"Can we learn from emerging countries about diverse and differentiated public transport?"

He cycles to work every day. Prof Dr Jochen Eckart does not own a car anymore. When he does need one, he relies on car sharing. "What I really don't need any more is a private car, and not so much for ideological reasons, but really for reasons of convenience. You're constantly looking for parking spaces, it has to get repaired all the time, it costs a lot of money - I can really do without it." 

Mr Eckart, as a scientist, you and your team took part in the ARD campaign #besserBahnfahren and analysed the surveys of almost 6,000 public transport users in Germany. According to the results, reliability, frequency, journey and waiting times as well as the price are the most important criteria for Germans when choosing a means of transport. Which of the results surprised you the most?  

Two of them: We realised that reliability is important, but it is very dominant. Reliability is the most important criterion, especially for people who already use public transport. We were also surprised that the issue of cost has clearly become less important. In other surveys it appears in second or third place - in ours in fifth place. I think this is one of the effects of the Deutschlandticket, because it has made public transport cheaper for season ticket holders. 

Compared to public transport, the car is often perceived as more practical because it is more flexible and reliable. Is public transport still competing with the car?  

I see the car as an individual means of transport that is not in competition with public transport alone, but with the entire environmental network, i.e. the combination of public transport, cycling and walking. And here I think that public transport is attractive, despite its well-known deficits, such as its lack of reliability. Studies have shown that for around a third of all journeys that are currently made by car, there is actually already an attractive alternative even under today's conditions - be it public transport, cycling or whatever. And these individual journeys could actually already be shifted today without having to expand anything else. 

Does the car have to become less attractive, i.e. more expensive to buy and maintain, in order to make public transport or the eco-mobility system more attractive?  

We did not ask this question in the #besserBahnfahren survey. But we know from other studies that what we want to promote must be made more attractive and what we want to promote less must be made less attractive. This combination always has the best redirection effects. However, this also gives some people the feeling that something is being taken away from them. Given that there is already an alternative for a third of all car journeys, I see potential here to start replacing them. But this rethink requires a gentle nudge, such as reminding people of the increased costs or the annoying search for a parking space. 

The Deutschland-Ticket has created a standardised price structure for public transport throughout Germany. Nevertheless, the offer for the standardised price differs greatly from region to region. How can such differences, especially between urban and rural areas, be broken down?  

The difference between urban and rural areas in the public transport structure has grown historically and in line with the demand for public transport. In urban areas, the transport network has been well developed and local public transport is used to the limits of its capacity at peak times. In rural areas, on the other hand, we have a basic service. And this is hardly used because it is not attractive enough for people to actually see it as an alternative means of transport. Public transport in rural areas must therefore also become more attractive. But that's not easy. The fact that there is a bus every hour is not enough to make it an attractive alternative. It has to be a bus that is also fast enough, it has to have a reliable frequency and so on. Only then can something be done in rural areas. But is that the first place to look? I mentioned earlier that a third of all car journeys can already be replaced today. These are not necessarily in rural areas, but rather in conurbations where there is already a good public transport service. 

What can the mobility transition look like in the countryside?  

In the city, we already have a relatively clear vision of what this will look like: a multimodal mix of environmentally friendly modes of transport, which are currently attractive or even more attractive than private transport by car. It is more difficult in rural areas. But that doesn't mean we should leave it there. Here, too, the infrastructure needs to be expanded and investments made in services such as attractive buses, links between different modes of transport or ridesharing services. I believe that the mobility transition will play a greater role in rural areas because there will be many car journeys that cannot be replaced by other alternatives as easily as in urban areas. And there is also no vision of everyone in rural areas only travelling by public transport. I believe that we first need to create sensible and good alternatives in order to get to difficult places. 

Would a more diverse public transport service be a lever for the mobility transition?  

Diversity can play a role, but for me it is not a criterion when choosing a means of transport. In Germany, we have the annoying tendency to say: We can offer everything in public transport as long as you can do it with a normal bus and a normal train. That is the traditional way of thinking. The fact that there is now a discussion about offering more diverse services, such as ridesharing, is important and also something that we see in other countries. One example that initially seems unusual is the Philippines: When I look at the public transport services there, I see diversity. There are buses that travel long distances. There are smaller buses that travel short distances with many stops. There are buses with and without air conditioning, there is a light rail system. There are various ridesharing services and much more. It is a very diverse and differentiated public transport service. And this raises an interesting question: can we learn something from emerging countries? Maybe that's something we need to think more about. 

Do you think ridepooling offers have a special role to play in the mobility transition?  

I don't see a single particularly important measure for the mobility transition, but rather a combination of many. However, if I had to give one thing a special role, I would choose the smartphone, because it makes it easy to explore different mobility offers, find timetables, buy tickets and connect offers with each other. The organisational power of a smartphone has a special role to play. 

As a transport ecologist, you are primarily concerned with the consequences of transport for people and the environment. Which measure in the field of mobility do you currently consider to be the most urgent in order to achieve a sustainable effect for the mobility transition and thus also for a better climate?  

In order for us to be really successful in climate protection, I believe we need a consistent combination of action: we make things more attractive and at the same time make the alternatives that we don't want a little less attractive. So carrot and stick. That would mean, for example, that we tackle urban speeds. If the car were to be slowed down to the same speed as other road users (30 km/h), it would lose some of its speed advantage because other modes of transport would then also be travelling at a similar speed. This could result in cycling becoming more attractive, public transport becoming more reliable and traffic flowing more consistently. I think that would be an important step. 

The future of mobility is a complex topic. Which question concerns you the most in this regard?   

I am concerned with the question of how we can persuade people to change or switch to other modes of transport and how we can influence them? Up to now, we have often taken an engineering perspective in the transport sector but have failed to recognise that transport is actually behaviour. The topic of transport must become more of a social science and psychological issue. 

And who would you like to ask this question?  

On the one hand, this question would be addressed to practitioners, who are still strongly characterised by the engineering perspective. And on the other hand, it is a question for the next generation of scientists. However, we don't have enough people in the transport sector to cope with the emerging transformation processes. Although we have many funding programmes, the current funds cannot be called up because there is simply a lack of personnel capacity to plan and implement the concepts. We are therefore happy to welcome anyone who is studying in this area to overcome the shortage of skilled labour. 

About: Dr Jochen Eckart has been a professor at the Faculty of Information Management and Media at Karlsruhe University of Applied Sciences since 2015 and conducts research at the Baden-Württemberg Institute for Sustainable Mobility. His research and teaching focuses on transport ecology, the interactions between transport and the environment. His current research interests include Noise abatement planning, water-sensitive road design, climate adaptation, promotion of pedestrians and cyclists, and needs-based research through stakeholder involvement. His expertise spans the disciplines of environmental science, urban planning and transport planning. As a scientist, he supervised the SWR participatory campaign #besserRadfahren in 2021 and the ARD participatory campaign #besserBahnfahren in 2023.