Book review: Urban transport development. A complex issue (Gunilla Jönson and Emin Tengström (eds.))
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book presents a selection of contributions to the 2003 Conference of The Volvo Research and Educational Foundations in Gteborg.It is not meant as a book of proceedings but as a book representing the major perspectives of the conference on urban transport problems.These perspectives can be summarized as follows: a more or less holistic view to be achieved through a system approach and an emphasis on complexity; in addition, a focus on the long-term dynamics of the development of the transport system.The book is structured into five sections.Section one (chapters 1 through 3) is an attempt to elaborate the above perspectives to provide common ground for the subsequent sections.The perspectives are highly relevant but also very comprehensive.In this light, the discussion is rather brief and could have been more systematic as an introduction.The second section (chapter 4 through 8) deals with complexity and understanding the variety herein in the practice of public transport systems in various places, i.e., Toronto (Canada) and Melbourne (Australia), Dar-es-Salaam (Tanzania), Kingston (Jamaica), and some cities in China and the US.The focus is on planning systems of urban public transport, including the level of competition, for example, coordination by the city administration as a monopoly and, as the opposite, to leave urban public transport to private operators.Both in Kingston and Dar-es-Salaam reforms of a monopoly towards privatisation and deregulation appear not successful and call for intermediate systems of controlled competition and coordinated planning.This section is very informative but sometimes also too broad, e.g. by including the impact of mass motorisation on societal development and problem perceptions.In section three (chapter 9 through 12) various analytical perspectives are provided, mainly related with mega-trends.With regard to the US, attention is drawn to the policy complexity as a result of experts' conflicting ways of interpreting transport problems, and political and institutional barriers to introduce new ideas.However, also some promising new initiatives are forwarded by the authors, like car-sharing and shuttle programs for home-work trips.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".