On the Move in [CITY] - Municipal Surveys on Mobility Planning and Citizen Participation in the CIMT Research Project

The study on municipal surveys on mobility planning and citizen participation in the CIMT research project was conducted by Tobias Escher and Katharina Holec from Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf. The project Citizen Involvement in Mobility Transitions/ Participation Benefits was funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) as part of the program “Junior Research Groups in Social-Ecological Research” from 1.5.2019 to 31.10.2024 (funding code 01UU1904).

Population surveys and participant surveys were conducted. The aim of the population surveys was to obtain as representative a picture as possible of the characteristics and attitudes in the city/district, in each case before or at the beginning of the planning and participation process, and once after completion (i.e. formal adoption of the planning decision by the council). The participant survey is explicitly aimed at the participants in the participation processes.

In the survey period 03.04.2021 to 16.09. 2024, people aged 16 and over (Marburg and Wuppertal 2021 aged 18 and over) were surveyed in online interviews (CAWI) and by means of self-completed questionnaires: paper on the following topics: Transport policy attitudes, mobility behavior (general, during the pandemic), mobility needs (general, process-specific on urban developments following a consultation process, legitimacy attitudes (general, process-specific on attitudes following a consultation process, during the pandemic), political involvement (general, process-specific in relation to specific participation formats during a consultation process), participation motives (general, process-specific in relation to specific consultation formats) and socio-demographics. The respondents for the population sample were selected using a simple random sample from the population register. No controlled sampling was used for the participant sample; instead, participants were contacted after the consultation steps (partly on site, partly by email, partly via a notice on the online participation website or in forums) with a call to register for the online survey. Panel survey of those who agreed to be surveyed again after the consultation.<br>1. Transport policy attitudes: attitude towards the future development of traffic (on the whole, federal politicians usually make good decisions regarding traffic policy; there are regular disputes about traffic policy in the city; there are regular disputes about traffic policy in the district); need for improvement regarding traffic in the city; suggestion for improvement made with regard to traffic; Attitude towards various traffic-related measures (vehicles with high pollutant emissions are no longer allowed to drive in the city area, maximum speed limit of 30 km/h in the city area with the exception of main roads, create more charging facilities for electric vehicles, expansion of cycle paths at the expense of parking spaces and car lanes, significant expansion of pedestrian zones, expansion of pedestrian paths at the expense of parking spaces, expansion or Construction of high-speed cycle paths and cycle lanes, creation of car-free residential areas, significant reduction in the number of parking spaces, expansion of environmental lanes, significant increase in parking fees, expansion of footpaths at the expense of cycle paths, free use of public transport in the city, expansion of the public transport network at the expense of car lanes, establishment of free park & ride parking spaces on the outskirts of the city, expansion of existing or new roads to avoid congestion, creation of additional parking spaces for cars in the city, use of plant-based fuels); opinion on the future of the city/district (more space for car traffic, wider footpaths, more space for bicycle traffic, less space for car traffic); importance of aspects with regard to the future development of transport (ranking: minimizing the impact on the environment and climate, enabling all people to make their everyday journeys comfortably and cheaply, promoting economic development in Germany and the competitiveness of German companies); extent of concern about climate change.

2. Mobility behavior (in general, during the pandemic): type and number of vehicles in the household; possession of a car driver´s license; type of ticket used for travel by bus or train in the region; walking distance to public transport stops; minutes walked to this stop; frequency of use of different means of transport in the last three months (bicycle, car, carsharing vehicle, bus or train in the region, routes exclusively on foot, train from about 100 km one-way distance, long-distance bus from about 100 km one-way distance); change in use of these means of transport compared to before the pandemic.

3. Mobility needs (general, process-specific for urban developments following a consultation process): importance of various criteria for daily journeys (flexible, fast, punctual, safe in traffic, protected from crime, inexpensive, relaxed, environmentally conscious, convenient, barrier-free travel, fun, easy to find my way around, accepted by friends, doing something for my health); which of these characteristics are associated with driving a car, cycling, local public transport and walking in my own city; changes in my own mobility as a result of measures; type of change in my own mobility as a result of measures (e.g. I was faster on the road, I was more punctual, I felt safer in traffic, etc.); expected changes in daily mobility; expectations after the conversion (e.g. I will be flexible on the road, fast on the road, punctual on the road, etc.).

4. Legitimacy attitudes (general, process-specific to attitudes following a consultation process, during the pandemic): attachment to the city and its citizens; attachment to Germany as a whole and its citizens; opinion on the idea of democracy; satisfaction with democracy in Germany; important that local politicians explain their decisions to citizens, that local politicians give citizens the opportunity to contribute their attitudes and knowledge to decision-making on important decisions, and that citizens have the final say on the most important local policy issues through direct votes; applicability of the above statements to the current situation in their own city; trust in public institutions and organizations (city council/ municipal council/ local council, city administration, district council, district assembly, citizenship, political parties in the city, local daily newspaper in the city, federal government, Bundestag, political parties in Germany, Federal Constitutional Court, judiciary, police); overall satisfaction with the performance of the Lord Mayor, the city administration, the head of the district office, the district office, the First Mayor, the federal government, the political parties in Germany and the magistrate; change in satisfaction with the local policies of the municipal council / city council, the city administration, the Lord Mayor or the head of the district office, the district office, the First Mayor, the federal government, the political parties in Germany, the Landesbetrieb Straßen, Brücken und Gewässer (LSBG) through citizen participation; Change in satisfaction with politics during the Corona pandemic with regard to the performance of the Lord Mayor, the city administration, the head of the district office, the district office, the First Mayor, the federal government, and the political parties in Germany.

5. Political involvement (general, process-specific in relation to specific participation formats during a consultation process): interest in politics in general and interest in local politics; political self-efficacy (I can understand and assess important political issues well, politicians care about what ordinary people think, I trust myself to actively participate in a conversation about political issues, politicians make an effort to maintain close contact with the population); forms of own political participation outside the Internet in the last twelve months (e.g. participation in a demonstration or collection of signatures, donation to political parties or organizations, products consumed or boycotted for political or ethical reasons, etc.); political participation outside the Internet also related to local issues (e.g. construction projects in the city); forms of own political participation on the Internet (e.g. own political contributions posted on social media, tweeted or sent via mailing lists, political contributions from other people forwarded or shared on social media, etc.); political participation on the Internet also related to local issues (e.g. construction projects in the city); membership (passive member, active member, volunteer) in an organization or association (e.g. sports club, peace or human rights organization, etc.).

Politics and participation (process-specific): source of information about the participation process (outdoor advertising, circle of friends or acquaintances, social media, information event, from an invitation by post, media, other); heard about the respective participation process in own city; active participation in the formats of the respective participation processes and frequency of participation; representation of interests (the selected advertising measures were appropriate for the recruitment of participants, all important population groups were represented at the event (age, education, gender, migration background).

6. Evaluation of the participation process: evaluation of the process design (e.g. satisfaction with the user-friendliness of the online platform used to conduct the event, the moderators supported the productive exchange of ideas between the participants, participants had sufficient opportunities to have a say in the course of the event and the dialogs, etc.); evaluation of the quality of the discussions (e.g. the dialogs ran smoothly (e.g. through functioning discussion rules), the contributions of the participants were largely constructive and relevant, etc.); evaluation of results (e.g. the event enabled the different interests to be reconciled, the results of the event will influence political decisions, the event provided new insights, etc.); transparency (e.g. I feel well informed about the planning and current developments); own involvement (as a resident, as a commuter, as a user of the leisure facilities, when running everyday errands, as a tradesperson, in other ways); also used the Internet to participate (actively or passively); evaluation of the measures (e.g. measures within the scope of the redesign fully correspond to my interests, the interests of all relevant population groups are taken into account in the redesign, after the redesign, car traffic will not be impaired and cycling will be safer and more comfortable, quality of stay for pedestrians will increase, etc.); evaluation of the citizens´ petition.

7. Motives for taking part in the participation process (e.g. by participating in this process I can contribute my personal skills, my circle of friends/family find it important to participate in this process, I feel part of a community, a suitable way to exert personal influence on politics, etc.).

Demography: private internet use; frequency of private internet use; length of time living in the city; since year; year of birth; age (classified); gender; born in Germany; parents born in Germany; mobility restriction due to walking disability, visual impairment or other restriction, no restriction); education: Highest general school-leaving qualification of the respondent and parents; vocational qualification or university degree; occupational group; household size; living with a partner; married to this partner; children in the household; number of children not of compulsory school age, children in elementary school, children in secondary school and children who have already finished school; net household income.

Additionally coded were: questionnaire ID; city (Altona, Marburg, Offenburg, Ottensen, Wuppertal); sample (population/participants); type of participation (offline, online); time; order of survey for participants in (city); number of missing variables on CORE dataset with around 230 variables; willingness to be re-interviewed; derived variables: Degree of participation in the participation procedure (detailed and simplified); participation in the participation procedure: heard of the procedure; sex; highest general school qualification (educational level according to ISCED); age.