本論文之目的，在於比較北美與歐洲地區高等教育機構關於他們如何表達在永續運輸方面發展的關切，以及這些機構以何種程度投入在永續運輸相關議題的研究。
　　為了本研究，我們根據運輸研究委員會2012年會的文論資料製作出相關學術機構的名單。接著我們分析這些學術機構公開網站的資料內容，以解構出北美與歐洲地區大學在設計永續相關運輸課程方面的差異。
經過大約5000個相課程資料的分析，我們發現：大部份的課程是授予三個學分、研究所的課程多於大學部的課程、講課（lecturing）是最常見的授課方法、最常見的課程是運輸工程。平均而言，北美大學比歐洲大學提供更多永續運輸相關的課程。

The purpose of this paper is to compare the differences between North American and European tertiary educational organizations regarding their expressed concerns about sustainable development within the transportation sector and their commitment to the research of issues related to sustainable transport.
For this study, we created a list of academic organizations based on the compendium of papers from the Transportation Research Board’s 2012 annual meeting. Then we analyzed the content from the public websites of these organizations to distinguish differences in the way universities in North America and Europe designed courses related to sustainable transport.
After analyzing information from about 5,000 such courses, we found that most of them were worth 3 credits, more courses were offered for graduate students than for undergraduates, lecturing was the most common teaching method, the most commonly offered course was Transportation Engineering, and, on average, North American universities offered more sustainable transport courses than their European counterparts.

Table of Content

Verification Letter from the Oral Examination Committee…………….………………...i
Abstract in Chinese...........…………………………………………………………….ii
Abstract in English...………………………….………………………………………iii
Table of Content……………………………………………………………………….iv
Tables……………………………………………………………………..……………v
1. Introduction………………………………………………………..………………….1
2. Literature Review.……….…………………….…………..………………………...4
2.1 Transport in Modern Life……………………………………………………..4
2.2 Sustainability and Sustainable Transport……….……………………………..5
2.3 Education for Sustainable Transport in Tertiary Education…………………..10
3. Methods………………………………………………………………….………….14
3.1 Transportation Research Board…………………………………………….....15
3.2 Steps to Form the List of Universities…….………………………..………..16
3.3 Sustainable Transport Related Terms Adopted……………………………….20
3.4 Procedure of Coding………………………………………………………….22
4. Results of the Study………………………………………………………………..25
4.1 General Result …………………………..…………………………………..25
4.2 Course Credits…………………….……………..…………………………..26
4.3 Comparison Between Countries..……………………………………………..27
4.4 Comparison Between North America and Europe……………………….....29
4.5 Lab Courses……………………..…………………………………………..30
4.6 Transportation Engineering………………………………….………………..31
4.7 Urban Transportation Planning…………………………………………….….32
4.8 Water Resources Management………….…………………………………33
4.9 Transportation Planning……………………………………………………..34
4.10 Environmental Engineering………………………………………………..34
5. Conclusions and Research Limitations…………..………………………………..35
5.1 Conclusions………………………………………………………………………35
5.2 Research Limitations…………………………………..…………………………37
6. References…………………………………………………………………………39

References:
1. Adomssent Maik, Michelsen Gerd, 2006. German Academia heading for sustainability? Reflections on policy and practice in teaching, research and institutional innovations, Environmental Education Research Vol.12, Issue 1, p85-99
2. Alan T. Murray, 2001. Strategic Analysis of Public Transport Coverage. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences. Vol.35, Issue 3, p175-188
3. Anna Nagurney, Zugang Liu & Trisha Woolley (2007): Sustainable Supply Chain andTransportation Networks, International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, Vol.1, Issue 1, p29-51
4. Bak Nelleke, 1995. Green Doesn’t Always Mean ‘GO’: Possible Tensions in the Desirability and Implementation of Environmental Education. Environmental Education research, Oct95, Vol.1, Issue 3, p345-352
5. Barla Philippe, Miranda-Moreno F. Luis, Lee-Gosselin Martin. 2011. Urban travel CO2 emissions and land use: A case study for Quebec City. Transportation Research Part D. Vol.16, Issue 6, p423-428
6. Barrie Stevens & Wolfgang Michalski, 1993. Infrastructure in the 1990s: An Overview of Trends and Policy Issues, OECD. chapter 1, p 7-20
http://www.oecd.org/futures/38456212.pdf
7. Bonnett. M. 2002. Education for sustainability as a frame of mind. Environmental Education Research, Vol.8, Issue 1, p9-20
8. California Air Resources Baord, 2008, California Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory. California Air Resources Board, Sacremento
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/tables/ghg_inventory_scopingplan_00-09_2011-10-26.pdf
9. Davis, S.C., S.W., Boundy, R.G., 2009. Transportation Energy Data Book, 28th ed. Prepare by Oak Ridge National Laboratory for the US Department of Energy, Washington, DC.
http://www.kerstech.com/PDFs/Transportation%20Energy%20Data%20Book%202009.pdf
10. European Commission. 2012, Sustainable Development http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eussd/
11. Fergus, A.H.T., and J.I.A. Rowney. 2005. Sustainable development: Lost meaning and opportunity. Journal of Business Ethics Vol.60, Issue 1, p17–27.
12. Flamm Bradley, 2009. The impacts of environmental knowledge and attitudes on vehicle ownership and use. Transportation Research Part D Vol.14, Issue 4, p272-279
13. Gough Annette(May 1999), Recognizing women in environmental education pedagogy and research: Toward an eco-feminist poststructuralist perspective Environmental Education Research, Vol.5, Issue 2, p143-162
14. Henderson, K., & Tilbury, D. (2004). Whole-school approaches to sustainability: An international review of sustainable school programs. Report prepared by the
Australian Research Institute for Education for Sustainability (ARIES) for the
Department of the Environment and Heritage, Australian Government.
http://aries.mq.edu.au/projects/whole_school/files/international_review.pdf
15. Ingólfur Ásgeir Jóhannessona,b*, Kristín Noredahlb, Gunnhildur Óskarsdóttirb,
Aueur Pálsdóttirb and Björg Pétursdóttirc, 2011. Curriculum analysis and education for sustainable development in Iceland. Environmental Education Research Vol. 17, Issue 3, p375–391
16. Liddle Brantley. 2009. Long-run relationship among transport demand, income, and gasoline price for the. US. Transportation Research Part D Vol.14, Issue 2, p73-82
17. Lu Jin-Long and Zhang Yi-Shon, 2012. Exploring airline passengers’ willingness to pay for carbon offsets. Transportation Research Part D Vol.17, Issue 2, p124-128
18. Mark J. Koetse, Piet Rietveld, 2009. The impact of climate change and weather on transport: An overview of empirical findings. Transportation Research Part D Vol.14, Issue 3, p205-221
19. Maruizio Bielli, Pasquale Carotenuto , Vincenzo Delle Site, 1998. Transport and Environment Interactions: The Italian Framework, Transportation Research Part D Vol.3, Issue 6, p389-397
20. Miles R. Tight, Alison Vicat, Abigail L. Bristow, Alison Pridmore & Anthony D.
May (2007): An Exploration of Household Response to Personal Travel Carbon-Reduction Targets, International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, Vol.1, Issue 3, p143-159
21. Moore, J. 2005. Is higher education ready for transformative learning? A question explored in the study of sustainability. Journal of Transformative Education Vol.3, Issue 1, p76-91
22. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2000. OECD Conference on Environmentally Sustainable Transport EST , Futures, Strategies and Best Practice
http://esteast.unep.ch/phocadownload/oecd0003.pdf
23. Pilar Aznar Minguest, M.Pilar Martinez-Agut, Belen Palacios, Albert Pinero and M. Angeles Ull, 2011. Introducing sustainability into university curricula: an indicator and baseline survey of the views of university teachers at the University of Valencia. Environmental Education Research Vol.17, Issue 2, p145-166
24. Ralph Buehler & John Pucher (2011): Sustainable Transport in Freiburg: Lessons
from Germany's Environmental Capital, International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, Vol.5, Issue 1, p43-70
25. Rauch Franz, 2002. The potential of Education for Sustainable Development for Reform in Schools. Environmental Education Research, Vol.8, Issue 1, p 43-51
26. Sperling D, Cannon J. (eds.). 2009. Reducing Climate Impacts in the Transportation Sector. New York: Springer.
27. Stern, N., 2007. The Economics of Climate Change: The Stern Review. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
28. Thomas Ian, Kyle Louise & Alvarez Amaya, 1999. Environmental Education across the Tertiary Curriculum: a process. Environmental Education Research, Vol.5, Issue 3, p319-337
29. UNCED, 1992. Promoting education and public awareness and training, Agenda 21, Conference on Environment and Development, Conches, Ch.36.
http://www.gdrc.org/u-gov/a21-education.html
30. UNESCO, 2008. Media as partners in education for sustainable development: A training and resource kit. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001587/158787e.pdf

31. United Nations, 2012. The future we want.
http://www.uncsd2012.org/content/documents/727The%20Future%20We%20Want%2019%20June%201230pm.pdf
32. Wu, Y.C. 2007. Contemporary logistics education: An international perspective. International Journal of Physical Distribution& Logistics Management, Vol.37, Issue 7, p504-528
33. Yen-chun Jim Wu, Chia-Wen Lin. 2008. : National port competitiveness: implications for India. Management Decision, Vol.46, Issue 10, p1482-1507
34. Yen-chun Jim Wu, Shihping Huang, Lopin Kuo, Wen-hsiung 2010. Management Education for Sustainability: A web-Based Content Analysis. Academy of Management Learning and Education Vol.9, Issue 3, p520-531
35. Yang Christopher, McCollum David, McCarthy Ryan, Leighty Wayne, 2009. Meeting an 80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from transportation by 2050: A case study in California. Transportation Research Part D Vol.14, Issue 3, p147-156