governance toward human-centric cities
Urban streets are our most valuable shared asset. To create truly livable cities, we must rethink how our streets are used and who benefits from it. We need to shift from a model of historical privileges toward a system of fairness and shared responsibility.
active mobility as a fundamental right
Walking, cycling, and using public transport are the most efficient and sustainable ways to move. They improve public health, have the lowest impact on our streets and our climate, and cause the least amount of pollution. Therefore, active mobility must remain a free, fundamental right for everyone.
passive mobility
is the root for a lot of our problems
Using a privat vehicle for personal convenience is a public subsidied form of mobility for a minority of urban society. It wears down our streets, pollutes our cities with noise, harmful emissions, is responsible for extra heat, and causes a life-threatening hazard for unprotected people. It is only fair that those who utilize the streets for private benefit contribute to their maintenance and pay for the additional costs to our health, environment, and climate.
When design our urban public street space we need to consider the near future of the passive mobility!
public street management
To achieve a fair use of public streets, it is vital to establish a public street management with two fundamental systems:
If we do not implement these governance models now, we risk a future of increased gridlock. By around 2035, robotaxis can dominate our streets.
passive mobility disruption
The significant risks of robotaxis:
- The “zombie car” effect
As an autonomous ride is more convenient than parking or walking, we will face massive induced demand. Without regulation, thousands of empty vehicles will circle our blocks, paralyzing the city. - The comfort trap of induced traffic
Because passengers in an autonomous vehicle can work or relax, the frustration of a traffic jam loses its sting – and the risk of massive induced demand rises. Without clear political steering, our cities will not become emptier; they will become more crowded. - Platform sovereignty
Without a public street management system, we surrender our streets to global platform monopolies. These providers have enormous disruptive power. Whoever controls the app, the data, and the fleet dictates the prices and the rules. If we leave the market to a few global robotaxi providers, we become a mere sales market: foreign platforms control customer access, foreign hardware provides the base – and the public sector is left only to handle the liability issues.
why we must act NOW
We are at a critical crossroads. While cities in the US and China already have robotaxi fleets, the first concrete pilot projects are now launching in Europe. This is about far more than just new technology – it is about the sovereignty over our public space.
1. preventing path dependency
Infrastructure is slow to change. If we allow proprietary systems from global IT giants to map our streets and define exclusive pick-up and drop-off (pudo) zones, we create a dependency that will be irreversible for decades. Whoever controls the software and the sensor data will ultimately control the traffic flow of the entire city.
2. defending public services
The business models of robotaxis companies are designed to privatize lucrative individual trips. This leads to the cannibalization of public transit. We must act now to ensure that autonomous driving is introduced as a tool for public service, integrated into the existing transit network rather than competing against it.
3. technological sovereignty vs. “black-box mobility”
If we surrender our streets without a plan, our streets become “black boxes.” We will lose insight into the algorithms that manage traffic and where our citizens’ data is stored.
4. the battle for the curb
Who is allowed to stop where? Who pays how much for a square meter of curb per minute? If we fail to establish a public digital management system now, private providers will fill this gap and set their own rules.
At this turning point, a system-critical question arises:
Will autonomous fleets become the “cash cows” of foreign platform monopolies that extract our mobility data and privatize profits
or
will we organize accessability also as part of public service.
Robotaxis vs. autonomous minibuses
Instead of surrendering the market to individual rides in autonomous cars, we should plan a “public service” in line with public service obligations. The goal is for municipalities, districts and regions to become the directors of mobility, including mobility as a service (MaaS) and autonomous on-demand transport.
Alongside traditional public transit, minibuses – as visionariy suggested in 1970 in “A Pattern Language” – should be deployed where large public transport capacities are not needed. We must not make the mistake of simply automating today’s traffic chaos. Instead of letting public space collapse under thousands of circling robotaxis, the strategy must focus on efficient pooling. Autonomous minibuses supplement public transport where needed, rather than cannibalizing it.
| Feature | robotaxis platform monopoly | public service model |
| Objective | profit maximization & data harvesting | affordable mobility & climate goals |
| Pricing | dynamic pricing (surges during demand) | socially just, integrated tariffs |
| Coverage | focus on lucrative city centers | servicing suburbs and rural areas |
| Data | proprietary algorithms (black box) | open data for urban planning |
our benefit of public transport
Improving our public transport means an increase in prosperity and freedom:
- Safety and climate
We move toward “vision zero” – a city where traffic fatalities are a thing of the past. Reclaiming our streets allows us to create “sponge cities” that can handle extreme weather and provide “green lungs” to cool our streets. - Quality of life
Imagine the street as our extended living room. By reducing noise and pollution, we create a “third place” for social interaction, play, and culture. We replace traffic zones with human zones. - Economic efficiency
Research in Munich showed that the public subsidizes every car kilometer by approximately 0.60 € in hidden costs. Conversely, every kilometer cycled saves the community 0.30 € in healthcare and infrastructure costs. This transition allows cities to reinvest billions into the quality of life.
research neccesities
By investing in strategic research and administrative readiness today, we ensure that the streets of tomorrow are not just “driverless,” but car-less, equitable, and filled with life.