Night-time mobilities and (in)justice in London: Constructing mobile subjects and the politics of difference in policy-making

The growing interest in urban night-time economies and night-time transport policies presents an important context in which to examine how mobility justice is conceived and operationalised in policy-making. Literature on transport exclusion and transport justice documents the disadvantages experienced by different social groups and advances theoretical frameworks for distributive justice and transport accessibility. However, this literature has rarely considered the politics of whether and how mobility difference is recognised and planned for in transport policy, including issues of deliberative justice (participation) and epistemic justice (knowledge production). To address these research gaps, this paper engages with Sheller's (2018) theorisation of mobility justice and critically analyses the construction of mobile subjects in policy discourse on night-time mobility. We analyse policy documents part of night-time policy for Greater London to examine the extent to which the differentiated night-time mobilities across social categories (gender, age, ethnicity, income, etc.) are recognised – in other words, how the ‘politics of difference’ play out in transport policy-making. Findings show that the discursive construction of mobile subjects in London's night-time policy distinguishes between workers, consumers, and transport users, yet, these broad categories poorly account for differentiated mobility needs and practices. Publicly available data on differentiated night-time mobilities in London does not inform current policy discourse, obscuring disadvantages experienced by different groups of people moving through the city at night, and thus limits the capacity of existing policy interventions to address mobility injustices. These findings reaffirm the need for transport research to move beyond distributive justice and accessibility analysis, towards exploring the potential of thinking about distributive and epistemic justice for challenging the status quo of transport policy

Equitable transport provision for night-time workers in 24-hour London

Over the past decade, cities across Europe and the US have begun to take the notion of a ‘24-hour city’ more seriously. Having recognised the economic value of night-time activities, cities such as Amsterdam and London have appointed night-time mayors to help foster the Night-Time Economy (NTE). This short research report unpacks current understandings of the NTE in London, highlighting the discrepancies between NTE as framed in policy strategies and the real nature of the NTE. It seeks to understand to what extent planning for night-time transport caters to those working in the sectors that make up the most of the NTE (health and social care services, transport and logistics), identifying blind spots in London’s current approach to night-time transport. Whilst this research project is in its early stages, this report aims to provide new methodological insights on how spatial data analysis can be leveraged to map the transport needs of night-time workers, in order to inform the design of more inclusive transport policy. More broadly, the report highlights that: - more inclusive framings of night-time strategies are possible if the NTE is viewed from the perspective of labour and the transport demand generated byworkers, rather thanfrom the perspective ofconsumption and the leisure-based economyalone; - in addition to investing in the extension of rail services to operate at night, policy development should include investigating options to improve night bus services further, such as express night buses to serve majornight-time employment areas; - access to transport needs to be understood and modelled not just in terms of access to consumption, the London Central Activities Zone or day-time destinations, but crucially include access to employment as a cornerstone

Night-time mobilities and (in)justice in London : constructing mobile subjects and the politics of difference in policy-making

The growing interest in urban night-time economies and night-time transport policies presents an important context in which to examine how mobility justice is conceived and operationalised in policy-making. Literature on transport exclusion and transport justice documents the disadvantages experienced by different social groups and advances theoretical frameworks for distributive justice and transport accessibility. However, this literature has rarely considered the politics of whether and how mobility difference is recognised and planned for in transport policy, including issues of deliberative justice (participation) and epistemic justice (knowledge production). To address these research gaps, this paper engages with Sheller's (2018) theorisation of mobility justice and critically analyses the construction of mobile subjects in policy discourse on night-time mobility. We analyse policy documents part of night-time policy for Greater London to examine the extent to which the differentiated night-time mobilities across social categories (gender, age, ethnicity, income, etc.) are recognised – in other words, how the ‘politics of difference’ play out in transport policy-making. Findings show that the discursive construction of mobile subjects in London's night-time policy distinguishes between workers, consumers, and transport users, yet, these broad categories poorly account for differentiated mobility needs and practices. Publicly available data on differentiated night-time mobilities in London does not inform current policy discourse, obscuring disadvantages experienced by different groups of people moving through the city at night, and thus limits the capacity of existing policy interventions to address mobility injustices. These findings reaffirm the need for transport research to move beyond distributive justice and accessibility analysis, towards exploring the potential of thinking about distributive and epistemic justice for challenging the status quo of transport policy

Night-time mobilities and (in)justice in London: constructing mobile subjects and the politics of difference in policy-making

The growing interest in urban night-time economies and night-time transport policies presents an important context in which to examine how mobility justice is conceived and operationalised in policy-making. Literature on transport exclusion and transport justice documents the disadvantages experienced by different social groups and advances theoretical frameworks for distributive justice and transport accessibility. However, this literature has rarely considered the politics of whether and how mobility difference is recognised and planned for in transport policy, including issues of deliberative justice (participation) and epistemic justice (knowledge production). To address these research gaps, this paper engages with Sheller's (2018) theorisation of mobility justice and critically analyses the construction of mobile subjects in policy discourse on night-time mobility. We analyse policy documents part of night-time policy for Greater London to examine the extent to which the differentiated night-time mobilities across social categories (gender, age, ethnicity, income, etc.) are recognised – in other words, how the ‘politics of difference’ play out in transport policy-making. Findings show that the discursive construction of mobile subjects in London's night-time policy distinguishes between workers, consumers, and transport users, yet, these broad categories poorly account for differentiated mobility needs and practices. Publicly available data on differentiated night-time mobilities in London does not inform current policy discourse, obscuring disadvantages experienced by different groups of people moving through the city at night, and thus limits the capacity of existing policy interventions to address mobility injustices. These findings reaffirm the need for transport research to move beyond distributive justice and accessibility analysis, towards exploring the potential of thinking about distributive and epistemic justice for challenging the status quo of transport policy

DevOps Adoption Benefits and Challenges in Practice: A Case Study

DevOps is an approach in which traditional software engineering roles are merged and communication is enhanced to improve the production release frequency and maintain software quality. There seem to be benefits in adopting DevOps but practical industry experiences have seldom been reported. We conducted a qualitative multiple-case study and interviewed the representatives of three software development organizations in Finland. The responses indicate that with DevOps, practitioners can increase the frequency of releases and improve test automation practices. DevOps was seen to encourage collaboration between departments which boosts communication and employee welfare. Continuous releases enable a more experimental approach and rapid feedback collection. The challenges include communication structures that hinder cross-department collaboration and having to address the cultural shift. Dissimilar development and production environments were mentioned as some of the technical barriers. DevOps might not also be suitable for all industries. Ambiguity in the definition of DevOps makes adoption difficult since organizations might not know which practices they should implement for DevOps.Peer reviewe

Fostering Continuous Innovation with Engaging IT-Assisted Transparent Information Sharing : A Case Study

The paper received the Honorary Mention – Best Paper Award Nominee.Peer reviewe

Reductive Amination of Ketones with Benzylamine Over Gold Supported on Different Oxides

Reductive amination of cyclohexanone with benzylamine was investigated at 100 °C under 30 bar hydrogen in toluene with five different gold catalysts prepared by deposition–precipitation method and supported on TiO2, La2O3/TiO2, CeO2/TiO2, La2O3 and CeO2. Size of metallic gold varied in the range of 2.6–3.6 nm. The best catalysts in reductive amination of cyclohexanone with benzylamine were 4 wt% Au/TiO2 and 4 wt% Au/CeO2/TiO2 giving 72% and 79% yield of the desired amine. The most acidic and basic catalysts were also unselective and exhibited low activity towards imine hydrogenation. The best catalyst 4 wt% Au/CeO2/TiO2 gave in reductive amination of propiophenone 56% selectivity to the corresponding amine at 20% conversion in 5 h.</p