Towards sustainable mobility--digital eco-systems as drivers of disruptive change.

Hanelt, Andre ; Hildebrandt, Bjorn ; Brauer, Benjamin 等

Introduction

Environmental degradation is becoming an increasingly important challenge for today's societies (Nykvist & Whitmarsh, 2008). The quest for sustainability has become a global struggle, essential for the survival of humankind on planet Earth. Governments worldwide fight against air or water pollution by supporting the diffusion of sustainable technologies or prohibiting practices that are harmful for the environment. Thus far, these initiatives have produced mixed results, and substantial progress towards environmental sustainability is still lacking (e.g., Steinhilber, Wells, & Thankappan, 2013). To achieve significant improvements in the realm of sustainability, discontinuous change is needed (Carrillo-Hermosilla, Del Rio, & Konnola, 2010).

Recently, such fundamental changes have been described using a multi-level perspective on sociotechnical transitions (e.g., Geels, 2012). According to the theory, transitional changes--such as the change towards sustainable mobility--arise through a complex, non-linear process. General developments (e.g., societal trends), called landscape developments, place a previously dominant socio-technical system, called a regime (e.g., automobility), under pressure. The resulting instability of the system gives niche developments (e.g., alternative technologies) the chance to rise and become part of a new sociotechnical regime (Geels, 2012).

Besides the increasing desire for environmental sustainability, there is another macro trend affecting societies worldwide: The diffusion of digital technologies throughout more and more aspects of everyday life (Yoo, 2010). Broadband Internet enables the real-time transmission of data and information, making it accessible via mobile devices to almost everyone, almost everywhere. This development changes the way we work, communicate, and live our lives as a whole. Due to their innate properties, digital technologies bring along affordances that allow for a greater variety in various contexts, e.g., adding digital features to physical products (Selander, Henfridsson, & Svahn, 2013). Moreover, their diffusion drives the emergence of digital eco-systems, i.e., coopetitive digital "technology environments] in which symbiotic relationships are formed to create mutual value for [their] members" (Selander, Henfridsson, & Svahn, 2010, p. 2), in an increasing variety of fields. These ecosystems enable connectivity across regional distances and allow for real-time communication among actors (Vodanovich, Sundaram, & Myers, 2010). By doing so, new and fundamentally different procedures such as the shared use of resources become more certain and reliable, in turn possibly mitigating barriers to adoption of alternative behaviors and thus driving resilience.

Initial research has hinted at the potential of digital technologies for achieving increased sustainability in multiple contexts. However, the mobility sector is particularly relevant because it is among the main contributors to environmental degradation (Nykvist & Whitmarsh, 2008). Consequently, enormous regulatory efforts have been made to foster sustainable mobility by, e.g., supporting electric mobility (Steinhilber et al., 2013). Within the field of mobility, the diffusion of digital technologies is clearly on the rise. The increased connectivity through broadband Internet and thus global communication possibilities not only allows for reduced travel needs (Nykvist & Whitmarsh, 2008), but also more profoundly--drives the transition of the physical mobility system. With the increased dissemination of digital mobile devices (e.g., smartphones), information about physical mobility options becomes widely available and the communication and coordination of alternative and sustainable modes of mobility (e.g., ride sharing) become enhanced (Banister, 2008). Through these phenomena, a digital layer is added to the physical mobility infrastructure (Hanelt, Piccinini, Gregory, Hildebrandt, & Kolbe, 2015a), allowing for information, interaction, coordination, and communication. For instance, access to information about mobility services, as well as localization and booking, is made much more convenient, thus fostering the resilience of individual sustainable behavior.

In this paper, we aim to explore the role of emerging digital eco-systems in the transition towards sustainable mobility. To do so, we draw on the established theory of socio-technical transitions and relate it to the phenomenon driven by the diffusion of digital technologies. Using this approach, we aim to shed light on the following research question: What is the role of digital eco-systems in the socio-technical transition towards sustainable mobility?

Related Work

Sustainable Mobility Developments

The reduction of C[O.sub.2] emissions constitutes a global matter and is addressed within multiple domains. Considerable attention is placed on the mobility sector, where there exists significant potential not only for the reduction of C[O.sub.2] emissions (Shaheen & Lipman, 2007) but also in the prevention of noise emissions (d'Orey & Ferreira, 2014) by different means. The transition towards more sustainable means of transportation can be achieved by changing individual mobility behavior, sustainably improving transportation modes, or providing sustainable modes of transportation.

The change towards sustainable mobility includes the minimization of motorized personal transport and the shift towards different forms of shared mobility. These mobility alternatives are characterized by their joint utilization resulting in lower emissions rates and ease the overall traffic situation. The classic means of transportation, such as bus, train, metro, and taxi in the public transportation domain as well as carpooling for work commuting, are gradually being extended by car-sharing and bike-sharing concepts as shared mobility solutions. Baptista, Melo, & Rolim (2014) demonstrated that a switch from private car ownership to membership in a car-sharing company can lead to a decrease of up to 50% in total mileage and promotes biking or walking. Moreover, studies have shown that many car owners sell their old, environmentally harmful cars after subscribing to a car-sharing service (Baptista et al., 2014).

Besides the development of new mobility concepts, business model innovations within the mobility sector and technological advances in the automotive industry also act as substantial drivers for sustainable mobility. The advent of electric vehicles (EVs) and hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs) contributes to a more sustainable mobility landscape by avoiding the production of C[O.sub.2] emissions altogether. This applies just as well in the private sector, where EVs substitute for conventional combustion-based vehicles (CVs), as it does for the integration of EVs and HEVs in car-sharing initiatives on a larger scale (Lue, Colorni, Nocerino, & Paruscio, 2012).

In most cases, a single mobility alternative cannot compensate as a replacement for the private car. For example, there might not be a bus or car-sharing station near to the commuter's home, workplace, or other points of interest. To overcome such drawbacks within the public transportation infrastructure, the trend is moving towards the full integration of all municipal, urban, and inter-city mobility forms within an intermodal transportation concept. The goal of this approach is to offer seamless transportation affecting different dimensions (Feng, 2014). The concept aims to connect various mobility forms into one collective commute, allowing for door-to-door mobility. This includes aggregating all information relevant to the travel endeavor and the integrating various services involved in the travel process, such as ticketing, billing, and payment (Spickermann, Grienitz, & Heiko 2014), to reduce travel time and increase comfort.

Urban mobility planning thus constitutes a complex field in which the integration of feedback from citizens and stakeholders during the design process is necessary to develop an improved transportation infrastructure (Nasrudin, Rostam, & Noor, 2014). This also applies to the implementation of information systems (IS) for supporting transitions in mobility behavior (Gabrielli et al., 2014). However, from a socio-technical perspective, new technologies cannot easily be introduced and established in the prevailing regime because the respective components, e.g., infrastructure, technologies, and user practices, are strongly linked and difficult to break (Hodson & Marvin, 2010).

Despite the variety of technological innovations, individual factors influence the transition towards transportation alternatives. Personal mobility habits, attitudes, and expectations concerning the different modes of mobility play a major role in the decision process for a change of the prevailing mobility behavior (Nasrudin et al., 2014). Sole awareness of the negative implications of one's individual mobility behavior is not sufficient to overcome the individual barriers that lead people to decide against using public transportation, the most predominant of which are the additional effort required and loss of flexibility (Nasrudin et al., 2014). Therefore, measures must be taken to influence and support the user in the transition towards the use of transportation alternatives by improving crucial factors such as comfort, reliability, and timeliness, thus reducing the obstruction of mobility behavior changes (Heath and Gifford, 2002). In this context, IS can provide fundamental supportive contributions to address such aspects and trigger mobility behavior transitions (Ben-Elia, Di Pace, Bifulco, & Shiftan,, 2013).

Digital Technologies and Digital Eco-Systems

Digital technologies, "viewed as combinations of information, computing, communication, and connectivity technologies" (Bharadwaj, El Sawy, Pavlou, & Venkatraman, 2013, p. 471), have an increasing influence on our daily lives (Yoo, 2010). Entire industries are becoming radically transformed; industrial-aged products such as cameras (e.g., Lucas & Goh, 2009), phones (e.g., Selander et al., 2010), and cars (e.g., King & Lyytinen, 2005) are equipped with digital capabilities, thus enabling the adaptation of existing as well as the creation of completely new business models (Hanelt, Hildebrandt, & Polier, 2015b; Yoo, Boland, Lyytinen, & Majchrzak, 2012; Yoo, Henfridsson, & Lyytinen, 2010).

These digital technologies are not just transforming entire industries, but also our society as a whole. Junglas and Watson (2006) identified four main drives pushing the transformation of the physical world into a digitalized world. First, there is ubiquity: Massive expansions of broadband networks and the appearance of mobile devices such as smartphones enable people to gain "access to information unconstrained by time and space" (Junglas & Watson, 2006, p. 578). Second, uniqueness means that persons or entities can be identified precisely and unambiguously as they have their own unique addresses (e.g., phone number) (Junglas & Watson, 2006). Third, universality refers to the universal usability and multi-functionality of digital technologies in order to "overcome the friction of information systems' incompatibilities" (Junglas & Watson, 2006, p. 580). Fourth, unison deals with the integration of data and its consistency across various applications and devices--not just on an individual level (i.e., synchronizing emails between different devices) but also to embrace cooperating groups or institutions (Junglas & Watson, 2006).

Digital technologies differ inherently from previous technologies and exhibit three essential properties. First, they demonstrate reprogrammability, meaning that the physical embodiment (i.e., hardware) is separate from the semiotic function logic (i.e., software), the latter of which is modifiable throughout its lifecycle (Yoo et al., 2010). Second, data homogenization implies that they use the same infrastructure (i.e., devices and networks) for storing, transmitting, processing, and displaying digital contents. The third property is self-reference: digital technologies are the prerequisite for digital innovation (Yoo et al., 2010).

Traditional, physical products rely on a modular architecture with components derived from a single functional design hierarchy separated by standardized interfaces and having fixed product boundaries (Ulrich, 1995; Lusch & Nambisan, 2015). In contrast, digital technologies build upon a layered architecture with the various components not bounded by a single product, as each layer relates to a different design hierarchy (Lusch & Nambisan, 2015; Yoo et al., 2010). The layered architecture consists of four layers: devices, networks, services, and contents (Yoo et al., 2010). The device layer comprises the physical components along with their logical capabilities (e.g., a smartphone including hardware and operating system). The network layer encompasses the physical transport (e.g., transmitters and broadband networks) as well as the logical transmission (e.g., communication protocols) and processes the data to the service layer (Hylving & Schultze, 2013). Within the service layer, application functionality is provided to directly serve the user (e.g., a camera app), whereas the contents layer includes the relevant outputs (e.g., media such as images or videos) as well as corresponding metadata (e.g., information on date and picture settings).

Due to these distinct characteristics, the traditional innovation logic is transformed when digital technologies are involved, as cross-boundary interrelations emerge and result in novel and complex eco-systems (Yoo et al., 2010; Selander et al., 2013). Eco-systems can be described as contexts "in which the success of a value proposition depends on creating an alignment of partners who must work together in order to transform a winning idea to a market success" (Adner, 2012, p. 4). Yoo et al. (2012) maintained that the formation of a digital technology platform is one of the most fundamental elements for developing a new digital eco-system. Such a platform can be described as "a building block, providing an essential function to a technological system--which acts as a foundation upon which other firms can develop complementary products, technologies or services" (Gawer, 2009, p. 2). Therefore, a digital eco-system relies on loose and partially temporary couplings across the layers and an increased dependence on open innovation and third-party developers (Selander et al., 2010). Due to the layered architecture of digital technologies, actors and technologies within this eco-system are distributed over the different layers of devices, networks, services, and contents (Yoo et al., 2010). Thus, innovation in these eco-systems implies openness towards diverse actors and the integration of heterogeneous knowledge (Yoo et al. 2012). Due to their reprogrammability, functions can be changed or added to already existing products, thus digital innovations become generative (Yoo et al., 2012; Zittrain, 2006). Convergence can be achieved in various ways, with digital technologies bringing together previously separated products, i.e., embedding digital technologies into physical products, industries, and users (Yoo et al., 2012). The latter reveals another anomaly of digital technologies, particularly mobile devices. Due to their small size and weight, they are a constant companion and not only change the actions of users but also serve as communication gateways by allowing people to communicate and interact with others, thus becoming part of the digital eco-system.

Socio-Technical Transitions Theory

A socio-technical system is composed of various elements, such as technologies, actors, infrastructures, and networks, as well as the business models connecting the different elements (Bidmon & Knab, 2014) and the relationships among them necessary to fulfill societal functions (Geels, 2005). They are created and sustained by underlying rules followed by the different societal groups, thus contributing to a relatively stable construct and dominant mindset. Accordingly, substantial changes to these established regimes happen rarely. Instead, actors within the existing socio-technical systems are more interested in further optimizing the given system and therefore mainly engage in incremental innovations, which do not change the underlying core logic (Geels, 2005). This can be described as reproduction of the current system (Geels & Kemp, 2006).

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

More profound changes to the established systems can be categorized into two different types: transformation and transition (Geels & Kemp, 2006). These changes rely on interactions of the sociotechnical regime (a sector comprises multiple regimes, e.g., bus, train, and automobility in the mobility sector) with two other conceptual levels, between which the regime is nested on a meso level (Nykvist & Whitmarsh, 2008). Above all regimes, on the macro level, reside landscape developments, which can be described as broad societal trends, general assumptions, political directions, etc. On the micro level, there are niches, which include "new technologies, institutions, markets, lifestyles and al elements and consists of networks of actors and organisations" (Nykvist & Whitmarsh, 2008, p. 1374) and where fundamentally different innovations emerge (Geels, 2005). Together, the three concepts--landscape, regime, and niches form a multi-level system that can explain fundamental changes, depicted in Figure 1.

When landscape developments, such as changed political directions, place the previously dominant regimes under pressure, established actors realize that profound changes are necessary. They therefore react by driving changes and adapting the established systems in order to stay relevant under the new circumstances as new actors from outside the system threaten their legitimacy. As a result, the regime changes radically, but the actors and elements remain largely the same (Geels & Kemp, 2006).

However, when adaptation and reorientation are difficult to reach, tensions and instability in the given system increase. As a result, the incumbent actors may fail to adapt to the new circumstances. This instability can be advantageous for outsiders who develop discontinuous innovations that may fit the changed realities and solve the existing systems. With such developments, a new regime with new technologies, actors, and structures can evolve and achieve dominance. This process is called transition (Geels & Kemp, 2006).

Prior research has applied the multi-level perspective on socio-technical transitions to various contexts. A first set of studies has used it to predict and assess future developments. For instance, Verbong and Geels (2010) employed the perspective to analyze sustainability transitions in the electricity system and derive several possible future pathways, while Hodson and Marvin (2010) used the multi-level perspective to examine the ongoing and future transformation of cities. Furthermore, Steinhilber et al. (2013) applied it to investigate barriers to the diffusion of EVs. In contrast, another stream of studies has focused on using the theory to explain technological transitions in the past. Geels and Kemp (2006) described the transition from cesspools to integrated sewer systems and the transformation in waste management.

Moreover, the concept was also applied substantially to the mobility and transport sector. Kohler et al. (2009) use the transition perspective to guide their empirical investigation and simulation of the future development of different propulsion technologies. While doing so, they account for the current regimes and possible landscape developments. They conclude that "technological transitions are most likely. Lifestyle change transitions require sustained pressure from the environment on society and behavioural change from consumers" (Kohler et al., 2009, p. 2994). Geels (2012) employed the socio-technical approach as a framework for a profound analysis of the transition towards lowcarbon transport systems and determines that although the automobile regime is still dominant, it is becoming increasingly unstable because of such developments as regulation initiatives. Several niches, e.g., green propulsion technology, are on the rise but not yet ready to take over. Finally, drawing on concepts from the transitions literature, Nykvist and Whitmarsh (2008) conceptualized and empirically investigate possible transitions towards sustainable mobility through technological change, modal shift, and reduced travel demand for the cases of Sweden and the UK. The authors describe "information technology as a driver in all three areas of innovation" (Nykvist & Whitmarsh, 2008, p. 1373).

Towards a Theory of Socio-Technical Transitions Through Emerging Digital Eco-Systems

In the following section, we will relate the phenomenon of emerging digital eco-systems to the multi-level theoretical perspective of socio-technical transitions and derive theoretical propositions.

Proposition I: The increased diffusion of digital technologies can be viewed as a landscape development affecting various established socio-technical regimes. The macro level of the multi-level perspective on sociotechnical transition is the landscape level and describes "the broader 'conditions', 'environment' and 'pressures' for transitions" (Hodson & Marvin, 2010, p. 479). Landscape developments "refer to aspects of the exogenous environment that [are] beyond the direct influence of actors" (Geels & Kemp, p. 4). Geels and Kemp (2006) explicitly mentioned pervasive technologies that affect societies as a whole as an instance of landscape developments. This characterization is representative of digital technologies, as prior research has described how digital technologies are entering more and more aspects of daily life. Yoo (2010) provided several examples from diverse contexts (e.g., entertainment, personal mobility) to illustrate how digital technologies increasingly become part of everyday experiences: "Every way we turn, we see information technology. Everywhere we go, we are constantly surrounded by computers. We use them when we talk, listen to music, drive our cars, and take pictures. T-shirts and jeans that come with radio frequency identification (RFID) tags remind us that our everyday life is fully saturated with advanced information technology" (Yoo, 2010, p. 214). This phenomenon has been examined in the IS research community under the theme of ubiquitous IS, enabling a continuous use of applications that "impact all facets and phases of human living" (Vodanovich et al., 2010, p. 713). As humans are part of every socio-technical system, the increased diffusion of digital consumer technologies in the private lives of these individuals also drives their relevance in the respective socio-technical regimes in which they are involved (Gregory, Ruch, Kaganer, & Henfridsson, 2014). To sum up, the emergence of digital technologies is a sound phenomenon that is independent from single firms, institutions, or sectors. Even if it were desirable, single actors could not stop or control the development of digital technology, due to their diversity and ubiquity.

Proposition II: The increased diffusion of digital technologies transforms existing socio-technical regimes through the formation of digital eco-systems. The transformational change of established sociotechnical systems involves a reorientation of the development path (Geels & Kemp, 2006). Geels and Kemp (2006) explained that "[t]his happens through a change in the regime rules that coordinate actions of regime actors, e.g. changes in technical problem agendas, visions, goals and guiding principles, relative costs and incentive structures, regulations and perceptions of opportunities" (p. 7). These effects can arise through digital technology diffusion via, e.g., a transfer of expectations stemming from experiences with digital consumer technologies made in the private sphere (e.g., in personal communication) to other (business) contexts (Gregory et al., 2014).

As described above, digital technologies follow a different architecture than most prior products, such as industrial ones. They comprise a layered architecture involving device, network, service, and content layers (Yoo et al., 2010). By entangling digital technologies with existing products or infrastructures (Yoo et al., 2012), this interwoven setup leads to the creation of digital eco-systems composed of different technologies and networks that are used in combination by different actors for various purposes and thus indeed bring along new rules for the participant actors (El Sawy & Perreira, 2013). While in the past there was a clear distinction between cooperation and competition, in the digital space there emerges an increased interdependence of a variety of actors, such as device manufacturers, service providers, and content providers, who may at the same time be viewed as rivals. Furthermore, changing rules manifest themselves in the relationships between actors and are transformed in such a way that results in customers being more informed, feeling more empowered, and wanting to be treated as partners and value co-creators instead of buyers (Lucas, Agarwal, Clemons, El Sawy, & Weber, 2013; Piccinini, Gregory, & Kolbe, 2015). Moreover, communication is synchronized more and more, making interaction and information much faster and available almost everywhere (Vodanovich et al., 2010).

Another indicator for the transformation is the advent of outside players trying to enter the existing regime, although at this point it is not about the total displacement of established actors and technologies. This aspect also comes along with digital technologies as players from the digital space, such as Google or Apple, invade more and more contexts, including retail, mobility, and music. Incumbents typically react to these developments by adapting to the new circumstances, as the core logic and thus their dominant positions are not endangered. To reproduce the system, they must make adaptations, as exhibited by the growing number of industrial players cooperating with digital entrants or enriching their products with additional digital features.

Proposition III: Digital eco-systems give rise to fundamentally different niche developments. According to socio-technical transitions theory, when the pressure from the landscape level is strong enough, it destabilizes the regime level. The incumbents within the regime might not be able to adapt the system beyond a certain degree due to, e.g., path dependencies or organizational inertia. This creates windows of opportunity for niche developments to break through (Geels & Kemp, 2006). Due to the emergence of digital technologies and the resulting eco-systems, business models (drawing on alternative technologies or solutions) that have the potential to replace previously dominant ones can be promoted. El Sawy and Perreira (2013) pointed out that in digital eco-systems "technologies and services rapidly become obsolete" (p. 2). As described by Lucas et al. (2013), media, entertainment, and telecommunications industries have undergone severe shifts driven by digital eco-systems. For instance, the spread of the Internet has led to phenomena such as file sharing, which endangered the existing regimes and their established mechanisms. Into this phase of uncertainty came players such as Apple that introduced an entirely new way of distributing music with their portable devices and the respective associated platforms that disrupted prior existing structures and supported entirely new use patterns (Yoo, 2010).

What becomes apparent is that niche developments that eventually change the previously dominant system are not necessarily an entirely new technology and do not necessarily include the best possible technological features. Instead, the fit with the emerged digital ecosystem and the resulting possibilities of combinatorial innovations (Yoo et al., 2012), incorporated in a viable business model (Bidmon & Knab, 2014) determine the rise and fall of new solutions. Another instance, described by Lucas and Goh (2009), is the fundamental transition in the photography industry stemming from the "digital camera combined with information and communications technologies (ICT), specifically the capabilities of the computer to store and display photographs, and the Internet to transmit them" (Lucas & Goh, 2009, p. 46).

Proposition IV: New socio-technical regimes driven by digital eco-systems are open, turbulent, and coopetitive. At the end of the socio-technical transition as described by prior research, new socio-technical regimes are reached and "a new period of dynamic stability and reproduction sets in" (Geels & Kemp, 2006, p. 7). However, if the transition was driven by digital eco-systems, it must be doubted that this is really the case, as these digital eco-systems create regimes that have distinct characteristics making them fundamentally different from most previously existing systems. Due to their nature, digital technologies "provide an environment of open and flexible affordances that are used in creating innovations characterized by convergence and generativity" (Yoo et al., 2012, p. 1398). The layered architecture of digital technologies results in products and solutions that remain open for adjustments, variations, and reconfigurations even after their implementation. Moreover, several new developments may start on the basis of the implemented digital technologies (Yoo et al., 2010). The same applies to the set of actors, as the digital eco-systems are open for new participants from previously distant areas.

In contrast to the cases that have been described in the literature on socio-technical transitions, the new dominant socio-technical regimes that build upon digital technologies follow a different logic: They do not account for a given and defined set of actors and technologies and do not form a closed system but are rather designed as open. Thus, prior dominant solutions must not necessarily disappear completely but are being surrounded by more and more alternatives that use the possibilities to create and capture value afforded by digital technologies and thus follow different rules. Hence, actors from previously dominant regimes need to understand contradictory logics at once. Furthermore, the new regimes are not stable or dynamically stable but are in constant fluidity and "can never be expected to revert to any kind of 'equilibrium' after disruptions change things; turbulence implies that cause-and-effect may cascade in unpredictable ways to alter the structure or health of the eco-system, or end it entirely" (El Sawy & Perreira, 2013, p. 2). Moreover, the stereotype roles that have been formulated in socio-technical transitions theory (concerning incumbents and outsiders) do not hold true, as new participants enter the open systems and cooperation with competitors and vice versa is a regular phenomenon (Selander et al., 2010).

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Because of the openness of emerging systems and the properties of digital technologies, the direction and logic of innovation is non-linear and rather unpredictable. As a result, a differentiation and diversification of regimes as well as a convergence of prior unconnected ones is likely to occur (Selander et al., 2013). Yoo et al. (2012) describe that this convergence comprises three aspects: the combination of previously unconnected user experiences, the embedding of digital technologies in smart physical products, and the convergence of previously separate industries. Altogether, these developments lead to an approximating and convergence of regimes and sectors that have been regarded as closed and separated in prior theory on socio-technical transitions. They are increasingly connected by digital eco-systems, which, e.g., include increasingly global communication infrastructures such as the Internet. Figure 2 depicts our line of reasoning.

Illustrative Case: Mobile Applications for Sustainable Mobility

In the following section, we illustrate our theoretical propositions from the prior section for the case of the socio-technical transition of physical mobility towards sustainability via mobile applications. We selected this case because mobile devices and the respective applications enable information, communication, and interaction on the go and thus have a logical connection to the topic of physical mobility.

To illustrate our propositions in this context, we performed an analysis of mobile applications for sustainable mobility. The database for the analysis was collected through an explorative research of the Google Play Store by using the search string "sustainable mobility" to find suitable applications. There are various terms describing the concept of physical movement, e.g., mobility, transport, or transportation; although according to Gudmunsson (2003) they can be regarded as equivalents, "mobility is a broader concept than transport" (p. 199). Since the aim of this analysis is the demonstration of solutions in a representative manner, we did not perform an exhaustive search of mobile applications using multiple terms. Instead, we decided to use the established term "sustainable mobility" (Gudmunsson, 2003). The search was conducted by querying the Google Web search engine instead of the Google Play Store, because the Play Store only returns a limited number of results. The search string "sustainable mobility" was entered in the search field with the extension "inurl:play.google.com". Furthermore, the parameter "filter=0" was added to the address bar of the results to retrieve the full list of results. Applications that were listed as similar applications were also considered, in the style of a forward search within literature analysis. The whole process of identifying suitable mobile applications was carried out by three authors separately. Afterwards, the resulting lists were merged by the application id, and in the case of different assignments, the specific application was discussed in detail by all authors until a consensus was reached. The final list comprises 186 relevant applications contributing to sustainable mobility. In the following sections, we match these application fields to the theoretical propositions.

Mobile applications as part of a landscape development. Mobile devices as well as their respective applications are an instance of the diffusion of digital technologies affecting various established sociotechnical regimes. Countless mobile applications have been developed, and the respective use cases cover nearly every aspect of life. Players such as Google have set up open platforms (i.e., Google Play Store) that allow almost anyone to obtain applications for nearly every purpose and area of life. Following the characteristics of the layered architecture of digital technology, various players--including device manufacturers such as Samsung, LG, or HTC and mobile service and content providers--work together, implicitly or explicitly, to create generative and convergent innovations, affecting a myriad of fields of applications. Thus, the phenomenon is beyond the control of single regime actors.

Our analysis of existing apps for sustainable mobility revealed an enormous quantity and variety of instances, affecting various different modes of transportation and thus different regimes, e.g., car-, train-, or bus-related mobility. Moreover, we found that the mobile applications were developed by a very heterogeneous set of actors stemming from both inside and outside of the existing systems.

After having identified relevant applications, they were categorized according to the following procedure: The final list of 186 applications was analyzed by two authors, who categorized the applications based on their functionality. Again, the results of the two researchers were merged and compared. The third author acted as a judge when a classification of one of the authors was unclear. The results of the classification are illustrated in Table 1 with the identified categories and the respective number of applications that were assigned to the particular category. Furthermore, the table includes the weighted average rating as well as the number of ratings and downloads. Because the Google Play Store provides only ranges for the number of downloads, we used the arithmetic mean for each application and computed a weighted average value for each category. The resulting categorization relies on a broader, abstract level and helps us assess how physical mobility is changed by digital technologies in general. Although both the average ratings as well as the number of ratings and downloads do not provide detailed information on actual use, these numbers can be seen as indicators for the frequency of use and the application's performance from a user's perspective.

* The entertainment category primarily includes applications that playfully enable the user to simulate sustainable mobility behavior with an educational character. They provide feedback about the consequences of their behavior and promote sustainable mobility concepts such as carpooling or taxi sharing.

* Informative applications encompass applications that contain articles or news about sustainable mobility initiatives. Moreover, this category contains travel IS that inform users about public transportation, such as buses, metros, or taxis. Although some of these applications offer additional services such as billing and booking, here we focus on the informative character of these applications (e.g., location of stations, departure times, costs).

* Shared-use services comprise applications that allow users to locate, book, and access shared services (commercial carsharing, private carsharing, bikesharing, carpooling, etc.). In the context of private sharing options (e.g., carpooling), the core functionality is the opportunity to establish an ad hoc communication link to other users and utilize the benefits of common origins and destinations. We deliberately separate these services from public transportation (as a part of informative applications) due to the individuality of the characteristics compared to mass transportation.

* The eco-friendly technology category contains all forms of applications that support or promote alternative technologies. This includes pure information about e-mobility (environmental impacts, benefits, and even a simulation of EVs for CV owners) as well as information and services regarding charging infrastructure.

* Human-based applications aim to influence user mobility behavior by monitoring their mobility habits and providing feedback based on the recorded data. These applications mainly calculate CO2 emissions caused by certain trips and display the negative environmental impacts. The goal is to raise awareness in the context of mobility in an educational manner.

Transformation of established mobility regimes by emerging digital eco-systems. The formation of digital eco-systems becomes obvious when looking at the applications for sustainable mobility. These eco-systems include actors such as mobile device manufacturers, network operators, and service or content providers, who bring along new rules, e.g., real-time information and communication, which are already known from other areas, such as the field of social media (Vodanovich et al., 2010). Incumbent actors react to these new rules and start to transform the system towards the digital eco-systems. For instance, automobile manufacturers design their in-car infotainment systems such that they can communicate with consumer devices: a Bluetooth interface enables wireless linkage with a smartphone to, e.g., use the hands-free car kit. Furthermore, car manufacturers offer functionality to display e-mails or text messages from smartphones on the in-vehicle control display. Thus, the trend is towards the integration of consumer devices into the vehicle, which supports Proposition II. Moreover, automotive manufacturers offer mobile applications themselves, such as Volkswagen's BlueMotion CHECK that tracks real-time driving profiles, calculates usage-based potential CO2 savings and the economic advantages of sustainable drive trains, and informs the user about these technologies. There are also a variety of apps that measure driving habits, provide informative analyses, and offer advice for enhancing fuel efficiency and thus driving more sustainably by cutting down CO2 emissions, e.g., KIA ECO-DRIVE TUMBLE, EcoDrive for NISSAN, and VW Think Blue Trainer.

By doing so, the incumbents use the platforms, rules, and standards that digital players have introduced. Moreover, they integrate them into their core offering, such as by transmitting vehicle data (e.g., driving data or vehicles status) or remote control functionalities (e.g., wireless door and light control) into an app or displaying apps on the vehicle's digital display. However, these kinds of developments do not question the key principles of the automobile industry.

In this context, apps belonging to the categories "entertainment," "informative," and "human-based" play a key role.

Digital eco-systems give rise to alternative mobility technologies and modes. Digital eco-systems promote a fundamentally different mobility behavior. The most obvious form is the increased communication possibilities among geographically dispersed persons--enabled by widespread broadband Internet; mobile devices; and such applications as Skype, Facetime or WhatsApp--which reduce the need to travel. However, the impact of digital eco-systems on actual physical mobility is more significant than just mobility avoidance (Nykvist & Whitmarsh, 2008). There are numerous apps focusing on making alternative modes of mobility more convenient by providing sound information on available possibilities and offering reservation, booking, and payment; these belong to the categories "shared-use services" and "eco-friendly technologies." By doing so, apps such as BlaBlaCar drive the attractiveness of shared forms of mobility. Carsharing is a sustainable form of transportation that has been around for decades; various offerings arose and disappeared during the '70s and '80s (Shaheen, Sperling, & Wagner, 1998). However, only progress in digital technologies and the appearance of associated mobile applications (e.g., SOCAR, Bat Sharing, Zipcar, Catch-Car) made these business models competitive by enabling a connection between vehicles, service providers, and users (Hildebrandt, Hanelt, Piccinini, Kolbe, & Nierobisch, 2015). Digital technologies can greatly enhance the attractiveness of such service-oriented business models by guaranteeing safety and offering flexible and convenient access to the service (Hildebrandt et al., 2015).

Furthermore, the use of alternative technologies such as EVs is supported. There are various apps, including LemNet, EV Stations Hawaii, ChargeJuice, and ChargeMap, that provide information concerning charging stations. Other apps, such as EV Range Calculator, help to reduce uncertainties and thus account for potential disadvantages such as range restrictions or concerns about new infrastructure. Further, mobile applications offer interaction functionalities with charging stations, allowing convenient access and automated accounting of kWh charged; these include FullCharger, intercharge, and e-kWh.

Radically different regimes for future mobility emerge. Finally, the new type of regimes emerging through digital eco-systems is becoming visible. Apps such as MOLECULES and moovel, for instance, represent platforms that collect the offerings of several forms of transportation, such as train, bus, taxi, and bike-/carsharing, and then recommend the respective alternatives and combinations of them in a dynamic way according to user preferences, traffic, etc. While MOLECULES was developed in the context of a European research project in cooperation with the city administration and the transportation authority of Berlin as well as a manufacturer from the automobile industry, the developer of moovels (moovel GmbH) is a full subsidiary of an automobile manufacturer and cooperates with several mobility service providers of different transportation alternatives. In such a case, the previously separate regimes of, e.g., automobile, train, and bus become increasingly connected through the facilitation of their combined use. However, the diversification of the regimes requires incumbent actors to play different games at once, each with its own rules, e.g., concerning cooperation. The case of moovel in particular illustrates the coopetitive and differentiated nature of the emerging regime, as a car manufacturer whose business objective is car sales--cooperates with different transportation providers who are competitors in the mobility sector by providing alternatives for motorized individual transport. Moreover, these apps are generally accessible to all existing and future suppliers of mobility to provide their services, highlighting the openness of these intermodal solutions.

Discussion and Implications

The increasing pervasiveness of digital technologies is a worldwide phenomenon affecting almost every aspect of human life. When digital technologies emerge, they do not occur in isolation but rather, due to their innate properties, lead to the emergence of digital eco-systems, comprising diverse IS, platforms, actors, and the relationships among them. These eco-systems change how value is created and captured, i.e. business models, by altering the rules of the game, including communication, cooperation, and competition, in the respective socio-technical regimes in which they are nested. With our approach, we have highlighted the importance of globally increasing the connectivity of more and more people in the sense that the enhanced communication possibilities reduce the need to travel and lead to new systems, which make individual sustainable behavior more reliable, comfortable, and resilient.

In parallel, environmental degradation is another global phenomenon. Substantial efforts have been made by policy makers, among others, to foster sustainable alternatives in multiple fields. One of the most prominent sectors in the realm of sustainability transitions is mobility. In this context, research has often described how socio-technical transitions lead to fundamentally new dominant and more sustainable systems, such as those involving green propulsion technologies.

In this conceptual paper, we have related both important global phenomena to each other and focus on how the emerging digital eco-systems drive sociotechnical transitions towards increased sustainability. Drawing from insights of international high-quality literature from the fields of IS, we included the specific effects that arise from the increasingly widespread dissemination of digital technologies and the resulting digital eco-systems to the multi-level perspective of socio-technical transitions theory. We propose that the diffusion of digital technologies is a landscape development that places existing regimes under pressure. To reproduce the existing socio-technical regime, participants of the regime react and adapt to the emerging digital trends. However, when the pressure from the macro level continues to grow and the digital aspects gain in importance, this creates windows of opportunity for new technologies or concepts that fit with the emerged digital eco-system to take over and constitute new socio-technical regimes. These new digitally driven systems differ not only in the specific technologies and actors they involve but also in their characteristics, as they are more open, turbulent, and diverse than previously existing ones.

By interlinking the two major phenomena, we contribute to related literature in the following ways. First, we contribute to the literature on socio-technical transitions theory by adding the specifics of digitalization to the multi-level perspective in a general way. As this phenomenon is taking place globally and in almost every sector, the proposed effects can be of explanatory value for socio-technical transitions in various contexts. In particular, we have highlighted the role of the fit of new technologies with digital ecosystems for their diffusion, thus refining existing theory. Moreover, we extend the transition theory in the sense that the regimes after the transition are not of the same type as the initial ones. Through digital technologies, regimes are becoming more open, turbulent, and differentiated. There is not one monolithic new regime, as suggested by prior works, but rather an interlocked network of new regimes, thus driving the need for decision makers to understand and react to different logics and requirements at once.

Second, we contribute to the literature on sustainable mobility developments as we add to the ongoing discussions and investigations on, e.g., new propulsion technologies, the facet of IS enhancing the attractiveness and thus diffusion of sustainable alternatives. As physical and digital elements form new hybrid solutions, a phenomenon called digital innovation (Yoo et al., 2010), that can account for the respective purposes, a focus on single technologies is not sufficient; it must be widened to include the relation of a technology to digital eco-systems and a joint consideration of physical and digital to integrate the best out of both worlds for new solutions.

Third, we contribute to the literature on digital technologies and transformations in the IS research community by introducing a socio-technical perspective that allows for explaining transitions resulting from the diffusion of digital technologies. Thus, a sound theoretical foundation for the phenomenon is proposed, explaining the different impacts of digital technologies. The multi-level perspective is of special interest for this research community as there are, as we propose, effects on every single level that change existing systems, particularly when they interact with each other. Moreover, it presents a new perspective on how IS, via multi-level effects, can contribute to achieving more sustainable practices, such as by giving rise to alternative technologies that fit the digital eco-systems.

In sum, by relating an established theoretical framework (the multi-level perspective on sociotechnical transitions) to an increasingly important development (the diffusion of digital technologies) and applying it to an urgent global phenomenon (environmental sustainability), we provide ample opportunity for future research. However, it must be noted that our work is explorative, qualitative, and conceptual in nature. We call for future research to challenge and test our assumptions and propositions, further differentiate our propositions through deeper empirical investigations, and apply them to other contexts. Furthermore, we want to motivate both future research as well as business practice to specifically account for and make use of the opportunities that are provided by emerging digital eco-systems for creating new sustainable systems for various societal tasks. The affordances of digital technologies allow for creative and transformative developments. This potential must also be used for the benefit of the environment and thus for human life on planet Earth.

However, the degree to which these opportunities exist and thus allow for transitional developments differs among countries worldwide. Thus, the mechanisms described above are sensitive to regional circumstances. For digital eco-systems for sustainable mobility to emerge, there must be, e.g., a sufficient availability of the internet, modern vehicles that are equipped with sensors and a big share of the population that can afford owning a smart mobile device. Research under the theme of digital divide has shown and investigated the international inequalities concerning the diffusion of IS in general and mobile IS in specific due to e.g., differences in wealth (see Stump et al., 2008).

Moreover, regardless of these economic or infrastructural circumstances, cultural differences play a major role. Prior research has pointed at the fact that nations significantly differ with respect to mobility culture (Nykvist and Whitmarsh, 2008). Here, cultural preferences for, e.g., ownership, freedom, flexibility, speed or privacy might inhibit the adoption of alternative mobility concepts like carsharing or intermodal solutions and, instead, reinforce individual automobility. Besides, culture also matters regarding a regions' ambition concerning achieving environmental sustainability leading to variances in the "cultural sense of urgency about climate change or higher fuel prices" (Geels 2012, p. 477).

However, as our model shows, emerging digital eco-systems provide another way to sustainable mobility by promoting the reliability and comfort of alternative mobility concepts, thus driving the attractiveness for potential users. By mobile IS, the convenience and resilience of sustainable mobility can be increased and thus lead to behavior changes. However, not only might digital eco-systems help to mitigate adoption barriers, but they also contribute change in the underlying cultural preferences since culture is an inherent element of a socio-technical regime. The latter, according to our model, can be completely revised by digital eco-systems. For instance, among others, Nykvist and Whitmarsh (2008) report a shift concerning the iconic status of the car "with urban lifestyles less dependent on individual transport, and in particular more closely aligned with ICT than with car ownership" (p. 1377). Although to an internationally varying degree, digital technologies might thus support the transition towards sustainable mobility.

Furthermore, the described effects of digital ecosystems might also be a chance for developing countries. Even though advanced infrastructure might still be missing in these areas, the progress in IS affords possibilities for an accelerated development. For instance, "mobile holds the potential for developing nations to leapfrog technologically since they are able to bypass the development of landline telephone systems" (Stump et al. 2008, p. 398). The potential of transferring advanced technologies and concepts from developed countries to developing ones in order to foster a more sustainable development path was described by Krup et al. (2013) with reference to sustainable energy generation and consumption. By the mechanism described above, the combination of digital technologies with sustainable mobility alternatives, developing countries might also leapfrog in the sense that they skip the unsustainable transportation development that developed countries experienced and thus avoid the negative environmental consequences for the benefit of digitally supported sustainable mobility.

Correspondence to:

Andre Hanelt

Chair of Information Management

University of Goettingen

Germany

E-Mail: [email protected]

References

Adner, R., & Kapoor, R. (2010). Value creation in innovation ecosystems: How the structure of technological interdependence affects firm performance in new technology generations. Strategic Management Journal, 31(3), 306-333.

Adner, R. (2012). The wide lens: A new strategy for innovation. New York: Portfolio/Penguin.

Banister, D. (2008). The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transport Policy, 15(2), 73-80.

Baptista, P., Melo, S., & Rolim, C. (2014). Energy, environmental and mobility impacts of car-sharing systems. Empirical results from Lisbon, Portugal. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 111, 28-37.

Ben-Elia, E., Di Pace, R., Bifulco, G. N., & Shiftan, Y. (2013). The impact of travel information's accuracy on route-choice. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 26, 146-159.

Bharadwaj, A., El Sawy, O. A., Pavlou, P. A., & Venkatraman, N. (2013). Digital business strategy: Toward a next generation of insights. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 471-482.

Bidmon, C. M., & Knab, S. (2014). The three roles of business models for socio-technical transitions. The Proceedings of XXVISPIM Conference-Innovation for Sustainable Economy and Society, 8-11.

Carrillo-Hermosilla, J., Del Rio, P., & Konnola, T. (2010). Diversity of eco-innovations: Reflections from selected case studies. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(10), 1073-1083.

d'Orey, P. M., & Ferreira, M. (2014). Can ride-sharing become attractive? A case study of taxi-sharing employing a simulation modelling approach. IET Intelligent Transport Systems, 9(2), 210-220.

El Sawy, O. A., & Pereira, F. (2013). Business modelling in the dynamic digital space: An ecosystem approach. New York: Springer.

Feng, C. M. (2014). New prospects of transportation mobility. IATSSResearch, 38(1), 22-26.

Gabrielli S., Forbes, P., Jylha, A., Wells, S., Siren, M., Hemminki, S., Nurmi, P., Maimone, R., Masthoff, J., & Jacucci, G. (2014). Design challenges in motivating change for sustainable urban mobility. Computers in Human Behavior, 41, 416-423.

Gawer, A. (ed.). (2011). Platforms, markets and innovation. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing.

Geels, F. W. (2005). The dynamics of transitions in socio-technical systems: A multi-level analysis of the transition pathway from horse-drawn carriages to automobiles (1860-1930). Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 17(4), 445-476.

Geels, F. W. (2012). A socio-technical analysis of low-carbon transitions: Introducing the multi-level perspective into transport studies. Journal of Transport Geography, 24, 471-482.

Geels, F. W., & Kemp, R. (2006). Transitions, transformations and reproduction: Dynamics in socio-technical systems. In M. McKelvey & M. Holmen (Eds.), Flexibility and stability in the innovating economy (pp. 227-256).

Gregory, R. W., Ruch, T. J., Kaganer, E. A., & Henfridsson, O. (2014). Toward everyone's IT: A study of consumerization at GlobalBankCorp. Academy of Management Proceedings, 15855.

Gudmundsson, H. (2003). Making concepts matter: sustainable mobility and indicator systems in transport policy. International Social Science Journal, 55(176), 199-217.

Hanelt, A., Piccinini, E., Gregory, R. W., Hildebrand, B., & Kolbe, L. (2015a). Digital Transformation of Primarily Physical Industries--Exploring the Impact of Digital Trends on Business Models of Automobile Manufacturers. Wirtschaftsinformatik 2015 Proceedings, Osnabruck, 1313-1327.

Hanelt, A., Hildebrandt, B. & Polier, J. (2015b). Uncovering the role of IS in business model innovation--A taxonomy-driven approach to structure the field. ECIS 2015 Completed Research Papers, Paper 71, 1-18

Heath, Y., & Gifford, R. (2002). Extending the theory of planned behavior: Predicting the use of public transportation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 52(10), 2154-2189.

Hildebrandt, B., Hanelt, A., Piccinini, E., Kolbe, L., & Nierobisch, T. (2015). The value of IS in business model innovation for sustainable mobility services--The case of carsharing. Wirtschaftsinformatik, 2015 Proceedings, Osnabruck, 1008-1022.

Hodson, M., & Marvin, S. (2010). Can cities shape socio-technical transitions and how would we know if they were? Research Policy, 39(4), 477-485.

Hylving, L., & Schultze, U. (2013). Evolving the modular layered architecture in digital innovation: The case of the car's instrument cluster. ICIS 2013 Proceedings, Milano.

Junglas, I., & Watson, R. T. (2006). The u-constructs: Four information drives. Communications of the Association for Information systems, 17(26), 568593.

King, J. L., & Lyytinen, K. (2005). Automotive informatics: Information technology and enterprise transformation in the automobile industry. In W. H. Dutton, B. Kahin, R. O'Callaghan, & A. W. Wyckoff (Eds.), Transforming enterprise: The economic and social implications of information technology (pp. 283-333). MA: MIT Press.

Kohler, J., Whitmarsh, L., Nykvist, B., Schilperoord, M., Bergman, N., & Haxeltine, A. (2009). A transitions model for sustainable mobility. Ecological Economics, 68(12), 2985-2995.

Krup, H., Hanelt, A. & Kolbe, L. M. (2013). Sustainable IS Research In Developed Countries-A Chance For Sub-Saharan Africa? ECIS 2013 Research in Progress. Paper 25, 1-8

Lucas, H. C., & Goh, J. M. (2009). Disruptive technology: How Kodak missed the digital photography revolution. The Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 18(1), 46-55.

Lucas, H. C., Agarwal, R., Clemons, E. K., El Sawy, O. A., & Weber, B. (2013). Impactful research on transformational information technology: An opportunity to inform new audiences. MIS Quarterly, 37(2), 371-382.

Lue, A., Colorni, A., Nocerino, R., & Paruscio, V. (2012). Green move: An innovative electric vehiclesharing system. Procedia--Social and Behavioral Sciences, 48, 2978-2987.

Lusch, R. F., & Nambisan, S. (2015). Service innovation: A service-dominant logic perspective. MIS Quarterly, (39: 1), 155-171.

Nasrudin, N., Rostam, K., & Noor, H. M. (2014). Barriers and motivations for sustainable travel behaviour: Shah Alam residents' perspectives. Procedia--Social and Behavioral Sciences, 153, 510-519.

Nykvist, B., & Whitmarsh, L. (2008). A multi-level analysis of sustainable mobility transitions: Niche development in the UK and Sweden. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 75(9), 1373-1387.

Piccinini, E., Gregory, R. W., & Kolbe, L. M. (2015). Changes in the producer-consumer relationshiptowards digital transformation. Wirtschaftsinformatik 2015 Proceedings, Osnabruck, 1634-1648.

Priem, R., Butler, J., & Li, S. (2013). Toward reimagining strategy research: Retrospection and prospection on the 2011 AMR decade award article. Academy of Management Review, 38(4), 471-489.

Selander, L., Henfridsson, O., & Svahn, F. (2010). Transforming ecosystem relationships in digital innovation. ICIS 2010 Proceedings, Saint Louis.

Selander, L., Henfridsson, O., & Svahn, F. (2013). Capability search and redeem across digital ecosystems. Journal of Information Technology, 28(3), 183-197.

Shaheen, S. A., & Lipman, T. E. (2007). Reducing greenhouse emissions and fuel consumption: Sustainable approaches for surface transportation. IATSSResearch, 31(1), 6-20.

Shaheen, S., Sperling, D., & Wagner, C. (1998). Carsharing in Europe and North American: Past, present, and future. Transportation Quarterly, 52(3), 35-52.

Spickermann, A., Grienitz, V., & Heiko, A. (2014). Heading towards a multimodal city of the future?: Multi-stakeholder scenarios for urban mobility. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 89, 201-221.

Steinhilber, S., Wells, P., & Thankappan, S. (2013). Socio-technical inertia: understanding the barriers to electric vehicles. Energy Policy, 60, 531-539.

Stump, R. L., Gong, W., & Li, Z. (2008). Exploring the Digital Divide in Mobile-phone Adoption Levels across Countries Do Population Socioeconomic Traits Operate in the Same Manner as Their Individual-level Demographic Counterparts?. Journal of Macromarketing, 28(4), 397-412.

Ulrich, K. (1995). The role of product architecture in the manufacturing firm. Research Policy, 24(3), 419-440.

Verbong, G. P., & Geels, F. W. (2010). Exploring sustainability transitions in the electricity sector with socio-technical pathways. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 77(8), 1214-1221.

Vodanovich, S., Sundaram, D., & Myers, M. (2010). Research commentary-Digital natives and ubiquitous information systems. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 711-723.

Yoo, Y. (2010). Computing in everyday life: A call for research on experiential computing. MIS Quarterly, 34(2), 213-231.

Yoo, Y., Boland R. J., Lyytinen, K., & Majchrzak, A. (2012). Organizing for innovation in the digitized world. Organization Science, 23(5), 1398-1408.

Yoo, Y., Henfridsson, O., & Lyytinen, K. (2010). Research commentary--The new organizing logic of digital innovation: An agenda for information systems research. Information Systems Research, 21(4), 724-735.

Zittrain, J. L. (2006). The generative internet. Harvard Law Review, 1974-2040.

09/17/2015

Table 1. Results of the Analysis of Mobile Applications

                      Number of      Average
Categories            applications   ratings

Entertainment         6              3.92
Informative           18             3.89
Shared-use services   71             4.19
Eco-friendly          49             4.27
  technologies
Human-based           42             3.84

                      Number of      Number of
Categories            ratings        downloads

Entertainment         2,299          55,800
Informative           2,575          26,249
Shared-use services   74,233         82,436
Eco-friendly          1,773          3,593
  technologies
Human-based           5,360          32,670