New forms of mobility: take cars out of circulation

The provocation of Katja Diehl's book consists in imagining a world in which the car plays a role appropriate to its functionality.

It consists of imagining parents who can safely send their children on their bikes for an afternoon activity alone, or people who, even with disabilities or in rural areas, can get around individually and safely without fossil fuel vehicles.

In short: Diehl's remarks are a slap in the face to the guardians of the transport policy status quo.

Philip Krohn

Editor in business, responsible for "People and Business".

• Follow I follow

The author, now a political advisor and host of the SheDrivesMobility podcast after a decade and a half in the mobility and logistics industry, does not believe that new technologies will alleviate the challenges of mobility.

"They will not be able to create solutions if the behavior remains the same," she writes.

Mobility products should be thought of as a system, urban space as a value in itself.

Then it could be possible to make cities more child-friendly, more livable and more sustainable.

The car, on the other hand, is too dominant, takes up too much space and endangers people.

She doesn't say that out of hatred: "By questioning automobility, however, I approach privileges that are misinterpreted as rights." That fits.

Promenades and political lobby backgrounds

But the book can also be read as something completely different from a provocation, namely as a vision of a life with needs-based mobility.

Diehl thinks through the extent to which the car dominates our lives, influences settlement structures and monopolizes our roads.

She shows examples of a gradual dismantling of this dominance in metropolises such as Barcelona, ​​Paris or Copenhagen and focuses on the fact that we reserve a lot of space for stationary vehicles in cities: "What does the freedom to use a car for an average of only 45 minutes a day mean, it but being allowed to park in public spaces free of charge for those who live next to the car?”

With her change of perspective, she succeeds in making visible the absurdity of a traffic structure dominated by cars.

It looks back into history and is reminiscent of promenades before motorized private transport dominated the cities.

By shedding light on legal, cultural and political lobbying backgrounds, a network becomes visible that has so far prevented a traffic turnaround.

Because automakers use the term "key industry" to hold everyone jointly liable for their economic well-being, their interest is overweighted.

Joint work on a traffic concept that includes the interests of all those involved does not take place.

Interviews with people in the countryside

Diehl's book is a great success and not, as is alleged, the pamphlet of an activist.

In order to design a utopia, it must start from the maximum, the car-free city.

What becomes of this in the political process through discussions between stakeholders is a completely different question.

She clearly describes the unreasonable demands of car dominance and openly deals with important counter-arguments.

Of course, the existing local transport is not yet an alternative, and of course life in the country without your own car is difficult at the moment.

But this in-alternative thinking is an important element of the book.

The author does not simply rely on empty phrases and apparent truths such as "mobility must remain affordable for the poor" or "in the country you cannot do without a car".

Instead, she has conducted many interviews with people in rural areas, on low incomes or with disabilities, who explain to her that they are involuntarily dependent on the car.

Habitats need to be repaired

With the results of these forty interviews, which are summarized in the book, she provides arguments for how mobility can be made more needs-based even without a car.

If the nurse could use public transport at six in the morning or if all trains were barrier-free or if a trans person were protected from attacks in the evening, none of these people would be dependent on private transport.

If there were car sharing concepts or car pools in rural areas, the dominance would be lower.

She doesn't like that it has to be considered courageous to give cities back to the people, but "this first step seems to be the hardest: recognizing that we have to repair our living spaces and to take away the exclusivity of the car".

A very difficult task needs to be tackled and conveniences overcome in order to give other forms of mobility equal rights again.

Katja Diehl lists many arguments as to why life would be better if it was successful.

Her book helps to free one's head from all apparent necessities.

Katja Diehl: “Autocorrect”.

Mobility for a world worth living in.