Image from Freiburgs official webside (Source: freiburg.de)
Source: freiburg.de

Is Freiburg really as green as it claims to be?

1st part: Transportation

Introduction

I have been living in Freiburg for almost six years now – and every time I mention where I am living, a blast of appreciation and admiration gushes towards me. Freiburg is perceived as the eco-town in Germany or perhaps even in Europe. This perception may partly result from a strong anti-nuclear movement in Freiburg since the 1970s when several nuclear power stations were planned around Freiburg – thus, green governance has a long and effective tradition in Freiburg.

Visualisation of Freiburg`s key features in terms of sustainable urban development as presented in Freiburgs marketing campaign (Source: FWTM)

But the picture of Freiburg as a centre of green living is also strongly enforced by the media – through Freiburg`s marketing, e.g. by the official city slogan “Freiburg Green City”  and other marketing campaigns such as the one shown above in cooperation with the FWTM, as well as through thousands of articles. Magazines run stories entitled “Is this the greenest city in the world?“, “The World’s Most Successful Model for Sustainable Urban Development?” or “Freiburg: A Model of Sustainability” calling Freiburg the “ecological capital” of Germany. Even some reviewed articles transport an extremely green picture of Freiburg, as for instance Hopwood who describes Freiburg as a ”self-styled solar city […] which has ”become a journey to the heart of sustainable living” where the “local population have a unique influence into how their communities look and feel”.
But is Freiburg really as green as it claims to be? This is supposed to be the first of a series of blog articles investigating the question how sustainable Freiburg`s urban planning really is. In this fist article, we will have a closer look at sustainable transportation.

 

What is sustainable transport?

But let us at first take a look at the key elements of sustainable transport – which is a core issue to sustainable urban planning. According to Luederitz `s  a city planning should

“enable self-sufficient neighbourhoods to reduce residents’ need to travel. Create neighbourhoods that provide daily needs, amenities, employment, education facilities, and public institutions within walkable distances. Provide access to good public transport for all social strata and reduce motorized individual transportation. Design streets as public space and enhance bicycle use within and outside the neighbourhood through well-connected districts. Develop contiguous compact neighbourhoods around nodes of varying sizes and avoid urban sprawl.” (Luederitz, 2013)

So, sustainable urban planning should reduce the need for transportation in the first place and help people to easily get everywhere they need to by bike, public transport or by walking , which is also stated in the Freiburg Charter in 2012.

Sustainable urban planning according to the Freiburg Charta.
Sustainable urban planning according to the Freiburg Charta.

To measure and compare the level of sustainability of a city `s transportation network various research groups have developed indicators for sustainable transport (STI) as a basis for sustainability transport indices. Haghshenas and Vaziri (2012) developed a set of 9 STI, taking environmental, economical and social factors into account. The resulting composite index allowed them to compare various cities. Alonsoa et al. (2014) created benchmark-approach-based composite indicators to measure the sustainability of urban passenger transport systems, which they applied to 23 European cities as a means for identifying the most influential factors of sustainable city transport. They found that transport policies should aim to increase the share of public transport and avoiding urban sprawl.

Tram in Freiburg.
Tram in Freiburg (Source:CP).

But what influences the sustainability of a transportation network the most? Goldman and Gorham (2006) looked at transport innovation and found New Mobility, City Logistics, Intelligent System Management, and Livability as the most promising areas to achieve sustainable transport systems.  Gösling and Cohen (2014) argue that European countries will fail to significantly reduce their passenger transport-related emissions due to ‘transport taboos’, which are unaddressed “barriers to the design, acceptance and implementation of transport policies, […] such as highly unequal individual contributions to transport volumes and emissions, social inequality of planned market-based measures, the role of lobbyism, and the various social and psychological functions of mobility”. They conclude those issues not being addressed within the EU policy because of a potential violation of specific interests within the neoliberal governance structures – which is of course a very controversial thesis. Grünig (2012) found financial and technological factors, but even more, the engagement of the public community via an open dialogue in order to achieve altered consumer behaviour to be important factors for a successful sustainable urban transport planning. So, is a democracy the way to sustainable transport?

 

Democracy and sustainable transport

Research has shown the significance of democracy and citizen participation in order to achieve sustainable transport planning. Or as a co-student nicely said during our September module:

“A bus with 50 people in it should have 50 times the right to drive first compared to a car with just one person in it!”

And that is exactly what is going on around the world. Sagaris (2014) investigated the role of citizen participation in transport system planning in Chile. He regards “thinking about citizens as planners in their own right, rather than as mere participants at specific points in a planning process” as a way to include social, environmental, and other challenges into the planning process. Doi and Kii (2012) proposed a cross-assessment model which includes vision- and consensus-led approach to sustainable urban transport. When applying this to Japan `s urban areas as planned by 2030, they found the factors related to efficiency, equity and the environment not to be conflicting with each other and “a combination of urban transport strategies with land use control in the form of ‘corridors and multi-centres`” appeared to help emission reduction and provide user benefits.

With regard to Freiburg, the WWF credits Freiburg’s success mainly to its democratic strength with the key elements being direct citizen participation, dynamic planning, and consensus.

 

Transportation policy in Freiburg

But what about Freiburg now? The WWF describes Freiburg `s policy as:

“the interconnectedness of accessibility and mobility with other issues is demonstrated by a city that started – earlier than most in the 1970s – with a decision to save energy. Citizens in Freiburg, a German university city, did not want to accept a planned nuclear power station. That first decision led to the development of Freiburg as a global first-rank model of sustainable urban life – for its leading solar industrialisation, high quality of life via energy-saving spatial and transport planning, and nature conservation, etc. Freiburg sought energy sustainability, and identified transport choices and urban sprawl as key factors.”
Bicycle lanes are just everywhere in Freiburg (Souce:CP).

Bicycle lanes are just everywhere in Freiburg (Souce:CP).

According to the city`s environmental policy (2011), the five pillars of Freiburg’s transport concept are an extended public transport network, the promotion of cycling, pedestrian traffic and liveable streets as well as a limitation of individual motorised traffic. This was confirmed by Ryan and Throgmorton (2003) who compared the transportation and land use planning of Freiburg (Germany) and Chula Vista (California). They found that Freiburg was pursuing a high density land development policy with transit service, in contrast to the car-centred urban sprawl observed for most US cities. And unlike many other cities, Freiburg has expanded its tram network with the aim of improving air quality, noise and energy consumption.

The five pillars of Freiburg’s transport concept are an extended public transport network, the promotion of cycling, pedestrian traffic and liveable streets as well as a limitation of individual motorised traffic (Source: Freiburg, 2011).

 

This planning policy reflects in the results of the last survey in 2012, which also show the importance of cycling in Freiburg for all kinds of activities.

The results of the last survey in 2012 shows the importance of cycling in Freiburg for all kinds of activities (Source: ICLEI, 2012).
 
The role of bicycling

The pastdecades, the role of bicycling has often been neglected as e.g. shown by Koglin and Rye (2014) who researched the scientific factors which led to the dominance of motorised transport in transport planning and compare them to the scientific research on bicycling. They found a marginalisation of bicycling in transport systems.

In contrast to that, Freiburg has, and still is, putting a lot of effort in bicycling transport planning. Within the cycling concept 2020, Freiburg invests significantly (3 Mio € within two years) in the improvement of its cycling lanes with the aim of increasing bicycle use to 30%. The core element of Freiburg cycling concept are “bike priority routes”, similar to the Dutch “cycling speedways”. On these priority lanes, which will crisscross the whole city in a few years, cyclists are supposed to proceed without having to stop.  The first route along the river Dreisam – the important east-west axis through Freiburg – is already finished. Two more routes will pass through the city in a north-south orientation. According to the building authorities, the 6 km long cycling tour from Zähringen (north of Freiburg) to St. Georgen (south-west of Freiburg), will take about 20 min, compared to the 7 km car route which takes about 30 min.  So it`s not only cheaper and healthier to take the bike, but also quicker!

Planned extension of the existing cycling network (Source: Freiburg.de).
Planned extension of the existing cycling network (Source: Freiburg.de).

A further measure to increase bicycle use is Freiburg is the enhanced visibility of bicycle lanes which is supposed to improve cyclists ` safety and this way to reduce the high numbers of bicycle accidents (in Freiburg: 602 in 2012)

Enhanced visibility of cycling lance is supposed to enhance safety (Source: bbboteblog).

And even a modern city bike was developed as a shared project by the Freiburg police department and the ADFC. The aim was to provide a safe, high-quality, durable bike. A funny project, but due to the high price (1590€) and the limited number of bikes, this projects appears to be rather a marketing gag than a real measure to provide safe and cheap cycling equipment for everyone.

Freiburg City Bike (Source:http://www.tout-terrain.de/freiburg-rad/).
Freiburg City Bike (Source: http://www.tout-terrain.de/freiburg-rad/).
 
Public transportation network

In terms of public transportation, Freiburg has put a lot of effort into increasing the share of public transportation. Fitz-Roy and Smith (1998) described “an enormous and unprecedented rise in the demand for local public transport [in Freiburg] since the early 1980s”. The authors found “the introduction of low cost `environmental’ travel cards with the key characteristics of transferability across friends and family and wide regional validity across operators” to be the major cause of this dramatic increase. In accordance with Fitz-Roy and Smith, a survey in 2012 showed that such a travel card is held by almost 40% of the households in Freiburg, or even by 47% when taking the student cards into account. Compared to other German cities such as Munich, this RegioCard is really cheap (currently about 50€ compared to about 200€ for the whole Munich area) which is a strong incentive to use public instead of individual, car-based transport.

Tram in Freiburg (Source:CP).
Tram in Freiburg (Source:CP).

In addition to that, Freiburg is currently improving the public transportation, car sharing and walking opportunities. The city centre is becoming a pedestrian zone with the tram lines being relocated to the surrounding area and extended to the more remote areas of Freiburg-Zähringen (completed: end 2013), Freiburg-Messe (planned: 2015). But even with all those plans waiting to be realised, inhabitant satisfaction regarding the public transportation system in Freiburg ranked highest of all Germany cities!

 

Satisfaction with public transportation system in several German cities (Source: Freiburg, 2014).

Also a sustainable electricity provision for the public transport has been considered: since the January 2009, Freiburg’s trams have been running completely on eco-electricity – the required 13 GW/yr have been provided through a mixture of hydropower (80%) and wind – and solar energy (20%). In addition, energy efficiency of the trams has been improved by 20% through energy recovery while braking (Freiburg, 2011).

 

Conclusion

We have seen that Freiburg has already come a long way in terms of sustainable transportation. Especially the important topics of public transportation and bicycling are highly adressed by the governmental policy which may lead to further improvements in the future. Motorised individual traffic is getting improved through car-sharing opportunities, partly with electric cars, and walking is promoted via pedestrian zones.  So it seems as if in terms of transportation, Freiburg is really on the right way to become a truly sustainable city.

 

Parts of this blog article were published as an essay for the Sustainability and Adaptation Master course at the Centre for Alternative Technologies in December 2014.

 

References

Felix FitzRoy and Ian Smith, 1998 ´Public transport demand in Freiburg: why did patronage double in a decade?`, Transport Policy Volume 5, Issue 3 , Pages 163–173, http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X98000249

Sherry Ryan and James A Throgmorton, 2003 ´Sustainable transportation and land development on the periphery: a case study of Freiburg, Germany and Chula Vista, California`, Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment Volume 8, Issue 1, Pages 37–52 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1361920902000172

Stefan Gössling, Scott Cohen, 2014 ´Why sustainable transport policies will fail: EU climate policy in the light of transport taboos`, Journal of Transport Geography Volume 39, Pages 197–207 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692314001586

Todd Goldman and Roger Gorham, 2006 ´Sustainable urban transport: Four innovative directions`, Technology in Society Volume 28, Issues 1–2, Pages 261–273, Sustainable Cities. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160791X05000606

Doi, K. and Kii, M. (2012) ´Looking at sustainable urban mobility through a cross-assessment model within the framework of land-use and transport integration`, IATSS Research, 35 (2), pp.62–70. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0386111212000052

Sagaris, L. (2014) ´Citizen participation for sustainable transport: the case of “Living City” in Santiago, Chile (1997–2012)` Journal of Transport Geography, 41, pp.74–83 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692314001732.

Grünig, M. (2012) ´25 – Sustainable urban transport planning`, Woodhead Publishing Series in Energy, pp. 607–624. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780857090461500254

Luederitz, C. and Lang, D.J. and Von Wehrden, H. (2013) ´A systematic review of guiding principles for sustainable urban neighbourhood development´, Landscape and Urban Planning, 118, pp. 40-52.

Makra, L. and Mayer, H. and Mika, J. and Sánta, T. and Holst,J. (2010) ´Variations of traffic related air pollution on different time scales in Szeged, Hungary and Freiburg, Germany`, Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C 35 (1–2), pp.85–94 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1474706510000203

Hopwood, D. (2007) ´Blueprint for sustainability?: What lessons can we learn from Freiburg’s inclusive approach to sustainable development?`, Refocus, 8 (3), pp.54–57 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1471084607700689

Haghshenas, H. and Vaziri, M. (2012) ´Urban sustainable transportation indicators for global comparison`, Ecological Indicators, 15 (1), pp.115–121. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X11002974

Alonsoa, A. and Monzónb, A. and Cascajoa, R. (2015) ´Comparative analysis of passenger transport sustainability in European cities`, Ecological Indicators, 48, pp. 578–592 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X14004300

May, A.D. and Page, M, and Hull, A. (2008) ´Developing a set of decision-support tools for sustainable urban transport in the UK`, Transport Policy, 15 (6), pp. 328–340. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0967070X08000462

Koglin, T. and Rye, T. (2014) ´The marginalisation of bicycling in Modernist urban transport planning` Journal of Transport & Health, In Press,http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214140514000747

IGLEI (2013) ´Freiburg, Germany Cycling 2020 – a concept fit for the future`, Local Governments for Sustainability.

Freiburg (2011) ´Environmental Policy in Freiburg  ` Available online at: http://www.freiburg.de/pb/site/Freiburg/get/340683/Umweltpolitik_engl.pdf. (Last access: 19.10.2014).

Freiburg (2014a) Official Webside, Available online at: http://www.freiburg.de/pb/,Lde/324702.html (Last access: 19.10.2014).

Freiburg (2014b) ´Urban Audit: Lebensqualität aus Bürgersicht 2013 – Deutsche und europäische Städte im Vergleich `,  Amt für Bürgerservice und Informationsverarbeitung der Stadt Freiburg im Breisgau.

WWF (2014) Available online at: http://wwf.panda.org/?204419/Freiburg-green-city (Last access: 19.10.2014).

 

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s