By Anja Höfner, Max Bömelburg, Nicolas Guenot
The use of digital technology in shaping urban mobility and the role of digital platforms as an increasingly important access point for various mobility options were the focus of this section of our project. Together with people active in various fields—from the tech scene to the environmental movement, from trade unions to civil society organizations—we explored the role of digital technology in the development of mobility to date and in a future mobility transition. Here, we would like to summarize our discussions from the seminars we conducted together.
What digital technology has changed in mobility so far
With the proliferation of digital devices and infrastructure, more and more data is being collected on traffic volumes, vehicle utilization, route planning, and ticketing. This makes mobility options more accessible and expands digital control options. The promise of digitizing mobility lies in the development of multimodal platforms that enable convenient and consistent access to and use of various modes of transport. Nevertheless, it was clear in our discussion: the mobility transition is still pending.
There was quick agreement that flexible and personalized offerings (often discussed under the term Mobility-as-a-Service) and the few multimodal platforms that have been developed have not yet been able to change the current balance between the different modes of transport. In 2018, almost three-quarters of passenger transport was accounted for by private motorized transport. The ecological footprint of mobility has also changed little in recent decades. However, multimodal offerings in cities have become more diverse—thanks to a wide variety of rental bikes, e-scooters, shared cars, on-demand buses, and, above all, new digital travel planning and timetable applications.
Although cities are hoping to use digital technology to organize their transport in a more environmentally friendly and less disruptive way, the development of this technology to date has been dominated by companies. The acquisition of traffic data is an important step for private actors to benefit from platform effects. Cities and transport companies run into difficulties if they fail to develop the necessary digital expertise. Due to their dependence on tech companies, they lose both control over data and some of their innovative and creative power in transport planning.
Mobility services are still rarely available across regions, and traffic data is generally scarce. Nevertheless, a shift toward private digital platforms is already evident. Access to transportation is now more frequently provided via digital offerings at various levels—such as accessing timetables, requesting rides, or renting vehicles. This is accompanied by externalization, whereby employees in the mobility sector are working less for municipal transport companies and are increasingly being pushed into precarious employment (including solo self-employment, as with Uber).
Socio-ecological criteria for the public mobility platforms of the future
If digital mobility platforms are to play an increasingly central role, they must serve socio-ecological goals. In light of the climate crisis and the necessary reduction in CO2 emissions, they must contribute to reducing traffic and, above all, to abandoning private cars as both a norm and a requirement. Easy access to a mode of transport that allows multiple modes of transport to be used in combination, sometimes on a single journey, will play a crucial role in the future—and this is where multimodal platforms are relevant. However, this new form of mobility must be designed with a view to a right to mobility for all, beyond constraints and privileges. Our discussion addressed the controversy over whether the initial focus should be on using digital tools and electromobility to reduce unecological car traffic, or whether the problem of excessive mobility should already be addressed in light of global injustices and the increase in traffic due to rebound effects.
To make the use of environmentally friendly modes of transport more attractive, the use of digital technology must be needs-oriented and accordingly consider the local context. While a highly frequented bus route can be covered by a regular timetable, access to the local transport system should be enabled through flexible mobility options in the outskirts of a larger city, despite lower passenger numbers—for example, with digitally supported on-demand buses that connect outlying districts to the city's public transport system. In this local design of mobility, the question of standardization was controversial for us. On the one hand, locally specific solutions make ecological sense and promote democratic control. On the other hand, supra-regional standardization enables more accessible and attractive mobility for everyone. The issues of common standards for transport data and the centralization of mobility platforms play a central role in this.
On a technical level, digital mobility offerings must be oriented towards data economy and data protection. When collecting and using traffic data, ecological and democratic factors must be weighed against the usefulness of the data—regardless of whether it is timetable data, real-time data, route requests, or map data. Beyond personal movement data, collective traffic data must also be handled with care, as it is an important foundation for public mobility and urban planning. During the discussion, we agreed that municipal flexibility in designing mobility offerings must be expanded to enable long-term, ecological, and democratic planning. The ability of cities to secure their control over data is an important goal to counteract a potential concentration of power in individual private actors. Digital mobility platforms must be part of an infrastructure oriented towards the common good.
Digital tools in a fair mobility design from below
One challenge in the discussion surrounding the use of digital technology, especially in the area of mobility, is the need for a broader framework: digital tools alone can never solve social, ecological, or societal problems. In our discussion, it was therefore quite clear that our vision of digital mobility offerings must be subordinate to a fundamental socio-ecological mobility transition—climate-friendly, oriented toward the common good and the removal of barriers and discrimination, transparent, and democratic. Based on this goal orientation, we discussed various strategies.
If transport must become climate-neutral as quickly as possible, it makes sense to digitally support the mobility transition and create real alternatives to privately owned cars through attractive multimodal platforms. In parallel with supporting the development of such public platforms, civil society approaches such as non-profit sharing services or booking systems for cargo bikes should be promoted. This requires both active members of the tech scene and the institutional creation of a productive framework. The goal here must be to provide everyone with access to good public transport—therefore, both residents of urban areas and those working in the mobility sector must help shape the necessary technological development.
A fair and transparent, bottom-up approach to mobility requires action on two levels. First, publicly funded development processes for mobility services oriented toward the common good and the promotion of open standards are needed. Traffic data must be understood as a common good, which could be achieved through a data-sensitive open data policy, whereby little or no personal data is collected while collective data is made accessible to everyone. At an institutional and governmental level, an undemocratic concentration of power in tech companies must also be prevented. Legal interventions such as requiring mobility platforms to operate open interfaces or to develop traffic data-based software under open source licenses are suitable for this purpose.
Our discussion has shown that continued exchange between civil society and mobility stakeholders with diverse perspectives is necessary. With the goal of using digital technology in the spirit of a socio-ecological mobility transition, and with the help of clear criteria for its development, much can be achieved. The movement that will make the necessary public multimodal platforms a reality has yet to come together—but the contours of the mobility transition are there and already partially indicate where the journey is headed.
