Hello. This week, in this video, I will talk about the concept of motility. So the concept of motility is an analytical concept, allowing addressing mobility in a new light from people's skills, and more generally from actors', which allows then to overcome the limitations which have been identified to the concept of mobility in the past week. Then, during last week's the lesson, we discussed the limitations of the concept of mobility, as it is used in research in particular and we also have identified a number of points that are important to work on mobility. So I would start from three of these points this week to introduce you to the concept of motility. So these things first, there is the question that mobility ultimately depends on the possibilities offered by a given context. Mobility, in other words, is situated. If you live in Lausanne, or if you live Abidjan or if you live in New York, you do not have the same opportunities to move in space or to move within the social space. Thus the mobility is defined as a phenomenon which is located, it is something that is absolutely essential especially when we want to develop a urban planning policy that accounts for this phenomenon. So that's the first point I would like to emphasize. Secondly we also saw last week, that mobility depends on the skill of the actors. That is something that may seem to be banal, but I think is extremely important. Driving without a license is difficult. That may be the simplest thing in relation to these skills, this is the most immediate example that comes to mind but say, here, to move, to be mobile, it supposes to have a number of skills, it presupposes a series of skills that it is important to go exploring. So that's the second point I want to stress on. And the third point I want to emphasize, is that mobility is partially activated as a form of travel. That is also something that is absolutely essential. Too often in the analyzes on mobility, we had seen the last week finally, we are interested in trips made and we are less interested in travels which could have been achieved but were not achieved and that ultimately remained in the potential state. So from the critics we saw last week, from these aspects that I have just recalled, I propose three aspects to understand mobility, three aspects which actually refer to methodological considerations. So the first aspect, is to understand mobility as a social phenomenon. So social phenomenon, what does that mean? This is a concept that has been defined by Marcel Mauss, it simply means that through the prism of mobility, calls itself a company as a whole. That is to say that it can be read from mobility, or in other words, that mobility is a social developer seen through the analysis of mobility, power relations within a society and thus ultimately mobility provides information on the company as a whole. So that's the first methodological proposal to address mobility. Second methodological proposal, we propose to consider mobility as a spatial and temporal social assembly. We saw that in the end, the analysis of mobility was often very focused on the spatial aspects but the temporal aspects, the temporality of mobility are absolutely essential and so is the social dimension. The space, the relationship to space, travels in space are ultimately a dimension of social mobility that may be wider or in other words, space as we understand it in this course, is one of the dimensions of the company and therefore, by definition, mobility is also social. That is the second proposal. Third proposal, we propose to analyze mobility from the potential of every actor and this is where the concept of motility comes, which eventually is particullary the subject of the present video. From these methodological principles, I propose to deal concretely mobility ultimately concerned with three levels of analysis that must be considered to deal with the mobility completely. So, the first dimension which falls within the territory, this is what could be called the catch or the potential home of territory for mobility. Finally, each country has a number of amenities, a number of transport systems which offer special accessibility, that are accessible on certain conditions, including financially, and this is obviously a contextual aspect in the broad sense which is absolutely essential to work on mobility. So this is the first of three dimensions that are proposed to grasp mobility. The second dimension is that of motility. So what is the dimension of the capacity of actors to move, of their skills So this is something that is unique to people or to collective actors. We all have more or less good capacity to organize ourselves, to project ourselves into space. We like or not to move, we are gifted or not to drive, we are very familiar with the network of public transport, we like to do physical exercise through the use of bicycles etc. All these things refer to skills which define a personal level, in terms of the person but can also be defined more collectively, so this is motility, so this is the second level of analysis. And then the third level of analysis is called activation, it is finally displacement carried out. Finally, motility, our ability to move, remains partly in a potential state, So suddenly, it is very important to focus on the trips that are made, of course, but also to all those we do not realize. And therefore, this dimension of activation, what is activated under the form of travel, what remains in the state of potential, it is a third level of analysis that is absolutely essential. <I> If we try to schematize these considerations, </ i> <I> what we propose to do beyond these levels, </ i> <I> catches, motility and activation, </ i> <I> it's finally going from the motility </ i> <I> of people to analyze or actors to analyze mobility, </ i> <I> that is to say to consider the genesis of mobility </ i> <I> in the minds of people or in the minds of actors, to put it differently. </ I> <I> So this motility is composed of ... </ i> <I> we all have access to a number of means of transport, </ i> <I> acces to these means of transport is subject to certain conditions. </ I> <I> There is also a range of skills that can be mobilized </ i> <I> to be mobile and then, </ i> <I> there is a third dimension which is essential </ i> <I> that can be called appropriation, </ i> <I> you could also call the project, projects, </ i> <I> we like or not to travel, we like to be somewhere else, </ i> <I> we appreciate the relationship to otherness or not </ i> <I> and this is the third dimension finally </ i> <i> important of mobility. </ I> <I> These three dimensions, and that's why we put small arrows </ i> <I> between the three dimensions in both directions, </ i> <I> finally, these three dimensions, </ i> <I> they are quite widely in interaction. </ I> <I> And so these three dimensions form motility, </ i> <I> that is to say the ability to move a person or an actor. </ I> <I> So that's a bit what is proposed as a basic approach, </ i> <I> as a basic level to address the issue of mobility, </ i> <I> to start from these skills to move. </ I> <I> The ability to move then turns into trips. </ I> <I> So, that's the dimension of activation. </ I> <I> They become movements </ i> <I> but remain partly into potential state. </ I> <I> In general, exceptions put aside, </ i> <I> all our motility does not turn into trips. </ I> <I> Especially compared to trips </ i> <I> from the perspective that we have chosen to address, </ i> <I> movement may be different in nature. </ I> <I> Trips, are the movements in everyday life, </ i> <I> it can be residential mobility, </ i> <i> it could be travel, </ i> <I> we came out of a vision, where eventually </ i> <i> daily mobility was on one side, </ i> <I> residential mobility, travel, </ i> <I> and everything would overlap according to specific spatio-temporal logic. </ I> <I> No! Here, the idea is ultimately to say, from motility, </ i> <I> that is to say, from the ability to move, </ i> <I> well, finally, we move, </ i> <I> we do crafts on travel, </ i> <I> that articulate the different forms of travel </ i> <I> spatially, temporally and socially. </ I> <I> And the third element, </ i> <I> you see that we have included the term mobility, </ i> <I> as encompassing, </ i> <I> well finally, it will be considered in this approach, </ i> <I> that mobility, that's all. </ I> <I> This is finally the result. </ I> <I> That is to say, it's motility, it is the ability to move, </ i> <I> it's obviously also all journeys that are made </ i> <I> and those that are not made and remain in the state of latency </ i> <I> or the potential sleeping in motility. </ I> <I> It could be added for completeness </ i> <I> that mobility in this context is located, </ i> <I> that is to say actually that offered opportunities </ i> <I> are not the same across regions of the world, </ i> <I> following even same regions of a country, and therefore, this mobility, </ i> <I> it is dependent on the potential home </ i> <i> it met in a given context. </ I> <I> Mobility, as we just saw it, </ i> <I> has the advantage of being a two-dimensional concept. </ I> <I> I was saying just now, </ i> <I> mobility must be considered, that is what is proposed in any case, </ i> <I> as a total social phenomenon, </ i> <I> that is to say, a phenomenon from which </ i> <I> it is possible to read the power relations of a society, relationships with space, </ i> <I> the relations of domination, how to build lifestyles etc </ i> <I> This is finally a phenomenon that provides information on all of a society, </ i> <I> it's finally a way to read a society. </ I> <I> Then, mobility, in regards to this, is two-dimensional, </ i> <I> that is to say, we found, </ i> <I> through the motility of indicators that we could build, </ i> <I> for the needs of different empirical research </ i> <I> motility has a vertical dimension, </ i> <I> that is to say, we can be much or little endowed with it. </ I> <I> It is found in the population of people who have a very strong motility, </ i> <I> which are highly mobile, which have large capacity to move, </ i> <I> and others who have much less the ability to move. </ I> <I> So that's the vertical dimension. </ I> <I> But mobility also has another dimension, </ i> <I> which is a horizontal dimension, </ i> <I> and the horizontal dimension is that in the end, </ i> <I> seen through the analysis we have done, </ i> <I> mobility, can be provided in different ways. </ I> <I> Some people have a greater aptitude, for example </ i> <I> to move in everyday life </ i> <I> and are not afraid to spend much time in transport, </ i> <I> are able to deal in these means of transport, </ i> <I> while others have little of this ability, </ i> <i> to give an example, </ i> <I> but on the other hand have a great aptitude </ i> <i> to uproot themselves from a place where they live </ i> <I> to go take root elsewhere, through a move. </ I> <I> So there, we indeed are in horizontality, </ i> <i> that is to say that it is difficult to say </ i> <I> who between a person who likes to move a lot </ i> <I> during the day, and that obviously has a lot of skills for that </ i> <I> versus another person who has little these skills </ i> <I> but on the contrary, many skills, </ i> <I> and appreciate to move, to uproot and take root elsewhere </ i> <I> has an ability to get in touch, </ i> <i> to rebuild social networks elsewhere, </ i> <I> it's hard to say which of these two has the most motility. </ I> <I> In fact, it's different motilities </ i> <I> and probably can not be quantified. </ I> <I> What can we say, and that is the horizontal dimension of motility, </ i> <I> is that eventually these people have different abilities to move. </ I> <I> So the value of this concept, </ i> <I> with respect to the verticality and horizontality, </ i> <I> is that from a theoretical point of view, </ i> <I> it is possible to talk of the approaches of the company </ i> <I> who would rather be post-modern or post-structuralist, </ i> <I> that tell us that contemporary societies </ i> <I> are especially built from horizontality, </ i> <I> from differences in lifestyles, </ i> <I> differences in social, spatial mobility </ i> <I> and to communicate these approaches with more structuralist approaches, </ i> <I> where finally, the idea is that a society </ i> <I> is built first from reporting relationships, </ i> <I> of vertical relationships, </ i> <I> and that it is therefore first from these vertical relationships </ i> <I> that it is possible to read and understand a society. </ I> <I> So you see there that, </ i> <I> by this verticality and horizontality of the concept of motility, </ i> <I> it is possible to work on both levels, </ i> <I> and consider spatial mobility </ i> <I> as belonging to a structuralist approach, </ i> <I> that is to say under ... logic within social categories, </ i> <I> of income levels, education levels </ i> <I> and these considerations, </ i> <I> finally return to the vertical structure of a company, </ i> <I> but also of the horizontal dimension, </ i> <I> that is to say, the differences between people in terms </ i> <I> of styles of life or lifestyle or relationship to space, </ i> <I> that are not directly related to the question of hierarchy. </ I> <I> So, a notion as motility, </ i> <I> and then more generally, an approach </ i> <I> as the one I have just presented, </ i> <I> it only makes sense if it allows you to see new things. </ I> <I> So, I'd maybe just, </ i> <I> to complete this video, open, lift a little bit the veil, </ i> <I> on empirical explorations that we could do, </ i> <I> with the concept of mobility, </ i> <I> and more generally with the approach to mobility that I have just presented. </ I> <I> There's a result that is very strong, and that is quite striking, </ i> <I> and is probably very useful for territory planning, </ i> <I> and this result is that, in the end, </ i> <I> a lot of people, and probably more, </ i> <I> are looking for a reversibility of mobility. </ I> <I> What is meant by that? </ I> <I> Well, it's just that many people use </ i> <I> the possibilities offered to them by transport systems </ i> <I> and remote communication systems, </ i> <I> which have grown substantially in recent years </ i> <I> to finally make the move as reversible as possible. </ I> <I> That is to say, to ensure that these trips </ i> <I> have the least impact on their lives </ i> <I> even if they have to go far in their daily lives, for example. </ I> <I> This is something we see a lot with the development </ i> <I> of the long-distance commuting. </ I> <I> In a number of countries in Europe, </ i> <I> when you find a job 100 kilometers away or even sometimes more </ i> <I> from your home, well you don't not move anymore </ i> <I> but you make daily round trips, </ i> <I> by car on the motorway or by using the train, </ i> <I> and therefore, that's typical of this logic of reversibility. </ I> <I> This is the idea that in the end, we will try to ensure </ i> <I> that mobility has the least possible impact on our life, </ i> <I> So we will avoid to move, </ i> <I> what would be rather an irreversible movement, </ i> <I> to instead focus on reversible travel solutions, </ i> <I> that is to say, back and forth throughout the day or week. </ I> <I> So we will have much opportunity in the course </ i> <I> to address that issue, </ i> <I> which is undoubtedly a trend of the recent evolution of mobility. </ I> <I> I wanted to talk immediately, saying in effect, </ i> <I> it is the concept of motility allowing truly </ i> <I> to take the measure of this phenomenon and to actually update it. </ I>