The use of practice theory in transport research

References

• Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akenji, L. (2014). Consumer scapegoatism and limits to green consumerism. Journal of Cleaner Production, 63, 13–23.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bamberg, S., & Schmidt, P. (2003). Incentives, morality, or habit? Predicting students’ car use for university routes with the models of Ajzen, Schwartz, and Triandis. Environment and Behavior, 35(2), 264–285.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, S., Gilg, A., & Shaw, G. (2011). ‘Helping people make better choices’: Exploring the behaviour change agenda for environmental sustainability. Applied Geography, 31(2), 712–720.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barr, S., & Prillwitz, J. (2014). A smarter choice? Exploring the behaviour change agenda for environmentally sustainable mobility. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 32(1), 1–19.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ben-Akiva, M., & Lerman, S. (1975). Disaggregate behavioural model of automobile ownership. Transportation Research Record, 569, 34–51.
   Google Scholar
• Berg, J., & Henriksson, M. (2020). In search of the ‘good life’: Understanding online grocery shopping and everyday mobility as social practices. Journal of Transport Geography, 83, 102633.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birtchnell, T. (2012). Elites, elements and events: Practice theory and scale. Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 497–502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonsall, P. (2009). Do we know whether personal travel planning really works? Transport Policy, 16(6), 306–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brög, W., Erl, E., Ker, I., Ryle, J., & Wall, R. (2009). Evaluation of voluntary travel behaviour change: Experiences from three continents. Transport Policy, 16(6), 281–292.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bruno, M., & Nikolaeva, A. (2020). Towards a maintenance-based approach to mode shift: Comparing two cases of Dutch cycling policy using social practice theory. Journal of Transport Geography, 86, 102772.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cao, X., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Handy, S. L. (2009). No particular place to go an empirical analysis of travel for the sake of travel. Environment and Behavior, 41(2), 233–257.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carrasco, J. A., & Farber, S. (2014). Selected papers on the study of the social context of travel behaviour. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 68, 1–2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cass, N., & Faulconbridge, J. (2016). Commuting practices: New insights into modal shift from theories of social practice. Transport Policy, 45, 1–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cass, N., & Faulconbridge, J. (2017). Satisfying everyday mobility. Mobilities, 12(1), 97–115.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domarchi, C., Tudela, A., & Gonzalez, A. (2008). Effect of attitudes, habit and affective appraisal on mode choice: An application to university workers. Transportation, 35(5), 585–599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dowling, R., & Kent, J. (2015). Practice and public–private partnerships in sustainable transport governance: The case of car sharing in Sydney, Australia. Transport Policy, 40, 58–64. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.02.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fraedrich, E. (2018). How collective frames of orientation toward automobile practices provide hints for a future with autonomous vehicles. Applied Mobilities. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2018.1501198
   Google Scholar
• Galvin, R., & Sunikka, M. (2016). Schatzkian practice theory and energy consumption research: Time for some philosophical spring cleaning? Energy Research & Social Science, 22, 63–68.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gärling, T., Eek, D., Loukopoulos, P., Fujii, S., Johansson-Stenman, O., Kitamura, R., … Vilhelmson, B. (2002). A conceptual analysis of the impact of travel demand management on private car use. Transport Policy, 9(1), 59–70.
   Google Scholar
• Geels, F. W. (2012). A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: Introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies. Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 471–482.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: outline of the theory of structuration. Oxford: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Giovoni, M., & Banister, D. (2013). Moving Towards Low Carbon Mobility. London: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greene, M., & Rau, H. (2018). Moving across the life course: A biographic approach to researching dynamics of everyday mobility practices. Journal of Consumer Culture, 18(1), 60–82.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guell, C., Panter, J., Jones, N. R., & Ogilvie, D. (2012). Towards a differentiated understanding of active travel behaviour: Using social theory to explore everyday commuting. Soc. Sci. Med, 75(1), 233–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagberg, J., & Normark, D. (2015). From basket to shopping bag: Retailers’ role in the transformation of consumer mobility in Sweden, 1941–1970. Journal of Historical Research in Marketing, 7(4), 452–475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagensby Jensen, R., Svangren, M. K., Skov, M. B., & Kjeldskov, J. (2019). Investigating EV driving as meaningful practice. In Proceedings of the 31st Australian Conference on Human-Computer-Interaction (OZCHI'19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 42–352.
   Google Scholar
• Hagerstrand, T. (1970). What about people in regional science. Regional Science Association Papers, 24(1), 7–21.
   Google Scholar
• Halkier, B. (2017). “Questioning the ‘Gold Standard’ Thinking in Qualitative Methods from a Practice Theoretical Perspective: Towards Methodological Multiplicity. In M. Jonas, B. Littig, & A. Wroblewski (Eds.), Methodological reflections on practice oriented theories (pp. 193–204). Cham: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Hampton, S. (2018). Policy implementation as practice? Using social practice theory to examine multi-level governance efforts to decarbonise transport in the United Kingdom. Energy Research and Social Science, 38, 41–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hargreaves, T. (2011). Practice-ing behaviour change: Applying social practice theory to pro-environmental behaviour change. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11(1), 79–99.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hasselqvist, H., Hesselgren, M., & Bogdan, C. (2016). Challenging the Car norm: Opportunities for ICT to support sustainable transportation practices. In Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1300–1311.
   Google Scholar
• Heisserer, B., & Rau, H. (2017). Capturing the consumption of distance? A practice-theoretical investigation of everyday travel. Journal of Consumer Culture, 17, 579–599.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesselgren, M., Sjöman, M., & Pernestål, A. (2019). Understanding user practices in mobility service systems: Results from studying large scale corporate MaaS in practice. Travel Behaviour and Society, 21, 318–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hitchings, R. (2011). Researching air-conditioning addiction and ways of puncturing practice: Professional office workers and the decision to go outside. Environment and Planning A, 43(12), 2838–2856.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hitchings, R. (2012). People can talk about their practices. Area, 44(1), 61–67.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hopkins, D. (2016). Can environmental awareness explain declining preference for car-based mobility amongst generation Y? A qualitative examination of learn to drive behaviours. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 94, 149–163.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ihlström, J., Henriksson, M., & Kircher, K. (2021). Immoral and irrational cyclists? Exploring the practice of cycling on the pavement. Mobilities, 16(3), 388–403.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson, F., Henriksson, G., & Envall, P. (2019). Moving to private-car-restricted and mobility-served neighborhoods: The unspectacular workings of a progressive mobility plan. Sustainability, 11(22), 6208.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Julsrud, T. E., & Farstad, E. (2020). Car sharing and transformations in households travel patterns: Insights from emerging proto-practices in Norway. Energy Research & Social Science, 66, 101497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller, M., Halkier, B., & Wilska, T-A. (2016). Policy and governance for sustainable consumption at the crossroads of theories and concepts. Environmental Policy and Governance, 26, 75–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent, J. L. (2014). Still feeling the car – the role of comfort in sustaining private car use. Mobilities, 10(5), 726–747.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent, J. L., & Dowling, R. (2013). Puncturing automobility? Carsharing practices. Journal of Transport Geography, 32, 86–92.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kent, J. L., & Mulley, C. (2017). Riding with dogs in cars: What can it teach us about transport practices and policy? Transportation Research Part A, 106, 278–287.
   Google Scholar
• Kent, J. L., Mulley, C., & Stevens, N. (2020). Challenging policies that prohibit public transport use: Travelling with pets as a case study. Journal of Transport Policy, 99, 86–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollmuss, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the Gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260.
   Google Scholar
• Kuutti, K., & Bannon, L. J. (2014). The turn to practice in HCI: towards a research agenda. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘14), ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 3543–3552.
   Google Scholar
• Laakso, S. (2017). Giving up cars – The impact of a mobility experiment on carbon emissions and everyday routines. Journal of Cleaner Production, 169, 135–142.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laakso, S. (2019). Experiments in everyday mobility: Social dynamics of achieving a sustainable lifestyle. Sociological Research Online, 24(2), 235–250.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larsen, J. (2017). The making of a pro-cycling city: Social practices and bicycle mobilities. Environment and Planning A, 49, 876–892. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0308518X16682732
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Law, J. (1994). Organising Modernity. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Lois, D., & Lopez-Saez, M. (2009). The relationship between instrumental, symbolic and affective factors as predictors of car use: A structural equation modeling approach. Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice, 43(9–10), 790–799.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattioli, G., & Anable, J. (2017). Gross polluters for food shopping travel: An activity-based typology. Travel Behaviour and Society, 6, 19–31.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mattioli, G., Anable, J., & Vrotsou, K. (2016). Car dependent practices: Findings from a sequence pattern mining study of UK time use data. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 89, 56–72.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McLaren, A. T. (2018). Parent–child mobility practices: Revealing ‘cracks’ in the automobility system. Mobilities, 13(6), 844–860.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meinherz, F., & Binder, C. R. (2020). The dynamics of modal shifts in (sub)urban commuting: An empirical analysis based on practice theories. Journal of Transport Geography, 86, 102763.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mokhtarian, P. L. (2005). Travel as a desired end, not just a means. Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice, 39(2–3), 93–96.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nettleton, S., & Green, J. (2014). Thinking about changing mobility practices: How a social practice approach Can help. Sociology of Health and Illness, 36(2), 239–251. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9566.12101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Neutens, T., Delafontaine, M., Scott, D. M., & De Maeyer, P. (2012). An analysis of day-to-day variations in individual space–time accessibility. Journal of Transport Geography, 23, 81–91.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ozaki, R., Shaw, I., & Dodgson, M. (2012). The coproduction of “sustainability”: Negotiated practices and the prius. Science, technology, & Human Values, 38(4), 518–541. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243912441029
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rau, H., & Sattlegger, L. (2018). Shared journeys, linked lives: A relational-biographical approach to mobility practices. Mobilities, 13(1), 45–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravensbergen, L., Buliung, R., & Sersli, S. (2020). Vélomobilities of care in a low-cycling city. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 134, 336–347.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reckwitz, A. (2002). Basic elements of a theory of social practices - A perspective in social theory. Zeitschrift Fur Soziologie, 32(4), 282–301.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Røpke, I. (2009). Theories of practice — New inspiration for ecological economic studies on consumption. Ecological Economics, 68(10), 2490–2497.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T. (1996). Social Practices—A Wittgensteinian Approach to Human Activity and the Social. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T. (2012). A Primer on Practices. In J. Higgs, R. Barnett, S. Billett, M. Hutchings, & F. Trede (Eds.), Theory and Research in Practice-Based Education: Perspectives and Strategies (pp. 13–17). Boston: Sense Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T. R. (2001). Introduction: Practice theory. In C. K. Knorr, T. R. Schatzki, & E. von Savigny (Eds.), The Practice Turn in Contemporary Theory (1st ed.) (pp. 10–23). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schatzki, T. R. (2002). The Site of the Social: A Philosophical Account of the Constitution of Social Life and Change. University Park, PA: Pennsylvania State University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scheurenbrand, K., Parsons, E., Cappellini, B., & Patterson, A. (2018). Cycling into headwinds: Analyzing practices that inhibit sustainability. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 37(2), 227–244.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwanen, T., & Lucas, K. (2011). Understanding Auto Motives. In K. Lucas, E. Blumenberg, & R. Weinberger (Eds.), Auto Motives: Understanding Car Use Behaviours (pp. 3–38). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Sersli, S., Gislason, M., Scott, N., & Winters, M. (2020). Riding alone and together: Is mobility of care at odds with mothers’ bicycling? Journal of Transport Geography, 83, 102645.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2000). The city and the car. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 24(4), 0309–1317.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and Planning A, 38, 207–226.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shipworth, M. (2000). Motivating home energy action: A handbook of what works. Canberra: Australian Greenhouse Office.
   Google Scholar
• Shoshany Tavory, S., Trop, T., & Shiftan, Y. (2020). Self-organized ridesharing: Multiperspective annotated review. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, 14(4), 270–279. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/15568318.2018.1542758
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shove, E. (2003). Comfort, cleanliness and convenience: The social organization of normality. Oxford, New York: Berg.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E. (2010). Beyond the ABC: Climate change policy and theories of social change. Environment and Planning A: Economy and Space, 42(6), 1273–1285.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shove, E. (2011). On the difference between chalk and cheese – a response to Whitmarsh et al.’s comments on ‘‘Beyond the ABC: Climate change policy and theories of social change”. Environment and Planning A, 43, 262–264.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shove, E. (2017). Practice theory methodologies do not exist. https://practicetheorymethodologies.wordpress.com/2017/02/15/elizabeth-shove-practice-theory-methodologies-do-not-exist/.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E., & Pantzar, M. (2005). Consumers, producers and practices: Understanding the invention and reinvention of Nordic walking. Journal of Consumer Culture, 5(1), 43–64.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E., Pantzar, M., & Watson, M. (2012). The dynamics of social practice: everyday life and how it changes. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Shove, E., & Walker, G. (2007). CAUTION! transitions ahead: Politics, practice, and sustainable transition management. Environment and Planning A, 39(4), 763–770.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shove, E., & Walker, G. (2010). Governing transitions in the sustainability of everyday life. Research Policy, 39(4), 471–476.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spinney, J. (2008). Cycling between the traffic: Mobility. Identity and Space. Urban Design, 108(Autumn), 28–30.
   Google Scholar
• Spotswood, F., Chatterton, T., Tapp, A., & Williams, D. (2015). Analysing cycling as a social practice: An empirical grounding for behaviour change. Transp. Res. Part F, 29, 22–33.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spurling, N. (2020). Parking futures: The relationship between parking space, everyday life and travel demand in the UK. Land Use Policy, 91, 103872. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.02.031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Spurling, N., & McMeekin, A. (2015). Interventions in practices: sustainable mobility policies in England. In Y. Strengers, & C. Maller (Eds.), Social Practices, Intervention and Sustainability (pp. 78–94). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Steg, L. (2005). Car use: Lust and must. Instrumental, symbolic and affective motives for car use. Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice, 39(2–3), 147–162.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steg, L., Geurs, K., & Ras, M. (2001). The effects of motivational factors on car use: A multidisciplinary modelling approach. Transportation Research Part A-Policy and Practice, 35(9), 789–806.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stigler, G. J. (1950). The development of utility theory. The Journal of Political Economy, 58(4), 307–327.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strengers, Y. (2011). Negotiating everyday life: The role of energy and water consumption feedback. Journal of Consumer Culture, 11, 319–338.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Triandis, H. C. (1977). Interpersonal behavior. Monterey: Brooks/Cole.
   Google Scholar
• Urry, J. (2012). Changing transport and changing climates. Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 533–535.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uteng, T. P., Julsrud, T. E., & George, C. (2019). The role of life events and context in type of car share uptake: Comparing users of peer-to-peer and cooperative programs in Oslo. Norway. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 71, 186–206.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Wee, B., Annema, J. A., & Banister, D. (2013). The Transport System and Transport Policy : An Introduction. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
   Google Scholar
• Verplanken, B., Aarts, H., Vanknippenberg, A., & Vanknippenberg, C. (1994). Attitude versus general habit - antecedents of travel mode choice. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 24(4), 285–300.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, M. (2012). How theories of practice can inform transition to a decarbonised transport system. Journal of Transport Geography, 24(0), 488–496.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, M., Browne, A., Evans, D., Foden, M., Hoolohan, C., & Sharp, L. (2020). Challenges and opportunities for re-framing resource use policy with practice theories: The change points approach. Global Environmental Change, 62, 102072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wu, H., Levinson, D., & Owen, A. (2019a). Commute mode share and access to jobs across US metropolitan areas. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 48(4), 671–684.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, H., Levinson, D., & Sarkar, S. (2019b). How transit scaling shapes cities. Nature Sustainability, 2(12), 1142–1148.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yan, Y., & Burke, M. (2021). School location, urban structure, and accessibility. In C. Mulley, & J. D. Nelson (Eds.), Urban Form and Accessibility (pp. 173–186). San Diego: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar