The C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group is a consortium of 96 cities around the world working to combat air pollution and make the air in our streets more breathable. It is a global network of mayors united against the climate crisis through inclusive, collaborative, and science-based actions to halve emissions by 2030, help the planet limit warming to 1.5 °C, and build healthy, just, and resilient communities. The objectives of this group include building a global movement, through robust advocacy and international diplomacy, to spread climate action on a large scale and share best practices across high-impact sectors.

Among the C40 metropolises, many have already made their mobility more restrictive by limiting the circulation of cars. Others have increased pedestrian spaces and encouraged soft mobility. The recipe is never the same, but the political will is: air pollution has a huge impact on public health, and congested traffic certainly does not help to reduce travel times. According to C40, it is time to change direction: not by improvising, but by relying on proven strategies that can guarantee solid results.

To help cities design their own clean zones, C40 has developed a comprehensive guideline document for administrations and decision-makers, the 'Clean Air Zone Toolbox'. The ways in which low-emission zones, also called clean-air zones, low-traffic zones, traffic-restricted zones, or even zero-emission zones in cases where the passage of cars is completely banned, are varied indeed.

This is evident in the C40 cities themselves: in London, for example, the clean air zone is extensive, operates 24 hours a day, and requires an entry fee. Paris, on the other hand, focuses on increasing cycle lanes and transforming on-street parking spaces into widespread green areas, while Quito has encouraged pedestrianisation and electric cars. In addition to combating emissions, some administrations have taken targeted measures to combat the harmful effects of solid waste combustion, cooking fuels and industrial emissions.

How, then, does one orientate oneself among this wide range of possibilities? C40 suggests, in its toolbox, starting with a fundamental strategic step: the detailed analysis of your needs (assessment). The grid of questions devised by its experts makes it possible to investigate the concrete reality from many angles. What are the main pollutants? How is the local demography distributed? Which population is most exposed to pollutants, and which are the most vulnerable groups most affected by them? How many people depend on a private vehicle for their journeys? And what can the impact of a reduction in traffic access be on the social and economic vitality of a specific area? 

Once data are acquired, awareness deepens and policy choices become more evident: it is the moment for participatory planning, through either citizen involvement or the establishment of focus groups, and for defining policy along with the optimal methods for its implementation.

In this planning phase, the municipality may opt to close an area to traffic or only specific roads. Certain parameters can guide the identification of access criteria: while in some cases all cars may be banned, in others the passage may be restricted to the most polluting vehicles or to all internal combustion vehicles, effectively favouring electric vehicles, including cargo vehicles for goods distribution. Another option is to bet on economic disincentives: a Clear Air Zone can be associated with toll payments, effectively betting on the dissuasive effect of the costs to be incurred. 

Some suggestions concern the criteria for choosing the location of Clear Air Zones. The recommendation, in this case, is to start with the areas where population density and air pollution are highest, so as to maximise the impact on the citizenry and leverage the achievements to capitalise on consensus. Voluntary and incentive-based programmes are not dismissed either, as they are particularly suitable in cases where specific legal constraints prohibit policies based on access restrictions. And because psychology plays its part, C40 suggests not opting for what it calls a 'big bang' approach: it is better not to impose a drastic change, but instead to favour the gradual introduction of selected measures.

Of course, a policy based solely on restricting access opportunities cannot, by itself, win the trust of those citizens who are sceptical about measures that could radically change their daily lives. It is important then, says C40, to compensate for what has been taken away with new services, starting with enhanced public transport, pedestrian and bicycle paths that guarantee safety, and power stations to recharge all electric vehicles. Again, the public sector is called upon to set a good example: there would be little point in adopting policies to decarbonise private transport if, for example, new municipal buses were not electric.

To date, there are 320 Clear Air Zones in Europe. Many other cities, from America to Asia, are active participants in the movement, contributing to the global discussion and exploring how to make use of the expertise that C40 and its community provide. The administrators of the C40 cities meet regularly to exchange guidelines and monitor the measures implemented, so as to continuously adjust the solutions applied on the ground according to their effectiveness. A durable commitment that, as statistics confirm, ultimately wins over citizens despite initial controversies, with polls appearing to endorse the adopted policies from Bogotá to Johannesburg, from London to Seattle and Seoul.

As defined by the World Bank, social inclusion means improving the terms on which individuals and groups take part in society. People are frequently unable to participate in political, economic, and social life to the full extent. This exclusion can be very costly, both at the individual and national levels. The barriers are usually rooted in poorly designed legal systems, labour markets, health systems, as well as discriminatory attitudes or perceptions.

All these elements have figured prominently on both social and political agendas. Nevertheless, one factor that has not been given enough attention, i.e. transport and mobility, has gained its momentum now. Transport-related social exclusion is widely discussed on all levels, from municipal councils to international forums. 

A revealing insight

International Transport Forum (ITF), the only global body to cover all transport modes, puts inclusivity high on its agenda. Transport ministers from around the world met on 18-20 May in Leipzig, Germany, for the Annual Summit. Its theme – "Transport for Inclusive Societies". The Moroccan Presidency prioritized various aspects of the theme of inclusion: from connectivity for rural communities to the digital divide, from workforce diversity in the transport sector to inclusive planning and design.

The first meeting held as an in-person event since the start of the COVID-19 pandemic was the occasion to promote the transition toward more accessible mobility for all. As emphasized by the Moroccan representative Larbi Fahim, Head of the Road Works Department: “Inclusion is a key element of sustainable societies, capacity to fully participate in the life of a community”.

The Young Researcher of the Year Award, granted annually by the ITF, went to a PhD Researcher at the Delft University of Technology Malvika Dixit. Her study on the effects of public transport design on equity was a perfect illustration of Mrs Fahim’s words. Dixit pulled from a database of smart card data covering all journeys made on the public transport network and combined with the neighborhood-level income data. It turned out that residents from the lower-density peripheral areas suffer from more circuitous routes, which usually results in higher fares. The research demonstrated a fundamental link between income and circuity: public transport users in Amsterdam’s predominantly higher-income areas have more direct routes, which translated into shorter distances and, therefore, lower fares. 

The combined effect aggravated the income disparity between the lower- and higher-income areas. As a result, it contributed to creating inequality within an already divided society.

What to do? An influential guideline for inclusive mobility

The World Economic Forum (WEF) joined forces with the Boston Consulting Group and the University of St Gallen, Switzerland, and in December 2021 published a White Paper on the ways that mobility shapes inclusion and sustainable growth in global cities.

Three different cities that represent the most common urban archetypes were closer looked at – polycentric Berlin, car-centric Chicago and the high-density megacity of Beijing. All three were struggling with soft spots, including traffic congestions and isolated underserved neighborhoods. Based on the examples of those metropolitan areas, the researchers came up with five imperatives that decision-makers must consider while creating more socially inclusive mobility.

First, improving inclusivity should be a top priority in urban transportation planning and design. If mobility is to be truly inclusive, the systems need to be adapted for people with disabilities and persons from low socioeconomic backgrounds.

Second, both demand and supply have to be taken into account by transportation managers. As authorities of Chicago found out, a simple increase in the frequency of late-night trains and additional transit lines does not necessarily lead to an increase in ridership. It must be combined with a real understanding of demand and the preferences of the users.

Third, more innovative and multimodal mobility systems that escape a binary logic with cars on one side and mass transportation on the other, need to be developed. Recent mobility innovations, such as on-demand shuttles, micro-mobility offerings (e.g. bikes, scooters) and car-sharing apps start playing a noticeable role in the city’s “mobility puzzle”.

Second to last, ensuring community engagement in the process of decision-making. All studies show that the mobility infrastructure is better designed when local communities are involved. Last but not least, collecting data and running mobility pilots is the only guarantee of successful scale-up. The pilot programmes ensure an in-depth analysis of a chosen solution and help to identify possible barriers that may occur.

Inclusive mobility means equal society

As WEF’s White Paper points out, the majority of transport systems look and function the way they did in the 1950s, when they served radically different societies. It is only now that the decision-makers begin to grasp the fundamental role of transport in providing jobs, access to quality education and healthcare, and, in consequence, leading to socio-economic growth and more equal societies. Mobility is not just about getting from point A to point B. It is the way to move people to a higher place on the social ladder. Therefore, the development of the right approach to equitable urban transport will take more and more place on the agenda of policymakers in the coming decades.