To move in Bogotá: beyond numbers (and buses) A bicycle race

To move in Bogotá: beyond numbers (and buses) A bicycle race DANIELA CAROLINA GARCÍA ROJAS Master in Urbanism and Strategic Planning dcgarciarojas@gmail.co - danielacarolina.garciarojas@student.kuleuven.be Critical review of Sustainable Development Policies and Planning - Spring 2020 Department of Architecture - Faculty of Engineering Science - KU Leuven

1.

Introduction

Mobility in Bogotá is as complex as the city itself. This Latin American capital has more than 7 million inhabitants.

Likewise, it is the head of a de facto metropolitan area1 where almost 11 million people live (DANE 2018).

Therefore, transporting that large amount of people -that mostly live on the peripheries- to the centralities within Bogotá -where job positions are usually concentrated- is a great challenge. However, by the end of the 1990’s the public transport was based in traditional old buses (TPC) managed and owned by private companies. The excess of those buses led to excessive congestion and air pollution (Lefèvre 2008). These problems were extremely imminent at the end of the decade. Thus, the politicians had to quickly address them. The solution was the construction of a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system: TransMilenio (TM). It solved many of the mobility problems by that time, and it is still the backbone of the mobility of Bogotá. Its institutional and operational successes during its first years of operation are widely known (Liliana 2010). Nevertheless, in recent years it has demonstrated its inefficiency in coping with the transport demand, ensuring safety within its vehicles and infrastructure, and facing the transition towards sustainability.

Due to the urgency of the mobility problem, authorities prioritized short-term solutions. By 2005, mistakes made during the planning of TM, related to this short-term vision, started to be evident. In specific, the planners of TM had not thought about how to replace the old traditional buses. Thus, TM and the buses were competing. Therefore, the challenge to create an Integrated Public Transport System for Bogotá (SITP) became a priority in the national and local public policy agenda. In consequence, the local government established in the Mobility Master Plan of 2006 the framework for the SITP. It was defined as the group of actions to articulate, link, and integrally operate the different modes of public transport in Bogotá. Likewise, to integrate the institutions and entities created for planning, organizing, controlling traffic and public transport, as well as the infrastructure required for accessibility, circulation, and fare collection of the integrated system (Secretaría de Movilidad 319, 2006, p. 5). In short, the goal of the SITP, in operative terms, was to diversify the offer of public transportation and to integrate all those modes of transportation, while modernizing the vehicles into less pollutant ones. On the other hand, the SITP aimed to create an institutional framework where all the planning, managing and implementation activities were integrated. This latter with the main objective of reducing the number of operating entities and to dismantle the private business of traditional buses (Diaz and Marroquin 2016).

With delays, the SITP started its operation by the end of 2012. During the last years the SITP has been slowly implemented with many difficulties, more delays, and the challenge to cope with both high demand and air pollution.

In this paper, I will delve into the factors that have led the mobility of Bogotá today, again, in a complicated situation and in a dangerous air pollution levels, while making a critical assessment of the public policy of the SITP, from the sustainable development perspective.

1

The conurbation of this metropolitan area is not institutionally constituted. It includes Bogotá, Soacha and 16 towns more. It is not legally structured nor recognized by the Government, mainly due to the desire of the towns to keep their authority in their territories, the evident administrative separation between the government of Bogotá and the local governments of the towns, and the complexity of the administration of such as vast area.

2.

Key analysis questions 1. If Transmilenio could solve most of the public transport problems 20 years ago, why did Bogotá’s mobility collapse again?

2. Why TransMilenio -a public transport model that has been widely recognized as a step towards a more sustainable Bogotá -is not well perceived by its users in terms of environment and social safety?

3. What is the SITP doing in order to integrate all the modes of transport in Bogotá? Are those efforts focused on shifting towards cleaner and more sustainable transport modes?

3.

Current context of the Integrated Public Transport System of Bogotá

Although TransMilenio is a subject that has been already over-studied, the mobility in Latin American cities is a complex field eager to be addressed. Despite that TM is the backbone of the public transport in Bogotá, the discussion now must to be focused on how it works in an integrate system that must cope with the challenge of population growth and climate change, in a context of socio-economic inequality, political corruption and institutional decay.

In Bogotá, pollution levels vary substantially from one place to another. There are areas in the south-west of the city in which air pollution levels exceed the daily limit set by the WHO almost daily (Franco 2012). Although vehicles are not the only sources of pollution, they are major contributors to poor air quality. In the context of Bogotá, it is common to see the locally known “chimney buses”: buses emitting dense exhaust gases. This happens even with the “relatively new vehicles” of TM. This situation is consequence of breaching the policy initially proposed. Although a strict fleet replacement program was imposed in the TM plan, in order to prevent it from becoming obsolete, inefficient or with high levels of pollutants, reality has been different. The renewal of the fleet, which was originally planned to be in 2011, has been postponed twice: first with mayor G. Petro (2012-2015) and then with mayor E. Peñalosa (2016-2019). Thus, by 2019, 25% percent of TM fleet was still composed of the same vehicles, Euro II standard, that started operating in 2001. This means that there are nearly 700 vehicles operating that are 18 years old, and that have traveled more than a million kilometers or, in some cases, up to 1.5 million (Hernández 2018).

Meanwhile, scientific evidence on health damage caused by air pollutants has led the environmental authorities of the European Union and the United States to adopt progressively stricter standards for vehicles operating in their territories. For instance, in the European context the Euro III (2000), Euro IV (2005), Euro V (2008) and, finally, Euro VI standards were successively adopted in 2014. The current standard (Euro VI) requires particle emission levels 50 times lower than Euro II and 15 percent lower than Euro V (Morales 2018). Therefore, the wear and tear of the TM fleet means that the vast majority of vehicles have a technological delay that would not allow them to operate in Europe (where these vehicles are, indeed, designed and manufactured) since about 18 years ago.

The last administration of E. Peñalosa, by the end of 2018, finally tendered the renovation of the fleet. The big surprise was that there was no focus on electric vehicles, as was expected. In contrast, it purchased 1,400 TM vehicles, of which 60% will have Euro V standard, and 40% are LNG-powered. Many critics of the measure considered it as a "not very ambitious" tender in environmental terms. This, due to the fact it does not consider the impact it will have on the health of citizens in the long-term. Ricardo Morales, environmental expert of Universidad de Los Andes stated that the Local Government argues that raising environmental standards is expensive, but that it does not consider the cost to health that is also measurable in money. Thus, “the Administration was more afraid of the economic stability of the system; and that, for the moment, the priority of the system is moving passengers” (Castillo 2019). Since mid-2019, the new fleet has been implemented, and although there are improvements in air quality within the TM infrastructure (buses, stations, and portals), the city's air quality in general has not improved significantly (Solanilla 2019).

The main reason why I consider that the Integrated Public Transport System (SITP) is a relevant topic to address is that, so far, there has not been political will or continuity to prioritize the sustainability and health of citizens over political interests in Bogotá. In fact, the institutions that run the process seem to be worn out. In addition, I consider

that Bogotá has the potential to start being assessed with international standards. This, considering that this year, after 7 years of collective efforts of the National Government, Colombia was recognized as member of the OECD. This motivates me to think that public policies in general are going to improve the quality of life of Colombians.

Finally, as I have personally and physically experienced the mobility in Bogotá, I find surprising the fact that the BRT model is still being sold as a generic formula to solve mobility problems in cities of developing countries. Even though it has to be recognized that the results and solutions that TM demonstrated in its first years of operation are impressive in both operational and institutional terms, today the concerns about the transport in Bogotá must go beyond and address the challenges towards sustainability.

4.

Methodology

Considering that mobility is a complex topic, and that it is related to many aspects of the spatial planning, I will combine two methodologies to critically assess how sustainability has been addressed (and could be potentially addressed) in the public policy of the SITP. As I am interested in how Colombia is going to reshape its public policies regarding its recent adhesion to the OECD, I consider it is interesting to do this discussion with both an European and North American analytical framework.

First, I will analyze how far the SITP is from achieving a sustainability policy approach. To do this I will use the parameters that the European Platform on Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMP) consider as guidelines for a new urban planning. SUMP is a planning and policy concept applied in many Europeans cities for strategic and sustainable mobility planning. It encourages a shift towards more sustainable modes of transport and supports integration and balanced development of all modes (Wefering et al. 2014). These guidelines aim to demonstrate, by comparing its approaches with the traditional transport planning ones, the priorities and considerations that the urban planning policies must have to achieve sustainable development. In Figure 1 I analyze if the priorities of the SITP are within the range of traditional or sustainable approaches in each of the items. I will discuss these findings by clearly showing (a) what has been done good, (b) what good job is in progress and (c) how far are the negative aspects from the sustainability approach.

Although the conclusions of that analysis will be discuss in the next section, at a glance, the graphic shows that SITP is still far from having a sustainability vision. Consequently, I proposed the use of a second methodology based on the Barbara C. Richardson’s work “Toward a policy on a sustainable transportation system” in which she identified a wide range of factors influencing the conditions of sustainability within transportation systems in the United States context. These factors include, for example, market forces, low-price fuel, and vehicle-dependent land use patterns.

This methodology identified 5 indicators of transport sustainability, which are Fuel Consumption, Accessibility, Congestion, Emissions and Safety (Richardson 1999). Then, how the interaction of these factors influence the indicators of a transport system is studied. As Richardson stated, influence diagrams explain how actors and circumstances interact in a transport system. Thus, through a influence diagram I will identify which factors have impact on the environmental degradation in the Bogotá context, by the following steps: (a) illustrating the interaction of the factors that influence the indicators of SITP, (b) pointing out the opportunities for political intervention and, (c) identifying the possibility of unintended consequences of such intervention and the tradeoffs among the indicators.

For step (a) of the second methodology I created an influence diagram illustrated in Figure 2. This graphic is based on Richardson’s approaches. To configurate it, I studied “Factors affecting environmental degradation” (Richardson 1999). There, I noticed that the technocratic and State levels are very similar with the Bogotá context.

Thus, I directly illustrate the actors and circumstances that interplay in the organization of the public transport of Bogotá, and how these dynamics impact on sustainable transport indicators. Based on that graphical result, I identified the opportunities for political intervention and possible unintended consequences, which will be explain in the next section.

á

á

Figure 1. Contrast between SUMP practices guidelines and the approaches of the SITP. Made by the author based on: Planning for people: GUIDELINES Developing and implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan (Directorate General for Mobility and Transport, European Commission 2013)

5.

Critical analysis

These guidelines aim to demonstrate the priorities and considerations that the urban planning policies must have to achieve sustainable development. This is done by comparing the approaches of these policies with the traditional transport planning ones. In Figure 1 I am analyzing, by contrast, if the priorities of the SITP are within the range of traditional or sustainable approach in each of the items. I will discuss these findings by showing (a) what has been done good, (b) what good job is in progress and (c) how far are the negative aspects from the sustainability approach.

V.I. What has been done good in the SITP planning so far?

Due to the nature of the infrastructure of a BRT, which is spatially demanding at the ground level, it is not possible to cover the entire city with it, even more if we consider Bogotá's geography. Thus, the challenge of TM since its origins was to articulate with other modes of transport. This is, indeed, the goal of SITP. Hence, regarding travel-patterns distribution the system has been successful because it created 7 modalities of vehicles that operate under the SITP umbrella, and that have a unified method of payment via a personal card (TuLlave). Consequently, exchanging of vehicle does not generate an additional cost, and if does, it is low. The core of the system is the TM (red buses), which travel long distances on exclusive lanes. Then, Alimentadores (green) connect the peripheries with the TM portals. On the other hand, the new generation of buses have differentiated specific objectives: First, Urbano-zonal (blue) connects urban areas with main road corridors where there is no TM infrastructure. Secondly, Complementario (orange) links zones around intermediate stations of TM, that are not portals, but have been developed as work centralities. And thirdly, Especial (brown) travel within peripherical areas where there is a low-demand or difficult access. Finally, TransMiCable, an aerial cable car based on the Medellin experience, have been implemented in 2018 in the district of Ciudad Bolivar.

(Moreno-Luna 2016). In sum, the planning of the SITP in its first decade of operation has really been focused on the travel-to-work patterns, aiming to give accessibility largely the city.

Nevertheless, it must be recognized that coverage efforts remain attached to vehicular transport, as much of the SITP response are buses. However, in terms of inter-modality, the bicycle has been positioning as an important mode. Bogotá, with its 540 kilometers of bike lanes and another 200 kilometers funded for 2020 development, is the only non-European city considered within The Copenhagenize Index (2019). Additionaly, bike infrastructure roll-out has also been tied to TM, with at least 13 bicycle garages located in key stations.

V.II. What good job is in progress?

Regarding interdisciplinarity, the great achievement is also related to the promotion of cycling. For instance, there have been successes in institutional terms: A bike management area Gerencia de la Bicicleta was created in 2016 within the Department of Mobility (Martínez 2019). Here it is possible to recognize that there is an institutional will to take the bicycle seriously as a mode of transport (which is novel in the Latin American context). Also, the urban cycling approach is gaining ground on a job that was previously exclusive to traffic engineers.

On the other hand, the Department of Mobility has implemented self-assessment tools on safety perception, social justice and environmental issues. An example of this is the Bogotá Cómo Vamos Citizen Perception Survey, which is issued every year (Bogotá Como Vamos 2018). Also, I identified that TM has a transparency policy regarding accountability, since they constantly show statistics of usage patterns and data in general. Finally, the Environmental Department has a modern air quality monitoring network. Here, as aforementioned, the available data shows that the conditions of air quality in the Bogotá represent a serious threat to public health (Secretaria Distrital del Medio Ambiente 2019). Consequently, the challenge is to be able to generate new policies from these results, to address the safety and environmental difficulties.

V.III. How far are the negative aspects from the sustainability approach?

The focus of the SITP remains attached to the planning model of the past, because the core of the system still is motorized vehicles with regular PM emission standards, and with an incipient inclusion in gas and hybrid buses. Taking this into account, I identified that the SITP prioritizes the increase of the fleet and its subsequent infrastructure construction.

Thus, it is visible that the increase in the fleet responds to economic interests for the financial stability of private operators.

The excessive construction of infrastructure, beyond covering a demand, responds to the award of contracts to building guilds with high political-power.

In contrast to the SUMP, which encourages accessibility and improvement of the quality of life, the goal of the SITP is efficiency in terms of speed: passengers transported per kilometer traveled. When talking about a transport system, its efficiency cannot be assessed only considering its speed. It must include the quality of the service it is offering. In this sense, the SITP (TM particularly) has not been that successful: to cover long distances in short times, lanes should not be congested. Therefore, it has led to a high crowdedness within the vehicles, even during off-peak hours. In the citizen perception survey, the degree of satisfaction with TM decreases every year. In 2018 it reached a low record of 13% satisfaction (Bogotá Como Vamos 2018). Therefore, the social unconformities are related to the service itself. The fact that both the stations and the vehicles stay full is not just an unpleasant situation but it foster vulnerability scenarios such as sexual harassment and robbery (El Espectador 2018).

Regarding sectorial planning, the SITP still has a traditional planning top-down approach. For instance, the SITP disregarded the business interests of some small private actors. Hence, the process of democratization failed. That process had the goal to include the owners of the old TPC buses. However, some of them went bankrupt in the attempt to enter in a business model that did not fit with theirs. Consequently, as these actors went out of business, some areas of the city were uncovered for any public transport mode. Thus, the SITP had to authorize the circulation of old buses, under the figure of SITP provisional (Fernández Prieto 2018). In short, the temporariness of the SITP is a clear example of the failure of the top-down model, in which the authorities decided to implement a public policy without understanding the actors who, despite not holding the same bureaucratic hierarchy, are no less important. Currently, after 5 years of its execution, the “provisional” SITP persists, even though initially, it was a strategy approved for only 2 months.

Following the idea of the traditional planning top-down approach, the planning of the SITP remains an exclusionary process, where only the experts meet with decision makers. Unlike what is proposed in the SUMP, the SITP does not include citizen participation, and there is an evident lack of coordination of stakeholders. I identified that this lack of coordination is highly noticeable in the phases and times of execution. Due to these two aspects, most of the times differ from what was agreed and theoretically stipulated by the SITP managers.

Finally, what I consider is distancing the SITP the most from having a truly integrated transport model, in which it is possible to consider a shift towards sustainability, is the lack of long-term vision. The imminence of mobility problems in Bogotá, since TM was planned in the late 1990’s, has made the focus of public transport policies to be solutions of rapid construction, and that consequently have provided immediate solutions. Hence, these policies often do not consider possible impacts on other aspects of urban life, beyond access or congestion. For example, with the purchase of Euro V buses, SITP ties the city to at least another 10 years of PM exposure. And in this sense, it seems that it was not considered that in the long-term this has a serious impact on the health of citizens.

Here, understanding that the Integrated Public Transport System for Bogotá has a long way to become a sustainability policy, it is relevant to analyze the factors that interplay towards this achievement.

V.IV. Opportunities for political intervention As SITP is based on buses, I identified that the first step towards a sustainability policy should be the replacement of older buses with new clean energy ones. Although there are already some vehicles with gas power, I consider that the challenge is to transition to electric power. However, in that scenario, Bogotá would also have to prepare itself in terms of infrastructure. This is because currently there is low availability of charging points along the city. Increasing charging points to power a mass transit fleet requires large investments of capital. Therefore it would have an implication in both local and national taxes, and the involvement of private stakeholders of the energy industry. On the other hand, political intervention should be focused on the reduction of the rolling fleet. To achieve this, despite the large demand for public transport in Bogotá, an articulation between the Department of Mobility and Land-Use Planning Policy is crucial to modify the patterns and times of journeys. This would decrease the demand and thereby, reduce congestion, which is the aspect that impact the most on environmental degradation. In this context, it is clear that there is a need for creating and reinforcing new forms of sustainable transport that are articulated to the existing system. The illustration shows an evident alternative: the bike.

V.V. Possibility of unintended consequences of such intervention and the tradeoffs among the indicators The bicycle, surprisingly, has benefited in the interplay of the factors in the SITP. As the use on buses have decreased during the last years, cycling has jumped from 6% to 9% in only the past two years. Thus, Bogotá is aiming for a 10% goal by 2020

(The Copenhagenize Index 2019). This shows that the discomfort and delays of SITP buses has foster more and more people to use the bicycle as a means of transportation. The bicycle has recently become that popular in Bogotá, that the Mobility Department had to create an institutional and technical framework to build new bicycle infrastructure and promote good practices in urban cycling. There is where a big opportunity towards a sustainable transportation policy is.

Figure 2. Influence diagram of factor interplay on SITP towards sustainable transport planning. Made by the author based on “Factors affecting environmental degradation” from (Richardson 2009)

6.

Conclusions

In order to answer the key questions of this assessment, the previous discussion concluded that (1) Even that TM cope with most of the public transport problems 20 years ago, institutional wear and tear as well as lack of long-term vision have meant that, today, it is not a sufficient response to the needs of the city. This is not just referred in terms of capacity and congestion, but especially to counteract air pollution, which I identified as the major challenge of the SITP if our institutions really want to address sustainability in the Bogotá’s planning agenda.

(2) TM still being sold as a generic formula based on its efficiency. But in reality, the system is not that efficient. Considering that the vehicles are usually highly crowded and that inside vehicles there is higher exposition to polluting and carcinogenic substances than the exposition of being on the streets, Bogotá is demanding a major shift in the way its “efficiency” is addressed.

Likewise, stakeholders and citizens must be involved in the planning and socialization process of projects and policies. In addition, as aforementioned in the discussion section, it its necessary to adopt tools that allow working over the results of the already existing self-assessment dynamics. Therefore, making evaluation processes worthwhile for transport sustainability. In sum, Bogotá citizens deserve to travel to their places of work, study, or leisure more than fast, but safe, at ease and not being exposed to risky situations.

(3) Finally, as well as I identify a major challenge regarding long-term vision and air quality achievement, I identified that the major opportunity of the transport system of Bogotá is cycling. The considerable increase in the use of the bicycle, and its infrastructure expansion and improvement, as well as its integration in an institutional framework, outline Bogotá as a city that can be moved by bike. Thus, despite the negative impacts of the SITP in terms of social and environmental justice and that it is evident that decision makers have prioritized their economic and political interests over air quality management, it can be considered that a side effect of the discomfort of the public transport has been, indeed, cycling. In short, Bogotá has a public transportation system that, although entirely based on buses, is struggling its transition to less polluting fuel sources. Hence, Bogotá is an ambitious city with difficult conditions to overcome. But, so far, it is surpassing other South American metropolises with its bicycle infrastructure and feeling of safety.

7.

References

Bogotá Como Vamos. 2017. “Encuesta de Percepción Ciudadana.” 2017. http://www.Bogotácomovamos.org/documentos/encuesta-de-percepcion-ciudadana-2017/.

———. 2018. “Conoce Cómo Hacemos La Encuesta de Percepción Ciudadana.” 2018. https://Bogotácomovamos.org/asihacemos-la-encuesta-de-percepcion-ciudadana/.

Castillo, Camilo. 2019. “Estos Son Los Cambios En TM Con La Llegada de Nuevos Buses.” 2019. https://www.eltiempo.com/Bogotá/estos-son-los-cambios-en-tm-con-la-llegada-de-nuevos-buses-363988.

DANE. 2018. “Censo Nacional de Población y Vivienda [National Population and Housing Census].” Bogotá.

Diaz, Myriam, and Julio Marroquin. 2016. “Las Relaciones Entre La Movilidad y El Espacio Público. TransMilenio En Bogotá.” Revista de Arquitectura 18 (1): 126–39. https://doi.org/10.14718/RevAr. Espectador, El. 2018. “Bogotá, La Ciudad Más Insegura Para Niñas y Mujeres Por Acoso Sexual a Nivel Mundial [Bogotá, the Most Unsafe City for Girls and Women for Sexual Harassment Worldwide].” 2018. https://www.elespectador.com/Bogotá-la-ciudad-mas-insegura-para-ninas-y-mujeres-por-acoso-sexual-nivel-mundialarticulo-816181.

Fernández Prieto, Mauricio Alejandro. 2018. “Revisión de La Implementación Del SITP: La Democratización y La Provisionalidad.” Via Inveniendi Et Iudicandi 13 (2): 53–80. https://doi.org/10.15332/s1909-0528.2018.0002.07.

Franco, Juan Felipe. 2012. “Contaminación Atmosférica En Centros Urbanos. Desafío Para Lograr Su Sostenibilidad: Caso de Estudio Bogotá.” Casos Empresariales, 193–205.

Hernández, Carlos. 2018. “De TransMilenio a TransMartínez y Otras Conclusiones Sobre Los Nuevos Buses.” 2018. https://lasillavacia.com/silla-cachaca/de-transmilenio-transmartinez-y-otras-conclusiones-sobre-los-nuevos-buses68721.

Lefèvre, Benoit. 2008. “Visión a Largo Plazo e Interacciones ‘Transporte-Urbanismo’, Los Excluidos En El Éxito Del SBR TransMilenio de Bogotá.” CIUDAD Y TERRITORIO Estudios Territoriales XL (156): 321–43.

Liliana, Silva Aparicio. 2010. “Revista de Estudios Regionales y Urbanos Territorios.” Territorios, 33–64.

Martínez, Jose Luis. 2019. “Bogotá Trabaja Para Consolidarse Como Capital Mundial de La Bici.” 2019. https://Bogotá.gov.co/mi-ciudad/movilidad/Bogotá-capital-mundial-de-la-bici.

Morales, Ricardo. 2018. “El Grave Impacto Del Atraso Medioambiental Del Sistema TransMilenio.” 2018. https://www.eltiempo.com/Bogotá/la-contaminacion-que-generan-los-transmilenio-en-Bogotá-y-el-impacto-para-lasalud-207958.

Moreno-Luna, Carlos Augusto. 2016. “Segregación En El Espacio Urbano de Soacha ¿TransMilenio Como Herramienta Integradora?” Revista de Arquitectura Universidad Católica de Colombia 18 (1).

Richardson, Barbara C. 1999. “Toward a Policy on a Sustainable Transportation System.” Transportation Research Record, no. 1670: 27–34. https://doi.org/10.3141/1670-05.

Secretaria Distrital del Medio Ambiente. 2019. “Calidad Del Aire.” 2019. http://www.ambienteBogotá.gov.co/calidad-delaire.

Solanilla, Catherine. 2019. “Nuevos Buses de TM Mejoraron En Un 50 % La Calidad Del Aire.” 2019. https://conexioncapital.co/nuevos-buses-de-tm-mejoraron-en-un-50-la-calidad-del-aire/.

The Copenhagenize Index. 2019. “The Most Bicycle-Friendly Cities of 2019.” 2019. https://copenhagenizeindex.eu/cities/Bogotá.

Wefering, Frank, Siegfried Rupprech, Sebastian Bührman, and Susanne Böhler-Baedeke. 2014. “Guidelines. Developing and Implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan.” 2014. https://www.eltis.org/sites/default/files/guidelines-developingand-implementing-a-sump_final_web_jan2014b.pdf.