A Choice Between Cars and Humans for the Future of Danish Cities

Authors

Gorka Díaz Merino

MSc Sustainable Design Student 

Aalborg University (Copenhagen)

Marika Zamelek

MSc Sustainable Design Student

Aalborg University (Copenhagen)

We were promised flying cars by the beginning of the 21st Century, but with tires still very much attached to the roads, we ask once again, how will people move from one place to another in a few years from now? Mainstream stories about technological change are told and retold into the future. Here we aim at retelling a story about mobility.

Considering the current climate crisis acknowledged by the scientific community, the fast pace of modern societies and the current enabling patterns of consumption and production, the transition to a more sustainable future is critical. Urban passenger transportation is considered a key sustainability concern in terms of CO₂ emissions (Moradi and Vagoni, 2018). 

What can the future of mobility teach us about mitigating Climate Change and building healthier communities? In this post we will analyze the future of the system of mobility as imagined by a global consultancy with a normative vision. We will use the lense of radical systemic change to explore how this narrative converges with the current dominant techno-centric discourse on solving sustainability challenges and the problems that arise from this perspective. We will then argue for a different framing that places people at the center to uncover alternative ways of thinking about the future and its opportunities.

We will draw on the concept of Socio-technical Systems as encompassing the linkages between elements in the production, diffusion and use of technology to fulfill a societal need, in this case mobility. We will apply the ‘Multilevel Perspective’ (Geels, 2002), which studies the dynamics of technological change as the result of interactions between three levels: the landscape -the ”macro” level at which external developments shape and create pressures on the dominant system–, the regime –the “meso” level, the dominant system that is being replaced– and the niche –the “micro” level at which innovative systems emerge to gain adoption. 

A Normative Narrative of Mobility

Currently, Danish streets are designed for cars, with some space reserved for trains and metro entrances, bike lanes competing for relevance and a rather narrow area for people to walk on. This is because the mobility system currently is dominated by a constellation of vehicles operating on roughly the same roads (cars, buses, shared vehicles or taxis and bikes). But if we look at the 70% GHG emission reduction target for Denmark by 2030 (Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy and Utilities, 2019), we know that something does not add up. 

One story about the future of mobility is told by the global consultancy KPMG on its video “Mobility 2030: Beyond transportation”, which hops on current growing trends of digitalization, smartness and big data, and electrification to present a hyper-technological mobility in 2030. The current niche of autonomous, electric cars becomes dominant, allowing us to live “more productive” lives by using the innumerable digital services integrated in the vehicles. We will digitally organize our calendar, play games or do the groceries without getting out of the car. Or perhaps we prefer to follow a personalized yoga routine, or breathe purified air. After all, if people often do not find the time to do everything they want to do in their day, what better option is there than to make the most of our commuting time or those trips to meet friends?

A second highlight of the customer experience is the freedom of choice given by the technology at hand. The digital services offered in the autonomous vehicles are claimed to be an extension of the customer’s life, an integral part of it. Not only will we achieve the most in our trips, we will also get the freedom to choose what we want to do at any given time. Cars or public transport become thus a separate bubble of the world in which a myriad of opportunities arise for us, customers. Should we want to watch a movie, a concert, track our favorite social media accounts, or do guided meditation, these services will have us covered. The promise is that through technology, we will experience anything they might want, when we want.

KPMG depicts a future of low-carbon emitting transport sector, led by currently emerging trends such as electrification displacing combustion engines, and embracing sharing as the main business model for cars as opposed to current private ownership seen at the regime level. This is in line with the mainstream discourse exemplified by Abid et al. (2021) stating that “it is entirely possible to achieve carbon neutrality in the transport sector [...] by going forward with a deep level of electrification” by 2050. Additionally, sharing models seek to increase use intensity and reduce the total amount of vehicles needed. 

 

Transportation, as portrayed by the consultancy, will follow a simple linear narrative where some environmental concerns (reducing carbon emissions), consumption demands and patterns (freedom of choice, infinite content availability, digital interaction) and industry trends (technification, smartness, efficiency, electrification) take us to a “logical” conclusion. 

Figure 1. Basic elements and values of KMPG’s narrative on technological change, where the current state of affairs is affected by some driver, resulting in a consequent state of affairs.

 

What is the Problem?

Some key questions arise from our analysis. Does the focus on our productivity limit us and reduce us to what we produce? At its core, it reinforces a fast-paced way of living that puts a strain on our mental and physical health. And is being disconnected from our immediate reality and only in touch with the digital world really a good idea? Questionable, unless we want to increase individuality and disconnectedness with our neighborhood and city. But surely it really is possible to reduce carbon emissions by 70% by shifting to electric vehicles and maximizing efficiency, right? Well, a focus solely on efficiency generally generates “rebound effects” that mitigate or reverse the intended effect (Berkhout, Muskens and Velthuijsen, 2000), and transitioning to a sustainable mobility system will necessarily mean a radical process of socio-technical change comprising a reconfiguration of urban infrastructure (Monstadt 2009). Current mainstream urban planning, design and engineering experts also hold concerns around the future role of streets in our lives –people having been pushed to the side, cars being in the center– and reimagine the streets as “livable” (Imagining the Future of Mobility, 2019). This contrast leads us to believe that connectedness to the real world should be the focus, and not taken for granted. This fits perfectly with a humane, non-motorized mobility system that simultaneously cuts down the CO₂ emissions drastically.

A Healthy, Connecting and Decarbonized Mobility

We contest that the future of mobility should focus on enhancing the experience of the people. Imagine streets without cars. Streets where green, open spaces predominate, integrated with walks and bike lanes. Imagine breathing unpolluted fresh air everywhere you go, listening to the soft sounds of nature, seeing wide streets with multitude of trees, bushes and grassy areas with which you can interact. Going from point “A” to point “B” becomes an enjoyable and fulfilling experience. We imagine streets with no infrastructure barriers, where citizens reclaim their place on the streets and are encouraged to connect to the surroundings and to other people. 

Figure 2. Infrastructure comparison of the imagined futures at the intersection of Rosenørns Alle - Åboulevard (Copenhagen).

These changes in the urban setting will go hand in hand with the design of spaces for recreation, social activities and sports, where communal life will be nurtured through play, sports, cultural and social exploration or artistic expression, encouraging a more fulfilling life. Green spaces promote physical activity, psychological well-being, and the general public health of urban residents, while providing critical ecosystem services (Wolch, Byrne and Newell, 2014). No motorized vehicles means no noise or pollution, and walking and cycling as the main means to move also allow for slowing the already fast pace at which we live, further reducing stress levels.

Figure 3. Comparison of what the user might see when using the future mobility systems.

A sustainable future means a drastic reduction in the number of motorized vehicles. We propose getting rid of the car to the largest extent possible and the inclusion of large and numerous green areas as a way of not only reducing, but potentially reaching net-positive CO₂ emissions. This entails the transition to a different technology of traveling, but it also entails the fulfillment of societal needs, which is why the focus of the infrastructure is to make a more humane environment where people can thrive and a different way of living is permitted, perhaps a better way.

Figure 4. A Multilevel perspective depicting the main socio-technical niches that both futures draw upon.

Conclusion

KPMG’s video supports the narrative that the future of mobility is hyper-technological and maximizes efficiency, convenience and productivity. A perspective that feeds back into the established socio-technical system and the inertia of modern societies towards extreme technological development as a source of well-being and a solution to the challenges we face. 

We argue that this narrative is not part of the radical systemic change needed in order to achieve a sustainable mobility system. On the contrary, it reinforces the regime and gives the impression that the unchallenged ‘status quo’ can still become sustainable without great changes. In order to challenge this idea, we develop an alternative narrative that puts people at the center through the local transformation of urban spaces to fit the community and environmental needs. We propose a decarbonized walking and cycling system where the infrastructure plays a major role in building healthier and more connected communities.

It is clear that the future of mobility needs to deviate from the narrative of the current regime if we are to travel sustainably in the cities. The goal of our proposal is to be just one alternative that could, jointly with other alternative narratives, open up the space to reimagine the future that we want.

References

Abid, H., Kany, M.S., Mathiesen, B.V., Nielsen, S. and Maya-Drysdale, D.W, 2021, Transport electrification scenarios for decarbonization of the European transport sector by 2050, in European Council for an Energy Efficient Economy (ECEEE): Summer Study Proceedings 2021, pp. 751-759.

Berkhout, P.H.G., Muskens, C., Velthuijsen, J.W., 2000, Defining the rebound effect, Energy Policy, 28(6), pp. 425-432.

Danish Ministry of Climate, Energy and Utilities, 2019. Denmark’s Integrated National Energy and Climate Plan.

Geels, FW, 2002, 'Understanding the Dynamics of Technological Transitions: A co-evolutionary and socio-technical analysis', University of Twente, Enschede.

"Imagining the Future of Mobility", 2019, Institute of Transportation Engineers, ITE Journal, 89(6), pp. 20-21.

Monstadt, J., 2009, Conceptualizing the political ecology of urban infrastructures: insights

from technology and urban studies, Environment and Planning A, 41(8), pp. 1924–1942.

Moradi, A., Vagoni, E., 2018, A multi-level perspective analysis of urban mobility system dynamics: What are the future transition pathways?, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 126, pp. 231-243.

Wolch, J., Byrne, J. and Newell, J., 2014, Urban green space, public health, and environmental justice: The challenge of making cities ‘just green enough’, Landscape and Urban Planning, 125, pp.234-244.