How May Public Transport Influence the Practice of Everyday Life among Younger and Older People and How May Their Practices Influence Public Transport?

Abstract

This paper examines public transport use through the lens of practice to understand the perspectives of two categories of public transport users: Younger and older people. In taking this approach, we assume that the forms of mobility in a society are dependent on citizens’ everyday practices and on the structures of the cities, landscapes, etc. Transport needs and accessibility may vary depending on contexts (i.e., where and how we live) and on the various resources of groups of citizens. Results indicated that younger people are repeatedly referred to public transport to meet their mobility needs, while older people are more often car-dependent. Local variations, among both younger and older people, indicate higher confidence in public transport in big and medium-sized cities and a greater desire for car ownership in small cities. For the transition to sustainable mobility, e.g., public transport, transport associations and local governments should be responsive to the practice of everyday life among citizens: e.g., younger people’s leisure activities in afternoons and weekends, and older people’s wish for accessible transport service outside the dominant flow of passengers and their daily commuting practice. The data come from Sweden, specifically from focus groups with teenagers aged 14–16 years and retired people aged 63–97 years.

The Role of Mobility Digital Ecosystems for Age-Friendly Urban Public Transport: A Narrative Literature Review

“…Insights from communications [ 26 , 27 , 28 ] and transport technology use [ 29 , 30 ] and transport mobility practices [ 31 , 32 ] will be used in Section 3.1 as a starting point to explore the materialities and digital elements of communications, mobility and transport. Reports from the World Health Organization and publications such as those by Alley, Liebig, Pynoos and Banerjee [ 33 ], Buffel, Handler and Phillipson [ 34 ] and Steels [ 35 ] will be used to get an insight into transport and mobility in age-friendly cities ( Section 3.2 ).…”

“…This section weaves together a selected range of perspectives from communications studies, transport studies and mobility studies to introduce the embeddedness of both communication technology use [ 26 , 27 ] and transport mobility practices [ 31 , 32 ] into their material conditions.…”

“…Historically, electronic communication technologies and motorised transport have been commonly contextualised in terms of one another [ 29 ]. During the interwar period of the 20th century, both new media technologies (radio and moving image) and transportation (the automobile, air travel) were “[c]onsistently paired” in public discourse as the prime agents behind the proliferation of modes of connection and contact between people and places [ 30 , 31 ]. Originating in the early years of communications studies, this perspective on communication as “organized movement and action” [ 30 ] has been revisited in the study of more recent developments surrounding mobility and contact as media technology and transportation “remain inextricably linked in ways that are both conceptual and material” [ 29 ].…”

“…Attuned to human rights and freedoms perspectives [ 31 ], access to ICT connectivity, destinations, and modes of transport foregrounds questions of resource (re)distribution, equity and justice, as captured in evolving discussions of transport and mobility justice [ 39 , 87 , 88 ]. Mobility is “a prerequisite for citizens to have independence and participate in activities, access services, and form social relations” [ 31 ].…”

“…Attuned to human rights and freedoms perspectives [ 31 ], access to ICT connectivity, destinations, and modes of transport foregrounds questions of resource (re)distribution, equity and justice, as captured in evolving discussions of transport and mobility justice [ 39 , 87 , 88 ]. Mobility is “a prerequisite for citizens to have independence and participate in activities, access services, and form social relations” [ 31 ]. Accordingly, differential access to spaces, places, services and social goods through transport systems are “not just the result” of inequality but are “also productive of [...] hierarchical systems of differentiation, through various kinds of enablement and disablement” [ 39 ].…”