Top

BMC Public Health

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2024 | Research

3 Months without the car in Bielefeld, Germany– a mixed-method study exploring individual motivation to participate in a municipal intervention

Authors: Anna Christina Nowak, Susanne Lopez Lumbi, Timothy Mc Call

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2024

Abstract

Background

Climate change is a major public health issue worldwide. To achieve climate targets and reduce morbidity, a paradigm shift in individual behavior e.g., in mobility, is needed. Municipal interventions can motivate individuals to engage in climate-friendly behavior through different psychological mechanisms. In order for successful interventions, it is necessary to gain better insight from study participants and their reasons for participating in mobility projects (e.g., motivational aspects).

Materials and methods

A mixed-methods design was used to evaluate reasons and characteristics of people for participating in an municipal mobility intervention. The quantitative sub-study assesses socioeconomic characteristics, environmental awareness and perceived stress. The qualitative sub-study explores motivation for participation and change, perspectives on car replacement and reasons for car use.

Results

Results show that participants (n = 42) are rather high educated and show medium environmental awareness. Participants of the qualitative study part (n = 15) were motiviated to reduce car use already before the intervention and used the intervention as starting point or trial phase.

Conclusions

Urban intervention projects with fitted recruitment strategies and better insights from study participants with the aim to motivate individuals to engage in climate-friendly behavior can help to strengthen sustainability and public health.

Available only for authorised users

IPCC. Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability; 2022.

Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen (WBGU). Planetare Gesundheit: Worüber wir jetzt reden müssen. Berlin: Wissenschaftlicher Beirat d. Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen; 2021.

Kahlenborn W, Porst L, Voß M, Fritsch U, Renner K, Zebisch M, et al. Klimawirkungs- Und Risikoanalyse 2021 für Deutschland. 26th ed. Dessau-Roßlau; 2021.

Wynes S, Nicholas KA. The climate mitigation gap: education and government recommendations miss the most effective individual actions. Environ Res Lett. 2017;12:74024. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aa7541.CrossRef

Blitz A, Busch-Geertsema A, Lanzendorf M. More Cycling, Less Driving? Findings of a Cycle Street intervention study in the Rhine-Main Metropolitan Region, Germany. Sustainability. 2020;12:805. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030805.CrossRef

Heinrichs D, Jarass J. Alltagsmobilität in Städten gesund gestalten: Wie Stadtplanung Fuß- Und Radverkehr fördern Kann. [Designing healthy mobility in cities: how urban planning can promote walking and cycling]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2020;63:945–52. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-020-03180-1.CrossRefPubMed

European Environment Agency. Transport and environment report 2022 - Digitalisation in the mobility system: challenges and opportunities; 2023.

van Wee B. Peak car: the first signs of a shift towards ICT-based activities replacing travel? A discussion paper. Transp Policy. 2015;42:1–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2015.04.002.CrossRef

Eurostat SP. 2022: Energy and Environment. 2022. https://transport.ec.europa.eu/media-corner/publications/statistical-pocketbook-2022_en. Accessed 21 Nov 2022.

10.

Schelewsky M, Follmer R, Dickmann C. CO2-Fußabdrücke Im Alltagsverkehr. Datenauswertung auf Basis der Studie Mobilität in Deutschland; 2020.

11.

Wothge J, Niemann H. Gesundheitliche Auswirkungen Von Umgebungslärm Im Urbanen Raum. [Adverse health effects due to environmental noise exposure in urban areas]. Bundesgesundheitsblatt Gesundheitsforschung Gesundheitsschutz. 2020;63:987–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00103-020-03178-9.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Temenos C, Nikolaeva A, Schwanen T, Cresswell T, Sengers F, Watson M, Sheller M. Theorizing Mobil Transitions Transfers. 2017;7:113–29. https://doi.org/10.3167/TRANS.2017.070109.CrossRef

13.

Johansson E, Winslott Hiselius L, Koglin T, Wretstrand A. Evaluation of public transport: regional policies and planning practices in Sweden. Urban Plann Transp Res. 2017;5:59–77. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2017.1395291.CrossRef

14.

Steinhorst J, Klöckner CA. Effects of Monetary Versus Environmental Information Framing: implications for long-term pro-environmental behavior and intrinsic motivation. Environ Behav. 2018;50:997–1031. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916517725371.CrossRef

15.

Staats H, van Leeuwen E, Wit A. A longitudinal study of informational interventions to Save Energy in an Office Building. J Appl Behav Anal. 2000;33:101–4. https://doi.org/10.1901/jaba.2000.33-101.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

16.

Reese G, Loew K, Steffgen GA, Towel Less. Social norms enhance pro-environmental behavior in hotels. J Soc Psychol. 2014;154:97–100. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2013.855623.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Kaiser FG, Henn L, Marschke B. Financial rewards for long-term environmental protection. J Environ Psychol. 2020;68:101411. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101411.CrossRef

18.

Filigrana P, Levy JI, Gauthier J, Batterman S, Adar SD. Health benefits from cleaner vehicles and increased active transportation in Seattle, Washington. J Expo Sci Environ Epidemiol. 2022;32:538–44. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41370-022-00423-y.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

19.

Osbaldiston R, Schott JP. Environmental sustainability and behavioral science. Environ Behav. 2012;44:257–99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916511402673.CrossRef

20.

Whitburn J, Linklater W, Abrahamse W. Meta-analysis of human connection to nature and proenvironmental behavior. Conserv Biol. 2020;34:180–93. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13381.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Barragan-Jason G, de Mazancourt C, Parmesan C, Singer MC, Loreau M. Human-nature connectedness as a pathway to sustainability: a global meta-analysis. Conserv Lett. 2022;15:e12852. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12852.CrossRefPubMed

22.

Wyss AM, Knoch D, Berger S. When and how pro-environmental attitudes turn into behavior: the role of costs, benefits, and self-control. J Environ Psychol. 2022;79:101748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2021.101748.CrossRef

23.

Creswell JW. A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Los Angeles. London, New Delhi, Singapore, Washington DC: Sage; 2015.

24.

Engel U, Pötschke M. Mobilität und Verkehrsmittelwahl 1999/2000. GESIS Data Archive; 2013.

25.

WHO Collaborating Centre for Mental health. WHO (Fünf) - Fragebogen zum Wohlbefinden. 1998.

26.

Schneider EE, Schönfelder S, Domke-Wolf M, Wessa M. Measuring stress in clinical and nonclinical subjects using a German adaptation of the perceived stress scale. Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2020;20:173–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchp.2020.03.004.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

27.

Geiger S. Weiterentwicklung Einer Skala Zur Messung Von Zentralen Kenngrößen Des Umweltbewusstseins. 25th ed. Dessau-Roßlau; 2020.

28.

Martin C, Czellar S. The extended inclusion of Nature in Self scale. J Environ Psychol. 2016;47:181–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2016.05.006.CrossRef

29.

Sischka PE, Costa AP, Steffgen G, Schmidt AF. The WHO-5 well-being index – validation based on item response theory and the analysis of measurement invariance across 35 countries. J Affect Disorders Rep. 2020;1:100020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadr.2020.100020.CrossRef

30.

Cohen S, Kamarck T, Mermelstein R. A Global measure of perceived stress. J Health Soc Behav. 1983;24:385. https://doi.org/10.2307/2136404.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Schultz PW. Inclusion with nature: the psychology of human-nature relations. In: Schmuck P, Schultz WP, editors. Psychology of Sustainable Development. New York: Springer; 2002. pp. 61–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4615-0995-0_4.CrossRef

32.

R Core Team. R: a Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing; 2021.

33.

Wickham H, Averick M, Bryan J, Chang W, McGowan L, François R, et al. Welcome Tidyverse JOSS. 2019;4:1686. https://doi.org/10.21105/joss.01686.CrossRef

34.

Hennink M, Kaiser BN. Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: a systematic review of empirical tests. Soc Sci Med. 2022;292:114523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523.CrossRefPubMed

35.

Witzel A. Das problemzentrierte interview. Forum: Qualitative Sozialforschung. 2000. https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/uetq8.CrossRef

36.

Kuckartz U. Qualitative inhaltsanalyse. Methoden, Praxis, Computerunterstützung. 3rd ed. Weinheim: Beltz; 2016.

37.

Software VERBI. MAXQDA 2022. Berlin; 2021.

38.

Howell RA. Lights, camera ? action? Altered attitudes and behaviour in response to the climate change film The Age of Stupid. Global Environmental Change. 2011;21:177–87. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2010.09.004.CrossRef

39.

Rau H, Nicolai S, Stoll-Kleemann S. A systematic review to assess the evidence-based effectiveness, content, and success factors of behavior change interventions for enhancing pro-environmental behavior in individuals. Front Psychol. 2022;13:901927. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.901927.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Laakso S. Giving up cars – the impact of a mobility experiment on carbon emissions and everyday routines. J Clean Prod. 2017;169:135–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.03.035.CrossRef

41.

Hudde A. Educational differences in Cycling: evidence from German cities. Sociology. 2022;56:909–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/00380385211063366.CrossRef

42.

Stieß I, Sunderer G, Raschweski L, Stein M, Götz K, Belz J, et al. Repräsentativumfrage zum Umweltbewusstsein Und Umweltverhalten Im Jahr 2020. 20th ed. Dessau-Roßlau; 2022.

43.

Hudde A. The unequal cycling boom in Germany. J Transp Geogr. 2022;98:103244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2021.103244.CrossRef

44.

Heinen E, Maat K, van Wee B. The role of attitudes toward characteristics of bicycle commuting on the choice to cycle to work over various distances. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ. 2011;16:102–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2010.08.010.CrossRef

45.

Heinen E, Maat K, van Wee B. The effect of work-related factors on the bicycle commute mode choice in the Netherlands. Transportation. 2013;40:23–43. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-012-9399-4.CrossRef

46.

Plaut PO. Non-motorized commuting in the US. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ. 2005;10:347–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2005.04.002.CrossRef

47.

Guo JY, Bhat CR, Copperman RB. Effect of the built Environment on Motorized and Nonmotorized trip making. Transp Res Rec. 2007;2010:1–11. https://doi.org/10.3141/2010-01.CrossRef

48.

Parkin J, Wardman M, Page M. Estimation of the determinants of bicycle mode share for the journey to work using census data. Transportation. 2007;35:93–109. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-007-9137-5.CrossRef

49.

Gilbert H, Pieters J, Allan A. Families, children and car: the environmental cost of chauffering children. Australia: Darwin; 2018.

50.

McCarthy L, Delbosc A, Currie G, Molloy A. Factors influencing travel mode choice among families with young children (aged 0–4): a review of the literature. Transp Reviews. 2017;37:767–81. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2017.1354942.CrossRef

51.

Handy SL, Xing Y. Factors correlated with bicycle commuting: a study in six small U.S. cities. Int J Sustainable Transp. 2011;5:91–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/15568310903514789.CrossRef

52.

Semenescu A, Coca D. Why people fail to bike the talk: Car dependence as a barrier to cycling. Transp Res Part F: Traffic Psychol Behav. 2022;88:208–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2022.05.025.CrossRef

53.

Steg L, Perlaviciute G, van der Werff E, Lurvink J. The significance of hedonic values for environmentally relevant attitudes, preferences, and actions. Environ Behav. 2014;46:163–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013916512454730.CrossRef

54.

Ramos ÉMS, Bergstad CJ, Chicco A, Diana M. Mobility styles and car sharing use in Europe: attitudes, behaviours, motives and sustainability. Eur Transp Res Rev. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-020-0402-4.CrossRef

55.

Andersson A. Is climate morality the answer? Preconditions affecting the motivation to decrease private car use. Transp Res Part D: Transp Environ. 2020;78:102198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2019.11.027.CrossRef

56.

Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Stages of change in the modification of problem behaviors. Prog Behav Modif. 1992;28:183–218.PubMed

57.

Vlaev I, King D, Darzi A, Dolan P. Changing health behaviors using financial incentives: a review from behavioral economics. BMC Public Health. 2019;19:1059. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-7407-8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

58.

Nello-Deakin S, Brömmelstroet M. Scaling up cycling or replacing driving? Triggers and trajectories of bike–train uptake in the Randstad area. Transportation. 2021;48:3239–67. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11116-021-10165-9.CrossRef

59.

We are possible. Going car free: Assessing the barriers to low-carbon transport for existing car users. 2022. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d30896202a18c0001b49180/t/62a2196fd681bc751e34de84/1654790512740/Copy+of+Going+Car+Free+briefing+note.pdf. Accessed 29 May 2023.

60.

de Kruijf J, Ettema D, Kamphuis CB, Dijst M. Evaluation of an incentive program to stimulate the shift from car commuting to e-cycling in the Netherlands. J Transp Health. 2018;10:74–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2018.06.003.CrossRef

61.

Ek K, Wårell L, Andersson L. Motives for walking and cycling when commuting– differences in local contexts and attitudes. Eur Transp Res Rev. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-021-00502-5.CrossRef

Title: 3 Months without the car in Bielefeld, Germany– a mixed-method study exploring individual motivation to participate in a municipal intervention
Authors: Anna Christina Nowak
Susanne Lopez Lumbi
Timothy Mc Call
Publication date: 01-12-2024
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2024
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18266-7

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

3 Months without the car in Bielefeld, Germany– a mixed-method study exploring individual motivation to participate in a municipal intervention

Abstract

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2024

Social determinants of health during and after coronavirus: a qualitative study

Exploring predictors and prevalence of postpartum depression among mothers: Multinational study

Would shared decision-making be useful in breast cancer screening programmes? A qualitative study using focus group discussions to gather evidence from French women with different socioeconomic backgrounds

The prevalence of sedentary behavior among university students in Saudi Arabia

A scoping review on the barriers to and facilitators of health services utilisation related to refugee settlement in regional or rural areas of the host country

The association between serum magnesium and chronic kidney disease in Chinese adults: a cross-sectional study