Next Article in Journal
An Integrated Medical-Psychological Approach in the Routine Care of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Pilot Study to Explore the Clinical and Economic Sustainability of the Healthcare Intervention
Next Article in Special Issue
Research into the Impacts of Driving Cycles and Load Weight on the Operation of a Light Commercial Electric Vehicle
Previous Article in Journal
The Spatial and Temporal Characteristics of Industry–University Research Collaboration Efficiency in Chinese Mainland Universities
Previous Article in Special Issue
Implementing Electromobility in Public Transport in Poland in 1990–2020. A Review of Experiences and Evaluation of the Current Development Directions
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Connectivity Benefits of Small Zero-Emission Autonomous Ferries in Urban Mobility—Case of the Coastal City of Gdańsk (Poland)

by
Maciej Tarkowski
* and
Krystian Puzdrakiewicz
Division of Regional Development, Faculty of Social Sciences, University of Gdańsk, 80-309 Gdańsk, Poland
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2021, 13(23), 13183; https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313183
Submission received: 31 October 2021 / Revised: 23 November 2021 / Accepted: 25 November 2021 / Published: 28 November 2021
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Sustainable Development of Urban Electric Transport Systems)

Abstract

:
An increase in energy-efficient transportation is one way that cities try to mitigate climate change. In coastal cities, public water transit is also undergoing transitions. A small zero-emission autonomous ferry seems to be a cutting-edge technology in this field. This study aims to decrease the knowledge gap in research on the impacts of autonomous passenger ferry development on urban mobility. In particular, the central theme regards the extent to which the new transport solution can help improve sustainable mobility patterns. This study explores the local spatial context of ferry development, land-use patterns, and transport network structure, and moderates the shift in urban mobility practices. Regarding land use patterns, the case of the coastal city of Gdańsk has been documented in secondary qualitative and quantitative data, including in a large body of policy documents, accompanying expert opinions, and scholarly literature. This study strongly emphasises that a typical short river crossing, due to autonomous vessels, can regain a competitive position, which was partially lost due to linear routes along the river. The research identified crucial benefits of autonomous ferry shipping on urban mobility by increasing public transport network connectivity, reducing travel distance, and creating modal shifts towards foot travel and bike riding. It appears as an exciting scalable solution for cities where limited or dispersed demand prevents achievement of economies of scale, therefore diminishing the necessary expenditures.

1. Introduction

Cities contain more than half of the world’s population, consume three-quarters of global energy production, and play a similar role in greenhouse gas emissions; they are the core of climate change mitigation [1] and the core of substantial fields of scientific research on sustainability [1,2,3,4,5]. Transport is a substantial source of urban greenhouse gas emissions. Chen and Kauppila [6] estimated that, in 2015, world urban systems, limited to cities of over 300,000 people, covered 37% of global CO2 emissions from passenger transport and 20% of the entire transport sector. Cities have tried to increase energy efficiency in transportation. Zero-emission or zero-carbon solutions have become feasible technological solutions, but their implementation involves city authorities enacting complex, multicriteria decision processes that require sophisticated supporting tools [7,8]. As a multilevel perspective on sustainability transitions [9,10,11] suggests, technological innovation development is insufficient. A profound shift in sociotechnical systems consists of networks of actors, institutions, material artefacts, and knowledge [12], which are all necessary to diffuse the innovation from niche to mainstream, defined as a sociotechnical regime [13]. The sustainability transition factors differ across places and spaces [14]. Therefore, the essential question is how and why are the transitions similar or different across locations [11,15]. By exploring the local spatial context of innovative zero-emission autonomous ferry development, this study helps to answer that question.
This study aims to diminish the knowledge gap in research on spatial or place-based factors of sustainability transition in a broader context. The built environment—land-use patterns and transport network structures—moderates the shift in urban mobility practices, but they are underestimated as transition factors [14]. In a narrow context, the study tries to reduce the gap in the research on the impact of autonomous passenger ferry development on urban mobility. In particular, the extent to which the new transport solution can help improve sustainable mobility patterns is the central theme. From the sustainable mobility paradigm point of view [16], autonomous ferries may change modal shift, reduce travel distance, increase transport energy efficiency, and reduce pollution. The demonstration effect increases public acceptability and supports active mobility in which pedestrians and cyclists are the target group of the small autonomous ferries, therefore raising public health [17]. In coastal and riverside cities, the ferries bridging opposite banks can play a significant role in walkability progress by radical improvement in path and street connectivity [18,19].
The research procedure consists of five stages and corresponding objectives (Figure 1). The premises are formulated on the basis of previous experiences in waterbus operations, which is the initial research stage. The second and third stages focus on the demand side, specifically, the living spaces and workplaces near the rivers and the location of leisure and tourist attractions. The final step is to evaluate the potential benefits of small autonomous ferry introduction on urban mobility.
The study emphasises that a typical short river crossing, due to an autonomous vessel, can regain a competitive position, which was partially lost due to linear routes along the river. It also identifies crucial benefits of autonomous ferry shipping on urban mobility, including travel distance reduction and a modal shift towards foot travel and bike riding, resulting in public health improvement. The results support the theorem that cities can be considered a bridge between niches and regimes that provide the actual conditions for implementing sociotechnical configurations [20]. As the case study, the study creates one of the “new varieties that subsequently can be fused through recombinant innovation, triggering a technological transition” [21].
Several experiments on zero-emission autonomous ferries for urban water, mainly in Norway and nearby, was carried out [22]. The Norwegian University of Science and Technology and Zeabus, a spin-off from the university, developed small autonomous passenger ferries in an urban setting. In December 2020, milliAmpere, the first autonomous battery-powered small ferry prototype (5 m long and 2.8 m wide monohull fit for five researchers) completed a fully autonomous operational test in Trondheim. The full-scale prototype (8.5 m long and 3.5 m wide monohull designed for 12 passengers), miliAmpere2, was placed into an irregular trial as a living lab in Trondheim city. The ferry equipment consisted of induction charging, a battery pack, four azimuth trusters, computing hardware, a sensor package (precise positioning system, radar, lidar, optical and infrared cameras), and a dynamic positioning system. They are also currently developing remote support centres, docking stations, and user interaction procedures. Zeabus, in cooperation with the municipality, port authority, local transport operator, and the maritime authorities, will design and launch the first ferry system in 2022 [23]. Trondheim is not the only city developing autonomous ferries. Knoxville, in the United States of America [24]; Teylingen [25]; and Amsterdam, the Netherlands [26], are also in process of autonomous passenger boat development.
Broad literature studies [27] have proven that urban experiments with low-carbon transport mainly focus on low-emission vehicles [28,29,30,31] and rapid bus transit systems [32,33,34,35,36]. However, urban water transit plays a significant role in coastal cities’ public transport systems [37] as commuter support [38,39,40] and simultaneously as an attraction for tourists [41,42]. In the case of a dozen large cities worldwide, the electrification of water transit systems is in progress. Newly built or retrofitted ferries equipped with pure electric or diesel–electric hybrid propulsion have been placed into operation. Three dominant pathways of this transition were identified—a comprehensive carbon-neutral policy, a transport sector policy, and a research and development policy [43]. Despite this progress, there are still a large number of cities without conditions and capabilities for large scale low-carbon water transit transition or development. In these cases, the feasible solution may be autonomous small vessels or boats, which require much lower capital and operational expenditures and which allow to scale the project to low shipping intensity [44].
A study relating to all the above-mentioned questions fits into a multi-level transition perspective [9,10,11], examining shifts in sociotechnical regimes towards electromobility instead of technical development issues broadly documented in scientific publications [44,45]. The literature of the field in the study is modest due to the thus-far initial implementation stage of the small autonomous ferries concept. The authors developing the milliAmpere project in Trondheim outlined the requirements for a maritime autonomous surface ship in urban passenger transportation [46]. They mainly identified technical questions of safe and secure navigation. However, outlined questions are a starting point for a shift in sociotechnical regimes. Amsterdam’s experiment, which involves autonomous platforms combined to form floating bridges and stages, as well as to collect waste, deliver goods, and transport people, has also been discussed [47]. Operational benefits for autonomous water taxis in logistics were also a subject of the study [44]. The results showed that autonomy can lead to substantial savings on travelled distance due to the number and locations of parking terminals, feasible only for autonomous systems.
The city of Gdańsk seems to be an interesting case of using a small autonomous vessel to improve the connectivity of the public transport system and to make urban mobility more sustainable. The city, inhabited by about 471,000 people, is located on the southern coast of the Baltic Sea. With Gdynia and Sopot, it forms the core of one of the largest metropolitan regions in Poland, populated by approximately 1.6 million people. Regarding functional specialisation, the region is classified in category four (the lowest) of the Metropolitan European Growth Areas, with several other urban regions such as Bordeaux, Genoa, le Havre, and Southampton [48]. The location in the mouth sections of the large river (Vistula) and its tributary (Motława) were determinants in the city’s spatial development directions. The historic Hanseatic city centre; the port; and industrial, residential, recreational, and tourist areas occupy the banks of these rivers. The beds of these rivers constitute a transport barrier, as the possibility of building permanent bridges is limited by the necessity to maintain the patency of the waterways. In recent years, two kinds of attempts have been made to alleviate this problem. As part of the revitalisation of the downtown river island, they built two pedestrian drawbridges.
Unfortunately, the attempt to revive the waterways by launching waterbuses ended in a fiasco. From 2008 to 2019, it served two seasonal lines connecting essential city points located on both sides of the rivers, which were equipped with appropriate harbours. The lack of modern ships, low running frequency, and high operating costs were all significant for servicing tourist traffic. However, this project did not constitute an attractive offer for commuters [49]. The COVID-19 pandemic and concurrent financial difficulties have brought it to an end. Studies on replacing the ships used thus far with modern vessels with pure electric or hybrid diesel–electric propulsion have not shown a possibility of significantly reducing the costs of servicing waterbuses [50].
For this reason, Gdańsk is an excellent example for proposing a radically different model for the development of urban passenger shipping. Instead of long routes parallel to riverbanks that are serviced by large waterbuses operated by a crew, this study verifies the effects of introducing a set of small autonomous vessels to cross the river and link to two or three points on opposite sides. Moreover, the Autonomous Vehicles/Vessels Working Group has started its activity in Gdańsk [51], which is the outcome of the regional smart specialisation strategy introduction.
This study adds the next aspect to the discussion on benefits for a small autonomous ferry. It focuses on spatial conditions of potential progress in sustainable mobility, especially walkability that emerged from vessel autonomy. This study is not a feasibility study. It omits detailed technical solutions and legal conditions that still do not regulate the use of autonomous vehicles.

2. Materials and Methods

Case studies are a leading research method, the outcomes of which are referred to in this study. It is a qualitative tool effectively used in various fields of social science research to investigate the impact of policy and practice [52,53]. The method is also widely adopted in urban studies [54,55]. Five primary research stages make up the research procedure (Table 1). A specific research objective was assigned to each of them. Appropriate research methods were applied at each stage, adequate to the problem and available sources. The premises were formulated on the basis of previous experiences in waterbus operations as an initial research stage. The second and third stages focused on the demand side, specifically the living spaces and workplaces near the rivers. In the case of Gdańsk, the one kilometre buffer was especially interesting due to the concentration of human activities related to waterfront areas [56]. On the basis of previous operational experiences and potential demand analysis, the location decision process was carried out. The final step was to evaluate the potential benefits of introducing a small autonomous ferry on urban mobility. The public transport timetable was used to assess the benefits of reducing travel time between areas on the opposite shores and estimates of travel time by foot and car, generated by Google Maps. The extent to which these benefits are consistent was also verified with the expectations contained in the urban development master plan. The master plan consisted of several loosely related documents such as socio-economic development strategy [57], operational programmes [58], and general spatial management plans [59] in the Polish legal framework. The local revitalisation program [60] also plays a significant role in Gdańsk.
The analysis was initiated through a comprehensive set of quantitative and qualitative data regarding waterbus system performance, current land use, and directions of spatial development, as well as tourist flow patterns. Expert opinions and strategic development documents helped in developing a better understanding of the nature of small autonomous ferry implementation conditions and to specify the possible benefits for urban mobility. In order to identify the spatial distribution of the most important areas of concentration of city-forming functions, we used spatial data, which are presented in Figure 1 and Figure 2. These data contain information on the transport system of Gdańsk riverside areas, including data on the number of registered inhabitants and the concentration of jobs by transport regions, which were provided by the Gdańsk Development Office.

3. Results

This study formulated two kinds of outcomes: The first covers river crossing locations serviced by autonomous ferries and important functional features such as travel distance between riverbanks and dominant function, traffic intensity, and seasonality. The second summarises the direct potential benefits of reducing travel time. The potential indirect advantages for walkability and public health benefits were also reported.

3.1. Autonomous Ferry Line Locations and Their Main Features

Spatial variability of demand examination combined with spatio-temporal accessibility analysis allowed for specifying five locations for river crossing serviced by small autonomous ferries (Figure 2).
Four of the connections are linear between two opposite riverbanks, while another establishes links between three stops, separated by a fairway and a harbour basin. The ferry crossing length does not exceed 500 m (Table 2). However, in three locations, it is much shorter. Tourism and recreation are essential to the function of all ferry crossings. Each line connects stops that are in the vicinity of the most visited attractions [68], which are anthropogenic (historic downtown buildings, post-shipyard areas related to the heritage of the Solidarity protest movement, place of the symbolic beginning of the Second World War) and natural (green areas and beaches) (Figure 3). However, besides historic downtown, there are no densely inhabited residential areas, service/industry parks, or workplaces near the ferry stops. Therefore, the substantial demand from commuters is limited to two locations (Młode Miasto–Polski Hak and Muzeum Morskie–Sołdek). In the first location, travel demand will result from the bold revitalisation of post-shipyard areas (Młode Miasto as the new city downtown) and new residential and service buildings (Polski Hak). The detailed design solutions of the planned nearby river crossing tunnel, depending on the extent to which it will be friendly to pedestrians and cyclists, will also impact ferry crossing attractiveness. Due to the short travel distance, favourable nautical conditions, and the possibility of the location of the remote support centre nearby, the ferry crossing at the heart of historic downtown (Muzeum Morskie, Sołdek) can play the role of living laboratory for autonomous vessel development. The dominant function directly connects with the degree of seasonality because tourism in Gdańsk is seasonal.
The scope of this study does not provide a possibility to quantitatively estimate passenger flow. However, data on passenger traffic regarding the former waterbus system [62] and tourist destination attractiveness [68] allow for quantitative estimation of potential traffic intensity (Table 2). The incidence of high tourist attractions and many waterbus passengers point out the Brzeźno–Latarnia Morska–Westerplatte location as a high-intensity ferry crossing. In contrast, the Górki Zachodnie–Górki Wschodnie ferry crossing indicates low potential traffic intensity. However, this connection will become attractive for bicyclists as an alternative to the current course of the EV10 international bicycle trail. The remaining three places have average potential traffic volumes. For the two historic downtown locations, significant demand may be limited by the availability of alternative pedestrian routes. The following section discusses this issue.

3.2. Benefits of Autonomous Ferry Development in Sustainable Urban Mobility

3.2.1. Travel Time Reduction

The savings in travel time versus distance better reflect the impact of transport investment for urban mobility [71,72]. Evaluation of the travel time benefits of the proposed ferry crossing development are based on the following assumptions: ferry average cruise speed of 5 km/h, shortest travel table time for public transport with excluded outliers, and estimated car riding and walking time in which Google Maps tools was used. Car riding time estimations regard off-peak hours. In both cases—public transport and private car—the necessary walk to the ferry stops was added. The mean waiting time for the ferry and the other means of public transport was not included. These cautious assumptions led to results showing substantial travel time savings in the case of all ferry crossings (Table 3). These ferry stops are now located on the fringes of the city’s transportation system. Moving between them requires overcoming long circular routes with heavy traffic. In the case of public transport, transport changes are necessary, which will extend the journey time. The connection of opposite shores radically improves the conditions of travel between them. It is also of significant importance for increasing the cohesion of the city’s public transport network. Furthermore, the ferry crossing placed nearby two pedestrian drawbridges (Muzeum Morskie–Sołdek) offers competitive travel time.
Estimated travel time savings are not only relevant to the sustainable mobility paradigm. They also meet the need of the city of Gdańsk urban development master plan. This directly fosters the achievement of all objectives in the strategic field of transport and mobility. The objectives include improving pedestrian and bicycle traffic conditions, increasing public transport attractiveness, improving internal and external transport accessibility, and promoting sustainable transport and active mobility [58]. The proposed ferry crossing development also covers spatial development objectives, such as continuing inwardly oriented development, enhancing the quality and attractiveness of public spaces, and developing city-creating functions in port-industry concentrations and the coastal belt.

3.2.2. Potential Benefits for Walkability and Public Health

The primary purpose of the small autonomous ferry is pedestrian transport or, eventually, bikers and other users of personal transport devices. Therefore, this is the tool that directly supports walkability. The radical improvement in street connectivity provided by the proposed ferry crossing also facilitates walkability. What is more, most of the connected places are essential public spaces in Gdańsk. They are pedestrian-friendly and offer many possibilities of spending time. This is why a small autonomous ferry development also supports the city’s strategic objective of improving public spaces quality. Another city development objective, namely, public health improvement [58], can also be supported by analysing the project. The interactions between walkability, physical activity, and public health are becoming increasingly more recognised [73,74].

4. Discussion

This study reduces the research gap on the impact of autonomous passenger ferry development on urban mobility, in particular by examining the extent to which the new transport solutions can help improve sustainable mobility patterns. The method used in this study helped to identify land use conditions favourable for introducing small autonomous ferries and their impact on the distance of urban travel and utilisation of different public transport means. The case of the coastal city of Gdańsk has been documented in secondary qualitative and qualitative data regarding land use patterns, location of living spaces and workplaces, public transport network patterns, and performance through a large body of policy documents (urban development master plan), accompanying expert opinions, and scholarly literature. The results should be considered to contribute to scientific knowledge in sustainable urban mobility and autonomous shipping. Because the designs of small autonomous ferries assume zero-emission propulsion systems [22], the study also supports the study on transport electrification, especially in urban areas. Thus far, research on urban autonomous ferry systems has not been numerous, and the research usually does not go beyond technical issues. As the present study shows, the broader sociotechnical transition perspective seems to be a promising research field, especially for urban mobility.
First, the study strongly emphasised that a typical short river crossing, due to autonomous vessels, can regain a competitive position, which was partially lost due to linear routes along the river [75]. As the study shows, it is an exciting solution for cities in which limited or dispersed demand prevents achieving sufficient economies of scale for a ferry system to reduce or at least justify the costs incurred by public institutions. The system consists of a small autonomous ferry that is much more scalable. Each ferry crossing is independent of others such that lines can be successively added as financially possible. The smaller dimensions of an autonomous ship versus a human-crewed vessel generate much lower investment and operational expenditures, especially in terms of labour costs [44,50].
Second, the research identified crucial benefits of autonomous ferry shipping on urban mobility, travel distance reduction, and a modal shift towards foot travel or bike riding, resulting in public health improvement. According to the sustainable mobility paradigm [16], there are some indirect advantages, such as pollution limitation to reduce travel distance results and assumed installation of a zero-emission propulsion system, which is also more energy-efficient. This demonstration effect may also increase public acceptability for a shift in mobility patterns. In order for the support for sustainable mobility to be summarised, it is worth framing the proposed project in the “avoid–shift–improve” concept to evaluate sustainable mobility policies [27]. A small autonomous ferry should “avoid” transport work volume, should result in a “shift” in modal split towards public transport modes, and should “improve” vessel energy efficiency.
Third, while the potential benefits of implementing small autonomous ferries are comprehensive, the question of their ability to transform entire urban transport systems remains open. The examined case suggests that the solution effectively increases connectivity of the peripheral parts of transport networks. The extent to which it supports daily commuters, tourists, or city inhabitants during leisure also regulates the transformation of the urban transport system [76].
Fourth, developing ferry systems fosters the economic development of revitalised waterfronts, and is not the only answer for commuting demand [75]. The analysed case confirms this rule—two of five planned ferry crossings are neighboured with waterfront properties under revitalisation processes. This circumstance creates an opportunity to involve private capital in the development of autonomous ferries.
Fifth, this study supports the assumption that inventing a new technology is not enough to change societies. Changes in markets, user practices, policy, and culture are also indispensable [77]. Cities that create development policy provide the actual conditions for implementing sociotechnical configurations [20].
Setting the scope of analysis to local patterns and consequences of zero-emission small autonomous ferry development is a significant limitation of this study. The development of new systems for ferries brings cities noticeable discursive and material benefits. Instead of avoiding a negative environmental impact, they may relocate outside the city (energy production or ferry manufacturing-related emissions) [78].

5. Conclusions

City activities, including urban mobility, play a crucial role in climate change mitigation. Urban mobility has a significant share in global transport greenhouse gas emissions. To lower the emissions rate, we need to introduce comprehensive policies and measures. Zero-emission autonomous ferries are one of the feasible solutions. This study investigated whether and how this cutting-edge technology can foster shift in urban mobility towards sustainability. Thus far, research on urban autonomous ferry systems is not numerous, and they usually do not go beyond technical issues. This study acknowledged that the broader sociotechnical transition perspective seems to be a promising research field, especially for urban mobility. As the study showed, small zero-emission autonomous ferries have become an exciting solution for cities where limited or dispersed demand prevents achieving economies of scale, thus diminishing the necessary expenditures. The examined case suggests that the solution effectively increases the connectivity of peripheral parts of transport networks. It is also more scalable because each ferry crossing is independent of others such that the lines can be successively added when financially possible. The smaller dimensions of an autonomous ship versus a human-crewed vessel generate much lower investment and operational expenditures, especially in terms of labour costs. The “avoid–shift–improve” concept evaluates small autonomous ferries as a tool of sustainable mobility policies that “avoid” transport work volume, that result in a “shift” in modal split towards public transport modes, and that “improve” vessel energy efficiency. The study outcomes have policy implications for urban stakeholders and policymakers. The small zero-emission autonomous ferry solution will become increasingly excellent and more affordable. They will therefore become difficult for policymakers to ignore. Stakeholders and policymakers should investigate emerging technical solutions and then choose the most relevant ones for their urban conditions, demand, and political promises. Cooperation with relevant water transport authorities is also necessary to develop the rules, standards, and certification procedures to ensure shipping safety and security.
Examining only essential specialities of small autonomous ferry introduction are the limitations of this study. Indicated ferry crossing locations require verification in terms of equipping the appropriate infrastructure. A multicriteria assessment of the introduction of small, zero-emission autonomous ferry outcomes for sustainability is needed to identify infrastructural needs. This multi-level perspective suggests that technology and economics assessment is insufficient. The equity criteria also should be taken into account [79]. The urban development master plans and sustainable urban mobility plans, in particular, should propose ways of using innovative means of transport in line with the city’s development goals and the global climate change agenda. However, these analyses overlook one key aspect. They focus on the benefits of increased efficiency in operating a new means of transport, but they ignore the ecological costs (e.g., equipment and energy production) transferred outside the city [78]. The COVID-19 pandemic adds one more exciting research direction. Uncrewed small ferries offer much safer working and travel conditions for health [80,81]. Finally, this study suggests one available future research direction. More case studies are necessary to systematise recombinant innovation to trigger a technological transition [71] in sustainable urban mobility.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, M.T.; methodology, M.T. and K.P.; software, K.P.; validation, M.T. and K.P.; formal analysis, M.T. and K.P.; investigation, M.T.; resources, K.P.; data curation, K.P.; writing—original draft preparation, M.T.; writing—review and editing, M.T.; visualisation, K.P.; supervision, M.T.; project administration M.T.; funding acquisition, M.T. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Nor applicable.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Mi, Z.; Guan, D.; Liu, Z.; Liu, J.; Viguié, V.; Fromer, N.; Wang, Y. Cities: The core of climate change mitigation. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 207, 582–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Rodriguez, R.S.; Ürge-Vorsatz, D.; Barau, A.S. Sustainable Development Goals and climate change adaptation in cities. Nat. Clim. Chang. 2018, 8, 181–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. McEvoy, D. Climate change and cities. Built Environ. 2007, 33, 5–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Bai, X.; Dawson, R.J.; Ürge-Vorsatz, D.; Delgado, G.C.; Barau, A.S.; Dhakal, S.; Dodman, D.; Leonardsen, L.; Masson-Delmotte, V.; Roberts, D.C.; et al. Six research priorities for cities and climate change. Nature 2018, 555, 23–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Reckien, D.; Salvia, M.; Heidrich, O.; Church, J.M.; Pietrapertosa, F.; De Gregorio-Hurtado, S.; D’Alonzo, V.; Foley, A.; Simoes, S.G.; Lorencová, E.K.; et al. How are cities planning to respond to climate change? Assessment of local climate plans from 885 cities in the EU-28. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 191, 207–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chen, G.; Kauppila, J. Global urban passenger travel demand and CO2 emissions to 2050: New model. Transp. Res. Rec. 2017, 2671, 71–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Krishankumar, R.; Pamucar, D.; Deveci, M.; Ravichandran, K.S. Prioritization of zero-carbon measures for sustainable urban mobility using integrated double hierarchy decision framework and EDAS approach. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 797, 149068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Pamucar, D.; Deveci, M.; Gokasar, I.; Işık, M.; Zizovic, M. Circular economy concepts in urban mobility alternatives using integrated DIBR method and fuzzy Dombi CoCoSo model. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 323, 129096. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Geels, F.W. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 2002, 31, 1257–1274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Geels, F.W.; Sovacool, B.K.; Schwanen, T.; Sorrell, S. The Socio-Technical Dynamics of Low-Carbon Transitions. Joule 2017, 1, 463–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  11. Köhler, J.; Geels, F.W.; Kern, F.; Markard, J.; Onsongo, E.; Wieczorek, A.; Alkemade, F.; Avelino, F.; Bergek, A.; Boons, F.; et al. An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2019, 31, 1–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  12. Markard, J.; Raven, R.; Truffer, B. Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 2012, 41, 955–967. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Geels, F.W. Socio-technical transitions to sustainability: A review of criticisms and elaborations of the Multi-Level Perspective. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2019, 39, 187–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Hansen, T.; Coenen, L. The geography of sustainability transitions: Review, synthesis and reflections on an emergent research field. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2015, 17, 92–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Binz, C.; Coenen, L.; Murphy, J.T.; Truffer, B. Geographies of transition—From topical concerns to theoretical engagement: A comment on the transitions research agenda. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2020, 34, 1–3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Banister, D. The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transp. Policy 2008, 15, 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Carr, L.J.; Dunsiger, S.I.; Marcus, B.H. Walk Score™ As a Global Estimate of Neighborhood Walkability. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2010, 39, 460–463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Molaei, P.; Tang, L.; Hardie, M. Measuring Walkability with Street Connectivity and Physical Activity: A Case Study in Iran. World 2021, 2, 49–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ellis, G.; Hunter, R.; Tully, M.A.; Donnelly, M.; Kelleher, L.; Kee, F. Connectivity and physical activity: Using footpath networks to measure the walkability of built environments. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 2016, 43, 130–151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  20. Späth, P.; Rohracher, H. Local Demonstrations for Global Transitions—Dynamics across Governance Levels Fostering Socio-Technical Regime Change Towards Sustainability. Eur. Plan. Stud. 2012, 20, 461–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Frenken, K.; Izquierdo, L.R.; Zeppini, P. Branching innovation, recombinant innovation, and endogenous technological transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2012, 4, 25–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  22. Reddy, N.P.; Zadeh, M.K.; Thieme, C.A.; Skjetne, R.; Sorensen, A.J.; Aanondsen, S.A.; Breivik, M.; Eide, E. Zero-Emission Autonomous Ferries for Urban Water Transport: Cheaper, Cleaner Alternative to Bridges and Manned Vessels. IEEE Electrif. Mag. 2019, 7, 32–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zeabus Milliamepere-ZEABUZ. Available online: https://zeabuz.com/miliampere/ (accessed on 27 October 2021).
  24. Automation, B. Autonomous Boats|Greycraft|Buffalo Automation. Available online: https://www.buffautomation.com/greycraft (accessed on 27 October 2021).
  25. Nussbaumer, N. Buffalo Automation Launches “Vaar met Ferry” in Netherlands—Buffalo Rising. Available online: https://www.buffalorising.com/2021/07/buffalo-automation-launches-vaar-met-ferry-in-netherlands/ (accessed on 27 October 2021).
  26. AMS Institute AMS Institute—What Key Ingredients Make Roboat Autonomously Navigate the City? Available online: https://www.ams-institute.org/news/what-key-ingredients-allow-roboat-navigate-autonomously-city/ (accessed on 27 October 2021).
  27. Wimbadi, R.W.; Djalante, R.; Mori, A. Urban experiments with public transport for low carbon mobility transitions in cities: A systematic literature review (1990–2020). Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021, 72, 103023. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Knez, M.; Obrecht, M. Policies for Promotion of Electric Vehicles and Factors Influencing Consumers’ Purchasing Decisions of Low Emission Vehicles. J. Sustain. Dev. Energy Water Environ. Syst. 2017, 5, 151–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Kester, J.; Sovacool, B.K.; Noel, L.; Zarazua de Rubens, G. Rethinking the spatiality of Nordic electric vehicles and their popularity in urban environments: Moving beyond the city? J. Transp. Geogr. 2020, 82, 102557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Heidrich, O.; Hill, G.A.; Neaimeh, M.; Huebner, Y.; Blythe, P.T.; Dawson, R.J. How do cities support electric vehicles and what difference does it make? Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2017, 123, 17–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Amundsen, A.H.; Sundvor, I.; Institute of Transport Economics (TOI); Agency, S.T. Low Emission Zones in Europe: Requirement, Enforcement and Air Quality; Institute of Transport Economics (TØI): Oslo, Norway, 2018; ISBN 9788248021889. [Google Scholar]
  32. Połom, M.; Wiśniewski, P. Implementing Electromobility in Public Transport in Poland in 1990–A Review of Experiences and Evaluation of the Current Development Directions. Sustainability 2021, 13, 4009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bartłomiejczyk, M.; Połom, M. Possibilities for Developing Electromobility by Using Autonomously Powered Trolleybuses Based on the Example of Gdynia. Energies 2021, 14, 2971. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. De Bortoli, A.; Fresnet, A.F.; Leurent, F. Life Cycle Assessment to Support Decision-Making in Transportation Planning: A Case of French Bus Rapid Transit. In Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 96th Annual Meeting, Washington, DC, USA, 8–12 January 2017; Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  35. Ruiz, S.; Arroyo, N.; Acosta, A.; Portilla, C.; Espinosa, J. An optimal battery charging and schedule control strategy for electric bus rapid transit. In Proceedings of the IET Seminar Digest; Institution of Engineering and Technology, Medellin, Colombia, 18–20 April 2018; Volume 2018, pp. 23–30. [Google Scholar]
  36. Vásquez, C.; Ramírez-Pisco, R.; Viloria, A.; Martínez Sierra, D.; Ruiz-Barrios, E.; Hernández-P, H.; Ventura, J.M.; De la Hoz Hernández, J. Conglomerates of Bus Rapid Transit in Latin American Countries. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 220–228. [Google Scholar]
  37. Cheemakurthy, H.; Tanko, M.; Garme, K. Urban Waterborne Public Transport Systems: An Overview of Existing Operations in World Cities; KTH Royal Institute of Technology: Stockholm, Sweden, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  38. Sandell, R. Network Design Strategies to Increase Efficiency and Usefulness of Urban Transit Ferry Systems. Transp. Res. Rec. 2017, 2649, 71–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Thompson, R.; Burroughs, R.; Smythe, T. Exploring the connections between ferries and urban form: Some considerations before jumping on board. J. Urban Technol. 2006, 13, 25–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Tanko, M.; Burke, M.I.; Cheemakurthy, H. Water Transit and Ferry-Oriented Development in Sweden: Comparisons with System Trends in Australia. Transp. Res. Rec. 2018, 2672, 890–900. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Le-Klaehn, D.-T.; Hall, C.M. Tourist use of public transport at destinations—A review. Taylor Fr. 2014, 18, 785–803. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Tan, P.Y.; Ismail, H.N. Reviews on interrelationship between transportation and tourism: Perspective on sustainability of urban tourism development. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, Surakarta, Indonesia, 6–7 November 2019; p. 447. [Google Scholar]
  43. Tarkowski, M. On the Emergence of Sociotechnical Regimes of Electric Urban Water Transit Systems. Energies 2021, 14, 6111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Gu, Y.; Wallace, S.W. Operational benefits of autonomous vessels in logistics—A case of autonomous water-taxis in Bergen. Transp. Res. Part E Logist. Transp. Rev. 2021, 154, 102456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Wang, L.; Wu, Q.; Liu, J.; Li, S.; Negenborn, R.R. State-of-the-Art Research on Motion Control of Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships. J. Mar. Sci. Eng. 2019, 7, 438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  46. Amro, A.; Gkioulos, V.; Katsikas, S. Connect and Protect: Requirements for Maritime Autonomous Surface Ship in Urban Passenger Transportation. In Computer Security; Katsikas, S., Cuppens, F., Cuppens, N., Lambrinoudakis, C., Kalloniatis, C., Mylopoulos, J., Antón, A., Gritzalis, S., Meng, W., Furnell, S., Eds.; Lect. Notes Comput. Sci. (including Subser. Lect. Notes Artif. Intell. Lect. Notes Bioinformatics), 11980 LNCS; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 69–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Duarte, F.; Johnsen, L.; Ratti, C. Reimagining urban infrastructure through design and experimentation. In The Routledge Companion to Smart Cities, 1st ed.; Willis, K.S., Aurigi, A., Eds.; Routledge: London, UK, 2020; pp. 395–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. ESPON 1.1. Potentials for Polycentric Development in Europe; ESPON Monitoring Committee: Luxembourg, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  49. Tarkowski, M.; Połom, M.; Puzdrakiewicz, K. Bridging tourist attractions. The role of waterbuses in urban tourism development. The case of the coastal city of Gdańsk (Poland). Geoj. Tour. Geosites 2021, 34, 126–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Połom, M.; Tarkowski, M.; Puzdrakiewicz, K.; Dopierała, Ł. Is It Possible to Develop Electromobility in Urban Passenger Shipping in Post-Communist Countries? Evidence from Gdańsk, Poland. Energies 2020, 13, 6362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Politechnika Gdańska Grupa. Robocza Pojazdy Autonomiczne Rozpoczęła Działalność—Aktualności—Politechnika Gdańska. Available online: https://pg.edu.pl/aktualnosci/-/asset_publisher/hWGncmoQv7K0/content/grupa-robocza-pojazdy-autonomiczne-rozpoczela-dzialalnosc (accessed on 27 October 2021).
  52. Bennett, A.; Elman, C. Qualitative research: Recent developments in case study methods. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2006, 9, 455–476. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Lowe, R.; Chiu, L.F.; Oreszczyn, T.; Oreszczyn, T. Socio-technical case study method in building performance evaluation. Build. Res. Inf. 2017, 46, 469–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  54. Sheppard, E.; Leitner, H.; Peck, J. Doing urban studies: Navigating the methodological terrain. In Urban Studies Inside/Out Theory, Method, Practice; Leitner, H., Peck, J., Sheppard, E., Eds.; Sage Publications: London, UK, 2020; pp. 21–44. [Google Scholar]
  55. Wang, Q.; Cheong, K.C.; Li, R. The Case Study Approach to City Analysis. In City Development and Internationalization in China; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 53–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Gurgul, M. Analiza Wyników Ankiety, Jak Urządzić Gdańskie Nabrzeża? Biuro Rozwoju Gdańska: Gdańsk, Poland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  57. Gdańsk City Council. Gdańsk 2020 Plus Development Strategy; Rada Miasta Gdańska: Gdańsk, Poland, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  58. Gdańsk City Council. Gdańsk Operational Programmes 2023. Gdańsk, Poland. 2015. Available online: https://download.cloudgdansk.pl/gdansk-pl/d/20160877137/gdansk-operational-programmes-2023.pdf (accessed on 20 October 2021).
  59. Biuro Rozwoju Gdańska. Directions of Spatial Development Based on the Document Adopted by the City Council on 23 April 2018 „Study of Conditions and Directions of Spatial Development in the City of Gdańsk; Biuro Rozwoju Gdańska: Gdańsk, Poland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  60. Rada Miasta Gdańska Gminny. Program Rewitalizacji Miasta Gdańska na Lata 2017–2023; Rada Miasta Gdańska: Gdańsk, Poland, 2019; Available online: https://www.brg.gda.pl/attachments/article/100/GPR-TEKST--2019.pdf (accessed on 20 October 2021).
  61. Zarząd Transportu Miejskiego. To Dopiero był Sezon! Gdański Tramwaj Wodny Przewiózł W Tym Roku Ponad 65 Tys. Osób! Available online: https://ztm.gda.pl/wiadomosci/to-dopiero-byl-sezon-gdanski-tramwaj-wodny-przewiozl-w-tym-roku-ponad-65-tys-osob,a,3913 (accessed on 28 October 2021).
  62. Zarząd Transportu Miejskiego. Liczba Pasażerów Tramwajów Wodnych W Okresie Maj–Wrzesień 2018; Zarząd Transportu Miejskiego: Gdańsk, Poland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  63. Gdańska Agencja Rozwoju Gospodarczego. Analiza Funkcjonowania Tramwaju Wodnego W Gdańsku Od 2018 r.; Gdańska Agencja Rozwoju Gospodarczego: Gdańsk, Poland, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  64. Główny Urząd Geodezji i Kartografii Geoportal.gov.pl. Available online: https://mapy.geoportal.gov.pl/imap/Imgp_2.html?gpmap=gp0 (accessed on 28 October 2021).
  65. Biuro Rozwoju Gdańska. Studium Uwarunkowań i Kierunków Zagospodarowania Przestrzennego Miasta Gdańska. Gdańsk, Poland. 2019. Available online: https://bip.brg.gda.pl/attachments/article/793/STUDIUM_zalacznik_uchwaly.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2021).
  66. OpenStreetMap. Foundation OpenStreetMap Dostępne na. Available online: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=6/52.018/19.137 (accessed on 31 July 2021).
  67. Biuro Rozwoju Gdańska. Gdańskie Badania Ruchu 2016 Wraz z Opracowaniem Transportowego Modelu Symulacyjnego Dla Gdańska. Raport 3—Raport z Przeprowadzenia Badań i Pomiarów; Biuro Rozwoju Gdańska: Gdańsk, Poland, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  68. Bęben, R.; Papis, O.; Cińcio-Pętlicka, A. Turystyka Gdańska. Raport Roczny za 2017 r.; Pomorski Instytut Naukowy im. prof. Brunona Synaka: Gdańsk, Poland, 2018; Available online: https://download.cloudgdansk.pl/visitgdansk-pl/d/2018053149/2018_05_28_raport-roczny-2017.pdf (accessed on 22 October 2021).
  69. Zarząd Transportu Miejskiego ZTM. Gdańsk: Lista Linii Z Opisem Trasy. Available online: https://www.ztm.gda.pl/rozklady/ (accessed on 28 October 2021).
  70. Google LLC Mapy Google. Available online: https://www.google.pl/maps/@54.4097463,18.6425073,14z (accessed on 28 October 2021).
  71. Vale, D.S. Does commuting time tolerance impede sustainable urban mobility? Analysing the impacts on commuting behaviour as a result of workplace relocation to a mixed-use centre in Lisbon. J. Transp. Geogr. 2013, 32, 38–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Stiglic, M.; Agatz, N.; Savelsbergh, M.; Gradisar, M. Enhancing urban mobility: Integrating ride-sharing and public transit. Comput. Oper. Res. 2018, 90, 12–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  73. Wernham, A. Health Impact Assessments Are Needed In Decision Making About Environmental And Land-Use Policy. Heal. Aff. 2011, 30, 947–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  74. Alves, F.; Cruz, S.; Ribeiro, A.; Silva, A.B.; Martins, J.; Cunha, I. Walkability Index for Elderly Health: A Proposal. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Tanko, M.; Burke, M.I. Transport innovations and their effect on cities: The emergence of urban linear ferries worldwide. In Proceedings of the Transportation Research Procedia, Shanghai, China, 10–15 July 2016; Volume 25, pp. 3957–3970. [Google Scholar]
  76. Soltani, A.; Tanko, M.; Burke, M.I.; Farid, R. Travel Patterns of Urban Linear Ferry Passengers: Analysis of smart card fare data for Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. Transp. Res. Rec. 2015, 2535, 79–87. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Geels, F.W. Ontologies, socio-technical transitions (to sustainability), and the multi-level perspective. Res. Policy 2010, 39, 495–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Sareen, S.; Grandin, J. European green capitals: Branding, spatial dislocation or catalysts for change? Geogr. Ann. Ser. B Hum. Geogr. 2020, 102, 101–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Van Wee, B.; Roeser, S. Ethical Theories and the Cost–Benefit Analysis-BasedEx AnteEvaluation of Transport Policies and Plans. Transp. Rev. 2013, 33, 743–760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Niemelä, E.; Spohr, J.; Hellström, M.; Långstedt, J.; Tsvetkova, A.; Sjöblom, J.; Khan, F.; Eriksson, J.E.; Wikström, K. Managing passenger flows for seaborne transportation during COVID-19 pandemic. J. Travel Med. 2021, 28, 28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Moraci, F.; Errigo, M.F.; Fazia, C.; Campisi, T.; Castelli, F. Cities under Pressure: Strategies and Tools to Face Climate Change and Pandemic. Sustainability 2020, 12, 7743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Research stages and aims. Source: own elaboration.
Figure 1. Research stages and aims. Source: own elaboration.
Sustainability 13 13183 g001
Figure 2. Location of the small autonomous ferry crossing in Gdańsk on the background of living space and workplace spatial patterns. Source: own elaboration based on [64,66,67].
Figure 2. Location of the small autonomous ferry crossing in Gdańsk on the background of living space and workplace spatial patterns. Source: own elaboration based on [64,66,67].
Sustainability 13 13183 g002
Figure 3. Location of the main tourist attractions in Gdańsk. Source: own elaboration based on [59,64,66,68].
Figure 3. Location of the main tourist attractions in Gdańsk. Source: own elaboration based on [59,64,66,68].
Sustainability 13 13183 g003
Table 1. Research stages, objectives, materials, and methods.
Table 1. Research stages, objectives, materials, and methods.
StageObjectiveMaterialsMethods
Initial (1)Identification of autonomous ferry introduction premises on the basis of previous experiences in waterbuses operationsData of the transport operator (Municipal Transport Authority) [61,62]
Results of the expert opinion on the operation of waterbuses [63]
Research studies on the waterbus system in Gdańsk [49,50]
Spatio-temporal statistical data analysis
Literature review
Commuting demand (2)Specification of demand in terms of commuting on the basis of analysing living space and workplace locations Geodetic and cartographic data available from public resources [64,65,66]
Data with high spatial resolution on the number of inhabitants and workplaces [67]
GIS method: choropleth maps
Tourist and recreational demand (3)Specification of demand in terms of location and rank of attractions for tourism recreation and leisureLocation of the most crucial tourist attractions [66,68]GIS method: single symbol map
Ferry line locations (4)Specification of ferry line locationsResearch stages 1, 2, and 3 outcomesGIS method: spatio-temporal accessibility analysis
Benefits in mobility (5)Identification of ferries’ potential support for sustainable urban mobilityResearch stage 4 outcomes
Public transport timetables [69]
Google Maps [70]
Urban development masterplan [57,58,59,60]
Spatio-temporal accessibility analysis
Strategic and operational development goals and qualitative analysis
Source: own elaboration.
Table 2. Essential features of the small autonomous ferry lines in Gdańsk.
Table 2. Essential features of the small autonomous ferry lines in Gdańsk.
Location Number (Figure 2)DirectionDistance (m)Main
Function
Traffic
Intensity
Seasonality
1Brzeźno–Latarnia Morska–Westerplatte440/215Tourism and
recreation
HighSeasonal
2Nabrzeże Zbożowe–Twierdza Wisłoujście220Tourism and
recreation
ModerateSeasonal
3Młode Miasto–Polski Hak175Commuting/
tourism and
recreation
ModerateYear-round
4Muzeum Morskie–Sołdek70Living lab/
tourism and
recreation/
commuting
ModerateYear-round
5Górki Zachodnie–Górki Wschodnie400Tourism and
recreation
LowSeasonal
Source: own elaboration.
Table 3. Travel time comparison between the most common urban transport modes.
Table 3. Travel time comparison between the most common urban transport modes.
Location Number
(Figure 2)
DirectionFerryOn FootPublic TransportPrivate Car
1Brzeźno–Latarnia Morska5.524.023.07.0
Latarnia Morska–Westerpaltte2.5Not applicable62.020.0
2Nabrzeże Zbożowe–Twierdza Wisłoujście2.5Not applicable95.012.0
3Młode Miasto–Polski Hak2.028.0Not applicable20.0
4Muzeum Morskie–Sołdek1.010.0Not applicable12.0
5Górki Zachodnie–Górki Wschodnie5.0Not applicable60.030.0
Source: own elaboration based on [69,70].
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Tarkowski, M.; Puzdrakiewicz, K. Connectivity Benefits of Small Zero-Emission Autonomous Ferries in Urban Mobility—Case of the Coastal City of Gdańsk (Poland). Sustainability 2021, 13, 13183. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313183

AMA Style

Tarkowski M, Puzdrakiewicz K. Connectivity Benefits of Small Zero-Emission Autonomous Ferries in Urban Mobility—Case of the Coastal City of Gdańsk (Poland). Sustainability. 2021; 13(23):13183. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313183

Chicago/Turabian Style

Tarkowski, Maciej, and Krystian Puzdrakiewicz. 2021. "Connectivity Benefits of Small Zero-Emission Autonomous Ferries in Urban Mobility—Case of the Coastal City of Gdańsk (Poland)" Sustainability 13, no. 23: 13183. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132313183

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop