Cities tackle sustainability challenges by modifying their socio-technical systems to adopt more sustainable production and consumption practices, a process known as transitions. Understanding the mechanisms that either facilitate or hinder these transitions is critical. Therefore, this paper aims to identify the mechanisms that can favor or slow down the implementation of sustainable urban mobility solutions using Set-theoretic Multi-Method Research (SMMR), which combines cross-case of Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) with within-case via process-tracing in a study of 60 cities. The results show how the degree to which cities make structural changes to implement innovative sustainable mobility solutions, as well as their negation, are explained by five distinct conjunctions. It is also found the existence of lock-in mechanisms that prevent cities from making necessary structural changes for implementing innovative sustainable mobility solutions. However, no unlocking mechanisms were found that trigger such transitions. The main contribution of the paper is the systematic approach used for selecting cities for within-case analysis and identifying existing lock-in mechanisms.

urban transitions; causal mechanism; SMMR; urban mobility; QCA

Abulibdeh, A. (2018). Implementing congestion pricing policies in a MENA Region City: Analysis of the impact on travel behaviour and equity. Cities, 74, 196–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.12.003

Aina, Y. A. (2017). Achieving smart sustainable cities with GeoICT support: The Saudi evolving smart cities. Cities, 71, 49–58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.07.007

Álamos-Concha, P., Pattyn, V., Rihoux, B., et al. (2021). Conservative solutions for progress: on solution types when combining QCA with in-depth Process-Tracing. Quality & Quantity, 56(4), 1965–1997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01191-x

Aljoufie, M., Zuidgeest, M., Brussel, M., et al. (2013). Spatial–temporal analysis of urban growth and transportation in Jeddah City, Saudi Arabia. Cities, 31, 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2012.04.008

Apajalahti, E.-L., & Kungl, G. (2022). Path dependence and path break-out in the electricity sector. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 43, 220–236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2022.03.010

Beach, D. (2018). Achieving Methodological Alignment When Combining QCA and Process Tracing in Practice. Sociological Methods & Research, 47(1), 64-99. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124117701475

Beach, D. (2019). Multi-Method Research in the Social Sciences: A Review of Recent Frameworks and a Way Forward. Government and Opposition, 55(1), 163–182. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2018.53

Beach, D., & Rohlfing, I. (2018). Integrating Cross-case Analyses and Process Tracing in Set-Theoretic Research. Sociological Methods & Research, 47(1), 3–36. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124115613780

Cecere, G., Corrocher, N., Gossart, C., et al. (2014). Lock-in and path dependence: an evolutionary approach to eco-innovations. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 24(5), 1037–1065. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-014-0381-5

Chamseddine, Z., & Ait Boubkr, A. (2020). Exploring the place of social impacts in urban transport planning: the case of Casablanca City. Urban, Planning and Transport Research, 8(1), 138–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2020.1752793

Chang, R. A., & Gerrits, L. (2022). What spatially stabilises temporary use? A qualitative comparative analysis of 40 temporary use cases along synchronised trajectories of stabilisation. Cities, 130, 103868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103868

Costales, E. (2022). Identifying sources of innovation: Building a conceptual framework of the Smart City through a social innovation perspective. Cities, 120, 103459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103459

Crespo, N. F., & Crespo, C. F. (2016). Global innovation index: Moving beyond the absolute value of ranking with a fuzzy-set analysis. Journal of Business Research, 69(11), 5265–5271. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.04.123

Csukás, M. S., & Szabó, R. Z. (2021). The many faces of the smart city: Differing value propositions in the activity portfolios of nine cities. Cities, 112, 103116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103116

Currie, P. K., Musango, J. K., & May, N. D. (2017). Urban metabolism: A review with reference to Cape Town. Cities, 70, 91–110. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.06.005

De Oliveira, L. G. S., Subtil Lacerda, J., & Negro, S. O. (2020). A mechanism-based explanation for blocking mechanisms in technological innovation systems. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 37, 18–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.07.006

Deloitte. (2021). Urban Future With a Purpose. 12 trends shaping the future of cities by 2030.

Di Giulio, G. M., Bedran-Martins, A. M. B., Vasconcellos, M. da P., et al. (2018). Mainstreaming climate adaptation in the megacity of São Paulo, Brazil. Cities, 72, 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.09.001

Eitan, A., & Hekkert, M. P. (2023). Locked in transition? Towards a conceptualization of path-dependence lock-ins in the renewable energy landscape. Energy Research & Social Science, 106, 103316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2023.103316

El Hilali, S., & Azougagh, A. (2021). A netnographic research on citizen’s perception of a future smart city. Cities, 115, 103233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103233

Frantzeskaki, N., & Loorbach, D. (2010). Towards governing infrasystem transitions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(8), 1292–1301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.05.004

Geel, F. W. (2018). Disruption and low-carbon system transformation: Progress and new challenges in socio-technical transitions research and the Multi-Level Perspective. Energy Research & Social Science, 37, 224-231.

Geels, F. W. (2007). Feelings of Discontent and the Promise of Middle Range Theory for STS. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 32(6), 627–651. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243907303597

Geels, F. W. (2011). The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 1(1), 24–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2011.02.002

Geels, F. W. (2014). Regime Resistance against Low-Carbon Transitions: Introducing Politics and Power into the Multi-Level Perspective. Theory, Culture & Society, 31(5), 21–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276414531627

Geels, F. W. (2019). Socio-technical transitions to sustainability: a review of criticisms and elaborations of the Multi-Level Perspective. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 39, 187–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2019.06.009

Geels, F. W. (2021). From leadership to followership: A suggestion for interdisciplinary theorising of mainstream actor reorientation in sustainability transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 41, 45–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2021.10.021

Geels, F. W. (2022). Causality and explanation in socio-technical transitions research: Mobilising epistemological insights from the wider social sciences. Research Policy, 51(6), 104537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2022.104537

Geels, F. W., & Schot, J. (2007). Typology of sociotechnical transition pathways. Research Policy, 36(3), 399–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.01.003

Geels, F. W., Kern, F., Fuchs, G., et al. (2016). The enactment of socio-technical transition pathways: A reformulated typology and a comparative multi-level analysis of the German and UK low-carbon electricity transitions (1990–2014). Research Policy, 45(4), 896–913. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2016.01.015

Gorissen, L., Spira, F., Meynaerts, E., et al. (2018). Moving towards systemic change? Investigating acceleration dynamics of urban sustainability transitions in the Belgian City of Genk. Journal of Cleaner Production, 173, 171–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.052

Grainger-Brown, J., Malekpour, S., Raven, R., et al. (2022). Exploring urban transformation to inform the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. Cities, 131, 103928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103928

Haesebrouck, T., & Thomann, E. (2021). Introduction: Causation, inferences, and solution types in configurational comparative methods. Quality & Quantity, 56(4), 1867–1888. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-021-01209-4

Hajek, P., Youssef, A., & Hajkova, V. (2022). Recent developments in smart city assessment: A bibliometric and content analysis-based literature review. Cities, 126, 103709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103709

Hedström, P., & Swedberg, R. (1998). Social Mechanisms. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511663901

Hedström, P., & Wennberg, K. (2016). Causal mechanisms in organization and innovation studies. Innovation, 19(1), 91–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2016.1256779

Heiberg, J., & Truffer, B. (2022). The emergence of a global innovation system – A case study from the urban water sector. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 43, 270–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2022.04.007

Irvine, S., & Bai, X. (2019). Positive inertia and proactive influencing towards sustainability: systems analysis of a frontrunner city. Urban Transformations, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s42854-019-0001-7

Jain, M., & Rohracher, H. (2022). Assessing transformative change of infrastructures in urban area redevelopments. Cities, 124, 103573. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103573

Jiang, H. (2021). Smart urban governance in the ‘smart’ era: Why is it urgently needed? Cities, 111, 103004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.103004

Jørgensen, U. (2012). Mapping and navigating transitions—The multi-level perspective compared with arenas of development. Research Policy, 41(6), 996–1010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2012.03.001

Kaidesoja, T. (2018). A dynamic and multifunctional account of middle‐range theories. The British Journal of Sociology, 70(4), 1469–1489. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-4446.12621

Kanger, L. (2021). Rethinking the Multi-level Perspective for energy transitions: From regime life-cycle to explanatory typology of transition pathways. Energy Research & Social Science, 71, 101829. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101829

Keller, M., Sahakian, M., & Hirt, L. F. (2022). Connecting the multi-level-perspective and social practice approach for sustainable transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 44, 14–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2022.05.004

Kim, J. (2022). Smart city trends: A focus on 5 countries and 15 companies. Cities, 123, 103551. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103551

Klitkou, A., Bolwig, S., Hansen, T., et al. (2015). The role of lock-in mechanisms in transition processes: The case of energy for road transport. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 16, 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2015.07.005

Köhler, J., Geels, F. W., Kern, F., et al. (2019). An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 31, 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2019.01.004

Krupnik, S., & Koniewski, M. (2022). Choosing a qualitative comparative analysis solution in multi-method impact evaluation. Evaluation, 28(2), 192–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/13563890221088015

Kuokkanen, A., Nurmi, A., Mikkilä, M., et al. (2018). Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition. Research Policy, 47(8), 1513–1522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.05.006

Loorbach, D., Wittmayer, J., Avelino, F., et al. (2020). Transformative innovation and translocal diffusion. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 35, 251–260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.01.009

Mandeli, K. (2019). Public space and the challenge of urban transformation in cities of emerging economies: Jeddah case study. Cities, 95, 102409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102409

Marchesani, F., Masciarelli, F., & Doan, H. Q. (2022). Innovation in cities a driving force for knowledge flows: Exploring the relationship between high-tech firms, student mobility, and the role of youth entrepreneurship. Cities, 130, 103852. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103852

Medina-Molina, C., Pérez-Macías, N., & Coronado-Vaca, M. (2024). Searching for complexity. Application of the set-theory to the analysis of urban mobility readiness index. Discover Sustainability, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43621-024-00187-5

Mejía-Dorantes, L., & Soto Villagrán, P. (2020). A review on the influence of barriers on gender equality to access the city: A synthesis approach of Mexico City and its Metropolitan Area. Cities, 96, 102439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102439

Mello, P. A. (2022). Qualitative Comparative Analysis. Routledge Handbook of Foreign Policy Analysis Methods, 385–402. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003139850-29

Méndez-Ortega, C., Micek, G., & Malochleb, K. (2022). How do coworking spaces coagglomerate with service industries? The tale of three European cities. Cities, 130, 103875. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103875

Menendez, M., & Ambühl, L. (2022). Implementing Design and Operational Measures for Sustainable Mobility: Lessons from Zurich. Sustainability, 14(2), 625. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14020625

Mikkelsen, K. S. (2015). Negative Case Selection: Justifications and Consequences for Set-Theoretic MMR. Sociological Methods & Research, 46(4), 739–771. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124115591015

Mirzadeh Phirouzabadi, A., Blackmore, K., Savage, D., et al. (2022). Modelling and simulating a multi-modal and multi-dimensional technology interaction framework: The case of vehicle powertrain technologies in the US market. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 175, 121412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121412

Morley, I. (2018). Manila. Cities, 72, 17–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.07.022

Nathansohn, R., & Lahat, L. (2022). From urban vitality to urban vitalisation: Trust, distrust, and citizenship regimes in a Smart City initiative. Cities, 131, 103969. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103969

Oana, I.-E., & Schneider, C., Q. (2018). SetMethods: an Add-on R Package for Advanced QCA. The R Journal, 10(1), 507. https://doi.org/10.32614/rj-2018-031

Oana, I.-E., Schneider, C. Q., & Thomann, E. (2021). Qualitative Comparative Analysis Using R. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009006781

Oliver Wyman Forum. (2022). Available online: https://www.oliverwymanforum.com/mobility/urban-mobility-readiness-index/rankings.html (accessed on 13 June 2022).

Panori, A., Kostopoulos, I., Karampinis, E., et al. (2022). New path creation in energy transition: Exploring the interplay between resource formation and social acceptance of biomass adoption in Europe. Energy Research & Social Science, 86, 102400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2021.102400

Papachristos, G. (2018). A mechanism based transition research methodology: Bridging analytical approaches. Futures, 98, 57–71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2018.02.006

Pinhate, T. B., Parsons, M., Fisher, K., et al. (2020). A crack in the automobility regime? Exploring the transition of São Paulo to sustainable urban mobility. Cities, 107, 102914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102914

Post, C., Sarala, R., Gatrell, C., et al. (2020). Advancing Theory with Review Articles. Journal of Management Studies, 57(2), 351–376. Portico. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12549

Rahman, S. M., Ratrout, N., Assi, K., et al. (2021). Transformation of urban mobility during COVID-19 pandemic – Lessons for transportation planning. Journal of Transport & Health, 23, 101257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jth.2021.101257

Rohlfing, I., & Schneider, C. Q. (2016). A Unifying Framework for Causal Analysis in Set-Theoretic Multimethod Research. Sociological Methods & Research, 47(1), 37–63. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124115626170

Rubinson, C., Gerrits, L., Rutten, R., & Greckhamer, T. (2019). Avoiding common errors in QCA: A short guide for new practitioners. Sociology, 9, 397-418.

Rutten, R. (2020). Applying and Assessing Large-N QCA: Causality and Robustness From a Critical Realist Perspective. Sociological Methods & Research, 51(3), 1211–1243. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124120914955

Sá, T. H. de, Edwards, P., Pereira, R. H. M., & Monteiro, C. A. (2019). Right to the city and human mobility transition: The case of São Paulo. Cities, 87, 60–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2018.12.024

Saeidizand, P., Fransen, K., & Boussauw, K. (2022). Revisiting car dependency: A worldwide analysis of car travel in global metropolitan areas. Cities, 120, 103467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103467

Schneider, C. Q. (2023). Set-Theoretic Multi-Method Research. A Guide to Combining QCA and Case Studies. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009307154

Schneider, C. Q., & Rohlfing, I. (2019). Set‐theoretic Multimethod Research: The Role of Test Corridors and Conjunctions for Case Selection. Swiss Political Science Review, 25(3), 253–275. https://doi.org/10.1111/spsr.12382

Shamsuzzoha, A., Nieminen, J., Piya, S., et al. (2021). Smart city for sustainable environment: A comparison of participatory strategies from Helsinki, Singapore and London. Cities, 114, 103194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2021.103194

Simoens, M. C., Fuenfschilling, L., & Leipold, S. (2022). Discursive dynamics and lock-ins in socio-technical systems: an overview and a way forward. Sustainability Science, 17(5), 1841–1853. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-022-01110-5

Simoens, M. C., Leipold, S., & Fuenfschilling, L. (2022). Locked in unsustainability: Understanding lock-ins and their interactions using the case of food packaging. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 45, 14–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2022.08.005

Smith, A., Stirling, A., & Berkhout, F. (2005). The governance of sustainable socio-technical transitions. Research Policy, 34(10), 1491–1510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2005.07.005

Sultan, B., Katar, I. M., & Al-Atroush, M. E. (2021). Towards sustainable pedestrian mobility in Riyadh city, Saudi Arabia: A case study. Sustainable Cities and Society, 69, 102831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102831

Thaler, T., & Penning‐Rowsell, E. C. (2023). Policy experimentation within flood risk management: Transition pathways in Austria. The Geographical Journal, 189(4), 701–714. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12528

Thomann, E., & Maggetti, M. (2017). Designing Research With Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA): Approaches, Challenges, and Tools. Sociological Methods & Research, 49(2), 356–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124117729700

Tongur, S., & Engwall, M. (2017). Exploring window of opportunity dynamics in infrastructure transformation. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 25, 82–93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2016.12.003

Trencher, G., & Wesseling, J. (2022). Roadblocks to fuel-cell electric vehicle diffusion: Evidence from Germany, Japan and California. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 112, 103458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2022.103458

van Rijnsoever, F. J., & Leendertse, J. (2020). A practical tool for analyzing socio-technical transitions. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 37, 225–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eist.2020.08.004

Verbong, G. P. J., & Geels, F. W. (2010). Exploring sustainability transitions in the electricity sector with socio-technical pathways. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(8), 1214–1221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2010.04.008

Wang, Y., & Wong, Y. D. (2020). Repositioning urban heritage for active mobility: Indications from news coverage in Singapore. Cities, 98, 102525. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.102525

Williams, T., & Gemperle, S. M. (2016). Sequence will tell! Integrating temporality into set-theoretic multi-method research combining comparative process tracing and qualitative comparative analysis. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 20(2), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2016.1149316

Yu, T. H.-K., & Huarng, K.-H. (2023). Configural analysis of GII’s internal structure. Journal of Business Research, 154, 113323. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.113323

Yu, T. H.-K., & Huarng, K.-H. (2024). Causal analysis of SDG achievements. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 198, 122977. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122977