L O C A L D I F F E R E N C E S I N S U S T A I N A B I L I T Y T R A N S I T I O N S : T H E C A S E O F C A R - S H A R I N G I N T H E N E T H E R L A N D S

Toon Meelen

T H E P UZ Z L E

Why do sustainability transitions hap-pen in some places but not in others?

EV in The Netherlands (RWO, own

calculations,2013)

PV in The Netherlands (Peer, own calculations, 2013)

PV in Germany(Dewald & Truffer, 2012)

THE CASE: CAR SHARING IN THE NETHERLANDS

Peer-to-peer Traditional

G E O G RA P H Y O F S US TA I N I B I L I T Y T RA N S I T I O N S

• Space & Scale (Coenen et al. 2012)

• local factors influencing transitions (e.g. local institutions, urban policies) (Hansen & Coenen, 2014)

• Truffer Dewald (2012) “Market formation”

• Sine Lee (2011) environmental movements

• Longhurst (2015) “alternative milieu” provides epistemological + ontological security

Focus on market/users

M E T H O D O LO GY

• Data on number of shared cars in the Netherlands via the peer-to-peer and traditional model per neighbourhood (n=10,421 cars, n=4047 neighbourhoods)

• Data on geographical and socio-demographic characteristics of neighbourhoods from Dutch statistical offices + car-sharing policy from all municipalities

• Zero inflated Negative Binomial Model

ADOPTIONPER

NEIGHBOURHOOD

Zero inflated part:

Probability that zero cars are

shared in a neighbourhood

  Traditional car sharing

Peer-to-peer car sharing

  Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2

Constant 5.441(8.610)

12.580(7.920)

5.048 (4.186)

5.753(4.737)

Number of cars (x1000) 0.178(0.149)

0.312(0.198)

-1.367*** (0.305)

-1.535***(0.350)

Population density (x1000) 0.062(0.100)

0.093(0.089)

-0.150(0.103)

0.189(0.144)

Distance to facilities -0.108(0.113)

-0.045(0.113)

0.035(0.048)

0.047(0.051)

Income (x1000) 0.083(0.098)

0.002(0.085)

0.063(0.045)

0.080(0.050)

% Vocational education -0.148(0.094)

-0.110(0.077)

-0.043(0.032)

-0.042(0.035)

% college, university education

-0.200*(0.093)

-0.132(0.070)

-0.067 *(0.031)

-0.042(0.035)

% one person households -0.199**(0.067)

-0.163**(0.058)

-0.028(0.031)

-0.031(0.031)

% age 25-45 0.161(0.162)

0.032 (0.119)

0.035(0.068)

0.024(0.075)

% age 45-65 0.130 (0.134)

0.049(0.113)

0.054(0.054)

0.057 (0.060)

% age 65+ 0.272*(0.125)

0.132(0.088)

0.058 (0.046)

0.070(0.048)

% Member environmental organization

-1.219**(0.394)

-1.015*(0.420)

-0.091(0.163)

0.021(0.181)

% Western immigrants 0.073(0.072)

0.212 (0.068)

0.032(0.035)

0.035(0.039)

Municipal policy (Information)

0.425 (0.633)

-0.650(0.752)

Municipal policy (Parking) -0.537 (0.785 )

0.468(1.503)

Spatial lags indep var yes yes yes yes

Mcfadden adj R2 0.346 0.362 0.194 0.196

N 2424 2290 2424 2290

Non-zero observations 439 400 1600 1503

***: sign. < 0.001**: sign. < 0.01*: sign. < 0.05

ADOPTIONPER

NEIGHBOURHOOD

Number of cars shared in

neighbourhoods in which it is likely that cars

are shared

  Traditional car sharing

Peer-to-peer car sharing

  Model 1 Model 2 Model 1 Model 2

Constant -3.586* (1.495)

-3.650*(1.522)

1.028(0.624)

0.938(0.663)

Number of cars (x1000) 0.298*** (0.043)

0.220***(0.043)

0.238***(0.013)

0.238***(0. 014)

Population density (x1000) 0.024 (0.016)

0.042(0.016)

0.033***(0.008)

0.042***(0.009)

Distance to facilities -0.098** (0.031)

-0.071*(0.032)

-0.024 *(0.010)

-0.024*(0.010)

Income (x1000) 0.014 (0.020)

0.007(0.020)

0.001(0.007)

0.004(0.007)

% Vocational education -0.069*** (0.014)

-0.048 **(0.014)

-0.033***(0.006)

-0.025 ***(0.006)

% college, university education

-0.028 (0.016)

-0.028 (0.015)

0.004 (0.005 )

0.003 (0.006)

% one person households 0.038**(0.011)

0.026 **(0.011)

0.014**(0.004 )

0.013**(0.004)

% age 25-45 0.035*(0.017)

0.023(0.017 )

0.008(0.008)

0.002(0.009)

% age 45-65 -0.001(0.018)

0.006 (0.019)

-0.033***(0.008)

-0.036*** (0.009)

% age 65+ -0.025(0.012)

-0.019 (0.013 )

-0.022**(0.006 )

-0.021** (0.006)

% Member environmental organization

0.414***(0.070 )

0.373 ***(0.079)

0.321***(0.029)

0.316***(0.034 )

% Western immigrants 0.062 *(0.018)

0.110***(0.020)

-0.018*(0.007)

-0.018*(0.007)

Municipal policy (Information)

0.618***(0.169)

0.181 **(0.061)

Municipal policy (Parking) 0.510*(0.234)

0.137 (0.071)

Spatial lags indep var yes yes yes yes

Mcfadden adj R2 0.346 0.362 0.194 0.196

N 2424 2290 2424 2290

Non-zero observations 439 400 1600 1503

***: sign. < 0.001**: sign. < 0.01*: sign. < 0.05

Conclusions:

• Peer-to-peer car-sharing occurs everywhere, traditional car-sharing occurs in places with people that are environmentally aware

• Policy mixed results

• Environmental awareness strong predictor of number of shared cars

• Peer-to-peer car-sharing for younger, traditional car-sharing for older people

• Questions?