The mobile risk society

Full text

Chapter 5
7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\
Sven Kesselring
The very modern experience is that of the disappearance of solid structures and their
acquainted reliabilities and familiar habits and the erosion of stabilities. Modern
living is faced with constant change, motion and transit. There is an ongoing
FRPSXOVLYHQHFHVVLW\IRULQGLYLGXDOVWRGH¿QHWKHLUVRFLDOERXQGDULHVDQGDI¿OLDWLRQV
and to navigate their life courses. Modernity is conceived as an unintended process
RILQGLYLGXDOL]DWLRQDQGGLVHPEHGGLQJDQGWKHRQJRLQJH[WHQVLRQRIVRFLDOQHWZRUNV
6LPPHO&DVWHOOV0RGHUQOLIHUHFRQ¿JXUHVDQGUHVWUXFWXUHVSHUPDQHQWO\
WKHVRFLDOWLHVDQGVSDWLDODQGPDWHULDOHOHPHQWVLQSHRSOH¶VHQYLURQPHQWV
Constantly increasing spatial mobilities are expressions for these fundamental
changes within the constitutions of modernity (Urry 2000). But also they are the
µWLPHVSDFH FRPSUHVVLRQ¶ +DUYH\ RI FDSLWDOLVW VRFLHWLHV WKH µGHDWK RI GLVWDQFH¶
(Cairncross 1997) and the acceleration of modern life (Virilio 1986). The theory of
UHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQDQGULVNVRFLHW\%HFN%HFN%RQDQG/DXLV
one of the current attempts to grasp the socio-temporal and socio-spatial changes
ZLWKLQPRGHUQLW\8OULFK%HFN DVNVµ:KDWLVJOREDOL]DWLRQ¶%HFND)RUKLP
LWLVDW¿UVWVLJKWWKH HURVLRQRIWKHQDWLRQDOFRQWDLQHUVRFLHWLHVDQG WKHULVHRIQHZ
FRQVWHOODWLRQV RI ULVN XQFHUWDLQW\ DQG LQVHFXULW\ 7KLV SDSHU H[SORUHV GLIIHUHQW
readings of the cosmopolitanization and globalization of modern life. In the light
RIWKHWKHRU\RIUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQLWLQWHUSUHWVJOREDOL]DWLRQDVWKHGRPLQDQFH
RIDPELYDOHQFH RQWKHJOREDO VFDOH,WJRHV DORQJZLWKWKH PRELOL]DWLRQRIWKH ULVN
VRFLHW\DQGWKHULVHRIZKDW,FDOOWKHµPRELOHULVNVRFLHW\¶
,Q 8OULFK %HFNSXEOLVKHGKLVERRN Risk Society in Germany (the English
YHUVLRQDSSHDUHGLQ  ,W KDG DODVWLQJLPSDFW RQ VRFLDO VFLHQWL¿F DQDO\VHVLQ
Germany and other European countries. In the year of the Chernobyl accident it
SURYLGHG WKH ÀRRU IRU D QHZ FULWLFDO DSSURDFK LQ *HUPDQ VRFLRORJ\7KH VRFLDO
DQG HFRORJLFDO PRYHPHQWV ZHUH DERXW WR FKDQJH VRFLHW\ +DQQDK$UHQGW¶V LGHDV
of a critical civil society and the mobilizing potentials of the public realm were
prominent and alive. In considering the analysis of technological and ecological
ULVNV%HFNSUREOHPDWL]HGrisk as a social concept and a general social phenomenon.
In a certain way he anticipated what Zygmunt Bauman (2000) recently described as
WKHµOLTXLGLW\¶RIVRFLDOVWUXFWXUHVDQGVRFLDOSUDFWLFHVRILQWHJUDWLRQHPEHGGLQJDQG
VWDELOLW\7KHULVN VRFLHW\ LV DVRFLHW\ZKHUHVRFLDOVWUXFWXUHV EHFRPH LQVWDEOH DQG
permeable. It is a social formation where the threat of a downward social mobility
is omnipresent for all social classes. Precarious stabilities are considered to be in
a state of liquefaction. Under the conditions of general insecurity, uncertainty and
ambivalence, class struggles return, but without the (relatively) clear-cut dichotomist

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
78
VWUXFWXUHRI WKH LQGXVWULDO DJH6RFLDO ULVNV VHHP WREH WDNHQ IRU JUDQWHGLQ PDQ\
FDSLWDOLVWDQG QHROLEHUDO VWDWHV7KHVRFLDOLQVWDELOLW\ DQG ZHDNQHVV RIWKHQDWLRQ
VWDWH V\VWHP WKH µ.H\QHVLDQ 1DWLRQDO :HOIDUH 6WDWH¶ -HVVRS  VHHP WR EH
accepted and the politics act as if this is inevitable and without alternatives. The
ongoing individualization culminates in a structurally institutionalized individualism,
where the individual is the legitimate addressee of responsibility. In his theory of the
ULVNVRFLHW\DQGUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQ%HFNSXWVWKLVDWFHQWUHVWDJHDQGFRPELQHV
LWZLWKDJHQHUDOWKHRUHWLFDOSHUVSHFWLYHRQWHFKQRORJLFDODQGVFLHQWL¿FULVNV%HFN
,Q%DXPDQ¶VUHDGLQJWKHULVNVRFLHW\LVRQHZKHUHLWVPHPEHUVDUHXUJHGWR
µZDONRQTXLFNVDQG¶%DXPDQ3HRSOHQHHGWRGHSOR\VWUDWHJLHVWRFRSH
ZLWKDQHZPRELOLW\UHJLPHWKDWGHPDQGVPRELOLW\ DQGÀH[LELOLW\IURPHYHU\ERG\
:HFDOOWKLVµPRELOLW\PDQDJHPHQW¶VHH.HVVHOULQJDQG9RJOLQWKLVERRN,WPHDQV
that people use their competence to manage the increasing demands for social and
VSDWLDOPRELOLWLHV µ,Q VNDWLQJ RYHUWKLQ LFH¶ %DXPDQ FLWHV WKH QLQHWHHQWKFHQWXU\
HVVD\LVW 5DOSK :DOGR (PHUVRQ µRXU VDIHW\ LV RXU VSHHG¶ %DXPDQ   7KH
ULVNVRFLHW\LQDZRUOGRIJOREDO FRPSOH[LW\DQGÀRZVLVDµPRELOHULVNVRFLHW\¶,W
sets its members into motion without giving any clear-cut reliabilities, any direction
and guidance for a successful life without anxiety and fear of failure. The increasing
PRELOL]DWLRQRIWKHULVNVRFLHW\OHDGVLQWRDVRFLDOVLWXDWLRQZKHUH WKH LQGLYLGXDOV
DUHIRUFHGWRQDYLJDWHDQGGHFLGHZKLOVWWKH\DUHFRQIURQWHGZLWKLQFUHDVLQJODFNRI
clarity, with social vagueness and obscurity. It is not a coincidence that for Bauman
WKH IUHHODQFHU WKH VHOIHPSOR\HG NQRZOHGJH ZRUNHU DQG WKH µGLJLWDO QRPDGV¶
0DNLPRWRDQG0DQQHUVDUHWKHSDUDGLJPDWLFVRFLDO¿JXUHVDQGW\SHVRIWKH
second modernity:
The greatest chances of winning belongs to the people who circulate close to the top
of the global power pyramid, to whom space matters little and distance is not a bother;
people at home in many places but in no one place in particular. They are light, sprightly
DQGYRODWLOHDVWKHLQFUHDVLQJO\JOREDOH[WHUULWRULDOWUDGHDQG¿QDQFHVWKDWDVVLVWHGDWWKHLU
birth and sustain their nomadic existence. … Their wealth comes from a portable asset:
µWKHLUNQRZOHGJH RI WKHODZVRI WKH ODE\ULQWK¶7KH\µORYH WR FUHDWHSOD\DQG EHRQWKH
PRYH¶7KH\OLYHLQ DVRFLHW\µRI YRODWLOHYDOXHVFDUHIUHH DERXWWKHIXWXUH HJRLVWLFDQG
KHGRQLVWLF¶ 7KH\ µWDNH QRYHOW\ DV JRRG WLGLQJV SUHFDULRXVQHVV DV YDOXH LQVWDELOLW\ DV
LPSHUDWLYHK\EULGLW\DVULFKQHVV¶,QYDU\LQJGHJUHHVWKH\PDVWHUDQGSUDFWLFHWKHDUWRI
µOLTXLGOLIH¶DFFHSWDQFHRIGLVRULHQWDWLRQLPPXQLW\WRYHUWLJRDQGDGDSWDWLRQWRDVWDWHRI
GL]]LQHVVWROHUDQFHIRUDQDEVHQFHRILWLQHUDU\DQGGLUHFWLRQDQGIRUDQLQGH¿QLWHGXUDWLRQ
of travel (Bauman 2005, 3–4).
:LWKLQWKHPRELOHULVNVRFLHW\SHRSOHDUHVHOIUHVSRQVLEOHIRUWKHURDGVDQGWUDMHFWRULHV
WKH\FKRRVHGXULQJWKHLUOLIHFRXUVH7KH\FDQQRWRYHUORRNWKHZKROHFRPSOH[LW\RI
DOLIHLQDUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQVRFLHW\%XWQHYHUWKHOHVVPRGHUQLQVWLWXWLRQVWUHDWWKHP
DVLIWKH\FRXOGGRVR7KH\EHKDYHDVLISHRSOHZRXOGOLNHWRGHFLGHDQGWRQDYLJDWH
through the misty cliffs and obstacles of social structures, where success and failure
DUHYHU\FORVHDQGOLNHO\6HQQHWWWDONVDERXWDQRQOLQHDUPRELOLW\PRGHWKDWSHRSOH
QHHGWR NQRZLIWKH\ZDQWWR PRYHVXFFHVVIXOO\WKURXJK WKHVRFLDOVWUXFWXUHVRI D
ÀH[LEOHFDSLWDOLVP6HQQHWW

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 79
$JDLQVWWKLV EDFNJURXQG ZHQHHGWRDVFHUWDLQ DQLPSRUWDQWGLIIHUHQFHEHWZHHQ
%HFN¶V ULVN VRFLHW\ DQGWKHRQH WKDW DXWKRUV VXFK DV %DXPDQ8UU\6HQQHWW
and others describe it at the time of writing (2006). Deep-going changes within
the constitutional settings of modernity occurred over the last twenty years. Today,
WKHULVN VRFLHW\ LV DZRUOGULVNVRFLHW\DQG LW LV DPRELOL]HGVRFLHW\±VSDWLDOO\ DV
ZHOODV VRFLDOO\7KHWLPHVSDFH VWUXFWXUHRIWKHZRUOGULVNVRFLHW\LV EDVHGRQWKH
IXQFWLRQDOLW\HI¿FLHQF\DQGWKHHIIHFWLYLW\RIODUJHVFDOHLQIUDVWUXFWXUHVRIWUDQVSRUW
and communication. The cosmopolitanization of modern societies, their processes
RIK\EULGL]DWLRQ DQG FXOWXUDO DPDOJDPDWLRQDUHGLUHFWO\UHODWHGWR HQRUPRXV ÀRZV
RIFDSLWDOVSHRSOHJRRGVLGHDVDQGVLJQV7KHPRELOLW\DQGÀH[LELOLW\RIWKHZRUOG
ULVN VRFLHW\ LV EXLOG XSRQ DQG VWDELOL]HG E\ KXJH DQG FRPSOH[ JOREDO WUDQVSRUW
systems. More than 90 per cent of all transnationally traded goods travel by vessels
*HUVWHQEHUJHUDQG:HONH7KH LQWHUFRQWLQHQWDOVKLSSLQJLQGXVWU\ LV RQH RI
the most important industrial complexes in the world. ‘For cities and regions a non-
VWRSÀLJKWWR/RQGRQLVDGLUHFWSLSHOLQHLQWRWKHZRUOGHFRQRP\¶.HHOLQJ 
$QGWKHZRUOGZLGHDLUOLQHQHWZRUNGH¿QHVWKHSDFHRIFDSLWDOLVWH[FKDQJHDQG
LQWHUDFWLRQ,WVFRQQHFWLYLW\ LV WKH PHWURQRPH RIWKH µZRUOG FLW\ QHWZRUN¶7D\ORU
2004; Derudder; Witlox 2005; Kesselring 2007):
7UDYHOOHUV IURP VWUDQGV LQ WKH ZHE OLQNLQJ WKH ZRUOG¶V FLWLHV &RUSRUDWH HPLVVDULHV
government trade and commerce representatives and independent entrepreneurs, for
H[DPSOHPRYH DPRQJ FLWLHV JUHDVLQJ WKH ZKHHOVRI SURGXFWLRQ ¿QDQFH RU FRPPHUFH
WKURXJKIDFHWRIDFHFRQWDFW6PLWKDQG7LPEHUODNH
3RZHUIXOµJOREDOLQIUDVWUXFWXUHV¶VKDSHWKHFXOWXUDODQGWKHVRFLDOFRQWH[WVRIPRGHUQ
VRFLHWLHV7KH\OD\GRZQWKHQHZµJHRJUDSK\RIPRELOLW\¶6HQQHWWRQDZRUOGVFDOH
Airports are crossroads where the spaces of globalization intersect the spaces of
territorialization. Based on global systems of transport, mobility and communication
the cosmopolitanization of modern societies occurs quasi by the way, underhand
and most of the time totally without excitement, without expectation and without
ZLGHU UHFRJQLWLRQ &RQVWHOODWLRQV RI µFKDQJH ULVN DQG PRELOLW\¶ %ROWDQVNL DQG
&KLDSHOORDUHRPQLSUHVHQWXQGHUWKHFRQGLWLRQVRIUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQ
The everyday practice in economy and society is a mobile one (Larsen, Urry and
Axhausen 2006; Lassen 2006; European Foundation for the Improvement of Living
DQG:RUNLQJ&RQGLWLRQV
In a world of global interconnectedness travelling is essential and air travel is
fundamental (Larsen, Urry and Axhausen 2006; Kesselring 2007). But the ‘dealing
ZLWKGLVWDQFH¶VHH8UU\LQWKLVERRNEHFRPHVPRUHFRPSOH[PRUHGLIIHUHQWLDWHG
Social, geographical and virtual spaces slot into each other. The bridging of time
and space is no longer exclusively tied to physical movement of people and goods.
Complex arrangements and assemblages emerge where people use technologies
LQVWHDGRIWUDYHOOLQJDQGIDFHWRIDFHFRQWDFWµ7HOHSUHVHQFH¶0LWFKHOOLVQRW
a substitute for physical co-presence. But it enlarges the motilities of actors and
RSHQVXS QHZ FRQ¿JXUDWLRQV DQG DFFHVVHVWR QHWZRUNV RI FRRSHUDWLRQ VKDULQJRI
NQRZOHGJHDQGVROLGDULW\:HOOPDQDQG*XOLD9RJO

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
80
$V D FRQVHTXHQFH ZH FDQ QR ORQJHU DQDO\VH SKHQRPHQD OLNH WKHVH ZLWK WKH
WUDGLWLRQDOFDWHJRULFDOWRROER[ RI PRELOLW\ UHVHDUFK 7KH NH\TXHVWLRQRI PRELOLW\
research is: How do people realize connections and exchange in a global society of
QHWZRUNVVFDSHVDQGÀRZV"7KHUHLVDQLPSRUWDQWFKDQJHLQWKHPRGHUQFRQFHSW
DQG SUDFWLFH RI PRELOLW\ ,W LV OLQNHG WR WKH HPHUJHQFH RI D µQHWZRUN VRFLDOLW\¶
:LWWHO DµQHWZRUNHGLQGLYLGXDOLVP¶%RDVHHWDO&DVWHOOV DQG
the social construction of solidarity and social stability through the technoscapes of
the Internet. Social positioning in time and space is getting differentiated. Beyond
µFODVVLFDO¶ IRUPV RI LQWHJUDWLRQ VRFLDO HPEHGGLQJ DQG LGHQWLW\ ZKLFK DUH EDVHG
RQ ORFDOLW\ SUHVHQFH DQG IDFHWRIDFH LQWHUDFWLRQ *LGGHQV  µFRQQHFWLYLW\¶
and virtual mobility become integrative moments of social life (Tomlinson
 :HOOPDQ DQG +D\WKRUQWKZDLWH  $FFHVV WR LQIRUPDWLRQ NQRZOHGJH
FRRSHUDWLRQDQGVROLGDULW\FDQGHFLVLYHO\LQÀXHQFHKXPDQUHODWLRQVLQDIRUPDVLWLV
property and possession in localized social contexts. If we consider future mobility
research we need to pay attention to structurations beyond class, social status and
PLOLHX0RELOLW\UHVHDUFKQHHGVWRLQWHJUDWHDQHWZRUNSHUVSHFWLYHRQPRYHPHQWDQG
PRWLOLW\VHHWKHLQWURGXFWLRQWRWKLVERRNZKLFKGRHVQRW\HWQHJOHFWWKHUHOHYDQFH
of classes and milieus but integrates a perspective on the disorganized character of
modern economies and societies (Urry 2003; Kaufmann 2002). Social structuration,
integration and positioning have to be re-thought in a cosmopolitan perspective as
%HFNDQGRWKHUVGHPRQVWUDWH9HUWRYHFDQG&RKHQ%HFNE0RELOLW\KDV
to be re-thought in the same way. It needs to be understood in terms of its impacts on
WKHVRFLDOFRQ¿JXUDWLRQVRIVRFLHWLHVLQWKHJOREDODJHVHH%HFNLQWKLVERRN
The following four arguments illustrate the structural changes in mobility and
its consequences on societies and the social. First, mobility is a general principle
of modernity. We cannot imagine a modern life without movement, motility and
PRELOLW\7KH\ DUH LQFUHPHQWDO HOHPHQWV RI WKH µVFULSW¶ RI PRGHUQ VRFLHWLHV DQG
as such they are inevitable and fundamental. They can be found in organizational
URXWLQHVDQGWKH\ DUH LQVFULEHG LQWR WKH ZD\V RIPDNLQJGHFLVLRQVZLWKLQSROLWLFDO
institutions (Jensen 2006).
Second, against conventional concepts, mobility has to be conceived as an
inconsistent, contradictory and ambivalent principle of modernity. The slightly
differentiated terminology of mobility research proposed in the introduction to this
ERRNPDNHV LWSODXVLEOHWKDW QHZFDWHJRULHVIRUWKH H[SODQDWLRQDQGGHVFULSWLRQ RI
mobility phenomena are needed.
7KLUGPRELOLW\ QHHGV WREHFRQFHLYHGDORQJ WKH WUDQVLWLRQIURP¿UVWWRVHFRQG
PRGHUQLW\$JDLQVW WKLV EDFNJURXQG RQ WKH JOREDO DQG VRFLHWDO VFDOH D VKLIW FDQ
EH REVHUYHG IURP D GLUHFWLRQDO WR D QRQGLUHFWLRQDO FRQFHSW RI PRELOLW\ ,Q ¿UVW
modernity, movements in spaces were conceived as point-to-point measurable
and unambiguous status changes. They were conceptualized as movements to be
channelled and controlled. In second modernity, the uncontrollable, non-linear
and non-directional character of mobility and migration is obvious. This changes
WKHVRFLDO VWUDWHJLHV RI DFWRUVWR WDFNOH PRELOLW\ FRQVWUDLQWV DQG FKDQFHV ,Q RWKHU
ZRUGVWKHDWWHPSWVRIWKH¿UVWPRGHUQLW\WRLQFUHDVHVSDWLDOPRYHPHQWVWRDKLWKHUWR
unimagined amount leads into the transformation of mobility as a social conception.
Modern societies increase mobility to explore new opportunity spaces. But at the

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 81
same time the crisis of the modern mobility concept is visible. We may not exclude
IURPWKLQNLQJWKHDOWHUQDWLYHPRELOLW\IXWXUHVRIDQLPPRELOHPRELOLW\EH\RQGPDVV
transport. Maybe the linear modernization of mobility leads to a tipping point where
virtual mobility becomes a very attractive alternative to the global rushing around
DQGEXVWOHRIWRGD\"
Fourth, to approach these fundamental questions of mobility research I propose
WKHUHÀHFWLRQRIWKUHHEDVLFSHUVSHFWLYHVRQPRELOLW\WKHPRYLQJPDVVHVSHUVSHFWLYH
focuses on quantitative effects of the linear modernization of mobility. The PRELOH
subject perspective WDNHV WKH LQGLYLGXDO VHULRXVO\ DV DQ DFWRU ZLWK D VXEMHFWWLHG
mobility politics. And the PRWLOHK\EULGSHUVSHFWLYHUHÀHFWVWKHFRPSOH[UHODWLRQV
between actors and structures: it concentrates on the fact that individuals always
PRYH WKURXJK KLJKO\ SUHVWUXFWXUHG VSDFHV DQG HQYLURQPHQWV ,W WDNHV VHULRXVO\
that in most cases it is impossible to distinguish between the autonomous moves of
individuals and the structural impacts of societal and professional constraints within
mobility decisions.
7KHDUWLFOHFRQFOXGHVZLWKVRPHVXJJHVWLRQVIRUDµFRVPRSROLWDQSHUVSHFWLYH¶LQ
VRFLDOVFLHQFHEDVHGPRELOLW\ UHVHDUFK7KH JOREDOPRELOL]DWLRQRIWKHULVNVRFLHW\
has impacts on many scales – from the body to the global. This is one of the reasons
why mobility issues are predestined for transdisciplinary treatment. Mobility is an
overarching issue within social sciences. It goes right through nearly all spheres
of societies (Sheller and Urry 2006). Hence, new centres in mobility research will
emerge, because the leitbilder and models of (social, physical and virtual) mobility
research come into trouble and motion (see Sheller and Urry 2006; Hannam, Sheller
and Urry 2006). The societal organization of mobility as a mono-mobility, tied to
one paradigmatic mode of transport, will lose its dominance. The future of mobility
will be multi-scalar and multi-functional. The temporal use of mobility technologies
becomes more and more important.
&RQQHFWLYLW\ DV D VXEVWLWXWH WR HPEHGGLQJ DQG ORQJWLPH DI¿OLDWLRQ ZLOO EH
RUJDQL]HGE\WKHXVHRIQHZWHFKQRORJLHVDQGWKHG\QDPLFDQGÀXLGRUJDQL]DWLRQRI
VRFLDODQGSURIHVVLRQDOQHWZRUNV
All this leads into a conceptual change in mobility research as a whole and
WR D WUDQVJUHVVLRQ RI GLVFLSOLQDU\ ERXQGDULHV 8QGHU WKH FRQGLWLRQV RI UHÀH[LYH
PRGHUQL]DWLRQ ZH UHDOL]H PRELOLW\ DV D µPXOWLGLPHQVLRQDO FRQFHSW¶ VHH &DQ]OHU
DQG .HVVHOULQJ  8UU\ LQ WKLV ERRN ZKLFK FDQQRW EH DQDO\VHG LQ D QDWLRQDO
perspective any longer. As a fundament for future research we need multi-
dimensional concepts and methods instead and mobility research opens the horizon
for a cosmopolitan perspective on modern societies.
Mobility as a general principle of modernity
Mobility is a general principle of modernity, comparable to individuality, rationality,
equality, and globality (see Bonß, Kesselring and Weiß 2004). Mobility relates to the
process of mobilization as the other principles do to individualization, rationalization,
the equalization of gender, race and class and the globalization of economies and
societies. As with the other principles and processes the mobilization of the world

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
82
is as incomplete as it is in the case of global justice and the pursuit of equal rights
for men and women, all races and all social classes. But nevertheless, mobility is a
powerful principle. It legitimizes political decisions and actions, as we can observe
LQWKHFDVHRIWKH(XURSHDQ8QLRQDQGLWVHIIRUWVWRUHDOL]HDµ(XURSHDQ0RQRWRSLD¶
(Jensen and Richardson 2003) and a common zero-friction space of seamless
mobility (Hajer 1999; Jensen 2006; European Foundation for the Improvement of
/LYLQJDQG:RUNLQJ&RQGLWLRQV
The assertion that mobility is a basic assumption for modern societal structuration
KDVSURPLQHQWSUHGHFHVVRUVLQVRFLRORJLFDOWUDGLWLRQVVHH5DPPOHULQWKLVERRN
0DU[IRU LQVWDQFHHPSKDVL]HVWKHSURFHVVHV RI EUHDNLQJGRZQDQGVSHHGLQJ XSDV
central elements of capitalist societies. Simmel (1920) elaborates his concept of
PRGHUQLW\DVDVSHFL¿FFRQ¿JXUDWLRQRIPRYHPHQWDQGPRWLOLW\µFRQVWDQF\DQGÀX[¶
(Simmel 2004, 509).1In pre-modern societies mobility is not a positive value and not
a principle which has any relevance for actions and individual and collective decision-
PDNLQJ%RQDQG.HVVHOULQJ7KHDLPRIWUDYHOOLQJLVWRUHWXUQWRWKHSODFH
of origin. The notions of stability and constancy, respectively immobility, dominate
social situations and contexts. The most important concept for social integration is
µORFDOEHORQJLQJ¶DQGµVRFLDOVWDWXV¶ZKLFKDUHµLPPRELOH¶VRFLDOFDWHJRULHV
Modern societies have a comprehension of mobility which is not self-evident and
which does not simply pop up in empirical data. The positive connotation of mobility
DQGVRFLDOFKDQJHZRXOGQRWKDYHEHHQSRVVLEOHZLWKRXWDQHZDVVHVVPHQWRIULVN
µXQVDIHW\¶DQGXQFHUWDLQW\%RQH[HPSOL¿HVWKLVLQWKHKLVWRU\RIWKHVRFLDOFRQFHSW
RIULVN%RQ+LVWRULFDOO\LWZDVGXULQJWKHWZHOIWKDQGWKLUWHHQWKFHQWXULHVWKDW
WKHFRQFHSWRIULVNFDPHXS7KHSHUFHSWLRQRIXQFHUWDLQW\DVDULVNZDVGHYHORSHG
LQ VHDIDULQJ DQG ORQJGLVWDQFH WUDGH ,Q WKHVH FRQWH[WV SHRSOH ¿UVWO\ LGHQWL¿HG
travelling as an instrument for social change and individual progress. Before that,
WUDYHOOLQJZDVQRWDIUHHFKRLFHEXWDGXW\DQGDµPXVW¶0LFKHOGH0RQWDLJQHUHSRUWV
in his Journal de voyage en Italie (1581) of experiencing travel as an exciting social
practice. In contrast to his companions spatial movement had an importance of its
own for him. It had a value for his individual self-concept and his consciousness. He
ZDVRQHRIWKH¿UVWZKRFRQFHLYHGPRYHPHQWDVPRELOLW\GHVFULELQJKRZPRELOLW\
changed his individual viewpoint and perception of the countries he was travelling
through. But Montaigne was a unique person and character at his time. His fellows
could not understand his excitement and fascination.
More than 200 years later Johann Wolfgang von Goethe explicitly formulated
the new perspectives indicated by Montaigne. His famous words ‘travelling to
5RPH WR EHFRPH DQRWKHU¶ IURP WKH Italianische Reise give expression to the
modern social concept of mobility. For Goethe mobility was much more than only
spatial movement. He had the concept of using spatial movement as a vehicle and
instrument for the transformation of social situations and of realizing projects and
plans by travelling. To him travel was a mode of social change and the way for him
to access an individual life.
 6LPPHO WDONV DERXW Bewegung and Beweglichkeit (movement and motility) as
constitutive elements of modernity. See also Junge (2000: 85ff).

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 83
In the modern concept of mobility the imagination of a mouldable society and the
idea of human beings as subjects on their way to perfection melt together. They connect
ZLWKWKHLGHDRIVSDWLDOPRYHPHQWDVWKHG\QDPLFIDFWRUWKHµYHKLFOH¶RULQVWUXPHQWIRU
LWµ<RXPXVWKDYHEHHQWKHUHWRXQGHUVWDQGZKDW¶VKDSSHQLQJ¶WKLVLVWKHLGHDEHKLQG
WKHµWRXULVWJD]H¶8UU\$JDLQVWWKLVEDFNJURXQGLWLVQRWDFRLQFLGHQFHEXWDQ
indicator for the relevance of mobility as a general principle that modernization theory
GHDOVZLWKPRELOLW\DVRQHRIWKHNH\LQGLFDWRUVIRUVRFLDOFKDQJHDQGWKHPHDVXUHPHQW
of the modernity levels of societies (Zorn 1977; Zapf 1998).
7KLVFDQ EH VWXGLHG LQWKH (XURSHDQ &RPPLVVLRQ¶VDJHQGD DQG QDPHO\ LQ WKH
Lisbon Strategy, the current action and development plan for the European Union.
0RELOLW\LVDWWKHKHDUWRIWKHSURFHVVWRLQWHUOLQN(XURSHDQ&RXQWULHVLQWRDFRPPRQ
PDUNHWDQGWRFRQVWUXFWWKHµ(XURSHDQ0RQRWRSLD¶-HQVHQDQG5LFKDUGVRQDV
an interactive space where national boundaries do not play that role that they still
do today.
Under the conditions of second modernity the social conception of mobility
changes at least in three ways:
)LUVW WKH FORVH UHODWLRQ EHWZHHQ VRFLDO DQG JHRJUDSKLFDO PRELOLW\ EUHDNV
up. Paradoxically, the compulsion to be mobile increases in a time where
technology enables people to organize proximity across space and without
movements (see European Foundation for the Improvement of Living and
:RUNLQJ &RQGLWLRQV  6FKQHLGHU DQG /LPPHU LQ WKLV ERRN %XW WKH
readiness for geographical mobility is not a prerequisite and a guarantee for
XSZDUG VRFLDO PRELOLW\ DQ\ ORQJHU VHH .HVVHOULQJ DQG 9RJO LQ WKLV ERRN
7KLVRQHRIWKHSDUDGR[HVRIWKHPRELOHULVNVRFLHW\
Second, we observe the rise of virtual mobilities (Castells 2001). Cyberspaces
are spaces of sociality and solidarity. They become stable and reliable realms
for social interaction (Boase et al. 2006; Boes et al.; Wittel 2001). People
UHDOL]HSURMHFWV DQG FRPSOH[ MRLQW XQGHUWDNLQJV RYHU GLVWDQFHV DQG FXOWXUDO
differences without being corporeally on the move. New forms of transnational
social integration and relations arise which are not based on physical contact
DQGFRSUHVHQFH7KH\UHO\RQFRPPXQLFDWLRQQHWZRUNVDQGWHOHSUHVHQFHDQG
they are new phenomena of global connectivity, sociality, and immediacy
(Tomlinson 2003).
Third, the self-image of the modern mobility-project changes. During the
HLJKWHHQWKDQGWKHQLQHWHHQWKFHQWXU\DQGGXULQJWKH¿UVWKDOIRIWKHWZHQWLHWK
century societies conceived social and geographical mobility as ‘not yet
UHDOL]HG¶ 8QGHU WKH FRQGLWLRQV RI SHUPDQHQW FRQJHVWLRQ DQG LQFUHDVLQJ
insecurity concerning social ascents and descents it becomes visible that the
modern mobility of autonomous subjects through time and space is illusionary.
7KLV LV D NLQG RI GLVHQFKDQWPHQW RI WKH PRGHUQ PRELOLW\ LPSHUDWLYH DQG
the beginning of a realistic appraisal of mobility as a general principle of
PRGHUQLW\,QOLQH ZLWK%UXQR/DWRXU¶VQRWLRQ RIPRGHUQLW\LWLV SRVVLEOHWR
VD\ µ:H KDYH QHYHU EHHQ PRELOH¶DQG ZH ZLOO QRW EH DEOH WR PRYH WRWDOO\
freely and unrestrictedly (see Latour 1993). In second modernity people and
institutions realize mobility as imperfect and incomprehensive, as a goal that is
•
•
•

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
84
unattainable in total and a project which cannot be produced in completeness.
Mobility is an ambivalent phenomenon. Modern societies need to provide
the mobility potentials for a maximum amount of free movement. But at the
same time they realize the impossibility and the counterproductive effects of
increasing mobilities.
$JDLQVWWKHEDFNJURXQGRIWKHVHWKUHHGHYHORSPHQWSDWKVVRPHSDUDGR[LFDOHIIHFWV
RIWKHUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQRIPRELOLW\EHFRPHYLVLEOHDQGWKHRUHWLFDOO\UHOHYDQW
On the one hand the discourses of mobility tend to be disillusioning. This is obvious,
especially in questions of the social and ecological sustainability of transport but also
in questions of global justice and transnational social mobility. But nevertheless, on
the other hand the essence of mobility as a general principle of modernity remains
stable even though the institutional settings for its realization change. In other words,
the mobility paradox results from reverse tendencies between the conceptual and the
institutional level of modernization. On the level of principles there is continuity
concerning the relevance and the social and political importance of mobility. The
zero-friction society and seamless social and spatial mobility remain powerful
societal goals and values (Hajer 1999).But on the level of institutions and institutional
procedures and routines there is irritation, confusion and doubt. This leads to a
structural discontinuity, where institutions search for alternative solutions for social,
ecological, economic and cultural problems caused by increasing mobility. And they
realize that the mobility script of modern societies and institutions is impossible to
FKDQJHZLWKRXWULVN\DQGGDQJHURXVLPSDFWVRQ WKHZKROHRUJDQL]DWLRQRIPRGHUQ
VRFLHWLHV VHH 5DPPOHU LQ WKLV ERRN 7KH VRPHWLPHV QHDUO\ HXSKRULF EXW RIWHQ
naïve celebrations of virtual mobility as a substitute for spatial movements sheds a
light on the catastrophic nature and the ambivalent character of modern mobilities.
Societies realize the destructive potential of unrestrained physical mobilities. Virtual
mobility forces societies and their institutions into the search for alternatives in the
organization and the supply of mobility. For a theory of mobility in the context of
UHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQ WKH SDUDGR[ QDWXUHRI PRELOLW\ LV GHFLVLYH DQG D SRLQWRI
GHSDUWXUHIRUWKHRUHWLFDOUHÀHFWLRQVDQGFRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQVRQWKHRQHKDQGPRELOLW\
is the great white hope of modernity, the symbol of Enlightenment and progress. And
RQWKHRWKHU VLGH LW LVWKHµWKLQNLQJDYDODQFKH¶WKHµVHOIUHÀH[LYH QDWXUDO GLVDVWHU¶
6ORWHUGLMNWKDWWKUHDWHQVWKHZRUOG 0RGHUQ VRFLHW\ LV VSHHGLQJ XS DQG
WKUHDWHQVLWVHOIZLWKGHVWUXFWLRQDQGEXULDO7KLVLVWKHUHDVRQZK\6ORWHUGLMNUHÀHFWV
PRGHUQLW\LQUHVSHFWWR(UQVW-QJHU¶VQRWLRQRIDµWRWDOPRELOL]DWLRQ¶RIWKHVRFLDO
and the natural (Jünger 1931).
Mobility, ambivalence and the paradox effects of capitalism
0RGHUQ KLVWRU\ UHSRUWV RQ WKH KXPDQ TXHVW IRU QHZ KRUL]RQV DQG PDUNHWV IRU
H[DPSOH%UDXGHO2OODUGDQG5H\QROGV.RVHOOHFN7KHRSHQLQJXSRI
new opportunity spaces was always grounded on the transport of people, goods,
ideas and technologies. Be it the travels of Marco Polo in the late thirteenth century,
the Portuguese and the Spanish conquest of the South American continent from the

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 85
years around 1500 on, or the economic and later colonial exploitation of foreign
regions, countries and continents by the capitalist actors of the nineteenth century,
DOO WKHVH SURFHVVHV RI ¿QGLQJ DQG FORVLQJ FRQQHFWLRQV VWDELOL]LQJ FRQWDFWV DQG
exchange relations were based on innovations in the transport sectors. Not without
XQFRQFHDOHG IDVFLQDWLRQ DQG DFNQRZOHGJHPHQW 0DU[ DQG (QJHOV ZULWH LQ WKH
Communist Manifesto:
7KHQHHG RID FRQVWDQWO\H[SDQGLQJPDUNHW IRULWV SURGXFWVFKDVHVWKH ERXUJHRLVLHRYHU
the entire surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish
connections everywhere. The bourgeoisie has, through its exploitation of the world
PDUNHWJLYHQDFRVPRSROLWDQFKDUDFWHUWRSURGXFWLRQDQGFRQVXPSWLRQLQHYHU\FRXQWU\
To the great chagrin of reactionaries, it has drawn from under the feet of industry the
national ground on which it stood. All old-established national industries have been
destroyed or are daily being destroyed. They are dislodged by new industries, whose
introduction becomes a life and death question for all civilized nations, by industries that
QRORQJHUZRUN XS LQGLJHQRXV UDZ PDWHULDO EXW UDZ PDWHULDO GUDZQ IURPWKHUHPRWHVW
zones; industries whose products are consumed, not only at home, but in every quarter of
WKHJOREH,QSODFHRIWKHROGZDQWVVDWLV¿HGE\WKHSURGXFWLRQRIWKHFRXQWU\ZH¿QGQHZ
wants, requiring for their satisfaction the products of distant lands and climes. In place
RIWKHROGORFDODQGQDWLRQDOVHFOXVLRQDQGVHOIVXI¿FLHQF\ZHKDYHLQWHUFRXUVHLQHYHU\
direction, universal inter-dependence of nations. And as in material, so also in intellectual
production. The intellectual creations of individual nations become common property.
National one-sidedness and narrow-mindedness become more and more impossible, and
from the numerous national and local literatures, there arises a world literature (see the
German original in Marx and Engels 1980, 16–17).2
But at the same time modernization is also a history of oppression, social inequality,
GRPLQDWLRQDQGFRQWURO7KHPRELOLW\RIWKHRQHLVWKHÀH[LELOLW\DQGWKHLPPRELOLW\
of the others. If the Spanish conquerors stepped on new land they extended the
VSDFHV RI LQÀXHQFH IRU WKHLU ,EHULDQ NLQJGRP %XW WKH\ EURXJKW VXSSUHVVLRQ DQG
diseases to the American natives. If the capitalist entrepreneurs of the nineteenth
FHQWXU\H[SORUHGQHZPDUNHWVDQGHFRQRPLFUHODWLRQVWKH\SURGXFHGSURVSHULW\IRU
themselves and others. But they installed a system of worldwide exploitation and
social inequality. If we observe movements within social and geographical spaces
ZHFDQPHDVXUHWKHPDQGZHFDQUHSURGXFHWKHPTXDQWLWDWLYHO\LQ¿JXUHVWDEOHVDQG
diagrams. But we are never able to simply say if the movements of people and goods
DUHDFWVRIIUHHGRPDQGVHOIIXO¿OPHQWRULIWKH\DUHUHDFWLRQVWRSUHVVXUHDQGVRFLDO
or economic constraints. The mobility discourse is deeply connected with the notion
of freedom. But if we simplify mobility to movement and motion we are in danger
RIORVLQJ WKLVFRQQHFWLRQDQG RIWDONLQJDERXWPDQ\ WKLQJVEXWQRW DERXWPRELOLW\
The history of modernity is the history of the constant increase and optimization of
mobility systems. From the eighteenth century onwards, modern societies invested
enormous sums and intellectual power to optimize transport systems and to reduce
WKHUHVLVWDQFHRIVSDFHDJDLQVWWKHJOREDOÀRZVRISHRSOHDQGJRRGV6HQQHWW
 7KHWUDQVODWLRQLVWDNHQIURPWKHZHEVLWHRI7KH$XVWUDOLDQ1DWLRQDO8QLYHUVLW\XSGDWHG
1RYHPEHUKWWSZZZDQXHGXDXSROVFLPDU[FODVVLFVPDQLIHVWRKWPO%RXUJRLVH!
accessed 28 February 2007.

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
86
But today the seamless global mobilities reveal the double character of mobility: if
ZHÀ\WKURXJKWKHµFRGHVSDFH¶RIWKHJOREDODLUOLQHQHWZRUNZHDUHXQGHUFRQVWDQW
surveillance and control (Dodge and Kitchin 2004; Adey 2004). The airport is a
highly ambivalent symbol of modernity (Fuller and Harley 2005; Aaltola 2005). It
VLJQDOV FRQQHFWLYLW\ WR ZRUOGZLGH FRVPRSROLWDQ QHWZRUNV DQG IUHHGRP %XW DIWHU
9/11 it became an object of total surveillance and control. The global air traveller is
WKHOHDVWIUHHWUDYHOOHULQWKHZRUOG8UU\$QGDQDLUSRUWLVDNLQGRIµFDPS¶IRU
PRELOHREMHFWVDQGVXEMHFWV'LNHQDQG/DXVWVHQZKHUHSHRSOHDQGWKLQJVDUH
VFDQQHGVRUWHGDQGGLVWLQJXLVKHGLQWRFOHDQDQGXQFOHDQULVN\RUVHFXUHDQGVRRQ
Mobility refers to the ambivalent and dialectical character of modernity (Bauman
1991). Simmel points out that the nature of modernity is shaped by the dichotomy
of movement and motility. In contrast to pre-modern societies modern constellations
are characterized by social and geographical mobility. Modern people travel with
intrinsic motivations. They are not only urged by the existential needs and necessities
or social conventions.
Modern society is a society on the move. Central to the idea of modernity is that of
PRYHPHQWWKDWPRGHUQVRFLHWLHVKDYHEURXJKWDERXWVRPHVWULNLQJFKDQJHVLQWKHQDWXUH
and experience of motion or travel (Lash and Urry 1987, 252).
7KHUHLVFRQVWDQWÀX[LQPRGHUQVRFLHWLHV7KH\DUHDOZD\VLQWUDQVLWLRQDQGRQWKHLU
ZD\LQWRQHZFRQ¿JXUDWLRQVWHPSRUDOVWDELOLWLHVDQGWRDIUDJLOHDQGWUDQVIRUPDWLYH
equilibrium (Elias 1997; Urry 2003). The social concept of mobility is an expression
IRUWKLVEDVLFDVVXPSWLRQRIPRGHUQL]DWLRQWKHRU\,W LV D VRFLHWDO ZD\ RI WDFNOLQJ
ZLWKWKHDPELYDOHQFHRIPRGHUQLW\6RFLDOJHRJUDSKLFDODQGYLUWXDOÀRZVSURGXFH
instability and insecurity. The problem of sorting and channelling movements of
people, goods, artefacts, information, waste and so on becomes evident in the course
of Western modernization (Sennett 1994; Thrift 1996; Thrift 2004). Unintended
consequences of spatial and social mobilizations become evident, inevitable and
non-rejectable. In particular the unintended ecological effects of a modern transport
V\VWHPVKRZ WKHSUREOHPVRI PRGHUQLW\ZLWKLWVHOI7KH\DUH UHÀH[LYHLQWKLV ZD\
that the positive effects of increasing mobility potentials cause negative effects for
the environment and the living conditions of humans and animals (Whitelegg 1996;
Thomas et al. 2003). Sustainable mobility is one of the crucial topics which exemplify
WKH UHÀH[LYH PRGHUQL]DWLRQ RI PRELOLW\ DQG PRELOLW\ SROLWLFV ,W GHPRQVWUDWHV
the Wahlverwandtschaft RU HOHFWLYH DI¿QLW\ VHH 5DPPOHU LQ WKLV ERRN RI ¿UVW
modernity and spatial movements as a resource and dynamic factor of progress and
ZHOIDUH,WVKRZVKRZGLI¿FXOWLWLV WRUHJXODWHDGHHSJRLQJDQGUDGLFDOFKDQJHWR
a sustainable transport policy (Hesse 1993; Harris, Lewis and Adam 2004). And
WRGD\ZHNQRZ D ORW DERXWWKHHFRORJLFDOPRGHUQL]DWLRQRIWUDQVSRUW V\VWHPV :H
NQRZ KRZ QHFHVVDU\ LW LV %XW DOVR ZH DUH FRQVFLRXV RI WKH ULVN\ FKDUDFWHU RI D
consequent change in transport policy. We realize the chances but also the limits of
DUDGLFDOUHYHUVH$OWHUQDWLYHFRQFHSWVOLNH&DVK&DUDQGFKRLFHVHH&DQ]OHULQWKLV
ERRNDFFHSWWKHVWDELOLW\DQGWKHUREXVWQHVVRIWKHV\VWHPRIµDXWRPRELOLVP¶DQG
automobilities (Featherstone, Thrift and Urry 2005). They learned about its nature as
DJLYHQDQGKDUGWRFKDQJHVRFLDOIDFWZKLFKFDQEHLQÀXHQFHGEXWQRWVXEVWLWXWHGLQ

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 87
total by other modes of transport. Automobility and individualization are entangled
and signify the modern mobility script in Western societies.
In Bonß and Kesselring (2004, 20ff) we developed different modes of dealing
with the ambivalences of mobility and modernity. How to cope with uncertainty
DQG WKH ULVN\ FKDUDFWHU RI PRELOLW\ LQ SULQFLSOH GHSHQGV RQ WKH EDVLF SHUFHSWLRQ
of the structural ambiguity of modernity. Modern strategies aim to increase and
optimize the amount of movements on different scales of the world society. But
the enhancement of the societal motilities lead into a situation where more mobility
is not better but worse. Its increase endangers the society as a whole. The mobile
ULVNVRFLHW\LVZLWKRXWDOWHUQDWLYHVWRWKHTXHVWIRUDQDSSURSULDWHDQGDVXVWDLQDEOH
dealing with mobilities. For the development of mobility policies which face the
fundamental ambivalences of mobility three basic variants can be distinguished:
Ambivalences can be seen as DQWLQRPLHV, as incongruent and indissoluble
µFRQWUDGLFWRU\ FHUWDLQWLHV¶ 6FKZDU] DQG 7KRPSVRQ  7KLV LV WKH
VWDQGDUGUHDGLQJDQGLQWHUSUHWDWLRQLQWKHFRQWH[WRI¿UVWPRGHUQLW\7KLVYLHZ
RI DPELYDOHQFHV OHJLWLPL]HV SXUL¿FDWLRQ SUDFWLFHV ZKLFK HOLPLQDWH SRVVLEOH
alternatives and foster one-best-way strategies.3
Ambivalences can be seen as inconsistencies. Inconsistencies are different
IURPFRQWUDGLFWRU\FHUWDLQWLHV7KH\DUHLQFRPSDWLEOHDW¿UVWJODQFHEXWPD\
be integrated in the long run.4
Ambivalences can be interpreted as SOXUDOLVP; that is, as equally good
possibilities, which are not contradictory but indifferent and perhaps
paradoxical. In a certain way this is a post-modern reading of ambivalences.
%XW WKH GLIIHUHQFH DJDLQVW D EDFNJURXQG RI UHÀH[LYH PRGHUQL]DWLRQ LV WKH
plurality of different strategies – for instance in transport policy – is not a
SURFHVV RI IUDJPHQWDWLRQ DQG GLVLQWHJUDWLRQ EXW LW VLJQL¿HV WKH TXHVW IRU D
policy which faces plurality as an integral element and source of power for the
IXWXUHVKDSLQJRIPRELOLWLHVLQUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQVRFLHWLHV
(DFKRIWKHVHYDULDQWVLQGLFDWHVVSHFL¿FVWUDWHJLHVRUPRGHVWRFRSHZLWKDPELYDOHQFH
If we conceive ambivalences as DQWLQRPLHVDQGFRQWUDGLFWRU\FHUWDLQWLHVWKH¿WWLQJ
strategy is to resolve the contradiction; that is, to decide for one of the contradictory
FHUWDLQWLHVDQGWR¿JKWIRUWKHLUUHDOL]DWLRQ,QWKLVFDVHWKHUHDFWLRQWRWKHSUREOHP
3 See for example the analysis of alternative variants to the internal combustion engine
in the history of the car (see Knie 1994).
4 Urban strategies in transport policy and the use of technologies for the ecological
and the service improvement in public and private urban transport are good examples for
this. The so-called MOBINET in Munich demonstrated a post-confrontational strategy in
transport policy which tried to integrate the diametrically opposed positions of members
of the ecological and green movement and the prevailing car and public transport lobby in
Munich. It was a major attempt for an integration of inconsistencies under the roof of urban
transport policy (see Hajer and Kesselring 1999; Kesselring 2001; Kesselring et al. 2003).
This large-scale project was an historically important attempt to dissolve inconsistencies and
to bind them together into a common urban strategy (for other case see Flämig et al. 2001;
Bratzel 1999).
•
•
•

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
88
of ambiguity is the search for clearness and unambiguity. The means of choice is
SXUL¿FDWLRQ and the development of one-best-way strategies. People operate with the
supposition that in principle there is only one best solution, not only for technological
problems but for social problems as well.
,QWKHVHFRQGFDVHWKH¿WWLQJVWUDWHJ\GRHVQRWDLPDWSXUL¿FDWLRQ,IDPELYDOHQFHV
are seen as inconsistencies, the incompatibilities cannot be abolished by decision
and optimal solutions, but at most by time. How this functions can be studied in
the educational novels of the eighteenth century and onwards, which present their
heroes as inconsistent but developing persons, who may be able to integrate in their
biography highly different concepts and identities.
The third version characterizes the highest degree of the acceptance of
ambivalence. For the supporter of the pluralistic position there exist no one-best-
way solutions but a plurality of possible, rational and equivalent strategies to deal
with the same problem. These may be indifferent or paradoxical, but they are judged
as possible and legitimate paths. In this last perspective ambivalence is a normal
phenomenon. That is why there is not necessarily a claim to integrate the different
concepts and identities.
From directional to non-directional mobility
7KHWKHRU\RIUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQ%HFN*LGGHQVDQG/DVK%HFN%RQ
DQG /DX  DVNV IRU WKH SURFHVVHV RI VRFLDO FRQVWUXFWLRQ WKDW GH¿QH WKH SDWKV
LQWRDOWHUQDWLYHIXWXUHV7KDW LV ZK\ WKH VXEWLWOH RI WKH µULVN VRFLHW\¶LV µWRZDUGV D
QHZPRGHUQLW\¶%HFN2QHRIWKHFUXFLDOWKHRUHWLFDOLGHDVLVWKDWPRGHUQLW\
IXQGDPHQWDOO\ WUDQVIRUPV LWVHOI IURP ¿UVW WR VHFRQG RU UHÀH[LYH PRGHUQLW\ E\
permanently applying modern principles as guidelines for societal orientation and the
development of routines. But these principles, respectively the institutional routines
based on them, are incomplete, incomprehensive and imperfect in their impacts.
6RFLDOFKDQJH LQ WKHOLJKW RI UHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQ WKHRU\ GRHVQRW UHVXOW IURP
UDWLRQDOSODQQLQJDQGGLUHFWLRQDORSWLPL]DWLRQ5HÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQLVFRQFHLYHG
as a process of unexpected, unseen, unintended but thus inevitable transformations of
WKHJHQHUDOFRQGLWLRQVRIPRGHUQLW\,WLVSURYRNHGE\WKHXQLQWHQGHGFRQVHTXHQFHV
of powerful modern principles such as rationality, individuality, globality and
PRELOLW\LQSUDFWLFH&RQVHTXHQWO\WKHWKHRU\RIUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQIRFXVHVRQ
processes of hidden or subversive (that is, subpolitical) transformations of modern
LQVWLWXWLRQVDQG SUDFWLFHV VHH%HFN+DMHUDQG .HVVHOULQJ%|VFKHQ.UDW]HU
and May 2006). In this view the transformation of modernity and mobility is non-
GLUHFWLRQDO7KH LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI UHÀH[LYH PRGHUQL]DWLRQ EUHDNV ZLWK VRFLRORJLFDO
WUDGLWLRQVVXFKDVWKRVHRI:HEHUDQG'XUNKHLP7KRVHDQWLFLSDWHWKHOLQHDUSURJUHVV
of modern capitalism and its institutional and normative settings. In contrast to
WKHRULVWV RI OLQHDULW\ OLNH 5LW]HU 5LW]HU  WKHRULVWV RI UHÀH[LYLW\ LGHQWLI\ D
VHFRQGRUµDQRWKHU¶PRGHUQLW\DQGDµGLIIHUHQWUDWLRQDOLW\¶/DVK
7KH LGHD RI D UHÀH[LYH UDWLRQDOLW\ LV EDVLFDOO\ OLQNHG ZLWK WKH DFFHSWDQFH RI
DPELYDOHQFHDQG WKH ORVV RISRZHU RI VLPSOH SROLWLFDO UHJXODWLRQ VWUDWHJLHV %HFN
GLVFXVVHV WKLV RQ WKH JOREDO VFDOH DQG KH GHSOR\V GLIIHUHQW VFHQDULRV +H WKLQNV

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 89
WKURXJKWKHFRQVHTXHQFHVRISROLWLFVWKDWDFFHSWVWKHZHDNQHVVRIWKHQDWLRQVWDWHDQG
the prevalence of neoliberal economic and political strategies, which intentionally
QHJOHFWWKHVWDWHDVDQDFWRU%HFN
7KH FRQFHSW RI D ¿UVW PRGHUQLW\ LV LQH[WULFDEO\ FRQQHFWHG ZLWK WKH QRWLRQ RI
nation state and national identity. First modernity is conceptualized as a container
PRGHUQLW\ 7KH UHIHUHQFH SRLQW RI WKHRULHV RI ¿UVW PRGHUQLW\ LV WKH QDWLRQ
VWDWH¶V LQVWLWXWLRQDO DQG DI¿UPDWLYH IRUPDWLRQ 7KLV SHUVSHFWLYH LV FULWLFL]HG DV
LQDGHTXDWH WR WKH DPELYDOHQFHV RI JOREDOL]DWLRQ %HFN $OEURZ  +HOG
HWDO*UDQGH%HFNSXWVLWDVµPHWKRGRORJLFDOQDWLRQDOLVP¶DQGDUJXHV
IRU D µFRVPRSROLWDQ VRFLRORJ\¶ DGHTXDWH IRU SKHQRPHQD OLNH QHWZRUNV VFDSHV
DQGÀRZV EH\RQG WKH QDWLRQ VWDWH DQG LWV VWUXFWXUDWLRQV$QHZ WHUPLQRORJ\ ZLWK
QRWLRQV OLNH VRFLRVSKHUHV $OEURZ  VFDSHV $SSDGXUDL  8UU\ 
transnational social spaces (Pries 2001), connectivity and immediacy (Tomlinson
LQWHUFRQQHFWHGQHVV+HOGHWDOOLTXLGLW\%DXPDQÀXLGV0RO
and Law 1994) and PRELOLWLHV (Sheller and Urry 2006; Hannam, Sheller and Urry
2006) indicates another perception of society and its structures as mobile, transitory,
transformative and liquid. All these approaches of theorizing in terms of mobility
$OEHUWVHQDQG'LNHQVXSSRVHWKHVRFLDODVQHZFRQ¿JXUDWLRQVDQGUHODWLRQV
of stability and change, mobility and immobility. Even theorists of linearity and
VWDELOLW\XVHWKHVHWHUPVWRWDONDERXWVWDEOHHOHPHQWVLQDZRUOGRIÀRZV5LW]HUDQG
0XUSK\XVHPHWDSKRUVVXFKDVEORFNDJHVKXUGOHVVWUDLQHUVDQGEDUULFDGHVWR
HPSKDVL]HWKHSRZHUDQGWKHQHFHVVLW\IRUVWDELOLWLHVDQG¿[LWLHVLQWKHVWHHULQJDQG
WKHUHJXODWLRQRISRZHUIXOOLTXLGLWLHVDQGÀRZV$VDFRQVHTXHQFH%HFNPDLQWDLQV
WKDW WKHRUL]LQJ KDV WR VNLS ERXQGDULHV DQG WR IRFXV RQ VWUXFWXUDWLRQV EH\RQG WKH
QDWLRQVWDWH DQG EH\RQG PRGHUQ VWDELOLWLHV,QOLQHZLWK8UU\  %HFN¶VZRUN
LVDTXHVWIRUWKHDPELYDOHQWDQGÀXLGVWUXFWXUDWLRQVRIµVRFLHWLHVEH\RQGVRFLHW\¶
DQG IRU WKH PHFKDQLVPV DQG WKH WHFKQRORJLHV RI UHVWUXFWXULQJ LQ D ZRUOG RI ULVN
GLVHPEHGGLQJ DQG VRFLDO OLTXLGLW\ µ>5@HÀH[LYH PRGHUQLVWV VHH JOREDOL]DWLRQ DV D
UHSDWWHUQLQJRIÀXLGLWLHVDQGPRELOLWLHVRQWKHRQHKDQGDQG VWRSSDJHVDQG¿[LWLHV
RQWKHRWKHUUDWKHUWKDQDQDOOHQFRPSDVVLQJZRUOGRIÀXLGLW\DQGPRELOLW\¶%HFN
LQWKLVERRN
%HFN¶V WKHRU\ RI FRVPRSROLWDQLVP LV D WKHRU\ RI DPELYDOHQW RU UDWKHU ÀXLG
structuration. Ahmed et al. use a dialectical metaphor for this interest in mobile
structuration. Mobility and migration are conceived as social processes of ongoing
µXSURRWLQJVDQGUHJURXQGLQJV¶$KPHGHWDO,QGLYLGXDOVJURXSVDQGZKROH
VRFLHWLHVDUHVHHQLQDFRQVWDQWO\ÀXLGSURFHVVRIVRFLDOO\FRQVWUXFWLQJVWDELOLWLHVDQG
DI¿OLDWLRQV+DQQDP6KHOOHUDQG8UU\FRLQHGWKHWHUPµPRRULQJ¶IRUWKHVRFLDOIDFW
that mobilities do not exist without relation to immobilities (Hannam et al. 2006).
3HRSOHQHHGVRFLDOEHQFKPDUNVDQGVWDELOLW\FRUHVWRRUJDQL]HDOLIHLQPRWLRQ5And
PRGHUQLW\LWVHOIUHVWVRQWKHRQWRORJLFDOGLDOHFWLFVRIµ¿[LWLHVDQGPRWLRQ¶+DUYH\
FLWHGLQ %UHQQHU  %HFNXVHVWKHPHWDSKRUµURRWV ZLWK ZLQJV¶WR
H[SUHVV WKH WHPSRUDOLW\ DQG WKH WUDQVLWRU\ FKDUDFWHU RI PRRULQJV DQG DI¿OLDWLRQV
 6HH.HVVHOULQJDQG .HVVHOULQJDQG9RJOLQ WKLVERRN RQWKHVRFDOOHGµFHQWUHG
PRELOLW\PDQDJHPHQW¶DQG WKHVWUDWHJLHVWRFRQVWUXFWVWDELOLWLHV LQDOLIHRILQWHQVH PRELOLW\
constraints and needs.

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
90
The mobility pioneers of the second modernity (Kesselring 2006) have the ability
WRFRQVWUXFWPHPEHUVKLSDQG DI¿OLDWLRQ IRU D FHUWDLQ WLPH DQG WR FKDQJH FRQWH[WV
7KH\ UHFRQ¿JXUH VRFLDO QHWZRUNV LI QHFHVVDU\ DQG QHHGHG $Q LQGLYLGXDO OLIH LQ
%HFN¶VXQGHUVWDQGLQJLV DOLTXLGOLIH ZKHUHSHRSOHWU\ WRQDYLJDWHDQG WRLQÀXHQFH
the direction of their mobilities. But at the same time they accept the imperfection
DQG WKH KHWHURQRP\ RI LQÀXHQFHV WKDW FDXVH PRYHPHQWV LQ DQ XQLQWHQGHG DQG
XQH[SHFWHG GLUHFWLRQ ,Q WKH FHQWUH RI WKH WKHRU\ RI UHÀH[LYH PRGHUQL]DWLRQ DUH
questions of social integration and cohesion. How can cosmopolitan societies secure
DUHODWLYHVWDELOLW\IRUWKHLUPHPEHUV"+RZLVLGHQWLW\SRVVLEOHXQGHUWKHFRQGLWLRQV
RILQFUHDVLQJPRELOLW\OLTXLGLW\DQGGLVHPEHGGLQJ"2UDV%HFNSXWVLWµ:KRDP,"
:KDWDP,":KHUHDP,":K\DP,ZKHUH,DP"±YHU\GLIIHUHQWTXHVWLRQVIURPWKH
QDWLRQDOTXHVWLRQV:KRDUHZH"DQG:KDWGRZHVWDQGIRU"¶%HFNLQWKLVERRN
7KLQNLQJ WKURXJK PRELOLW\ ZLWK WKH WRROER[ RI WKH WKHRU\ RI UHÀH[LYH
modernization leads to the notion of a QRQGLUHFWLRQDOPRELOLW\. In the following I
will elaborate this and I propose a systematic approach for the distinction between
PRGHUQDQGUHÀH[LYHUHVSHFWLYHO\¿UVWDQGVHFRQGPRGHUQPRELOLW\
The modern notion of society is connected with the idea of social security,
WHFKQRORJLFDOVDIHW\DQGWKH FDOFXODWLRQRIULVNV%HFN %RQ0RGHUQ
WKLQNLQJDQGPRGHUQVRFLDOFRQFHSWVFRQFHQWUDWHRQVWDELOLW\0RGHUQWKHRULVWVDVVXPH
that after fundamental changes and transformations systems tend to restructure into
VWDELOLW\ µ$OO WKDW LV VROLG PHOWV LQWR DLU¶ PHDQV WKDW DIWHU WKH GRZQJUDGLQJ DQG
the destruction of traditional structures, the new just and stable order waits for its
IXO¿OPHQW7KHµZLOOWRRUGHU¶JRHVULJKWWKURXJKWKHFODVVLFDOPRGHUQVRFLDOWKHRULHV
OLNH 3DUVRQ¶V IXQFWLRQDOLVP DQG )RXFDXOW¶V SROLWLFDO WKHRU\ 7KH µUHGXFWLRQ RI
FRPSOH[LW\¶LVVHHQDVDJHQHUDOSULQFLSOHRIPRGHUQLW\µ+HDY\PRGHUQLW\¶%DXPDQ
RUµKDUGFDSLWDOLVP¶7KULIWDLPWRUHGXFHWKHÀXLGLW\RIVRFLDOVWUXFWXUHV
,QOLQHZLWK%DXPDQLWLVSRVVLEOHWRVD\WKDW¿UVWPRGHUQLW\LQWHQGVWKHSXUL¿FDWLRQ
of all its elements and Ritzer and Murphy (Ritzer 1996) re-formulate the Weberian
idea of modernization as standardization and conformation.
$W WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WKH WZHQW\¿UVW FHQWXU\ ZH FDQQRW GHVFULEH PRGHUQLW\
with the tools of a sociology of order and stability any longer (Urry 2003). Second
modernity goes along with liquidity and ongoing transformations on every scale of
political and social regulation (Brenner 2004). It is more oriented to contingency
than to order. Second modernity is characterized by the unavoidable presence and
GRPLQDQFHRI DPELYDOHQFHDQGWKH QHHGWRDµUHÀH[LYH UDWLRQDOLW\¶/DVK ,W
implies the social and the political acceptance of permanent change, unpredictability,
contingency, disorder and the continuous restructuring of accepted realities (Junge
 &DWFKZRUGV OLNH µQHWZRUNV VFDSHV DQG ÀRZV¶ 8UU\  %HFN %RQ
and Lau 2003), transnational connectivity, interdependency and the dominance of
XQLQWHQGHGVLGH HIIHFWVPDGFRZGLVHDVH *0IRRGWUDI¿FFRQJHVWLRQ DQG VRRQ
indicate that second modernity is an era of instability, insecurity and uncertainty.
/LTXLGPRGHUQLW\UHIHUVWRDVRFLDOVLWXDWLRQRIFRQWLQXRXVµERXQGDU\PDQDJHPHQW¶
%HFN%RQDQG /DX  8QGHU WKH FRQGLWLRQV RIUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQDQG
global complexity the idea of linear modernization becomes obsolete and loses its
touch of practicability and its explanative power. The notion of the ‘meta-play of
SRZHU¶ %HFN  OLQNV WR WKH GLDJQRVLV WKDW VRFLDO WKHRU\ FDQQRW LGHQWLI\ DQ\

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 91
longer powerful actors who transform societies (for example, the economy as the
NH\DFWRULQ0DU[LVWWKHRULHVRUWKHGLDOHFWLFVRIFXOWXUHDQGHFRQRP\ LQ6LPPHO¶V
ZRUNV$QGRQWKHRWKHUKDQGWKHWHUPµPHWDFKDQJH¶LQGLFDWHVWKDWDFWRUVDUHIDFHG
ZLWKWKHSUREOHPRILGHQWLI\LQJWKHLURZQGLUHFWLRQLQDZRUOGRIRSDTXHÀRZV
7KHGLVWLQFWLRQEHWZHHQ¿UVWDQGVHFRQGPRGHUQLW\LVKHXULVWLFQRWHVVHQWLDOLVW
$V LW LV LQ WKH FDVH RI %DXPDQ¶V µKHDY\¶ DQG µOLJKW¶ PRGHUQLW\ %DXPDQ 
the purpose of those ideal types is to identify different reference points for social
structuration in modern societies. In the beginning of modernity (approximately in
the eighteenth century) there were other dominant patterns to cope with uncertainty,
DQGDPELYDOHQFHWKDQDWWKHEHJLQQLQJRI WKHWZHQW\¿UVWFHQWXU\7DEOHVKRZV
the different reference points and patterns of structuration and their relationship in
WKHJHQHUDOVRFLDOFKDQJHIURPLQGXVWULDOWRULVNVRFLHW\RUVHFRQGPRGHUQLW\DQG
indicates the rise of mobilities as structuring social dimensions. The two patterns are
typical of the two modernities on the micro, meso and macro scales.
In detail there may be a lot of serious questions on the systematic and the historical
reliability and meaning of the different concepts of modernity. The distinction relates
fundamentally to one of the major questions in historical sciences: Are there any
SHULRGVLQKLVWRU\SRVVLEOHWRGLVWLQJXLVKLQD FOHDUFXWDQGREYLRXVZD\"%XW WKH
SRLQWLVWKDWWKLVGLVWLQFWLRQLVHYHQQRWHVVHQWLDOLVW%HFNDQGRWKHUVXVHWKHQRWLRQV
RI¿UVWDQGVHFRQGPRGHUQLW\DVDKHXULVWLFWRROWRH[HPSOLI\WKHIXQGDPHQWDOVRFLDO
change in modernity. Other authors such as Bauman, Thrift, Castells and Urry use
slightly different terminologies. But the common idea, the central threat, is that
7DEOH 'RPLQDQWUHIHUHQFHSRLQWVRIVRFLDOVWUXFWXUDWLRQVLQ¿UVWDQG
second modernity
First modernity Second modernity
Critique of ambivalence
ĺSXUL¿FDWLRQ
Acceptance of ambivalence
ĺSOXUDOLVP
One-best-way solutions 0XOWLSOHEHVWZD\VROXWLRQV
VWUXFWXUHVUXOHVDQG¿UPQHVV QHWZRUNVVFDSHVDQGÀRZV
safety/certainty riskiness/uncertainty
Constancy Fluidity
VFLHQWL¿FDWLRQDQGpredictability VFLHQWL¿FDWLRQDQGunpredictability
growing stability JURZLQJOLTXLGLW\
continuity and evolution discontinuity and change
target-oriented process-oriented
(national) order (cosmopolitan) contingency
stable connections connectivity as problem and project
(national) structures in the long run temporary (transnational) structuration
Solid boundaries and ERXQGDU\NHHSLQJ Flexible boundaries and
ERXQGDU\PDQDJHPHQW
Source: Revised from Bonß and Kesselring (2004).

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
92
a global complexity and interconnectedness is rising that fundamentally changes
the conditions of the social, the cultural and the political. The consequence is a
comprehensive loss of reliability, predictability and stability in all social spheres of
society and on all political and cultural scales of regulation and interaction.
Mobility or, even better, PRELOLWLHV move this deep-going change into centre stage.
+HQFHWKHVHFRQGPRGHUQLW\LVDPRELOHULVNVRFLHW\µLQZKLFKWKHFRQGLWLRQVXQGHU
ZKLFKLWVPHPEHUVDFWFKDQJHIDVWHUWKDQLWWDNHVWKHZD\VRIDFWLQJWRFRQVROLGDWH
LQWRKDELWVDQGURXWLQHV¶%DXPDQ
7KH PRELOH ULVN VRFLHW\ TXHVWLRQV ± IRU LWV LQGLYLGXDO PHPEHUV DV ZHOO DV LWV
institutions and systems of regulation – how social stability is possible in a world of
constant movement and change.
7KLV LV WKH NH\ DUJXPHQW DQG PDLQ K\SRWKHVLV RI WKLV DUWLFOH along with the
HPHUJHQFHRIVHFRQGPRGHUQLW\WKHUHDUHVWUXFWXUDOFKDQJHV LQ PRELOLW\WRR. And
more than this: the rise of mobilities on every scale of society – from the body to the
JOREDO±UDGLFDOL]HVWKHULVNVRFLHW\DQGVKRZVWKHJOREDOLQWHUFRQQHFWHGQHVVDQGWKH
inescapable character of the social and spatial mobilization of modernity.
%XWKRZLVLWSRVVLEOHWRFKDUDFWHUL]HWKHVHVWUXFWXUDOFKDQJHV",QDQDUWLFOHZLWK
Wolfgang Bonß (see Bonß and Kesselring 2004, 17) we used an example for this.
In the 1970s and 1980s motorways had an origin, a direction and a destination.
It was the motorway from Nuremberg to Munich, from Geneva to San Remo or
from Paris to Lyon. Today it is the E9 and the E7 or it is the rhizomatic structure
RIUHODWLRQV DURXQG FRQXUEDWLRQVOLNHWKH&RORJQH DUHD RUWKH5XKUJHELHW1RERG\
WDONVDERXWRULJLQDQGGHVWLQDWLRQQRWLQWKHUDGLRDQG79VWDWLRQVDWDOO,QWKHSDVW
HDFK PRWRUZD\ KDG LWV XQLTXH KLVWRU\ LWV µLGHQWLW\¶ ,W ZDV VRPHWKLQJ VSHFLDO WR
drive from A to B. Today the orientation is abstract. Motorways are places or scapes
RIÀRZVQRWRILGHQWL¿FDWLRQ3HRSOHXVLQJWKH PRWRUZD\VSDUWLFLSDWHLQWKH7UDQV
(XURSHDQ1HWZRUN7(1ZKLFKVSUHDGVDOORYHU(XURSHDQGZKLFKPDNHVWKHROG
$LQWRDQµHSLVRGH¶DVPDOOµEULGJH¶RQWKHZD\IURPIRUH[DPSOH7KH+DJXHWR
Rome. People move in a scape, a material structure where they do not understand its
constitution and all the relationships and conditions shaping it. The scape represents
a mobility potential for different individual, collective and societal purposes. It
seems to be material but it is a constitutive element of the optional space around us
which offers the chances to move and to act (motility). But we realize this system
RIPRWRUZD\V DVMXVWRQHHOHPHQW LQDJOREDOQHWZRUN RIUHODWLRQVKLSVZLWKPDQ\
crossroads and intermodal transfer points to other modes of transport and so on.
This illustrates the general hypothesis: mobility as a social concept (and not as its
UHGXFWLRQWRVSDWLDOPRYHPHQWWUDI¿FDQGWUDYHOWUDQVIRUPVLWVHOIIURPdirectionality
to QRQGLUHFWLRQDOLW\ 3HRSOH H[SHULHQFH µDQ DEVHQFH RI LWLQHUDU\ DQG GLUHFWLRQ¶
%DXPDQLQPRGHUQOLIH7KH\XVHQDUUDWLRQVRIWKHµLQGH¿QLWHGXUDWLRQRI
WUDYHO¶,QRWKHUZRUGVWKHVRFLDOFRQFHSWRI¿UVWPRGHUQPRELOLW\LVdirectional; it
emphasizes the necessity and the possibility to develop effective straightness and
accuracy – in a spatial as well as in a social way. Modern mobility in this sense is
conceived as movement with origin,direction and destination)URP¿UVWWRVHFRQG
modern mobility it is the change from roads to routes. The paradigmatic metaphor
LVWKHOLJKWQLQJFDUHHUDVDµPHWHRULFULVH¶IURPWKHERWWRPWRWKHWRS,QWKHFRQFHSW
RI ¿UVW PRGHUQLW\ PRELOLW\ PHDQV WR WUDYHO RQ URDGV DQG WUDFNV ZLWK FDOFXODEOH

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 93
durations and precise timetables. It means to move straight forward and socially
upwards. The paradigmatic example for a modern form of spatial movement since
the nineteenth century was the train, which was not only fast, but at the same time
was able to move from one place to another in a direct line and in a calculable
manner. In contrast to pre-modern societies the modern idea of social mobility was
moulded to the concept of class mobility and vertical career mobility.
7KH UHÀH[LYH FRQFHSW RI PRELOLW\ LV QRQGLUHFWLRQDO. It goes along with the
H[SHULHQFHRIVWUDLJKWQHVVDVD¿FWLRQDQGWKHOLNHOLKRRGRIWKHIDLOXUHRI GLUHFWLRQDOLW\
7KHHYHU\GD\H[SHULHQFHRIWUDI¿FMDPVDQGWKHGDLO\EUHDNGRZQRIWKHµGUHDPRIWUDI¿F
ÀRZ¶6FKPXFNLPDNHV LW SODXVLEOH ,Q WKH GLPHQVLRQ RI VRFLDO PRELOLW\ RQ WKH
RWKHUKDQG WKHUHLVWKHH[SHULHQFH RI XQH[SHFWHGEORFNDGHVDQGWKH FKDQJLQJRIFOHDU
cut criteria of inequality to mere differences. Be it long-distance travelling, be it career
PRELOLW\RUEHLWVXU¿QJWKH,QWHUQHWWKHH[SHULHQFHRIPRYLQJIURPRQHVSRWWRDQRWKHU
LV RIWHQ QRQGLUHFWLRQDO DQG FRUUHVSRQGV PXFK PRUH ZLWK GULIWLQJ DQG ÀRDWLQJ WKDQ
with a movement with clear direction and itinerary. Actors are faced with disappointing
VLWXDWLRQVRIGHOD\ZDLWLQJDQGEUHDNGRZQ([SHULHQFLQJUHÀH[LYH PRELOLW\ LV IXOO RI
GHWRXUVDQGPLVW\LQFRPSUHKHQVLEOHWUDFNV7KHDFFHSWDQFHRIDPELYDOHQFHZHFDQDOVR
GHVFULEHRQWKHERG\VFDOHRILQGLYLGXDOGHFLVLRQPDNLQJVHH.HVVHOULQJDQG9RJOLQWKLV
ERRN$V%DXPDQSXWVLWRQHRIWKHPDMRUFKDUDFWHULVWLFVRIUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQIRU
LQGLYLGXDOVLVWKHµDFFHSWDQFHRIGLVRULHQWDWLRQ¶%DXPDQ
,Q ¿UVW PRGHUQLW\ WKH GRPLQDQW FRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQ RI PRELOLW\ UHIHUV WR WKH
paradigmatic idea of unambiguous transport in the geographical dimension and to the
idea of clear vertical class, respectively, career mobility. In both dimensions mobility
meant moving from one place to another in a more or less direct route. The concept of
UHÀH[LYHPRELOLW\LVGLIIHUHQWO\FRQVWUXFWHGLWQRORQJHUUHIHUVWRWKHSDUDGLJPDWLFLGHD
RIOLQHDUGHYHORSPHQWEXWWRFRQFHSWVRIUHWLFXODUDQGQHWZRUNPRELOLW\7KLVVZLWFK
seems necessary, because there are many ways without a clear-cut and unambiguous
direction for the move, neither under geographical nor under social perspectives.
Besides the URDG PRELOLW\ RI ¿UVW PRGHUQLW\ WKH QHWZRUN PRELOLW\ emerges. The
dominant imagery of a YHUWLFDOFDUHHUPRELOLW\ gets out of focus, and is replaced by a
concept and practice of KRUL]RQWDOVFHQHPRELOLW\which calls a permanent and active
boundary management (Wittel 2001; Vogl 2006). Table 5.2 summarizes different
aspects of the concepts of directional and non-directional mobility.
Moving masses, mobile subjects, and motile hybrids
In the following section I elaborate three basic perceptions in current mobilities
research. In most of the studies on mobility they play – explicitly or implicitly – an
LPSRUWDQWUROH7KH\ LQWHUOLQN GLVFLSOLQHV DQG DSSURDFKHV DV GLIIHUHQW DV JHRJUDSK\
sociology; cultural, migration and transport studies; science and technology studies
676DQGVRIRUWK,QWKH¿UVWFRQFHSWRIPRELOLW\UHVHDUFKWKHLQWHUHVWLVWRPHDVXUH
movements and to describe the scales of movements of people, goods and capitals.
,QWKH FRQWH[W RI JOREDOL]DWLRQVWXGLHVWKHVRFDOOHG µPRYLQJ PDVVHV SHUVSHFWLYHV¶LV
crucial. It is powerful as it helps to depict a precise imagination of global dimensions and
dynamics (see, for example, United Nations/Economic Commission for Europe 2005;

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
94
International Organization for Migration, United Nations 2005). Mobility research
needs to measure the quantitative dimensions of global movements, otherwise we
FDQQRWVD\LIWKHSKHQRPHQDZHWDONDERXWDUHUHOHYDQW7KHIXQGDPHQWDOK\SRWKHVLV
in mobility research is that there is an increase of movements on the global scale (Urry
2003). Hence we need more and better data on the quantitative dimensions of mobilities
to estimate if there is an increase or a decrease of multiple mobilities.
But also we need to measure the impacts of movements and mobility constraints
RQLQGLYLGXDOVIDPLOLHVJURXSVVRFLDOQHWZRUNVDQGVRRQ7KLVLVWKHUHDVRQZK\WKH
µPRELOHVXEMHFW¶WKHLQGLYLGXDO DVDPRELOHDFWRUZKRQHHGVWRGHSOR\VWUDWHJLHVDQG
tactics to struggle and to juggle with mobility constraints, is a very important level
DQG UHVHDUFK SHUVSHFWLYH 7KH µERG\ VFDOH¶ PXVW QRW EH QHJOHFWHG LQ UHODWLRQ WR WKH
quantitative dimensions of mobility.
7KHWKLUGPDMRUIUDPLQJRIPRELOLW\,FDOOWKHµPRWLOHK\EULG¶SHUVSHFWLYH,QDFHUWDLQ
way this is the most important and realistic scale of observation. Motile hybrids are for
H[DPSOHWKHZKROHÀHHWV RI HPSOR\HHV RI PXOWLQDWLRQDO FRPSDQLHV WUDYHOOLQJ DURXQG
WKH ZRUOG ZLWKRXW OHDYLQJ WKH µVFDSH¶RI WKH FRPSDQ\ 7KHVH µFRUSRUDWH HPLVVDULHV
JRYHUQPHQW WUDGH DQG FRPPHUFH UHSUHVHQWDWLYHV DQG LQGHSHQGHQW HQWUHSUHQHXUV¶
6PLWK DQG 7LPEHUODNH   WKHVH NH\ DFFRXQW PDQDJHUV PHFKDWURQLFV RU
the troubleshooters of the IT industry travelling around the world to solve problems,
VHOO JRRGV RU MXVW WR PHHW FDQQRW H[LVW DQG FDQQRW ZRUN ZLWKRXW WKHLU WHFKQRORJLFDO
equipments. They move within highly technological surroundings and spaces –
VRFLRPDWHULDOQHWZRUNVDQGDVVHPEODJHV7KH\FRQVWDQWO\FURVVDQGLQWHUVHFWGLJLWDOL]HG
µPRYHPHQWVSDFHV¶7KULIW  DQG WKH\ HYHQ À\ WKURXJKWKHµFRGHVSDFH¶'RGJH
DQG.LWFKLQRIDLUSRUWVDQGDLUOLQH QHWZRUNV 0RWLOH K\EULGV DUH FRQVWHOODWLRQV
RIERGLHVWHFKQRORJLHVDUFKLWHFWXUDOIRUPDWLRQVNQRZOHGJHDQGVNLOOV7KH\DUHDFWRU
QHWZRUNVZKHUHFRPSXWHUVPRELOHSKRQHV,QWHUQHWFRQQHFWLRQVWKHZKROHFDEOHDQG
Table 5.2 Directional and non-directional mobility
First modernity: directional mobility Second modernity: non-
directional mobility
Unequivocal origin, clear direction
and distinct destination
Muddled origin, ambivalent direction
and indistinct destination
Certainty, orientation,
predictability, planning
Uncertainty, disorientation,
unpredictability, shaping
Teleology Liquidity and chaos
Business traveller )OkQHXUGULIWHU
$I¿OLDWLRQLQWHJUDWLRQ 7HPSRUDU\PRRULQJVµURRWVZLWKZLQJV¶
5RDGPRELOLW\: moving from one place to
another in a direct line and/or with timetable
1HWZRUNPRELOLW\: rhizomatic moving in a
net without direct lines and/or timetables
9HUWLFDOPRELOLW\: clear-cut social
ascents/descents according to
dominant economic criteria
+RUL]RQWDOPRELOLW\: no clear criteria
for social ascents or descents;
XQFOHDUQHVVDQGµQHZFRQIXVLRQ¶
Class mobility and career mobility Cultural mobility and biographical mobility
Source: Revised from Bonß and Kesselring (2004).

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 95
ZLUHOHVVVXUURXQGLQJV RI WKH QHWZRUN VRFLHW\DQG VR RQ PHOW WRJHWKHUZLWK KXPDQV
They interpenetrate with their actions and decisions and it is very hard to say if their
movements are intrinsically motivated or just reaction to pressures and demands from
outside. But all in all, the highly complex nature of the sociomaterial constellations
within the movement spaces of the second modern societies enable individual and
FROOHFWLYHDFWRUVWRµGHDOZLWKGLVWDQFH¶8UU\LQWKLVERRN7KHDFWRUVQHYHUORVHFRQWDFW
ZLWKWKHLU KRPH EDVHV DQGYLFHYHUVD&RPSOH[ DVVHPEODJHV DQG µDUPDWXUHV¶-HQVHQ
RIFDSLWDOVWHFKQRORJLHVNQRZOHGJHVRFLDOVNLOOVDQGWKHLQGLYLGXDOFDSDFLWLHVRI
people to handle travelling and technologies enable and empower individuals to travel
WKURXJKQHWZRUNVDQGWRPDQDJHDKLJKOHYHORIPRYHPHQWDQGPRELOLW\%XWDWWKHVDPH
WLPHWKHPHOWLQJWRJHWKHURILQGLYLGXDOVDQGWKHWHFKQRORJLFDOHFRORJLHVRIWKHQHWZRUN
society guarantees a high mobility level for companies, transnational organizations and
FRVPRSROLWDQQHWZRUNVDQGVRFLHWLHV
Table 5.3 presents the different concepts of dealing with modern ambivalences
DQGPRELOLWLHV7KHOLQNVWRGLIIHUHQWIRUPVRIPRELOLW\UHVHDUFKDUHKLJKOLJKWHGDQG
should be understood as complementary – not as competing concepts.
Table 5.3 Modern ambiguity and concepts of mobility
Concepts
Characteristics
I
First-modernity
standard
II
First/second-
modernity standard
III
Second-modernity
standard
Interpretation
of structural
ambivalence as ...
Antinomy Inconsistency Pluralism
Reaction to
the problem of
ambiguity
Searching for
clearness and
unambiguity by
SXUL¿FDWLRQ
Acceptance and
integration of
inconsistencies
Ambivalence
as normality
Type of solutions Optimal solutions Suboptimal solutions Indifferent or
paradox solutions
Principles and
characteristics of
societal structuration
Class Milieu 1HWZRUN
Property Possession Access
Heteronomy Autonomy Relationality
Structural trends
and challenges
Stability Liquidity Boundary
management, politics
of perspectives
Prefered concept
of mobility
Mono-mobility Multi-mobility Temporalized use of
mobility technologies
Models of mobility
research
Moving masses Mobile subjects Motile hybrids
µ/HLWELOG¶SDUDGLJP
atic example
Train Car Air travel, Internet
6FLHQWL¿F
aggregation
µ8VHUFODVVHV¶ µ8VHUSUR¿OHV¶ ‘Fragmented
RELOLWLHV¶
Source0RGL¿HGIURP%RQDQG.HVVHOULQJ

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
96
The ongoing transformation of mobility research hinges intrinsically on a rising
interdisciplinary and international (that is, global) approach in mobility research
(Sheller and Urry 2006; Hannam, Sheller and Urry 2006). The ongoing combination
of different perspectives on mobility transforms mobility research on many scales
and leads into a nearly paradigmatic push in all spheres of social science dealing
with global and intercultural phenomena (Sheller and Urry 2006). Mobility as mono-
PRELOLW\VHHPVWRORVHLWVGRPLQDQFHDQGWKHPXOWLSOH[LW\RIµPXOWLPRELOLWLHV¶DQG
the temporal use of mobility technologies are getting more and more important (see
Larsen, Urry and Axhausen 2006). This leads to a conceptual change in mobility
research as a whole and to a transgression of disciplinary boundaries as well as to a
QHZPHWKRGRORJ\VHH8UU\RQµPRELOHPHWKRGV¶
%HFN  GHVFULEHV D VLPLODU FKDQJH RI SDUDGLJPV ZLWK KLV FRQFHSW RI D
µPHWKRGRORJLFDO FRVPRSROLWDQLVP¶ +LV GLDJQRVLV UHVWV RQ WKH REVHUYDWLRQ WKDW
traditional sociological concepts lose their explanatory power for the analysis of
second modern societies. Notions such as citizen, here and there, absence and
presence, space, places and locality, social integration, culture and society have to be
UHWKRXJKWDJDLQVWWKHEDFNJURXQGRIWKHRQJRLQJPRELOL]DWLRQRIPRGHUQVRFLHWLHV,I
SHRSOHDUHQRORQJHUVRFLDOO\LQWHJUDWHGLQWKHZD\VDVZHNQHZLQWKHLQGXVWULDODQG
WKHQDWLRQVWDWHDJHEXWWKH\DUHZHOOFRQQHFWHGWKH\DUHSHUIHFWO\VRFLDOO\QHWZRUNHG
and they develop a intelligent mode of social positioning – not integration – we need
WRDVNLIWKHVHSHRSOHDUHLQDVWDWHRIDQRP\RULIZHFDQOHDUQIXQGDPHQWDOWKLQJV
about new modes of vergesellchaftung and YHUJHPHLQVFKDIWXQJ6LPPHO¶VLGHDVRI
VRFLDOQHWZRUNVDQGFLUFOHVSRLQWHGLQWKHGLUHFWLRQRIDQHZPRGHRIVRFLDELOLW\%XW
WRGD\XQGHUWKHFRQGLWLRQVRIUHÀH[LYHPRGHUQL]DWLRQDQGQHWZRUNHGLQGLYLGXDOLVP
we are able to conduct research on the mobile positioning of individuals in a society
shaped by movements and highly complex mobility potentials.
,Q OLQH ZLWK %HFN WKH LQVWLWXWLRQDO DQG PDWHULDO WUDQVIRUPDWLRQ RI QDWLRQ VWDWH
societies can be observed. Shifting boundaries (Entgrenzung) and new transnational
constellations emerge and demand new modes of individual and collective decision-
PDNLQJ 6XEYHUVLYHO\ VXESROLWLFDOO\ DQG XQQRWLFHG IURP VFLHQFH DQG SROLWLFV
stucturations beyond classical concepts and beyond effective boundaries emerge.
The concentration on the territory and its supposed power for social and national
integration for societies and cultures seem to be obsolete or at least in question.
New categories and concepts are needed for an appropriate description of ‘what
KDSSHQV¶LQWKHPRELOHULVNVRFLHW\0RELOLW\ WKHRU\KDVWKH FRQFHSWXDOSRZHUDQG
WKHSRWHQWLDOWRFRQVWUXFWLYHO\UHÀHFWDQGPRGLI\WKHµ]RPELHFDWHJRULHV¶%HFNRI
WKHPRGHUQVRFLHW\DQGVRFLRORJ\%HFN XQGHUSLQV 8UU\¶VSURSRVDOIRUµQHWZRUNV
VFDSHVDQGÀRZV¶DVWKHDGHTXDWHWHUPLQRORJLFDOWULDQJOHIRUDQDQDO\VLVRIPRELOLWLHV
EH\RQGWKHQDWLRQVWDWH%HFN UHIXVHVWKHSUHYDLOLQJVWUXFWXUHSDUDGLJPRI:HVWHUQ
VRFLRORJ\ZLWKLWV ¿[DWLRQVRQQDWLRQVWDWHV DVUHIHUHQFHSRLQWVIRU VRFLDODQDO\VLV
DQG WKHRU\$JDLQVW WKLV EDFNJURXQG WDNHQIRUJUDQWHG ERXQGDULHV DQG FRQFHSWV
IURPWKH VWUXFWXUH SDUDGLJP OLNHQDWLRQDODQGLQWHUQDWLRQDO FLWL]HQ DQG IRUHLJQHU
member and non-member, property and non-property and so on) come into trouble.
The question arises if these concepts still refer to a certain practice of more or less
FRVPRSROLWDQ KXPDQ EHLQJV 8QGHU FRQGLWLRQV RI UHÀH[LYH PRGHUQL]DWLRQ DQG LQ

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 97
WKHFRQWH[WRIDPRELOL]HGULVNVRFLHW\WKH\ORVHWKHLUIRUPHUH[SODQDWRU\SRZHUDQG
KDYHWREHUHSODFHGE\DQHZWHUPLQRORJ\RIPRELOLW\ÀXLGLW\DQGFRQQHFWLYLW\
References
$DOWROD0µ7KH,QWHUQDWLRQDO$LUSRUW7KH+XEDQG6SRNH3HGDJRJ\RIWKH
$PHULFDQ(PSLUH¶Global Networks 5:3, 261–78.
Adey, P. (2004), ‘Surveillance at the Airport: Surveilling Mobility/Mobilising
6XUYHLOODQFH¶(QYLURQPHQWDQG3ODQQLQJ 36:8, 1365–80.
Ahmed, S., Castaneda, C., Fortier, A.M. and Sheller, M. (2003), Uprootings/
5HJURXQGLQJV4XHVWLRQVRI+RPHDQG0LJUDWLRQ2[IRUG1HZ<RUN%HUJ
$OEHUWVHQ1DQG'LNHQ' µ0RELOLW\-XVWL¿FDWLRQ DQG WKH &LW\¶ Nordic
Journal of Architectural Research 14:1, 13–24.
Albrow, M. (1996), The Global Age (Cambridge: Polity Press).
Appadurai, A. (2001), Globalization'XUKDP1&'XNH8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV
Bauman, Z. (1991), 0RGHUQLW\DQG$PELYDOHQFH (Cambridge: Polity Press).
—
(2000), /LTXLG0RGHUQLW\(Cambridge: Polity Press).
—
(2005), /LTXLG/LIH (Cambridge: Polity Press).
%HFN8Risk Society (London: Sage).
—
(1997), :DV LVW *OREDOLVLHUXQJ" ,UUWPHU GHV *OREDOLVPXV ± $QWZRUWHQ DXI
Globalisierung)UDQNIXUWD06XKUNDPS
—
(1999), World Risk Society (Cambridge: Polity Press).
—
(2000a), ‘The Cosmopolitan Perspective: Sociology of the Second Age of
0RGHUQLW\¶British Journal of Sociology 51:1, 79–105.
—
(2000b), :KDWLV*OREDOL]DWLRQ" (Cambridge: Polity Press).
—
(2002), 0DFKW XQG *HJHQPDFKW LP JOREDOHQ =HLWDOWHU 1HXH ZHOWSROLWLVFKH
2NRQRPLH)UDQNIXUWD06XKUNDPS
—
(2006), 3RZHULQ D *OREDO $JH $ 1HZ *OREDO 3ROLWLFDO (FRQRP\ (Oxford:
%ODFNZHOO
%HFN8 %RQ:DQG /DX&µ7KH 7KHRU\RI5HÀH[LYH 0RGHUQL]DWLRQ
3UREOHPDWLF+\SRWKHVHV DQG5HVHDUFK3URJUDPPH¶ Theory, Culture & Society
20:2, 1–34.
%HFN 8 *LGGHQV $ DQG /DVK 6  5HÀH[LYH 0RGHUQL]DWLRQ 3ROLWLFV
7UDGLWLRQVDQG$VWKHWLFVLQWKH0RGHUQ6RFLDO2UGHU(Cambridge: Polity Press).
%HFN 8 +DMHU 0 DQG .HVVHOULQJ 6  'HU XQVFKDUIH 2UW GHU 3ROLWLN
(PSLULVFKH )DOOVWXGLHQ ]XU 7KHRULH GHU UHÀH[LYHQ 0RGHUQLVLHUXQJ (Opladen:
/HVNH%XGULFK
Boase, J., Horrigan, J.B., Wellman, B. and Rainie, L. (2006), The Strength of Internet
7LHV7KH,QWHUQHWDQG(PDLO$LG8VHUVLQ0DLQWDLQLQJWKHLU6RFLDO1HWZRUNVDQG
Provide Pathways to Help when People Face Big Decisions (Washington DC:
PEW Internet & American Life Project).
%RHV$+DFNHW$.lPSI7DQG7ULQNV. µ:HUGLHGLJLWDOH6SDOWXQJ
EHHQGHQ ZLOO PXVV LQ GHU UHDOHQ *HVHOOVFKDIW DQIDQJHQ¶ Aus Politik und
Zeitgeschichte 17–18, 11–18.

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
98
%ROWDQVNL/DQG&KLDSHOOR('HUQHXH*HLVWGHV.DSLWDOLVPXV (Konstanz:
UVK Verl.-Ges.).
Bonß, W. (1995), 9RP 5LVLNR 8QVLFKHUKHLW XQG 8QJHZLKHLW LQ GHU 0RGHUQH
(Hamburg: Hamburger Edition).
Bonß, W. and Kesselring, S. (2001), ‘Mobilität am Ubergang von der Ersten zur
=ZHLWHQ 0RGHUQH¶ LQ %HFN 8 DQG %RQ : HGV 'LH 0RGHUQLVLHUXQJ GHU
0RGHUQH)UDQNIXUWD06XKUNDPS±
—
µ0RELOLW\DQGWKH&RVPRSROLWDQ3HUVSHFWLYH¶LQ%RQ:.HVVHOULQJ
S. and Vogl, G. (eds), 0RELOLW\DQGWKH&RVPRSROLWDQ3HUVSHFWLYHD:RUNVKRSDW
WKH0XQLFK5HÀH[LYH0RGHUQL]DWLRQ5HVHDUFK&HQWUH6)%±-DQXDU\
(München: SFB 536), 9–24.
Bonß, W., Kesselring, S. and Weiß, A. (2004), ‘Society on the Move. Mobilitätspioniere
LQ GHU =ZHLWHQ 0RGHUQH¶ LQ %HFN 8 DQG /DX & HGV Entgrenzung und
(QWVFKHLGXQJ 3HUVSHNWLYHQ UHÀH[LYHU 0RGHUQLVLHUXQJ )UDQNIXUW D0
6XKUNDPS±
Bratzel, S. (1999), (UIROJVEHGLQJXQJHQ XPZHOWRULHQWLHUWHU 9HUNHKUVSROLWLN LQ
6WlGWHQ$QDO\VHQ]XP3ROLF\:DQGHOLQGHQµUHODWLYHQ(UIROJVIlOOHQ¶$PVWHUGDP
*URQLQJHQ=ULFKXQG)UHLEXUJLP%UHLVJDX%DVHO%LUNKlXVHU
Braudel, F., Ollard, R.L. and Reynolds, S. (1992), 7KH 0HGLWHUUDQHDQ DQG WKH
0HGLWHUUDQHDQ:RUOGLQWKH$JHRI3KLOLS,, (London: HarperCollins).
Brenner, N. (1998), ‘Between Fixity and Motion: Accumulation, Territorial
2UJDQL]DWLRQDQGWKH+LVWRULFDO*HRJUDSK\RI 6SDWLDO 6FDOH¶ (QYLURQPHQWDQG
Planning D Society and Space 16:4, 459–81.
—
(2004), New State Spaces. Urban Governance and the Rescaling of Statehood
2[IRUG1HZ<RUN2[IRUG8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV
Böschen, S., Kratzer, N. and May, S. (2006), 1HEHQIROJHQ±$QDO\VHQ]XU.RQVWUXNWLRQ
XQG7UDQVIRUPDWLRQPRGHUQHU*HVHOOVFKDIWHQ:HLOHUVZLVW9HOEUFN
Cairncross, F. (1997), 7KH'HDWKRI'LVWDQFH+RZWKH&RPPXQLFDWLRQV5HYROXWLRQ
will Change our Lives (Boston MA: Harvard Business School Press).
&DQ]OHU:DQG .HVVHOULQJ 6µ³'DJHK LFKKLQFKHFNHLQ XQG ELQZHJ´
$UJXPHQWHIUHLQH6WlUNXQJGHUVR]LDOZLVVHQVFKDIWOLFKHQ0RELOLWlWVIRUVFKXQJ¶
in Rehberg, K.-S. (ed.), Soziale Ungleichheit, Kulturelle Unterschiede,
9HUKDQGOXQJHQGHV.RQJUHVVHVGHU'HXWVFKHQ*HVHOOVFKDIWIU6R]LRORJLHLQ
0QFKHQ)UDQNIXUWD01HZ<RUN&DPSXV±
Castells, M. (1996), The Rise of the Network Society2[IRUG%ODFNZHOO
—
(2001), 7KH,QWHUQHW*DOD[\5HÀHFWLRQVRQWKH,QWHUQHW%XVLQHVVDQG6RFLHW\
(Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Derudder, B. and Witlox, F. (2005), ‘An Appraisal of the Use of Airline Data in
$VVHVVLQJWKH :RUOG&LW\ 1HWZRUN$ 5HVHDUFK 1RWH RQ 'DWD¶ Urban Studies
42:13, 2371–88.
'LNHQ% DQG /DXVWVHQ&%The Culture of Exception. Sociology Facing
WKH&DPS (Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge).
Dodge, M. and Kitchin, R. (2004), ‘Flying through Code/Space: The Real Virtuality
RI$LU7UDYHO¶(QYLURQPHQWDQG3ODQQLQJ 36:2, 195–211.
Elias, N. (1997), 8EHU GHQ 3UR]H GHU =LYLOLVDWLRQ 6R]LRJHQHWLVFKH XQG
psychogenetische Untersuchungen )UDQNIXUWD06XKUNDPS

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 99
(XURSHDQ)RXQGDWLRQIRUWKH,PSURYHPHQWRI/LYLQJDQG:RUNLQJ&RQGLWLRQV
0RELOLW\LQ(XURSH$QDO\VLVRIWKH(XUREDURPHWHU6XUYH\RQ*HRJUDSKLFDO
DQG/DERXU0DUNHW0RELOLW\ (Dublin: Eurofound).
Featherstone, M., Thrift, N. and Urry, J. (2005), $XWRPRELOLWLHV(London: Sage).
Flämig, H., Bratzel, S., Arndt, W.H. and Hesse, M. (2001), 3ROLWLNVWUDWHJLHQ LP
+DQGOXQJVIHOG0RELOLWlW3ROLWLNDQDO\VHYRQORNDOHQUHJLRQDOHQXQGEHWULHEOLFKHQ
)DOOEHLVSLHOHQXQG%HXUWHLOXQJHQGHU3UD[LVLP+DQGOXQJVIHOG0RELOWlW (Berlin:
+DQV%|FNOHU6WLIWXQJ
Fuller, G. and Harley, R. (2005), Aviopolis. A Book about Airports /RQGRQ%ODFN
Dog Publishing).
*HUVWHQEHUJHU+ DQG :HONH8  6HHIDKUW LP =HLFKHQ GHU*OREDOLVLHUXQJ
(Münster: Westfälisches Dampfboot).
Giddens, A. (1997), 7KH&RQVHTXHQFHVRI0RGHUQLW\ (Cambridge: Polity Press).
Goethe, J.W. von (1960), ,WDOLHQLVFKH5HLVH± (München: Hirmer).
*UDQGH(  µ*OREDOLVLHUXQJ XQG GLH =XNXQIW GHV 1DWLRQDOVWDDWV¶ LQ %HFN
U. and Bonß, W. (eds), 'LH 0RGHUQLVLHUXQJ GHU 0RGHUQH )UDQNIXUW D0
6XKUNDPS±
+DMHU 0  µ=HUR)ULFWLRQ 6RFLHW\¶ Urban Design Quarterly 71: Summer
1999, 29–34.
+DMHU0DQG.HVVHOULQJ6µ'HPRFUDF\LQWKH5LVN6RFLHW\"/HDUQLQJIURP
WKH1HZ3ROLWLFVRI0RELOLW\LQ0XQLFK¶(QYLURQPHQWDO3ROLWLFV 8:3, 1–23.
+DQQDP.6KHOOHU0DQG8UU\-µ0RELOLWLHV,PPRELOLWLHVDQG0RRULQJV¶
Editorial,0RELOLWLHV 1:1, 1–22.
Harris, P., Lewis, J. and Adam, B. (2004), ‘Time, Sustainable Transport and the
3ROLWLFVRI6SHHG¶World Transport Policy and Practice 10:2, 5–11.
Held, D., McGrew, A., Goldblatt, D. and Perraton, J. (1999), *OREDO7UDQVIRUPDWLRQV
3ROLWLFV(FRQRPLFVDQG&XOWXUH (Cambridge: Polity Press).
Hesse, M. (1993), 9HUNHKUVZHQGH2NRORJLVFK|NRQRPLVFKH3HUVSHNWLYHQIU6WDGW
und Region (Marburg: Metropolis).
International Organization for Migration, United Nations (2005), World 0LJUDWLRQ
5HSRUW&RVWVDQG%HQH¿WVRI,QWHUQDWLRQDO0LJUDWLRQ1HZ<RUN81
-HQVHQ$ µ*RYHUQLQJZLWK5DWLRQDOLWLHV RI0RELOLW\¶3K' WKHVLVIRUWKH
Department for Environment, Technology and Social Studies, University of
5RVNLOGH'HQPDUN5RVNLOGHXQSXEOLVKHGPDQXVFULSW
Jensen, O.B. and Richardson, T. (2003), 0DNLQJ(XURSHDQ6SDFH0RELOLW\3RZHU
and Territorial Identity (London: Routledge).
Jessop, B. (2002), The Future of the Capitalist State (Cambridge: Polity).
Junge, M. (2000), $PELYDOHQWH *HVHOOVFKDIWOLFKNHLW 'LH 0RGHUQLVLHUXQJ GHU
9HUJHVHOOVFKDIWXQJ XQG GLH 2UGQXQJHQ GHU $PELYDOHQ]EHZlOWLJXQJ (Opladen:
/HVNH%XGULFK
Jünger, E. (1931), 'LHWRWDOH0RELOPDFKXQJ%HUOLQ9HUODJIU=HLWNULWLN
Kaufmann, V. (2002), 5H7KLQNLQJ 0RELOLW\&RQWHPSRUDU\6RFLRORJ\ (Aldershot:
Ashgate).
.HHOLQJ '-  µ7UDQVSRUW DQG WKH:RUOG &LW\ 3DUDGLJP¶ LQ .QR[ / DQG
Taylor, P.J. (eds), :RUOG &LWLHV LQ D :RUOG 6\VWHP (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press), 115–31.

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
100
Kesselring, S. (2001), 0RELOH3ROLWLN(LQVR]LRORJLVFKHU%OLFNDXI9HUNHKUVSROLWLNLQ
0QFKHQ (Berlin: Edition Sigma).
—
(2006), ‘Pioneering Mobilities. New Patterns of Movement and Motility in a
0RELOH:RUOG¶(QYLURQPHQWDQG3ODQQLQJ 38:2, 269–79.
—
  µ*OREDOHU 9HUNHKU ± )OXJYHUNHKU ¶ LQ 6FK|OOHU2 &DQ]OHU : DQG
Knie, A. (eds), Handbuch Verkehrspolitik (Wiesbaden: VS Verlag), 828–53.
Kesselring, S., Moritz, E.F., Petzel, W. and Vogl, G. (2003), Kooperative
0RELOLWlWVSROLWLN 7KHRUHWLVFKH HPSLULVFKH XQG SUDNWLVFKH 3HUVSHNWLYHQ DP
%HLVSLHO0QFKHQXQG)UDQNIXUW5KHLQ0DLQ (München: IMU).
Knie, A. (1994), :DQNHO0XW LQ GHU $XWRLQGXVWULH $QIDQJ XQG (QGH HLQHU
Antriebsalternative (Berlin: Sigma).
.RVHOOHFN 5  6WXGLHQ ]XP %HJLQQ GHU PRGHUQHQ :HOW (Stuttgart: Klett-
Cotta).
Larsen, J., Urry, J. and Axhausen, K. (2006), 0RELOLWLHV 1HWZRUNV *HRJUDSKLHV
(Aldershot: Ashgate).
Lash, S. (1999), $QRWKHU0RGHUQLW\D'LIIHUHQW5DWLRQDOLW\2[IRUG%ODFNZHOO
Lash, S. and Urry, J. (1987), 7KH(QGRI2UJDQL]HG&DSLWDOLVP (Cambridge: Polity
Press).
/DVVHQ&µ$HURPRELOLW\DQG:RUN¶(QYLURQPHQWDQG3ODQQLQJ 38:2, 301–
12.
Latour, B. (1993), :H +DYH 1HYHU %HHQ 0RGHUQ 1HZ <RUN +DUYHVWHU
Wheatsheaf).
0DNLPRWR7DQG0DQQHUV''LJLWDO1RPDG(Chichester: Wiley).
Marx, K. and Engels, F. (1980), 0DQLIHVW GHU .RPPXQLVWLVFKHQ 3DUWHL (Berlin:
Dietz).
Mitchell, W.J. (1995), City of Bits: Space, Place, and the Infobahn (Cambridge MA:
MIT Press).
0RO$ DQG /DZ-µ5HJLRQV 1HWZRUNV DQG )OXLGV$QDHPLDDQG 6RFLDO
7RSRORJ\¶Social Studies of Science 24:4, 641–71.
Montaigne, M. de (1929), 7KH'LDU\ RI 0RQWDLJQH¶V-RXUQH\WR ,WDO\ LQ DQG
1581 (ed. Trechmann, E.J.) (London: L. and Virginia Woolf).
Pries, L. (2001), 1HZ 7UDQVQDWLRQDO 6RFLDO 6SDFHV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 0LJUDWLRQ
DQG 7UDQVQDWLRQDO &RPSDQLHV LQ WKH (DUO\ 7ZHQW\)LUVW &HQWXU\ (London:
Routledge).
Ritzer, G. (1996), 7KH 0F'RQDOGL]DWLRQ RI 6RFLHW\ $Q ,QYHVWLJDWLRQ LQWR WKH
&KDQJLQJ &KDUDFWHU RI &RQWHPSRUDU\ 6RFLDO /LIH 7KRXVDQG 2DNV &$ 3LQH
Forge Press).
5LW]HU*DQG0XUSK\-µ)HVWHVLQHLQHU:HOWGHV)OXVVHV'LH%HVWlQGLJNHLW
GHU0RGHUQHLQHLQHU]XQHKPHQGSRVWPRGHUQHQ:HOW¶LQ-XQJH0.URQ7DQG
Bauman, Z. (eds), 6R]LRORJLH]ZLVFKHQ3RVWPRGHUQHXQG(WKLN2SODGHQ/HVNH
& Budrich), 51–80.
6FKPXFNL %  'HU 7UDXP YRP 9HUNHKUVÀX )UDQNIXUW D0 &DPSXV
Verlag).
Schwarz, M. and Thompson, M. (1990), 'LYLGHG :H 6WDQG 5HGH¿QLQJ 3ROLWLFV
Technology and Social Choice1HZ<RUN/RQGRQ+DUYHVWHU:KHDWVKHDI

7KH0RELOH5LVN6RFLHW\ 101
Sennett, R. (1994), Flesh and Stone: The Body and the City in Western Civilization
1HZ<RUN1RUWRQ
—
(1998), 7KH&RUURVLRQRI&KDUDFWHU7KH3HUVRQDO&RQVHTXHQFHVRI:RUNLQ
WKH1HZ&DSLWDOLVP1HZ<RUN1RUWRQ
6KHOOHU0DQG8UU\-µ7KH1HZ0RELOLWLHV3DUDGLJP¶(QYLURQPHQWDQG
Planning 38:2, 207–26.
Simmel, G. (1923), 6R]LRORJLH 8QWHUVXFKXQJHQ EHU GLH )RUPHQ GHU
Vergesellschaftung0QFKHQ/HLS]LJ'XQFNHU+XPEROW
—
(2004), 7KH 3KLORVRSK\ RI 0RQH\, translated by Frisby, D. (London:
Routledge).
6ORWHUGLMN 3  (XURWDRLVPXV=XU .ULWLN GHU SROLWLVFKHQ .LQHWLN )UDQNIXUW
D06XKUNDPS
6PLWK'$DQG7LPEHUODNH0µ&RQFHSWXDOL]LQJDQG0DSSLQJWKH6WUXFWXUH
RIWKH:RUOG6\VWHP¶V&LW\6\VWHP¶Urban Studies 32:2, 287–302.
Taylor, P.J. (2004), World City Network. A Global Urban Analysis (London:
Routledge).
Thomas, C., Upham, P., Maughan, J. and Raper, D. (2003), Towards Sustainable
Aviation (Sterling VA: Earthscan Publications).
Thrift, N. (1996), 6SDWLDO)RUPDWLRQ (London: Sage).
—
µ7KH5LVHRI6RIW&DSLWDOLVP¶Cultural Values 1:1, 29–57.
—
µ0RYHPHQW6SDFH7KH&KDQJLQJ'RPDLQRI7KLQNLQJ5HVXOWLQJIURP
WKH'HYHORSPHQWRI1HZ.LQGVRI6SDWLDO$ZDUHQHVV¶(FRQRP\6RFLHW\ 33:4,
582–604.
Tomlinson, J. (1999), Globalization and Culture (Oxford: Oxford University
Press).
—
µ&XOWXUH 0RGHUQLW\DQG ,PPHGLDF\¶ LQ %HFN86]QDLGHU1 DQG
Winter, R. (eds), *OREDO$PHULFD"7KH&XOWXUDO&RQVHTXHQFHVRI *OREDOL]DWLRQ
(Liverpool: Liverpool University Press), 69–90.
United Nations/Economic Commission for Europe (2005), Annual Bulletin of
7UDQVSRUW6WDWLVWLFVIRU(XURSHDQG1RUWK$PHULFD1HZ<RUN8QLWHG1DWLRQV
Urry, J. (1990), The Tourist Gaze (London: Sage).
—
(2000), 6RFLRORJ\ EH\RQG 6RFLHWLHV 0RELOLWLHV RI WKH 7ZHQW\)LUVW&HQWXU\
(London: Routledge).
—
  µ7KH *OREDO &RPSOH[LWLHV RI 6HSWHPEHU WK¶ Theory, Culture &
Society 19:4, 57–69.
—
(2003), *OREDO&RPSOH[LW\ (Cambridge: Polity Press).
Vertovec, S. and Cohen, R. (2002), &RQFHLYLQJ&RVPRSROLWDQLVP7KHRU\&RQWH[W
and Practice2[IRUG1HZ<RUN2[IRUG8QLYHUVLW\3UHVV
Virilio, P. (1986), 6SHHGDQG3ROLWLFV$Q(VVD\RQ'URPRORJ\1HZ<RUN&ROXPELD
University).
9RJO *  µ6HOEVWVWlQGLJH 0HGLHQVFKDIIHQGH LQ GHU 1HW]ZHUNJHVHOOVFKDIW
=ZLVFKHQLQQRYDWLYHU%HZHJOLFKNHLW XQG ÀH[LEOHU$QSDVVXQJ¶ 3K' WKHVLV IRU
the Technische Universität München (Münich: unpublished manuscript).
:HOOPDQ%DQG*XOLD0µ1HW6XUIHUV'RQ¶W5LGH$ORQH¶LQ:HOOPDQ%
(ed.), Networks in the Global Village (Boulder CO: Westview Press), 331–66.

7UDFLQJ0RELOLWLHV
102
Wellman, B. and Haythornthwaite, C. (2002), The Internet in Everyday Life (Oxford:
%ODFNZHOO
Whitelegg, J. (1996), &ULWLFDO 0DVV 7UDQVSRUW (QYLURQPHQW DQG 6RFLHW\ LQ WKH
7ZHQW\)LUVW&HQWXU\(London, Chicago: Pluto Press).
:LWWHO$µ7RZDUGVD1HWZRUN6RFLDOLW\¶ Theory, Culture & Society 18:6,
31–50.
=DSI: µ0RGHUQLVLHUXQJ XQG 7UDQVIRUPDWLRQ¶LQ6FKlIHUV%DQG=DSI
W. (eds), +DQGZ|UWHUEXFK ]XU *HVHOOVFKDIW 'HXWVFKODQGV 2SODGHQ /HVNH 
Budrich), 472–82.
=RUQ :  µ9HUGLFKWXQJ XQG %HVFKOHXQLJXQJ GHV 9HUNHKUVDOV %HLWUDJ ]XU
(QWZLFNOXQJGHU ³PRGHUQHQ:HOW´¶LQ .RVHOOHFN 5HG6WXGLHQ]XP %HJLQQ
GHUPRGHUQHQ:HOW (Stuttgart: Klett-Cotta), 115–34.