4.7 Article

How to design policy packages for sustainable transport: Balancing disruptiveness and implementability

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.trd.2021.102714

关键词

Disruptiveness; Implementability; Policy package; Sustainable transport; Mobility transformation

资金

  1. Austrian Science Fund (FWF) [W1256]
  2. Styrian Provincial Government -Department 8 Health, Care and Science
  3. Austrian Climate and Energy Fund under its 11th call of the Austrian Climate Research Program ACRP, project Qualitative change to close Austria's Paris gap: Shaping the pathway (QUALITY) [KR18AC0K14664]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

To achieve emission reduction targets in passenger transport sector, emphasis must be placed on consumer mobility behavior and effective policy intervention. A well-balanced combination of diverse policy instruments is crucial to address disruptiveness and implementability dimensions effectively.
In order to achieve emission reduction targets in the passenger transport sector, the demand side and especially the mobility behavior of consumers deserve special attention. It is unlikely that such behavior will change without significant political intervention, nor will single policy instruments be sufficient to induce the needed changes. In this study, therefore, we analyze the design of so-called disruptive policy packages required to drastically reduce passenger transport emissions in industrialized countries and illustrate it for the case of Austria. Our research approach consists of three methods: a literature review to develop a policy category system, expert interviews to build effective policy packages and a stakeholder workshop to identify the specific needs of different geographical areas. For the design of successful policy packages, we identify two critical dimensions, disruptiveness (having high-level and rapid effectiveness) and implementability. A well-balanced combination of diverse policy instruments is required to adequately address both dimensions.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据