The impact of rivalry and excludability on Personal Social Responsibility regarding transport behaviour - a pilot study

  • Monika Paradowska Uniwersytet Opolski
Keywords: transport behaviour, personal social responsibility (PSR), rivalry, excludability, sustainable transport

Abstract

Aim: While transport systems play a crucial role in socio-economic development, its expansion has serious environmental impacts. Reducing rivalry in use by supporting public transport, cycling and walking, as well as exclusion of car users are popular instruments to support sustainable transport. While such policy (external stimuli) may lead to positive impact in the short run, a change in attitude of transport users may be necessary in order to long-term sustainable transport. This attitude change is related to Personal Social Responsibility (PSR), relying on the education of a conscious and responsible society and influencing individual transport choices of individuals. The purpose of the paper is to examine the impact of modifications of the levels of rivalry and excludability in the access to transport systems on the development of Personal Social Responsibility in terms of sustainable transport behaviour.

 

Design/ Research methods: Based on literature review, a survey was developed to provide an answer to the main research question: To what extent do changes in the urban transport system supporting sustainable transport have an impact on transport behaviour? The following elements of Personal Social Responsibility are considered: aware and voluntary transport choices, state-of-well-being resulting from choices, environmental and social impact, and being a good example to others

 

Conclusions/findings: The respondents observed numerous changes in the elements of the Wrocław transport system they use (Wrocław is a large city in the South-West of Poland), mainly related to the development of road infrastructure. The level of competition between individual transport users remained largely unchanged or slightly decreased, to the benefit of pedestrians, cyclists and public transport users. Only 26.21% of the respondents declared a change of the most frequently used means of transport, with half of them choosing to drive by car, and half - by public transport. These changes were not related to concerns about ecology, the local community or awareness of doing good for people and the environment. Therefore, it can be concluded that they resulted from external stimuli affecting private benefits not related to the development of the PSR.


Originality/value:
While international research in the field of the field of sustainable mobility focuses mostly on factors impacting sustainable transport choices and the effectivity of different instruments of sustainable transport policies affecting the factors considered most important in transport choices, this study shows that even when changes in the intensity of rivalry and excludability in transport systems for different users lead to required changes in transport behavior, this does not necessarily result in the development of PSR elements that would overall support the social transformation towards sustainable transport development.

 

JEL: Q01, R41, R48

References

Barata E., Cruz L., Ferreira J. (2011), Parking at the UC campus. Problems and solutions, “Cities”, vol. 28 no. 5, pp. 406-413.

Blum U. (1998), Positive externalities and the public provision of transportation infrastructure. An evolutionary perspective, “Journal of Transportation and Statistics”, vol. 1 no. 3, pp. 81-88.

Bond A., Steiner R.L. (2006), Sustainable campus transportation through transit partnership and transportation demand management. A case study from the University of Florida, “Berkeley Planning Journal”, vol. 19, pp. 125-142.

Borys T. (2009), Problemy zrównoważonej konsumpcji, in: Rozwój zrównoważony, teoria i praktyka, Fiedor B., Jończy R. (eds.), Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego, Wrocław.

Borys T. (2011), Wyzwania dla współczesnej ekonomii, in: Kształtowanie teorii i wdrożeniowe aspekty zrównoważonego rozwoju, Poskrobko B. (ed.), Wyższa Szkoła Ekonomiczna, Białystok 2011.

Brockman R., Fox K. (2011), Physical activity by stealth? The potential health benefits of a workplace transport plan, “Public Health”, vol. 125 no. 4, pp. 210-216.

Buchanan J. (1965), An economic theory of clubs, “Economica”, vol. 32 no. 125, pp. 1-14.

Czaja S. (2011), Paradygmat ekonomii głównego nurtu i ekonomii zrównoważonego rozwoju, in: Ekonomia zrównoważonego rozwoju w świetle kanonów nauki, PoskrobkoB. (ed.), Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Ekonomicznej, Białystok, pp. 29-48.

Davis S.L., Rives L.M., de Maya S.R. (2017), Introducing Personal Social Responsibility as a key element to upgrade CSR, “Spanish Journal of Marketing – ESIC”, vol. 21 no. 2, pp. 146-163.

dell’Olio L., Bordagaray M., Barreda R., Ibeas A. (2019), A methodology based on parking policy to promote sustainable mobility in college campuses, “Transport Policy”, vol. 80, pp. 148-156.

European Commission (2017), Sustainable Urban Mobility. European policy, practice and solutions, Luxemburg.

European Conference of Ministers of Transport (2001), Transport and Economic Development, ECMT Round Tables, OECD Publishing, http://oecdbookshop.org/browse.asp?pid=title-detail&lang=en&ds=Transport-and-Economic-Development&k=5LMQCR2K67D1 [28.01.2017].

European Union (2014), Guidelines. Developing and implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan, Brussels, http://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/guidelines-developing-and-implementing-a-sump_final_web_jan2014b.pdf [15.03.2015].

Farley J.C. (2012), The economics of sustainability, in: Sustainability. Multi-disciplinary perspectives, Cabezas H., Diwekar U. (eds.), Bentham Science Publishers, Sharjah, pp. 40-64.

Magnuszewski P. (2008), Myślenie systemowe, in: Przewodnik po zrównoważonym rozwoju, Zamościńska E., Gajewska B. (eds.), pp. 6-18, http://www.csrinfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/przewodnik_zrownowazony_rozwoj.pdf [22.03.2021].

Midor K. (2012), Ekonomia zrównoważonego rozwoju alternatywą dla współczesnej gospodarki światowej, „Wspomaganie Zarządzania Systemami Produkcyjnymi”, vol. 2 no. 2, pp. 56-68.

Ostrom E. (1990), Governing the commons. The evolution of institutions for collective action, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Ostrom E. (2010), Beyond markets and states. Polycentric governance of complex economic systems, “American Economic Review”, vol. 3 no. 100, pp. 1-33.

Paradowska M. (2014), Problems involved in the development of instruments supporting the creation of sustainable behaviour in transport, “Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Bankowej we Wrocławiu”, vol. 39 no. 1, pp. 255-275.

Paradowska M. (2017a), Wpływ rywalizacji i wykluczenia na rozwój zrównoważonej mobilności miejskiej, “Studia i Prace WNEIZ US”, vol. 2 no. 47, pp. 109-118.

Paradowska M. (2017b), Wpływ rywalizacji i wykluczenia na rozwój zrównoważonej mobilności miejskiej, „Studia i Prace WNEIZ US”, vol. 47 no. 2, pp. 109-118.

Paradowska M. (2017c), Rywalizacja i wykluczenie a postulaty transportowe – przykłady oddziaływań, „Prace Naukowe Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego we Wrocławiu”, vol. 491, pp. 308-322.

Paradowska M. (2017d), Zmiana poziomu rywalizacji i wykluczenia w dostępie do miejskich systemów transportowych jako narzędzia ich zrównoważonego rozwoju, in: Trendy i wyzwania w zarządzaniu środowiskiem, Ptak M., Lebiedź K. (eds.), Wydawnictwo Ad Rem, Jelenia Góra.

Paradowska M. (2019a), Rivalry, excludability and positive transport externalities – case study of a private university in Poland, “International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education”, vol. 20 no. 7, pp. 1290-1312.

Paradowska M. (2018), Rivalry and excludability as characteristics of tools aimed at making cycling in cities more attractive, “Ekonomia i Prawo”, vol. 17 no. 2, pp. 169-181, DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/EiP.2018.012.

Paradowska M. (2019b), The impact of rivalry and excludability on transport choices: a preliminary research, “Ekonomia i Środowisko”, vol. 69 no. 2, pp. 160-178.

Platje J. (2011), Institutional capital – creating capacity and capabilities for sustainable development, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Opolskiego, Opole.

Platje J. (2012), Current challenges in the economics of transport systems – a stakeholder and club good approach, “Logistics and Transport”, vol. 15 no. 2, pp. 37-49.

Poskrobko B. (2011), Przedmiot, paradygmat i kategorie zrównoważonego rozwoju, in: Kształtowanie teorii i wdrożeniowe aspekty zrównoważonego rozwoju, Poskrobko B. (ed.), Wydawnictwo Wyższej Szkoły Ekonomicznej, Białystok.

Poskrobko B. (2013), Paradygmat zrównoważonego rozwoju jako wiodący kanon w badaniu nowych obszarów ekonomii, „Ekonomia i Środowisko”, vol. 46 no. 3, pp. 10-24.

Romer P.M. (1990), Endogenous technological change, “Journal of Political Economy”, vol. 98 no. 5, pp. 71-102.

Samuelson P. (1954), The pure theory of public expenditure, “Review of Economics and Statistics”, vol. 36 no. 4, pp. 387-389.

Shoup, D. (2008), The politics and economics of parking in campus, in: The implementation and effectiveness of transport demand management measures. An international perspective, Ison S., Rye T. (eds.), Ashgate Publishing, Aldershot, pp. 121-149.

Stiglitz J.E. (1999), Knowledge as a global public good, in: Global public goods. International cooperation in the 21st century, Kaul I., Grunberg I., Stern M.A. (eds.), Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 308–325.

Stiglitz J.E. (2000), Economics of public sector, 3rd ed., W.W. Norton & Company, London, New York.

Toor W., Havlick S.W. (2004), Transportation and sustainable campus communities. Issues, examples, solutions, Island Press, Washington D.C.

UN-Habitat (2013), Planning and design for Sustainable Urban Mobility. Global report on human settlements 2013, Routledge, Oxon, New York.

Wyszomirski O. (ed.) (2008), Transport miejski. Ekonomika i organizacja, Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego, Gdańsk.

Published
2021-03-23