Journal of Transport and Land Use

Mapping opportunity in time and space: An inductive approach

David J. Hoelzel

Department of Transport Planning TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2338-2094

Joachim Scheiner

Department of Transport Planning TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6157-437X

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2022.1903

Keywords: Activity Spaces, Kairos, Life Course, Opportunity, Occasion, Pockets of Local Order, Time Geography

---

Abstract

Several authors delineate “geographies of opportunity,” which are assumed to influence individual life courses. In transport geography and related subjects, “opportunity” is a term that is frequently used to circumscribe dynamics of spatial and social mobility. However, previous approaches to opportunity usually apply deductive reasoning in such a way that opportunity represents a local feature whose functional utility impacts individual lives. Such approaches are inadequate for the analysis of individual life courses, as neither the emergence of opportunity nor its meaning for individual motives is sufficiently incorporated. Such neglect may lead to insufficient or even incorrect conclusions about the relation of space, mobility and the life course, because a concept for systematic mappings of opportunities in both individual life courses and space has not yet been developed. This paper aims to reconceptualize opportunity as a personally and socially experienced interrelation between agents and their socio-spatial environment with beneficial outcomes for the respective life courses. With regard to mapping opportunity, pockets of local order and occasions are presented as mappable spatiotemporal entities. Occasions are sections in timespace, which are unique and meaningful to the development of the individual life course. Finally, we discuss implications for empirical application, future research, planning and policy.

---

Author Biographies

David J. Hoelzel, Department of Transport Planning TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany

David J. Hoelzel is a PhD student at the Department of Transport Planning, Faculty of Spatial Planning, Technische Universität Dortmund, Germany. His current research is concerned with activity spaces and residential mobility and the interrelations with the life courses of emerging and young adults.

Joachim Scheiner, Department of Transport Planning TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany

Joachim Scheiner received his PhD in geography at Freie Universität Berlin. He is now a professor in transport studies at the Department of Transport Planning, Faculty of Spatial Planning, Technische Universität Dortmund, Germany. His research focuses on travel behaviour in the context of residential mobility, spatial development and societal change.

---

References

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469–480. https://doi.org/org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469

Axhausen, K. (2007). Activity spaces, biographies, social networks and their welfare gains and externalities: Some hypotheses and empirical results. Mobilities, 2(1), 15–36. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.1080/17450100601106203

Bailey, A. (2009). Population geography: Lifecourse matters. Progress in Human Geography, 33(3), 407–418. https://doi.org/org/10.1177/0309132508096355

Bandura, A. (1982). The psychology of chance encounters and life paths. American Psychologist, 37(7), 747–755. https://doi.org/org/10.1037/0003-066X.37.7.747

Bandura, A. (1998). Exploration of fortuitous determinants of life paths. Psychological Inquiry, 9(2), 95–99. https://doi.org/org/10.1207/s15327965pli0902_2

Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.1

Becker, H. S. (1994). ‘Foi por acaso’: Conceptualizing coincidence. The Sociological Quarterly, 35(2), 183–194. https://doi.org/org/10.1111/j.1533-8525.1994.tb00406.x

Blasius, J., Friedrichs, J., & Klöckner, J. (2008). Doppelt benachteiligt? Leben in einem deutsch-türkischen Stadtteil. Wiesbaden: VS.

Boschmann, E. E., & Cubbon, E. (2014). Sketch maps and qualitative GIS: Using cartographies of individual spatial narratives in geographic research. The Professional Geographer, 66(2), 236–248. https://doi.org/org/10.1080/00330124.2013.781490

Boterman, W. R., & Musterd, S. (2016). Cocooning urban life: Exposure to diversity in neighbourhoods, workplaces and transport. Cities, 59, 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2015.10.018

Breheny, M. J. (1978). The measurement of spatial opportunity in strategic planning. Regional Studies, 12(4), 463–479. https://doi.org/10.1080/09595237800185401

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Butler, J. (2004). Undoing gender. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.

Cagney, K. A., York Cornwell, E., Goldmann, A. W., & Cai, L. (2020). Urban mobility and activity space. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 623–648. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-121919-054848

Carrasco, J. A., Hogan, B. Wellman, B., & Miller, E. J. (2008). Collecting social network data to study social activity-travel behavior: An egocentric approach. Environment and Planning B, 35(6), 961–980. https://doi.org/10.1068/b3317t

Cass, N., Shove, E., & Urry, J. (2005). Social exclusion, mobility and access. The Sociological Review, 53(3), 539–555. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954X.2005.00565.x

Champion, T., & Gordon, I. (2021). Linking spatial and social mobility: Is London’s ‘escalator’ as strong as it was? Population, Space and Place, 27(7), e2306. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2306

Chapin, F. S. (1968). Activity systems and urban structure: A working schema. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 34(1), 11–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366808977214

Chapin, F. S. (1974). Human activity patterns in the city: Things people do in time and space. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

Chapin, F. S. (1978). Human time allocation in the city. In T. Carlstein, D. Parkes, & N. Thrift (Eds.), Timing space and spacing time: Volume 2. Human activity and time geography (pp. 13-26). London: Edward Arnold.

Crang, M. (2005). Time : space. In P. J. Cloke & R. J. Johnston (Eds.), Spaces of geographical thought: Deconstructing human geography’s binaries (pp. 199-220). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Cullen, I. G. (1978). The treatment of time in the explanation of spatial behaviour. In T. Carlstein, D. Parkes, & N. Thrift (Eds.), Timing space and spacing time: Volume 2. Human activity and time geography (pp. 27-38). London: Edward Arnold.

De Vos, J., Schwanen, T., Van Acker, V., & Witlox, F. (2013). Travel and subjective well-being: A focus on findings, methods and future research needs. Transport Reviews, 33(4), 421–442. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2013.815665

Dijst, M. (1999). Action space as planning concept in spatial planning. Netherlands Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 14(2), 163–182. https:/doi.org/10.1007/BF02496820

Edlund, L. (2005). Sex and the city. Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 107(1), 25–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9442.2005.00393.x

Elder, G. H., Kirkpatrick Johnson, M., & Crosnoe, R. (2003). The emergence and development of life course theory. In J. T. Mortimer & M. J. Shanahan (Eds.), Handbook of the life course (pp. 3-19). Philadelphia: Kluwer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-306-48247-2_1

Ellegård, K. (2019a). Thinking time geography. Concepts, methods and applications. Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.

Ellegård, K. (2019b). Introduction: The roots and diffusion of time-geography. In K. Ellegård (Ed.), Time geography in the global context. An anthology (pp. 1-18). Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.

Ellegård, K., & Vilhelmson, B. (2004). Home as a pocket of local order: Everyday activities and the friction of distance. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 86(4), 281–296. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0435-3684.2004.00168.x

Farrington, J. & Farrington, C. (2005). Rural accessibility, social inclusion and social justice: Towards conceptualisation. Journal of Transport Geography, 13, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2004.10.002

Fielding, A. J. (1992). Migration and social mobility: South East England as an escalator region. Regional Studies, 26(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00343409212331346741

Fielding, A. J., & Halford, S. (1993). Geographies of opportunity: A regional analysis of gender-specific social and spatial mobilities in England and Wales, 1971–81. Environment and Planning A, 25(10), 1421–1440. https://doi.org/10.1068/a251421

Findlay, A., McCollum, D., Coulter, R., & Gayle, V. (2015). New mobilities across the life course: A framework for analysing demographically linked drivers of migration. Population, Space and Place, 21(4), 390–402. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1956

Finio, N., Lung-Amam, W., Knaap, G.-J., Dawkins, C., & Wong, B. (2020). Equity, opportunity, community engagement, and the regional planning process: Data and mapping in five U.S. metropolitan areas. Journal of Planning Education and Research (advanced online publication). https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X20945385

Flamm, M., Jemelin, C., & Kaufmann, V. (2008). Travel behaviour adaptation processes during life course transitions. A methodological and empirical study using a person-based GPS tracking system. Lausanne, Swtizerland: Federal Polytechnic School of Lausanne. https://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/128461/files/COST355-RapportLaSUR.pdf

Frank, S. (2016). Inner-city suburbanization – no contradiction in terms: Middle-class family enclaves are spreading in the cities. Spatial Research and Planning, 76(2), 123–132. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13147-016-0444-1

Galster, G. C., & Killen, S. P. (1995). The geography of metropolitan opportunity: A reconnaissance and conceptual framework. Housing Policy Debate, 6(1), 7–43. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.1995.9521180

Geurs, K. T., & Van Wee, B. (2004). Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: Review and research directions. Journal of Transport Geography, 12(2), 127–140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2003.10.005

Giddens, A. (2006). Fate, risk and security. In J. F. Cosgrave (Ed.), The sociology of risk and gambling reader (pp. 29-59). Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.

Gladkova, N., & Mazzucato, V. (2017). Theorising chance: Capturing the role of ad hoc social interactions in migrants’ trajectories. Population, Space and Place, 23(2), e1988. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.1988

Gordon, I. & Vickerman, R. (1982). Opportunity, preference and constraint: An approach to the analysis of metropolitan migration. Urban Studies, 19(3), 247–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/00420988220080491

Götz, F. M., Yoshino, S., & Oshio, A. (2020). The association between walkability and personality: Evidence from a large socioecological study in Japan. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 69, 101438. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2020.101438

Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 1360–1380.

Hägerstrand, T. (1970). What about people in regional science? Papers in Regional Science, 24(1), 7–24. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1435-5597.1970.tb01464.x

Hägerstrand, T. (1985). Time-geography: Focus on the corporeality of man, society, and environment. In United Nations University (Ed.), The science and praxis of complexity. Contributions to the Symposium, Montpellier, France, May 9–11, 1984 (pp. 193–216).

Handy, S. L., & Niemeier, D. A. (1997). Measuring accessibility: An exploration of issues and alternatives. Environment and Planning A, 29(7), 1175–1194. https://doi.org/10.1068/a291175

Hansen, W. G. (1959). How accessibility shapes land use. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 25(2), 73–76. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944365908978307

Häring, A., Richter, A., & Stoye, K. (2014). Struktur und Funktionsweise von Partnermärkten. Beschreibung von Partnermärkten mit den Daten des Partnermarktsurvey. In A. Häring, T. Klein, J. Stauder, & K. Stoye (Eds.), Der Partnermarkt und die Gelegenheiten des Kennenlernens. Der Partnermarktsurvey (pp. 47-68). Wiesbaden: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-02794-0_3

Hasanzadeh, K., Laatikainen, T., & Kyttä, M. (2018). A place-based model of local activity spaces: Individual place exposure and characteristics. Journal of Geographical Systems, 20(3), 227–252. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10109-017-0264-z

Hasanzadeh, K., Czepkiewicz, M., Heinonen, J., Kyttä, M., Ala-Mantila, S., & Ottelin, J. (2019). Beyond geometries of activity spaces: A holistic study of daily travel patterns, individual characteristics, and perceived wellbeing in Helsinki metropolitan area. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 12(1), 149–177. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2019.1148

Helbrecht, I., & Dirksmeier, P. (2012). Auf dem Weg zu einer Neuen Geographie der Architektur: Die Stadt als Bühne performativer Urbanität. Geographische Revue, 14(1), 45–60.

Hochstenbach, C., & Boterman, W. (2018). Age, life course and generations in gentrification processes. In L. Lees & M. Phillips (Eds.), Handbook of gentrification studies (pp. 170-185). Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781785361746.00021

Horton, F. E., & Reynolds, D. R. (1971). Effects of urban spatial structure on individual behavior. Economic Geography, 47(1), 36–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/143224

Houston, S., Wright, R., Ellis, M., Holloway, S., & Hudson, M. (2005). Places of possibility: Where mixed-race partners meet. Progress in Human Geography, 29(6), 700–717. https://doi.org/10.1191/0309132505pp578oa

Hubbard, P. (2007). Geographies of going out: Emotion and embodiment in the evening economy. In J. Davidson, L. Bondi, & M. Smith (Eds.), Emotional geographies (pp. 117–134). Farnham, UK: Ashgate.

Huinink, J., & Kley, S. (2008). Regionaler Kontext und Migrationsentscheidungen im Lebensverlauf. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 48(8), 162–184.

Kaufmann, V., Bergman, M. M., & Joye, D. (2004). Motility: Mobility as capital. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(4), 745–756. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0309-1317.2004.00549.x

Kieslinger, J., Kordel, S., & Weidinger, T. (2020). Capturing meanings of place, time and social interaction when analyzing human (im)mobilities: Strengths and challenges of the application of (im)mobility biography. Forum Qualitative Social Research, 21(2). https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-21.2.3347

Kinneavy, J. L. (1986). Kairos: A neglected concept in classical rhetoric. In J. D. Moss (Ed.), Rhetoric and praxis. The contribution of classical rhetoric to practical reasoning (pp. 79-105). Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press.

Kley, S. (2009). Migration im Lebensverlauf. Der Einfluss von Lebensbedingungen und Lebenslaufereignissen auf den Wohnortwechsel (doctoral dissertation), University of Bremen, Germany.

Kley, S. A., & Mulder, C. H. (2010). Considering, planning, and realizing migration in early adulthood: The influence of life-course events and perceived opportunities on leaving the city in Germany. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 25(1), 73–94. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10901-009-9167-8

Knaap, E. (2017). The cartography of opportunity: Spatial data science for equitable urban policy. Housing Policy Debate, 27(6), 913–940. https://doi.org/10.1080/10511482.2017.1331930

Krantz, D. L. (1998). Taming chance: Social science and everyday narratives. Psychological Inquiry, 9(2), 87–94. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327965pli0902_1

Kwan, M.-P. (1998). Space-time and integral measures of individual accessibility: A comparative analysis using a point-based framework. Geographical Analysis, 30(3), 191–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1538-4632.1998.tb00396.x

Kwan, M.-P. (1999). Gender and individual access to urban opportunities: A study using space-time measures. Professional Geographer, 51(2), 211–227. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-0124.00158

Lanzendorf, M. (2003). Mobility biographies. A new perspective for understanding travel behaviour. Paper presented at the 10th International Conference on Travel Behaviour Research (IATBR), Lucerne, Switzerland. http://archiv.ivt.ethz.ch/news/archive/20030810_IATBR/lanzendorf.pdf

Lättman K., Olsson, L. E., Friman, M. (2016). Development and test of the perceived accessibility scale (PAC) in public transport. Journal of Transport Geography, 54, 257–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.06.015

Lenntorp, B. (2004). Path, prism, project, pocket and population: An introduction. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, 86(4), 223–226. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0435-3684.2004.00164.x

Lens, M. C. (2017). Measuring the geography of opportunity. Progress in Human Geography, 41(1), 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1177/0309132515618104

Levinson, D. M., & Wu, H. (2020). Towards a general theory of access. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 13(1), 129–158. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2020.1660

Lung-Amam, W. S., Knaap, E., Dawkins, C., & Knaap, G.-J. (2018). Opportunity for whom? The diverse definitions of neighborhood opportunity in Baltimore. City & Community, 17(3), 636–657. https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12318

Massey, D. (1993). Questions of locality. Geography, 78(2), 142–149.

Mennis, J., Mason, M. J., & Cao, Y. (2013). Qualitative GIS and the visualization of narrative activity space data. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 27(2), 267–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658816.2012.678362

Merlin, L. A. (2017). A portrait of accessibility change for four US metropolitan areas. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 10(1), 309–336. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2015.808

Mokhtarian, P. L., Salomon, I., & Singer, M. E. (2015). What moves us? An interdisciplinary exploration of reasons for traveling. Transport Reviews, 35(3), 250–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441647.2015.1013076

Mollenhorst, G., Völker, B., & Flap, H. (2008). Social contexts and personal relationships: The effect of meeting opportunities on similarity for relationships of different strength. Social Networks, 30(1), 60–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socnet.2007.07.003

Moos, M., Revington, N., Wilkin, T., & Andrey, J. (2019). The knowledge economy city: Gentrification, studentification and youthification, and their connections to universities. Urban Studies, 56(6), 1075–1092. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017745235

Müggenburg, H., Busch-Geertsema, A., & Lanzendorf, M. (2015). Mobility biographies: A review of achievements and challenges of the mobility biographies approach and a framework for further research. Journal of Transport Geography, 46, 151–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2015.06.004

Murray, G., Judd, F., Jackson, H., Fraser, C., Komiti, A., Hodgins, G., Pattison, P., Humphreys, J., & Robins, G. (2005). The five factor model and accessibility/remoteness: Novel evidence for person–environment interaction. Personality and Individual Differences, 39(4), 715–725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2005.02.007

Neutens, T., Farber, S., Delafontaine, M., & Boussauw, K. (2013). Spatial variation in the potential for social interaction: A case study in Flanders (Belgium). Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 41, 318–331. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2012.06.007

Neutens, T., Witlox, F., Van De Weghe, N., & De Maeyer, P. H. (2007). Space-time opportunities for multiple agents: A constraint‐based approach. International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 21(10), 1061–1076. https://doi.org/10.1080/13658810601169873

Nowok, B., Van Ham, M., Findlay, A. M., & Gayle, V. (2013). Does migration make you happy? A longitudinal study of internal migration and subjective well-being. Environment and Planning A, 45(4), 986–1002. https://doi.org/10.1068/a45287

Oakil, A. T., Ettema, D., Arentze, T., & Timmermans, H. (2011). Longitudinal model of longer-term mobility decisions: Framework and first empirical tests. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 137(3), 220–229. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000066

Park, Y. M., & Kwan, M.-P. (2018). Beyond residential segregation: A spatiotemporal approach to examining multi-contextual segregation. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, 71, 98–108. doi: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2018.05.001

Perchoux, C., Kestens, Y., Thomas, F., Van Hulst, A., Thierry, B., & Chaix, B. (2014). Assessing patterns of spatial behavior in health studies: Their socio-demographic determinants and associations with transportation modes (The RECORD cohort study). Social Science & Medicine, 119, 64-–3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.07.026

Peters, P., Kloppenburg, S., & Wyatt, S. (2010). Co‐ordinating passages: Understanding the resources needed for everyday mobility. Mobilities, 5(3), 349–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2010.494840

Pred, A. (1983). Structuration and place: On the becoming of sense of place and structure of feeling. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 13(1), 45–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1983.tb00461.x

Pred, A. (1984). Place as historically contingent process: Structuration and the time-geography of becoming places. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 74(2), 279–297. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8306.1984.tb01453.x

Rämö, H. (1999). An Aristotelian human time-space manifold: From chronochora to kairotopos. Time and Society, 8(2), 309–328. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961463X99008002006

Rau, H., & Manton, R. (2016). Life events and mobility milestones: Advances in mobility biography theory and research. Journal of Transport Geography, 52, 51–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2016.02.010

Rau, H. & Sattlegger, L. (2018). Shared journeys, linked lives: A relational-biographical approach to mobility practices. Mobilities, 13(1), 45–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2017.1300453

Reckwitz, A. (2002). Toward a theory of social practices: A development in culturalist theorizing. European Journal of Social Theory, 5(2), 243–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/13684310222225432

Rentfrow, P. J., & Jokela, M. (2016). Geographical psychology: The spatial organization of psychological phenomena. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25(6), 393–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721416658446

Rosenbaum, J. E., Reynolds, L., & Deluca, S. (2002). How do places matter? The geography of opportunity, self-efficacy and a look inside the black box of residential mobility. Housing Studies, 17(1), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673030120105901

Salmela-Aro, K., Aunola, K., & Nurmi, J.-E. (2007). Personal goals during emerging adulthood: A 10-year follow up. Journal of Adolescent Research, 22(6), 690–715. https://doi.org/10.1177/0743558407303978

Sarver, V. T. (1983). Ajzen and Fishbein’s ‘theory of reasoned action’: A critical assessment. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 13(2), 155–164. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5914.1983.tb00469.x

Schatzki, T. (2009). Timespace and the organization of social life. In E. Shove, F. Trentmann, & R. Wilk (Eds.), Time, consumption and everyday life. Practice, materiality and culture (pp. 35-48). Oxford, UK: Berg.

Schatzki, T. (2014). The edge of change: On the emergence, persistence, and dissolution of practices. In E. Shove & N. Spurling (Eds.), Sustainable practices. Social theory and climate change (pp. 31-46). Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.

Scheiner, J. (1998). Aktionsraumforschung auf phänomenologischer und handlungstheoretischer Grundlage. Geographische Zeitschrift, 86(1), 50–66.

Scheiner, J. (2014). Residential self-selection in travel behavior: Towards an integration into mobility biographies. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 7(3), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.v7i3.439

Scheiner, J. (2018). Why is there change in travel behaviour? In search of a theoretical framework for mobility biographies. Erdkunde, 72(1), 41–62. https://doi.org/10.3112/erdkunde.2018.01.03

Shanahan, M. J., & Porfeli, E. J. (2006). Chance events in the life course. Advances in Life Course Research, 11, 97–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1040-2608(06)11004-7

Sharmeen F., Arentze, T., & Timmermans, H. (2014). An analysis of the dynamics of activity and travel needs in response to social network evolution and life-cycle events: A structural equation model. Transportation Research Part A, 59, 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2013.11.006

Simons, H., & Weiden, L. (2016). Schwarmverhalten, Reurbanisierung und Suburbanisierung. Informationen zur Raumentwicklung, 3, 263–273.

Smith, J. E. (1969). Time, times, and the ‘right time’; Chronos and kairos. Monist, 53(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5840/monist196953115

Smith, J. E. (1986). Time and qualitative time. The Review of Metaphysics, 40(1), 3–16.

Stouffer, S. A. (1940). Intervening opportunities: A theory relating mobility and distance. American Sociological Review, 5(6), 845–867. https://doi.org/10.2307/2084520

Strüver, A. (2015). Critical Mass als performative Kritik der städtischen Verkehrspolitik? Fahrradfahren mit Judith Butler auf dem Gepäckträger. suburban, 3(3), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.36900/suburban.v3i3.204

Sugden, R. (2003). Opportunity as a space for individuality: Its value and the impossibility of measuring it. Ethics, 113(4), 783–809. https://doi.org/10.1086/373953

Sugden, R. (2010). Opportunity as mutual advantage. Economics and Philosophy, 26(1), 47–68. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266267110000052

Sui, D. (2012). Looking through Hägerstrand’s dual vistas: Towards a unifying framework for time geography. Journal of Transport Geography, 23, 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2012.03.020

Tao, S., He, S. Y., Kwan, M.-P., & Luo, S. (2020). Does low income translate into lower mobility? An investigation of activity space in Hong Kong between 2002 and 2011. Journal of Transport Geography, 82, 102583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2019.102583

Thomson, R., Bell, R., Holland, J., Henderson, S., McGrellis, S., & Sharpe, S. (2002). Critical moments: Choice, chance and opportunity in young people’s narratives of transition. Sociology, 36(2), 335–354. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038502036002006

Urry, J. (2007). Mobilities. Cambridge, MA: Polity.

Van Acker, V., Van Wee, B., & Witlox, F. (2010). When transport geography meets social psychology: Toward a conceptual model of travel behaviour. Transport Reviews, 30(2), 219_240. https://doi.org/10.1080/01441640902943453

Wagner, M. (1989). Räumliche Mobilität im Lebensverlauf. Eine empirische Untersuchung sozialer Bedingungen der Migration. Erlangen, Germany: Enke.

Waibel, S. (2019). Does spatial mobility in young adulthood matter? Indirect and direct effects of spatial mobility during education on occupational status (BiB working paper). Wiesbaden, Germany: Federal Institute for Population Research (BiB). https://www.bib.bund.de/Publikation/2019/Does-Spatial-Mobility-in-Young-Adulthood-Matter.html?nn=9751912

Walker, K. E. (2017). The shifting destinations of metropolitan migrants in the U.S., 2005-2011. Growth and Change, 48(4), 532–551. https://doi.org/10.1111/grow.12187

Wang, D., Li, F., & Chai, Y. (2012). Activity spaces and sociospatial segregation in Beijing. Urban Geography, 33(2), 256–277. https://doi.org/10.2747/0272-3638.33.2.256

Weidinger, T., Kordel, S., & Kieslinger, J. (2021). Unravelling the meaning of place and spatial mobility: Analysing the everyday life-worlds of refugees in host societies by means of mobility mapping. Journal of Refugee Studies, 34(1), 374–396. https://doi.org/10.1093/jrs/fez004

Wilson, H. F. (2011). Passing propinquities in the multicultural city: The everyday encounters of bus passengering. Environment and Planning A, 43(3), 634–649. https://doi.org/10.1068/a43354

Zorlu, A., & Kooiman, N. (2019). Spatial trajectories in early life: Moving on or returning home? Population, Space and Place, 25(7), e2268. https://doi.org/10.1002/psp.2268