Comic zum Thema „Decision Theatre“: „Ida und der Mathe-Agent oder eine Geschichte vom Modellieren der Mobilität von Morgen“, von Sarah Wolf et al., gezeichnet von Alberto Madrigal
How does your method differ from that of Decision Theatre, Mr. Nagel?ie unterscheidet sich Ihre Methode, Herr Nagel, von der des Decision Theatres?
Nagel: We conduct what are known as citizen assessments on mobility transformation scenarios. The process is similar to Decision Theater, but we limit ourselves to traffic in the respective region, which allows us to perform more accurate simulations. We also try to ensure that the participants represent a broad spectrum of society.
What were the results of these citizen reports?
Nagel: On the one hand, there is broad consensus. More than 90 percent of participants support the goal of non-fossil fuel transportation by 2045. More than 80 percent also favor the polluter pays principle. However, when it comes to specific measures such as tolls or more expensive resident parking permits, approval drops to below 50 percent.
Can you derive specific recommendations from the citizens' reports?
Nagel: One result is that commercial transport can be made CO2-free by technical means, and this is not particularly controversial – so progress could be made more quickly in this area.
The area of private passenger transport is particularly controversial. So-called pull measures such as the expansion of public transport or cycle paths enjoy broad support here, but they will not be nearly enough to make private passenger transport CO2-free.
If the goal is “only” to achieve CO2 neutrality, the engines of the many remaining vehicles would also have to be decarbonized; if, at the same time, the number of cars in urban areas is to be significantly reduced, there is no way around push measures such as bans, restrictions, or price increases in all simulation runs.