Advertisement

Comparing Urban Mobility and the Energy Transition in France, USA, and Brazil: From Research Collaboration to Institutional Partnerships

  • J. Kent Fitzsimons
  • Guy Tapie
  • Patrice Godier
  • Cristina de Araújo Lima
Chapter
Part of the International and Development Education book series (INTDE)

Abstract

This chapter describes and analyzes a research project undertaken by a multidisciplinary team, including scholars from France, the USA, and Brazil, which was formed to respond the French government’s 2011 research program Ignis mutat res. The proposal aimed to study the effects of the energy transition on mobility policy and practices, as well as on urban form, in three metropolitan areas: Bordeaux, Cincinnati, and Curitiba. After a brief presentation of the project’s research methodology and results, the chapter focuses on the key factors that contributed to the endeavor’s positive outcome, as well as on the limiting factors and obstacles encountered. It aims to contribute to understanding the parameters involved in collaborations between contrasting national and institutional cultures, as transnational research becomes increasingly important in light of global challenges such as climate change.

Keywords

Urban mobility Energy transition Academic partnership 

References

  1. Banister, D. (2005). Unsustainable Transport: City Transport in the New Century. London: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
  2. Bardet, F., & Helluin, J.-J. (2010). Comparer les Performances des Villes. Le Programme des Indicateurs Pour les Villes du Monde de la Banque Mondiale [Comparing City Performance: The World Bank’s Program for World City Indicators]. Revue Française de Socio-Économie, 5(1), 83–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Beck, U. (2001). La Société du Risque. Sur la Voie d’une Autre Modernité [Risk Society: The Path of Another Modernity]. Paris: Aubier.Google Scholar
  4. Biau, V., Godier, P., & Haumont, B. (1998). Métiers de l’Architecture et Position des Architectes en Europe : Une Approche Comparative [Practices in Architecture and the Positioning of Architects in Europe: A Comparative Approach]. In M. Bonnet (Ed.), L’Elaboration des Projets Architecturaux et Urbains en Europe V. 3 “Les Pratiques de l’Architecture”. Paris: PUCA.Google Scholar
  5. Chadoin, O., Godier, P., & Tapie, G. (2000). Du Politique à l’Œuvre. Bilbao, Bordeaux, Bercy, San Sébastian. Systèmes et Acteurs des Grands Projets Urbains et Architecturaux [From Policy to Project. Bilbao, Bordeaux, Bercy and San Sebastian. Systems and Actors in Major Urban and Architectural Projects]. La Tour d’Aigues: Editions de l’Aube.Google Scholar
  6. Choi, B. C. K., & Pak, A. W. P. (2006). Multidisciplinarity, Interdisciplinarity and Transdisciplinarity in Health Research, Services, Education and Policy: 1. Definitions, Objectives, and Evidence of Effectiveness. Clinical & Investigative Medicine, 29(6), 351–364.Google Scholar
  7. Cresswell, T. (2011). Mobilities I: Catching Up. Progress in Human Geography, 35(4), 550–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. de Melo, H. P., & Rodrigues, L. (2006). Pioneiras da Ciência no Brasil. [Women Science Pioneers in Brazil]. Rio de Janeiro: SPBC.Google Scholar
  9. de Tocqueville, A. (1986 [1835]). De la Démocratie en Amérique [Democracy in America] (vol. 1). Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
  10. Donzelot, J. (2003). Faire Société. La Politique de la Ville aux Etats-Unis et en France [Making Society: Urban Policy in the USA and in France]. Paris: Seuil.Google Scholar
  11. Dupré, M., Jacob, A., Lallement, M., Lefèvre, G., & Spurk, J. (2003). Les Comparaisons Internationales: Intérêt et Actualité d’une Stratégie de Recherche [International Comparison: A Research Strategy’s Topicality]. In M. Lallement & J. Spurk (Eds.), Stratégies de la Comparaison Internationale. Paris: Presses du CNRS.Google Scholar
  12. Dureau, F., & Levy, J.-P. (2007). Villes et Mobilités au Nord et au Sud: la Construction d'une Problématique Commune [Cities and Mobility in the North and in the South: Building a Common Problematics]. Autrepart, 1(41), 135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Erhenberg, A. (2010). La Société du Malaise [The Uneasy Society]. Paris: Odile Jacob.Google Scholar
  14. Ferraz, E. (2013). Seja a Pessoa Certa no Lugar Certo [Be the Right Person in the Right Place]. São Paulo: Gente.Google Scholar
  15. Figueiredo, R., & Lamounier B. (1996). As Cidades que Dão Certo [Cities That Work]. Brasilia: MH Comunicação.Google Scholar
  16. Fitzsimons, J. K., de Andrade Pereira, M., de Araújo Lima, C., Chifos, C., Gerbeaud, F., Godier, P., Schmid, A. L., Russell, F., Tapie, G., & Williamson, R. (2013). Métropoles et Mobilités Durables à l’Epreuve d’un Nouveau Paradigme Energétique; Bordeaux – France, Cincinnati – Etats unis, Curitiba – Brésil [Sustainable Metropolitan Areas and Mobility Facing a New Energy Paradigm: Bordeaux, France, Cincinnati, USA, and Curitiba, Brazil]. Final Report for Research Program Ignis Mutat Res: Looking at Architecture, the City and the Landscape Through the Prism of Energy, Bureau de la Recherche Architecturale Urbaine et Paysagère, Ministère de la Culture et de la Communication, France [Office of Architectural, Urban and Landscape Research, Ministry of Culture and Communication, France].Google Scholar
  17. Godier, P. (2001). Coordination et Coopération dans les Grands Projets Urbains et Architecturaux en France et en Espagne [Coordination and Cooperation in Major Urban and Architectural Projects in France and Spain]. In Cahiers Ramau 2, May. Paris: Éditions de La Villette.Google Scholar
  18. Godier, P. (2003). Du Projet à la Coordination : Parcours d’un Architecte Urbaniste ‘Coordonnateur’ [From Project to Coordination: The Career Path of a ‘Coordinator’ Architect-Planner]. In Cahiers Ramau 3, October. Paris: Éditions de la Villette.Google Scholar
  19. Godier, P., & Tapie, G. (1997). L’Elaboration des Projets Architecturaux et Urbains en Europe: Acteurs et Projets (1) [The Elaboration of Architectural and Urban Projects in Europe: Actors and Projets (1)]. Paris: PUCA-CSTB.Google Scholar
  20. Goodman, J., Laube, M., & Schwenk, J. (2006, Winter). Curitiba’s Bus System is a Model for Rapid Transit. Race, Poverty and Environment. (2005/2006): 75–76. http://www.reimaginerpe.org/files/25.Curitiba.pdf. Accessed 16 Jan 2015.
  21. Gruber, S. (2012). Learning From Curitiba. The Successes and Failures of an Early Instance of Urban Acupuncture. Urban Transit, 72–73. www.ifa.de/fileadmin/pdf/kunst/poc-gruber_en.pdf. Accessed 10 Jan 2015.
  22. Gunderson, D. (2014). The Curitiba Experiment. Planning Required. Boise State Community and Regional Planning Student Blog. https://boiseplanning.wordpress.com/2014/04/28/the-curitiba-experiment. Accessed 16 Jan 2015.
  23. Haesbaert, R. (2003). Da Desterritorialização à Multiterritorialidade [From De-territorialization to Multi-territoriality]. Boletim Gaúcho de Geografica, 29, 11–24. http://seer.ufrgs.br/bgg/article/view/38739/26249. Accessed 18 Jan 2015.
  24. Hassenteufel, P. (2005). De la Comparaison Internationale à la Comparaison Transnationale [From International Comparison to Transnational Comparison]. Revue Française de Science Politique, 55, 113–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Jonas, H. ([1979]1991). Le Principe de Responsabilité [The Responsibility Principle]. Paris: Flammarion.Google Scholar
  26. Le Néchet, F. (2011, May 18). Consommation d’Energie et Mobilité Quotidienne Selon la Configuration des Densités dans 34 Villes Européennes [Urban Spatial Structure, Daily Mobility and Energy Consumption: A Study of 34 European Cities]. Cybergeo: European Journal of Geography, Systèmes, Modélisation, Géostatistiques.Google Scholar
  27. Lévy, J. (2010). Le Développement Urbain Durable entre Consensus et Controverse [Sustainable Urban Development, Between Consensus and Controversy]. L’Information Géographique, 74(3), 39–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lima, M. F. E. M., & Lima-Filho, D. O. (2009). Condições de Trabalho e Saúde do/a Professor/a Universitário/a [The Working Conditions and Health of the University Professor]. Ciências & Cognição, 14(3), 62–82.Google Scholar
  29. Massot, M.-H. (2010). Mobilités et Modes de Vie Métropolitains. Les Intelligences du Quotidien [Metropolitan Mobility and Lifestyles. Everyday Intelligence]. Paris: L’Oeil d’Or.Google Scholar
  30. McKibben, B. (2005, November 8). Curitiba: A Global Model For Development. CommonDreams. http://www.commondreams.org/cgi-bin/print.cgi?file=/views05/1108-33.htm. Accessed 15 Jan 2015.
  31. Menezes, C. L. (1996). Desenvolvimento Urbano e Meio Ambiente: A Experiência de Curitiba [Urban Development and the Environment: The Curitiba Experiment]. Campinas: Papirus.Google Scholar
  32. Newman, P., & Kenworthy, J. (1999). Sustainability and Cities: Overcoming Automobile Dependence. Washington, DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
  33. Orfeuil, J.-P. (2010, December 27). La Mobilité, Nouvelle Question Sociale? [Mobility, a Novel Social Question?]. SociologieS. http://sociologies.revues.org/3321. Accessed 7 Nov 2016.
  34. Parin, C., Tapie, G., Gerbeaud, F., & Malignon, C. (2008). Développement Durable Territorial, une Comparaison Franco-Thaïlandaise [Sustainable Territorial Development: A Franco-Thai Comparison]. Final report, D2RT PUCA 2005–2008, PUCA, MEDAD.Google Scholar
  35. Pinderhughes, R. (2004). Alternative Urban Futures. Planning for Sustainable Development in Cities Throughout the World. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  36. Rifkin, J. (2011). The Third Industrial Revolution; How Lateral Power is Transforming Energy, the Economy, and the World. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  37. Rodrigues, A. M. (2005, December). Problemática Ambiental – Agenda Política. Espaço, Território, Classes Sociais [Environmental Problematics as Political Agenda. Space, Territory, Social Class]. Boletim Paulista de Geografia. Perspectiva Crítica, 83, 91–110.Google Scholar
  38. Ruano, M. (1999). Eco-urbanism – Sustainable Human Settlements: 60 Case Studies. Editorial Barcelona: Gustavo Gili.Google Scholar
  39. Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006). The New Mobilities Paradigm. Environment and Planning A, 38(2), 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tapie, G. (2000). Architectes: Mutations d'une Profession [The Architect: Changes in a Profession]. Paris: L’Harmattan.Google Scholar
  41. Tapie, G. (2003). Les Professions de la Maîtrise d’Œuvre : Architectes, Ingénierie, Economistes de la Construction [The Construction Professions: Architects, Engineers, Quantity Surveyors]. Paris: La documentation Française.Google Scholar
  42. Tapie, G. (2005). Maison Individuelle, Architecture, Urbanité [The Single-Family House, Architecture and Urbanity]. La Tour d’Aigues: Editions de l’aube.Google Scholar
  43. Tapie, G., Kent Fitzsimons, J., & Godier, P. (2014). Comparer la Fabrication de la Ville: Rigueur Méthodologique et Imagination Sociologique [Comparing City Building: Methodological Rigor and Sociological Imagination]. 13p. (Unpublished).Google Scholar
  44. Tress, B., Tress, G., & Fry, G. (2005). Defining Integrative Research Concepts and Process of Knowledge Production. In B. Tress, G. Tress, G. Fry, & P. Opdam (Eds.), From Landscape Research to Landscape Planning: Aspects of Integration, Education and Application. Dordrecht: Springer. http://atlas.uniscape.eu/allegati/02_tress.pdf. Accessed 19 Jan 2015.
  45. United Nations Conference on Environment and Development [UNCED]. (1993). Agenda 21: Programme of Action for Sustainable Development; Rio Declaration on Environment and Development; Statement of Forest Principles: The Final Text of Agreements Negotiated by Governments at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), 3–14 June 1992, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Chapter 38: International Institutional Arrangements. New York: United Nations Department of Public Information.Google Scholar
  46. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO]. (2015). Women in Science. UNESCO Institute for Statistics Fact Sheet N. 34. http://www.uis.unesco.org/ScienceTechnology/Pages/gender-and-science.aspx
  47. van den Besselaar, P., & Heimeriks, G. (2001, July 16–20). Disciplinary, Multidisciplinary, Interdisciplinary. Concepts and Indicators. Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Scientometrics and Infometrics-ISSI2001. Sydney, Australia, 705–716. http://heimeriks.net/2002issi.pdf. Accessed 19 Jan 2015.
  48. Veiga, A. M. (2006). Mulheres e Ciência: Uma História Necessária [Women and Science: a necessary history]. Estudos Feministas. Florianopolis, 14 (3): 819–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vigour, C. (2005). La Comparaison dans les Sciences Sociales. Pratiques et Méthodes [Comparison in the Social Sciences. Practices and Methods]. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. Kent Fitzsimons
    • 1
  • Guy Tapie
    • 1
  • Patrice Godier
    • 1
  • Cristina de Araújo Lima
    • 2
  1. 1.PAVE Research LaboratoryBordeaux National School of Architecture and Landscape ArchitectureBordeauxFrance
  2. 2.Department of Architecture and Urban PlanningFederal University of ParanaCuritibaBrazil

Personalised recommendations