Generic functions of railway stations: A conceptual basis for the development of common system understanding and assessment criteria

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Standard

Generic functions of railway stations: A conceptual basis for the development of common system understanding and assessment criteria. / Zemp, Stefan; Stauffacher, Michael; Lang, Daniel et al.
in: Transport Policy, Jahrgang 18, Nr. 2, 03.2011, S. 446-455.

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Bibtex

@article{360928d5c5754bcd8f552cfdfbd99ef2,
title = "Generic functions of railway stations: A conceptual basis for the development of common system understanding and assessment criteria",
abstract = "The redevelopment of railway stations calls for the integration of many different objectives. Two crucial challenges thereby are the development of a common system understanding among the multiple stakeholders with potentially conflicting interests and the structured definition of comprehensiveassessment criteria. Defining the functions of the system railway station, i.e. discussing what the system should do, can support solving these challenges. Based on a review of Swiss railway stations in a transdisciplinary research project applying four focus groups (n¼38), 28 expert interviews and twoexpert workshops, we present a structured framework of five generic functions of railway stations and their interdependencies. The five generic functions are: linking catchment area and transport network, supporting transfer between modes of transport, facilitating commercial use of real estate, providingpublic space, and contributing to the identity of the surrounding area. Potential conflicts between functions are identified. They concern the competition of multiple functions for space, for customer attention or for revenues as well as increasing system complexities with station size. We illustrate how the framework of functions can be used to foster a common system understanding and to develop assessment criteria. Although elaborated from a Swiss perspective the framework is perceived adaptable to railway stations of other countries.",
keywords = "Environmental planning, Functions , Stakeholders, Common system understanding , Assessment, Railway station, Systemic perspective , Assessment, Common system understanding, Functions, Railway station, Stakeholders, Systemic perspective",
author = "Stefan Zemp and Michael Stauffacher and Daniel Lang and Scholz, {Roland W.}",
year = "2011",
month = mar,
doi = "10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.09.007",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "446--455",
journal = "Transport Policy",
issn = "0967-070X",
publisher = "Elsevier Ltd",
number = "2",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Generic functions of railway stations

T2 - A conceptual basis for the development of common system understanding and assessment criteria

AU - Zemp, Stefan

AU - Stauffacher, Michael

AU - Lang, Daniel

AU - Scholz, Roland W.

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - The redevelopment of railway stations calls for the integration of many different objectives. Two crucial challenges thereby are the development of a common system understanding among the multiple stakeholders with potentially conflicting interests and the structured definition of comprehensiveassessment criteria. Defining the functions of the system railway station, i.e. discussing what the system should do, can support solving these challenges. Based on a review of Swiss railway stations in a transdisciplinary research project applying four focus groups (n¼38), 28 expert interviews and twoexpert workshops, we present a structured framework of five generic functions of railway stations and their interdependencies. The five generic functions are: linking catchment area and transport network, supporting transfer between modes of transport, facilitating commercial use of real estate, providingpublic space, and contributing to the identity of the surrounding area. Potential conflicts between functions are identified. They concern the competition of multiple functions for space, for customer attention or for revenues as well as increasing system complexities with station size. We illustrate how the framework of functions can be used to foster a common system understanding and to develop assessment criteria. Although elaborated from a Swiss perspective the framework is perceived adaptable to railway stations of other countries.

AB - The redevelopment of railway stations calls for the integration of many different objectives. Two crucial challenges thereby are the development of a common system understanding among the multiple stakeholders with potentially conflicting interests and the structured definition of comprehensiveassessment criteria. Defining the functions of the system railway station, i.e. discussing what the system should do, can support solving these challenges. Based on a review of Swiss railway stations in a transdisciplinary research project applying four focus groups (n¼38), 28 expert interviews and twoexpert workshops, we present a structured framework of five generic functions of railway stations and their interdependencies. The five generic functions are: linking catchment area and transport network, supporting transfer between modes of transport, facilitating commercial use of real estate, providingpublic space, and contributing to the identity of the surrounding area. Potential conflicts between functions are identified. They concern the competition of multiple functions for space, for customer attention or for revenues as well as increasing system complexities with station size. We illustrate how the framework of functions can be used to foster a common system understanding and to develop assessment criteria. Although elaborated from a Swiss perspective the framework is perceived adaptable to railway stations of other countries.

KW - Environmental planning

KW - Functions

KW - Stakeholders

KW - Common system understanding

KW - Assessment

KW - Railway station

KW - Systemic perspective

KW - Assessment

KW - Common system understanding

KW - Functions

KW - Railway station

KW - Stakeholders

KW - Systemic perspective

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79251635672&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - https://www.mendeley.com/catalogue/8bcc4467-5bf3-34a1-93a5-4902b29092a7/

U2 - 10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.09.007

DO - 10.1016/j.tranpol.2010.09.007

M3 - Journal articles

VL - 18

SP - 446

EP - 455

JO - Transport Policy

JF - Transport Policy

SN - 0967-070X

IS - 2

ER -

DOI

Zuletzt angesehen

Aktivitäten

  1. 71st Annual Meeting of the Academy of Management - AOM 2011
  2. Organic Waste as Source of Secondary Raw Material
  3. World Conference on Computing and Communication Technologies - WCCCT 2020
  4. Emerging Researchers on Videos in Teacher Education - Structured Video Talk [Konferenz abgesagt]
  5. Small Groups, Big Groups and Social Franchising - A Hayekian Perspective on Scaling Social Entrepreneurship
  6. Materialität
  7. 4th International Conference on Health Promotion in Schools
  8. Trivialität und Freiheit. Eine Menschenfassung der 1960er (TRVIALISIERUNG. Hyperkult 20)
  9. diaphanes (Verlag)
  10. AMLE, JBR, SJM, SBUR: Meet the Editors
  11. Why is the rare dispersal mechanism hygrochasy so common around the world?
  12. 27th EGOS Colloquium - EGOS 2011
  13. Kinderliterarisches Übersetzen
  14. European Sociological Association (ESA) (Externe Organisation)
  15. Conference of the Acadmey of Marketing - AM 2015
  16. diaphanes (Verlag)
  17. Insectes Sociaux (Zeitschrift)
  18. Product-service systems as enabler for sustainability-oriented innovation: The case of Osram’s off-grid lightin
  19. Research Synthesis 2018
  20. Conference „Managing the way out of the crisis: between regulation and forecasts“ 2011
  21. Transferability of water governance institutions across contexts, focussing on the EU’s WFD and China
  22. The Motif's Address. Or: Writing Resemblance - 2011
  23. 4th International Conference on Health Promotion in Schools
  24. Rational Design of Green, (Bio) Degradable β Adrenergic Receptor Blocker Derivatives through Non - Targeted Synthesis: Atenolol as an Example