Old Mobility? What's the Problem?

What's wrong with "Old Mobility"

What's the problem?

Judged from a Kyoto perspective, or from a public health perspective, our present arrangements for transport in cities are seriously broke. They threaten health in the city and on the planet. They are dangerous. They are costly. They are disruptive. They are thoroughly dysfunctional. And they are howlingly unfair.

All this is a problem of course -- but we prefer to think of it instead as the "problematique", a word we see more often in French and which is used to describe the broader context or fabric of the problem. Or in this case the interlinked nexus of problems, shortcomings and inefficiencies that together constitute our patently unsustainable transportation arrangements in cities in general, and in your city in particular. Let's have a look at this in steps:

1. Simple really. The system's broke

Well when it comes specifically to our present arrangements for transport in cities, that which we are calling the "old mobility", the answer to this is a very long one. Just to hit the high spots:

The present (car-based) system is dangerous, injurious and menaces our health as one of the most debilitating public health menaces of our era.
It provides poor value for money - for individual car owners as well as others, and for the taxpayer in terms of bang per buck.
It is socially unjust and discriminatory to the poor, racial minorities, women, children, the unemployed, and people with physical disadvantages.
It consumes and wastes resources on an intolerable scale.
It pollutes to the extent that it is endangering the planet's ecosystem
It puts the national economy, the international economy and your and my economy at risk by total systemic dependence on a cartel of oil suppliers.
Despite the fact that it costs an arm and a leg to both individual citizens and the community as a whole, the system is steadily degrading in environmental, performance and economic terms year after year.
It implicitly accepts assurances that the transportation specialists, specialist administrators, industry and technology will solve the problems in the long run.
Worse yet -- and this is the final nail in the coffin -- there are as things stand today no grounds for hopefulness. . . unless there is a major underlying paradigm change (which is not in sight).

Moreover, when we take the measures that are being discussed in most places under the cover of would-be solutions, we can see that in all most all cases they are indeed either

Not going to offer the needed relief in the critical target period (which we define somewhat arbitrarily as the 24 months directly ahead) and
Worse yet, in almost all cases are actually going to contribute to increasing the scale of the problem in the longer run that they are purportedly targeting (i.e., by creating more new infrastructure, bringing more vehicles on the road, etc. etc.).

Furthermore, and with only few exceptions, when measured in terms of spending and measures with teeth, it all but ignores anything that might actually provide an alternative to present arrangements: whether in terms of demand management, non-motorized transport, new services and innovative private providers, and transport substitution though better planning, clustering of activities, or new technologies.

Is that true for every city on the planet? Fortunately no, but it does do a pretty good job at characterizing the majority, in the advanced economies and even more catastrophically in cities in the developing world. And is it true for your city? Well, we have to leave that to you to judge.

So, we can see that we have a system (of sorts) and we for sute have a problem. What next? A solution? Not quite. Let's take a look first at the nature of the problem as it stands today here in cities across the globe.

Note: Just to be sure that this is more than a personal and idiosyncratic summary of problem and eventual solutions, we have placed this before several authoritative international forums of transportation and environment specialists from more than fifty countries around the world. And while there was, as you might well guess, abundant criticism and qualifications - many of which have been incorporated into this draft - the bottom line was that this analysis is generally on track.

2. What do you do when everyone else is sitting on their hands?

To figure out where we have to go, let's first make a quick detour to list some of the things that are being consistently touted here and there as solution elements, but which are not... at least if you consider as we think you must, that these are very high priority problems that quite simply cannot wait.

You don't start to plan and build another yet another highway
You don't even give priority to a new metro.
Never mind anything like PRT, monorails or other such wondrous solutions to someone else's' problems (maybe).
You let someone else devote time and money to long term scenarios (remembering what Lord Keynes said about the long term).
You don't wait for fuel cells or new automotive technologies to dig you out of these pits in the decade or more ahead.
Nor do you wait for all those industrial groups that are making money out of present arrangements who step forward with anything that is going to change the basic transportation problematique (which is after all their problematique).
You might pray for World Government to solve your problems (but don't hold your breath).

What this means is truly simple: and that is that if you want the problem to be solved, you the citizen have to roll up your sleeves, get together with your neighbors, have a close look at what is really going on unencumbered by all you are being told you cannot do to solve the problem, open up the debate, get public attention, mobilize real on-street expertise, and go to work yourself. Remember this. No one else is going to do it for you.