Commoning mobility: Towards a new politics of mobility transitions

REGULAR PAPER Commoning mobili y: Towa ds a new poli ics o mobili y ansi ions Anna Nikolae a 1,2 | Pe e Adey 3 | Tim C esswell 4 | Jane Yeonjae Lee 5 | And e Nó oa 6 | C is ina Temenos 7 1 Depa men o Human Geog aphy, Spa ial Planning and In e na ional De elopmen S udies, Uni e si y o Ams e dam, Ams e dam, The Ne he lands 2 Cope nicus Ins i u e o Sus ainable De elopmen , U ech Uni e si y, U ech , The Ne he lands 3 Depa men o Geog aphy, Royal Holloway, Uni e si y o London, Egham, Su ey, UK 4 T ini y College, Ha o d, CT, USA 5 School o Social Sciences, Singapo e Managemen Uni e si y, Singapo e 6 Ins i u e o Social Sciences, Uni e si y o Lisbon, Lisbon, Po ugal 7 Depa men o Geog aphy and Manches e U ban Ins i u e, School o En i onmen , Educa ion and De elopmen , Uni e si y o Manches e , Manches e , UK Co espondence Anna Nikolae a Email: [email p o ec ed] Funding in o ma ion Mobile Li es Fo um; No heas e n Uni e si y Schola s ha e a gued ha ansi ions o mo e sus ainable and jus mobili ies equi e mo ing beyond echnocen ism o e hink he e y meaning o mobili y in ci ies, communi ies, and socie ies. This pape demons a es ha such e hinking is inhe - en ly poli ical. In pa icula , we ocus on ecen heo isa ions o commoning p ac- ices ha ha e gained ac ion in geog aphic li e a u es. D awing on ou global compa a i e esea ch o low‐ca bon mobili y ansi ions, we a gue ha c i ical mobili ies schola s can e hink and expand he unde s anding o mobili y h ough engagemen wi h commons–enclosu e hinking. We p esen a new concep , “com- moning mobili y,”a heo isa ion ha bo h en isions and shapes p ac ices ha de elop ai e and g eene mobili ies and mo e inclusi e, collabo a i ely go e ned socie ies. Ou analysis in oduces h ee “logics”o mobili y ansi ion p ojec s. Fi s , he pape discusses how a logic o sca ci y has been a d i e o mobili y planning as he sca ci y o oil, inance, space, and ime a e in oked ac oss he wo ld as s imuli o aspi ing o g eene , “sma e ,”and cheape mobili ies. The pape hen iden i ies wo esponses o he logic o sca ci y: he logics o aus e i y and he logics o com- moning. Aus e e mobili ies a e examined o p oblema ise he dis ibu ion o espon- sibili y o emissions and ensuing injus ices and exclusion in low‐ca bon ansi ions. The logics o commoning shows a po en ial o eassess mobili y no only as an indi- idual eedom bu also as a collec i e good, pa ing he way o ai e mobili y an- si ions and a collabo a i e ackling o sus ainable mobili y challenges. KEYWORDS Ams e dam, aus e i y, commons, mobili ies, San iago, ansi ion Like any ue commons, he s ee i sel was he esul o people li ing he e and making ha space li eable …s ee s a e no mo e o people. They a e now oadways o au omobiles, o buses, o axis, ca s, and ucks. People a e ba ely ole a ed on he s ee s unless hey a e on hei way o a bus s op. I people now sa down o s opped on he s ee , hey would become obs acles o a ic, and a ic would be dange ous o hem. The oad has been deg aded om a commons o a simple esou ce o he ci cula ion o ehicles. People can ci cula e no mo e on hei own. T a ic has displaced hei mobili y. They can ci cula e only when hey a e s apped down and a e mo ed. (Illich, 1983, n.p.) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is an open access a icle unde he e ms o he C ea i e Commons A ibu ion‐NonComme cial‐NoDe i s License, which pe mi s use and dis ibu ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal wo k is p ope ly ci ed, he use is non‐comme cial and no modi ica ions o adap a ions a e made. The in o ma ion, p ac ices and iews in his a icle a e hose o he au ho (s) and do no necessa ily e lec he opinion o he Royal Geog aphical Socie y (wi h IBG). © 2019 The Au ho s T ansac ions o he Ins i u e o B i ish Geog aphe s published by John Wiley & Sons L d on behal o Royal Geog aphical Socie y (wi h The Ins i u e o B i ish Geog aphe s). Accep ed: 28 Decembe 2018 DOI: 10.1111/ an.12287 346 | wileyonlinelib a y.com/jou nal/ an T ans Ins B Geog . 2019;44:346–360. Unbounded eedom uled he wande ing scene No ence o owne ship c ep in be ween To hide he p ospec o he ollowing eye I s only bondage was he ci cling sky One migh y la undwa ed by bush and ee Sp ead i s ain shadow o immensi y And los i sel , which seemed o eke i s bounds In he blue mis he ho izon's edge su ounds (John Cla e, The Moo es c.1812) 1 | AT THE SPEED OF A BICYCLE In wha ways can mobili y be econcep ualised in o de o necessi a e a shi in ac ions owa ds low‐ca bon ansi ion when he mo emen o people and hings con inues o be a majo con ibu o o g eenhouse emissions? Schola s ha e long a gued ha any meaning ul clima e change policy should o e “cleane ”al e na i es o high‐ca bon mobili ies, ye he eluc ance o ques ion he alue o high‐ca bon mobili y is sus ained by he dominan belie in he p io i y o (na ional) eco- nomic g ow h and he dependence o ha g ow h on he mobili y o people and hings (Cohen & Gössling, 2015; Cowen, 2014; Gi oni & Banis e , 2013; Hickman & Banis e , 2014; Low, 2013). This na a i e is suppo ed by a cul u al appa a- us linking indi idual eedom, p og ess, and mode ni y wi h physical mobili y (C esswell, 2006a). We a gue ha he in as uc u al and cul u al “lock‐in”(U y, 2009) suppo ing high‐ca bon mobili ies canno be sepa a ed om wide deba es on cul u al poli ical economies o ansi ions o sus ainabili y, ques ioning wha ideologies and co esponding o ms o poli ical and economic o ganisa ion a e suppo ing cu en high‐ca bon li ing (c . Gössling & Cohen, 2014; Schwanen e al., 2011). These ques ions, howe e , ha e no been add essed wi hin he hus a dominan app oach o low‐ca bon ansi- ions –socio‐ echnical ansi ion s udies (Cha e on, 2016). We make h ee con ibu ions o his ield. The i s is o b ing he discussion o low‐ca bon ansi ions in o con e sa ion wi h o he heo isa ions o mobili y ansi ion –ones ha ocus on “mobili y jus ice”(Shelle , 2015) in o de o explo e how access o mobili y (and he access ha mobili y p o ides) can be mo e equi able ac oss ace, gende , class, age, and a ange o o he social ma ke s. Such discussion has s a ed in he ansi ion deba e, b oadly unde s ood (Cha e on, 2016), add essing long‐s anding c i iques o socio‐ echnical ansi ion heo ies as downplaying ideology, powe , and jus ice in a ou o echnologically de e mined inno a ions (Sho e & Walke , 2007; Smi h & S i ling, 2010). Second, we oo ou discussion o mobili y jus ice in longe in ellec ual his o ies o mobili y and en i onmen al and mobili y and acial jus ice. P e‐da ing he heo isa ion o ansi ions o low‐ca bon mobili y u u es has been wo k on mobil- i y jus ice. Illich (1974), o example, a gued ha high ene gy use in all i s o ms co odes social ela ions and deg ades landscapes. “Pa icipa o y democ acy,”he a gued, “demands low‐ene gy echnology, and ee people mus a el he oad o p oduc i e social ela ions a he speed o a bicycle”(1974, p. 8). T a elling a he speed o a bicycle signi ied ha a adical s uc u al shi away om mode nis 's obsession wi h speed was necessa y o add ess en i onmen al c isis. C i ical ace schola s ha e also ocused on mobili y equi y p ima ily, hough no exclusi ely, in he Uni ed S a es. Theo is s o “jus anspo a ion”ha e explo ed he long his o y o connec ions be ween unequal access o mobili y and acism, linking con- empo a y a gumen s abou such hings as he p o ision o public ansi and he acial p o iling o black d i e s o deep his o ical ajec o ies connec ing ace o mobili y, including Jim C ow Laws and ac i ism a ound bus boyco s (Bulla d e al., 2004; Bulla d & Johnson, 1997). In addi ion o connec ing ace and class in discussions o ansi , Bulla d (2007) e- quen ly linked issues o social jus ice o en i onmen al issues h ough an analysis o en i onmen al acism. Simila con ic- ions d i e he wo k o schola s wo king on “jus sus ainabili y”and equi able o ms o “sha ing economies”(Agyeman e al., 2016; McLa en & Agyeman, 2015; Swilling & Annecke, 2012). Thi d, we d aw on hese wo app oaches o mobili y ansi ions – ocusing on low‐ca bon ansi ions and on jus ansi- ions –in o de o highligh a adical poli ics o mobili y in o med by ecen mobili ies esea ch. The s eng h o he mobil- i ies li e a u e on ansi ions has been a icula ing how high‐ca bon mobili ies a e pa and pa cel o con empo a y ways o li ing (Shelle & U y, 2016). The heo isa ion o a “poli ics o mobili y”(C esswell, 2010, 2006a; see also Massey, 1993) o e s a c i ique o he cul u al poli ical economies ha shape high‐ca bon mobile li ing while o e ing new possibili ies o concep ualising mobili y ansi ions. Ou discussion o ansi ions is oo ed in mobili ies schola ship, inco po a ing insigh s om bo h socio‐ echnical ansi ions li e a u e and wo k on jus ansi ions. NIKOLAEVA ET AL. | 347 We do so in h ee ways. Fi s , his pape expands spa ial unde s andings o he poli ics o mobili y by a guing o a econcep ualisa ion o mobili y as commons. We a gue ha he commons lens can lead o concep ualising ansi ions ha a e uly ans o ma i e, ha aim o econ igu e he e y ela ionship o humans wi h mobili y and wi h each o he . The enclosu e o space has oubled schola s and poe s since a leas he Enclosu e Ac s beginning in he 17 h cen u y. This ela ionship be ween enclosu e, mobili y, and ansi ion, which he opening epig aphs demons a e, has pu us in li e al and concep ual g idlock and he e o e needs o be heo e ically and ma e ially e hough . Second, we a gue ha a new poli ics o mobili y ansi ions based on a logic o he commons can c i ically in e oga e mobili y‐ ela ed sca ci ies on na ional and local poli ical agendas and sc u inise he poli ics o p oduc ion o “aus e e mobil- i ies”–mobili ies ha equi e ewe esou ces –as a esponse o sca ci ies. Thi d, a commons pe spec i e enables nuanced c i icism o eme ging “sha ing”p ac ices, whe eby a na a i e o com- muni y and pa icipa ion disguises he highly une en e ec s o new o ms o o ganising mo emen , which is pa icula ly p e alen in u ban agglome a ions h ough sma ci y policies and deba es o e ide‐sha e and bike‐sha e businesses (McLa en & Agyeman, 2015). Ou a gumen is based on a global compa a i e s udy analysing key na ional mobili y ansi ion policies and a selec ed numbe o local p ojec s in 14 coun ies: B azil, Canada, Chile, Kazakhs an, he Ne he lands, New Zealand, No way, Po ugal, Singapo e, Sou h A ica, Sou h Ko ea, Tu key, he Uni ed A ab Emi a es, and he Uni ed Kingdom. A sepa a e “case”co e ed in e na ional policy‐making in he sphe e o mobili y ansi ions and included a s udy o he Eu opean Union policies and p ojec s ini ia ed by he Uni ed Na ions and associa ed bodies. Policy analysis was com- plemen ed by 216 s akeholde in e iews including ep esen a i es o anspo companies, na ional, egional and local au ho i ies, NGOs, hink anks, in e na ional o ganisa ions, ac i is g oups, and knowledge ins i u es. Examining he logics behind mobili y ansi ion p ojec s as well as ha o he policies, ini ia i es, and p ojec s hey a e en angled wi h, we ha e analysed he b oade con ex o mobili y ansi ion policies and p ojec s, including policies in he sphe es o anspo , heal h, wo k, en i onmen , ade, economy, and u ban and egional de elopmen . We ha e iden i ied h ee in e ela ed “logics”o mobili y ansi ion –logics being a cohe ing, s uc u ing, and e en a coali ion o a ionali ies, he o ics, ideologies, and discou ses ha unde pin he policy and p ac ice o mobili y ansi ion (in he same way ha in his w i ing Foucaul iden i ied he logic o “no malisa ion”as an “inne unc ional cohe ence”wi hin biopoli ics; Collie , 2009; Eagle on, 1991). Two dominan logics eme ged in he 14 coun ies, all o which ope a e unde an inc easingly neolibe al, capi alis global economy. These a e: sca ci y unde lying mobili y ansi ion planning and aus e i y as a esponse o sca ci y. The hi d logic, commoning, is one ha is eme gen , o en quie , and de ian agains he p edominan logics o sca ci y and aus e i y. Howe e , i is a logic ha demons a es ha spaces o al e na i es and po en ial ans o - ma ions a e ali e and well ac oss he Global No h and Global Sou h. Commoning was no a dominan logic and did no appea in he majo i y o ou case s udies. Indeed ins ances o commoning we e small scale and o en incomple e, exhibi - ing ensions wi h cu en go e nance s uc u es. D awing on li e a u es on commoning and C esswell's no ion o mobili y as mo emen , meaning, and p ac ice, highligh s he possibili y o al e na i e poli ics, p og ams, and policies, demons a ing how he logic o commoning can ans o m spaces o go e nance and p ac ices o mobili y and challenge he dominan na a i es on he meaning o mobili y in socie y. In C esswell's e ms, hey poin owa ds an eme gen “cons ella ion o mobili y.” The pape un olds as ollows. In he nex sec ion we ou line cu en mobili y ansi ion esea ch and discuss he po en ial o a “poli ics o mobili y” o add ess issues o meaning, powe , and jus ice ha ha e ecei ed less a en ion in dominan app oaches o mobili y ansi ions. Second, we ou line he logics o sca ci y and aus e i y in mobili y ansi ion p ojec s. Nex , we d aw on ecen wo k in geog aphy and mobili ies esea ch on commoning p ac ices in o de o a gue o “ ansi- ions wo h making”(Cha e on, 2016, p. 406). We go on o illus a e ou a gumen o e hink mobili y as commons h ough an analysis o wo cases d awn om ou wo k o demons a e he logics a play in he cu en mobili y ansi ion landscape and he ans o ma i e po en ial behind hem. In he conclusion we ou line ways o b ing his new poli ics o mobili y ansi ions o wa d and discuss how he concep ual oolki o commoning mobili y can ad ance he schola ship on he geog aphies o mobili ies and mobili y ansi ions. 2 | TOWARDS A POLITICS OF MOBILITY TRANSITIONS The Fi h Assessmen Repo (AR5) o he In e go e nmen al Panel o Clima e Change (IPCC) es ima es ha g eenhouse emissions om anspo a ion “ha e mo e han doubled since 1970 …80% o his inc ease coming om oad ehicles” (IPCC 2014, p. 606). The demand o mobili y is cu en ly p ojec ed o inc ease and i no mi iga ion measu es a e aken 348 | NIKOLAEVA ET AL. “ he cu en anspo sec o 's GHG emissions could inc ease by up o 50% by 2035 …and almos double by 2050”(2014, p. 648). Fac s such as hese ha e led o he ise o socio‐ echnical ansi ion s udies. The examina ion o socio‐ echnical ans o ma ions o low‐ca bon o ms o ene gy, mobili y, and li es yles has eme ged as a dominan sub ield add essing sus- ainable anspo solu ions o clima e change in geog aphy and beyond (Geels, 2002, 2014; Schwanen, 2017; Temenos e al., 2017). Geog aphe s ha e p ima ily engaged ansi ion s udies by d awing on analyses ha use he mul i‐le el pe spec- i e (MLP) –a amewo k seeking o accoun o complex socio‐economic and poli ical p ocesses ha media e sus ainabil- i y inno a ion. Mul i‐le el pe spec i e app oaches s a om he p emise ha he ansi ion in ques ion is singula ly ocused on educ- ing ca bon emissions and has a la gely echno‐social solu ion. Jus ice is no a he cen e o MLP app oaches, which la gely ail o accoun o exis ing powe dynamics and poli ics (A olde bach & Schulz, 2016; Geels, 2014; Shelle , 2012). While some s udies ha e conside ed he poli ics o sus ainabili y ansi ions in gene al (A elino e al., 2016; Cha e on, 2016), esea ch on mobili y ansi ions mo e o en han no ocuses on echnological change as a s a ing poin o inqui y. Ye , while echnology‐powe ed sus ainable mobili y solu ions ( om elec ic bicycles o d ones used o deli e ies) a e abundan , anspo schola s ag ee ha ocusing on echnology is insu icien and can be coun e ‐p oduc i e (Banis e e al., 2013; Fe ei a e al., 2017; Temenos e al., 2017). Li le, i any, a en ion has been paid o pa allel heo isa ions o mobili y ansi- ions o igina ing om a conce n o social jus ice. As schola s o en i onmen al jus ice and jus sus ainabili y ha e long a gued, a singula ocus on ca bon emissions may lead o a new wo ld o mobili y ha ails o add ess s uc u al asymme- ies o powe (Cha e on, 2016; Swilling & Annecke, 2012). Cha e on obse es ha “ he e emains a eluc ance o name and ad oca e o he mo e adical na u e o ansi ions ha socie y needs o emba k on o add ess he huge challenges i aces”(2016, p. 403). While hinking h ough he poli ical implica ions o low‐ca bon ansi ions has begun in a eas such as building s anda ds (A olde bach & Schulz, 2016) and ene gy (Bouza o ski & Simcock, 2017; Pe o a, 2018), unda- men al ques ions su ounding he poli ics o mobili y ansi ions ha e ye o be explo ed o accoun o mobili y as a key si e and c ucial p ocess o conside a ion. The poli ics o mobili y has long been a he hea o adical schola ship on anspo and ansi (Bulla d & Johnson, 1997; C esswell, 2006a). Wo k in he new mobili ies pa adigm, in o med by ea lie wo k on ansi jus ice, has sough o p o ide a amewo k o hinking h ough he ole o mobili y in sys ema ically asymme ical powe ela ions. This has been especially ue in ela ion o ques ions o ace and i s in e sec ion wi h en i onmen al sus ainabili y and low‐ca bon ansi ions (C esswell, 2016; Nicholson & Shelle , 2016; Shelle , 2015). Mobili y i sel can be b oken down in o h ee in e ela ed elemen s: mo emen , meaning, and p ac ice (C esswell, 2006a, 2010). Mo emen , he physical ac o ge ing om poin A o poin B, is he mos basic elemen o mobili y and is inhe en ly embodied and spa ialised. Meaning o ep- esen a ions o mo emen s uc u e socie al and indi idual pe cep ions o mobili y ha a e ela ional, coding mo emen and i s a endan mobile li es and esou ces wi hin pa icula con ex s. Finally, d awing on Bou dieu (1990), C esswell de ines mobili y p ac ices as encompassing “bo h he e e yday sense o pa icula p ac ices such as walking o d i ing and also he mo e heo e ical sense o he social as i is embodied and habi ualised”(2010, p. 20). These elemen s o mobili y –mo emen , meaning, and p ac ice –a e always ci cumsc ibed by exis ing go e - nance s uc u es, his o ies, powe ela ions, and embodied expe iences. Mobili y is in and o i sel ela ional. How and why mobili y happens exe s i s own o ce on he ways laws a e cons uc ed and poli ics plays ou ac oss spaces, a ec ing poli ical and li ed ou comes and spa ial o ma ions (Adey, 2009; C esswell, 2006a; Temenos & McCann, 2012). Mobili y, hen, is always bo h spa ial and poli ical. We con end ha any meaning ul conside a ion o ansi- ion mus also en ail a conside a ion o he poli ics o mobili y ansi ions, including ques ioning he ela ionship be ween an indi idualised “ igh o mo e”(C esswell, 2006b) and how collec i e social needs a e media ed h ough mobili ies. This app oach is ound in he connec ion be ween mobili y and jus ice. Fo example, Shelle (2015) cha s how Philadelphia's a emp s o mo e i s ci izens o bike and ca sha ing schemes and ac i e anspo a ion a e esis ed, seen as p ojec s o acialised gen i ica ion. The his o ically embedded pa e ns o inequali y, po e y, and seg ega ion el by poo and e hnic mino i ies also p oduce pa icula ly s ong desi es o ca owne ship as a signal o secu i y and s a us. In his ins ance, achie ing mobili y ansi ion equi es a ending o he cul u al logics o acial jus ice simul aneously. C esswell (2006a) likewise cha s how he Los Angeles Bus Ride s Union ough o access o public anspo a ion in an au omobile‐domina ed ci y, d awing on a long his o y o u ban ac i ism o acial jus ice. In hese ins ances, s uggles o e how o mo e and i s ep esen a ions a e inex icably linked wi h s uggles o e u ban space, he poli ics o dis ibu- ion o esou ces, and he ques ion o pa icipa ion in decision‐making. In his pape we p opose a new poli ics o mobil- i y ansi ions ha ies hese issues oge he h ough he no ion o commoning. To o eg ound his concep ualisa ion, in NIKOLAEVA ET AL. | 349 he nex sec ion we ou line he dominan logics 1 o sca ci y and aus e i y ha la gely ame con empo a y public policy deba es conce ning mobili y. 3 | FROM CONTESTED SCARCITIES TO AUSTERE MOBILITIES The logics o sca ci y and calls o some o ms o aus e i y – o sa ing esou ces such as ime, money, space, and oil – a e ubiqui ous in deba es su ounding mobili y and socie y in he 21s cen u y. They ha e also been he mains ay o ans- po planne s, geog aphe s, and p ac i ione s conce ned wi h imp o ing mobili y o anspo e iciencies o many decades –al hough we dis inguish ou iden i ica ion o “aus e i y” om a conce n o “e iciency.” 2 Sca ci y is consis en ly na u- alised, gene alised, and aken ou o speci ic his o ical and geog aphic con ex s. In ou wo k, sca ci y has been in oked as mo i a ion o accele a e ansi ion o as an excuse o hinde change in almos e e y case, om he na ional le el (e.g., Chile, he Ne he lands, No way, Singapo e) o he le el o u ban s ee space (e.g., São Paulo, Alma y, San iago, Vancou- e ). In mos con ex s, sca ci y and aus e i y logics, e en when wo king in qui e con adic o y ways, bo ow om he poli - ical‐economic endencies o neolibe alism as an economic logic based on Da winian o neo‐Mal husian impe a i es o compe i ion, e iciency, and indi idualism, se e ed, as Bou dieu pu s i , om a “social logic […] subjec o he ule o ai - ness”(1998, n.p.), and an a ch‐enemy o ins i u ional and social collec i e s uc u es. While sca ci y is o en p esen ed as a aken‐ o ‐g an ed “ ac ,”i is mo e o en he case ha he esou ce ha is de ined as “sca ce”exis s in ela ion o o he esou ces ha a e igno ed o ma ginalised. The de ini ion o some hing (space, ime, ene gy, e c.) wi h a pa icula limi o ini ude plays an ac i e ole in he de ini ion o app op ia e esponses. As Denie (2007) sugges s in he e y di e en con ex o heal h ca e, economic a ional and mechanis ic app oaches o sca ci y end o lead owa ds a ioning mechanisms in o de o di ide up o limi access o a limi ed esou ce. In he Ne he lands, o example, he sca ci y o oad space and he ela i ely small e i o ial oo p in o he coun y was e oked by many Du ch policy expe s in in e iews: “We' e go a lack o space in he ci y, we' e go a lack o space on he oad and we' e go a lack o space …i 's a s ange me apho , bu a lack o space in he ai ” (Sus ainable mobili y expe , 3 pe sonal communica ion, 24 July 2015). In his sense, sca ci y is e oked as a lack o space: a lack o oom o pedes ians, cyclis s, and ca s; wi hin ci ies o people and buildings o inhabi ; and e en wi hin he ai –imagined o be ull o unwan ed ca bon and exhaus pa icula es. And so, despi e i s epu a ion as a leade in cycling policy, oad conges ion is p esen ed as “ he mobili y p oblem”o he coun y (TFMM, n.d.). Th ough he na ional p og amme “Op imising Use”(“Be e Benu en”), beha iou change is encou - aged ia incen i es o a ion hose sca ce esou ces, by d i ing du ing al e na e imes, elecommu ing o wo king a home occasionally, using e‐bikes, o ca pooling. In his ins ance, nei he en i onmen al impac no he a ionali y o d i ing i sel (du ing low‐conges ion pe iods) is ques ioned: high‐ca bon mobili y has o be managed by mino adjus men s o indi idual beha iou a he han h ough sys emic change. The a en ion o mechanis ic no ions o economics and human beha iou should pe haps no be su p ising. While sug- ges ing ha sca ci y is a “common ea u e o anspo a ion sys ems,” anspo economis Jona han L. Gi o d (2011) a gued ha anspo and mobili y could be conside ed h ough se e al beha iou al‐economic app oaches o sca ci y: he capaci y o anspo sys ems; esou ces o imp o ing and main aining hose sys ems; in o ma ion abou he sys ems and hei eliabili y, and he a en ion o he a elle o op imising o imp o ing hei own decisions. Resou ce p icing is one o he me hod o managing demand. In Singapo e, sca ci y is an explici policy a ionale o i s in oduc ion o ime‐based elec onic oad p icing (ERP) and he Vehicle Quo a Sys em (VQS; Go e nmen o Singapo e, 2013). Nei he policy is new, wi h he i s e sion o ERP beginning in 1975 and he VQS es ablished in 1990, no is he discu si e emphasis on indi idual beha iou change. ERP and VQS policies ha e been success ul in s emming oad conges ion om indi idual ehicles, ye nei he ques ions he assumed “ igh o mobili y”(C esswell, 2006b). Sca ci ies, so p ominen in Du ch and Singapo ean policy goals, a e ela i e, as bo h coun ies’ oad ne wo ks a e among he denses in he wo ld (T ading Economics, n.d.). These sca ci ies, usually amed wi hin discussions on sa ing ime in he daily commu e, a e no a consequence o lacking in as uc u e, bu o p esump ions abou he alue o pa icula mobil- i ies abo e o he s and hei appa en igh o pa icula p opo ions o hose sca ci ies. Con adic ions come o he o e e en mo e p ominen ly in ou case, co e ing he p o es s agains new cycling lanes in São Paulo in 2015, whe e he edis ibu- ion o “sca ce” oad space was seen as a “ he ”by axi d i e s and au omobilis s, despi e cyclis s using a signi ican ly smalle sha e o u ban space han d i e s. These b ie examples demons a e he cons uc ed and con es ed na u e o sca ci ies in mobili y policy deba es. Fu he - mo e, discou ses on sca ci y con inue o shape hinking on mobili y and imagina ions o ai e and cleane mobile u u es. 350 | NIKOLAEVA ET AL. Mos na ional and sup ana ional policies we examined demons a e ha , despi e he pe cei ed p essu es o sca ci y, he ole o mobili y has no been c i ically eassessed a a socie al le el: educing mobili y o goods and people emains a “ aboo” subjec wi hin neolibe al g ow h pa adigms and ecological mode nisa ion app oaches (Gössling & Cohen, 2014; Schwanen e al., 2011). In he con ex o sca ci y, mobili y is exp essed in squa e me es o oad space, kilome es o mo o way ne - wo k, millions o Eu os, limi s o pollu ion, o minu es o sa ed a el ime. Such logics, we ha e obse ed in ou s udy, mos o en lead o ad oca ing some o m o sa ing hose esou ces, ei he h ough op–down s a e and local policies o h ough bo om–up communi y p ojec s. Fo example, in se e al cases, he esponse o policy‐make s and poli icians o managing he dual p essu es o mo ing people and goods while also add essing en i onmen al conce ns has been o pa e back s a e se ices a he han inc ease in e en ions o encou age sus ainable mobile u u es. The esul is he c ea ion o wha we call aus e e mobili ies –mobili- ies ha equi e ewe esou ces: hey a e, o ins ance, cheape ( o he s a e) o occupy less space. In an age o inancial aus e i y, aus e e mobili ies may in ol e he c ea ion o spaces whe e only he mos basic le el o in as uc u e is p o- ided, and p e iously exis ing se ices such as public anspo a ion a e inc easingly con ac ed ou o p i a e companies. This was he case in Po ugal du ing he 2008 socio‐economic c isis. Ins ead o upg ading public anspo a ion o incen- i ising s a e‐d i en sus ainable solu ions, he Po uguese go e nmen , p essed by a co‐join supe ision commi ee be ween he IMF and EU au ho i ies ( he oika), adop ed a se ies o neolibe al policies based on a s ic economic a ionale aimed a educing s a e spending. This mean supplying mobili y h ough he e o s o p i a e companies, u he libe alising he anspo sec o –examples include a emp s o p i a ise public companies and ew i en laws o accommoda e eme ging p i a ised lexible anspo se ices like Ube . Illus a ing an en anglemen o inancial aus e i y policies and aus e e mobil- i ies leading o low‐ca bon mobili y p ojec s ha delega e esponsibili y o ansi ion o i s ci izens, in Ams e dam he emo al o a bus line in a public‐ anspo a ion‐dependen communi y was ollowed by a pilo o an elec ic‐cab‐on‐demand ha was no pe cei ed by he inhabi an s as an adequa e subs i u ion and was discon inued (see also Mo an Figue oa, 2015). Aus e e mobili ies a e unde pinned by logics o aus e i y b oadly unde s ood as limi ing consump ion. The a gumen o aus e i y is necessa ily linked o dominan o es ablished de ini ions o wha has been de ined as “sca ce.”Thus, hey a e no always linked o inancial aus e i y policies, which a e bu a ecen a icula ion o an ancien and e e ‐changing se o ideas (see Schui, 2014) and may also esul in immobili ies. A good example o his is ou case Telewo k New Zealand, a company p omo ing he educ ion o a ic conges ion and emissions by encou aging people o a oid commu ing al o- ge he . They espond o he logics o sca ci y by p oposing ways ha companies can sa e money, space on he oad, and a el ime h ough immobili y, and ope a ionalise his aus e i y logic h ough using a “Bene i Calcula o ” o calcula e he sa ings o hei clien s (Be is England, pe sonal communica ion, 11 Ma ch 2015). A simila logic and oolki is o e ed by he “Low Ca Die ,”a campaign by a Du ch en i onmen al ounda ion U genda, whe eby hey help pa icipa ing compa- nies y a “low ca die ” o a limi ed pe iod o ime and explo e he esul s oge he wi h pa icipan s. By ans o ming an en i onmen al a gumen in o an economic one, hey encou age people o cycle, wo k om home o dedica ed places close o home, and demons a e he bene i s o ansi ion o he employe : “[T]he companies say, hey …i 's no abou CO 2 , I'm sa ing money”(U genda, pe sonal communica ion, 24 July 2015). While hey also emphasise heal h and well‐being bene- i s o d i ing less, he appeal o economics, in hei iew, is he mos powe ul one. Ano he playe in he aus e e mobili ies ield is he ansi ion own mo emen ocusing on small‐scale p ac ices wi hin de ined a eas (Ja is, 2015; Mason & Whi ehead, 2012). While mobili y is no o emos among hei conce ns, hei gene al philosophical o ien a ion is owa ds localisa ion. P ac ically, his means emphasising local, o ganic ag icul u e and die , con- s uc ion using local ma e ials, p ac ising local consensual o ms o democ acy, de eloping Local Economic T ans e Schemes (LETS), and gene ally ac ing agains he inco po a ion o place in o wide global ne wo ks. The mo emen is o i- en ed owa ds d ama ically educed mobili ies o ood, ene gy, capi al, ma e ials, and people. The agen s o ansi ion a e communi ies. Go e nmen s, ad oca es a gue, will be oo la e and indi iduals oo ine ec i e (Hopkins, 2011). T ansi ion owns d aw on and e lec la ge public unde s andings o al e na i e mobili y ansi ions ha celeb a e localism and discu - si ely wo k in opposi ion o dominan policy agendas ha a ou de elopmen , speed, and echnological ixes. Ye , hei low up ake and uppe ‐middle‐class suppo base (Aiken, 2012) indica e ha , a he han ushe in a as ly di e en mobili y ansi ion, hey may emain niche ini ia i es. These examples ocus on cu bing indi idual beha iou in esponse o la ge‐scale socie al c ises. E en hough hey a e no coupled wi h he poli ics o inancial aus e i y, hey may ne e heless ollow dominan logics o neolibe alisa ion ha ocus on educing dependence on s a e se ices and elying on indi idual momen um and ingenui y o p o ide solu ions wi hin cu en socio‐economic sys ems. Thinking abou mobili ies in he con ex o aus e i y di ec s a en ion o ce ain p oblems and pa adoxes ha hese discou ses and p ojec s may en ail. Like inancial aus e i y, logics o aus e e mobili ies NIKOLAEVA ET AL. | 351 a e deeply ideological, d i en by “mo al and poli ical conside a ions”(Schui, 2014, p. 6) and a e augh wi h con adic- ions. While economic aus e i y policies could be associa ed wi h an i‐consume is ideology, and his o ically ha e been, con empo a y inancial aus e i y policies do no a ge indi idual consump ion, which is seen as he p ima y d i e o he economy (B amall, 2013; Schui, 2014). Ins ead, hey a e ocused on go e nmen expendi u e, mos p ominen ly on con- sumable se ices such as heal hca e o public anspo a ion, and he educ ion o labou cos s. The logics o aus e e mobili- ies a e o en also based on a pa adox ha e lec s a simila ideological choice o p opose ha some mobile subjec s ake ca e o hemsel es while subsidising he mobili ies o o he s. Thus, globally, people a e encou aged o ake up heal hie li es yles h ough walking and cycling (cos ing he go e nmen no hing when no suppo ed by in es men in in as uc- u e), while na ional go e nmen s implemen policies main aining and p omo ing (au o)mobili y consump ion h ough oad building, economic incen i es o co po a e policies s imula ing ca use by employees, expo ing oil, e c. (Spinney, 2016). Fu he mo e, like inancial aus e i y measu es ha a e in amous o dis ibu ing he esponsibili y o bea ing he conse- quences o deb h ough sa ing on spending (Bly h, 2015), aus e e mobili ies do no adequa ely e lec he pa ies p ima ily esponsible o c ea ing he deb i sel . Fo example, he UN discou se on “leap ogging”– he hope ha coun ies in he Global Sou h will ansi ion o low‐ca bon mobili y egimes by skipping he s age o poli ical ca elessness abou ca bon emissions ha cha ac e ised many OECD coun ies’de elopmen –illus a es he disjunc ion be ween he o igins o he emissions and he si es whe e aus e i y logics may be applied. Guil ‐ ee unlimi ed p i a e ca usage is en isaged as a hing o he pas ; howe e , wi h 10% o he wo ld popula ion accoun ing o 80% o ca a el, mobili y is s ill a sca ce and es ic ed esou ce o many (IPCC, 2014, p. 606). Mobili y hus emains a desi ed and legi ima e ac and calls o cu bing i a e no embedded in na ional policy. Ye , unde s anding mobili y h ough a lens o aus e i y allows us o iden i y p oblema ic dis ibu ions o esponsibili y o p o- ducing he nega i e consequences o high‐ca bon mobili y and exis ing inequali ies in accessibili y. Aus e e mobili ies a e a esponse o sca ci y discou ses. We a gue ha bo h sca ci y discou ses and a endan esponses can and should be chal- lenged, and in he nex sec ion we poin o an al e na i e possibili y o e hinking mobili y as a ans o ma i e se o p ac- ices enabling ai e sus ainable u u es. 4 | COMMONING MOBILITY Apa om he logics o aus e i y as a esponse o sca ci y and clima e change, we ha e obse ed some ini ia i es unde - pinned by a poli ics ha ques ions no only he shee quan i y o mo emen , emi ed CO 2 , o in es men , bu also chal- lenges he e y logics o sca ci y and pushes o e hinking he alue o mobili y and possible o ms o mobili y go e nance. Connec ing ou indings wi h geog aphic deba es on commons, we demons a e how hese ini ia i es a e ins ances o commoning mobili y and a gue o he need o heo ise mobili y as commons, a icula ing a new poli ics o mobili y ansi ions. Common p ope y and commonweal h ha e been o in e es o economis s and philosophe s om Hobbes (1651/1960) o Ma x (1867/1977). In he 20 h cen u y, Ha din's (1968) unde s anding o he “ agedy o he commons,”which a gued ha commonly held esou ces a e subjec o o e use and des uc ion (and can be seen in he logic o aus e e mobili ies se ou abo e), has been a lashpoin o hese deba es. While his hesis has had conside able impac on deba es su ounding s a e owne ship s p i a isa ion, Os om (1990) con incingly a gued o he egula ion o he common pool esou ces (CPR) by sel ‐go e ning ins i u ions as an al e na i e mode o go e nance. Ou a gumen ocuses no only on common spaces hemsel es, bu also on he p ocesses o commoning, o changing logics and pe cep ions as well as p ac ices o go - e nance and managemen o access o mobili y. The no ion o commoning, a he han commons, highligh s ac i e and collec i e p ocesses o making commons (B esni- han, 2013; Linebaugh, 2008). Wi hin geog aphy, he no ion o commoning is p ima ily engaged h ough wo deba es: he discussion o he managemen o CPR beyond he s a e and he ma ke , and he in e oga ion o he no ions o commons and commoning as ools o en ision and enac al e na i e pos ‐capi alis poli ics (Hu on, 2015). While o en s ill ocusing on he ac ual physical p ope ies o commons, geog aphe s ha e been pushing owa ds unde s anding commons as “com- plex social and poli ical ecologies which a icula e pa icula socio‐spa ial p ac ices, social ela ionships and o ms o go e - nance ha unde pin hem o p oduce and ep oduce hem”(Cha e on, 2010, p. 626; see also B own, 2007). As such he p ocessual, he spa ial, and he ela ional dimensions o commons come o wa d as he ocus shi s owa ds commoning (Cha e on, 2010; Williams, 2017) and o s a egies and p ac ices ha can wo k o “assemble mo e inclusi e, jus and sus- ainable spaces”(Je ey e al., 2012, p. 2) and, as we a gue, mobili ies. 352 | NIKOLAEVA ET AL. Mo eo e , i commoning desc ibes a se o p ocessual ela ions h ough which some hing becomes common, i should be unde s ood in ela ion o he p ocesses o enclosu e ha w es le some hing om he commons. As Je ey e al. w i e, “ he seizu e o he commons is ac i ely assembled h ough po ous, socio‐ma e ial and dis ancia ed o ms o enclosu e – h ough ela ions o s abili y and lux, ixi y and mo emen ”(2012, p. 2). Such p ac ices a e also dialec ically ela ed o p ac ices o commoning, which migh seek o sub e , unde mine, o euse hose enclosu es h ough di e en spa iali ies, a di e en scales, and e en h ough he p oduc ion o di e en o ms o subjec i i y. The ac s o enclosu e a e li e ally and igu a i ely connec ed o ques ions o (in)jus ice. The spa ial ac o enclosu e enac s a edis ibu ion o esou ces – emo ing hem om many and alloca ing hem o some. One such esou ce is mobil- i y. F om he beginning o he 17 h cen u y in he Uni ed Kingdom, he Enclosu e Ac s we e expe ienced by many (as poe John Cla e w i es in he epig aph) as a limi on hei “ igh o oam.”This included bo h people and li es ock ha people wished o g aze on common land. This igh was explici ly ecognised in he Coun yside and Righ s o Way Ac o 2000, a i ming he igh o oam on all common land as well as ou es h ough p i a e land along so‐called “ igh s o way,”in England and Wales. Fo Blomley (2007, p. 5), he hedge ma ked one o he key ma e iali ies o enclosu e in B i ain, con- c e ising “a new se o con o e sial discou ses a ound land and p ope y igh s”aiming “ o p e en he o ms o physical mo emen associa ed wi h he commoning economy”As well as immobilising, enclosing p ac ices we e also inhe en ly dis- placing, causing despe a e mobili ies esul ing om dispossession and e ic ion as labou e s and peasan a me s sough sub- sis ence elsewhe e. Mo e ecen ly, ca ‐cen ic planning has been heo ised as enclosu e o public space and as a sca ci y‐ p oducing egime (Illich, 1983; Hoeschele, 2010). Gi en his his o y, i is su p ising ha he li e a u e on commoning and mobili y is absen . The e a e ew engagemen s wi h he no ion o he commons as i ela es o anspo . While Ve linghie i and Ven u ini (2018) men ion a possibili y o hinking o mobili y as a common in he con ex o discussing he igh o mobili y, hey do no elabo a e wha ha migh en ail. Road in as uc u e has been epea edly amed as commons, wi h conges ion being seen as he “ agedy o he com- mons”(Iaione, 2010; F ischmann, 2012). A b oade app oach is aken by O'Boyle, who iews mobili y as a “ o m o in as uc u e commons”and de ines “mobili y commons”as “ he a ailabili y o means o mo e sa ely and eely abou he communi y wi h minimal impedimen o incon enience”(2010, p. 59). Ye , his discussion emains ocused on in as uc- u e managemen a he han he meaning o mobili y and pa icula poli ics o mobili y ha p oduce exis ing inequali ies in access o in as uc u e and he de imen al en i onmen al oo p in , o which pa icula mobile “classes”a e esponsible. A mo e ho ough engagemen wi h he concep o “mobili y commons”app oaches small‐scale, localised endea ou s, such as communi y‐owned anspo o social en e p ises unning anspo a ion se ices, as common in as uc u e ha can po en ially be in eg a ed in o la ge anspo sys ems (Glo e , 2016). De eloping insigh s on anspo se ices and ans- po in as uc u e as a common pool esou ce, Glo e (2016) pu s o wa d an app oach ha is b oade han adi ional no ions o he commons as a bo de ed e i o y, u ging a econside a ion o he use o ma e ial in as uc u es and ocusing on ques ions o pa icipa ion in mobili y go e nance. This ision, howe e , s ill elies on sca ci y discou ses, neglec ing o engage wi h he po en ial o cu bing mo emen o econside ing i s alue. Ha d and Neg i (2009) push beyond he no ion o p ope y as commons and hink h ough o he in ellec ual and cul- u al esou ces. They de ine he no ion o cul u al commons as “dynamic, in ol ing bo h he p oduc o labo and he means o u u e p oduc ion. This common is no only he ea h we sha e bu also he languages we c ea e, he social p ac- ices we es ablish, he modes o sociali y ha de ine ou ela ionships, and so o h”(2009, p. 350). Ou heo isa ion o mo- bili y as commons ollows his b oade de ini ion, emb acing o ms o hinking abou and o ganising mobili y ha d aw on he logics o commoning such as communal decision‐making p ac ices, openness o new o ms o pe cei ing he igh o mobili y as well as he igh o immobili y ( he igh no o be displaced), he awa eness o he social p oduc ion o mobili y and he powe ela ions inhe en in i , as well as a commi men o c ea ing equi y and wo king in he in e es o he public good, con es ed as i may be. This no ion o commoning has con inui ies wi h wo k on jus sus ainabili ies and jus ansi- ions ha ha e social jus ice a i s hea . While he p ecise meaning o he commons may no ha e been widely in e o- ga ed, i is he case ha anspo jus ice ad oca es ha e asked us o ocus on mobili y as a key ac o in ongoing ools o exclusion and, mo e hope ully, as a b oad ci izenship igh and a esou ce a he hea o es ablishing an equi able common good (Bulla d & Johnson, 1997; B owne, 2015; Sha pe, 2016). Commoning mobili y can he e o e be unde s ood as a p ocess ha encompasses go e nance shi s o mo e communal and democ a ic o ms while also seeking o mo e beyond small‐scale, niche in e en ions and p ojec s. I is impo an o emembe ha “ he commons”a e always con es ed, as is he ideology behind i (Ha ey 2011). Fu he mo e, while Glo e (2016) desc ibes mobili y commons as a egime o owne ship and Iaione (2010) and F ischmann (2012) ocus on in as- uc u es, ou emphasis is on e hinking he alue, meaning, and p ac ice o mobili y as a s ep owa ds econ igu ing soci- e al mobili y egimes in mo e equi able and en i onmen ally sus ainable ways: a new poli ics o mobili y ansi ions. NIKOLAEVA ET AL. | 353 5 | TOWARDS A NEW POLITICS OF MOBILITY TRANSITIONS In his sec ion, we illus a e ways o hink abou commoning mobili y by d awing ou he h ee essen ial elemen s o a poli- ics o mobili y: mo emen , meaning, and p ac ice. Using wo examples om ou esea ch, we illus a e wha a new poli ics o mobili y ansi ions migh look like by ocusing on commoning mo emen , commoning meaning, and commoning p ac- ice. Commoning mo emen e e s o collec i e engagemen wi h he amoun o mo emen ac oss space; commoning mean- ing is de ined he e as collec i e econside ing o he socie al alue o mobili y; and commoning p ac ice as collec i e e hinking o ways in which mobili y is pe o med and go e ned, wi h a pa icula emphasis on he la e . These elemen s o mobili y a e en angled wi h each o he ; so oo a e he elemen s o commoning mobili y. As physical mo emen is “ he aw ma e ial o he p oduc ion o mobili y”(C esswell, 2010, p. 19), commoning mo emen mo e o en han no akes place in conjunc ion wi h commoning meaning and p ac ice, which a e en angled elemen s o mobili y ha un old ac oss spa ial scales and le els o go e nance. Elemen s o commoning meaning, mo emen , and p ac ice a e p esen in he ansi- ion own mo emen and elewo k ini ia i es, ye hey a e mani es ed s onge in bo om–up mo emen s challenging he enclosu e o public space h ough ca ‐cen ic planning and emphasising he collec i e na u e o p oducing mobili y and mobili y ansi ions, such as a you h‐led ini ia i e “Gene a ion Ze o”in New Zealand o a smalle p o‐cycling communi y g oup “Velo‐Alma y”in Kazakhs an. The la e emphasises ha being in ol ed in cycling ad ocacy means engaging wi h o he s, also d i e s and pedes ians whom hey see as “closes allies”; i means c ea ing a communi y and os e ing “u ban cul u e”(Velo‐Alma y, pe sonal communica ion, 3 Decembe 2015). In he wo b ie igne es below, we illus a e how commoning mo emen , meaning, and p ac ice can be ound ac oss wo di e se si es –one in he Global No h, he o he in he Global Sou h –c ea ing openings o ans o ma i e poli ics o mobili y ansi ions. As we no ed abo e, we highligh hese cases as excep ions o hegemonic neolibe al p ac ices. Com- moning mobili y in bo h cases is no a o alising o disc e e p ocess, a he i is a p ocess ha exhibi s go e nance and p ac- ice‐based ans o ma ions ha se he s age o edi ec and es uc u e adical democ a ic engagemen wi hin exis ing ma e ial ci cums ances. Bo h cases p oduce “ enegade ca og aphies”(Ka z, 1996) o commoning, showing ha al e na i e mobili y p ac ices a e possible. 5.1 | Mobilising mobili y: Fos e ing communi y connec ions h ough cycling Commoning he meaning o mobili y happens when a social ac o o ac o s ac i ely push o e hink he social impac s o mo emen , i s ep esen a ions, o he meaning o ela ionships on he mo e. In he IJbu g a ea in Ams e dam o example, a bo om–up neighbou hood ci ic ini ia i e began in 2011 ha aimed o inc ease cycling h ough communi y connec ions and ac i ism. Ring‐Ring ® uses a sma phone applica ion o encou age mo e people o cycle, bu i wo ks di e en ly om o he nudging applica ions o such ype. Cycling kilome es –“ ie skilome e s”in Du ch, o Fkm –a e eco ded and can be “exchanged” o discoun s in local shops. The co e dis inguishing ea u e o his applica ion is, howe e , i s ocus on changing and poli icising he meaning o mobili y, whe e i p o ides a possibili y o “mobilise mobili y” 4 o a social goal. A public au ho i y, a p i a e company, o a g oup o ci izens can s a a “g oup”in he applica ion, se a cycling a ge (e.g., o achie e 1,000 Fkm pe mon h), alloca e an amoun o money, and announce ha i will be spen on a pa icula social goal i he a ge is achie ed. Ring‐Ring ® collec s he money om he dono and media es he exchange, ans e ing he money o a pa icula local ini ia i e chosen by he g oup. P ojec s such as a local lib a y, a ins alla ions on a local cycling ou e, a monumen in he neighbou hood, ips o a pony a m o child en wi h disabili ies, pu chasing bikes o handicapped people, and plan ing ees we e co‐ inanced in his way. A non‐ma ke based in e en ion, Ring‐Ring ® a emp s o shi he meaning o mobili y o e hink i s po en ial as a com- mon con ibu ion o socie y. The a ionale behind he p og amme is ha cycling con ibu es o neighbou hoods and ci ies no only as an en i onmen ‐ iendly mobili y mode, bu also as ac i i y which –when unde aken collec i ely –suppo s li eabili y, sociali y, and p ospe i y o places, since cyclis s a e encou aged o equen small businesses in he local econ- omy, and o be mo e deeply engaged in he communi y and place a ound hem due o hei slowe speeds and openness. Thus, cycling, acco ding o he ounde o Ring‐Ring ® ,isa“gi ” o onesel and o socie y: by being mobile, you a e enac ing change and econ igu ing you ela ionship wi h he communi y (pe sonal communica ion, 30 Augus 2017). The in e ace o he applica ion media es commoning mo emen and meaning by showing he numbe o Fkm cycled by an indi idual use , he o al amoun o Fkm cycled by all use s, and he amoun o Fkm cycled by pa icula g oups wo king owa ds a common social goal. While he key objec i e o Ring‐Ring ® is o inc ease cycling a es, p e e ably encou aging people o swi ch om d i ing o cycling, i s b oade social goal is o eassess mobili y beyond i s u ili a ian alue and do i in a democ a ic ashion 354 | NIKOLAEVA ET AL.