposed to only mobility as a service (MaaS) may unlock greater potential for responsible innovation (i.e. mobility being an end in itself in terms of the investment of time – for exercise, socialising, relaxing, creating head space, working).

Key research questions for responsible research and innovation in transport

While the scope for further research in this area is considerable, a major theme comes to the fore, namely the imperative of RRIT. Responsible innovation appears to have received growing attention and yet apparently less so in relation to transport. Put succinctly, in the absence of suitable framework conditions for innovation, how can we have confidence in its consequences (‘heaven or hell?’). This may be translated into two research questions:- how can ex-ante examination of potential future consequences of contemporary innovations be

advanced methodologically and in application in order to influence the development paths of the innovations in question?; and

- how can behavioural research be employed to help us avoid the pitfalls of past expectations and pursuit of innovation to enable public and private sector stakeholders to realise the most promising outcomes from contemporary innovations?

References

21

- Atkinson, A. (2006). Sustainability is Dead—Long Live Sustainability. In Keiner, M. (Ed.) The Future of Sustainability, 231-243, Springer. http://dlia.ir/Scientific/e_book/Social_Sciences/Economic_History_Conditions/HC_79_Special_Topics_/002313.pdf#page=233

- Chase, R. (2016). Self-Driving Cars Will Improve Our Cities. If They Don’t Ruin Them. Blog posting by the co-founder and former CEO of Zipcar, August. https://backchannel.com/self-driving-cars-will-improve-our-cities-if-they-dont-ruin-them-2dc920345618#.ku73f2ipf

- Geels, F.W., Smit, W.A., 2000. Failed technology futures: pitfalls and lessons from a historical survey. Futures, 32, 867–885. https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/files/25559587/POST-PEER-REVIEW-PUBLISHERS.PDF

- Stilgoe,J., Owen, R. and Macnaghten, P. (2013). Developing a framework for responsible innovation. Research Policy, 42, 1568-1580. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048733313000930

22

this page intentionally left blank

23

5. Policy implementation and behavioural insights

Maarten Kansen, Sieds Halbesma, Emiel Reiding, Ministry of Infrastructure and the Environment, the Netherlands

For policy implementation of behavioural aspects, Behavioural Insight Teams (BITs) have been set up in various European Union countries. But understanding behaviour is of primary importance, prior to policy implementation. By learning from other fields, by developing other methods than random control trials and by developing scenarios we are able to increase our knowledge. Further research is needed on how to understand the behavioural aspects of policy making processes and how to design intelligent policies building on behavioural insights on stakeholders. Also, new approaches are needed to enhance transferability of findings and results from the policy making processes and its effects.

Behavioural insights help to design effective policy instruments, but the way in which policy affects behaviour is to a considerable extend terra incognito

Understanding behaviour is useful for policy making in several ways. Firstly, behaviour is not simple; there are many reasons why people react the way they do. Hence, understanding behaviour is of primary importance, prior to policy implementation. Secondly, behavioural insights can lead to behavioural informed policy instruments, such as price policy or regulation. In the field of transport policy various general policy measures can be made ‘behavioural informed’, like building infrastructure, land use planning and traffic management. Thirdly, specific policy measures may directly aim at changing behaviour. Nudging is a straightforward and much sited example. Yet, various other measures can be thought of in particular in transportation, such as demand management, stimulating people to travel off peak to reduce congestion, informing people on the benefits of travelling by bike or having role models set an example. Incorporating behavioural aspects into policy is far from simple. The way in which policy affects behaviour is to a considerable extend terra incognito, there is a lot to be learned. Addressing these complex behavioural issues demands an interdisciplinary approach. In addition, there is a gap between knowledge on behaviour and the use of that knowledge in policy making.

Insights into the behaviour are helpful to define policy objectives, to design policies and to evaluate the impact

The premise that behavioural knowledge can contribute to effective policy has resulted in all manner of international, European and national research, such as, in the Netherlands (Scientific Council for Government Policy, 2014). Policymakers have several ‘levers’ to make their policies work: (a) providing infrastructure capacity, (b) providing traffic information and traffic management, (c) legislation (permits, licenses, traffic rules), (d) pricing and fiscal policies, (e) RTDI policy and (f) communication. Insights into the behaviour of individuals, groups and organisations are helpful to define policy objectives and to design and evaluate the outcome and impact of policy measures.

24

In specific areas, specific knowledge on behaviour is readily available

Behavioural Insight Teams (BITs) have been set up in various European Union countries. The British BIT in particular has proved to be pioneering, implementing practical applications (Dolan, Hall Worth et al., 2010) that build upon the behavioural economic ‘nudge’ research conducted by Thaler and Sunstein (Thaler and Sunstein, 2008).Moreover, not only has attention been devoted to individuals, but also to organisations (Cabinet Office, 2016). A research study called AIDA-F on the potential of interdisciplinary approaches for organisational innovation in transport logistics concluded that also the transport logistics system is getting more and more complex, in research the system is always cut up into small pieces in order to make research findings fit into the small-cut framework, although they don’t address the whole problem.

In policy making, systematic social scientific support and comprehensive evaluations are often lacking

Despite the research conducted by the BITs, room for improvement remains. Influencing behaviour via policy has had varying degrees of success. Dutch researchers have concluded that the path from policy to influencing behaviour is wayward and rarely proceeds as policymakers had initially thought, hoped or expected. Systematic social scientific support and comprehensive evaluations are often lacking. Many of the attempts to influence behaviour were not based on social scientific knowledge, models or hypotheses. Policy development is often founded on intuitive notions of 'what works'. A scientific foundation is often lacking or overlooked when the policy is evaluated (Brunsting, Uyterlinde et al., 2013). Much can also be learned from experiences in other countries. Knowledge exchange can be further improved on both the national and international levels.The research study Activating Interdisciplinary Approaches in Freight Businesses (AIDA-F; Dörr et al, 2015) proposed to stronger focus on research to monitor the emergence of approaching challenges, research in sensitivity in terms of how approaching challenges can be addressed by co-operation across disciplinary research fields and antagonistic research in terms of looking at technologies from different disciplinary perspectives to avoid risky developments for our society.

Further research is needed on how to understand the behavioural aspects of policy making processes and how to design intelligent policies building on behavioural insights on stakeholders

There are two major questions. The first one deals with policies, the second with understanding behaviour.

1. How to design intelligent policies building on behavioural insights for the short as well as the long term?

An example is linking parking restrictions and environmental concerns. If municipalities aim to preserve liveability of their inner city they may address behaviour of motorists by charging higher parking fees for polluting cars.

2. How can we understand the behaviour of policy makers and organizations?

For instance, policy makers slowly respond to the increasing body of knowledge on climate change. Many explanations can be found in the literature, such as short term versus long term

25

interests, lobbying, common pool problems, coordination on the wrong equilibrium, prisoner dilemmas, path dependencies or lack of clear framing of the problem.

New approaches needed to enhance transferability of findings and results

- Transferability of findings and results.

Do specific cultural aspects affect the transferability of findings and results from one to another context of decision? Is international comparison possible of best (or worst) practices in policies that affect behaviour? Publications on behavioural insights in policy making by the European Commission, World Bank and the OECD document many lessons in various fields, such as the energy sector. What can we learn from these findings for the transport sector and logistics?

- Other methods than random control trials (RCT).

RCTs often apply to small measures like drafting a letter differently. They are not or less suitable for problems that become effective over a long period of time or complex wicked problems. Which alternative methods exist to take behaviour into account? For example simulations or field tests? Which scientific disciplines are useful here besides behavioural economics?

- Developing scenario’s to deal with uncertainties.

Scenarios may be very useful to address uncertainty. How can policy makers use scenarios in case of uncertainty? An option is to go for the no-regret policies, i.e. those policy measures that are effective in all scenarios. However, often no regret policies are few and policy makers have to make an entrepreneurial decision to act in a context of large uncertainty.

References

• Brunsting, S. Uyterlinde, M., Tigchelaar, C. and Pol, M. (2013). Effectief beleid voor duurzaam gedrag: een theoretische vergelijking. ECN/ Dune Works.

• Cabinet office(2016). Organiser. A behavioural approach for influencing organisations. London: Cabinet Office• Dolan, Paul, Michael Hallsworth, David Halpern, Dominic King and Ivo Vlaev (2010). Mindspace. The practical

guide. London: Cabinet Office. Dörr, Heinz, Viktoria Marsch, Andreas Romstorfer, Yvonne Toifl (2015) Potenzial interdisziplinärer Ansätze für

organisatorische Innovationen im Güterverkehr, BMVIT, Wien, Austria• Thaler, Richard H. and Cass R. Sunstein (2008). Nudge. Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness.

New Haven: Yale University Press.• Wetenschappelijke Raad voor het Regeringsbeleid (2014). Met kennis van gedrag beleid maken. Amsterdam:

Amsterdam University Press.