Designing a digital intervention for sustainable mobility in a Mediterranean port: Evidence from a single-port case study
Nicoletta González-Cancelas et al.
What the paper says
• Examines internal mobility challenges in a Mediterranean port. • Identifies user-specific mobility patterns and constraints. • Translates empirical findings into a policy-support framework. • Proposes a digital tool to support port mobility governance. • Provides transferable insights for medium-sized urban ports. Ports located in dense urban environments face increasing challenges in managing internal mobility while ensuring safety and environmental sustainability. This paper presents a case study conducted in a medium-sized Mediterranean commercial port characterized by mixed cargo operations, controlled access areas, and a strong port–city interface. The study examines mobility conflicts among workers, freight operators, administrative staff, and visitors, as well as the limited uptake of micromobility despite declared interest. An exploratory survey (n = 138) was carried out to identify travel patterns and perceived barriers. Walking is the dominant internal mode (49.3%), while dependence on private vehicles remains significant for specific user groups. Although current micromobility use is low, 58% of respondents expressed willingness to adopt it under improved safety and infrastructure conditions. Major barriers include access restrictions, lack of dedicated infrastructure, and perceived insecurity. Based on these findings, a user-informed digital intervention was developed as a policy-support tool integrating profile-based routing, micromobility guidance, restricted-area management, and incident reporting. The case provides transferable insights for medium-sized urban ports seeking to enhance sustainable mobility while balancing operational and security constraints.
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.