A CLIOS Analysis For The Promotion Of Sustainable Plans Of Mobility The Case Of Mexico City

applied
sciences
Article
A CLIOS Analysis for the Promotion of Sustainable
Plans of Mobility: The Case of Mexico City
Ioannis Chatziioannou 1,* , Luis Alvarez-Icaza 1 , Efthimios Bakogiannis 2,
Charalampos Kyriakidis 2 and Luis Chias-Becerril 3
1 Institute of Engineering, UNAM National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico D.F. 04510, Mexico;
alvar@pumas.iingen.unam.mx
2 Department of Geography and Regional Planning, School of Rural and Surveying Engineering,
National Technical University of Athens, 15780 Athens, Greece; ebako@mail.ntua.gr (E.B.);
kyriakidisharry@gmail.com (C.K.)
3 Institute of Geography, UNAM, National Autonomous University of Mexico, Mexico D.F. 04510, Mexico;
luis.chias@gmail.com
* Correspondence: IChatziioannou@iingen.unam.mx; Tel.: +52-15-5454-37015
Received: 2 June 2020; Accepted: 25 June 2020; Published: 1 July 2020

Abstract: Transportation systems help in shaping an area’s economic health and quality of life,
providing the infrastructure for the mobility of people and goods. Nevertheless, the negative
externalities of car-oriented urban-metropolitan planning have heightened awareness for the need of
urban planning approaches that incorporate sustainable mobility. Consequently, cities worldwide have
increasingly produced sustainable mobility plans. This points to the need of creating mechanisms to
implement these sustainable plans, particularly in large, complex, and fast-growing cities. This paper
provides guidelines to facilitate the implementation of Sustainable Mobility Plans by focusing on the
case of Mexico City. This is achieved by applying the complex large-scale integrated open systems
(CLIOS) systemic analysis, in two steps: first, we facilitate the identification of the complexities
and relationships among the essential systems of Mexico City’s urban structure, along with the
recognition of their most important components and the institutions involved within the urban
planning process. Second, we assess the effectiveness of the public policies–strategies that form part
of Mexico City’s Sustainable Mobility Plan and organize them in order of importance. The results
show which principal subsystems should be considered for sustainable mobility and which public
policies–strategies should be prioritized in order to implement the aforementioned plan effectively.
Keywords: urban planning; sustainable urban mobility plans; CLIOS analysis; public policies;
sustainable mobility
1. Introduction
Undoubtedly, transportation is a key factor in shaping an area’s economic health and quality
of life [1]. Transportation systems provide the infrastructure for the mobility of people and goods.
Moreover, they influence patterns of growth and socio-economic activity by providing access to several
different land use types that are spatially separated; thus, allowing people to carry out a diverse range
of everyday activities, such as working, studying and, shopping [1–3].
Because of its intensive use of infrastructure, the transport sector is an important component
of the economy and a common tool used for economic development [4,5]. In the past two decades,
the analytical literature has grown substantially with studies carried out using different approaches,
such as a production function and growth regressions, as well as different variants of these techniques
(using different methodologies, methods and data). Most of these studies concluded that transportation
Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556; doi:10.3390/app10134556 www.mdpi.com/journal/applsci

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 2 of 30
infrastructure and the transportation sector in general contribute to productivity, output, and growth
rate [6–17].
In these growth-focused studies, there is a bias towards the economic impact rather than the social
goals, making it necessary to study the impact of transportation with qualitative parameters, such as
development, and not only on quantifiable ones, such as growth [18].
Furthermore, it is vital to mention that there are also some negative externalities related to
transportation. For example, private cars are responsible for generating the majority of greenhouse
emissions and several distinct pollutants, and these emissions contribute to climate changes, which
could have serious consequences in terms of health and environmental costs [19,20]. Some data
for Mexico are illustrative. In 2008, the pollution generated by gasoline combustion was connected
to 14,000 deaths. In addition, traffic accidents caused 24,000 deaths and left 40,000 disabled and
750,000 injured [21]. The annual cost of these accidents was around 126 billion pesos, which is
equivalent to 1.3% of the National Gross Domestic Product (GDP) [22].
In terms of quality of life and social goals, the long periods of time spent in travelling reduce
the involvement of individuals in their communities and limit social relations [23]. In the study by
Hart [24], it can be appreciated that in regions of heavy traffic, there are 1.15 friends and 2.8 family
members per person. In regions of medium traffic, he finds 2.45 friends and 3.65 family members per
person, while for the case of low traffic, there are 5.35 friends and 6.1 family members per person.
In this pessimistic overview, there is the need to highlight that the degradation of public space due
to the overuse of private vehicles (and its associated infrastructure) has harmful effects, not only upon
the psychology of local population, but also upon the attractiveness and image of the city, which in turn
lowers the value of land use [25]. Consequently, the contemporary challenge of urban traffic and urban
planning systems is to promote sustainable mobility using the available network (infrastructures) and
constituent entities, and with a qualitative improvement based on geospatial information, participation,
accessibility, and personalized travel related services that take into account social groups with different
mobility necessities.
For this reason, many countries, primarily in Europe, have attempted to implement sustainable
urban mobility plans so as to shift from the traditional vehicle-oriented transport planning towards a
new user-friendly way of planning urban mobility. A Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) can
be defined as a plan aimed at establishing a better quality of life via the satisfaction of people and
business mobility needs in cities and their suburbs. It is based on existing planning practices and
considers the principles of integration, participation, and evaluation [26]. The focal point of a SUMP is
the improvement of accessibility within urban areas to offer transportation modes and sustainable
mobility of high quality through and within the urban area [27].
In pursuit of this goal, a SUMP seeks to contribute to development of an urban transport system
that [27]:
• is accessible and inclusive by taking into consideration the basic mobility needs of all users;
• counterpoises and reacts to the diverse demands for mobility and transport services of citizens,
businesses, and industry;
• promotes the integration of different transport modes in order to establish a balanced development;
• covers the requirements of sustainability, through the identification of sustainable development’s
main axes, such as environmental quality, health, social equity, and economic viability;
• enhances efficiency and cost effectiveness;
• optimizes the use of urban space, urban image, and of existing transport infrastructure and services;
• intensifies the attractiveness and amenities of the urban environment and public health that
consequently raises the quality of life;
• upgrades traffic safety and security;
• improves the quality of air by reducing air and noise pollution, greenhouse gas emissions,
and energy consumption.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 3 of 30
A regeneration scheme with the above-mentioned characteristics must have multiple guiding
principles due to the nature of sustainable mobility that considers accessibility, mobility, land use,
air quality issues, etc. Therefore, the regeneration area where the scheme is going to be implemented
should be conceptualized and understood as a whole entity (system) that includes a variety of land-uses
and activities, and where each of its components are interlinked and contribute in different ways to the
overall wellness of the system.
Several studies have highlighted [28,29] that the traditional paradigm of urban mobility planning
based on the capacity concept in which new infrastructure (especially for auto-mobiles) is continuously
built, so that to achieve a better flow of vehicles is no longer adequate because it generates a vicious
cycle of development. Namely, the expansion of infrastructure (dedicated to move auto-mobiles) causes
the phenomenon of urban sprawl, as access to the urban periphery is easier and can be achieved in a
rapid way by the high-speed transportation networks. Nevertheless, such expansion encourages the
increase in car use, which, in order to avoid congestion phenomena, further promotes the construction
of new infrastructure; therefore, the vicious cycle of development is established. The result of such
a development pattern forces citizens to interact less with the city, to travel longer distances, to use
the car and to walk less. This pattern of urban development makes it costly and difficult to establish
public transport systems, travel by bicycle, or walk. Remoteness also requires the consumption of
more energy for transport and the invasion of public space by roads. Moreover, such an unsustainable
development is capable of generating the fragmentation of mobility planning, which, as a consequence,
causes poor adaptation to requirements regarding the sustainable urban mobility and interdisciplinary
approaches, confusion over objectives, priorities, and plans, and finally, lack of communication between
the different stakeholders involved (public institutions, local community, experts, users, vulnerable
groups) [28,30,31].
Hence, it is essential for the successful design of urban mobility plans to consider systemic
approaches [32–35]. The latter can be appreciated via the recommendations of the Committee of the
Regions of the European Union [36], where it is expressed that the development of urban environments
must be based upon a sustainable basis and the mobility of people should not be treated via partial
counter-measures [36] that are strongly characterized by lack of continuity. Therefore, the European
Committee proposes the guidelines, upon which the generation of SUMPs must be based [37]:
(a) a sustainable method that seeks to balance social justice, environmental quality, and economic
development; (b) a systemic approach that considers strategies with their derived policies, programs and
practices of different sectors, levels of authorities, and administrative areas; (c) a strongly participative
and transparent approach that takes into account public involvement and public awareness through
the stages of the planning process; (d) a clear vision, persuasive goals, and incentives that are an
integral part of the sustainable development plan.
Consequently, it is of paramount importance to apply systemic methods to the decision-making of
SUMPs in order to achieve sustainable mobility [38], as it helps to reduce the negative externalities of
urban growth and transportation activities [39,40]. With a systemic approach, a socially, environmentally,
and economically sustainable urban environment is created via the promotion of principles, such as
social responsibility (safety, equality, accessibility to transportation), climate change (use of non-fossil
energy for vehicles, lowering the emissions of vehicles and infrastructures), and the efficient use of
resources [41,42].
Developing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan is a complex, integrated process requiring intensive
cooperation, knowledge exchange, and consultation between planners, politicians, institutions, local,
as well as regional actors and citizens [43]. For this reason, in this study we decided to make use of the
complex large-scale integrated open systems (CLIOS) systemic approach because it perfectly matches
the requirements and challenges of the SUMP process since a complex process must be analysed by
a method capable of describing such complex systems. An integrated process must be supported
by a systemic approach whose components are integrated. Finally, a planning process that requires
intensive cooperation needs to be handled via a method that uses open systems. Moreover, we decided

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 4 of 30
to use the CLIOS analysis because it has been applied previously in transportation studies [44–52] but
not in sustainable mobility and SUMP promotion issues.
The advantages of such a systemic approach to decision-making in SUMP are, among others: focus
on mobility (people), not on transportation (traffic) [53]; balanced development of all relevant transport
modes, encouraging shared mobility approaches [53]; comprehensive set of actions that are not only
focused on infrastructure, so that to achieve cost-effective solutions [53]; establishment of long-term
vision plans that consider short- and medium-term delivery policies-strategies [53]; cooperation and
communication across institutional boundaries; reduced promotion of car oriented approaches so
that to regulate transportation demand [39]; secure, stable, comprehensive, multi-modal, efficient,
environmentally and user friendly urban mobility system [37]; strategic and goal-oriented management;
transparent and participative decision-making via the involvement of numerous stakeholders [54];
reduction of congestion; sustainable freight transport [39]; establishment of communication channels
between different policy areas and removal of institutional barriers [55]; generation of interdisciplinary
approaches and integration of different transport modes (public transport, walking, cycling) [56].
The SUMP approach was proposed in Mexico by the recently elected government as a possible
solution to the problems faced by the majority of Mexican cities, including the capital, which, generally
speaking, follow a 3D (dispersed, distant, and disconnected) model of urban growth, characterized by
a disproportionate, fragmented, and unplanned urban expansion. This model of territorial occupation
is highly unproductive, because it deepens the inequality and generates high levels of pollution,
increasing the risk of climate change [57]. In Mexico, the losses for negative externalities generated
by the excessive use of private cars alone—which is encouraged by the current urban planning
practice—represent, per year, 5379 Mexican pesos per capita, or the equivalent to 4% of the total
GDP of five large metropolitan areas that concentrate 40% of the national urban population [58].
This situation is predicted to worsen if the use of cars continues to grow. It is within this context that
the Mexican government has proposed a SUMP. However, little has been said about how this plan is to
be implemented, which mirrors a situation faced by many other large, fast-growing cities worldwide.
This study applies a CLIOS systemic analysis to Mexico City’s SUMP in order to provide guidelines
to improve its implementation. This is achieved in two steps: first, we facilitate the identification of
the complexities and relationships among the systems of transportation, sustainable mobility, urban
planning, and socio-economic activities, along with the recognition of their most important components
and the institutions involved within the urban planning process. Second, we assess the effectiveness
of the public policy strategies that form part of the Mexico City’s SUMP and organize them in order
of importance.
The main research question for this study is: “How can the implementation of a SUMP in a city
that has not started SUMP procedures, such as Mexico City, be facilitated via a systemic approach?”
This principal question can be divided in four sub-questions:
1. What are the most important components of urban environment for sustainable mobility?
2. What are the relations between them?
3. What is the system’s structure?
4. What are the most important public policies for the promotion of a SUMP in Mexico City?
The paper is structured as follows. Section 2 provides a brief description of the CLIOS analysis
and a general overview of its basic principles. Section 3 describes the application of CLIOS to Mexico
City’s SUMP and, more specifically, is divided into three subsections:

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 5 of 30
1. the representation phase of the CLIOS analysis where the reader can identify the actual problematic
situation in Mexico City in terms of unsustainable development, and, the relations and complexities
between the most important subsystems of Mexico City for integral development;
2. the evaluation phase of CLIOS analysis shows what subsystems and what components of them
are the most important for integral-sustainable development, and secondly, how to assess and
organize hierarchically the public policies-strategies belonging to Mexico City’s SUMP;
3. the implementation phase of CLIOS presents the guidelines to implement the sustainable mobility
plan and the mechanism that establishes how the plan is going to be monitored, reported,
and verified.
Section 4 presents the discussion part of the paper; Section 5 gives some conclusions and future
avenues of research on this approach.
2. Materials and Methods
To provide guidelines for the implementation of sustainable mobility plans, we applied a CLIOS
systemic analysis. The term CLIOS stands for complex, large-scale, integrated, open systems, and was
conceived by Sussman [59] as a way to capture the characteristics of a type of system of increasing
interest for researchers, decision-makers, politicians, and stakeholders. A system is complex if it
is composed of interrelated elements (components and subsystems), where the degree and nature
of the relationships are not well known in terms of their directionality, magnitude, and time scales.
The impact of the CLIOS is of great magnitude, in terms of ample duration and geographical extension.
The subsystems of a CLIOS system are integrated via feedback loops. In addition, CLIOS systems
include social, political, and economic aspects, which is why they are considered open [60].
Due to the fact that the CLIOS analysis is a tool for identifying policy interventions in order to
improve the systems behaviour, it is important to understand the source of the system’s complexity.
In this paper, we decided to think of complexity as a concept related to the four dimensions expressed
by Sussman [50] and can be appreciated in the following lines:
1. internal complexity—is the type of complexity that is defined by the number of components
belonging to the system and the network of interconnections between them;
2. behavioural complexity—this type of complexity is the result of the way that the sets of components
interact with each other;
3. evaluative complexity—this type of complexity results from the competing perspectives of
decision makers and stakeholders in the system who have different points of view in terms of
“good” system performance and how to improve it;
4. nested complexity—resulting by the relationship of information implementation that exists
between the policy and the physical systems (Figure 1). Policy system is the one responsible
for the actions of the physical system as it informs the physical system about changes that need
to happen. The physical system on the other hand, responds by implementing the commands
coming from the policy system, for example, the policy system informs the physical system
that a capacity paradigm of mobility is going to be followed; the physical system responds by
constructing more roads for the territorial displacement of auto-mobiles.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 6 of 30
‐

Figure 1. The nested complexity within a complex large-scale integrated open systems (CLIOS) analysis.
Adapted from [51].
In this section of the paper, we present the “12 Steps in a CLIOS Analysis”, showing, in a general
way, what are the steps (Figure 2) that should be followed within a CLIOS analysis. However, in the
results section, we explain each step in detail and provide the results of our application to the SUMP of
Mexico City.
‐

Figure 2. The phases of CLIOS analysis, proper elaboration based on [52].
The previous figure can be more illustrative via a brief description of the whole CLIOS process,
which can be appreciated in the following lines [52]:
• the first step in the CLIOS analysis is to describe the main characteristics and challenges of
the system;

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 7 of 30
• the second step of the methodology, is to determine which subsystems compose the CLIOS system
and how they interact and connect with each other;
• in the third step, the determined subsystems resulting from the previous step need to be explained
in detail in order to recognize the essential elements in each subsystem;
• the fourth step has as a purpose the description of the system both in terms of structure
(what components form the whole system), but also in terms of interlinks (what is the nature of
the relationships between the system’s elements);
• the fifth step has, as a purpose, the understanding of the system’s overall behaviour. This is
possible through the recognition of the system’s structure concerning both the physical and the
policy systems;
• the sixth step aims to provide the system’s identified common drivers with some necessary tools
for performance evaluation;
• the seventh step permits the identification of performance improvements. The direction of these
improvements can be either from the outer policy system to the physical system (outside in
approach) or from the inner physical system to the exterior policy system (inside out approach);
• the eighth step considers the identification of options for the improvements of system performance
via the description of the factors that cause uncertainty in the performance of the CLIOS system;
• the ninth step evaluates the system’s common drivers through scenario planning in order to
conclude to the most robust solutions in terms of sustainable mobility;
• the tenth step proposes a well-established process in order to elaborate the sustainable plan of
mobility with its derived strategies;
• in the eleventh step of the CLIOS analysis, the structure of the policy system is analysed so
that institutional changes and architecture modifications to be promoted for the elaboration of
sustainable plans of mobility;
• the twelfth step establishes the necessary mechanisms, to monitor and observe whether the
intended improvements in system performance actually occurred.
3. Results
3.1. Representation Phase
3.1.1. System’s Explanation
In this section, we provide a list of characteristics of Mexico City, highlighting some of the most
important problems that are putting the attempt to establish a sustainable mobility environment
in Mexico City and its Metropolitan Area under pressure. These problems have been identified in
literature review (included in the introduction and in the following lines), and are strongly related
to the Mexico City’s SUMP implementation attempt, as well as to the actual problematic situation in
Mexico City in terms of unsustainable urban planning.
• Mexico City is a “Megacity” with more than 20 million inhabitants in its Metropolitan Zone,
producing a very high demand level for mobility in order the people to cover their needs [61].
• Every day, about 17 million trips are made through Mexico City. The extensive network of public
and concessional transport, as well as the road infrastructure, allows the population to access their
workspaces, education, health services, as well as the transport of goods to supply the population
of the city. In recent decades, this system has strengthened in terms of road safety by encouraging
a gradual [35%] decline of road events [62].
• While the rate of traffic deaths has been significantly reduced, the challenges remain great in
achieving an equitable and safe city. In addition to the high number of deaths (659) resulting each
year from traffic events, pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists remain the main victims of the car
drivers driving habits. According to the Ministry of Citizen Security (SSC in Spanish), private

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 8 of 30
cars are involved in 50% of road events. At the same time, according to the same source, 44% of
fatalities were pedestrians and only 8.5% were car drivers [62].
• These patterns of accident rates reflect that—while the mobility system as a whole is safer—the
travel conditions of the most vulnerable road users have not improved: (a) the pedestrians,
predominantly women of low socio-economical level, are the most exposed and vulnerable road
users to traffic events. (b) Adults over the age of 61 are the most common victims of road accidents
with a percentage equal to 21.7%, followed by young people aged 18 to 25. (c) Transit events are
the leading cause of death in Mexico in boys and the second in girls aged 5 to 14 [62].
• The modal distribution in Mexico City can be characterized by a 57% use of public transport,
followed by non-motorized usage 28% and 15% of private auto-mobiles use. While the average
cost of public transport services is equal to 16 Mexican pesos considering that 50.5% of the trips
total include at least two modes of transport in order for people to reach their destinations [63].
• The increased private auto usage causes several negative externalities, such as poor air quality,
road accidents and congestion that not only affect the people that make use of the cars, but society
as a whole [64].
• The real estate market determines the current model of urban growth in Mexico City as well as
its Metropolitan Zone; until today, it has been predominantly dispersed, disordered, with low
densities, without mixed uses and unsustainable. This 3D (disperse, distant, disordered) urban
model demands the expenditure of a greater amount of energy for transportation and for road
space allocation, a phenomenon that is reflected in the majority of Mexican cities that show a
faster increase in the number of private cars in comparison to its population [65].
• The majority of investments (65%), product of public policies oriented to the mobility sector,
are destined to be used in road infrastructure for private cars [66].
• The travel times in Mexico City increase steadily. In fact, the transfer times and transport modes
used are very unevenly distributed in Mexico City and its suburban area. This is due to the
unequal distribution of travel destination areas and to the lack of coverage and serious operational
flaws of mass transit networks [67].
• There is no integrated vision of the mobility subject in Mexico City: fragmentation prevails
between the different modes of transport. This is compounded by the lack of a metropolitan
perspective, which fails to understand Mexico City and its suburbs municipalities as a single
system of mobility. In reality, the city’s mobility policies are delinked from territorial occupancy
policies and programs of land use [67].
• There is no comprehensive traffic management aimed at giving fluidity and safety to the
displacement of different transport modes and users. The city’s cycling infrastructure is scarce,
disconnected, and concentrated in the city’s central areas [67].
• It is estimated that 101 trains (out of 390 trains in total) of the “Metro” mass transit system are
out of operation, while their failures are continuous. Only in 2017 there were 22.195 systems
failures, generating delays to millions of people a year [67]. The electrical transport system
(trolleybuses and light rails) has a more acute crisis. Its 300 trolleybuses exceed 20 years of useful
life, its fleet has been reduced by 12% since 2017, and only 63% of the remaining trolleybuses is in
operation. In addition, a third of the light rail fleet is out of operation for a variety of reasons [67].
Furthermore, the City’s Passengers Transport Network (RTP in Spanish) acquired new units in the
last two years, nevertheless, 27% of its public service fleet is out of operation. Only the Metrobus
(Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system) has received investment for its expansion, but 7% of its fleet is in
maintenance and has saturation problems that reduce the quality of travel [67].
• There are limited cases of established policies related to inter-modality such as park and ride, park
and bike, etc., or are concentrated to the central areas of the city [67].

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 9 of 30
• It can be observed, an absence of the necessary socio-economic motives in order to establish push
and pull policies and change the actual transportation paradigm from the motorized private
vehicles towards public and non-motorized transportation [64].
• There are difficulties in traffic regulations concerning the territorial displacement of micromobility
vehicles, such as e-scooters, hoverboards, and the connectivity of them with more “traditional”
sustainable mobility modes, such as bicycles [62].
• The main driving policy (until now) is that of economic growth instead of policies oriented
towards social aspects and development [52].
• Nowadays, there is a potentially extraordinary political shift for Mexico, with the election of
President López Obrador in 2019, and the new government’s efforts to move from a transportation
paradigm to a mobility one via the sustainable plan of mobility.
The aforementioned Federal government of Mexico, along with the government of Mexico
City, proposed a SUMP with its associated strategies, policies, and lines of actions (Figure 3) in
order to neutralize the actual problematic situation in terms of mobility, and to support the new
mobility paradigm.
 ‐
 ‐
‐

‐


Figure 3. The sustainable urban mobility plan of Mexico City.
The plan is based upon three strategic axes that are called integrate, improve, and protect,
respectively. The integrate strategic axis consists of the following public policies:
1. integration of public transportation systems; the focal point of this policy is based upon the
unification of all the public transport services managed by the government of Mexico City into a
single prepaid system. The network will count with a unified image, a single map and optimized
connections between mass transit stations;
2. expansion of the mass transport network coverage; this policy is oriented toward an increase in
the mass transit network managed by the government of Mexico City and the construction of the
cable bus transportation system;
3. integral reform of concession transport; this policy is aimed at the improvement of concession
transport (mini-buses, vans, mini-vans) and the level of service provided by this kind of
transportation modes. Thus, all the circulating units are going to be equipped with Global
Positioning System (GPS) platforms that will be available to the public for monitoring operation
and verification of routes;

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 10 of 30
4. policy oriented towards the promotion of walking and cycling, this policy consists of the expansion
of bike lanes network and the establishment of bicycle parking places next to mass transit stations
(intermodalism).
The improve strategy depends on the public policies seen in the following lines:
1. improvement of public transport systems; this policy is oriented towards the enhancement
of public transport via the acquisition of new units (100 units for the electric transportation
modes and 800 units for the public bus systems) as well as a periodical metro maintenance.
Furthermore, this policy considers the remodelling of 2 modal transfer centres, the management
of agglomerations in at least five Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) stations, and the implementation of
exclusive lanes for public transport;
2. transit and parking places management policy, which is aimed at the integration of automated
traffic light systems and the integration of parking-meter systems;
3. policy for regulation and improvement of private mobility services; this policy considers the
proposal for comprehensive regulation of taxi services and the publication of guidelines for the
operation of bicycle systems and micromobility vehicles;
4. policy of innovation and technological improvement, contemplating the installation of the control
and innovation centre of mobility in Mexico City, as well as, the release of public transport’s open
data. Furthermore, this policy takes into account the establishment of comprehensive programs
related to electric mobility and smart mobility in Mexico City;
5. comprehensive policy of freight transport, which is based on the publication of the strategic cargo
plan for Mexico City;
6. citizen attention policy, which considers the geographic expansion of care centres.
While the protect strategy is based on the following public policies:
1. safe streets policy, which considers the establishment of safe infrastructure with elements of
universal accessibility for walking and cycling;
2. road safety policy that is oriented to the behaviour change of drivers via the implementation of
the good driver’s decalogue and the establishment of a system of civic sanctions;
3. mobility with gender perspective policy, aimed at an improved perception of safety levels among
the female public transport users, through the prevention of harassment in the transportation
system of Mexico City.
3.1.2. Identify Major Subsystems
In our case, via the previously identified problems of Mexico City, we were able to recognize the
four physical subsystems as the aforementioned problems are strongly related to transportation, urban
planning, sustainable mobility, and socio-economic activities (Figure 4).
‐
‐
‐
Figure 4. The subsystems extracted by the actual situation in Mexico City and its suburbs.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 11 of 30
The socio-economic activities subsystem has a direct connection with the subsystem of urban
planning because the population’s socio-economic activities give form to the urban planning via
the definition of land use. Moreover, the socio-economic activities subsystem influences both the
transportation and sustainable mobility subsystems by generating aggregate transportation demand
that is oriented towards vehicles and people respectively.
The urban planning subsystem provides the necessary background in order the people to realize
their socio-economic activities within open (parks, sports centres) and closed (universities, schools,
offices, industries) places. Furthermore, urban planning is strongly connected to transportation because
according to the models of urban design, aggregate transportation demand can be generated and the
usage of certain modes of transportation can be encouraged, for example, the urban sprawl with no
densification patterns encourages the usage of private auto-mobiles. In addition, the urban planning
subsystem influences the sustainable mobility-environment subsystem because urban planning is
responsible for the establishment of accessibility via mixed land use so that the people to cover their
daily activities within a compact city.
On its part, the subsystem of transportation influences the urban planning via several policies
and can manipulate the city’s urban development patterns, for example, transit oriented development,
pacification of transit in school areas, and generation of car-free roads. Transportation through its
negative externalities such as environmental pollution, road accidents, and congestion can affect the
environment, making necessary the establishment of a sustainable urban mobility plan. Moreover,
the transportation subsystem affects the system of socio-economic activities by offering the necessary
means in order the people to travel and conclude their everyday activities.
The sustainable mobility subsystem is capable to influence transportation systems via the usage of
new and more efficient modes so that the people to cover their mobility needs, such as micromobility
vehicles, electric and hybrid cars. Moreover, the sustainable mobility can set the basis in order the
urban planning to change accordingly, so that to encourage the pedestrian, cyclist, micromobility
user, and user of public transport mobility, for example, the densification of land use close to stations
of public transport and bike lanes. Finally, the sustainable mobility subsystem can influence the
subsystem of socio-economic activities by providing the necessary means in order the people to cover
their everyday activities without the need to use a private auto-mobile.
3.1.3. Develop the CLIOS Diagram via System Description
In this step, the four subsystems seen previously (socio-economic activities, sustainable mobility,
transportation, and urban planning) are going to be analysed exhaustively so that to recognize the
major elements in each subsystem (Figures 5–8). The nature of the system is visualized in a CLIOS
analysis as a network-type diagram with nodes representing elements, and lines the relationships
between them [68]. Each of these elements can be one of the three following types [51]:
• component; this is the CLIOS basic type of element and belong to the physical system;
• policy lever; the elements of this type belong to the physical system but are directly influenced by
the institutions and organizations belonging to the policy system;
• common drivers; these are very important elements that belong to various physical subsystems,
and, for that reason, can influence the behaviour and performance of different subsystems.
Another very important issue that needs to be taken into account within the CLIOS diagram
development is the nature of the links that interconnect each element. According to Dodder and
Sussman [51], the links should indicate at least:
1. the direction of influence and the existence of feedback loops;
2. the intensity of influence (important or marginal impacts on the interlinked elements).

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 12 of 30
Hence, the element type as well as the characterization of the individual links for the identified
four physical subsystems of our case study, can be appreciated in Figures 5–8. Nevertheless, it should
be noted that the following figures are the result of an extensive literature review process where several
works have been consulted [4,51,64–67], [69–79] and interlinks have been created, where at first were
not obvious.
‐
Figure 5. The subsystem of socio–economic activities concerning common drivers-policy levers indicators.
‐
Figure 6. The subsystem of urban planning concerning common drivers-policy levers indicators.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 13 of 30
‐
‐
‐

Figure 7. The subsystem of transportation concerning common drivers-policy levers indicators.
Adapted from [51].
‐
‐
‐

Figure 8. The subsystem of sustainable mobility concerning common drivers-policy levers indicators.
3.1.4. Seek Insight about System Behaviour
In this stage, it is necessary to understand the system’s overall behaviour. This is viable through
the recognition of the system’s structure at its different levels (both the physical and policy systems)
and by asking the following types of questions concerning the relations within the policy system [52]:
• What is the hierarchical structure of the policy system, and are there strong command and control
relations among the organizations (Figure 9)?
• Are the relationships between organizations characterized by conflict or cooperation (Figure 10)?
• What is the nature of interaction between organizations that both influence the same subsystems
within the physical system (Figure 10)?

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 14 of 30


Figure 9. The hierarchical structure of the policy system.


Figure 10. The relations between different organizations within the policy system. Adapted from [80].
The relationships between different policy institutions are characterized, in general, by synergy
due to the nature of sustainable mobility that includes issues like transportation, geography, urban
planning, accessibility and environmental matters. Nevertheless, the lack of a systematized channel of
communication has as a result the overlapping of activities, the incoherence of data and the difficulty
to share and have access to useful data. Furthermore, the lack of a common geotechnological inventory
has as a consequence the ignorance of certain infrastructure that due to the Sustainable Mobility Plan,
will require a new way to see, think, build, maintain, and improve certain infrastructure of which
almost nothing is known, because everything has, until now, been focused towards the auto-mobiles
instead of people.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 15 of 30
However, it is also very important for the understanding of system’s behaviour to distinguish the
links between the policy and the physical systems by asking the following questions [52]:
• Are there components within the physical systems that are influenced by many different
organizations in the policy system (Figure 11)?
• Are there organizations on the policy system that have an influence on many components within
the physical system (Figure 11)?
The components that have been characterized as common drivers as has been stated before are
the most important ones due to their presence in different subsystems of the CLIOS that influences the
behaviour of each subsystem and the CLIOS as a whole. For this reason, we are going to highlight
the links between the organizations of the policy system and the common drivers of the physical
system. More specifically, through the following figure we can appreciate the common drivers that are
influenced by many different organizations belonging in the policy sphere. Moreover, we are able to
identify the organizations of the policy sphere that have an influence on many different components
within the physical system.
‐


‐
Figure 11. Links between the policy and the physical spheres.
3.2. Evaluation Phase
The evaluation phase aims to establish the required mechanisms for systems performance
measures-improvements, as well as the identification of the important factors that may cause instability
to the overall system’s performance if not prioritized and treated accordingly within the urban planning
process. The three steps contained within the evaluation phase can be seen in the following lines:
3.2.1. Identify and Refine Performance Measures
The objective of this stage is to provide the previously identified common drivers with some
necessary tools for performance evaluation. The performance measures that could be applied in order
to evaluate performance at certain common drivers can be appreciated in the following table (Table 1).

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 16 of 30
Table 1. The instruments for performance measurement.
ID
Common
Drivers
Unit of Measurement Indicators
1 Policy Levers National currency.
Level of investment for the construction of
infrastructure related to private cars, bikes,
and public transportation modes [66].
2 Environment
Parts per million, parts per hundred million,
micrograms per cubic meter, among others.
Environmental pollutants, such as carbon
monoxide, nitrogen oxides and
hydrocarbons [81].
3 Human health
Road accidents deaths and injuries per
municipality, road accidents deaths and
injuries per census tract. Deaths and health
problems caused by poor air quality per
municipality, deaths and health problems
caused by poor air quality per census tract.
Effects caused by poor air quality and road
accidents, such as number of people who
die by poor air quality or by road accidents,
number of people injured by road accidents,
number of people having health problems,
such as asthma by the poor quality of air,
etc. [21,22].
4 Population
Total population per census tract, total
population per block. Number of disabled
people per census tract, number of disabled
people per block. Age, gender, level of
studies, and salary per person.
Socio–demographic indicators. For
example, total number of people living
within a certain geographic area, the age,
gender, income, level of studies, and the
level of disability of the inhabitants of a
certain geographic area [82].
5
Transportation
Demand
Land use type per block, total of vehicles
per intersection, total population per block.
Indicators related with the flow of vehicles
and the factors that influence it, such as
number of vehicles, land use type,
and population concentration [71,82,83].
6 Accessibility
Number of blocks having high or very high
auto-sufficiency level per census tract,
number of blocks having a walk-able
proximity level to various points of interest
per census tract.
Indicators related with the capacity of
people to cover their needs without the
usage of private auto-mobiles. For instance,
number of blocks that have high or very
high auto-sufficiency level, proximity level
of each block (number of blocks that have
points of interest within 750 meters
distance) [71,72].
7 Land use
Land use type per block and total
population per block.
Indicators of urban planning, such as land
use type per block and population
concentration (number of people) [71,72].
8
Catchment area
of specific
means
Meters, kilometres
Indicators related to the vicinity of a stop,
station, or terminal belonging to a transport
line. For instance, bike sharing catchment
area, public transport catchment area
[84,85].
9
Urban
Transportation
Infrastructure
and
transportation
modes choice
National currency, travels made by
non-motorized modes of transport, private
transport and public transport divided by
the total number of travels realized in a city.
Level of investment for the construction of
infrastructure related to private cars, bikes,
public transportation modes, and indicators
of modal distribution. [66,67,72,86].
10 Quality of life
Road accidents deaths and injuries per city.
Deaths and health problems caused by poor
air quality per city. Number of people with
access to health services per city, number of
homicides per city. Number of time spent in
the traffic (minutes-hours) per day. Number
of friends and familiars per person.
Indicators associated to the different
dimensions of life’s quality. For example,
education level, work, social capacity,
security, health, environment etc. [87].
3.2.2. Identify Options for System Performance Improvements
In our case of CLIOS analysis, the options that have been identified for the improvement of
system’s performance can be seen in the following lines.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 17 of 30
• establish metadata norms in order to enhance the interoperability of data as well as the
communication and the data searching between the organizations that belong to the policy
system (inside out);
• generate an inventory related to the urban transportation infrastructure and the urban surroundings
that are associated to the sustainable modes of transportation in order to be able to evaluate their
levels of coverage and functionality (inside out);
• institute a systematized channel of communication between different organizations of the policy
sphere in order to avoid the overlapping of activities, data incoherence, and simultaneously to
enhance data sharing and the co-management of the sustainable urban mobility in Mexico City
(inside out);
• integrate the city’s different transport systems, promote active transportation modes and usage of
public transport (outside in);
• improve the infrastructure and existing transport services with the object of increasing the
accessibility of the people, decreasing transfer times, improving travel conditions, and making
more efficient the transportation of goods (outside in);
• protect the users of different systems of transport through the provision of infrastructure and
inclusive, worthy and safe services (outside in).
3.2.3. Flag Important Areas of Uncertainty
In our study, the most important elements that need to be managed primarily so that to not
generate instability and uncertainty in the system’s behaviour are the common drivers (seen in Table 2),
that truly are essential components for the establishment of a sustainable mobility environment.
The question that arises is how to prioritize these common drivers in order to evaluate public policies
and promote the ones with the highest positive impact to the CLIOS system (seen in Section 3.2.4).
3.2.4. Evaluate Options and Select Robust Ones that Perform “Best” Across Uncertainties
In this step, the identified common drivers were evaluated through scenario planning in order
to conclude to the most robust solutions in terms of sustainable mobility. One way to represent
robustness is through a matrix (Tables 2–4), where the columns represent different scenarios (which
may be combination of common drivers that tell a “story” about the political, urban planning, mobility,
accessibility future of Mexico City). On the other hand, the rows of the matrix represent strategies
belonging to Mexico City’s sustainable mobility plan (seen in Figure 2) that influence the common
drivers of the study. By that way, we are able to see how the strategies perform across different common
drivers, as well as, the justification of the relationships between them. The logic for filling up the
Tables 2–4 is to highlight the influence that each of the public policies (row) has upon the common
drivers (column). For example the creation of safe infrastructure that permits unhindered walking and
cycling is able to change the physical characteristics of Urban Transportation Infrastructure (UTI) and
to encourage the use of such sustainable modes that will eventually affect positively the accessibility of
people, human health (through active transport), quality of life (via safety and inclusiveness), land
use change through urban design, permitting the densification of land use in places where bike lanes,
and pedestrian zones are built so that the people to interact more with the city and its features. Finally,
a policy of this nature is going to affect the city’s population via civic awareness (education) so to
respect the specially designed places (e.g., ramps).

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 18 of 30
Table 2. Hierarchical structure of public policies concerning the protect strategy via CLIOS.
Common Drivers
Policies for Urban
Mobility Resulting from
Mexico City’s
Sustainable Mobility
Plan
Transportation
Demand
UTI and
Transportation
Modes Usage
Environment Accessibility Human Health
Quality of
Life
Population Land Use
Safe infrastructure with
universal accessibility in
order to freely walking
and cycling.
X (the transportation
infrastructure needs
to adjust to the
mobility’s necessities
of people with
different capacities so
that to use modes of
sustainable
transportation).
X (physical
and social
accessibility).
X (active
transport).
X (safety and
inclusiveness).
X (education
and
capacitation).
X (urban
design).
Road security policies
oriented to behavioural
change.
X (safe
infrastructure).
X (road
security).
X (safety).
X
(education,
capacitation).
Mobility with gender
perspective policy.
X (Transport services
that consider the
destinations and
women travel hours.
X (safety).
X
(education,
awareness).

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 19 of 30
Table 3. Hierarchical structure of public policies concerning the integrate strategy via CLIOS.
Common Drivers
Policies for Urban
Mexico City’s
Plan
Transportation
Demand
UTI and
Transportation
Modes Usage
Environment Accessibility Human Health Quality of Life Population Land Use
Integration of public
transport systems policy.
X (the integration of
public transport
systems will make
easier the usage of
public transport via
intermodalism).
X (establishment of
the necessary
infrastructure that
will make possible the
integration of public
transport systems).
X (social
accessibility).
X (better quality
of service,
commodity).
Expansion of the
mass-transport network
coverage policy.
X (an improvement in
public transport
system regarding
coverage can increase
public transport
usage).
X (construction of
new lines of public
transport).
X (reduction of
environmental
pollution).
X (physical
accessibility)
X (active
transport due to
the fact that the
user of public
transport when
it is not on the
bus it is a
pedestrian or
cyclist).
X (increase in
social
interaction
among public
transport users).
X (the public
transport
infrastructure is
going to be
installed where
there is a great
number of
people).
X (urban design
that benefits the
city’s land uses).
Integral reform of the
concession transport.
X (fleet renewal).
X (fleet renewal
that means a
better
technology of
vehicles and less
environmental
pollutants).
X (due to the
advances in
urban space and
the
environment).
X (working
opportunities).
Integration of bicycle
usage to the mobility
system.
X (the establishment
of a friendly
environment in terms
of cyclist mobility is
able to generate an
increase in bicycle
usage).
X (construction of
bike lanes, expansion
of Ecobici bicycle
sharing project,
establishment of the
cyclist infrastructure
that permits
intermodalism.
X (reduction of
environmental
pollution).
X (physical
accessibility).
X (active
transport).
X (due to the
advances in
urban space and
the
environment).
X (the bike
infrastructure is
going to be
installed where
there is a great
number of
people).
X (urban design
that benefits the
city’s image and
the city’s land
uses).

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 20 of 30
Table 4. Hierarchical structure of public policies concerning the improve strategy via CLIOS.
Common Drivers
Policies for Urban
Mexico City’s
Plan
Transportation Demand
UTI and Transportation
Modes Usage
Environment Accessibility
Human
Health
Quality of
Life
Population Land Use
Improvement of public
transport systems policy.
X (a considerable
improvement in public
transport system in terms
of coverage, travels
frequency and comfort is
able to generate an
increase in the public
transport modes usage).
X (fleet renewal,
construction of new lines
of public transport,
construction of new
accessible infrastructure).
X (fleet renewal
that is friendlier
with the
environment).
X (due to the
advances in
urban space
and the
environment).
X (better quality
of service,
commodity and
frequency of
service).
Transit and parking
places management
policy.
X (roads infrastructure
and parking places
management).
Policy for regulation and
improvement of private
mobility services.
X (Regulation of new
mobility systems:
micromobility vehicles
and dockless bikes.
Regulation and
improvement of the
traditional taxi system
and the application-based
taxi system).
Policy of Innovation and
technological
improvement.
X (alternative
transportation demand,
e.g. working via
internet).
X (e-mobility).
X (better quality
of service,
commodity,
information
about travels).
Comprehensive policy of
freight transport.
X (e-mobility, usage of
infrastructure).
X (location of
distribution
centres-logistics).
X (urban design
for freight
transport).
Citizen attention policy.
X (inclusion
via
participation.
X (enhanced
links with the
public).

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 21 of 30
3.3. Implementation Phase
In this phase are proposed the necessary steps in order the Mexico City’s sustainable mobility
plan to pass from the conceptual world to the real one and be implemented. Hence, within the
implementation phase, it is important to define the strategy for SUMP implementation, along
with the understanding of opportunities concerning institutional changes and the establishment of
post-implementation mechanisms for monitoring, reporting, and evaluation.
3.3.1. Strategy for Implementation
Once the prioritization of different strategies has been viable through the method of scenarios, we
can propose a process in order to elaborate the sustainable plan of mobility with its derived strategies.
The process for the implementation of the SUMP can be appreciated in the following lines (Figure 12):



‐
‐
‐
Figure 12. Process of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (SUMP) elaboration, adapted from [65].
3.3.2. Identify Opportunities for Institutional Changes and Architecture
• Establish metadata norms in order to enhance the interoperability of data, as well as the
communication and the data searching between the organizations that belong to the policy
system and are working towards sustainable mobility.
• Generate an inventory related to the urban transportation infrastructure and the urban
surroundings that are associated to the sustainable modes of transportation in order to be
able to evaluate their levels of coverage and functionality. The previously mentioned inventory
will be used by all the organizations that belong to the policy sphere of the CLIOS analysis and
will be enriched according to the investigation made by them.
• Institute a systematized channel of communication between different organizations of the policy
sphere in order to avoid the overlapping of activities, data incoherence, and simultaneously to
enhance data sharing and the co-management of the sustainable urban mobility in Mexico City.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 22 of 30
3.3.3. Post-Implementation Evaluation and Modification
Once the strategies-public policies have been implemented, the following step is to monitor if the
expected improvements in system performance actually occurred. However, the capability to monitor
the success of policy options is often absent, and therefore one may include monitoring systems as part
of the strategy for implementation. For this reason, it is proposed through this paper to incorporate the
SUMPs generated indicators to a Measuring Reporting and Verifying (MRV) mechanism in order to
clarify the processes related to the generation of the indicators, for example via the MRV mechanism
we will be able to know who measures, who reports, who verifies etc. This mechanism was chosen for
the following reasons [88]:
• it facilitates decision-making and planning;
• it supports the implementation of the established action lines and generates feedback on
their effectiveness;
• it promotes coordination and communication between the issuing sector;
• it generates comparable and transparent information;
• it highlights good practices.
The first letter composing the MRV mechanism is the “M” that stands for measurement and/or
monitoring, in this stage it is included a set of actions whose objective is to determine the values of
the parameters that were taken into account. The measurement is used to compare the actual results
with the goals established for a specific indicator. However, in a broader sense, the “M” also means,
“monitoring”, referring to the monitoring process of an indicator that is carried out over a determined
period of time, in order to compare the results with the estimated values [89]. The letter “R”, refers to
the reporting stage, which follows the previous measurement-monitoring stage. The reporting stage
includes the relevant information pertaining to mitigation measures, such as, the indicators that have
been used and the calculation methods for each one of them. This report can be done at a national or
international level depending on the particular objectives of the project [89].
Finally, the letter “V” corresponds to the verification process of the previously measured-monitored
and reported phases. This phase is related to all the activities undertaken so that to validate, compare,
evaluate or provide an opinion upon the accuracy of the measurements with the objective to improve
project execution and obtain better results. The verification—depending on the particular objectives of
each project—can be carried out by the same institutions that implement the program or by a third
party [89]. Some important questions (Table 5) need to be used as a guide within the MRV process in
order to provide information about the required parameters of each phase.
Table 5. Structure of MRV [89].
Measurement Report Verification
How to measure? What to report? What to Verify?
What sources of information are used? How to report? How to Verify?
When to measure? When to report? When to Verify?
Who measures? Who reports? Who Verifies?
What actions and/or assumptions are necessary in order to
carry out the measurement and monitoring phases?
The answers to the above issues allow the MRV mechanism to be clear and accurate for the
objectives required, whichever is the sector in which the mitigation strategy is developed. The MRV
mechanism should consider all kinds of indicators that may be useful, with relatively simple way
of measurement in order to enable the governmental agents to follow up the proposed strategies.
Likewise, it is necessary to gather all the elements that may support the whole process, which means
better databases need to be generated with greater reliability and accuracy.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 23 of 30
4. Discussion
Based upon the studies seen in the introduction section of the paper [37–56], we decided to apply
the CLIOS systemic analysis to Mexico City’s SUMP, in order to provide guidelines to improve its
implementation and to serve the present study as a point of reference for other cities around the world
that have not adopted SUMP procedures. The soundest part of this study is the theoretical construction
of a set of subsystems related to the Mexico City’s urban structure that permits the identification of the
most important components and the type of connections between them. By that way, the decision
makers are able to realize what the types of complexity between the different subsystems are, how the
systems behave, and what has to be done in order to support the new mobility paradigm in Mexico City.
Moreover, through systems theory we were able to realize that the most important elements for
sustainable urban mobility are accessibility and land use due to the fact that sustainable transportation
modes (walking, cycling, and public transport usage) do not have the capacity to cover long distances.
Therefore, it is necessary the existence of high density patterns close to the people’s habitat in order to
cover their everyday activities without the need to use a car.
In addition, human health, environment, and quality of life are also very important components
that need to be taken into account within the sustainable urban mobility framework as the establishment
of sustainable transportation modes has the ability to affect positively both human health through
active transportation and the environment via the reduction of the pollution generated by private
motorized transport, leading, as a consequence, to a better quality of life.
Furthermore, it is worth mentioning that equally important within a sustainable mobility
framework are the population, transportation demand, and infrastructure and transportation modes
usage. This is because population is capable to generate aggregate transportation demand and
considerable urban transportation infrastructure usage. On the other hand, transportation demand
and urban transportation infrastructure set the background for the territorial displacements of people
and define their everyday travels.
Through the identification of the previously mentioned common drivers we were able to generate
logical connections with the public policies and strategies belonging to the Mexico City’s SUMP so
that to organize them in order of importance. Our findings show that the most important strategy in
terms of influence upon the common drivers is the “integrate” one and the most important policies
are the integration of bicycle usage to the mobility system and the expansion of the mass-transport
network. Once this integrate strategy is well established, then we might want to continue with the
“improve” strategy. This one is related to the improvement of public transport systems and followed
by the “secure” strategy, with its policy named safe infrastructure with universal accessibility, in order
to allow free walking and cycling.
Finally, concerning more technical, short-term objectives, this paper proposes the following lines
of action in order to help the implementation of Mexico City’s SUMP:
• form mechanisms such as metadata norms that enhance interoperability of data and data searching
between institutions residing within the policy system and are oriented towards sustainable
mobility planning;
• develop a shared diagnostic apparatus (inventory) that considers urban transportation
infrastructure and city’s urban environment coverage and functionality so that to create a
friendly habitat for pedestrians, cyclists and users of public transport. This apparatus will be
updated periodically according to the research made by the institutions that belong to the policy
sphere of CLIOS analysis and will be strongly characterized by continuity;
• establish a formal channel of communication that permits the on-time connections between
different organizations of the policy sphere so that to strengthen the co-management activities of
sustainable urban mobility in the city of Mexico and to avoid the phenomena of data incoherence
and activities overlapping.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 24 of 30
5. Conclusions
The twentieth century was decisive for the urbanization of the world as economic, social, cultural,
and political processes, such as globalization in conjunction with population growth, caused the
expansion of cities [90]. Hence, the cities needed to be remodelled as they faced overpopulation,
peripheral formations and metropolisation. The structure of the city had transformed into a diversified,
multinuclear form, with high rates of environmental pollution and internal insecurity [90]. This situation
resulted in the disorder of urban space, the deterioration of public space, the weakening of links between
communities and the massive exodus to the periphery of many people, generating the phenomenon of
suburbanization [91]. Through the phenomenon of suburbanization, it became apparent that travels
within cities and from cities to other regions were essential. Transport then emerged as a key element
for urban development [92].
However, the 21st century introduced new challenges to which the concept of transport failed to
respond, such as environmental problems, major congestion, the invasion of public space in order to
build new roads and move vehicles, noise, barrier effects, the inclusive-equitable management, and the
humanization of urban management [51,92,93]. Therefore, the literature shows a transition from one
approach in terms of transport to one in terms of mobility [90,94–102]. It is worth mentioning that
this shift from transport to mobility means moving from an approach oriented to the movement of
vehicles and the infrastructure necessary for them, to a mobility approach interested in the movements
of individuals [90].
The performance of the transportation system has the capacity to influence several other subsystems
within an urban and metropolitan area due to the interlinks between them. The transportation/urban
planning/and sustainable mobility subsystems are very important elements in a megacity or a fast
growing urban area as the impact of transportation on the environment and land use affects the level
of socio-economic activities, which will ultimately influence the people’s quality of life and will make
necessary the promotion and usage of more sustainable and efficient ways of transport [103–105]. Thus,
transportation and urban planning via their associated strategies-public policies and decision-making
indirectly determine the vision of the community’s quality of life through the establishment of strategic
transportation investment and system operations directions for a geographic area.
Because of the transportation’s relation with other essential subsystems of a city’s urban structure,
a system’s approach has been suggested to be part of the concept of sustainable development oriented
planning [104,106–108]. The systemic approach takes into consideration whole systems, instead of
assessing each of the system’s components separately; this requires comprehensive and interdisciplinary
research methods, which is time consuming and data intensive, but provides more useful information.
Nevertheless, big cities, such as Mexico City, are experiencing and will continue to experience
significant growth, so it is very important to be able to deliver integral and holistic plans of mobility in a
successful and sustainable manner. Experience with cases and projects in the past have given us insight
into the failures and, according to Klynveld Peat Marwick Goerdeler (KPMG) [109], these experiences
show that we need to take some points into consideration if we want to succeed:
• project environment and turbulence;
• political control and sponsorship;
• role of national government;
• effectiveness of the plan;
• effectiveness of procurement and financing;
• operations organization.
Considering these facts, this study applied a CLIOS systemic analysis to Mexico City’s Sustainable
Mobility Plan in order to provide guidelines to make its implementation more effective. This was
achieved in two steps: first, we facilitated the identification of the complexities and relationships among
the systems of transportation, sustainable mobility, urban planning, and socio-economic activities,
along with the recognition of their most important components and the institutions involved within

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 25 of 30
the urban planning process. Second, we assessed the effectiveness of the public policy strategies that
form part of the Mexico City’s Sustainable Plan of Mobility and organized them hierarchically.
This paper can contribute in promoting and organizing, in order of importance,
transportation-urban planning policies, which can mitigate the problems of urban-metropolitan
regions with respect to inaccessibility and private auto-mobiles overuse. It is expected that a strategy
or policies of sustainable mobility can play their role in alleviating the low-income families (that do not
have necessarily the opportunity to own a car) by reducing the times needed for territorial displacement
via alternative transportation modes, improving by that way the competitiveness of population, urban
development and quality of life.
In addition, the present work provides evidence on how certain components of urban structure
within a megalopolis, such as Mexico City, are linked to various public policies–strategies, so that
governmental decision-makers can assess the effectiveness of public policies–strategies according to the
co-benefits that their implementation would mean to the aforementioned urban structure components.
However, there are some aspects that need to be considered in order to further enrich the
sustainable development oriented planning [108]:
• the establishment of sustainable mobility within a huge metropolitan area as that of Mexico
City it is not a easy task that will be solved in an instant. There is the need to change the way
transportation issues are conceptualized and, therefore, to establish long-term goals that will last
for different re-election cycles so that to assure continuity. Moreover, it is essential to interlink
these goals to certain time plans in order to facilitate the implementation process;
• sustainable mobility takes into consideration various aspects such as transportation, land use,
socio-economic activities, accessibility, the environment, and quality of life. Therefore, it is
necessary to treat sustainable mobility matters via interdisciplinary and systemic approaches
that permit the examination of the system’s totality in order to identify the vision, system goals
and objectives as well as the impacts. Furthermore, configurations related to SUMP within a
megacity, such as Mexico City, need to consider multiscale analysis due to the collaboration
between different states, counties, municipalities, and localities.
• the planning of sustainable urban mobility is a strongly political process, as the decisions taken
into the policy sphere set the basis for the SUMP application and its outcomes are often influenced
by the opinions of different political institutions and lobbies. The procedure consists of dealing
and looking for consensus among stakeholders with sometimes different points of view. Hence, an
effective planning process must have the ability to incorporate new information for comparative
evaluation of alternatives and to provide the opportunities to all stakeholders to be involved and
to be able to influence in the decision making process;
• the institutions responsible for the sustainable mobility planning need to count with the institutional
structures and the skills needed to implement, operate, and maintain sustainable mobility projects
within transportation systems. In addition, the ideas, cultural norms, orientations, and processes
that the institution’s elements adopt are suggested to be those that comply with the principles of
sustainable mobility.
The next step to consider is the combination of the CLIOS analysis with quantitative, geospatial
and participative methodologies in order to evaluate mobility plans with their derived strategies and
public policies, and to be able create global indexes that could reveal to the public authorities the
quality of urban mobility within certain geographic areas by taking into account the perception of
the people.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, I.C. Formal analysis, I.C. and L.A.-I.; Investigation, I.C., L.A.-I., E.B.
and C.K.; Methodology, I.C.; Supervision, I.C.; Writing – original draft, I.C.; Writing – review editing, L.A.-I.,
E.B., C.K. and L.C.-B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 26 of 30
Acknowledgments: I.C. specially acknowledges the support from the DGAPA scholarship program.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Bakogiannis, E.; Kyriakidis, C.; Siti, M. Land use and transportation: Identifying the relationship between
parking and land use in the Municipality of Zografou, Athens. Int. J. Real Estate Land Plan. 2018, 1, 2623–4807.
2. Hanson, S.; Giuliano, G. The Geography of Urban Transportation, 3rd ed.; Guilford Press: New York, NY, USA, 2004.
3. Bakogiannis, E.; Kyriakidis, C.; Papagerasimou, T.; Kourmpa, E. Applying low-cost interventions for
promoting sustainable mobility in cities. In Proceedings of the 16th Tactical Scientific Conference (ERSA-GR),
Athens, Greece, 22–23 June 2018.
4. Rodrigue, J.P. The Geography of Transport Systems, 4th ed.; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2017.
5. Skayannis, P.; Kaparos, G. The infrastructure projects in Greece and the presence of Mega Transport
Infrastructure Projects (MTIPs): Changing paradigms and priorities. Aeichoros 2013, 18, 12–65.
6. Calderon, C.; Serven, L. Infrastructure and economic development in Sub-Saharan Africa. Work. P. 2008,
4712, 1–64. [CrossRef]
7. Aschauer, D.A. Transportation Spending and Economic Growth: The Effects of Transit and Highway Expenditures;
American Transit Association: Washington, DC, USA, 1991.
8. Alminas, M.; Vasiliauskas, A.V.; Jakubauskas, G. The impact of transport on the competitiveness of national
economy. Dep. Transp. Manag. 2009, 24, 93–99.
9. Álvarez-Herranz, A.; Martínez-Ruiz, M.P. Evaluating the economic and regional impact on national transport
and infrastructure policies with accessibility variables. Transport 2012, 27, 414–427. [CrossRef]
10. Calderon, C.; Chong, A. Labor market institutions and income inequality: An empirical exploration.
Public Choice 2009, 138, 65–81. [CrossRef]
11. Estache, A.; Fay, M. Current Debates on Infrastructure Policies; Commission on Growth and Development:
Washington, DC, USA, 2010.
12. Fan, S.; Zhang, X. Public expenditure, growth and poverty reduction in rural Uganda. Afr. Dev. Rev. 2008,
20, 466. [CrossRef]
13. Khandker, S.R.; Bakht, Z.; Koolwal, G.B. The poverty impact of rural roads: Evidence from Bangladesh.
Econ. Dev. Cult. Chang. 2009, 57, 685–722. [CrossRef]
14. Melo, P.; Graham, D.; Brage-Ardao, R. The productivity of transport infrastructure investment:
A meta-analysis of empirical evidence. Reg. Sci. Urban Econ. 2013, 43, 695–706. [CrossRef]
15. Mu, R.; van de Walle, D. Rural Roads and Poor Area Development in Vietnam; The World Bank: Washington, DC,
USA, 2007. [CrossRef]
16. Schofer, J.L.; Mahmassani, H.S. Mobility 2050. A Vision for Transportation Infrastructure; The Transportation
Center, Northwestern University: Evanston, IL, USA, 2016.
17. Zhang, X. Transport infrastructure, spatial spillover and economic growth: Evidence from China.
Front. Econ. China 2008, 3, 585–597. [CrossRef]
18. Flores, I.; Chatziioannou, I.; Segura, E.; Hernández, S. Urban transport infrastructure: A state of the art.
In Proceedings of the European Modelling and Simulation Symposium, Athens, Greece, 25–27 September
2013; pp. 83–92.
19. Galindo, L.M.; Heres, D.R.; Sánchez, L. Tráfico inducido en México: Contribuciones al debate e implicaciones
de política pública. Estud. Demogr. Urbanos 2006, 21, 123–157. [CrossRef]
20. Bakogiannis, E.; Kyriakidis, C.; Siti, M.; Floropoulou, E. Reconsidering Sustainable Mobility Patterns in
Cultural Route Planning: Andreas Syngrou Avenue, Greece. Heritage 2019, 2, 1702–1723. [CrossRef]
21. OMS. Available online: www.who.int/gho/en/ (accessed on 15 January 2012).
22. Cervantes Trejo, A. Accidentes de tránsito: Asunto de Estado y Salud Pública. Movil. Amable 2009, 6, 100–101.
23. Putnam, R. Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community; Simon Schuster: New York, NY,
USA, 2000.
24. Hart, J. Driven to Excess: Impacts of Motor Vehicle Traffic on Residential Quality of Life in Bristol. Master’s
Thesis, University of West England, Bristol, UK, 2008.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 27 of 30
25. Kyriakidis, C.; Bakogiannis, E.; Siolas, A. Identifying Environmental Affordances in Kypseli Square in Athens,
Greece. In Proceedings of the International New York Conference on Social Sciences, New York, NY, USA,
17–19 November 2017.
26. European Union. Available online: https://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/guidelines_for_developing_and
_implementing_a_sustainable_urban_mobility_plan_2nd_edition.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2020).
27. European Commission. Available online: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/sites/transport/files/legislation/com
%282013%29913-annex_en.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2020).
28. UN-Habitat. Mobility; UN-Habitat: Nairobi, Kenya, 2012.
29. Tafifidis, P.; Sdoukopoulos, A. Pitsiava-Latinopoulou, M. Sustainable urban mobility indicators: Policy versus
practice in the case of Greek cities. Transp. Res. Procedia 2017, 24, 304–312. [CrossRef]
30. Van Audenhove, F.-J.; Korniichuk, O.; Dauby, L.; Pourbaix, J. The Future of Urban Mobility 2.0; ADL UITP:
Paris, France, 2014.
31. Hull, A. Policy integration: What will it take to achieve more sustainable transport solutions in cities?
Transp. Policy 2008, 15, 94–103. [CrossRef]
32. Kelly, J.; Grosvenor, T.; Jones, P. Guidemaps Consortium. Successful Transport Decision-Making. A Project
Management and Stakeholder Engagement Handbook; Fastcolour Limited: Brussels, Belgium, 2004.
33. Hautala, R.; Karvonen, V.; Laitinen, J.; Laurikko, J.; Nylund, N.-O.; Pihlatie, M.; Rantasila, K.; Tuominen, A.
Smart Sustainable Mobility; VTT Visions 5: Espoo, Finland, 2014.
34. Macário, R. Upgrading quality in urban mobility systems. Manag. Ser. Qual. Int. J. 2001, 11, 93–99. [CrossRef]
35. György, K.; Attila, A.; Tamás, F. New framework for monitoring urban mobility in European cities.
Transp. Res. Procedia 2017, 24, 155–162. [CrossRef]
36. Uradni List Evropske Unije, “Informacije in Objave”. 2014. Available online: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legalc
ontent/SL/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2014:271:TOC (accessed on 2 April 2019).
37. Rupprecht Consult. Trajnostna Mobilnost za Uspešno Prihodnost, Smernice za Pripravo CPS; Ministrstvo za
Infrastrukturo in Prostor: Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2015.
38. Bertolini, L.; Le Clerk, F.; Kapoen, L. Sustainable accessibility: A conceptual framework to integrate transport
and land use plan-making. Two test-applications in the Netherlands and a reflflection on the way forward.
Transp. Policy 2005, 12, 207–221. [CrossRef]
39. Okraszewska, R.; Romanowska, A.; Wołek, M.; Oskarbski, J.; Birr, K.; Jamroz, K. Integration of a Multilevel
Transport System Model into Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning. Sustainability 2018, 10, 479. [CrossRef]
40. Mardani, A.; Zavadskas, E.K.; Khalifah, Z.; Jusoh, A.; Nor, K.M. Multiple criteria decision-making techniques
in transportation systems: A systematic review of the state of the art literature. Transport 2015, 31, 359–385.
[CrossRef]
41. Maghraoui, O.A.; Vallet, F.; Puchinger, J.; Yannou, B. Framing key concepts to design a human centered
urban mobility system. In Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Engineering Design (ICED 17),
Vancouver, BC, Canada, 21–25 August 2017; pp. 91–100.
42. United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat). Planning and Design for Sustainable Urban
Mobility: Global Report on Human Settlements; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
43. May, A. Ch4llenge Measure Selection Manual–Selecting the Most Effective Packages of Measures for Sustainable
Urban Mobility Plans; European Platform on Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans: Brussels, Belgium, 2016.
44. Sussman, J.; Dodder, R.; McConnel, J.; Mostashari, A.; Sgouridis, S. The Clios Process: A User’s Guide. Frameworks
and Models in Engineering Systems; Massachusetts Institute of Technology Publications: Cambridge, MA,
USA, 2007.
45. Osorio, C.A.; Dori, D.; Sussman, J. COIM: An object-process based method for analyzing architectures of
complex, interconnected, large-scale socio-technical systems. Syst. Eng. 2011, 14, 364–382. [CrossRef]
46. Sussman, J.; Sgouridis, S. Regional Strategic Transportation Planning as a CLIOS. In Proceedings of the MIT
Engineering Systems Symposium, Cambridge, MA, USA, 29–31 March 2004.
47. Sussman, J.; Sgouridis, S.; Ward, J. New Approach to Transportation Planning for the 21st Century–Regional
Strategic Transportation Planning as a Complex Large-Scale Integrated Open System; Planning and Analysis 2005;
Transportation Research Board Natl Research Council: Washington, DC, USA, 2005; pp. 89–98.
48. Sussman, J. The CLIOS Process, Special Edition for the East Japan Railway Company; Massachusetts Institute of
Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2005.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 28 of 30
49. Sussman, J. Perspectives on Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS); Springer Science + Business Media: Berlin,
Germany, 2005.
50. Sussman, J. Introduction to Transportation Systems; Artech House: Boston, MA, USA, 2000.
51. Dodder, R.; Sussman, J. The Concept of a CLIOS Analysis Illustrated by the Mexico City Case; (Engineering
Systems Division Working Paper Series 2002, ESD-WP-2003-01.07-ESD Internal Symposium); Massachusetts
Institute of Technology: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2002.
52. Dodder, R.; Sussman, J.; McConnell, J. The Concept of the “CLIOS PROCESS”: Integrating the study of
physical and policy systems using Mexico City as an example. In Proceedings of the Engineering Systems
Division Symposium, Cambridge, MA, USA, 29–31 March 2004.
53. Rupprecht Consult. Guidelines for Developing and Implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan, 2nd ed.
Available online: https://www.eltis.org/mobility-plans/sump-guidelines (accessed on 8 January 2020).
54. Pérez, J.C.; Carrillo, M.H.; Montoya-Torres, J.R. Multi-criteria approaches for urban passenger transport
systems: A literature review. Ann. Oper. Res. 2015, 226, 69–87. [CrossRef]
55. Sarasini, S.; Diener, D.; Sochor, J.; Vanacore, E. Stimulating a Transition to Sustainable Urban. Mobility; JPI Urban
Europe: Gothenburg, Sweden, 2018.
56. Buhrmann, S.; Wefering, F.; Rupprecht, S.; Plevnik, A.; Mladenoviˇc, L.; Balant, M.; Ružiˇc, L. Trajnostna
Mobilnost za Uspešno Prihodnost: Smernice za Pripravo Celostne Prometne Strategije; Ministrstvo za infrastrukturo
in prostor RS: Ljubljana, Slovenia, 2012.
57. CTS EMBARQ. Available online: http://bibliotecadigital.imipens.org/uploads/Reforma%20Urbana%20100
%20Ideas%20para%20las%20Ciudades%20de%20Mexico%20-%20ctsEM.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2020).
58. Medina, S. La Importancia de la Reducción del Uso del Automóvil en México. Tendencias de Motorización, del Uso
del Automóvil y de sus Impactos; ITDP: Mexico City, Mexico, 2012.
59. Sussman, J. Collected Views on Complexity in Systems. In Proceedings of the Engineering Systems Division
(ESD) Internal Symposium, Cambridge, MA, USA, 29–30 May 2002.
60. Sánchez-Lara, B. Enseñando Ingeniería de Sistemas usando Análisis CLIOS” Eje temático: Ingeniería
y Gestión de Sistemas. In Proceedings of the XIV Congreso Internacional de la Academia de Ciencias
Administrativas, A. C. (ACACIA), Mexico City, Mexico, 27–30 April 2010.
61. Chias Becerril, L.; Cervantes Trejo, A. Diagnóstico Espacial de los Accidentes de Tránsito en el Distrito Federal;
Secretaría de Salud: Mexico City, Mexico, 2008.
62. SEMOVI. Available online: https://semovi.cdmx.gob.mx/storage/app/media/plan-estrategico-de-convivencia
-vial-2019-para-la-ciudad-de-mexico-200619.pdf (accessed on 4 February 2020).
63. Herrera, S. ¿Movilidad y Ciudad? In Proceedings of the Foro Internacional Sobre el Derecho a la Movilidad,
Mexico City, Mexico, 7–8 August 2012.
64. ITDP. Transforming Urban Mobility in Mexico; ITDP: Mexico City, Mexico, 2012.
65. ITDP. Planes Integrales de Movilidad; ITDP: Mexico City, Mexico, 2012.
66. Nieto Enríquez, A. El Desafío de la movilidad y la Gestión de la Ciudad. In Proceedings of the 6th Congreso
Internacional de Transporte, Mexico City, Mexico, 24–26 April 2014.
67. SEMOVI. Available online: https://semovi.cdmx.gob.mx/storage/app/media/uploaded-files/plan-estrategico-
de-movilidad-2019.pdf (accessed on 4 August 2019).
68. Flood, R.L.; Carson, E.R. Dealing with Complexity: An Introduction to the Theory and Application of Systems
Science, 2nd ed.; Plenum Press: New York, NY, USA, 1993.
69. Afzal, M.; Shaoib, S.A.; Nawaz, M. MacroEconomic Determinants of Urbanization in Pakistan. Growth 2018,
5, 6–12. [CrossRef]
70. De Saulles, M. Information 2.0: New Models of Information Production, Distribution and Consumption;
Facet Publishing: London, UK, 2015.
71. Chatziioannou, I.; Alvarez-Icaza, L. A structural analysis method for the management of urban transportation
infrastructure and its urban surroundings. Cogent Eng. 2017, 4, 1326548. [CrossRef]
72. Chatziioannou, I.; Alvarez-Icaza, L. Evaluation of the urban transportation infrastructure and its urban
surroundings in the Iztapalapa County: A geotechnology approach about its management. Cogent Eng. 2017,
4, 1330854. [CrossRef]
73. Alessandri, A.; Gaggero, M.; Tonelli, F. Min-Max and Predictive Control for the Management of Distribution
in Supply Chains. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 2011, 19, 1075–1089. [CrossRef]

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 29 of 30
74. Kamath, M.; Srivathsan, S.; Ingalls, R.; Shen, G.; Pulat, P. TISCSoft: A Decision Support System for
Transportation Infrastructure and Supply Chain System Planning. In Proceedings of the 44th Hawaii
International Conference on System Sciences, Kauai, HI, USA, 4–7 January 2011; pp. 1–9.
75. Santos, G.; Behrendt, H.; Maconi, L.; Shirvani, T.; Teytelboym, A. Part I: Externalities and economic policies
in road transport. Res. Transp. Econ. 2010, 28, 2–45. [CrossRef]
76. Towle, G. Porque el futuro no va a ser como el pasado, sino mejor. (Why the Future Won’t be Like the Past,
but Better.). In Proceedings of the VII Congreso Internacional de Transporte Sostenible, Ciudad de México
(VII International Congress on Sustainable Transport, Mexico City), Mexico City, Mexico, 3–5 October 2011.
77. Kramar, U.; Dragan, D.; Topolšek, D. The Holistic Approach to Urban Mobility Planning with a Modified
Focus Group, SWOT, and Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchical Process. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6599. [CrossRef]
78. Thill, J.-C.; Kim, M. Trip making, induced travel demand, and accessibility. J. Geogr. Syst. 2005, 7, 229–248.
[CrossRef]
79. Chatziioannou, I. Modelo para la Gestión de la Infraestructura de Transporte Urbano y su Entorno en la
Ciudad de México. PhD Thesis, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico, 2017.
80. García-Ortega, S. Diagnóstico de la Viabilidad Organizacional del Sistema de Transporte de la Ciudad de
México. Master’s Thesis, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico, 2009.
81. Boguski, T. Understanding Units of Measurement; Environmental Science and Technology Briefs for Citizens,
Center for Hazardous Substance, Kansas State University: Manhattan, KA, USA, 2006.
82. INEGI. Available online: https://www.inegi.org.mx/programas/intercensal/2015/default.html#Tabulados
(accessed on 19 December 2019).
83. SCT. Available online: http://www.sct.gob.mx/fileadmin/DireccionesGrales/DGST/Datos-Viales-2019/00_INT
RODUCCI%C3%93N.pdf (accessed on 20 December 2019).
84. Zhang, G.; Yang, H.; Li, S.; Wen, Y.; Li, Y.; Liu, F. What is the best catchment area of bike shares station?
A study based on Divvy system in Chicago USA. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on
Transportation Information and Safety (ICTIS), Liverpool, UK, 14–17 July 2019.
85. Flamm, B.; Rivasplata, C.R. Public Transit catchment areas: The curious case of of cycle-transit users.
Transportation Research Record. J. Transp. Res. Board 2014, 2419. [CrossRef]
86. SEDATU. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/sedatu/documentos/anatomia-de-la-movilidad-en-mexico-
hacia-donde-vamos?idiom=es (accessed on 7 January 2020).
87. García-Vega, J.J. Hacia un nuevo sistema de indicadores de bienestar. Realidad Datos y Espacio. Rev. Int.
Estad. Geogr. 2011, 2, 78–95.
88. Garro Flores, F. Available online: http://www.olade.org/sites/default/files/seminarios/namas/MRV%20NA
MAs%20CUBA_FGF-AENOR.pdf (accessed on 3 January 2020).
89. INE, PNUD, CTS EMBARQ México. Available online: https://www.gob.mx/cms/uploads/attachmen
t/file/110169/CGCCDBC_2012_Politicas_medidas_e_instrumentos_para_la_mitigacion.pdf (accessed on
4 January 2020).
90. Dangond Gibsone, C.; Jolly, J.F.; Monteoliva Vilches, A.; Rojas Parra, F. Algunas reflexiones sobre la movilidad
urbana en Colombia desde la perspectiva del desarrollo humano. Pap. Polít. Bogotá 2011, 16, 485–514.
91. Ascher, F. Los Nuevos Principios del Urbanismo; Alianza: Madrid, Spain, 2004.
92. Rojas, F. Mutaciones Urbanas. Memorias II Coloquio de Profesores de la Facultad de Ciencia Política y Relaciones
Internacionales; Pontificia Universidad Javeriana: Bogota, Colombia, 2007.
93. Appleyard, D. Livable Streets; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1969.
94. Avellaneda, P.; Lazo, A. Aproximación social al estudio de la movilidad cotidiana en la periferia pobre de la ciudad.
Los casos de Juan Pablo II, en Lima, y de La Pintana, en Santiago de Chile. In Proceedings of the XV Congreso
Latinoamericano de Transporte Público y Urbano, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 31 March–3 April 2009.
95. Gutiérrez, A. Movilidad o inmovilidad: ¿Qué es la movilidad? Aprendiendo a delimitar los deseos.
In Proceedings of the XV Congreso Latinoamericano de Transporte Público y Urbano, Buenos Aires,
Argentina, 31 March–3 April 2009.
96. Gutiérrez, A. Movilidad y acceso: Embarazo y salud pública en la periferia de Buenos Aires. In Proceedings
of the XV Congreso Latinoamericano de Transporte Público y Urbano, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 31 March–3
April 2009.

Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 4556 30 of 30
97. Gutiérrez, A. La movilidad de la metrópolis desigual: El viaje a la salud pública y gratuita en la periferia de
Buenos Aires. In Proceedings of the XII Encuentro de Geógrafos de América Latina, Montevideo, Uruguay,
3–7 April 2009.
98. Gutiérrez, A. ¿Qué es la movilidad? Elementos para reconstruir las definiciones básicas del campo de
transporte. Bitácora 2012, 21, 61–74.
99. Hernández, D. Los desafíos del Transporte Público como canal de acceso al bienestar y mecanismo de
integración social. El caso de Santiago de Chile. In Proceedings of the XV Congreso Latinoamericano de
Transporte Público y Urbano, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 31 March–3 April 2009.
100. Jara, M.; Carrasco, J.A. Indicadores de inclusión social, accesibilidad y movilidad: Experiencias desde la
perspectiva del sistema de transporte. In Proceedings of the XV Congreso Latinoamericano de Transporte
Público y Urbano, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 31 March–3 April 2009.
101. Lazo, A. Transporte, movilidad y exclusión. El caso de Transantiago en Chile. Scripta Nova 2008, XII, 2008.
102. Miralles-Guasch, C. Ciudad y Transporte. El Binomio Imperfecto; Ariel: Barcelona, Spain, 2002.
103. Sussman, J. Mega-cities in Developing Countries-A Major ITS Market for the Future. ITS Quart. 2000.
[CrossRef]
104. Meyer, M.; Miller, E. Urban Transportation Planning, 2nd ed.; McGraw-Hill: Boston, MA, USA, 2001.
105. Vuchic, V.R. Transportation for Livable Cities; Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University:
New Brunswick, NJ, USA, 1999.
106. Littman, T. Reinvention of Tranportation Exploring Paradigm Shifts Needed to Reconcile Transportation and
Sustainability Objectives. Transp. Res. Rec. 2003, 1670, 8–12. [CrossRef]
107. VTPI. Comprehensive Transport Planning Creating a Comprehensive Framework for Transportation Planning
and Policy Analysis. In Proceedings of the 11th World Conference on Transport Research, Berkeley, CA,
USA, 24–28 June 2007.
108. Zakaria, Z. Framework for Designing Regional Planning Architecture for APTS-Enabled Regional Multimodal
Public Transportation System. Master’s Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA,
USA, 2004.
109. KPMG. Available online: https://www.polisnetwork.morris-chapman.com/uploads/Modules/PublicDocume
nts/Success-failure-urban-transportation-infrastructure-projects%5b1%5d.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2020).
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

A CLIOS Analysis For The Promotion Of Sustainable Plans Of Mobility The Case Of Mexico City

More Related Content

Similar to A CLIOS Analysis For The Promotion Of Sustainable Plans Of Mobility The Case Of Mexico City (20)

More from Michelle Shaw (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

A CLIOS Analysis For The Promotion Of Sustainable Plans Of Mobility The Case Of Mexico City