IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/trapol/v163y2025icp247-261.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How does bike-sharing enable (or not) resilient cities, communities, and individuals? Conceptualising transport resilience from the socio-ecological and multi-level perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Chan, Tommy H.Y.

Abstract

Bicycles play a crucial role in promoting resilient urban mobility, yet current approaches often focus primarily on engineering resilience, emphasising short-term resistance, adaptability, and recovery from disruptions. This perspective tends to overlook the equally important social dynamics and institutional factors. Socio-ecological resilience theory fills this gap by viewing disruptions as opportunities for renewal, innovation, and transformation, recognising that systems operate in dynamic, non-equilibrium states where change is inevitable and unpredictable. However, its application in transport studies has been limited due to the complexity of empirical implementation. This paper utilises the Multi-Level Perspective (MLP) to offer a framework for understanding transport systems as complex socio-technical networks—encompassing artifacts, infrastructure, human actors, regulations, and cultural meanings. MLP's nested, layered ontology helps conceptualise the complexity and evolution of transport systems. Using Hong Kong's dockless bike-sharing system during the social movements and pandemic, this study explores how individual, community, and organisational resilience interact across scales. It shows how institutions both shape and are shaped by human agency, with interpretive flexibility allowing individuals to adapt institutional rules to personal contexts. The structuration of parking practices—shaped by voluntary digital communities managing bike parking and formalised through organisational and regulatory frameworks—illustrates how multi-level resilience arises through interactions among diverse actors, rather than from the mere accumulation of individual actions. While higher degrees of structuration, shaped by the scale of fields and number of actors reproducing them, foster stability, they can also perpetuate social exclusion, highlighting the need for equitable policies that balance individual responsibility with inclusive institutional strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Chan, Tommy H.Y., 2025. "How does bike-sharing enable (or not) resilient cities, communities, and individuals? Conceptualising transport resilience from the socio-ecological and multi-level perspective," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 247-261.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:163:y:2025:i:c:p:247-261
    DOI: 10.1016/j.tranpol.2025.01.020
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X25000204
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.tranpol.2025.01.020?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schot, Johan & Kanger, Laur, 2018. "Deep transitions: Emergence, acceleration, stabilization and directionality," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1045-1059.
    2. Bakhuis, Jerico & Kamp, Linda Manon & Barbour, Natalia & Chappin, Émile Jean Louis, 2024. "Frameworks for multi-system innovation analysis from a sociotechnical perspective: A systematic literature review," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    3. Unruh, Gregory C., 2002. "Escaping carbon lock-in," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 317-325, March.
    4. Teixeira, João Filipe & Silva, Cecília & Moura e Sá, Frederico, 2022. "The strengths and weaknesses of bike sharing as an alternative mode during disruptive public health crisis: A qualitative analysis on the users’ motivations during COVID-19," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 129(C), pages 24-37.
    5. Roberts, Cameron & Geels, Frank W., 2019. "Conditions for politically accelerated transitions: Historical institutionalism, the multi-level perspective, and two historical case studies in transport and agriculture," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 221-240.
    6. Joan Crespo & Raphael Suire & Jerome Vicente, 2014. "Lock-in or lock-out? How structural properties of knowledge networks affect regional resilience," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 199-219, January.
    7. Zhang, Liye & Xiao, Zhe & Ren, Shen & Qin, Zheng & Goh, Rick Siow Mong & Song, Jie, 2022. "Measuring the vulnerability of bike-sharing system," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 353-369.
    8. Chan, Ho-Yin & Chen, Anthony & Ma, Wei & Sze, Nang-Ngai & Liu, Xintao, 2021. "COVID-19, community response, public policy, and travel patterns: A tale of Hong Kong," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 173-184.
    9. Coenen, Lars & Benneworth, Paul & Truffer, Bernhard, 2012. "Toward a spatial perspective on sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(6), pages 968-979.
    10. Geels, Frank W., 2010. "Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 495-510, May.
    11. Chan, Ho-Yin & Xu, Yingying & Chen, Anthony & Zhou, Jiangping, 2023. "Choice and equity: A critical analysis of multi-modal public transport services," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C), pages 114-127.
    12. Geels, Frank W. & Schot, Johan, 2007. "Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 399-417, April.
    13. Maxim Vlasov & Karl Johan Bonnedahl & Zsuzsanna Vincze, 2018. "Entrepreneurship for resilience: embeddedness in place and in trans-local grassroots networks," Journal of Enterprising Communities: People and Places in the Global Economy, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 12(3), pages 374-394, August.
    14. Wang, Yao & Jin, Huan & Zheng, Shiyuan & Shang, Wen-Long & Wang, Kun, 2023. "Bike-sharing duopoly competition under government regulation," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 343(C).
    15. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    16. Geels, Frank W., 2012. "A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 471-482.
    17. Shove, Elizabeth & Walker, Gordon, 2010. "Governing transitions in the sustainability of everyday life," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 471-476, May.
    18. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    19. R. Cantelmi & G. Di Gravio & R. Patriarca, 2021. "Reviewing qualitative research approaches in the context of critical infrastructure resilience," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 341-376, September.
    20. Geels, Frank W., 2002. "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8-9), pages 1257-1274, December.
    21. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2016. "The interplay of institutions, actors and technologies in socio-technical systems — An analysis of transformations in the Australian urban water sector," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 298-312.
    22. Peng, Qiao & Bakkar, Yassine & Wu, Liangpeng & Liu, Weilong & Kou, Ruibing & Liu, Kailong, 2024. "Transportation resilience under Covid-19 Uncertainty: A traffic severity analysis," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    23. Samantha Hayes & Cheryl Desha & Matthew Burke & Mark Gibbs & Mikhail Chester, 2019. "Leveraging socio-ecological resilience theory to build climate resilience in transport infrastructure," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(5), pages 677-699, September.
    24. Adrienne Grêt-Regamey & Sibyl H. Huber & Robert Huber, 2019. "Actors’ diversity and the resilience of social-ecological systems to global change," Nature Sustainability, Nature, vol. 2(4), pages 290-297, April.
    25. Jorge Moya & María Goenechea, 2022. "An Approach to the Unified Conceptualization, Definition, and Characterization of Social Resilience," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(9), pages 1-15, May.
    26. Jan Fransen & Daniela Ochoa Peralta & Francesca Vanelli & Jurian Edelenbos & Beatriz Calzada Olvera, 2022. "The emergence of Urban Community Resilience Initiatives During the COVID-19 Pandemic: An International Exploratory Study," The European Journal of Development Research, Palgrave Macmillan;European Association of Development Research and Training Institutes (EADI), vol. 34(1), pages 432-454, February.
    27. Zhang, Li & Chen, Tingting & Liu, Zhongshan & Yu, Bin & Wang, Yunpeng, 2024. "Analysis of multi-modal public transportation system performance under metro disruptions: A dynamic resilience assessment framework," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    28. van Exel, N. Job A. & Rietveld, Piet, 2001. "Public transport strikes and traveller behaviour," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 8(4), pages 237-246, October.
    29. Chan, Ho-Yin & Xu, Yingying & Wang, Zhuowei & Chen, Anthony, 2024. "The deeper and wider social impacts of transportation infrastructure: From travel experience to sense of place and academic performance," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 51-63.
    30. Lu Cheng & Zhifu Mi & D’Maris Coffman & Jing Meng & Dining Liu & Dongfeng Chang, 2022. "The Role of Bike Sharing in Promoting Transport Resilience," Networks and Spatial Economics, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 567-585, September.
    31. Geoff A. Wilson, 2014. "Community resilience: path dependency, lock-in effects and transitional ruptures," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 57(1), pages 1-26, January.
    32. Bruno, Matthew & Nikolaeva, Anna, 2020. "Towards a maintenance-based approach to mode shift: Comparing two cases of Dutch cycling policy using social practice theory," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    33. Ron Martin, 2010. "Roepke Lecture in Economic Geography—Rethinking Regional Path Dependence: Beyond Lock-in to Evolution," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 86(1), pages 1-27, January.
    34. Geels, Frank W., 2004. "From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 897-920, September.
    35. Denver V. Nixon & Tim Schwanen, 2024. "Community Smarts in Grassroots Initiatives to Support Cycling and Walking in Large Urban Areas," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 9-28, January.
    36. Hoffmann, Sebastian & Weyer, Johannes & Longen, Jessica, 2017. "Discontinuation of the automobility regime? An integrated approach to multi-level governance," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 391-408.
    37. Chan, Ho-Yin & Ma, Hanxi & Zhou, Jiangping, 2024. "Resilience of socio-technical transportation systems: A demand-driven community detection in human mobility structures," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    38. Whitmarsh, Lorraine, 2012. "How useful is the Multi-Level Perspective for transport and sustainability research?," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 483-487.
    39. Schwanen, Tim & Lucas, Karen & Akyelken, Nihan & Cisternas Solsona, Diego & Carrasco, Juan-Antonio & Neutens, Tijs, 2015. "Rethinking the links between social exclusion and transport disadvantage through the lens of social capital," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 123-135.
    40. Kivimaa, Paula & Rogge, Karoline S., 2022. "Interplay of policy experimentation and institutional change in sustainability transitions: The case of mobility as a service in Finland," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    41. Markolf, Samuel A. & Hoehne, Christopher & Fraser, Andrew & Chester, Mikhail V. & Underwood, B. Shane, 2019. "Transportation resilience to climate change and extreme weather events – Beyond risk and robustness," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 174-186.
    42. Lucas, Karen, 2012. "Transport and social exclusion: Where are we now?," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 105-113.
    43. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    44. Jones, P.J.S. & Qiu, W. & De Santo, E.M., 2013. "Governing marine protected areas: Social–ecological resilience through institutional diversity," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 5-13.
    45. Bale, Catherine S.E. & Varga, Liz & Foxon, Timothy J., 2015. "Energy and complexity: New ways forward," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 150-159.
    46. Tim Schwanen, 2015. "The Bumpy Road toward Low-Energy Urban Mobility: Case Studies from Two UK Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(6), pages 1-26, June.
    47. Robert Egan & Brian Caulfield, 2024. "Driving as essential, cycling as conditional: how automobility is politically sustained in discourses of everyday mobility," Mobilities, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 789-805, July.
    48. Chengpeng Wan & Zaili Yang & Di Zhang & Xinping Yan & Shiqi Fan, 2018. "Resilience in transportation systems: a systematic review and future directions," Transport Reviews, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 479-498, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Svensson, Oscar & Nikoleris, Alexandra, 2018. "Structure reconsidered: Towards new foundations of explanatory transitions theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(2), pages 462-473.
    2. Heiberg, Jonas & Truffer, Bernhard & Binz, Christian, 2022. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical configuration analysis – a methodological framework and a case study in the water sector," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    3. Sorrell, Steve, 2018. "Explaining sociotechnical transitions: A critical realist perspective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(7), pages 1267-1282.
    4. Nilsson, Måns & Nykvist, Björn, 2016. "Governing the electric vehicle transition – Near term interventions to support a green energy economy," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 1360-1371.
    5. Contesse, Maria & Duncan, Jessica & Legun, Katharine & Klerkx, Laurens, 2021. "Unravelling non-human agency in sustainability transitions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    6. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Binz, Christian, 2018. "Global socio-technical regimes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 735-749.
    7. Nikas, A. & Koasidis, K. & Köberle, A.C. & Kourtesi, G. & Doukas, H., 2022. "A comparative study of biodiesel in Brazil and Argentina: An integrated systems of innovation perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 156(C).
    8. Manning, Stephan & Reinecke, Juliane, 2016. "A modular governance architecture in-the-making: How transnational standard-setters govern sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 618-633.
    9. Lachman, Daniël A., 2013. "A survey and review of approaches to study transitions," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 269-276.
    10. Fuenfschilling, Lea & Truffer, Bernhard, 2014. "The structuration of socio-technical regimes—Conceptual foundations from institutional theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(4), pages 772-791.
    11. Cheng Wang & Tao Lv & Rongjiang Cai & Jianfeng Xu & Liya Wang, 2022. "Bibliometric Analysis of Multi-Level Perspective on Sustainability Transition Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-31, March.
    12. Canitez, Fatih, 2019. "Pathways to sustainable urban mobility in developing megacities: A socio-technical transition perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 319-329.
    13. Attila Havas & Doris Schartinger & K. Matthias Weber, 2022. "Innovation Studies, Social Innovation, and Sustainability Transitions Research: From mutual ignorance towards an integrative perspective?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 2227, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    14. Weigelt, Carmen & Lu, Shaohua & Verhaal, J. Cameron, 2021. "Blinded by the sun: The role of prosumers as niche actors in incumbent firms’ adoption of solar power during sustainability transitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    15. Hirschhorn, Fabio & Paulsson, Alexander & Sørensen, Claus H. & Veeneman, Wijnand, 2019. "Public transport regimes and mobility as a service: Governance approaches in Amsterdam, Birmingham, and Helsinki," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 178-191.
    16. Haddad, Carolina R. & Bergek, Anna, 2023. "Towards an integrated framework for evaluating transformative innovation policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(2).
    17. Kok, Kristiaan P.W. & Loeber, Anne M.C. & Grin, John, 2021. "Politics of complexity: Conceptualizing agency, power and powering in the transitional dynamics of complex adaptive systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(3).
    18. Turnheim, Bruno & Nykvist, Björn, 2019. "Opening up the feasibility of sustainability transitions pathways (STPs): Representations, potentials, and conditions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 775-788.
    19. Sebastian Fastenrath & Boris Braun, 2018. "Lost in Transition? Directions for an Economic Geography of Urban Sustainability Transitions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    20. Jonas Heiberg & Christian Binz & Bernhard Truffer, 2020. "Assessing transitions through socio-technical network analysis – a methodological framework and a case study from the water sector," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2035, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2020.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:trapol:v:163:y:2025:i:c:p:247-261. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/30473/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.