Speaker
Description
Multimodality is increasingly recognized as a vital component of sustainable urban mobility, offering multiple means of transport to reduce car dependence while enhancing travel resilience against mobility disruptions. It also promotes seamless multimodal options that motivate individuals to diversify their travel behavior. However, most existing measures of multimodality are limited by two main gaps. They rarely account for the underlying personal or contextual factors, such as access to infrastructure, practical skills, and attitudinal factors, that shape how individuals adopt multiple modes. Second, multimodality research often relies on large-scale surveys that overlook neighborhood-level specificities and the lived experiences of local communities.
To address these shortcomings, our study proposes a methodological framework for exploring multimodality and the propensities that facilitate or hinder its adoption. Building on Kaufmann’s concept of “motility,” which highlights the importance of access, competencies, and appropriation in shaping people’s mobility behavior, we replicated the notion of “Multimotility.” This new concept expands motility into the multimodal realm, focusing on individuals’ propensity to use diverse transport modes, from physical access to different services, skills, and personal aptitudes.
We tested this framework with a quali-quantitative survey conducted in Milan’s Città Studi (a mixed-use neighborhood that hosts two major universities). Over 300 fully completed responses capture both current travel behavior and the potential for multimodality. Participants reported weekly trip frequencies, detailed their travel chain, and indicated whether they subscribed to public transport passes or micro-mobility services. They also assessed their smartphone and voiced their openness to adjusting their mobility habits. We operationalize the Multimodality and Multimotility index to quantify these responses. Both indices were then standardized and compared through scatter-plot analyses.
Our results reveal five distinct user profiles that reflect varying balances and imbalances between individuals’ actual use of multiple modes (Multimodality) and their propensity to do so (Multimotility).
These nuanced user profiles underscore the need for more equitable and context-sensitive solutions in urban mobility planning. Identifying who can genuinely benefit from multimodal strategies and who faces systemic or personal barriers enables policymakers to tailor interventions beyond uniform measures. For instance, improving ticket integration for regional travelers who must transfer at suburban stations could alleviate the sense of “forced” multimodality, while adding local infrastructure like bike lanes or micromobility docks might unlock the unrealized potential in areas where service coverage exists, but adoption is low.
In conclusion, multimotility is a practical lens for capturing how people travel and why they choose (or do not choose) multiple modes. By applying this framework at a micro-scale in the Milan Citta Studi neighborhood, our study highlights the importance of aligning tangible infrastructure enhancements with targeted efforts to improve skills and foster supportive attitudes. This dual emphasis opens new avenues for creating more adaptive and inclusive mobility systems that cater to individual needs, catalyzing a broader shift toward sustainable travel behavior.
References
- Kaufmann, V., Bergman, M. M., & Joye, D. (2004). Motility: mobility as capital. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(4), 745–756. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00549.x
- Karner, A., Pereira, R. H. M., & Farber, S. (2024). Advances and pitfalls in measuring transportation equity. Transportation. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-023-10460-7
- Diana, M., & Mokhtarian, P. L. (2009). Desire to change one’s multimodality and its relationship to the use of different transport means. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 12(2), 107–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2008.09.001
- Heinen, E., & Chatterjee, K. (2015). The same mode again? An exploration of mode choice variability in Great Britain using the National Travel Survey. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 78, 266–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2015.05.015
- Nobis, C. (2007a). Multimodality. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2010(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.3141/2010-05
- Groth, S. (2019a). Multimodal divide: Reproduction of transport poverty in smart mobility trends. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 125, 56–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2019.04.018
| Keywords | Multimodality; Multimotility; Motility; Mobility Behavior; Mobility habits, students’ mobility; Milan |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
