Conceptualizing the Role of Individual Agency in Mobility Transitions: Avenues for the Integration of Sociological and Psychological Perspectives

Abstract

With the release of the latest IPCC report, the urgency to steer the transport sector toward ecological sustainability has been recognized more and more broadly. To better understand, the prerequisites for a transition to sustainable mobility, we argue that interdisciplinary mobility research needs to revisit the interaction between social structures and individual agency by focusing on social norms. While critical sociological approaches stress the structural barriers to sustainable mobility, political discourse over sustainable mobility is still largely dominated by overly individualistic approaches, which focus on individual behavior change neglecting its social embeddedness. With discursive struggles over sustainable mobility intensifying, it becomes more urgent to better understand how structural contexts condition individual travel behavior, while at the same time showing how individuals engage in processes of social change. Against this backdrop, the article seeks to deepen the cooperation between sociological and psychological research in mobility transitions research. Building on a broad body of literature, we revisit recent theoretical approaches, which conceptualize the role of individual agency in sustainability transitions. On this basis, we highlight the role of social norms in mobility transitions as a key concept bridging individual behavior and social structures. Using Strong Structuration Theory as an integrative framework, we focus on the role of individual agency in processes of re-negotiation of social norms. Our main hypothesis is that individuals can contribute to mobility transitions by influencing and re-negotiating social norms, especially in the context of windows of opportunity. We analyze how focusing on the dynamic and conflicted nature of social norms can help to illustrate leverage points for a mobility transition as well as inspire future empirical research in the field. This includes that individuals can influence social norms through changing their own travel behavior as well as through engaging in discourse on transport policies.

Barriers and enablers of 1.5° lifestyles: Shallow and deep structural factors shaping the potential for sustainable consumption

“…A substantial share of the literature emphasizes that enacting transformative change in the context of sustainable consumption and lifestyles will require an openness to actively regulate the demand for products and services (Henders et al, 2018;Jackson and Smith, 2018;Mathy et al, 2018;Ruhrort and Allert, 2021;Stankuniene, 2021). In the past, such "regulation" was confined to specific, rather passive (i.e., shallow) policies and approaches, typically focused on informing consumers, raising awareness among them, and encouraging them to take individual responsibility (Fuchs and Lorek, 2005).…”

“…Recognizing the shortcomings of individualist approaches, many contributions in the literature emphasize the importance of collective mitigation schemes and associated changes in social practices. Energy communities contribute to a decentralized energy system, relevant public procurement and city-level schemes, more public spaces, and a better mobility infrastructure (Larsen et al, 2011;Mosannenzadeh et al, 2017;Schaffartzik and Fischer-Kowalski, 2018;Wamsler and Raggers, 2018;Gossen et al, 2019;Sareen and Grandin, 2020;Cunha et al, 2021;Ruhrort and Allert, 2021). The broad failure of weak sustainable consumption governance asserted in the literature suggests that active political demand-side regulation will necessitate addressing broader political and social norms as well as material factors at the deeper level.…”

“…Unsustainable levels of consumer demand create an additional deep material barrier to transformation (Spangenberg, 2013;Ertekin and Atik, 2015;Gossen et al, 2019;Jensen and Friis, 2019;De Rosa et al, 2021;Ruhrort and Allert, 2021). Research links this barrier to the capitalist logics mentioned above, insofar that overconsumption is production-driven, with products and services, and specifically advertising artificially creating perceived wants and needs (Gossen et al, 2019).…”

“…This unsustainable consumer culture is also related to capitalist economic logics, however. Individuals are encouraged to pursue "self-optimization" through high-level consumption and via societal factors enhancing time pressures and status competition, including long work-hours (Ruhrort and Allert, 2021;Keil and Kreinin, 2022).…”

“…In this context, scholars argue that stronger participation in climate governance through a wide range of actors, including grassroots initiatives, unions, and energy communities and citizens more broadly can facilitate necessary social innovation (Manzini, 2013;Mont et al, 2014;Prinz and Pegels, 2018;Cunha et al, 2021). Such involvement may be provided for stronger individual (Ruhrort and Allert, 2021) or public participation (Sareen and Grandin, 2020), e.g., in the context of urban governance and energy cities (Mosannenzadeh et al, 2017). Importantly, however, such approaches will only make a difference if they really focus on overcoming power asymmetries (Brand and Wissen, 2021), implement a real shift in control, including the empowerment to shift lifestyles (Jackson and Smith, 2018), rather than shallow performances of participatory sustainability governance.…”