Appreciated by some because it is a proven technique, comfortable and promising for the mobility transition. Others fear or even hate it because it changes cities, requires roadworks and takes the place of the car. The tramway. At the end of the 19th century, there was a worldwide boom of tramways. Around 100 systems were built in Germany alone. In the middle of the 20th century, however, they were increasingly replaced by cars, and many were decommissioned. As man-made climate change intensifies, tramways can be an important building block for the increasingly urgent mobility transition, because the transport sector is one of the biggest drivers of the climate crisis worldwide. It needs mobility that meets human needs, creates social justice and respects ecological boundaries – such a sustainable mobility also contributes to several Sustainable Development Goals such as good health (SDG 3), sustainable cities (SDG 11), climate action (SDG 13), and life on land (SDG 15).

A green showcase city – a failed case

Cities are key actors in the mobility transition and are often challenged by the tension between transport and climate policy goals and social acceptance. The city of Tübingen in Germany faced precisely this tension: Despite good arguments in favour of a tramway in Tübingen, it was rejected by citizens in a referendum in 2021. Remarkably, the Tübingen municipal council and city administration were in favour of it across parties, as were environmental and climate groups as well as transport and bicycle advocates. Tübingen is considered a model green city with many students, a green mayor and cargo bikes that cruise through the city alongside buses. Why was the tramway still rejected?

To find an answer to this, we analysed newspaper articles and the municipal information brochure for their arguments in order to highlight the discourse. We then assigned these arguments to superordinate mobility narratives.

According to the researcher Erling Holden and his colleagues, a distinction can be made between three mobility transition narratives, which are about moving more efficiently, differently and less: The e-mobility narrative is about switching from combustion engines to electric engines in order to achieve low-CO2 transportation. The collective transport narrative is about the expansion of public transport and forms of mobility that promote sharing and using instead of owning. In addition to ecological aspects, social issues are also raised here. The mobility reduction narrative proposes less to no use of vehicles. This includes efficient public transport and the elimination of private transport. This can lead to car-free city centres with a higher quality of life. It is needed to re-negotiate what a good, fair life is for everyone. While the first narrative attacks the status quo the least, the other two are the most effective for transformation, but must gain acceptance. For example, breaking up a car culture first. The transport transition can only succeed if the three narratives are hierarchized – 1. reduce mobility, 2. change it, 3. make it more effective – and told together.

Discursive pitfalls: Backed the wrong horse

Our results: Few but well-organized stakeholders were against the construction. If you look at their arguments, it becomes clear that they used a clever mix of NIMBY-arguments and arguments from the tangible e-mobility narrative. They argued, for example, that a tramway was too expensive, would disfigure the city, would displace cars, would be based on outdated technology, would be a danger to bicycles, would cause a lot of emissions or would expand the bus network.

The proponents, on the one hand, failed to refute these counterarguments: Tramways are more expensive than buses, but a large part of the costs would have been paid by the federal government, they would have been integrated into the cityscape and provided more mobility, it is a proven and modern e-technology, the danger to bicycles is comparatively low, the emissions would have been amortized and existing buses would have supplemented the network anyway. On the other hand, the proponents did not develop a positive narrative about a Tübingen with a tramway: A city with modern mobility and a better quality of life for its citizens. The good arguments for Tübingen and its citizens themselves were there, but hardly in the public discourse. Instead, the focus was on the advantages for the surrounding area and people, who commute into the city.

A communication strategy is therefore needed to counter such conflicts and tensions. If a new tramway is built, there will ultimately be a battle for scarce space: How much space does the tramway, buses, bikes, pedestrians and cars get?

Storytelling for the mobility transition – advice for the municipal practice

The heated debate about a new tramway in Tübingen shows that building a new tramway is not only a technical challenge, but also a communicative one. So how can new tramway be communicated well?

We can derive the following advice for municipal practice from the results of our study:

Infrastructure projects that are to make cities more socio-ecologically sustainable must include narrative strategies and be communicated convincingly: The transformative potential of mobility narratives must be used in a targeted manner. As a serious mobility transition questions the status quo, a sensitive approach must be taken. Narratives that are still unknown or little accepted – e.g. the reduction of individual transport – should not be shortened, but it should instead be made clear that a more liveable city can be gained. The mobility transition is not only good for climate protection, but can also be positive for climate adaptation, health through cleaner air, social interaction, inclusion through accessibility, the housing market and the local economy. A tramway can play an important role in this narrative.

Tramways can contribute to transforming cities, connecting the city – also with the surrounding area, creating a high quality of life through more appealing street design with fewer cars. The important thing is to focus on local benefits and make them tangible. In other words: Create a concrete utopia of a greener, safer, healthier and more social city. Good illustrative material supports this.

In order to recognize fears early on and find solutions, the respective mobility culture of a city should also be taken into account. For example, cyclists' fear of falling. It is helpful to bring social scientists on board alongside engineers to find out how people think in the city.

After all, whether it's the emancipation of women, the abolition of slavery or freedom rights – major changes in history are based on narratives. They help us humans to imagine the future and solve problems. Narratives give meaning to ideas and convey complex information and can therefore legitimize policies. Policies such as building a new tramway.

Picture: Mailänder Consult