In my most recent blogpost, I provided an explanation for the Staging Mobilities framework established by our research supervisor here in Aalborg. Today, I am presenting the initial draft of the framework we developed for our present project, based on our supervisor's framework.
The purpose of creating the Linear Mobilities framework is to target the Staging Mobilities model directly at the study of Route 100 and the bicycle commuter network in Aalborg. In this blogpost I will introduce the four primary components of the model and will next provide an explanation for how this model refers back to the concept of Staging Mobilities.
Components of Linear Mobilities Model
The four components of the Linear Mobilities Model described below are:A. People
B. Places
C. Plans
D. Practices
 |
| (02/10/2014 | Linear Mobilities Model | Credit: Cat Silva) |
Source of Analytical Information
To inform and explore these each component, the results of a survey the research team developed and deployed for Route 100 users are used. Although the survey was written prior to the creation of the Linear Mobilities framework, the related Staging Mobilities model was very much in mind. Nearly every survey question is directly applicable and useful for an analysis of one or more components of the new model. Moreover, individual face-to-face interviews with survey respondents were conducted with volunteers.Theoretical Connections
Each component of the Linear Mobilities model is directly linked to the Staging Mobilities research framework established by Ole B. Jensen. For more information on the Staging Mobilities model, refer to my most recent blogpost or look up the book under the same name published by Routledge.'PEOPLE'
The first component of the Linear Mobilities model is ‘people’, which specifically looks at the bicycle riders using of Route 100. |
| (02/10/2014 | Linear Mobilities Model: People | Credit: Cat Silva) |
The general profile of the Route 100 users is defined by the categories of age, gender, and educational background. User affiliation primarily considers whether users are students or employees of Aalborg University, or if they are not associated with this institution. The reason this distinction is made is due to the purpose and alignment of the route. As the route explicitly provides a connection to the main campus of the university, the research is specifically interested in understanding whether those associated with the university comprise the largest user group. The type of user is delineated along the lines of how often an individual rides the route, and how much of the route they use. This area differentiates among those who are current, regular riders of the entire route and current, regular riders who only use a portion of the route. Additionally, this area identifies former regular riders as well as riders who do not use the route at present, but do plan to become regular users in the future. And finally, familiarity is examined under the presumption that how aquatinted with the route had an impact on how the use and experience their bicycle ride. Familiarity is related to the type of user, and is further explored by contemplating how long users have been residents of Aalborg Municipality and how long they have been using Route 100.
As is stated above, user perception defined as a function of all four attributes of ‘people’. This assumption is reflective of the fact that the each of the parts individually influences how an individual observes and comprehends the world around them. In addition to considering how each of these areas effect perception, route enjoyment as well as rider motivations and deterrents are also of importance.
'PLACES'
The second component of the Linear Mobilities model is ‘places’, which is targeted at explaining the environment as well as the implementation of planning initiatives. |
| (02/10/2014 | Linear Mobilities Model: Places | Credit: Cat Silva) |
Details of Component
For this portion of the model, the research team inspects the physical roadway and how it is ‘staged from above’ by looking at these five areas: 1) Street Typologies; 2) Landmarks; 3) Bicycle Infrastructure and Facilities; 4) Roadway Quality; and 5) Cultural Frames.Street typologies are generalized and grouped according to whether the roadway runs through a residential area, a commercial district, or exist as a thoroughfare connecting different parts of the city. Information on the official land uses and street typologies might also be gathered from the municipality. For the purpose of this project, however the roadways are instead described based on observations made by the research team.As this project is targeted at an investigation of a bicycle route, special consideration is given to whether and how bicyclists are accommodated along the planned route. The physical elements of Route 100 are categorized as infrastructure or facilities. What is provided is a function of what is planned for, thus the ‘plans’ component is also considered an important factor in implementing portions of the physical environment.
Along Route 100, there are myriad structures, landscapes that might act as landmarks for riders. This includes religious, commercial, and intuitional buildings. Parks and pieces of the infrastructure, such as the three tunnels along the route, may also serve as landmarks. Such landmarks are considered to play a role in how bicyclists experience their ride. Those structures and landscapes near to the route can help orientate individuals or might evoke feelings of pleasure or memories.
As this project is targeted at an investigation of a bicycle route, special consideration is given to how, and whether, bicyclists are accommodated along the planned route. The physical elements of Route 100 are categorized as infrastructure or facilities. Quality is assumed to be a determinant in how safe, secure, comfortable, and cared for users feel. For the purposes of this model, the term quality is mean to simultaneously describe the traits as well as the general upkeep of the route’s infrastructure and facilities. To that end, the quality of the roadway is assessed both with a consideration for the condition of the physical topography, the surface, and the degree to which the bicycle route is maintained by the municipality.
With theoretical research on the in mind, personal perceptions are embedded in how ‘people’ experience their environment. Cultural frames influence how individuals understand and use a given physical setting, as features are more or less legibility due to familiarity and background. Bicyclists new to the area or for whom the culture of bicycling in Denmark is foreign may not be able to read the route as easily as those who have grown up riding their bicycle in the northern Jutland.
'PLANS'
The third component of the Linear Mobilities model considers the ‘plans’ that are responsible for envisioning the future for Aalborg Municipality and the bicycle commuter network. |
| (02/10/2014 | Linear Mobilities Model: Plans | Credit: Cat Silva) |
Details of Component
The ‘plan’ component of the Linear Mobilities model delves into the planning, policy, and funding documents behind the implementation of the route. Broken up according to scale of influence, the three primary areas of ‘staging from above’ are: 1) Aalborg Municipality; 2) Danish Roads Directorate; and 3) CIVITAS Initiative.As the local planning authority, Aalborg Municipality is responsible for creating the planning documents meant to guide the development and growth of the area. One document describes the goals for the municipal strategy within the context of northern Denmark. Others focus more directly at the physical setting or create a strategy for the development of the municipality. At the smallest-scale relevant to this research project is the municipal Bicycle Action Plan (Cykelhandlingsplan in Danish), which establishes specific metrics for achieving specific target goals related to bicycling. All of these documents are intentionally interlinking, with the smaller-scale plans referring approaches and intentions established in larger-scale plans. With the exception of the largest-scale vision, relevant planning documents share the same 2025 planning horizon.
With respect to transportation projects, the implementation of planning projects within these planning documents is answerable to the Danish Roads Directorate (Dansk Vejdirektoratet in Danish), which is responsible for managing all work done on the state-run roadways in Denmark. All projects, such as Route 100, are subjected to the scrutiny of the Directorate and must follow the Road Rules (Vejreglerne in Danish). One aspect of the Route 100 project was not addressed under the Road Rules, which required that a special permit be applied for through the Directorate before implementation was possible at a legal and administrative level. Moreover, the Directorate issues funds set aside specifically for bicycle projects and (Cykelpuljen in Danish). Aalborg Municipality applied for and received funding through this source. Through both of these mechanisms, the national government had a hand in determining how Aalborg Municipality developed ‘places’ along the route.
This bicycle route project was planned by Aalborg Municipality in concert with the CIVITAS Initiative, which is an organization co-financed by the European Union that focuses on developing innovative sustainable transportation techniques for urban areas. Collaboratively, these two parties established the goals and developed the implementation initiatives for the Route 100 project. The CIVITAS Initiative provided funding for the project and required the Municipality to evaluate the success of the project after implementation. Results of this evaluation are intended to inform future CIVITAS Initiative projects, but they also served to meet the evaluation requirements imposed on the project by the Cyklepujlen funds given by the Danish Roads Directorate.
'PRACTICES'
The fourth and final component to the Linear Mobilities model is ‘practices’, which encompasses the activities and routines that ‘people’ carry out in ‘places’ along Route 100. |
| (02/10/2014 | Linear Mobilities Model: Practices | Credit: Cat Silva) |
Details of Component
This final component of the Linear Mobilities model aims to define and describe the ‘practices’ that users of Route 100 engage in. The two primary areas of interest to this component are: 1) Activity; and 2) Routine.The activities that bicyclists conduct while using Route 100 are looked divided between the necessary and optional. (Gehl 1982:9-11) Necessary activities are categorized as commuting and shopping. As the primary purpose for implementing the route was to encourage those affiliated to Aalborg University to commute to school or work, it is expected that commuting to and from the campus is the dominate necessary activity. The route alignment itself supports this assumption, as accessing the university from the city centre is the most obvious use. That said, the route is permeable from end to end and there are no barriers to bicyclists using the route as a connection point on the way to other destinations. Accounting for this fact, the existence of possible optional activates is recognized. Such activities are categorized as being recreational, for exercise, or for the purpose of visiting family or friends.
In addition to categorizing the activities ‘people’ use Route 100 for, a deeper assessment of user ‘practice’ is done by exploring the routine use of the route. Rider routine is gaged considering to how frequently they use the route and how these patterns change according to the time of day and the season of the year. The length of the trip along the route and the rider’s destination is also analyzed. Route 100 rider routines are expected to related back to the type of ‘people’ using the route. Individuals who are affiliated with the university are expected to use the route more regularly than non-affiliates. Furthermore, the level of familiarly that ‘people’ have with the ‘places’ along the route is assumed to be strongly related to how frequently the route is used.
No comments:
Post a Comment