The river solofrana bicycle network: a project of green mobility

The article presents the “LungoSolofrana” project, carried out during the course “Urban and Mobility” in the academic year 2009/2010, held during the bachelor in Environmental Engineering at the University of Naples “Federico II”. The work has also been chosen as a finalist at the “UrbanPromo 2010” contest, the urban and territorial marketing event sponsored by the National Institute of Urban Planning and Urbit which was held in Venice in 2010. The project consists in a green mobility proposal, developed with an approach based on the integration of the environmental redevelopment of a portion of river Solofrana, located in the Salerno Province, and of the renewal of seven local stations of the railway line Mercato San Severino – Nocera Inferiore, including the realization of a cycle-path network for the natural environment fruition. Furthermore the work drew attention to the local and regional administration. The main intent of the project is to integrate sustainable mobility themes with the environment recovery in a territory affected by high environmental troubles. The area includes the municipalities of Nocera Inferiore, Nocera Superiore, Mercato San Severino, Castel San Giorgio and Roccapiemonte, situated in Salerno’s province, with a total population about 114.000 (font Demo ISTAT 2010). The area extension is about 84,30 sqkm and it is crossed by river Solofrana that is the central point of the project idea. The intervention strategy is defined in two kinds of actions: internal and external rail station interventions. The external rail station interventions regard the construction of pedestrian-cycle paths with the scope of increasing the spaces dedicated to cyclists and to pedestrians along the river Solofrana sides and to connect the urban areas with the railway station. In this way, it’s also possible to achieve an urban requalification of the interested area. On the other side, the interventions inside the station , according to Transit Oriented Development principles, aim at redeveloping common spaces with the insertion of new activities and at realizing new automatic cycle parks covered by photovoltaic panels. The project proposal consists of the urban regeneration of small railway stations along the route-Nocera-Codola Mercato San Severino in the province of Salerno, through interventions aimed at improving pedestrian accessibility. The project involves in particular the construction of pedestrian paths protected access to the station and connecting with neighboring towns and installation of innovative bike parking stations in elevation, covering surfaces coated with solar panels and spaces information. The project is aimed to propose a new model of sustainable transport for small and medium shifts as an alternative to private transportation

Practicing convict criminology: lessons learned from British academic activism

Joanne Belknap’s recent ASC presidential address included a critique of Convict Criminology’s activism. A number of concerns were provided, although of particular importance here are, first, Belknap’s concerns regarding the absence of ‘marginalized voices’ in the Convict Criminology network. Second, the issue of defining how non-con academics function as Convict Criminology group members. This paper responds to these criticisms. Specifically, we discuss the question of ‘representation’ in BCC and our attempts to remedy this issue. We also draw attention to the academic activism that British Convict Criminology is conducting in Europe. This includes a detailed discussion of the collaborative research-activist activities that involve non-con as well as ex-con academic network members. We demonstrate how these collaborations explain the vital group membership role that non-con academics assume in the activism of Convict Criminology.

The paradox of competition for airline passengers with reduced mobility (PRM)

Airline competition with customer service as product differentiator has forced down costs, air fares and investor returns. Two passenger markets operate in aviation: (a) able-bodied passengers for whom airlines compete and (b) passengers with reduced mobility (PRMs) – disabled by age, obesity or medical problems – for whom airlines do not compete. Government interference in the market intended to protect a minority of narrowly-defined PRMs has had unintended consequences of enabling increasing numbers of more widely-defined PRMs to access complimentary airline provisions. With growing ageing and overweight populations and long-haul travelling medical tourists such regulation could lead to even lower investors’ returns. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) (2013) examined the air transport value chain for competitiveness using Porter’s (2008) five forces but did not distinguish between able-bodied passengers and PRMs. Findings during an investigation of these two markets concurred with IATA-Porter that the markets for the bargaining powers of PRM buyers and PRM suppliers were highly competitive. However, in contrast to the IATA conclusions, intensity of competition, and threats from new entrants and substitute products for PRM travel were low. The conclusion is that airlines are strategically PRM defensive by omission. Paradoxically, the airline which delivers the best PRM customer service could become the least profitable.

The paradox of competition for airline passengers with reduced mobility (PRM)

Airline competition with customer service as product differentiator has forced down costs, air fares and investor returns. Two passenger markets operate in aviation: (1) able-bodied passengers for whom airlines openly compete and (2) passengers with reduced mobility (PRMs) – disabled by age, obesity or medical problems – for whom airlines do not compete. Government interference in the market intended to protect a minority of narrowly-defined PRMs has had unintended consequences of enabling increasing numbers of more widely-defined PRMs to access complimentary airline provisions. With growing ageing and overweight populations and long-haul travelling medical tourists such regulation could lead to even lower investors’ returns. The International Air Transport Association (IATA) (2013) examined the air transport value chain for competitiveness using Porter’s (2008) five forces but did not distinguish between able-bodied passengers and PRMs. Findings during an investigation of these two markets concurred with IATA-Porter that the markets for the bargaining powers of PRM customers and PRM suppliers were ‘highly competitive’. However, in contrast to the IATA conclusions the threats posed by new entrants, substitute products and intensity of competition for PRM passengers were all ‘low’. The conclusion is that airlines are strategically PRM defensive by omission. Paradoxically, the airline which delivers the best PRM customer service could become the least profitable.