Transportation· 2026Q1
Who supports transformative parking policies? Insights from urban population segments
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Psychographic segmentation of 1,186 urban residents reveals four distinct profiles regarding transformative parking policies, with 'Car-Independent Change Supporters' showing the highest acceptability.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- Policy-specific beliefs, transport norms, and perceived parking problems are the strongest predictors of transformative parking policy acceptability.
- Four distinct population segments were identified: Car-Independent Change Supporters, Car-Independent Moderates, Problem-Focused Sceptics, and Car-Dependent Status-Quo Supporters.
- Acceptability of transformative parking policies is highest among Car-Independent Change Supporters and decreases across the other identified segments.
- Segments differ significantly in socio-demographics, spatial contexts, travel behavior, and transport attitudes.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract Transformative parking policies aim to address transport and land-use issues in urban neighbourhoods, yet concerns over public acceptability often limit their implementation. To identify barriers and entry points for implementation, this study examines who supports transforming on-street parking by segmenting the population based on psychological factors associated with policy acceptability. Using survey data from N = 1,186 residents in two German cities, we find that policy-specific beliefs, transport norms and perceptions of parking-related problems are the strongest predictors of acceptability. Psychographic segmentation via k-means clustering reveals four distinct parking policy profiles: Car-Independent Change Supporters , Car-Independent Moderates , Problem-Focused Sceptics and Car-Dependent Status-Quo Supporters . Acceptability is highest among Change Supporters and declines across the other groups. The segments also differ systematically in their socio-demographics, spatial contexts, travel behaviour and transport attitudes. Building on these profiles, we discuss implications for staged implementation strategies that initially prioritise receptive segments and broadly supported policies, while highlighting the need to address car dependency, perceived unfairness, and disproportionate burdens on vulnerable groups through complementary measures.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Transportation, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Building and Construction
Building and ConstructionEngineering