Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/125992
|
| Title: | 協作的⾏動性與城市空間實踐：以WeMo Scooter共享電動機⾞為例
Exploration of the Emergence of Collaborative Mobility and Urban Spatial Practices: WeMo Scooter As An Example |
| Authors: | 劉倚帆
Liu, Yi-Fan |
| Contributors: | 王淑美
Wang, Su-Mei
劉倚帆
Liu, Yi-Fan |
| Keywords: | 城市空間
行動媒介
行動性
協作行動性
實踐
urban space
mobile media
mobility
collaborative mobility
practice |
| Date: | 2019 |
| Issue Date: | 2019-09-05 17:43:09 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 媒介研究領域已有豐富成果指出，智慧型手機在促成人際溝通之時，亦促成個人空間經驗變化。本文認為，進入行動時代後，智慧型手機應用範圍已不再僅作為人際溝通之用，在物聯網發展趨勢下，智慧型手機可與其他日常物件連動，逐漸廣泛地介入日常生活，成為個人進行日常活動所仰賴的終端管理裝置。因此智慧型手機所帶來的城市空間變動已不只在個人經驗層次，社會空間生成的物質向度亦因其介入而產生改動。
本文以智慧型手機與電動機車連動共構的ＷeMo Scooter共享機車為例，試圖理解這個需由媒介中介的行動性體系如何構成，及其介入城市空間生成的過程。循「空間轉向」（the spatial turn）思潮，本文首先指出城市空間乃是物質實體與社會關係的共構產物，且城市空間處於持續生成的動態過程中；在此認識基礎上，本文進一步援引「行動性典範」（mobilities paradigm）以掌握行動性體系的構成要素，並說明行動性體系如同城市空間皆處在持續生成的動態過程中，且兩者相互影響各自生成。
同時，由於本文欲探究的共享機車系統必須經智慧型手機中介方得運作，因此本文以媒介介入城市空間的歷史補充說明，在城市空間的生成過程當中，媒介亦扮演重要角色，到今日行動時代亦然，其幅度甚至更深且廣。由此本文認為無論是行動性體系或是媒介體系，皆在城市空間生成的過程中展現其「政治性」。
在前述基礎上，本文認為行動性體系與行動媒介兩者皆可視為「社會—技術—文化」共構產物，據此，本文進一步說明在日常生活逐漸朝向編碼化的進程中，行動性體系（電動機車）與行動媒介（智慧型手機）的彼此接合共構出了新型態的行動性體系，本文將其定義為「協作行動性」（collaborative mobility），其乃促成媒介實踐與移動實踐無法二分的技術系統，並由此介入城市空間的生成。
本文所指涉的「協作行動性」以有別於過往的型態介入城市空間生成，關鍵環節在於其構成與運作皆必須仰賴智慧型手機，且必須以常民實踐為本方得以持續完成。故本文緊接著從實踐角度，探討常民參進協作行動性體系的實踐過程，說明常民實踐並不僅在象徵意義層面轉化了個人生活空間的意涵，具物質向度的城市空間紋理與行動性體系自身，乃至常民日常生活，皆因常民具協作性質的移動／媒介實踐而得以持續變動生成。
研究發現，協作行動性在台北市區浮現與運作的過程，確實展現為一種「社會—技術—文化」動態過程，並且分別在這三方面展現出新意。在技術層面，智慧型手機與電動機車接合而成的協作行動性因促成媒介實踐與移動實踐的不可二分，因此有別於既有的編碼化行動性體系；同時，協作行動性展現出一種「擬個人」特性，不僅因其可模擬個人自有運具，提供同等的移動便利性，更因其在運作過程中，以「數據化個人」的使用行為數據，將個人轉化為擬個人。
在社會文化層面，由於協作行動性符應當前智慧城市發展趨勢，其亦進一步反映出智慧城市所需之「智慧精神」治理形構；這種以數據為本的治理形構要求一種「好市民」主體形構，而此種主體形構在「擬個人」的運作基礎上，展現為混雜了技術客體與兼及個人認知與身體主體的新型態「機靈」主體形構。同時，協作行動性亦反映出一種新的監視型態：一方面，使用者並非單向被監視，其亦施展監視並據此進行移動實踐，且其可以逃逸甚至缺席於技術體系監控；另一方面，不同於過往監視相關討論，在協作行動性運作過程中，使用者可有能力在物質向度實質改動空間關係。
由於行動性典範並未深論媒介實踐環節，同時媒介實踐研究領域中亦缺乏與移動實踐相關的討論，本文認為，以ＷeMo Scooter共享機車服務為例探索本文所提出的協作行動性之構成，不僅有助於理解行動時代中的城市空間生成過程，亦可在理論層次上為行動性研究與媒介研究兩個領域做出研究視野上的延伸與補充。
Numerous media studies have argued that people’s temporal–spatial experiences can be modified and transformed through human-to-human communication using mobile media. However, human interaction is not the only function that mobile media has in the mobile era. Today, mobile media devices such as smartphones can be involved in human–machine and machine–machine interactions, making the Internet of Things (IoT) possible. This new style of communication may transform urban space as well as people’s temporal–spatial experiences in an entirely new fashion.
To study this new style of communication and new temporal-spatial experiences, the mobilities paradigm is insufficient and media studies lack discussion of movement. Therefore, this study is an interdisciplinary attempt to fill these research gaps.
This study focused on the example of WeMo Scooter, which connects smartphones and electric scooters and makes them work together, and explored how this mediated mobility system is assembled as well as how it embeds itself in and transforms people’s everyday lives; furthermore, this study explored the becoming process of urban space.
According to the spatial turn, an intellectual movement founded by Henri Lefebvre, (urban) space is a set of social relations and forms between things, and it is always in the process of becoming. In the mobilities paradigm inherited from the spatial turn movement, mobility systems are also always in the process of becoming. Furthermore, because mobility systems must occupy social space and self-adjust in accordance with spatialities, social space and mobility systems affect each other during their becoming processes.
Based on this premise, I attempted to redefine mediated mobility systems such as WeMo Scooter as “collaborative mobility,” treating this as a social–technical–cultural assemblage. Thus, I analyzed how smartphones and scooters are assembled socially, technically, and culturally to form a new style of mobility system. Furthermore, I analyzed how it is involved in the becoming process of urban space.
Urban space becomes continuously through the operation of collaborative mobility, and collaborative mobility is affected by urban space at the same time. Moreover, collaborative mobility operates through media practice and movement practice simultaneously, which are inseparable. In this process, collaborative mobility not only reflects a contemporary governance formation called “smartmentality” but also creates new cultural formations, such as new hybrid subjectivity and new surveillance. |
| Reference: | Hayden（2019.02.22）。〈踏著電動滑板車，帥氣地上班？史上成長最快的新創公司，改變了全球上班族的通勤方式〉，《創新拿鐵》。上網日期：2019年3月13日，取自：https://startuplatte.com/2019/02/22/bird-scooter/
Tandee（2017.07.27）。〈台灣oBike之亂延燒 10餘輛oBike棄置溪流中〉，《癮科技》。上網日期：2017年10月18日，取自：https://www.cool3c.com/article/127145
Wong. A.（2018）。〈這鍵盤佈局，或加快打字速度，但卻從不入主流〉。《*CUP》。上網日期：2018年12月19日，取自https://www.cup.com.hk/2018/05/28/keyboard-dvorak-qwerty/
方孝謙（2006.01）。〈現代性態度、日常生活與消費: 日常消費抗爭的理論回顧〉，「2005文化研究年會」，桃園市。
方念萱（2011. 05）。〈當我們（we/wii）同在一起？家戶採用、退用任天堂Wii 歷程分析〉，「2011第三屆台灣科技與社會研究年會」，台北市。
方俊育、林崇熙譯（2004）。〈技術物有政治性嗎？〉，吳嘉苓、傅大為、雷祥麟（編），《科技渴望社會》，頁123-125。台北：群學。（原文Winner, L. [1980]. Do artifacts have politics? Daedalus, 109(1), 121-136.）
王志弘、張華蓀、宋郁玲、陳毅峰譯（2004）。《現代地理思想》，台北：群學、國立編譯館。（原書Peet, R. [1998]. Modern geographical thought. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.）
王志弘譯（2002）。〈空間‥社會產物與使用價值〉，夏鑄九、王志弘（編譯），《空間的文化形式與社會理論讀本》，頁19-30。台北：明文。（原文 Lefebvre, H. [1979]. Space: Social product and use value. In J. W. Freiberg (ed.), Critical sociology: European perspective (pp. 285-295). New York: Irvington.）
王昭正、朱瑞淵譯（1999）。《參與觀察法》。台北:弘智。（原書 Jorgensen, D. L. [1989]. Participant observation: A methodology for human studies. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.）
王淑美（2014）。〈馴化IM：即時通訊中的揭露、協商與創造〉，《中華傳播學刊》，25：161-192。
王淑美（2017）。〈從傳播的偏向到STS：再探Harold Adam Innis傳播理論的關鍵元素〉，《傳播研究與實踐》，7（1）：291-303。
石婉婷（2013）。《日常生活的科技社交角色——以Facebook打卡為核心的媒體實踐為例》。政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
任凱、王佳煌譯（2005）。《質性研究法—社會情境的觀察與分析》。台北：學富。（原書 Lofland, J., & Lofland, L. H. [1995]. Analyzing social settings: A guide to qualitative observation and analysis [3rd ed.]. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.）
行政院主計處（2017.04.19）。《國情統計通報（第70號）》。上網日期：2017年10月18日，取自https://www.dgbas.gov.tw/public/Data/74191738458VPAVQ8D.pdf
何雪松（2006）。〈社會理論的空間轉向〉，《社會》，2：34-48。
何道寬譯（2003）。《傳播的偏向》。北京市：中國人民大學出版社。（原書 Innis, H.[1951]. The bias of communication. Toronto, Canada: University of Toronto Press.）
吳姿嫻（2007）。《MSN與日常生活》。世新大學公共關係暨廣告學系碩士論文。
吳筱玫（2016）〈網上行走：Facebook 使用者之打卡戰術與地標實踐〉，《新聞學研究》，126：93-131。
吳筱玫、李蔡彥（2018）。〈資訊科學與質性研究之對話：Facebook打卡實踐之視覺化行人言說分析〉，《中華傳播學刊》，33：19-58。
吳嘉苓（2012）。〈訪談法〉。蘇國賢、王增勇、林本炫、林國明、柯志明、徐 振國等（編），《社會及行為科學研究法（二）：質性研究法》，頁33-60。台北：東華。
吳寧（2007）。《日常生活批判—列斐伏爾哲學思想研究》。北京:人民。
吳馥馨（2017.12.21）。〈賴揆：2035機車全面電動化 2040汽車全面電動化〉，《經濟日報》。上網日期：2018年11月19日，取自ttps://udn.com/news/story/7241/2887207
呂采穎（2016）。《日常生活中的科技實踐：以台北市YouBike系統為例》。政治大學社會學系碩士論文。
李佩璇（2009）。《自行車的休閒化：休閒實作型式的象徵鬥爭》。台灣大學社會學系碩士論文。
李彥穎、俞子堯（2013.06.10）。〈騎YouBike上武嶺惹議 單車男願賠：我可以買10台〉，《ETtoday新聞雲》。上網日期：2018年12月19日，取自https://www.ettoday.net/news/20130610/220315.htm
李美華、孔祥明、王婷玉、林嘉娟、黃玉枝、陳雅潔等譯(1998)。《社會科學研究方法》。台北:時英。(原書 Babbie, E. [1995]. The practice of social research. [8th ed.]. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.)
李黎、郭官義譯（1999）。《作為“意識形態”的技術與科學》。上海：學林。（原書Habermas, J. [1970]. Technik und wissenschaft als "ideologie." Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.）
李蕾蕾（2012）。〈媒體與地緣政治區的治理：兼及媒體與傳播地理學對粵港澳地區的洞察〉，《傳播與社會學刊》，21：151-170。
周天穎、賴玉真、杜雅鈴（2015）。〈國際智慧城市發展指標與評比機制〉，《國土及公共治理季刊》，3（2）：8-18。
周伶芝、郭亮廷譯（2014）。《巴黎地鐵上的人類學家》。台北市：行人文化實驗室。（原書Augé, M. [1986]. Un ethnologue dans le metro. New York: Hachette.）
易俊宏（2013）。《機車道路空間的科技與社會觀點分析—以台北市為例》。陽明大學科技與社會研究所碩士論文。
林柏齊（2015）。《智慧城市發展關鍵及應用主流方向分析》。（資訊工業策進會產業研究報告 CDOC20150323003）。台北市：資訊工業策進會產業情報研究所。
林書嫻譯（2017）。《飛航管制的祕密世界：從地面到天空，從管制台到駕駛艙，飛航第一線直擊全紀錄》。台北：臉譜。（原書：伊藤恵理[2016]。《空の旅を科学する 人工知能がひらく！？ 21世紀の「航空管制」》。東京都：河出書房新社。）
林欽榮（2013）。〈智慧城市國基發展趨勢與國內邁向智慧城市發展策略〉。《國土資訊系統通訊》，86：10-22。
邱志翔（2019.05.08）。〈WeMo Scooter 共享機車十大情境大公開，還首創騎車遊戲化抽禮物！〉，《人車事》。上網日期：2019年5月9日，取自https://www.carstuff.com.tw/motocycle/item/28818-WeMo-scooter.html
邵培仁、楊麗萍（2010）。《媒介地理學 : 媒介作為文化圖景的研究》。北京市 : 中國傳媒大學出版社。
紀品志（2018.01.17）。〈特斯拉小心！法拉利要打造第一輛電動超跑〉，《數位時代》。上網日期：2018年1月28日，取自https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/47827/ferrari-is-planning-to-make-an-electric-supercar
徐宗國譯（1997）。《質性研究概論》。台北：巨流。（原書 Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. [1990]. Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.）
徐詩思譯（2003）。《NO LOGO》。台北：時報。（原書Klein, N. [2000]. No logo : Taking aim at the brand bullies. New York: Picador.）
高子梅譯（2018）。《偉大城市的二次誕生：從紐約公共空間的凋零與重生，探尋以人為本的街道設計和智慧運輸》。台北市：臉譜。（原書Sadik-Khan, J., & Solomonow, S. [2017]. Streetfight: Handbook for an urban revolution. New York: Penguin.）
高敬原（2018.01.15）。〈加碼投資逾3千億、開發40款，福特進軍電動車玩真的？〉，《數位時代》。上網日期：2018年1月28日，取自https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/47794/us-autoshow-detroit-ford-motorford-plans-11-billion-investment-40-electric-vehicles-by-2022
財團法人台灣網路資訊中心（2018）。《2018台灣網路報告》。上網日期：2019年2月17日，取自https://www.twnic.net.tw/doc/twrp/201812e.pdf
張可婷譯（2010）。《民族誌與觀察研究法》。台北:韋伯文化。（原書：Angrosino, M. [2007]. Doing ethnographic and observational research. London: Sage.）
張讚國、高從霖（2016）。《塗鴉香港：公共空間、政治與全球化》。香港：城市大學。
曹嬿恆譯（2018）。《解密iPhone》。台北市：商周。（原書Merchant, B. [2017]. The one device: The secret history of the iPhone. New York: Little Brown and Company.）
陳向明（2002）。《社會科學質的研究》。台北:五南。
陶子亭，（2018.10.22）。〈深圳一片「紅海」 突然全面禁航拍 習近平真的「南巡」？〉，《DronesPlayer》。上網日期：2018年11月19日，取自https://dronesplayer.com/drone-laws/%E6%B7%B1%E5%9C%B3%E4%B8%80%E7%89%87%E3%80%8C%E7%B4%85%E6%B5%B7%E3%80%8D%E7%AA%81%E7%84%B6%E5%85%A8%E9%9D%A2%E7%A6%81%E8%88%AA%E6%8B%8D/
馮建三譯（1995）。《電視：科技與文化形式》。台北：遠流。（原書Williams, R. [1974]. Television: Technology and cultural form. London: Fontana.）
黃厚銘、曹家榮（2015）。〈「流動的」手機：液態現代性的時空架構與群己關係〉，《新聞學研究》，124：39-81。
黃柏堯（2007）。《街頭塗鴉的日常生活研究：以台北市西門町為例》。政治大學新聞研究所碩士論文。
新北市政府交通局（2018.12.19）。〈全國第一 新北電動輔助YouBike(E-YouBike)試辦計畫啟動〉。上網日期：2018年12月22日，取自https://www.ntpc.gov.tw/ch/home.jsp?id=28&parentpath=0,6,27&mcustomize=news_view.jsp&dataserno=201812190015&mserno=201309100001
楊文琪（2019.05.28）。〈交通部要Uber不要再期待了 10月起不合法就取締〉。《聯合新聞網》。上網日期：2019年6月3日，取自https://udn.com/news/story/7238/3839248
楊柳譯（2016）。《被科技綁架的世界：無人駕駛、人工智慧、穿戴式裝置將帶你去哪裡？》。台北：行人。（原書Carr, N. [2014]. The glass cage: how our computers are changing us. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.）
楊樹煌（2017.09.17）。〈oBike遭民眾惡搞 5輛腳踏車被丟在排洪道〉，《中國時報》。上網日期：2017年11月22日，取自http://www.chinatimes.com/realtimenews/20170917002176-260405
廖漢騰（2003）。〈從開國紀念日到跨年狂歡：以媒體事件觀點分析1994-2003臺灣跨年晚會〉，《中華傳播學刊》，3：37-82。
潘淑滿（2003）。《質性研究：理論與應用》。台北：心理。
蔡宜紋（2008）。《克難城市：戰後台灣都市規劃視野的反省》。清華大學社會學研究所碩士論文。
蔡紀眉（2017.10.17）。〈2018十大策略科技趨勢預測，Gartner：主戰場在AI〉，《數位時代》。上網日期：2017年11月23日，取自https://www.bnext.com.tw/article/46573/gartner-identifies-the-top-10-strategic-technology-trends-for-2018
賴文福譯（2000）。《民族誌學》。台北：弘智。（原書：Fetterman, D. M. [1989]. Ethnography: Step by step. London: Sage.）
駱冠宏（2007）。《騎過半世紀：台灣機車性別文化史，1930s-2007》。高雄醫學大學性別研究所碩士論文。
鍾蔚文（2008）。〈體物入微，漸窺堂奧〉，余舜德（主編），《體物入微：物與身體感的研究》，頁431-441。新竹：清華大學。
嚴祥鸞（1996）。〈參與觀察法〉。胡幼慧(編)，《質性研究:理論、方法及 本土女性研究實例》，頁195-221。台北：巨流。
蘇碩斌（2005）。《看不見與看得見的臺北》。台北市：左岸。
蘇碩斌（2006.11）。〈人與空間：台灣都市社會學典範的建立與變化〉，「2006台灣社會學會年會」，台中市。
蘇銘翰（2018.01.05）。〈Toyota 與 Mazda 合作還不夠？竟找來7大日系品牌組電動車聯盟！〉，《自由時報》。上網日期：2018年1月28日，取自http://auto.ltn.com.tw/news/9182/44
Adams, P. C. (2009). Geographies of media and communication: A critical introduction. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Adams, P. C., & Jansson, J. (2012). Communication geography: A bridge between disciplines. Communication Theory, 22, 299-318.
Adey, P. (2010). Mobility. New York: Routledge.
Adey, P., & Bevan, P. (2006). Between the physical and the virtual: Connected mobilities? In M. Sheller & J. Urry (Eds.), Mobile technologies of the city (pp.44-60). London: Routledge.
Albino, V., Berardi, U., & Dangelico, R. M. (2015). Smart cities: Definitions, dimensions, performances, and initiatives. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 3-21.
Albrechtslund, A. (2012). Socializing the city: Location sharing and online social networking. In C. Fuchs, K. Boersma, A. Albrechtslund & M. Sandoval (Eds.), Internet and Surveillance(pp187-197). New York: Routledge.
Amey, A. M. (2010). Real-time ridesharing : Exploring the opportunities and challenges of designing a technology-based rideshare trial for the mit community. Unpublished Master’s thesis, Department of Urban Studies and Planning, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA.
Amin A. & Thrift, N. (2002). Cities: Reimagining the Urban. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Anderson, B. (1991). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. New York: Verso.
Appadurai, A. (1996). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Augé, M. (1995) Non-places: Introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity. London: Verso.
Baldry, C. (1999). Space: The final frontiers. Sociology. 33(3): 535-553.
Barney, D. (2004). The network society. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Batty, M. (1997). The computable city. International Planning Studies, 2, 155–173 .
Batty, M. (2013). Big data, smart cities and city planning. Dialogues in Human Geography, 3(3), 274–279.
Batty, M., Axhausen, K. W., Giannotti, F., Pozdnoukhov, A., Bazzani, A., Wachowicz, M., et. al (2012). Smart cities of the future. The European Physical Journal Special Topics, 214(1), 481–518.
Bauman, Z. (1998). Globalization: The human consequences. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Bausinger, H. (1984). Media, technology and daily life. Media, Culture & Society, 6(4), 343-352.
Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London: Sage.
Beck, U., Giddens, A., & Lash, S. (1997). Reflexive modernization: Politics, tradition and aesthetics in the modern social order. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Bell, D. (1973). The coming of post-industrial society: A venture in social forecasting. New York: Basic.
Bendixson, T., & Richards, M. G. (1976). Witkar: Amsterdam’s self-drive hire city car. Tranportation, 5, 63-72.
Bijker, W. E. (1995). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Bull, M. (2007). Sound moves: iPod culture and urban experience. London: Routledge.
Buscher, M., Urry, J., & Witchger, K. (2011). Introduction: Mobile methods. In M. Buscher, J. Urry & K. Witchger (Eds.), Mobile methods(pp.1-19). New York: Routledge.
Callon, M. (1986). Some elements of sociology of translation: Domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St. Brieuc Bay. In J. Law (ed.). Power, action and belief: A new sociology of knowledge(pp.196-233). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Callon, M. (1987). Society in the making: The study of technology as a tool for sociological analysis. In T. Huges, & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology (pp. 83-103). London: MIT Press.
Callon, M., Barry, A., & Slater, D. (2002). Technology, politics and the market: An interview with Michel Callon. Economy and Society, 31(2): 285–306.
Calzada, I., & Cobo, C. (2015). Unplugging: Deconstructing the smart city. Journal of Urban Technology, 22(1), 23–43.
Campbell, S. (2008). Mobile technology and the body: Apparatgeist, fashion, and function. In J. E. Katz(Ed.). Handbook of mobile communication studies(pp.153-164). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Carey, J. (1989). Communication as culture: Essays on media and society. Boston, MA: Unwin Hyman.
Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Cleophas, C., Cottrill, C., Ehmke, J. F., & Tierney, K. (2019). Collaborative urban transportation: Recent advances in theory and practice. European Journal of Operational Research, 273, 801–816.
Couldry, N. (2004). Theorising media as practice. Social Semiotics,14(2), 115-132.
Cresswell, T. (2001). The production of mobilities. New Formations, 43, 11-25.
Cresswell, T. (2006). On the move: Mobility in the modern western world. New York: Routledge.
Cresswell, T. (2010). Towards a politics of mobility. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 28, 17-31.
Dant, T. (2014). Drivers and passengers. In P. Adey, D. Bissell, K. Hannam, P. Merriman, & M. Sheller (eds.). The Routledge handbook of Mobilities handbook(pp.367-375). New York: Routledge.
Davis, A., & Marshall, A. (2019.01.24). So Uber wants self-driving bikes and scooters. Why? And How?. Wired. Retrieved December 12, from https://www.wired.com/story/Uber-self-driving-scooters/
de Certeau, M. (1984). The practice of everyday life (S. Rendall, Trans.). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
DeLanda, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. London & New York: Continuum.
de Souza e Silva, A. (2006). From cyber to hybrid: Mobile technologies as interfaces of hybrid spaces. Space and Culture, 9(3), 261-278.
de Souza e Silva, A., & Frith, J. (2010). Locative mobile social networks: Mapping communication and location in urban spaces. Mobilities, 5, 485-505.
de Souza e Silva, A., & Sutko, D. M. (2008). Playing life and living play: How hybrid reality games reframe space,play and the ordinary. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 25(5), 447-465.
de Souza e Silva, A., & Sutko, D. M. (2009). Merging digital and urban playspaces: An introduction to the field. In A. de Souza e Silva & D. M. Sutko (Eds.), Digital cityscapes: Merging digital and urban playscapes(pp. 1-20). New York: Peter Lang.
Dodge, M., & Kitchin. R. (2001). Atlas of cyberspace. London: Addison-Wesley.
Dodge, M. & Kitchin, R. (2007). The automatic management and driving and driving spaces, Geoforum, 38, 264-275.
Dodge, M. (2009). Code/Space. Urbis Research Forum Review, 1(2), 15-25.
Duarte, F. (2016). Disassembling bike-sharing system: Surveillance, advertising, and the social inequalities of a global technological assemblage. Journal of Urban Technology, 23(2), 103-155.
Edensor, T. (2012). Commuter: Mobility, rhythm and commuting. In T. Cresswell & P. Merriman(Eds.), Geographies of mobilities: Practices, spaces, subjects (pp.189-203). Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
Efrati, A., & Weinberg, C. (2018.10.23). Inside Bird’s scooter economics. The Information. Retrieved December 12, from https://www.theinformation.com/articles/inside-birds-scooter-economics
Falkheimer, J., & Jansson A. (eds.). (2006). Geographies of communication: The spatial turn in media studies. Göteborg, Sweden: Nordicom.
Farman, J. (2012). Mobile interface theory: Embodied space and locative media. New York: Routledge.
Feenberg, A. (1999). Questioning technology. London: Routledge.
Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Random House.
Fuller, M. (2008). Software studies: A lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Gabrys, J. (2014). Programming environments: Environmentality and citizen sensing in the smart city. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 32(1), 30-48.
Gansterer, M., & Hartl, R. F. (2017). Collaborative vehicle routing: A survey. European Journal of Operational Research, 268, 1–12.
Gardiner, M. E. (2000). Critiques of everyday life. London: Routledge.
Gibson, J. J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Gillespie, T., Boczkowski, P. J., & Foot, K. A. (2014). Introduction. In T Gillespie, P. J. Boczkowski, & K. A. Foot(eds.). Media technologies: Essays on communication, materiality, and society(pp.1-17). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Goggin, G. (2012). Encoding place: The politics of mobile location technologies. In R. Wilken & G. Goggin(Eds.), Mobile technology and place(pp.198-209). New York: Routledge.
Graham, S. (2005). Software-sorted geographies. Progress in Human Geography, 29(5), 562–580.
Gray, A. (2003). Research practice for cultural studies: Ethnographic methods and lived cultures. London: Sage.
Greenfield, A. (2006). Everyware: The dawning age of ubiquitous computing. Berkeley, CA: New Riders.
Greenfield, A. (2017). Radical technologies: The design of everyday life. London: Verso.
Greenfield. A. (2013). Against the smart city. New York: Do Projects.
Gregory, D. (1994). Geographical imaginations. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Hanson, S. (1995). Getting there: Urban transportation in context. In S. Hanson(Ed.). The geography of urban transportation(pp.3-25). New York: Guilford.
Hanson, S. (2010). Gender and mobility: New approaches for informing sustainability. Gender, Place & Culture, 17(1), 5-23.
Haraway, D. J. (1991). Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.
Harvey, D. (1989). The condition of postmodernity: An enquiry into the origins of cultural change. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Harvey, D. (2006). Spaces of global capitalism. London: Verso.
Hawkins, A. J. (2019.08.06). Uber and Lyft finally admit they’re making traffic congestion worse in cities. The Verge. Retrieved August 13, 2019, from https://www.theverge.com/2019/8/6/20756945/uber-lyft-tnc-vmt-traffic-congestion-study-fehr-peers
Hay, J., & Packer, J. (2004). Crossing the media(-n): Auto-mobility, the transported self and technologies of freedom. In N. Couldy & A. McCarthy (Eds.), MediaSpace: Place, scale and culture in a media age(pp. 209-232). London: Routledge.
Highmore, B. (2004). Everyday life and cultural theory. New York: Routledge.
Howe, E. (2018). Global scootersharing market report 2018. Berlin, Germany: Innovation Centre for Mobility and Societal Change (InnoZ) GmbH.
Howe, E., & Bock, B. (2017). Global scootersharing market report 2017. Berlin, Germany: Innovation Centre for Mobility and Societal Change (InnoZ) GmbH.
Huang, W.-J. (2012). ICT-oriented urban planning strategies: A case study of Taipei City, Taiwan. Journal of Urban Technology, 19(3), 41–61.
Huffaker, C. (2016.07.14). There are fewer Pokemon Go locations in black neighborhoods, but why? Miami Herold. Retrieved November 23, 2017, from http://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/national/article89562297.html
Humphreys, L. (2007). Mobile social networks and social practice: A case study of Dodgeball. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 341-360.
Humphreys, L. (2010). Mobile social networks and urban public space. New Media & Society, 12, 763-778.
Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35(2), 441–456.
Ihde, D. (1990). Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Ingold, T. (2000). The perception of the environment: Essays on livelihood, dwelling and skill. London: Routledge.
Ingold, T. (2011). Being alive: Essays on movement, knowledge and description. London: Routledge.
Ingold, T. (2013). Making: Anthropology, archaeology, art and architecture. London, UK: Routledge.
Ito, M., Okabe, D. & Anderson, K. (2009). Portable objects in three global cities: The personalization of urban places. In R. Ling & S. W. Campbell (Eds.), The reconstruction of space and time: Mobile communication practices(pp.67-88). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
Janelle, D. G. (2004). Impact of information technologies. In G. Hanson & G. Giuliano (Eds.), The geography of urban transportation (3rd ed., pp.86-112). New York: Guilford.
Jansson, A. & Falkheimer, J. (2006). Towards a geography of communication. In J. Falkheimer & A. Jansson (eds.), Geographies of communication: The spatial turn in media studies (pp. 9-25). Göteborg, Sweden: Nordicom.
Jansson, A. (2007). Texture: A key concept for communication geography. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 10(2), 185-202.
Jansson, A. (2015). Interveillance: A new culture of recognition and mediatization. Media and Communication, 3(3), 81-90.
Jenkins, H. (2006). Fans, bloggers, and gamers: Exploring participatory culture. New York: New York University Press.
Joerges, B. (1999). Do politics have artifacts? Social Studies of Science, 29(3), 411-31.
Katz, J. E. (2003). Bodies, machines and communication contexts: What is to become of us? In J. E. Katz (Ed.), Machine that become us: The social context of personal communication technology (pp. 311-321). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Katz, J. E., & Aakhus, M. A. (2002). Conclusion: Making meaning of mobiles—a theory of apparatgeist. In J. E. Katz & M. A. Aakhus(Eds.), Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 301-320). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kelley, M. J. (2014). Urban experience takes an informational turn: Mobile internet usage and the unevenness of geosocial activity. GeoJournal, 79(1), 15–29.
Kempton, R. (2007). Provo: Amsterdam`s anarchist revolt. New York: Autonomedia.
Kitchin, R. (2014). The real-time city? Big data and smart urbanism. GeoJournal, 79(1), 1–14.
Kitchin, R., & Dodge, M. (2011). Code/space: Software and everyday life. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Krajina, Z., Moores, S., & Morley, D. (2014). Non-media-centric media studies: A cross-generational conversation. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 17(6), 682–700.
Larsen, B. S. (2000). Radio as ritual: An approach to everyday use of radio. Nordicom review, 21, 259-274.
Lefebvre, H. (1984). Everyday life in the modern world (R. Sacha, Trans.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. (Original work published 1971)
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith Trans.). London: Blackwell. (Original work published 1974)
Lefebvre, H. (2004). Rhythmanalysis: Space, time, and everyday life. London & New York: Continuum.
Ling, R., & Yttri, B. (2002). Hyper-coordination via mobiles phones in Norway. In J. E. Katz & M. A. Aakhus (Eds.), Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 139-169). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Lyons, G., Jain, J., & Holley, D. (2007). The use of travel time by rail passengers in Great Britain. Transportation Research Part A, 41: 107-120.
Mackenzie, A. (2006). From café to park bench: Wi-Fi and technological overflows in the city. In M. Sheller & J. Urry (eds.), Mobile technologies of the city (pp.137-151). London: Routledge.
Manovich, L. (2000). The language of new media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Manovich, L. (2013). Software takes command. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Massey, D. (1994). Space, place, and gender. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Massey, D. (2005). For space. London: Sage.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: McGraw-Hill.
McQuire, S. (2008). The media city: Media, architecture and urban space. London: Sage.
Mels, T. (2004). Lineages of a geography of rhythms. In T. Mels (ed.). Reanimating places: A geography of rhythms(pp.3-44). New York: Ashgate.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (1962). Phenomenology of perception. London: Routledge.
Merriman, P. (2004). Driving places: Marc Augé, non-places and the geographies of England’s M1 motorway. Theory, Culture and Society, 21(4/5): 145-167
Meyrowitz, J. (1985). No sense of place: The impact of electronic media on social behavior. New York: Oxford University Press.
Milller, H. J. (2011). Collaborative mobility: Using geographic information science to cultivate cooperative transportation systems. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 21, 24–28.
Milller, H. J. (2013). Beyond sharing: Cultivating cooperative transportation systems through geographic information science. Journal of Transport Geography, 31, 296–308.
Molotch, H. (2005). Where stuff comes from: How toasters, toilets, cars, computers and many other things come to be as they are. New York: Routledge.
Moores, S. (2014). Digital orientations: “Ways of the hand” and practical knowing in media uses and other manual activities. Mobile Media & Communication, 2(2), 196-208.
Moores, S. (2015). We find our way about: Everyday media use and ‘inhabitant knowledge’. Mobilities, 10(1), 17–35,
Morley, D. (2000). Home territories: Media, mobility and identity. London: Routledge.
Morley, D. (2007). Media, modernity and technology: The geography of the new. London: Routledge.
Morley, D. (2009). For a materialist, non-media-centric media studies. Television and New Media, 10(1), 114–116.
Obert, J. C. (2008). Sound and sentiment: A rhythmanalysis of television. Journal of Media & Cultural Studies, 22(3), 409-417.
Oudshoorn, N., & Pinch, T. (2008). User-technology relationships: Some recent developments. In E. Hackett, O. Amsterdamska, M. Lynch & J. Wajcman (Eds.), The handbook of science and technology studies(pp.1-25). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Pinch, T. (2008). Technology and institutions: living in a material world. Theory & society, 37, 461-483.
Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1989). The social construction of facts and artifacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. In W. E. Bijker , T. P. Hughes & T J. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology(pp. 17-50). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Pink, S., Sinanan, J., Hjorth, L., & Horst, H. (2016). Tactile digital ethnography: Researching mobile media through the hand. Mobile Media & Communication, 4(2), 237-251.
Postill, J. (2010). Introduction: Theorising media and practice. In B. Brauchler & J. Postill (Eds.), Theorising media and practice (pp.1-32). New York: Berghahn Books.
Radusch, I. (2013). Collaborative mobility: Beyond communicating Vehicles. ERCIM News, 94, 4.
Relph, E. (1976). Place and placelessness. London: Pion.
Rheingold, H. (2003). Smart mobs: The next social revolution. Cambridge, MA: Perseus.
Richardson, I. (2008). Pocket technospaces: The bodily incorporation of the mobile media. In G. Goggin (ed.), Mobile phone cultures (pp. 66-76). New York: Routledge.
Ritzer, G. & Jurgenson, N. (2010). Production, consumption, prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital “prosumer”. Journal of Consumer Culture, 10(1), 13-36.
Rosa, H. (2003). Social acceleration: Ethical and political consequences of a desynchronized high-speed society. Constellations, 10(1), 3-33
Rose, G. (2017). Posthuman agency in the digitally mediated city: Exteriorization, individuation, reinvention. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 107(4), 779-793.
Ruston, S. (2012). Calling ahead: Cinematic imaginations of mobile media`s critical affordances. In A. P. Kavoori & N. Arceneaux (Eds.), The mobile media reader (pp. 23–39). New York: Peter Lang.
Rutherford, J. (2011). Rethinking the relational socio-technical materialities of cities and ICTs. Journal of Urban Technology, 18(1), 21–33.
Scharff, V. (2003). Twenty thousand roads: Women, movement, and the West. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Sennett. R. (1976). The fall of public man. New York: Knopf.
Shaheen, S. A., Guzman, S., & Zhang, H. (2010). Bikesharing in Europe, the Americas, and Asia: Past, present, and future. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2143, 159-167.
Sheller, M. (2011). Mobility. Sociopedia.isa. DOI:10.1177/205684601163.
Sheller, M. (2013). The islanding effect: Post-disaster mobility systems and humanitarian logistics in Haiti. Cultural Geographies, 20(2), 185-204.
Sheller, M. (2017). From spatial turn to mobilities turn. Current Sociology, 65(4), 1-17.
Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006a). The new mobilities paradigm. Environment and Planning A, 38, 207-226.
Sheller, M., & Urry, J. (2006b). Introduction: Mobile cities, urban mobilities. In M. Sheller & J. Urry (Eds.), Mobile technologies of the city (pp.1-17). London: Routledge.
Silverstone, R. (1994). Television and everyday life. London: Routledge.
Silverstone, R. (1999). Why study the media? London: Sage.
Silverstone, R. (2002). Complicity and collusion in the mediation of everyday life. New Literary history, 33, 761-780.
Silverstone, R. (2006). Domesticating domestication: Reflections on the life of a concept. In T. Berker, M. Hartmann, Y. Punie, & K. J. Ward (Eds.), Domestication of media and technology (pp. 229-248). Berkshire, UK: Open University Press.
Southerton, D. (2006). Analysing the temporal organisation of daily life: social constraints, practices and their allocation. Sociology, 40(3), 435-454.
Spigel, L. (2001). Media homes: Then and now. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 4(4): 385-411.
Spitulnik, D. (2002). Mobile machines and fluid audience: Rethinking reception through Zambian radio culture. In F. D. Ginsburg, L. Abu-Lughod & B. Larkin (Eds.), Media Worlds (pp. 337-354). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Spring, U. (2006). The linear city: Touring Vienna in the nineteenth century. In M. Sheller & J. Urry (Eds.), Mobile technologies of the city (pp. 21-43). London: Routledge.
Stiegler, B. (1998). Technics and time, 1: The fault of epimetheus (R. Beardsworth & G. Collins, Trans.). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Stigler, B. (2010). Taking care of youth and the generations. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Suchman, L. (2007). Human–machine reconfigurations: Plans and situated actions. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Suchman, L., & Jordan, B. (1992). Validity and the collaborative construction of meaning in face-to-face surveys. In J. M. Tanur (ed.), Questions about questions: Inquiries into the cognitive bases of surveys (pp. 241-267). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Sudnow, D. (2001). Ways of the hand: A rewritten account. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tallis, R. (2003). The hand: A philosophical inquiry into human being. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
Thrift, N. (2004). Driving in the city. Theory, Culture and Society, 21 (4/5), 41-59.
Thrift, N. (2006). Space. Theory, Culture & Society, 23, 139-146.
Thrift, N. (2007). Non-representational theory: Space, politics, affect. New York: Routledge.
Thrift, N. (2012). The insubstantial pageant: Producing an untoward land. Cultural Geographies, 19(2), 141-168.
Thrift, N., & French, S. (2002). The automatic production of space. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 27(3), 309-335.
Tiwari, A. (2019). Micro-mobility: The next wave of urban transportation in India. YSJournal. Retrieved March 21, from https://yourstory.com/journal/micro-mobility-edc6x8f1y1
Tomlinson, J. (2007). The culture of speed: The coming of immediacy. London: Sage.
Townsend, A. M. (2013). Smart cities: Big data, civic hackers, and the quest for a new utopia. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
Turkle, S. (2008). Always-on/always-on-you: The tethered self. In J. E. Katz (Ed.), Handbook of mobile communication studies (pp.121-138). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tuters, M., & Varnelis, K. (2006). Beyond locative media: Giving shape to the Internet of Things. Leonardo, 39(4) ,357-363.
Urry, J. (1985). Social relations, space and time. In D. Gregory & J. Urry (Eds.), Social relations and spatial structures (pp.20-48). Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan.
Urry, J. (2000). Sociology beyond societies: Mobilities for the twenty-first century. London: Routledge.
Urry, J. (2002). The tourist gaze. London: Sage.
Urry, J. (2003). Global complexity. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Urry, J. (2007). Mobilities. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Uteng, T. P., & Cresswell, T. (eds.) (2008). Gendered Mobilities. Burlington, VT: Ashgate.
van der Zee, R. (2016.04.26). Story of cities #30: How this Amsterdam inventor gave bike-sharing to the world. The Guardian. Retrieved December 27, 2018, from https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2016/apr/26/story-cities-amsterdam-bike-share-scheme
Vanolo, A. (2014). Smartmentality: The smart city as disciplinary strategy. Urban Studies, 51(5), 883–898.
Vanolo, A. (2016). Is there anybody out there? The place and role of citizens in tomorrow’s smart cities. Futures, 82, 26–36.
Virilio, P. (1997). Open sky. New York: Verso.
Wilken, R., & Goggin, G. (2012). Mobilizing place: Conceptual currents and controversies. In R. Wilken & G. Goggin(eds.), Mobile technology and place(pp.3-25). New York: Routledge.
Wise, J. (2017). Toward a minor assemblage: An introduction to the clickable world. In A. Hess & A. Davidsson(eds.). Theorizing digital rhetoric(pp.68-82). New York: Routledge.
Wolff, J. (1993). On the road again: Metaphors of travel in cultural criticism. Cultural Studies, 7(2), 224-239.
Woolgar, S. & Copper, G. (1999). Do artefacts have ambivalence? Moses’ bridges, Winner’s bridges and other urban legends in S&TS. Social Studies of Science, 29(3), 433-449.
Woolgar, S. (1990). Configuring the user: the case of usability trials. The Sociological Review, 38(51), 58-99.
Woyke, E. (2014). The Smartphone: Anatomy of an Industry. New York: The New Press. |
| Description: | 博士
國立政治大學
傳播學院博士班
99451501 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0994515012 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| DOI: | 10.6814/NCCU201901018 |
| Appears in Collections: | [傳播博士班] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 501201.pdf | 11798Kb | Adobe PDF2 | 518 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
