They are everywhere. They occupy public space, pollute the air and cause accidents. The solution does not only happen to replace combustion cars with electrical models. The problem, according to Daniel Knowles, is deeper. In Carmagedonntranslated as Autocalypse To Spanish (Ed. Captain Swing), the British journalist draws a brilliant approach to the economic and social impact that we assume having normalized the use of the private vehicle to question if, really, it is worth it.
Correspondent in the west for The EconomistKnowles covers stories throughout the region, but is especially interested in urban government, crime, social change and transport. He studied history and economy at Pembroke College from the University of Oxford. He previously worked at the Office of Foreign Affairs in London.
He says that cars have ruined cities. But haven’t economic growth and comfort brought?
My argument is not that cars are not useful or valuable. The problem is that now we have so many, and we have made such drastic changes in our cities, that the costs far exceed the benefits. Having a car is comfortable, but your comfort is compensated with the cost that your car imposes on others. They have filled the air of toxic pollutants, make the most dirty, most insane, less useful cities and make it more dangerous to be on the street. If we talk about a first car, if there is only one, it is not so much. But, when there are millions, it is a lot. In economic terms, every more car on the street slows everyone else. In New York, before the arrival of tariffs for congestion, the cost of one more car on the streets slowed everyone else that the social cost was 160 dollars/hour.
Having a car doesn’t give freedom?
It is a myth. Actually, we are all interdependent of them. So that you can go car everywhere, you need roads, you need someone to pay and keep them, you need a place to park, you need an entire infrastructure to repost, etc. And what is worse, they make your life much more difficult if you don’t have one. Many American cities are so focused on the car that it is practically impossible to move differently. Teenagers are trapped in their houses outside, unable to go anywhere unless one of their parents takes them. In Houston (Texas), the Katy Freeway highway has 26 lanes and there are 30 parking spaces for each resident, enough land to occupy Paris ten times. Meanwhile, in Paris or in London they can move alone. Go to your friends home or school or wherever. They are much freer. The same goes for older people, the poor or anyone who does not have access to a car.
What cities inspire you for your mobility policies?
In the book I specifically set me in London, Paris and Tokyo. The London congestion rate found a lot of opposition, but finally the citizens accepted it and, now, it is a worldwide inspiration. In the disadvantaged neighborhoods – many near the most congested roads – 80% reductions are estimated in the exposure of people to illegal levels of pollution. Paris demonstrates how much it can be achieved with pedestrianization and bicycles. Tokyo seems to me the most interesting place: it was built after World War II, but never made the mistakes of others. The lesson we can learn from it is the importance of not giving free public space to motorists. In the Japanese capital, if you want to buy a car you have to demonstrate to the police that you have a parking space for him. These types of policies are incredibly effective and, as a result, people use the car much less.
How to address the resistance of those who see the restrictions on the car as an attack?
It is a real challenge. Having a car seems to go crazy to people. I think the trick is to maintain a conversation and, as far as possible, start with small things. In New York, many drivers thought that congestion toll would be terrible. Now they are in favor because transport is much faster, air is cleaner and people are healthier. You have to take advantage of these arguments.
See a future without cars?
I do not think we get rid of the car completely: it is a very useful invention, but I think we can reach a situation in which most people do not have one in property and rent it when they really need it: to transport something big or to travel.