Degree | Type | Year | Semester |
---|---|---|---|
2503743 Management of Smart and Sustainable Cities | OB | 3 | 1 |
There are no prerequisites.
This subject aims to study mobility and transport within the framework of the new paradigm of sustainability. More specifically, the following specific objectives are raised.
- Know the basic concepts of mobility
- Understand the complex relationship between mobility and territory
- Know the limits and impacts associated with the current mobility model
- Understand and be able to predict the positive and negative externalities of future developments in terms of mobility and transport
- Know the main methodologies of study of mobility
- Know the necessary instruments and their methodologies for the management of mobility
1. Introduction to mobility
1.1 What is mobility?
1.2 The evolution of mobility: farther, faster, more distance
2. The modes of transport
2.1 The modes of transport the instruments that move us
2.2 Access to modes of transport
2.3 Transport for everyone
3. The main determinants of the forms of mobility and transport
3.1 Mobility and urban form
3.2 Mobility and socio-economic factors
3.3 Habits, ideology and beliefs behind the use of modes of transport
3. The costs of mobility
3.1 Environmental costs
3.2 Social costs
3.3 Health costs
3.4 Economic costs
5. Future scenarios: challenges and solutions in the context of the Smart City
5.1 Defining the objectives of the future mobility model
5.2 Clean technologies
5.3 Automation
5.4 Vehicles of personal mobility
5.5 Utopias
6. The sources to study mobility
6.1. Quantitative sources in the study of the supply
6.2. Quantitative sources in the study of demand
6.3. Qualitative sources in the study of mobility
Methodology
The teaching methodology will consist of:
- Theoretical classes
- Sessions for debate and critical analysis of multimedia media
- Active participation in class discussions
- Presentation of the work
- Course reading
Title | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|
Type: Directed | |||
Practical sessions and class debates | 20 | 0.8 | 1, 2 |
Theoretical classes | 37 | 1.48 | 3, 6, 5 |
Type: Supervised | |||
Class project | 20 | 0.8 | 4 |
Individual or small group tutorization | 10 | 0.4 | 4 |
Type: Autonomous | |||
Preparation of written exams | 18 | 0.72 | 6 |
Readings | 18 | 0.72 | 3, 5 |
The final mark will be obtained from:
First part exam: 30%
Second part exam: 30%
Course work: 20%
Practices and participation: 20%
To be evaluated you will need:
- Do the two exams
- Deliver the work
- Have delivered at least 70% of the practices
Otherwise the note will be considered as non-evaluable.
There will be only reassessment of the exam
The copying or plagiarism of material, both in the case of works and in the case of examinations, constitute a crime that will be sanctioned with a zero to the activity. In case of recidivism, the whole subject will be used. Let's remember that a "copy" is considered a work that reproduces all or most of the work of one or more partners. "Plagiarism" is the fact of presenting all or part of a text of an author as its own, without mentioning the sources, being in paper format in digital format. See UAB documentation on "plagiarism" at: http://wuster.uab.es/web_argumenta_obert/unit_20/sot_2_01.html
Title | Weighting | Hours | ECTS | Learning Outcomes |
---|---|---|---|---|
Class project | 20% | 11 | 0.44 | 2 |
Partial exam 1 | 30% | 2 | 0.08 | 2, 3, 6 |
Partial exam 2 | 30% | 2 | 0.08 | 1, 4, 5 |
Practic exercises and participation | 20% | 12 | 0.48 | 3, 4, 6 |
Banister, D. (2011). Cities, mobility and climate change. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 1538–1546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.03.009
Banister, D. (2011). The trilogy of distance, speed and time. Journal of Transport Geography, 19(4), 950–959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.12.004
de Vos, J., Mokhtarian, P. L., Schwanen, T., van Acker, V., & Witlox, F. (2016). Travel mode choice and travel satisfaction: bridging the gap between decision utility and experienced utility. Transportation, 43, 771–796. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-015-9619-9
De Witte, A., Hollevoet, J., Dobruszkes, F., Hubert, M., & Macharis, C. (2013). Linking modal choice to motility: A comprehensive review. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 49, 329–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2013.01.009
Ewing, R., & Cervero, R. (2010). Travel and the built environment. A meta-analysis. Journal of American Planning Association, 76(3), 265–294. Retrieved from http://eastportlandactionplan.org/sites/default/files/Ewing_Cervero_JAPA_2010_Travel+BE_MetaAnalysis.pdf
Fonzone, A., Saleh, W., & Rye, T. (2018). Smart urban mobility – Escaping the technological Sirens. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 115(July), 1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.07.002
Gehl, J. (2010). Cities for people. Washington D.C: Island Press.
Gelauff, G., Ossokina, I., & Teulings, C. (2019). Spatial and welfare effects of automated driving : Will cities grow , decline or both ? Transportation Research Part A,121(December 2018), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.01.013
Marquet, O., & Miralles-Guasch, C. (2014). Walking short distances. The socioeconomic drivers for the use of proximity in everyday mobility in Barcelona. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 70, 210–222. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2014.10.007
Marquet, O., & Miralles-Guasch, C. (2016). City of Motorcycles. On how objective and subjective factors are behind the rise of two-wheeled mobility in Barcelona. Transport Policy, 52, 37–45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2016.07.002
Marquet, O., & Miralles-Guasch, C. (2017). Resilient territories and mobility adaptation strategies in times of economic recession. Evidence from the Metropolitan Region of Barcelona, Spain 2004-2012. European Urban and Regional Studies, 1–15. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1177%2F0969776417703158
Metz, D. (2013). Peak Car and Beyond: The Fourth Era of Travel. Transport Reviews, 33(3), 255–270. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2013.800615
Næss, P. (2006). Urban structure matters. Residential location, car dependance and travel behaviour (Vol. 50). New York: Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.1080/09640560701402133
Næss, P., & Cao, X. J. (2017). Which D ’ s are the important ones ? The effects of built environment characteristics on driving distance in Oslo and Stavanger. The Journal of Transport and Land Use, 945–964.
Priemus, H., Nijkamp, P., & Banister, D. (2001). Mobility and spatial dynamics: an uneasy relationship. Journal of Transport Geography, 9(3), 167–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0966-6923(01)00007-2
Schwanen, T., Lucas, K., Akyelken, N., Cisternas, D., Carrasco, J., & Neutens, T. (2015). Rethinking the links between social exclusion and transport disadvantage through the lens of social capital. Transportation Research Part A, 74, 123–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.02.012