1.2 Transition of consumption and mobility

Western (and increasingly global) consumption patterns (and the corresponding production patterns) also need a transition if a socio-ecological transformation is to succeed.

The production of more and more goods, which are to be acquired and individually owned by more and more people, is in need of change if the production, distribution and disposal of the increasing quantity of goods cause ecological and social problems. These include, above all, the waste of scarce resources, environmentally harmful production methods and unfair working and trading conditions. In addition, however, it is also important to critically reflect on the consequences for the consumers themselves: The possibility of satisfying personal preferences through appropriate consumption of goods is important and positive for individual freedom and self-determined way of living. However, freedom of choice and consumption becomes problematic when the acquisition of goods (promoted by advertising and incentives) leads people to define themselves primarily through consumption and to strive for constant increase in wealth and status. This narrow view, which is often reinforced by traditional social norms¹⁶, is often at the expense of other life goals such as health and long-term satisfaction.

As an example of the complex field of action of the shift in consumption and mobility, the motorised private transport, which is essential for many national economies and societies, will be picked out here. If we consider, for example, that cars in Europe on average remain unused 92% of the time, the use of resources and the environmental impact of production are grossly disproportionate to the mobility benefits they generate (cf. Fig. 4). If cars were produced in such a way that all resources used could be recycled to a large extent (circular economy) or if there were suitable service offerings and sharing models ("use instead of own"¹⁸) so that every car would be used by as many people as possible, the ratio of environmental impact and mobility benefits would already improve significantly. It would be even more sustainable if unnecessary traffic were avoided and the mobility benefits were generated by other modes of transport. This would also significantly reduce use-related energy consumption, environmentally harmful emissions, health hazards¹⁹ (especially through lack of exercise and accident-related personal injuries) and the occupation of public space by moving as well as parked cars.

This makes clear that a genuine mobility transition must clearly go beyond alternative drive technologies. In the sense of sufficiency, it must be asked whether living, working, holidays or leisure time really have to be linked to constantly growing mobility requirements, as is – at least until the outbreak of the Corona pandemic – often suggested in discussions about the future of mobility. Moreover, in order to reduce the aforementioned social and ecological problems, a culture of consumption and mobility that is supported by appropriate offers and incentives and that focuses more on "using instead of owning" is required. In addition, the objects that are still owned must be used for as long as possible and must then be recycled as comprehensively as possible.

However, the example of reducing vehicle ownership also shows how difficult it is to get the necessary change underway. There are positive approaches such as various sharing models or improved recycling cycles. Attempts to make urban car use less attractive by introducing city tolls and higher parking fees have proven successful where at the same time public transport and other modes of transportation as well as their infrastructure, have been made more attractive. Nevertheless, there is no sign of a widespread shift away from private motorised transport. The inertial forces that are counteracting the change are manifold.

It is not only in Germany that the automotive industry is of central economic importance, so that the transformation towards sustainable mobility can lead to economic and social upheavals. In fact, the result of a high significance of the automotive industry often is that politicians primarily try to preserve established technologies and the corresponding jobs, and that the technical change is then delayed, but all the more violent. The fact that in 2017 almost 10% of gross value added in Germany was attributable to the automotive sector and almost half of all patent registrations from legal entities came from the automotive industry²⁰ shows how important it is to proactively shape the change to modified mobility concepts and new drive technologies. The necessary change requires complex political and corporate management. The opportunities offered by digital intelligence should not only be used for the production of high-class vehicles and the more intelligent control of individual transport, but also for the improvement of local and long-distance public transport and an attractive nationwide tariff system.²¹

At the same time, the automotive industry in particular shows that in many cases goods are not only purchased because of their use value. For many people, goods of this kind address important needs for status and differentiation – an effect that is deliberatively reinforced by advertising and marketing.²² In addition, owning a car is simply taken for granted in many societies, so that other options are often not seriously considered.²³ This is an example of the great importance of action routines and socially stabilised habits. Powerful routines of this kind, which are relevant for the entire field of consumption, cannot be broken by moralising appeals, but only by a double strategy: Both a politically promoted change on the supply side as well as a change in consciousness and mentality on the part of consumers (which must also be promoted by politics and civil society) is required.

With regard to the example of mobility, it becomes clear that there are various powerful factors that impede a transition – and yet it is possible. For example, in metropolises such as London and Stockholm through a distance- and time-based congestion charge inner-city traffic has been significantly reduced and public transport has been improved. A global initiative of large metropolises is also calling for the financial aid to overcome the Corona crisis to be used to make the urban infrastructure more future- and people-friendly. For example, the car parking spaces that dominate the current cityscape could be increasingly transformed into footpaths, cycle paths, bar areas or urban open spaces if public transport could be made safer, more efficient and thus more attractive.²⁴ In order to promote the sustainable development of rural areas, a forward-looking structural policy and regional planning should counteract further urban sprawl. In addition, in rural areas, where attractive mobility alternatives are more difficult to realise, there is still great potential to promote climate-friendly drive technologies and creative neighbourhood assistance, but also faster internet connections to avoid unnecessary traffic (keyword: "data highway instead of commuter congestion").