The polarisation of mobility needs and sustainability concerns

As we learnt last week that global temperatures will likely break the 1.5C threshold over the next five years, many will be looking to big industries, like the automotive sector for example, to make further progress in terms of becoming more sustainable. With the Earth’s average temperature already higher than 1C, you would think now more than ever, there would be a growing consensus towards tackling this issue head on.

However, in the early months of 2020 the Coronavirus pandemic created shifts in people’s behaviours, the likes of which have not been seen for many a generation. For example, although personal mobility usage (cars, motorbikes etc.) dropped greatly during the peak of the crisis, we now see a sharp increase, particularly in car usage. While many people may feel the latest rise is justified due to the drop in usage and pollution levels during the peak of the crisis, the World Health Organisation has repeatedly stressed that the industrial and economic slowdown from Covid-19 is not a substitute for sustained and co-ordinated climate action”.

Even prior to the crisis, people recognised that sustainable living requires changes to less polluting transport. However, this wasn’t a strong enough reason in itself for many people to change their mobility choices. There was an awareness that private vehicle ownership is polluting the planet, but the convenience of vehicles, and the inconvenience of alternative options meant that so far, no large-scale behavioural changes had taken hold. I would argue that in the time of coronavirus, the same is still true today, with the perceived added health benefits of using your own personal mode of transport vs public transport.

At Nacar, we recently ran an in depth study into the behavioural changes displayed by people as a result of the COVID-19 crisis. In this ongoing research, we gained a first understanding of how the hierarchies of human needs have been shaken up. We paused, listened to people and with them we collected insights to get an initial understanding of the transformations in their behaviours. What we began to see is a global tension between two sides. The people that wish to go back to how things were and the people that wish to replace outdated traditions forever. This was especially true when we look at the mobility behaviours of the participants.

One key finding was the awareness and recognition that the reduction in transportation usage during the COVID-19 crisis has had a positive effect on the environment. However, the research also showed a clear split in terms of people who would now change their mobility behaviours, citing environmental concerns vs those who would still return to their previous ways post crisis (convenience of vehicles, and the inconvenience of alternative options). Yet it’s not quite as clear cut as it sounds. There were many factors involved in these decisions, for example:

• Health concerns related to the usage of shared mobility (public transport).
• The infrastructure currently in place is not adequate to allow for a change in transportation.
• People no longer need to travel due to a change in work patterns.
• The desire to move to more suburban areas as opposed to the inner city.

With this polarisation in mind, the question remains, who will lead the way when it comes to creating more sustainable mobility services that meet the needs of both groups? One option would be to look to local authorities to help change the behaviours of its citizens. For example, in Copenhagen, around 40% of daily commutes are now made by bicycle. The city’s bicycling infrastructure means it is often perceived as the most convenient transport option. To further increase bicycling rates, the city has implemented a range of initiatives, including an electric city-bicycling scheme, dedicated cargo-bicycle parking, bicycling highways, and green bicycling routes creating shortcuts across the city.

However, it’s unlikely that we can rely on local authorities alone to solve this complex problem. To build truly sustainable mobility services, you need to work with other key stakeholders, such as the automotive manufacturers. However, OEM’s have very complex business models. The shorter product and service development cycles and increasing technological complexity of smarter cars already required a complete restructuring of the OEM supply chains. To expect them to once again go through something similar in order to move from their current linear practices to more circular economy principles is a big ask.

What we need is to find ways of bringing together multiple strategic partners and stakeholders within the mobility space rather than singling out and applying increasing amounts of pressure on one group. We need to foster a collaborative approach, to work with relevant business, governments and even academia to build frameworks and policies for the development of mobility systems that are restorative and circular by design. A leading example of this would be the Ellen McArthur Foundation, who lead the way when it comes to accelerating the transition to a circular economy across industries such as Fashion and Food. The Foundation aims to inspire and communicate circular economy thinking through insights & analysis, learning activities, and collaborative business opportunities.

Using these industry examples as inspiration alongside our ongoing research into mobility based behavioural shifts, Nacar will be refocusing its work with its new and existing clients and networks in the mobility space and beyond to help inspire and deliver on circular economy thinking, starting right here in Barcelona. These are the first steps into a very complex and fluid challenge, but it’s one that we feel very passionately about in order to do our part in helping build more sustainable products and services. We all have to work together now more than ever to prevent a long-term move to this new, more dangerous, warmer world.