Speaker
Description
The role of the car in a post car society
According to Ivan Illich in his book “Tools for Conviviality” (Illich 1973) each technical invention has its liberating effects, however, if not carefully managed, turns men into slaves of the same invention. The car is one of his favourite examples.
The original purpose of cars was (1) Leisure trips to the countryside for wealthy urbanites, and 2) supporting living /working in rural areas for farmers. In the 1950’s a democratization of the car lead to industrial production for a market instead of selected customers. Since then, instead of leisure trips or selective functional trips in industrialized countries the car has been used for ubiquitous, utilitarian trips like commuting and shopping, leading to the ‘cycle of car dependency’.
Although worldwide car use and ownership are rising, many governments currently are trying to shape conditions for a so called mobility transition, away from the car. However, the current ´system of automobility´, as described by Urry, (Urry 2004) is proving extremely resilient to change. This system is not sustainable, as it needs mass production of private (e) cars, damaging the environment on macro level, and destroying the urban fabric on micro level.
In this discussion paper, we explore if and how rethinking the role of the car, starting from its original qualities, can help unlock this situation.
Key questions are: What are the essential liberating qualities of the car? Can these be again put centre stage? And: Can they be sustainable?
Our findings show that, in line with the original purposes:
1) A first unique quality of automobility is the possibility of leisure or social trips over longer distances to peripheral locations. This is liberating in a positive way.
2) A second unique quality is the possibility of functional trips to locations and/or times beyond walking/cycling/public transport range, but also special purpose such as trips carrying bulky goods, trips carrying people not able to walk/cycle/ride public transport etc.
In the first category trips are mostly incidental. As incidental use is appropriate for sharing or renting, one feature of a sustainable automobility of the future could be the availability of renting systems for e-cars, for leisure or special trips. Renting instead of owning leads to more sustainability, as the demand for new produced private cars would drop dramatically.
In the second category trips are either incidental or daily. If people depend on the daily use of the car, renting is not very likely. However, as these daily trips are mostly individual, and covering relatively short distances, the present-day car is oversized and overpowered for this purpose. Downsizing of the car is possible. Variants of the microcar could fill this gap, leading to more sustainability, as the production and use of microcars seems to be less damaging for the environment and for the urban fabric.
The paper concludes that a in a post car society the car could play two positive and sustainable roles: A rental system for leisure purposes and special functional trips, and, in a downsized form, for the societal participation of those who are daily dependent on the use of a car. The paper ends with some reflections how policy could create the conditions for such a transition.
References
Illich, I. (1973). Tools for conviviality. London: Calder and Boyars.
Urry, J. (2004). The ‘system’ of automobility. Theory, culture & society, 21(4-5), 25-39.
References
Illich, I. (1973). Tools for conviviality. London: Calder and Boyars. Urry, J. (2004). ‘The ‘system’ of automobility’. Theory, culture & society, 21(4-5), 25-39.
| Keywords | mobility; sustainability; transition |
|---|
