A deeper understanding of pedestrian dynamics is essential to improve crowd flows in public spaces such as train stations. It is essential to understand both the physical and the psychological processes present in this context. However, current research on train boarding behavior is limited in scope and mainly focuses on how group level variables such as number of boarders/deboarders influence train boarding efficiency. Viewing pedestrian dynamics through a psychological lens is important for a detailed understanding of the train boarding context and to recognize target areas for improvement. At Dutch train stations, boarders follow a social norm of waiting at the train door until deboarding is complete. Although people generally adhere to this norm, the way it is executed may not be optimal for deboarding efficiency. We investigate how waiting boarders form a deboarding channel (a corridor where deboarders exit the train) and how this channel in turn influences the efficiency of deboarding. Analyzing a dataset with 3278 boarding events at Utrecht Centraal Station in the Netherlands from 2017 to 2020 (subset of a trajectory dataset capturing 100,000 trajectories per day), we found that higher numbers of boarders and a higher ratio of boarders to deboarders, reduced the width of the deboarding channel, and a lower width was associated with lower deboarding efficiency. These results shift the focus from group level variables to identifying macroscopic structures that are formed when pedestrians interact within a social system and provide specific target areas where nudges/behavioral interventions could be implemented.

This book investigates behaviour change technologies (BCTs) from an ethical perspective, examining the broader societal and philosophical implications of these types of technologies. These technologies—ranging from fitness trackers and smart home systems to digital nudging and persuasive AI—are increasingly shaping our choices, habits, and lifestyles. This book moves beyond nudging and persuasion to explore a broader spectrum of ethical concerns, including autonomy, privacy, trust, responsibility, and social justice. Contributors from leading scholars do not merely critique BCTs but also offer constructive ethical frameworks and ethical analysis for their responsible design and implementation.

Current research on the train boarding process focuses predominantly on the physical modelling of pedestrian dynamics and situational characteristics such as platform design. Little psychology is involved in this approach even though individual behavior is a major factor in influencing dwell times. We take a systematic psychological approach to estimate whether parameters like pedes-train speed, area available per pedestrian, and interpersonal distance show variation at the microscopic level (individual variation), macroscopic level (situational variation), or both. Analyzing real-life train (de)boarding events (n = 3728) at a specific location at a Dutch train station, we find that boarders’ speed varies more at the microscopic (individual variation) than the macroscopic level. This behavior could thus result from stable aspects of the situation such as some structural feature of the environment or a social norm. Understanding such variation is help-ful in designing behavioral interventions/nudges. If variation is due to individual differences, then an individual-targeted intervention will be most effective. If variation is due to situational differences, then individual-targeted interventions may not be particularly useful, and nudges targeted at crowds or environmental features may be most effective.

Postphenomenology and mediation theory strongly explain the micro-level interactions between human individuals and objects. Recently, humans as a collective have been added to the theory at the political macro-level, which we argue that is an important contribution. However, the enlargement of the theory would also merit a meso-level explanation of the role of collectives, in between the micro- and the macro-level. For this purpose, we introduce the mediation triangle, illustrating three bidirectional relations, all mediated by technology: human-object, human-collective, and collective-object. The mediation triangle we combine with three borrowed concepts from systems philosophy to aid in our framework design: differentiality, emergence, and irreducibility. This approach, named system-phenomenology, can explain the interaction between objects, individuals, collectives, political levels, and technology. We illustrate this using an empirical case of boarding and deboarding at train stations. We conclude that system-phenomenology is promising, but further research is needed to develop this theory conceptually.

Nudging has become a popular method to change the behavior of pedestrians in public spaces. However, nudges often do not work as intended because they are based on an incomplete understanding of the nudging environment, physical (e.g., pedestrian trajectories), but not psychological data is used in their development, and behavioral theories are often inadequate or not (correctly) applied. In this article, we argue that the design of nudges can benefit from complementary psychological data analyzed using relevant social and environmental psychological theories. Adequate theories, we argue, are those that aim at describing the objective (i.e., person independent) attributes of the environment or situation and how these affect human decision-making. Using the example of train boarding, and in particular the formation of the deboarding corridor, we demonstrate how psychological theories like interdependence theory and social norms theory can be applied to relevant psychological data—in our case obtained with two focus groups—to better characterize the sociophysical attributes of the train boarding situation. The focus group, or sometimes called a “group discussion”, is a qualitative research method in which data is generated from guided discussions amongst research participants following pre-defined discussion topics. Based on the thematic analysis of the focus group data, we find that a high level of competition and interdependence are related to structural aspects of the train boarding situation. Subsequently, we use these insights to provide tentative explanations for, or hypotheses about micro- and macroscopic behavior patterns observed during train boarding. Finally, we discuss how these insights, in turn, can inform the design of nudges that can be further investigated in future research.

There are concerns amongst researchers and the general public that social media platforms threaten democratic values. Social media corporations and their engineers have responded to these concerns with various design solutions. Though the objective of designing social media democratically sounds straightforward, the concrete reality is not. The authors discuss what a democratic design for social media platforms could look like by exploring two classical conceptions of democracy, one in the liberal tradition and the other in the deliberative tradition. In particular, they discuss three concerns: 1) mis-and disinformation; 2) hate speech; and 3) the relations between filter bubbles, echo chambers, and public debate. By describing the underlying ideals of the two traditions and translating these into design guidelines, the authors make explicit how varied and contrary the implications of different conceptions of democracy can be for addressing public concerns and designing for democratic social media. With these things in mind, this article responds to a call, which is to raise awareness among social media corporations, engineers, and policymakers about varying democratic ideals and the implications that these may have for social media.

Faced with globally pressing sustainability challenges, the e-bike provides a potentially sustainable mobility alternative. Yet, a growing consensus among researchers is that the environmental and social impacts of e-bikes are context dependent. Previous studies indicate different e-bike pathways in two major e-bike markets. In China, e-bikes seem to be a stepping stone to further motorization. In the Netherlands, e-bike use partially substitutes car use, thereby advancing sustainability. However, little is known about why e-bikes serve different pathways. We address this research problem by employing social practice theory to unpack e-bike practices according to three interdependent elements of materials, competences, and meanings. In doing so, we shed light on the more complex and nuanced dynamics in everyday mobility practices around e-bikes. The findings suggest that in China hostile cycling conditions and positive cultural associations of automobility feed to a vicious circle toward car-based motorization. In the Netherlands, the e-bike provides a viable option for those locked into car practices. Despite these differences, evidence from the two countries indicates that dissatisfactions with elements of car practices may redirect people to e-bike practices. Policy needs to direct toward overcoming structural barriers in domains where individuals have limited agency. Furthermore, this comparative study illustrates that differentiated focus is needed when applying practice theory. Given that the average carbon footprint per capita is lower in the Global South than in the Global North, the focus should be on maintaining existing sustainable practices in the Global South while substituting unsustainable practices in the Global North.

There are concerns amongst researchers and the general public that social media platforms threaten democratic values. Social media corporations and their engineers have responded to these concerns with various design solutions. Though the objective of designing social media democratically sounds straightforward, the concrete reality is not. The authors discuss what a democratic design for social media platforms could look like by exploring two classical conceptions of democracy, one in the liberal tradition and the other in the deliberative tradition. In particular, they discuss three concerns: 1) mis- and disinformation; 2) hate speech; and 3) the relations between filter bubbles, echo chambers, and public debate. By describing the underlying ideals of the two traditions and translating these into design guidelines, the authors make explicit how varied and contrary the implications of different conceptions of democracy can be for addressing public concerns and designing for democratic social media. With these things in mind, this article responds to a call, which is to raise awareness among social media corporations, engineers, and policymakers about varying democratic ideals and the implications that these may have for social media.

The “attention economy” refers to the tech industry’s business model that treats human attention as a commodifiable resource. The libertarian critique of this model, dominant within tech and philosophical communities, claims that the persuasive technologies of the attention economy infringe on the individual user’s autonomy and therefore the proposed solutions focus on safeguarding personal freedom through expanding individual control. While this push back is important, current societal debates on the ethics of persuasive technologies are informed by a particular understanding of attention, rarely posited explicitly yet assumed as the default. They share the same concept of attention, namely an individualistic and descriptive concept of attention that is a cognitive process, an expendable resource, something that one should control individually. We step away from a negative analysis in terms of external distractions and aim for positive answers, turning to Buddhist ethics to formulate a critique of persuasive technology from a genuinely ethical perspective. Buddhist ethics points at our attention’s inescapable ethical and ontological embeddedness. Attention as practice requires “the right effort” to distinguish desirable and undesirable states, the “right concentration” to stop the flow we are caught in, and the “right mindfulness” to fortify the ability to attend to the present situation and keep in mind a general sense of life’s direction. We offer input for further philosophical inquiry on attention as practice and attention ecology. We put forward comfort/effort and individualism/collectivism as two remaining central tensions in need of further research.

Current energy justice literature has developed a strong empirical approach to describe how justice plays a role in energy transitions. We argue that the individual-level perception measures are insufficiently developed within this field, while they are vital for a successful just energy transition. Reviewing studies on how people (citizens, users or consumers) perceive fairness in the context of the energy transition, we first investigate how fairness perceptions are currently studied within energy social science. Subsequently, we look into social and environmental justice research and interdependent decision-experiments, to map potential extensions of fairness conceptualizations and measures. Following the triumvirate model of energy justice – distinguishing distributive, procedural, and recognitive justice – we found that only recently studies also contained recognition justice aspects, while the majority of energy social science studies focuses on either distributive or procedural aspects. Extending these insights, we argue that environmental justice research provides a potential way of specifying groups to be recognized in the energy transition (i.e., future generations, non-human species, humans worldwide). Moreover, we propose that interactional justice could be an additional tenet of citizen's fairness perceptions to consider. Importantly, for a successful global energy transition, in-depth insight into the principles underlying people's justice judgments is necessary. Social justice theorizing and interdependent decision-experiments offer concrete ways of tapping into these principles. Interdependent decision-experiments in particular pose a way of measuring fairness tendencies that could be applied to the specific context of the energy transition and be expanded beyond the current research focus measuring distributive justice perceptions.

The three-tenet model, which focuses on ‘distributional justice’, ‘procedural justice’, and ‘justice as recognition’, has emerged as the most influential framework in the field of energy justice. Based on critical reviews of the three-tenet model, we identify three challenges that the model currently still faces: (i) a normative challenge on the grounding of the three-tenet model in philosophical theories; (ii) an ‘elite’ challenge on the justification of the use of power in energy-related decision; and (iii) a practical challenge on the application of the three tenets in situations of conflicting justice demands. In this article, we provide the basic contours of a three-step pluralist and pragmatic dialogue model for questions of energy justice that addresses the three challenges, based on the ‘commonwealth model’ of Luc Boltanski and Laurent Thévenot. The model proposes to create moral legitimacy in the face of plural demands for energy justice by engaging actors in an inclusive dialogue based on an explicit recognition of Boltanski and Thévenot’s commonwealth model. We thereby make three contributions to the existing literature on energy justice. First, the commonwealth model’s rootedness in normative political theory provides a stronger philosophical underpinning than was available up till now in the literature (challenge 1). Second, it allows one to go beyond the (almost exclusive) focus on injustices perpetrated on disempowered or marginalised groups, to include questions on the justified exercise of power (challenge 2). Third, the commonwealth model shows us practical ways out of situations where conflicting demands for justice are being made (challenge 3).

Recent energy justice studies have explicitly introduced different normative frameworks. However, an elaboration of how these newly introduced normative frameworks relate to each other is missing in the energy justice literature. This could lead to false expectations that a specific normative framework could solve the normative challenges of energy justice. We indicate that normative frameworks embrace specific values and priority rules, but still lack an attempt to map out a general overall value structure of human and societal values in general. We introduce Shalom Schwartz's core value theory to propose a structure that allows us to map key values and their relation to energy justice. We illustrate that the three-tenets framework as such lacks normative guidance and show how Schwartz theory can be used to scaffold the three-tenets framework in dealing with underlying value disputes. The study concludes that Schwartz's theory proves useful in addressing the lack of a normative framework structure. The study indicates the individual approach as a key limitation and proposes further analyses towards a more collective approach.

AbstractThis chapter explores the shift in the balance of individual versus collective values instigated by the COVID-19 pandemic. The incredible viral spread rate among the population and its relatively high fatality rate has initially resulted in an assertion of the primacy of collective values (such as collective safety, collective responsibility, conformism). In contrast, individual rights and values (such as the individual counterparts of autonomy, freedom, responsibility, and privacy) took a ‘back seat’ for the good of the collective. However, as the pandemic extended over the months, there emerged a pressure to reject the primacy of collective values and restore the importance of individual values. If we are to return to a healthy and prosperous living within a well-functioning society, this balance shift between collective and individual values will have to be re-negotiated and resolved to reach a societally acceptable balance position.We conduct this ethical exploration, first, by following the ethico-philosophical discussion on the balance between individual and collective values generally, as well as in times of crisis, with special focus on the COVID-19 crisis. Second, we explore this topic through the lens of recent changes to how particular technologies were and are used before and during the COVID-19 pandemic. More precisely, we identify and explore broad trends we see relevant to ethics – with a particular focus on crowd management and nudging and on the balance shift between individual and collective values. Finally, by exploring findings from a sociophysics case study dealing with crowd management of people before and during the pandemic, we argue that some sociophysical phenomena can be used as proxies for ethical principles. Here, distance is used as a conceptual proxy for individual and collective responsibility, having in mind COVID-19 distancing rules and recommendation.With all the above, we identify several broad trends that have been instigated by the pandemic that are relevant to ethics. These changes relate to future crowd management, nudging, and control; individual (per-person) tracking; insistence on the importance of collective values in times of crisis, and the rejection of this infringement upon individual rights. In this regard, we assert that such value changes are an opportunity to rethink and (re)set balance points between individual and collective rights for each particular society.

Virtue accounts of innovation ethics have recognized the virtue of creativity as an admirable trait in innovators. However, such accounts have not paid sufficient attention to the way creativity functions as a collective phenomenon. We propose a collective virtue account to supplement existing virtue accounts. We base our account on Kieran's definition of creativity as a virtue and distinguish three components in it: creative output, mastery and intrinsic motivation. We argue that all of these components can meaningfully be attributed to innovation groups. This means that we can also attribute the virtue of creativity to group agents involved in innovation. Recognizing creativity as a collective virtue in innovation is important because it allows for a more accurate evaluation of how successful innovation generally happens. The innovator who takes a collective virtue account of creativity seriously will give attention to the facilitation of an environment where the group can flourish collectively, rather than only nurturing the individual genius.

Research on the effectiveness of case studies in teaching engineering ethics in higher education is underdeveloped. To add to our knowledge, we have systematically compared the outcomes of two case approaches to an undergraduate course on the ethics of technology: a detached approach using real-life cases and a challenge-based learning (CBL) approach with students and stakeholders acting as co-creators (CC). We first developed a practical typology of case-study approaches and subsequently tested an evaluation method to assess the students’ learning experiences (basic needs and motivation) and outcomes (competence development) and staff interpretations and operationalizations, seeking to answer three questions: (1) Do students in the CBL approach report higher basic needs, motivation and competence development compared to their peers in the detached approach? (2) What is the relationship between student-perceived co-creation and their basic needs, motivation and competence development? And (3) what are the implications of CBL/CC for engineering-ethics teaching and learning? Our mixed methods analysis favored CBL as it best supported teaching and research goals while satisfying the students’ basic needs and promoting intrinsic motivation and communication competences. Competence progress in other areas did not differ between approaches, and motivation in terms of identified regulation was lower for CBL, with staff perceiving a higher workload. We propose that our case typology model is useful and that as a method to engage students as co-creators, CBL certainly merits further development and evaluation, as does our effectiveness analysis for engineering ethics instruction in general and for case-study approaches in particular.

A course on ethics and history of technology, taught to 1886 first-year engineering students of 14 engineering departments was redesigned using Self-Determination Theory (SDT) by adapting many course elements at the same time. We applied the situational level of Vallerand’s hierarchical model, analysing how the elements of this ethics and history course influenced basic needs and motivation in a mediating role, which influenced in turn course outcomes. Regression analysis demonstrated the central role of competence in the assignment for intrinsic motivation. A complementary qualitative analysis showed strong polarisation between different types of students and indicated many remaining challenges. We conclude that the Vallerand model was a useful tool for prioritising redesign in this course. We suggest further research in the use of this model, on the role and meaning of competence and on the role of frustration, in ethics and history courses in particular and engineering courses in general.

Digitalization affects the relation between human agents and technological objects. This paper looks at digital behavior change technologies (BCT) from a deontological perspective. It identifies three moral requirements that are relevant for ethical approaches in the tradition of Kantian deontology: epistemic rationalism, motivational rationalism and deliberational rationalism. It argues that traditional Kantian ethics assumes human 'subjects' to be autonomous agents, whereas 'objects' are mere passive tools. Digitalization, however, challenges this Cartesian subject-object dualism: digital technologies become more and more autonomous and take on agency. Similarly, human subjects can outsource agency and will-power to technologies. In addition, our intersubjective relations are being more and more shaped by digital technologies. The paper therefore re-examines the three categories 'subject', 'object' and 'intersubjectivity' in light of digital BCTs and suggests deontological guidelines for digital objects, digital subjects and a digitally mediated intersubjectivity, based on a re-examination of the requirements of epistemic, motivational and deliberational rationalism.

This paper investigates the modal shift patterns of e-bike users in the Dutch context. We focus on the change in e-bikers' travel behavior to assess whether this change benefits sustainability. Our study provides direct ecologically valid evidence on modal shift by using a longitudinal dataset from the Netherlands Mobility Panel survey. We examine e-bikers' modal shift patterns before and after acquiring an e-bike. The findings indicate that after e-bike adoptions, conventional bike use reduces significantly, while car use reduces less strongly. Nonetheless, the share of car kilometers is much larger than that of conventional bikes at the baseline. Besides, the emission rate per passenger kilometer of an e-bike is several times lower than that of a car. These imply a net environmental gain after e-bike adoptions. The present study also sheds light on modal shifts at a disaggregated level by investigating those e-bikers who are more likely to drive less after ebike adoption. The findings suggest that e-bikers younger than 50 and those around retirement age (60-69) seem more likely to step out of their cars. Additionally, people living in rural areas tend to be more likely to reduce their car use than their counterparts in highly urbanized areas. Based on our findings, we present policy recommendations for achieving a greener shift in mobility systems.

The UN Agenda 2030 lends itself to an interpretation in light of the human rights framework and related contractualist ethical theories. These frameworks have been developed in the context of Western individualism. This paper analyses the sustainable development goals in light of the debate between human rights on the one side and the rights of nature on the other side. It argues that human rights are often (though not exclusively) linked to social contract theories. The paper points out strengths and weaknesses of contractualist individualism. It discusses various challenges to the contractualist framework. How can contractualist individualism deal with the representation of future generations? What assumptions does the social contract make with regard to the nature of the individual? Should we conceive of them, e.g., as utility maximizers or as idealized rational agents? A final weakness of the framework is that contractualism seems to ignore other values, especially the value of nature. The paper therefore sketches recent developments in ethical theory that attempt to go beyond Western individualism.