Barr Personal mobiltiy WIREs_article_template Revision 2 June 2018 CLEAN COPY

PLEASE READ ALL ‘COMMENT’ TEXT BEFORE PREPARING YOUR ARTICLE If you not see the Comments, select View > Print Layout Please delete them before submitting (Review > Delete All Comments in Document) so that peer reviewers see a clean copy of the manuscript Remember that you are writing for an interdisciplinary audience Please be sure to discuss interdisciplinary themes, issues, debates, etc where appropriate Note that the WIREs are forums for review articles, rather than primary literature describing the results of original research If you have any questions, contact your editorial office Article Title: Personal Mobility and Climate Change Article Type: OPINION PRIMER OVERVIEW ADVANCED REVIEW FOCUS ARTICLE SOFTWARE FOCUS Authors: [List each person’s full name, ORCID iD, affiliation, email address, and any conflicts of interest Copy rows as necessary for additional authors Please use an asterisk (*) to indicate the corresponding author.] First author Stewart Barr ORCID ID: 0000-0002-7734-0519 Geography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences University of Exeter S.W.Barr@exeter.ac.uk No conflicts of interest to declare Abstract Changing personal mobility behaviour in response to climate change represents a major challenge for social scientists and practitioners given the embedded nature of mobility in daily life Attempts to understand, govern and promote more sustainable mobility have tended to focus on individual decision making and incremental shifts in behaviour, such as reduced car use and increased walking, cycling and public transport use Indeed, these are progressively being woven into narratives of ‘smart’ travel and the use of technology to enhance individual decision making In this review I respond to these developments by arguing that researchers and practitioners need to re-frame their understanding of personal mobility to consider how travel can also be understood as an embedded form of practice, intimately connected to historic, economic and cultural influences In so doing I propose that researchers need to focus their attention on two major challenges that constitute underpinning obstacles for promoting long-term shifts in personal mobility: the ways in which cities are governed, designed and regulated to promote hyper-mobility rather than dwelling; and the formidable problem of reducing personal carbon emissions from a growing international tourism industry In addressing these two challenges, I argue for a new intellectual agenda that places personal wellbeing at the centre of efforts to promote shifts towards low carbon mobility practices Such (radical) shifts include reducing the demand for travel, an emphasis on dwelling, the promotion of ‘active’ travel and ‘slow tourism’ In short, I ask why we travel so much; and why we don’t travel well Graphical/Visual Abstract and Caption Changing personal mobility practices to address climate change means tackling the underpinning social, economic and cultural drivers of hyper-mobility Source: Michigan Department of Transportation (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US_131,_M-6,_68th_St_interchange.jpg ) Introduction The association between anthropogenic climate change and transport is one that has been highlighted for some time by the physical and social science communities (IPCC, 2007; Chapman, 2007; Banister, 2011; Scott et al., 2012) In its most recent Assessment Report, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimated that 11% of growth in anthropogenic greenhouse emissions between 2000 and 2010 was attributable to transport (IPCC, 2014) Indeed, Banister (2011) has demonstrated how carbon emissions per capita related to transport are globally well over the 2050 required stabilisation level of below 2tCO2 (in the US: 19.45 tCO2, in the EU: 9.28tC02 and even 4.07tCO2 in China) Moreover, there are frequent estimates demonstrating the role that different types of transport mode play in contributing to climate change, in particular air transport (Chapman, 2007) These figures can often be stark; for example Aamas (2013) noted that in Germany car use accounted for 46% of transport-related emissions, whilst flying accounted for 45% of transport emissions Indeed, such emissions are clearly associated with socio-economic status, with highincome households making a greater number of trips by aircraft As such, there is clear evidence that flying and personal car use are critical ‘vehicles’ for rising emissions, both in developed and developing nations (Becken and Hay, 2007; IPCC, 2014) However, such estimates are problematic when attempting to deeply understand the drivers of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions because the transport modes onto which such estimates are projected are merely representations of much more complex social processes (FreudendalPedersen, 2009) ‘Transport’ as a term includes a wide range of social, cultural and economic activities (Rodrigue et al., 2016) and so apportioning a given set of emissions to one type of activity is highly complex, especially when the same journey may be used to transport tourists, business travellers and freight Indeed, associating emissions with transport in general hides the wider impact of transport as a producer of certain kinds of economic activity In other words, the traditional assumption that transport is simply derived demand (Rodrigue et al., 2016) takes no account of the ways in which travel practices have been (historically) moulded and promoted through the openingup of inexpensive, accessible and frequent road and air transport (Barr et al., 2018) Consequently, the connections between climate change and transport need to be understood as historically entwined and intimately connected with the value apportioned to mobility in daily life Exploring what we can term the ‘personal’ aspects of mobility and climate change therefore becomes a fruitful exercise because it enables us to begin the process of unpacking the relationship between transport, mobility and climate change as something which is connected to shifting social practices (Verbeek and Mommaas, 2008; Spaargaren and Mol, 2008; Hargreaves, 2011; Shove, et al., 2010) In so doing, this review aims to examine the ways in which transport and mobility researchers have conceptualised personal mobility and its relationship with climate change, and the methods they have sought to deploy in developing theoretical insights Through such an analysis, I argue for a repositioning of scholarship on personal mobility and climate change to take account of research from the new mobilities paradigm (Sheller and Urry, 2006; Urry; 2007; 2011), which demonstrates that mobility is a deeply embedded social activity; as such, analyses require an intellectual reflexivity that recognises the contingent nature of understanding contemporary mobility patterns, including historic, economic, spatial and cultural processes This matters because many academic researchers and policy makers continue to use both an intellectual and governance framework that upholds rational, ‘smart’ and individualised decision making as the key units of analysis (Schwanen et al., 2011) In this review, I challenge this basic assumption and argue that more insightful and impactful research could arise from understanding the deeply embedded nature of personal mobility, through three new engagements First, there is abundant evidence that personal mobility is closely linked to the infrastructures and architectures of place; many quantitative studies have discussed the relationship between urban design and propensity to travel, but there are major new opportunities to forge links between disciplines such as psychology, sociology and urban planning and architecture to undertake research that explores how places can be planned for reduced mobility and enhanced dwelling Second, at the other end of the spatial scale, researchers of personal mobility urgently need to engage with the growth in international tourism, particularly as developing economies foster growing middle classes with higher levels of disposable income Air transport is a particularly potent issue here and there is growing evidence that even when consumers attempt to use more sustainable transport in daily life, this is overshadowed by what Cohen et al (2011) term ‘binge flying’ Both this phenomenon and a re-invigorated interest in place leads to a third disciplinary connection that needs to be drawn between research on personal mobility and the broader health and wellbeing agendas of both slower and more physically active travel It is notable that most studies on climate change and changing travel behaviours are framed around promoting environmental protection; yet I argue here that there are clear co-benefits to be delivered from using the insights and strategies deployed by health researchers to promote a positive way of both reengaging people with place and promoting mobility practices that enhance physical and emotional health In essence, what I argue for is an intellectual questioning of why we travel so much and an exploration of the physical and emotional impacts such hyper-mobility has on our societies The review is structured in the following way First, I provide a brief context that demonstrates the ways in which the changing governance of mobility through a ‘citizen-consumer’ lens has framed the basic assertion that we ought to be focusing on the individual as a unit of measurement and change Second, this is exemplified through exploring the ways in which particular forms of psychologicallyinformed research on personal mobility and travel behaviour has emerged as a powerful academic and policy discourse This has become manifested in several key ways: through the development of behavioural change campaigns and the philosophy of ‘nudge’; and through the utilisation of behavioural theories to create the Utopian and often rationalistic visions of the smart city Third, and by contrast, I then explore some of the intellectual critiques of individual conceptions of travel behaviour through examining the new mobilities paradigm in the social sciences Through linking these to wider social, economic and historical processes, I propose three ways in which social scientists can deploy research on personal mobility and climate change in the key fields of urban place-making, international travel and tourism, and health and wellbeing In so doing, I argue for a fundamental change to the intellectual and political approach to addressing personal mobility and climate change that questions the deeply held assumption that more and faster mobility is a goal worth pursuing GOVERNING MOBILITIES Transport policy, and by implication policy about how people should travel, has frequently been concerned with meeting wider political ambitions (Banister, 2008) In relation to climate change, Marsden and Rye (2010) have noted how transport policy is frequently rendered ineffective through complex and multi-layered scales of governance However, Marsden et al (2014) point to two key ‘governance contradictions’ that they argue distort our view of personal mobility and the ways in which it can be reduced First, there is a long-standing frustration within transport studies about the use of derived demand (Rodrigue et al., 2016) and ‘predict and provide’ (Goulden et al., 2014; Owens, 1995) as mechanisms for policy making As Marsden et al (2014) note, most governments have argued that economic growth is linked to higher traffic levels and that to seek to suppress road building equates to an attack on the principle of economic growth There are both technical and philosophical issues here Cullingworth and Nadin (2006) have highlighted that road building can produce higher traffic volumes without the attendant rises in economic activity; but there is also a question of political leadership: since the 1950’s road building has been regarded as the privileged mechanism for delivering growth in many nations (Buchanan, 1963; Banister and Stead; 2002; Banister, 2008) through predicting transport demand and largely meeting it through motor transport (Goulden et al., 2014) This connects to broader and underlying cultural narratives of the car as a preferred mode of personal transport (Wells and Xenias, 2015) Rajan (2006, p 113) has referred to the car as the literal articulation of freedom in neo-liberal society, where: “Its constitutive visual image is one of dignified convoys of individual cars…as they collectively pursue private goals on public highways” The car has been a crucial piece of technology that has been used to fundamentally re-shape urban and rural landscapes, through processes of suburbanisation and freeway construction (Baldassare, 1992; Kunstler, 1994; 1998; Jeekel, 2013) and this has led to a re-framing of dependencies, in which higher numbers of households become reliant on private motor transport for most activities (Newman and Kenworthy, 1989) In this way, I argue that many of the clear advantages of personal motor transport have been used in a distorted way to pursue an agenda of divestment from critical public transport infrastructure Accordingly, the vast majority of government policies ‘build in’ the private motor vehicle as the mode of choice, through planning, the design of place, properties and the allure of the car (Grindrod, 2013; Schiller and Kenworthy, 2017) A second governance contradiction has to with the ways in which scholarship on personal mobility and climate change has predominantly been focused on understanding individual decision making about travel mode choice (Marsden et al., 2014; Schwanen et al., 2012) This has been characterised by the use of specific, cognitively-based psychological theories and frameworks to understand individual behaviour, drawing on frameworks like the Theory of Reasoned Action (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1977), Theory of Planned Behaviour (Ajzen, 1991) and Schwartz’s (1977) Norm Activation Model These frameworks utilise deductive scientific reasoning (Lupton, 2013) to examine the factors that influence human decision making, focusing on the role of cognitive processes (Slovic, 2000; 2010) Yet there has been growing concern in recent years within the social sciences to explore why this particular kind of research has become both so academically prominent, but more to the point why it has come to dominate research and insight amongst policy makers (Pykett et al., 2016) In addressing this concern, Marsden et al (2014, p 71) note how this “… appeal to a politically powerful, but incoherent, discourse of individualism” constitutes part of a broader rationalistic narrative in policy making (Owens, 2015), in which certain kinds of scientifically verifiable evidence are privileged over others Moreover, in the case of such approaches to behavioural change, there is also a political dimension The emergence of neo-liberal modes of governance during the 1980’s (Giddens, 1991) has led to a progressive rolling back of the state (Rose and Miller, 1992; Jessop, 2002) and the development of a political philosophy that champions the small state and the importance of market forces Indeed, Gilg (2005) and Clarke et al (2007) have argued that this has fundamentally changed the role of government from ‘provider and regulator’ to ‘encourager and exhorter’ In this way, states must govern from a distance, meaning that the only viable route for delivering certain policy goals, such as reductions in carbon emissions from personal mobility, is to encourage individuals to change their behaviour As evidenced by major investments in behavioural research in countries like the UK (Behavioural Insights Team, 2016), national policy architectures are being created to support behavioural change and Clarke et al (2007) have conceptualised this shift towards individualised forms of behaviour change as the invocation of the ‘citizen-consumer’, an individual who simultaneously embodies diligent responsibilities whilst exercising these through choice, rather than through (regulated) necessity Moreover, Jones et al (2011a; 2011b; 2016) and Whitehead et al (2011) have demonstrated how behavioural change represents a form of ‘libertarian paternalism’: an assemblage of apparently free choice within the market economy overseen and guided by moral narratives Within studies of personal mobility, this can be witnessed through the invocation of making ‘smart’ choices (Barr and Prillwitz, 2014), which have an implicit moral weighting Such moral codes are indicative of a narrowly defined set of choices for citizenconsumers (Slocum, 2004), in which choices are highly limited, incremental and politically passive (Johnson, 2008) Accordingly, I argue here that the governance of personal mobility in relation to climate change presents three overlapping challenges First, there is an implicit mainstream political narrative that more travel is economically beneficial and that the affordances of personal motor transport far outweigh the benefits and status of other (public and active) travel modes Second, within this overall narrative, only certain kinds of behavioural change are deemed acceptable or desirable; major behavioural change is not desirable because it neither fits with the economic narrative nor the ideology of the small state and consumer choice Third, in these contexts, specific kinds of psychologically-informed modes of scientific enquiry have become a useful means through which to deploy such a political agenda, given the focus on individual cognition and the seemingly powerful role that identifying ‘factors’ can have in leading to small-scale policy change and the ability to ‘nudge’ THE PSYCHOLOGY OF TRAVEL BEHAVIOUR The intellectual trajectory of research on personal mobility and climate change is similar to that for other research into human behaviour (Spaargaren and Mol, 2008), in which psychology has taken the lead in deploying theoretical insights Commentaries on the role that psychology can play in combatting climate change have necessarily focused on the nature of human behavioural contributions (Swim et al., 2011a; Whitmarsh, 2009), the disciplinary understanding of climate change and what psychology can contribute (Stern, 2011; Swim et al., 2011b), the particular psychological characteristics of engaging with climate change (Spence et al., 2012; Stoll-Kleemann, 2001), the key ‘barriers’ for mitigation (Gifford, 2011), and the potential for psychology to link with other disciplines (Spence and Pidgeon, 2009) In this way, as a broad discipline, psychology has much to offer in contributing to inter-disciplinary understandings of climate change, the ways in which humans learn to cope with and adapt to change, and the likely acceptance (or otherwise) of climaterelated policies (Clayton et al., 2015) Focusing on travel behaviour within this sub-disciplinary context, three broad approaches can be identified that seek to understand personal travel behaviour and the factors that could be used to influence individual decision making First, Hunecke et al (2007) have highlighted the vital role of studies focusing on ‘pro-environmental behaviour’, in which the goal for researchers has been to explore the determinants of individual sustainability related behaviours, frequently defined by travel behaviour researchers as avoiding car use and reducing air travel (ECMT, 2004; EEA, 2007) Studies with a focus on pro-environmental behaviour have often utilised Stern et al.’s (1999) Value-Belief–Nom (VBN) Theory and Schwarz’s (1977) Norm Activation Model (NAM), which focus on particular constructs: the VBN integrates the role of environmental dimensions of value scales like the New Ecological Paradigm (Dunlap and Van Liere, 1978; Dunlap et al., 1992), whilst the NAM highlights the role of awareness of consequences and ascriptions of responsibility in activating personal norms to change behaviour Critically, these approaches assume a morally-based motivation for engaging in certain kinds of behaviour, i.e that reducing car use and switching to lower carbon transport modes is a deliberate attempt to act in pro-environmental way A second category of research has relied considerably on scholarship informed by cognitive psychological reasoning, which focuses specifically on the ways in which individuals process information and the role of elements such as memory, perception, thinking, reasoning, language and learning (Lachman et al., 2015; Neisser, 2014) Lanzini and Khan’s (2017) meta-analysis of 58 primary research studies of travel mode choice illustrates the widespread use of cognitive models in psychology to examine travel behaviour (Line et al., 2012), including Ajzen’s (1991) Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB), which incorporates the role of attitudes, social norms and perceived behavioural control in influencing behavioural intentions Beyond the TPB, research focusing on situational or contextual factors frequently addresses just one or two elements and examines these in specific detail, for example the relative role of extrinsic and intrinsic factors (Schoneau and Muller, 2017), demographics (Line et al., 2010) household composition and domestic context (Vincent-Geslin and Ravalet, 2016), the influence of facilities and urban infrastructure design (Larsen and El-Geneidy, 2011), residential location (Srinivisan and Ferreira, 2002), and the role of social norms in encouraging the take-up of new behaviours (Wang et al., 2015) Of particular note has been the aligned development of research that has attempted to explore the embedded nature of travel behaviour and the challenges of shifting daily habits (Verplanken et al., 1997; Verplanken and Aarts, 1999), a stream of work which is now recognising the critical role of consumption settings in shaping habits (Kenyon and Lyons, 2013) and the ways in which habits might be altered through ‘moments of change’ (Prillwitz and Lanzendorf, 2006) A third strand of research has further developed these insights in attempts to explore travel behaviour through the lens of segmentation (Barr and Prillwitz, 2012) This research tradition emerges from attempts to change behaviours through greater levels of insight into the characteristics of populations and the kinds of factors that influence defined segments Research in this field has utilised techniques such as factor analysis and cluster analysis (Anable, 2005; Barr and Prillwitz, 2012) to identify key groups and their demographic, behavioural and attitudinal characteristics Segmentation approaches vary significantly both in terms of the basis for segmentation (e.g behaviour, attitudes) and the statistical techniques applied Most approaches within social science have utilised ‘frequentist’ approaches (which explore the number of participants in a study with particular characteristics), but researchers are now beginning to examine the role of dynamic segmentation, in which Bayesian probabilistic approaches are used to examine the probability of a given individual being in one segment or another (Gill, 2015) Accordingly, within the field of travel behaviour research, cognitive psychological approaches attempt to use deductive reasoning and mostly quantitative approaches to examine the process of decision making and the factors that influence behavioural outcomes The epistemological basis for this approach to understanding mobility has been challenged in other parts of the social sciences (see section 5), but it is critical to recognise the profound political impact psychology has had on the ways in which policy makers attempt to promote sustainable mobility through behavioural change campaign (Jones et al., 2013), to which the review now turns DEVELOPING ‘SMART(ER)’ MOBILITIES The utilisation of individualised frameworks for understanding travel behaviour has provided the basis for two contemporary trajectories of research and interaction with policy makers in the last ten years, focusing on the ways in which individuals can be persuaded or ‘nudged’ (Thaler and Sunstein, 2008) to change their behaviours The first has sought to utilise cognitively-based psychological theories alongside concepts drawn from commercial marketing to form what has been termed social marketing French et al (2009) demonstrate that social marketing is the application of commercial marketing logic through three lenses: behavioural insights, segmentation and the development of an appropriate marketing mix Andreasen (2006) highlights the application of such logics to the promotion of different consumption practices, emphasising the positive nature of change (as opposed to traditional negative messaging associated with behavioural change) This has been regarded as especially effective in health promotion in countries such as Canada, the USA, the UK and Australia (Gordon et al., 2006; Hastings et al., 2007; National Social Marketing Centre, 2007), but has gained prominence within the sustainability and mobilities field in recent years (Shaw et al., 2014) Politically, social marketing has become particularly prominent amongst governments in developed nations, where there is a neatly fitting narrative about continuing but different forms of consumption (Barr et al., 2011) Indeed, its application has become embedded in central government initiatives in various contexts, such as the UK Government’s Framework for Pro-environmental Behaviours (DEFRA, 2008) and the UK Department for Transport’s (Thornton et al., 2011) Transport Choices segmentation model These ideas have been crystalised through commentaries on one of the most influential publications of the last decade: Thaler and Sunstein’s (2008) Nudge, which has outlined the potential for utilising cognitive psychology and related sub-disciplines (such as behavioural economics) for realising a wide range of environmental and social goals Nudge is founded on the notion that subtle alterations in ‘choice architecture’ can promote changes in habitual behaviours, defined thus: “…any aspect of the choice architecture that alters people’s behaviour in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives To count as a mere nudge, the intervention must be easy and cheap to avoid Nudges are not mandates Putting the fruit at eye level counts as a nudge Banning junk food does not” (Thaler and Sunstein, p 8) Nudge has had a major impact on cementing the links between psychology and behavioural economics and policy making in the Anglophone world, as evidenced most notably by the UK Government’s funding and support for the Behavioural Insights Team (2016, p 6), which has argued that: “The use of behavioural and experimental approaches to address social challenges is developing in scale, complexity and ambition…there can be no doubt that they are bringing a practical and powerful new lens to policy challenges – no longer just in the UK, but across the world” This notion of ‘experimental’ approaches is now being aligned to a second and seemingly much more globalised narrative of behavioural change, which connects to the ways in which behavioural insights can be used in the development of so-called ‘smart cities’ (Kitchin, 2015) The smart cities agenda is a rapidly evolving socio-technical field in academic research (Kitchin, 2016) and at one level can ostensibly be viewed as an attempt to capitalise and derive efficiencies from the major increases in data collection, storage and connectivity afforded by the Internet and sharing platforms However, the smart cities agenda is fundamentally characterised by a particular kind of vision of what cities (and by implication places) should look and feel like, and how people ought to behave in them: “The premise of a smart city is that by having the right information at the right time, citizens, service providers and city government alike will be able to make better decisions that result in increased quality of life for urban residents and the overall sustainability of the city” (Khansari et al (2013, p 46) I argue here that this approach towards the re-making of urban (mobility) space has two fundamental implications First, notions of smart cities are imbued with the same kinds of logics that underpin the behavioural economics of nudge, namely that there is a measurable, empirical logic to behaviour and that this can be controlled to achieve particular goals or even technologically utopian desires, in the case of smart cities Examples of ‘modelling’ mobility behaviour therefore come to the fore and highlight the role of being able to ‘intervene’ and ‘model’ behaviour for specified outcomes, such as changing driver behaviour or reducing car use (Stankovic, 2014) Here the language of urban mobility ‘solutions’ is invoked, where integrated congestion management can be achieved through pooling data, manipulating infrastructures and therefore influencing behaviours (Engaged Smart Transport, 2015) In this way, corporate proponents of the smart city contend that: “The science of cities will enable improved perception, better prediction, superior risk management and enhanced decision-making” (City Science, 2016, n.p.) This kind of logic is emblematic of the experimentalism now being deployed in many cities and towns, in which human subjects are enrolled in urban experiments that seek to explore how technologies and people interact (Bulkelely and Castan Broto, 2013) This leads to a second key implication, which is that smart mobilities, aligned to the notions of ‘perception’ and ‘enhanced decision making’, raises critical ethical and political concerns surrounding how mobility practices are manipulated (House of Lords, 2011) and the democratic accountability for what is often a technologically utopian, corporate driven agenda (Hollands, 2015) Critical to this debate is the way in which (mobility) practices are being conceived and promoted by city government–corporate relationships (Vitanen and Kingston, 2014) and the (lack of) voice that citizens can exercise in shaping configuration of cities, which is so critical in framing mobility (Kitchin, 2016) Accordingly, I argue here that a ‘perfect storm’ of particular intellectual, political and corporate assemblages has coalesced over the past 20 years to form an over-arching narrative for governing individual behaviours and is becoming central to policy making to reduce carbon emissions In this way, this narrative has privileged particular ways of both framing behaviour and behavioural change, and casting the logics of how mobility might be envisioned for the future, frequently through a technological utopian lens However, I argue that these approaches, whilst politically compelling, are intellectually and ethically narrow In the following sections of this review, I explore the basis for this contention, through first examining the critiques of narrowly-conceived behavioural approaches I then explore the new mobilities paradigm in the social sciences, which has set down an alternative intellectual framework I then examine how this framework could be used to examine three hopeful research trajectories for promoting low carbon mobility in the 21 st Century NEW MOBILITIES: THE SOCIAL PRACTICE OF TRAVEL Alongside the growth of behavioural economics, the science of nudge and the evolution of the smart cities concept has attracted persistent and growing critiques from a range of social science disciplines that have questioned both the pragmatic effectiveness and deeper political motivations for pursuing the kind of behavioural science emblematic of many current policy regimes (Shove, 2010) From a pragmatic perspective, social marketing and its popular manifestation in nudge are regarded as highly limiting and unambitious forms of behavioural change (Thøgersen and Crompton, 2009), which are unlikely to yield the kinds of mobility transformations required in a climate changed world (Peattie and Peattie, 2009) In other words, the kinds of aspirations set by attempting to marginally reduce car use and promoting occasional use of alternatives is both practically ineffective and will not lead to a major change in habits Such a critique is pivotal, because it underscores the need to address structurally significant drivers of individual mobility, which are often spatial and economic in nature (Barr and Prillwitz, 2014) Accordingly, addressing individual behaviour requires a recognition of the ways in which personalised decisions are framed by the broader political economy This links to a further critique of the science of nudge and smart cities, which centres on the political disengagement of publics with debates over climate change and mobility In this way, social marketing, nudge and the individualised notion of smart mobility are examples of highly passive (Johnson, 2008) and dis-engaged forms of practice, which not offer the political possibility of considering more radical alternatives to the mantra of atomistic and incremental behavioural change (House of Lords, 2011) This emphasises the seemingly ‘blind belief’ that behavioural economics and its enactment through technologies can create better mobilities for people and lies at the heart of the arguments pursued by Jones et al (2011a; 2011b; 2016) in their discussion of the role of the Libertarian Paternalist state, in which policy goals are achieved through manipulations of individuals, apparently exercising free choice The question is raised, therefore, of what role the state ought to hold in not only governing from a distance (Jessop, 2002), but providing the kind of planning legislation, infrastructure, regulations and participatory mechanisms for an alternative vision for low carbon mobility (Marsden et al., 2014) Indeed, as Vitanen and Kingston (2014) and Kitchin (2016) note in regard to smart cities, such initiatives are ethically questionable not only because of the apparent lack of democratic legitimacy, but also because they impose a particular neo-liberal narrative of what ‘efficient’ cities ought to be like These critiques offer a basis for questioning the logic of achieving low carbon mobility through individual incrementalism However, at the heart of both lies a foundational intellectual schism that stretches across social sciences, but which has been powerfully illustrated in the last 20 years through the fundamental arguments concerning the intellectual basis for behavioural approaches (Hargreaves, 2011; Hobson, 2002; Owens, 2000; Shove, 2010) and also attempts to demonstrate the ways in which connections may be drawn between these two approaches (Nash et al., 2017) Spaargaren and Mol (2008) have noted that the basis for this intellectual schism is founded on some key epistemological differences, broadly (but by no means exclusively) that research from the behavioural economics and cognitive psychological traditions focuses on a theory-led, extensive & quantitative approach, whereas broader psychological, anthropological and sociological traditions focus on theory-building (or grounded theory), interpretivist and intensive & qualitative approaches Aligned to the schism within social science, researchers of mobility have therefore sought to challenge the intellectual and political dominance of behavioural economics and particular elements of psychological thought through developing new ways of researching and imagining low carbon mobility, through the new mobilities paradigm The new mobilities paradigm (Sheller and Urry, 2006; Urry, 2011a) has been a major vehicle through which social scientists have advocated an alternative narrative for framing low carbon mobility (Urry, 2011b) and is founded on both conceptual and methodological change: “Travel has been for the social sciences seen as a black box, a neutral set of technologies and processes predominantly permitting forms of economic, social, and political life that are seen as explicable in terms of other, more causally powerful processes As we shall argue, however, accounting for mobilities in the fullest sense challenges social science to change both the objects of its inquiries and the methodologies for research” (Sheller and Urry, 2006, p 208) In terms of ‘objects’, Adey (2010) highlights the importance of appreciating that mobility is not an objectified or quantifiably measurable entity, but rather is manifested in a series of contexts, all of which have meaning and which begin to unpack why changing mobility practices is so challenging Indeed, Hannam et al (2006) have argued for four ways in which contemporary mobility needs to be appreciated: through understanding that mobility is fluid and not affixed to instrumental definitions of behaviour; that mobility is virtual and imaginary, as well as physical; that mobility in and of itself has identity value; and that mobility is embodied and emotive (Hannam et al., 2006) As such, how we explore mobility needs to be governed through different intellectual lenses and in terms of personal mobility and climate change necessitates a refocusing of our efforts in two ways (Cresswell, 2010; 2011; Cresswell and Merriman, 2011) First, rather than exploring the atomistic behaviours of individuals and attempting to define barriers or drivers, we ought to be exploring practices As Shove and other sociologists have advocated (Shove, 2003; Shove et al., 2012), practices are: “…routine-driven, everyday activities situated in time and space and shared by groups of people as part of their everyday life Social practices form the historically shaped, concrete interaction points between, on the one hand actors, with their lifestyles and routines, and on the other hand, modes of provision with their infrastructures of rules and resources, including norms and values” Verbeek and Mommaas, 2008, p 634) In this way we can begin to re-conceptualise high carbon travel behaviours such as car driving in terms of the broader historic, social and economic factors that contribute to individual behaviours Accordingly, rather than viewing driving to work as a solely individual decision, a practices perspective also enables us to understand how the culture of long-distance car commuting has developed and has been perpetuated by freeway developments, workplace parking, suburban living and the prominence afforded to the car in popular culture (Dennis and Urry, 2009; Kunstler, 1994; 1998) Indeed, more than this, we can view most developed and developing societies as having or working towards forms of auto-mobility, in which the car is privileged above all other forms of transport (Urry, 2007) and through which the logics of neo-liberal individualism can be exercised to their fullest extent To understand personal mobility and any potential to reduce carbon emissions we must therefore look towards an analysis of mobility practice alongside individual transport behaviours Indeed, we must also pay attention to the spaces in which (affective) situational contexts evolve (Adey, 2008; Cresswell and Merriman, 2011)) These situational contexts may be connected to both transport infrastructure (Dunckel Graglia, 2016; Merriman, 2009) and wider urban architectures and domestic designs (Barr et al., 2018; Katz, 1994; Langdon, 1994) What these studies demonstrate is the importance of space and spatial design in promoting or suppressing certain kinds of movement In both Kunstler’s (1994) evocative account of American suburbia and Grindrod’s (2013) revealing narrative of post-war British urban planning, the influence of space and design become critical in establishing practices that have led to carbon-heavy personal mobility as something, literally set in stone In this way, I argue that changing mobility behaviours to tackle and adapt to climate change becomes much more of a task related to the underpinning contexts for practices and the out-working of such practices in everyday life TRANSFORMING PERSONAL MOBILITIES Thus far in this review I have argued that cognitive-psychological approaches towards travel behaviour and their translation into behavioural change programmes are unlikely on their own to promote the kinds of cultural changes in personal mobility that will be needed to reduce carbon Banister, D (2008) The sustainable mobility paradigm Transport policy, 15(2), 73-80 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2007.10.005 Banister, D (2011) Cities, mobility and climate change Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 15381546 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.03.009 Banister, D., & Stead, D (2002) Reducing transport intensity European Journal of Transport and Infrastructure Research 2(3-4), 161-178 Barr, S., Gilg, A., & Shaw, G (2011) ‘Helping People Make Better Choices’: Exploring the behaviour change agenda for environmental sustainability Applied Geography, 31(2), 712-720 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.12.003 Barr, S., & Prillwitz, J (2012) Green travellers? Exploring the spatial context of sustainable mobility styles Applied geography, 32(2), 798-809 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.08.002 Barr, S., & Prillwitz, J (2014) A smarter choice? Exploring the behaviour change agenda for environmentally sustainable mobility Environment and Planning C: government and policy, 32(1), 119 https://doi.org/10.1068/c1201 Barr, S., Prillwitz, J., Ryley, T., & Shaw, G (2018) Geographies of Transport and Mobility: Prospects and Challenges in an Age of Climate Change Routledge, Abingdon Barr, S., & Shaw, G (2016) Knowledge co-production and behavioural change: collaborative approaches for promoting sustainable mobility In D Hopkins and J Higham (Eds.) Low Carbon Mobility Transitions (pp 12-29) Goodfellow Publishing: Oxford Becken, S., & Hay, J E (2007) Tourism and climate change: Risks and opportunities Channel View: London Behavioral Insights Team (2016) The Behavioural Insights Team Update Report 2016-17 London: Behavioural Insights Team http://38r8om2xjhhl25mw24492dir.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/10/BIT_Update-16-17_E_.pdf Burbidge, S., & Goulias, K (2009) Active travel behavior Transportation letters, 1(2), 147-167 https://doi.org/10.3328/TL.2009.01.02.147-167 Boarnet, M., & Crane, R (2001) The influence of land use on travel behavior: specification and estimation strategies Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 35(9), 823-845 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(00)00019-7 Böcker, L., Dijst, M., Faber, J., & Helbich, M (2015) En-route weather and place valuations for different transport mode users Journal of Transport Geography, 47, 128-138 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.06.003 Bornioli, A., Parkhurst, G., & Morgan, P L (2018) Psychological Wellbeing Benefits of Simulated Exposure to Five Urban Settings: an Experimental Study From the Pedestrian's Perspective Journal of Transport & Health https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2018.02.003 Brög, W., Erl, E., Ker, I., Ryle, J., & Wall, R (2009) Evaluation of voluntary travel behaviour change: Experiences from three continents Transport Policy, 16(6), 281-292 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2009.10.003 Buchanan, C (1963) Traffic in Towns HMSO: London Budeanu, A (2007) Sustainable tourist behaviour – a discussion of opportunities for change International Journal of Consumer Studies, 31(5), 499–508 doi:10.1111/j.1470-6431.2007.00606.x Buehler, R., Pucher, J., Merom, D., & Bauman, A., (2011) Active Travel in Germany and the U.S Contributions of Daily Walking and Cycling to Physical Activity American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 41(3), 241–250 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2011.04.012 Bulkeley, H., & Castán Broto, V (2013) Government by experiment? Global cities and the governing of climate change Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 38(3), 361-375 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-5661.2012.00535.x Bulkeley, H., & Betsill, M (2005) Rethinking Sustainable Cities: Multilevel Governance and the 'Urban' Politics of Climate Change Environmental Politics, 14(1), 42-63 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0964401042000310178 Burbidge, S., & Goulias, K (2009) Active travel behavior Transportation Letters, 1(2), 147-167 https://doi.org/10.3328/TL.2009.01.02.147-167 Caffyn, A (2012) Advocating and Implementing Slow Tourism Tourism Recreation Research, 37(1), 77-80 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2012.11081690 Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P.L., & Handy, S.L (2007) Do changes in neighborhood characteristics leadto changes in travel behavior? A structural equations modeling approach Transportation 34(5), 535556 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-007-9132-x City of Portland (2016) CC2035 Proposed Draft City of Portland: Portland, OR City Science (2016, December 17) City Science website Retrieved from www.cityscience.com Clark, B (2003) Ebenezer Howard And The Marriage Of Town And Country: An Introduction to Howard’s Garden Cities of To-morrow (Selections) Organization & Environment, 16(1), 87–97 https://doi.org/10.1177/1086026602250258 Clarke, J., Newman, J., Smith, N., Vidler, E., & Westmarland, L (2007) Creating citizen-consumers: Changing publics and changing public services Sage: London Clayton, S., Devine-Wright, P., Stern, P C., Whitmarsh, L., Carrico, A., Steg, L., Swim, J & Bonnes, M (2015) Psychological research and global climate change Nature Climate Change, (7), 640-646 doi:10.1038/nclimate2622 Coghlan, A (2015) Tourism and health: using positive psychology principles to maximise participants’ wellbeing outcomes – a design concept for charity challenge tourism Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(3), 382-400 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2014.986489 Cohen, S A., Higham, J E S., & Cavaliere, C T (2011) Binge flying: Behavioural addiction and climate change Annals of Tourism Research, 38(3), 1070-1089 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annals.2011.01.013 Cohen, S A., Higham, J E S., & Reis, A.C (2013) Sociological barriers to developing sustainable discretionary air travel behavior Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(7), 982-998 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.809092 Creating Excellent (2017, December 17) Creating Excellent: for better places and communities Retrieved from: http://creatingexcellence.net/ Cresswell, T (2010) Towards a politics of mobility Environment and planning D: society and space, 28(1), 17-31 https://doi.org/10.1068/d11407 Cresswell, T., & Merriman, P (Eds.) (2011) Geographies of mobilities: Practices, spaces, subjects Ashgate Publishing: Aldershot Cullingworth, J B., & Nadin, V (2006) Town and country planning in the United Kingdom Routledge, London de Nazelle, A., Nieuwenhuijsen, M J., Antó, J A., Brauer, M., Briggs, D., Braun-Fahrlander, C., Cavill, N., Cooper, A R., Desqueyroux, H., Fruin, S., Hoek, G., Int Panis, L., Janssen, N., Jerrett, M., Joffe, M., Andersen, Z J., van Kempen, E., Kingham, S., Kubesch, N., Leyden, K M., Marshall, J D., Matamala, J., Mellios, G., Mendez, M., Nassif, H., Ogilvie, D., Peiró, R., Pérez, K., Rabl, A., Ragettli, M., Rodríguez, D., Rojas, D., Ruiz, P., Sallis, J F., Terwoert, J., Toussaint, J-F, Tuomisto, J., Zuurbier, M., & Lebret, E., (2011) Improving health through policies that promote active travel: A review of evidence to support integrated health impact assessment Environment International, 37(4), 766-777 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2011.02.003 Dennis, K., & Urry, J (2009) After the car Polity: Cambridge Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA) (2008) Framework for proenvironmental behaviours Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, London Department for Transport (2016) Transport Statistics Great Britain: 2016 Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/576095/tsgb-2016report-summaries.pdf Dickinson, J E., Lumsdon, L M., & Robbins, D (2011) Slow travel: issues for tourism and climate change Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(3), 281-300 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2010.524704 Dickinson, J E., Robbins, D., & Lumsdon, L (2010) Holiday travel discourses and climate change Journal of Transport Geography, 18(3), 482-489 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2010.01.006 Dillimono, H D., & Dickinson, J E (2015) Travel, tourism, climate change, and behavioral change: travelers’ perspectives from a developing country, Nigeria Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 23(3), 437454 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2014.957212 Docherty, I (2003) Policy, Politics and Sustainable Transport: The Nature of Labour's Dilemma In I Docherty and J Shaw (Eds.), A New Deal for Transport? The UK's Struggle with the Sustainable Transport Agenda Blackwell Publishing Ltd: Oxford, UK https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470773734.ch1 Dunlap, R E., & Van Liere, K D (1978) The “new environmental paradigm” The journal of environmental education, 9(4), 10-19 https://doi.org/10.1080/00958964.1978.10801875 Dunlap, R E., Van Liere, K D., Mertig, A G., & Jones, R E (2000) New trends in measuring environmental attitudes: measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: a revised NEP scale Journal of social issues, 56(3), 425-442 https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00176 Easthope, H (2009) Fixed identities in a mobile world? The relationship between mobility, place, and identity Identities, 16(1), 61-82 https://doi.org/10.1080/10702890802605810 Engaged Smart Transport (2015, January 2018) Engaged Smart Transport website Retrieved from: www.commute-exeter.com Engebretsen, O., Christiansen, P., & Strand, A (2017) Bergen light rail – Effects on travel behavior Journal of Transport Geography, 62, 111-121 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2017.05.013 Fagnant, D J., & Kockelman, K (2015) Preparing a nation for autonomous vehicles: opportunities, barriers and policy recommendations Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 77, 167181 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.04.003 Fishbein, M., & Ajzen, I (1977) Belief, attitude, intention, and behavior: An introduction to theory and research Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA Foley, R., & Kistemann, T (2015) Blue space geographies: Enabling health in place Health & Place, 35, 157–165 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2015.07.003 Freeman, L., Neckerman, K., Schwartz-Soicher, O., Quinn, J., Richards, C., Bader, M.D.M., Lovasi, G., Jack, D., Weiss, C., Konty, K., Arno, P., Viola, D., Kerker, B., & Rundle, A.G (2013) Neighborhood Walkability and Active Travel (Walking and Cycling) in New York City Journal of Urban Health, 90(4), 575-585 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11524-012-9758-7 French, J., & Blair-Stevens, C (2009) In Social marketing and public health: theory and practice Oxford University Press: Oxford Freudendal-Pedersen, M (2009) Mobility in daily life: between freedom and unfreedom Ashgate: Aldershot Fuhrer, U., Kaiser, F G., & Hartig, T (1993) Place attachment and mobility during leisure time Journal of Environmental Psychology, 13(4), 309-321 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-4944(05)802531 Fullagar, S (2012) Gendered cultures of slow travel: women’s cycle tourism as an alternative hedonism In Fullagar, S., Markwell, K and Wilson, E (Eds.) Slow Tourism: experiences and mobilities (pp 99-112) Channel View: Bristol Fullagar, S., Markwell, K., & Wilson, E (Eds.) (2012) Slow Tourism: experiences and mobilities Channel View: Bristol Giddens, A (1991) Modernity and Self-Identity: self and society in the late modern age Policy: Cambridge Gifford, R (2011) The dragons of inaction: Psychological barriers that limit climate change mitigation and adaptation American Psychologist, 66(4), 290-302 Gilg, A (2005) Planning in Britain: understanding and evaluating the post-war system Sage: London Gill, J (2015) Bayesian Methods: A Social and Behavioral Sciences Approach Third Edition: CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL Glaeser, E L., & Shapiro, J (2001) Is there a new urbanism? The growth of US cities in the 1990s (Working Paper No 8357) Harvard Institute of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA Gössling, S., & Peeters, P (2007) ‘It Does Not Harm the Environment!’ An Analysis of Industry Discourses on Tourism, Air Travel and the Environment Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 15(4), 402417 https://doi.org/10.2167/jost672.0 Gössling, S., Bredberg, M., Randow, A., Sandström, E., & Svensson, P (2006) Tourist Perceptions of Climate Change: A Study of International Tourists in Zanzibar Current Issues in Tourism, 9(4-5), 419435 https://doi.org/10.2167/cit265.0 Goulden, M., Ryley, T., & Dingwall, R (2014) Beyond ‘predict and provide’: UK transport, the growth paradigm and climate change Transport Policy, 32,139-147 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.01.006 Green, J., Steinbach, R., Jones, A., Edwards, P., Kelly, C., Nellthorp, J., Goodman, A., Roberts, H., Petticrew, M., & Wilkinson, P (2014) On the buses: a mixed-method evaluation of the impact of free bus travel for young people on the public health Public Health Research, 2(1) https://doi.org/10.3310/phr02010 Grindrod, J (2013) Concretopia: a journey around the rebuilding of post-war Britain Old Street Publishing: Brecon.Hannam, K., Sheller, M., & Urry, J (2006) Mobilities, immobilities and moorings Mobilities, 1(1), 1-22 https://doi.org/10.1080/17450100500489189 Haq, G., Whitelegg, J., Cinderby, S., & Owen, A (2008) The use of personalised social marketing to foster voluntary behavioural change for sustainable travel and lifestyles Local Environment, 13(7), 549-569 https://doi.org/10.1080/13549830802260092 Hares, A., Dickinson, J., & Wilkes, K (2010) Climate change and the air travel decisions of UK tourists Journal of Transport Geography, 18(3), 466-473 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.06.018 Hargreaves, T (2011) Practice-ing behaviour change: Applying social practice theory to proenvironmental behaviour change Journal of Consumer Culture 11(1), 79–99 https://doi.org/10.1177/1469540510390500 Hartwell, H., Hemingway, A., Fyall, A., Filimonau, V., & Wall, S (2018) Tourism engaging with the public health agenda: Can we promote ‘wellville’ as a destination of choice? Public Health, 126(12), 1072–1074 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhe.2012.08.013 Harvey, D (2003) The right to the city International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(4), 939–941 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-1317.2003.00492.x Hibbert, J F., Dickinson, J E., Gössling, S., & Curtin, S (2013) Identity and tourism mobility: an exploration of the attitude–behaviour gap Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(7), 999-1016 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2013.826232 Higham, J E S., Cohen, S A., & Cavaliere, C T (2014) Climate Change, Discretionary Air Travel, and the “Flyers’ Dilemma” Journal of Travel Research, 53(4), 462–475 https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287513500393 Higham, J., Cohen, S A., Cavaliere, C T., Reis, A., & Finkler, W (2016) Climate change, tourist air travel and radical emissions reduction Journal of Cleaner Production, 111, Part B, 336-347 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.10.100 House of Lords Science and Technology Committee (2011) Behaviour Change: second report The Stationary Office: London Hu, G., Jousilahti, P., Borodulin, K., Barengo, N C., Lakka, T A., Nissinen, A., & Tuomilehto, J (2018) Occupational, commuting and leisure-time physical activity in relation to coronary heart disease among middle-aged Finnish men and women Atherosclerosis, 194(2), 490–497 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atherosclerosis.2006.08.051 Hunecke, M., Haustein, S., Grischkat, S., & Böhler, B (2007) Psychological, sociodemographic, and infrastructural factors as determinants of ecological impact caused by mobility Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(4), 277-292 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2007.08.001 International Air Transport Associations (IAIA) (2016) IATA Forecasts Passanger Demand To Double Over 20 Years Press release number 59 18th October 2016 http://www.iata.org/pressroom/pr/Pages/2016-10-18-02.aspx Imrie, R (2012) Auto-Disabilities: The Case of Shared Space Environments Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 44(9), 2260–2277 https://doi.org/10.1068/a44595 IPCC (2007) Climate Change 2007: Synthesis Report [Core Writing Team, Pachauri, R.K and Reisinger, A (eds.)] IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland IPCC (2014) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report [Core Writing Team, R.K Pachauri and L.A Meyer (eds.)] IPCC: Geneva, Switzerland Jacobs, J (1961) The death and life of American cities New York: Random House Jeekel, H (2013) The Car-dependent Society: a European perspective Aldershot: Ashgate Jessop, B (2002) Liberalism, neoliberalism, and urban governance: A state–theoretical perspective Antipode, 34(3), 452-472 https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8330.00250 Johnston, J (2008) The citizen-consumer hybrid: ideological tensions and the case of Whole Foods Market Theory and Society, 37(3), 229-270 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11186-007-9058-5 Jones, R., Pykett, J., & Whitehead, M (2011a) Governing temptation: Changing behaviour in an age of libertarian paternalism Progress in human geography, 35(4), 483-501 https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132510385741 Jones, R., Pykett, J., & Whitehead, M (2011b) The geographies of soft paternalism in the UK: the rise of the avuncular state and changing behaviour after neoliberalism Geography Compass, 5(1), 50-62 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-8198.2010.00403.x Jones, R., Pykett, J., & Whitehead, M (2013) Changing behaviours: on the rise of the psychological state Edward Elgar Publishing: Cheltenham Kaján, E., & Saarinen, J (2013) Tourism, climate change and adaptation: a review Current Issues in Tourism, 16(2), 167-195 https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2013.774323 Katz, P., Scully, V., & Bressi, T W (1994) The new urbanism: Toward an architecture of community New York: McGraw-Hill Khansari, N., Mostashari, A., & Mansouri, M (2014) Impacting sustainable behavior and planning in smart city International journal of sustainable land Use and Urban planning, 1(2), pp 46-61 Khattak, A J., & Rodriguez, D (2005) Travel behavior in neo-traditional neighborhood developments: A case study in USA Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 39(6), 481–500 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2005.02.009 Kitchin, R (2015) Making sense of smart cities: addressing present shortcomings Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, 8(1), 131-136 https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsu027 Kitchin, R (2016) The ethics of smart cities and urban science Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society A, 374(2083), 20160115 https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016.0115 Krizek, K K (2003) Operationalizing Neighborhood Accessibility for Land Use–Travel Behavior Research andRegional Modeling Journal of Planning Education and Research, 22, 270-287 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X02250315 Kroesen, M (2013) Exploring people's viewpoints on air travel and climate change: understanding inconsistencies Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 21(2), 271-290 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2012.692686 Kunstler, J H (1994) Geography Of Nowhere: The Rise And Decline of America's Man-Made Landscape Simon and Schuster: New York Kunstler, J H (1998) Home from nowhere: Remaking our everyday world for the 21st century Simon and Schuster: New York Lachman, R., Lachman, J L., & Butterfield, E C (2015) Cognitive psychology and information processing: An introduction New York: Psychology Press Langdon, P (1997) A better place to live: reshaping the American suburb University of Massachusetts Press: Boston, MA Lanzini, P., & Khan, S A (2017) Shedding light on the psychological and behavioral determinants of travel mode choice: A meta-analysis Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 48, 13-27 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2017.04.020 Larco, N., Steiner, B., Stockard, J., & West, A (2012) Pedestrian-Friendly Environments and Active Travel for Residents of Multifamily Housing: The Role of Preferences and Perceptions Environment and Behavior, 44(3), 303–333 https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916511402061 Larsen, J., & El-Geneidy, A (2011) A travel behavior analysis of urban cycling facilities in Montréal, Canada Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 16(2), 172-177 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2010.07.011 Lee, A.C.K., & Maheswaran, R (2011) The health benefits of urban green spaces: a review of the evidence Journal of Public Health, 33(2), 212–222 https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdq068 Lewicka, M (2011) Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years? Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31(3), 207-230 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2010.10.001 Lin, T., & Wang, D (2015).Tradeoffs between in- and out-of-residential neighborhood locations for discretionary activities and time use: social contexts matter? Journal of Transport Geography, 47, 119-127 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.03.001 Line, T., Chatterjee, K., & Lyons, G (2010) The travel behaviour intentions of young people in the context of climate change Journal of Transport Geography, 18(2), 238-246 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.05.001 Line, T., Chatterjee, T., & Lyons, G (2012) Applying behavioural theories to studying the influence of climate change on young people’s future travel intentions Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 17(3), 270-276 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2011.12.004 Loco2 (2017, December 17) Loco2 rail booking website Retrieved from: https://loco2.com/ Lumsdon, L.M., & McGrath, P (2011) Developing a conceptual framework for slow travel: a grounded theory approach Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(3), 265-279 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2010.519438 Lupton, D (2013) Risk: key ideas Routledge: Abingdon Second edition Mackett, R (2014) Has the policy of concessionary bus travel for older people in Britain been successful? Case Studies on Transport Policy, 2(2), 81–88 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cstp.2014.05.001 Mackett, R (2017) Older People’s Travel and its Relationship to their Health and Wellbeing In Charles Musselwhite (ed.) Transport, Travel and Later Life (pp 2–15) Emerald Publishing Limited https://doi.org/doi:10.1108/S2044-994120170000010001 Marsden, G., Mullen, C., Bache, I., Bartle, I., & Flinders, M (2014) Carbon reduction and travel behaviour: Discourses, disputes and contradictions in governance Transport Policy, 35, 71-78 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.05.012 Marsden, G., & Rye, T (2010) The governance of transport and climate change Journal of Transport Geography, 18(6), 669-678 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2009.09.014 McKercher, B., Prideaux, B., Cheung, C., & Law, R (2010) Achieving voluntary reductions in the carbon footprint of tourism and climate change Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(3), 297-317 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669580903395022 Merom, D., van der Ploeg, H P., Corpuz, G., & Bauman, A E (2018) Public Health Perspectives on Household Travel Surveys American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 39(2), 113–121 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2010.04.007 Meyer, M D (1999) Demand management as an element of transportation policy: using carrots and sticks to influence travel behavior Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 33 (7–8), 575599 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(99)00008-7 Musselwhite, C., Holland, C., & Walker, I (2015) The role of transport and mobility in the health of older people Journal of Transport & Health, 2(1), 1–4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2015.02.001 Nash, N., Whitmarsh, L., Capstick, S., Hargreaves, T., Poortinga, W., Thomas, G., & Xenias, D (2017) Climate‐relevant behavioral spillover and the potential contribution of social practice theory Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, (6), 1-20 Neisser, U (2014) Cognitive psychology: Classic edition New York: Psychology Press O'Neill, J (2008) Happiness and the good life Environmental Values, 17, 125-144 doi: https://doi.org/10.3197/096327108X303819 O’Regan (2012) Alternative mobility cultures and the resurgence of hitch-hiking In Fullagar, S., Markwell, K and Wilson, E (Eds.) Slow Tourism: experiences and mobilities (pp 128-142) Channel View: Bristol Ogilvie, D., Mitchell, R., Mutrie, N., Petticrew, M., & Platt, S (2010) Shoe leather epidemiology: active travel and transport infrastructure in the urban landscape International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 7(43) https://doi.org/10.1186/1479-5868-7-43 Owens, S (1995) From ‘predict and provide’ to ‘predict and prevent’?: Pricing and planning in transport policy Transport Policy, 2(1), 43-49 https://doi.org/10.1016/0967-070X(95)93245-T Owens, S (2000) ‘Engaging the public’: information and deliberation in environmental policy Environment and planning A, 32(7), 1141-1148 https://doi.org/10.1068/a3330 Owens, S (2015) Knowledge, Policy, and Expertise: The UK Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution 1970-2011 Oxford University Press: Oxford Pabayo, R., Gauvin, L., Barnett, T A., Nikiéma, B., & Séguin, L (2010) Sustained Active Transportation is associated with a favorable body mass index trajectory across the early school years: Findings from the Quebec Longitudinal Study of Child Development birth cohort Preventive Medicine, 50, 59–64 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2009.08.014 Paschalidis, E., Basbas, S., Politis, I., Prodromou, M (2016) “Put the blame on…others!”: The battle of cyclists against pedestrians and car drivers at the urban environment A cyclists’ perception study Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 41(Part B), 243-260 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2015.07.021 Peattie, K., & Peattie, S (2009) Social marketing: A pathway to consumption reduction? Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 260-268 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2008.01.033 Preston, J (2009) The Case for High Speed Rail: A review of recent evidence RAC Foundation, London Report 09/128 https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/high%20speed %20rail%20-%20preston%20-%20301009%20-%20report.pdf Prillwitz, J., & Barr, S (2011) Moving towards sustainability? Mobility styles, attitudes and individual travel behaviour Journal of Transport Geography, 19(6), 1590-1600 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.06.011 Prillwitz, J., & Lanzendorf, M., (2006) The importance of life course events for daily travel behaviour – a panel analysis 11th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research Kyoto, 16–20 Pyke, S., Hartwell, H., Blake, A., & Hemingway, A (2016) Exploring well-being as a tourism product resource Tourism Management, 55, 94–105 https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.02.004 Pykett, J., Jones, R., & Whitehead, M (Eds.) (2016) Psychological Governance and Public Policy: Governing the Mind, Brain and Behaviour Taylor & Francis: Abingdon Rajan, S C (2006) Automobility and the liberal disposition In S Bohm, C Jones, C Land and M Paterson (Eds.) Against Automobility (pp.113-129) Oxford: Blackwell Rissel, C E (2009) Active travel: a climate change mitigation strategy with co-benefits for health New South Wales Public Health Bulletin, 20(2), 10–13 https://doi.org/10.1071/NB08043 Rodrigue, J P., Comtois, C., & Slack, B (2016) The geography of transport systems Taylor & Francis: Abingdon Rose, N., & Miller, P (1992) Political power beyond the state: Problematics of government British journal of sociology, 173-205 https://doi.org/10.2307/591464 Sadik-Khan, J., & Solomonov, S (2016) Street Fight Viking: New York Sallis, J F., Frank, L D., Saelens, B E., & Kraft, M K (2004) Active transportation and physical activity: opportunities for collaboration on transportation and public health research Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 38(4), 249–268 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2003.11.003 Schiller, P L., & Kenworthy, J R (2017) An introduction to sustainable transportation: Policy, planning and implementation Abingdon: Routledge Schoenau, M., & Müller, M (2017) What affects our urban travel behavior? A GPS-based evaluation of internal and external determinants of sustainable mobility in Stuttgart (Germany) Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 48, 61-73 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2017.05.004 Schoner, J E., Cao, J., & Levinson, D M (2015) Catalysts and magnets: Built environment and bicycle commuting Journal of Transport Geography, 47,100-108 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.07.007 Schwanen, T., Banister, D., & Anable, J (2011) Scientific research about climate change mitigation in transport: A critical review Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 45(10), 993-1006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2011.09.005 Schwanen, T., Banister, D., & Anable, J (2012) Rethinking habits and their role in behaviour change: the case of low-carbon mobility Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 522-532 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.06.003 Schwartz, S H (1977) Normative influences on altruism Advances in experimental social psychology, 10, 221-279 Scott, D (2011) Why sustainable tourism must address climate change Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 19(1), 17-34 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2010.539694 Scott, D., Peeters, P., & Gössling, S (2010) Can tourism deliver its “aspirational” greenhouse gas emission reduction targets? Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 18(3), 393-408 https://doi.org/10.1080/09669581003653542 Scott, D., Gössling, S., & Hall, C M (2012) International tourism and climate change WIREs Climate Change, 3, 213–232 https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.165 Scottish Executive Social Research (2005) Well-being and quality of life: Measuring the benefits of culture and sport: A literature review and thinkpiece Retrieved from http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2006/01/13110743/0 Shaw, G., Barr, & Wooler, J (2014) The application of social marketing to tourism In S McCabe (Ed.) The Routledge Handbook of Tourism Marketing Routledge: Abingdon Sheller, M., & Urry, J (2006) The new mobilities paradigm Environment and planning A, 38(2), 207226 https://doi.org/10.1068/a37268 Shen, Y., Chai, Y., & Kwan, M-P (2015) Space–time fixity and flexibility of daily activities and the built environment: A case study of different types of communities in Beijing suburbs Journal of Transport Geography, 47, 90-99 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.06.014 Shove, E (2003) Converging conventions of comfort, cleanliness and convenience Journal of Consumer policy, 26(4), 395-418 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1026362829781 Shove, E (2010) Beyond the ABC: climate change policy and theories of social change Environment and planning A, 42(6), 1273-1285 https://doi.org/10.1068/a42282 Shove, E (2010) Social Theory and Climate Change Theory, Culture & Society, 27(2–3), 277–288 https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276410361498 Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M (2012) The dynamics of social practice: Everyday life and how it changes Sage: London Slocum, R (2004) Consumer citizens and the cities for climate protection campaign Environment and planning A, 36(5), 763-782 https://doi.org/10.1068/a36139 Slovic, O (2010) The feeling of risk: New perspectives on risk perception Routledge: Abingdon Slovic, P (2000) The Perception of Risk Earthscan: London Smith M., & Kelly, C (2006) Wellness Tourism, Tourism Recreation Research, 31(1), 1-4 https://doi.org/10.1080/02508281.2006.11081241 Snow Carbon (2017, December 17) Ski Holidays by Train Retrieved from: https://www.snowcarbon.co.uk/ Soper K (2008) Alternative hedonism, cultural theory and the role of aesthetic revisioning Cultural Studies, 22(5), 567-587 https://doi.org/10.1080/09502380802245829 Spaargaren, G., & Mol, A P (2008) Greening global consumption: Redefining politics and authority Global Environmental Change, 18(3), 350-359 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2008.04.010 Spence, A., & Pidgeon, N (2009) Psychology, Climate Change & Sustainable Bahaviour, Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development, 51(6), 8-18 https://doi.org/10.1080/00139150903337217 Spence, A., Poortinga, W and Pidgeon, N (2012) The Psychological Distance of Climate Change Risk Analysis, 32, 957–972 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6924.2011.01695.x Southworth, M (2005) Designing the Walkable City Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 131(4), 246–257 https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9488(2005)131:4(246) Srinivasan, S., & Ferreira, J (2002) Travel behavior at the household level: understanding linkages with residential choice Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 7(3), 225-242 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-9209(01)00021-9 Stankovic, J A (2014) Research directions for the internet of things IEEE Internet of Things Journal, 1(1), 3-9 https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2014.2312291 Stern, P C (2011) Contributions of Psychology to Limiting Climate Change American Psychologist, 66(4), 303–314 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023235 Stoll-Kleemann, S., O’Riordan, T., & Jaeger, C C (2001) The psychology of denial concerning climate mitigation measures: evidence from Swiss focus groups Global Environmental Change, 11(2), 107117 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0959-3780(00)00061-3 Sturm, R., & Cohen, D (2014) Proximity to Urban Parks and Mental Health The Journal of Mental Health Policy and Economics, 17(1), 19–24 Swim, J K., Clayton, S., & Howard, G S (2011) Human behavioral contributions to climate change: Psychological and contextual drivers American Psychologist, 66(4), 251-264 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023472 Swim, J K., Stern, P C., Doherty, T., Clayton, S., Reser, J P., Weber, E U., Gifford, R., & Howard, G S (2011) Psychology's contributions to understanding and addressing global climate change mitigation and adaptation American Psychologist, 66, 241-250 https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023220 Thaler, R H., & Sunstein, C R (2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness Yale University Press: New Haven: CT Thøgersen, J., & Crompton, T (2009) Simple and painless? The limitations of spillover in environmental campaigning Journal of Consumer Policy, 32(2), 141-163 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-009-9101-1 Thornton, A., Evans, L., Bunt, K., Simon, A., King, S., & Webster, T (2011) Climate change and transport choices: Segmentation model-a framework for reducing CO2 emissions from personal travel Department for Transport, London Timmermans, H J P., & Junyi Zhang, J (2009) Modeling household activity travel behavior: Examples of state of the art modeling approaches and research agenda Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 43(2), 187-190 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2008.06.004 Urry, J (2002) The tourist gaze Sage: London Urry, J (2007) Mobilities Polity: Cambridge Urry, J (2011a) Does mobility have a future? Mobilities: New perspectives on transport and society, 3-20 Routledge: London Urry, J (2011b) Climate and Society Polity: Cambridge van den Berg, A E., Maas, J., Verheij, R.A., & Groenewegen, P.P (2010) Green space as a buffer between stressful life events and health Social Science & Medicine, 70(8), 1203-1210 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.002 Verplanken, B., & Aarts, H (1999) Habit, attitude, and planned behaviour: is habit an empty construct or an interesting case of goal-directed automaticity? European review of social psychology, 10(1), 101-134 https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779943000035 Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., & Van Knippenberg, A (1997) Habit, information acquisition, and the process of making travel mode choices European journal of social psychology, 27(5), 539-560 Verbeek, D., & Mommaas, H (2008) Transitions to Sustainable Tourism Mobility: The Social Practices Approach Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 16(6), 629-644 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09669580802159669 Vincent-Geslin, S., & Ravalet, E (2016) Determinants of extreme commuting Evidence from Brussels, Geneva and Lyon Journal of Transport Geography, 54, 240-247 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.06.013 Wang, C-H., Akar, G., & Guldmann, J-M (2015) Do your neighbors affect your bicycling choice? A spatial probit model for bicycling to The Ohio State University Journal of Transport Geography, 42,122-130 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.12.003 Wang, D (2015) Place, context and activity–travel behavior: Introduction to the special section on geographies of activity–travel behavior Journal of Transport Geography, 47, 84-89 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.08.019 Wang, D., & Law, F.Y.T (2007) Impacts of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) on time use and travel behavior: a structural equations analysis Transportation 34(4), 513 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-007-9113-0 Wang, R (2015) The stops made by commuters: evidence from the 2009 US National Household Travel Survey Journal of Transport Geography, 47, 109-118 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2014.11.005 Weber, E U., & Stern, P C (2011) Public understanding of climate change in the United States American Psychologist, 66(4), 315-328 http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023253 Weber, J (2017) Continuity and change in American urban freeway networks, Journal of Transport Geography, 58, 31-39 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.11.007 Wells, P., & Xenias, D (2015) From ‘freedom of the open road’to ‘cocooning’: Understanding resistance to change in personal private automobility Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 106-119 White, M., Pahl, S., Wheeler, B., Fleming, L., & Depledge, M (2016) The ‘Blue Gym’: What can blue space for you and what can you for blue space? Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom, 96(1), 5-12 https://doi.org/10.1017/S0025315415002209 Whitehead, M., Jones, R., & Pykett, J (2011) Governing irrationality, or a more than rational government? Reflections on the rescientisation of decision making in British public policy Environment and Planning A, 43(12), 2819-2837 https://doi.org/10.1068/a43575 Whitmarsh, L (2009) Behavioural responses to climate change: Asymmetry of intentions and impacts Journal of Environmental Psychology, 29(1), 13-23 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2008.05.003 Whitmarsh, L., Seyfang, G., & O’Neill, S (2011) Public engagement with carbon and climate change: To what extent is the public ‘carbon capable’? Global Environmental Change, 21(1), 56-65 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.07.011 Wolch, J.R., Byrne, J., Newell, J.P (2014) Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’ Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, 234244 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.01.017 ... planning A, 42( 6), 127 3- 128 5 https://doi.org/10.1068/a 422 82 Shove, E (20 10) Social Theory and Climate Change Theory, Culture & Society, 27 (2? ??3), 27 7? ?28 8 https://doi.org/10.1177/ 026 327 6410361498... https://www.racfoundation.org/assets/rac_foundation/content/downloadables/high %20 speed %20 rail %20 - %20 preston %20 - %20 301009 %20 - %20 report.pdf Prillwitz, J., & Barr, S (20 11) Moving towards sustainability? Mobility styles,... 31 (2) , 7 12- 720 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog .20 10. 12. 003 Barr, S., & Prillwitz, J (20 12) Green travellers? Exploring the spatial context of sustainable mobility styles Applied geography, 32( 2),