Spatial contexts and firm strategies: applying the multilevel perspective to sustainable urban mobility transitions in Brazil

Abstract The Multilevel Perspective on Sustainable Transitions (MLP) has been widely used to explain different patterns of technological, societal, cultural and normative transitions in an integrated and systemic way. This framework has been used to analyze individual transportation based on internal combustion engine automobiles and to develop niches that can challenge the existing dominant regimes in favor of more sustainable urban mobility systems. In a recent and relevant work, Markard et al. (2012) thoroughly discussed MLP, highlighting gaps and research opportunities. One such gap is that much of the research developed using this framework was conducted primarily using European scenarios, omitting various aspects of regional or country diversity, or the role of firm strategies failed to be considered. Therefore, we propose to analyze and compare Brazilian and German case studies regarding sustainable urban mobility transitions. To accomplish this goal, we analyze the diffusion level and different characteristics that explain the current development level of four niches: electro mobility, car sharing schemes, intermodal transportation, and innovation in public transportation. Using the multiple case study method, we compare the sustainable mobility initiatives and innovations undertaken by two German automotive companies in Brazil and in Germany. The results of the research conducted with both companies show that mobility initiatives in Brazil remain very limited. Manufacturers remain much more concerned with selling traditional products (in a much faster growth market than in Germany) than with initiating more aggressive strategies oriented to mobility. Even in their mother countries, mobility innovations can be considered moderate. Our main conclusions are that mobility initiatives in Germany and in Brazil are very different for a number of reasons, such as different pre-existing infrastructures to support new mobility initiatives, public pressure for mobility solutions, different growth patterns concerning car sales and different institutional and legal conditions regarding public and private participation in mobility issues. Therefore, the MLP framework would generate different trajectories and outcomes; in addition, firm strategies should be considered in the framework, particularly in a sector such as the automotive industry, in which firms have considerable influence.

[1]  Oliver Schöller-Schwedes The failure of integrated transport policy in Germany: a historical perspective , 2010 .

[2]  R. Kemp Technology and the transition to environmental sustainability , 1994 .

[3]  Heiko A. von der Gracht,et al.  Heading towards a multimodal city of the future , 2014 .

[4]  Frank W. Geels,et al.  A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies , 2012 .

[5]  Graham. Parkhurst,et al.  Intermodal personal mobility: A niche caught between two regimes , 2012 .

[6]  Roberto Marx,et al.  Exploring scenarios for the possibility of developing design and production competencies of electrical vehicles in Brazil , 2013 .

[7]  Vanessa Oltra,et al.  Variety of technological trajectories in low emission vehicles (LEVs) : a patent data analysis. , 2006 .

[8]  Two ways of defining sustainable mobility: Autolib’ and BeMobility , 2014 .

[9]  Gerardo Marletto,et al.  Car and the city: Socio-technical transition pathways to 2030 , 2014 .

[10]  Renato J. Orsato,et al.  The emergence of an electric mobility trajectory , 2013 .

[11]  Lloyd Wright,et al.  Bus Rapid Transit: A Review of Recent Advances , 2011 .

[12]  Bernhard Truffer,et al.  The geography of sustainability transitions: Contours of an emerging theme , 2015 .

[13]  David Banister,et al.  The sustainable mobility paradigm , 2008 .

[14]  Alexander Peine,et al.  Comparing technological hype cycles: Towards a theory , 2013 .

[15]  Glenn Lyons,et al.  Automobility in transition?: A socio-technical analysis of sustainable transport , 2012 .

[16]  Wrong Forecasts and Unexpected Changes: the World that Changed the Machine , 2009 .

[17]  B. Truffer,et al.  Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects , 2012 .

[18]  M. Hodson,et al.  Can cities shape socio-technical transitions and how would we know if they were? , 2010 .

[19]  Giorgos Kallis,et al.  Environmental innovation and societal transitions: Introduction and overview , 2011 .

[20]  Masaru Yarime,et al.  The Electrification of Automobility. The bumpy ride of electric vehicles towards regime transition , 2012 .

[21]  F. Geels Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study , 2002 .

[22]  Lars Coenen,et al.  Towards a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions , 2012 .

[23]  J. Schot,et al.  Regime shifts to sustainability through processes of niche formation : the approach of strategic niche management , 1998 .

[24]  F. Geels,et al.  Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways , 2007 .

[25]  Paul Andre Henri Francois Nieuwenhuis,et al.  The nature and causes of inertia in the automotive industry: regime stability and non-change , 2011 .

[26]  F. Geels From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory , 2004 .

[27]  Charles Edquist,et al.  Systems of innovation perspectives and challenges , 2004 .