"When water, energy, or transport networks suffer extreme pressures or collapse completely, the underlying urban power geometries become somewhat more perceptible.” (Giglioli and Swyngedouw, 2008)
Introduction and Historical Context.
Dating back to the year 1237, Berlin was born as a trading hub on the banks of the Spree River. The original districts, now iconic destinations such as Alexanderplatz in Mitte, or Checkpoint Charlie in Kreuzberg, stand as bustling urban centres, subject to the buzz of thousands of residents and tourists passing through on a daily basis. Every day, 60,000 cars pass by Alexanderplatz (BFGG), highlighting the growth of the city and demonstrating Berlin’s contemporary aspirations for urban mobility.
Berlin’s urban landscape illuminates urban mobility's social, political, and spatial dimensions. French philosopher Henri Lefebvre’s concept of the ‘right to the city’ enables examination into how power dynamics and social justice intersect with transportation policies and practices and will be discussed further in this inquiry. This allows a deeper understanding of mobility challenges and opportunities to be obtained, as well as contributing to the ongoing discourse on creating more sustainable and equitable urban environments.
During a visit to the city, I gained an understanding of Berlin’s history and governance in order to inform this inquiry’s assessment of both. Looking beyond its medieval beginnings and towards the Prussian Empire's rule (1701-1918), Frederick the Great introduced political authority, culture, and industry. He also implemented large-scale urban development initiatives, such as the building of the famous Brandenburg Gate. The Industrial Revolution, beginning around 1870, developed Berlin rapidly, with its population growing exponentially, alongside huge advancements in technology and manufacturing. Like every city experiencing a strong industrial revolution, Berlin did not account for its carbon footprint, and rapid industrialisation also saw the construction of more landmark sites - such as the Berlin Cathedral and the Reichstag. Berlin faced unprecedented difficulties in the 20th century, including two catastrophic world wars and the city's subsequent division during the Cold War. The capital was severely damaged and lost many lives during World Wars I and II, leaving lasting damage in their wake. Following World War II, Berlin was divided into East and West, leading the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961.
A new era of reunification and renewal was ushered in with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, which marked a historic turning point in Berlin's history. Berlin undertook a tremendous process of redevelopment after East and West were united. With reunification, Berlin was reinstated as the capital city of united Germany and the Länder of the former German Democratic Republic joined the Federal Republic of Germany in its membership of NATO (NATO, 1990). As Berliners came together to rebuild their city and create a shared future, this period of reunification was accompanied by a wave of hope and possibility, with urban mobility at the forefront of the process.
Origins of Berlin’s Urban Mobility.
Medieval Roots
Mobility in Berlin can be traced back to the medieval origins of the city. The settlements along the banks of the Spree River, estimated to have been during the 13th-15th centuries, laid the foundation for early transportation networks, with waterways serving as vital arteries for commerce and communication. The ancient trading routes along the rivers from the West to the East made for an inviting spot to build a market (NHH, 2012), and facilitated the movement of goods and people within the city and beyond. The development of bridges can be traced to this period, created to provide essential links between different parts of the city, enabling people and goods to move freely. These medieval roots laid the groundwork for its subsequent development as a major urban centre, setting the stage for the evolution of transport networks and mobility patterns that were to come.
Prussian Development
During the Prussian expansion between the 17th and 19th centuries, Berlin underwent significant transformation, moving from a trading town into a prominent European capital. The years between 1870 and 1914 saw Berlin become a ‘booming metropolis’ (Schnurr, 2012). The development of the railroad transformed the city, enabling goods and commodities to travel long distances - which was vital for the trade in metals and textiles, boosting Berlin’s mechanical engineering industry. Uplifted by the economic boom after 1871, as well as Franco-Prussian wartime reparations from France, Berlin became an attractive place for business - in the year 1872, 250 new businesses registered in the city (Schnurr, 2012). This unsurprisingly saw the rapid expansion of mobility and transport in Berlin with the introduction of horse-drawn omnibuses, followed by horse and steam-powered trolleys. In 1881, Berlin witnessed the inauguration of the world's first electric trolley in Gross-Lichterfelde, signaling a shift towards electrified transport. These electric trolleys, powered by overhead lines and batteries in affluent areas, were soon customary on city streets, ferrying passengers across Berlin for a fare of 10 pfennig (Schnurr, 2012). Additionally, Europe's first viaduct rail line, spanning from Charlottenburg in the West to Schlesischer Bahnhof in the East, emerged as a symbol of Berlin's growing transportation network. The viaduct facilitated swift and efficient travel across the city, attracting tens of thousands of passengers on its inaugural Sunday, with the rapid growth of transportation infrastructure not only transforming Berlin's urban landscape but also fostering an affection for mobility among its inhabitants (Schnurr, 2012).
20th-Century
The 20th-century interwar period brought further strides in Berlin’s urban development - alongside political upheaval and economic instability. The construction of the Untergrundbahn in 1902 further expanded the metro system, integrating various neighborhoods and suburbs into a cohesive transportation network. Rail stations emerged as hubs for housing and employment - shaping the city's spatial organisation and social dynamics (Braun, 2010). The impact of Berlin's transport infrastructure extended beyond functionality, influencing architectural styles and cultural expressions. Even during the tumultuous Weimar era and the subsequent rise of National Socialism,
transport remained a focal point of urban planning and political agendas, culminating in ambitious projects such as the completion of the North-South S-Bahn line in the 1930s (Braun, 2010).
On May 8th, 1945, when Germany signed the German Instrument of Surrender - ending the reign of Nazi Germany and World War Two, it became clear that Berlin’s transport infrastructure would need rebuilding. Over 400 rails, structures, and tunnels were severely damaged throughout the war (Mahjoub, 2021). Only 18 of the 900 available buses remained operational, and a quarter of the streetcars were still fit for use. However, within 7 months, the city was able to restore around 90% of the pre-war U-Bahn network (Mahjoub, 2021).
Division and the Cold War
Up until the mid-1940s, the S-Bahn had proved itself as one of the largest rapid rail transport systems in Europe. However, the Cold War and the construction of the Berlin Wall in 1961 ‘abruptly ripped the unified and closed rapid rail system apart’ (Heinemann, 2008). To put it simply, West Berlin experienced significant investment in modern transport systems and infrastructure, and East Berlin began to lag behind due to neglect and ideological priorities.
Transport infrastructure in West Berlin became a symbol of resistance and defiance against the Soviet Union's influence. In reaction to the Soviet blockade, the West demonstrated its commitment to keeping the city connected to the outside world during the Berlin Airlift of 1948–1949, where Anglo-American allies were able to supply the West with ‘everything needed to break the Soviet stranglehold’ (Stivers, 1997). West Berlin also benefited from strong financial support from its Western allies, which helped further transport network development. When it was reported that the S-Bahn’s profits were going to East Berlin authorities, West Berlin’s mayor, Willy Brandt, called for a boycott - resulting in S-Bahn passengers falling from 500,000 per day to 50,000 over the course of a year (Mahjoub, 2021). This meant that during this time of division, West Berlin saw a large increase in bus service, to replace S-Bahn usage.
West Berlin aimed to emulate modern urban centres like London or Los Angeles - deeming tramways outdated and prioritising automobile-centric infrastructure by eliminating tram tracks, and expanding roads for cars. By 1967, trams ceased to operate in West Berlin, and plans for a subway expansion largely faltered, with minimal progress on proposed projects (Mahjoub, 2021).
East Berlin adopted a separate strategy, expanding and modernising its tramway network during the period of separation. Drawing inspiration from Moscow rather than Western cities, East Berlin not only retained but also extended tram lines, adding 24 new routes. Additionally, the city updated its bus system with trolleybuses, utilising electric-powered vehicles that used energy from overhead power lines via trolley poles (Mahjoub, 2021).
This stark difference in the two strategies taken by each half of Berlin has interesting and significant implications for sustainable urban mobility. While West Berlin's emphasis on automobile-centric infrastructure may have initially accommodated individual mobility preferences, it contributed to increased reliance on cars, increasing traffic congestion, air pollution, and carbon emissions. In contrast, East Berlin's expansion of tramways, along with the adoption of electric trolleybuses, agrees with sustainable urban mobility due to the preference for mass transit - reducing overall fossil fuel emissions.
Governance and Sustainable Urban Mobility
Berlin’s history is undeniably one of the most interesting stories that any city can tell, and its past has shaped the capital into what it is today. It is clear that with each period, from mediaeval to modern-day, there have been large steps in its development, for better or for worse. One of the key areas for discussion when it comes to looking to the future regarding sustainability is governance, and Berlin is very familiar with radically different outcomes stemming from different styles of governance. So what structures are currently in place, how does Berlin promote sustainability, and have there been efforts to address the clear historical inequalities?
Structure
Modern-day Germany is a constitutional democracy. The constitution, published in 1949, is regularly updated and is ‘one of the most flexible of its kind in the world’ (Expatrio, 2024). The Federal nature of its democracy means that power is divided nationally, with separate regions having separate responsibilities, for example, Berlin directs the law regarding health insurance (Expatrio, 2024). There are a variety of political parties, with the Social Democrats (SPD) - Germany’s oldest party and the Christian Democrats (CPD) being the two largest. The current Chancellor, Olaf Schulz aligns with the SPD and took over from Angela Merkel in 2021.
The three largest constitutional bodies in the Federal Republic of Germany are based in Berlin - the Bundesregierung, the Bundestag, and the Bundesrat (BBLC), and the federal government itself has few responsibilities at the city level - aside from providing resources. Berlin is a State and a municipality, resulting in what is known as the Berlin Senate which is responsible for education, health, transport, and environmental sustainability (LSE Cities, 2007). ids
The overall historical development of mobility in Berlin focused on growing the network, but as is the case globally, sustainability and environmental concerns were simply not a priority - contributing toward the climate change crisis that has become so prevalent today.
Policy
Today, the Senate Department for Environment, Transport and Climate Protection oversees transportation policies and initiatives aimed at promoting sustainability and reducing emissions (Huskes et al, 2019). Additionally, local district authorities play a role in implementing transportation projects and managing infrastructure within their respective areas. Beyond the city level, regional and national authorities, such as the Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure, influence transportation policies and funding allocations that impact Berlin's mobility landscape.
In 2014, the Berlin Senate published the Urban Transportation Development Plan, under the authority of the Social Democratic Party. Aimed at promoting sustainable mobility, the report aims to hit specific economic, social, environmental, and institutional targets by the year 2040. Notable targets include:
Reducing transport’s consumption of natural resources, such as energy and sealed spaces.
Easing the burden of traffic-related pollution on the urban and global environment.
Providing equal mobility opportunities by taking into account different needs
Further improving links between Berlin and the housing areas along the axes radiating from the city.
(Menge et al, 2014)
Two of the main strategies outlined in the report tackle ecomobility as well as urban, environmental, and life quality. They are designed to prioritise eco-friendly transportation modes like public transit, cycling, and walking. These initiatives are formulated not only to alleviate traffic congestion and reduce environmental pollution but also to enhance the overall livability and sustainability of the city (Menge et al, 2014). Yet it is important to note that ensuring equitable access to transportation services for all residents, regardless of income level or location, is imperative for creating a truly inclusive and sustainable mobility system.
Failed Initiatives
The fall of the Berlin Wall was undoubtedly a turning point in terms of mobility in and around Berlin, with broken connections requiring bridges to be built. However, despite an overall
German reputation for strong governance and planning, shortly after the fall of the wall, governors in Berlin embarked on what would turn out to be one of the worst planned and executed mobility initiatives in its history. In 1990, the idea to build a new airport - the Berlin Brandenburg, was created.rThe airport, intended to ‘mark reunified Germany’s re-emergence as a global destination’ (Bowlby, 2019), opened with 120,000 defects, 10 years late, and at 3 times the original cost (Papadopoulos, 2021).
Berlin Brandenburg airport is the perfect example to illustrate poor governance impeding mobility initiatives and should be learnt from to help understand exactly what not to do. The failure can be attributed to several factors, highlighted by a report from the OECD. Inexperienced management and inadequate supervision, driven by political decisions to shift the project from private to public hands, resulted in confusion and delays. Inaccurate budget estimations, influenced by political motives to keep costs low, led to significant cost overruns. Poor planning and procurement, including delays in awarding contracts and incomplete planning documents, further exacerbated the project's challenges (OECD, 2016). The failure can be related to John Urry's theory of mobility through the lens of governance and infrastructure development. In Urry's framework, mobility is not solely about physical movement but also involves the interplay of various factors such as technology, regulations, and social norms (Urry, 2007). In the case of the Brandenburg Airport project, poor governance played a crucial role in the failure of the construction. Governance encompasses the regulation and decision-making processes that shape infrastructure development. In this case, mismanagement coupled with bureaucratic hurdles contributed to delays and cost overruns in the construction of the airport.
Achievements and Obstacles
21st century Berlin is taking excellent strides towards comprehensive sustainable urban mobility, tackling the challenges its rocky history has thrown at it. Bridges between East and West have been rebuilt and large mobility projects have been undertaken. Even the distinct setback regarding the new airport has been looked past, and despite the embarrassing nature of the governance and execution, the airport now serves Berlin successfully and certainly stands as a symbol of Berlin being reconnected to the world.
The city’s current public transportation network, facilitated by affordable fares and an easy-to-use app, ‘VBB’, offers an array of options to its public. Buses, trams, trains, and bicycle lanes are for the most part accessible and equitable, embodying an essence of mobility. The city boasts multiple car-free zones, with the needs of pedestrians in mind - propelling Berlin to having one of the highest pedestrian modal shares in the Urban Mobility Readiness Index (OWF, 2024). To add to this, the city has pledged funding in excess of $200 million to expand its cycling infrastructure, signalling a commitment to further promoting sustainable modes of transportation (OWF, 2024). In 2021, Berlin made it clear that it wants to move away from automobiles being the go-to method of transport. The state parliament passed a ‘Pedestrian Law’ which aims to promote walking around the city, rather than driving. This included ‘longer green light phases for pedestrians, safer school routes for children, more crosswalks and more benches, lowered curbs for improved accessibility, more municipal enforcement against illegal parking and dangerous driving in the city’ (Walker, 2021). This kind of initiative prompts discussion regarding who has the right to the city, with Berlin leaning toward opening the city to pedestrians, rather than giving it away to cars and roads, and this will be discussed further shortly.
However, no system is perfect. Despite it being difficult to find issues within Berlin’s modern system, the relatively low ridership presents a minor challenge. The city’s expansive sprawl and low station density must be addressed to sufficiently enhance connectivity (OWF, 2024). As well as this, the transition to Electric Vehicles (EVs), is not progressing at the desired rate. Regarding Germany as a whole, in 2022, it was reported that the nation will miss its 2030 target to get 15 million EVs on the road - instead, they will only reach 10 million, due to a lack of charging infrastructure (Amelang, 2022). Addressing this challenge will require concerted efforts from both the public and private sectors. Berlin’s government will need to play a crucial role in incentivising the expansion of charging networks through policy measures, such as subsidies for charging infrastructure deployment and regulatory mandates for EV-friendly urban planning. Private companies, including energy providers and automotive manufacturers, must also invest in charging infrastructure to create a more robust and accessible network for EV users.
The utilisation of space and Henri Lefebvre.
Electric Vehicles and ridership statistics aside, one would advocate for Berlin’s approach to sustainable mobility to serve as a blueprint for other cities to use and to follow suit. Their Urban Transportation Development Plan, strong infrastructure, forward-thinking governance, and commitments to move to sustainable methods of transport have resulted in the city sitting ‘among the top 10 metropolises across the globe when it comes to sustainability’ (Ellis, 2023).
How can other cities follow suit, and can Berlin’s actions and intentions be related to a framework?
Labelled as ‘one of the most important urban theorists of the 20th century’ (Bond, 2017), French philosopher Henri Lefebvre created one of his most widely recognised theories - regarding the right to the city. Criticised and reviewed by academics worldwide, the theory, although not commonly done so, can be related to the issue of urban mobility, and more specifically the priorities of mobility and the decision-making processes behind them. Lefebvre’s radical vision saw cities differently. He disagreed with cities being governed and managed by the state. He believed that those who live in the city should be able to shape the environment around them, without the interference of the state (Purcell, 2013). Lefebvre believed that cities should not merely be spaces for consumption and economic activity but should prioritise the well-being of their residents. The right to the city entails the right of all urban dwellers, regardless of socioeconomic status, ethnicity, or other factors, to actively participate in shaping the social, political, and cultural life of the city. Lefebvre calls for urban planning and governance structures that prioritise the needs of the community over profit-driven development, empowering residents to reclaim and reinvent their urban environment to better meet their collective interests and desires. Mobility and transport play a huge role in determining the livability and sustainability of a place, and Berlin is certainly moving towards prioritising people’s needs over large profits. The best example of this relates to the aforementioned initiative to get more people walking around the city, and pedestrianising certain areas. Lefebvre’s work on space offers an insight into the complex nature of automobility, arguing that car travel is a social dilemma, or a collective action problem - exemplifying the contradictory character of abstract space (Scott, 2013). There is a clear problem with the modern city, and that lies within the use of space, notably that the majority of it is used by cars and roads. Lefebvre notes that ‘it is almost as though automobiles and motorways occupy the entirety of space’, and that the ‘building of highways benefits both the oil companies and the automobile manufacturers; every additional mile of highway translates into increased car sales’ (Lefebvre, 1991, p.374). Berlin is actively reimagining its urban spaces to reduce dependence on automobiles and create environments that prioritise pedestrians, cyclists, and public transportation. Initiatives such as car-free zones, expanded bike lanes, and improved public transit infrastructure are central to this vision.
‘There are two ways in which urban space tends to be sliced up, degraded, and eventually destroyed by this contradictory process: the proliferation of fast roads and of places to park and garage cars, and their corollary, a reduction of tree-lined streets, green spaces, and parks and gardens.’(Lefebvre, 1991, p. 359)
Fast roads, designed to accommodate vehicular traffic, often result in the fragmentation and degradation of urban areas. These roads prioritise the movement of vehicles over the quality of urban life, leading to the division of neighborhoods, increased noise and air pollution, and reduced safety for pedestrians and cyclists. Similarly, the allocation of space for parking and garaging further exacerbates this issue, as it prioritises the storage of cars over the creation of vibrant, people-centred urban environments. In 2022, Berlin rolled out a plan to abolish almost all the parking spaces in the Graefekiez neighbourhood. Kreuzberg’s Green district councillor, Annika Gerold, stated ‘The idea we are pursuing is whether public spaces can be experienced and used in more efficient ways than keeping them reserved for parked cars’ (Oltermann, 2023). This re-imagination of space is exactly why other cities need to follow suit, with the idea being that those who have cars in cities do not actually need them to get around, especially with such excellent alternatives provided. In the same year, Berliners proposed a law to ban all cars from their city centre, through the campaign group ‘Berlin Autofrei’. One of the campaign’s organisers, Nina Noble noted that ‘We want people to be able to sleep with their windows open and children to be able to play in the street again’ (Frearson, 2022). This proposal gained over 50,000 supporters in Berlin, indicating that individuals living there, whether they are aware or not, agree with Lefebvre’s ideas of reclaiming the city.
Concluding Remarks
Berlin's approach to urban planning highlights a response to the criticism of car-centric models detailed by Lefebvre and reflects the city's distinct governance structure and intriguing past. Berlin's history, which included times of division and reunification, has shaped its identity. The current urban policies and initiatives that aim to create more sustainable and livable communities are influenced by this historical background.
Berlin's citizens have a strong sense of community and resilience due to their experience during the Cold War division. This sense of community is demonstrated by the city's dedication to advancing sustainable mobility solutions that put people's welfare ahead of cars. Innovative approaches to urban planning and development are made possible by Berlin's governance structure, which is characterised by a history of citizen engagement and decentralised decision-making.
Berlin has taken steps to recover urban space from cars and use it for green infrastructure and sustainable mobility, while also incorporating aspects of its history and governance framework. The capital is committed to developing inclusive and environmentally friendly urban spaces, as evidenced by initiatives like expanding pedestrian zones, building infrastructure for cyclists, and improving public transport systems.
Berlin offers other cities attempting to tackle the problems of urbanisation in the twenty-first century a model to follow by embracing its history and making the most of its distinct system of government. Urban planners and policymakers worldwide can learn a great deal from the city's ability to integrate progressive urban policies with historical context successfully, highlighting the significance of context-specific approaches to sustainable development.
Bibliography
Giglioli. I, Swyngedouw. E, 2008, ‘Let’s drink to the great thirst! Water and the politics of fractured techo-natures in Sicily’ Available online at:
https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.sussex.idm.oclc.org/doi/10.1111/j.1468-2427.2008.00789.x (Accessed: 14 April 2024)
Berliner Forum für Geschichte und Gegenwart ‘Preliminary stages of today’s greater Berlin’ Available online at: https://world-heritage-estates-berlin.com/berlin-history/ (Accessed: 9 April 2024)
North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, 1990, ‘German Reunification’ Available online at:
https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/declassified_136311.htm (Accessed: 10 April 2024)
Klaus. L, 1961 ‘Mauerbau Sebastianstraße’ Available online at:
https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en/service/archive/construction-berlin-wall-1777024
(Accessed: 3 April 2024)
Nature History Heritage, 2012, ‘Medieval Histories’ Available online at:
https://www.medieval.eu/medieval-berlin/ (Accessed: 19 March 2024)
Schnurr. E, 2012, ‘Berlin’s turn of the century growing pains’ Available online at:
https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/the-late-19th-century-saw-the-birth-of-modern-berlin-a-866321.html (Accessed: 2 April 2024)
Braun. S, 2010, ‘ Transit metropolis’ Available online at: https://www.the-berliner.com/berlin/transit-metropolis/ (Accessed: 3 April 2024)
Anschutz. O, 1902 ‘Der Eröffnungszug der Berliner U-Bahn’ Available online at:
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Eroeffnungszug_U-Bahn_Berlin_1902.jpg
(Accessed: 8 April 2024)
Mahjoub, H, ‘Journey through time: Public transportation in Berlin’ Available online at:
https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/4cdc48413b3d4f89b474173b888ceb0c (Accessed: 25 March 2024)
Heinemann. T, 2008 ‘Yesterday, today and tomorrow’ Available online at:
https://www.intelligenttransport.com/transport-articles/1225/yesterday-today-and-tomorrow/
(Accessed: 9 April 2024)
Stivers. W, 1997 ‘The Incomplete Blockade: Soviet Zone Supply of West Berlin, 1948-49’ Available online at:
https://www-jstor-org.sussex.idm.oclc.org/stable/24913337?sid=primo (Accessed: 12 April 2024)
Expatrio, 2024 ‘German Political System’ Available online at:
https://www.expatrio.com/about-germany/german-political-system (Accessed: 3 April 2024)
Berlin Business Location Center, ‘Government and Administration’ Available online at:
https://www.businesslocationcenter.de/en/business-location/berlin-at-a-glance/political-system (Accessed 1 April 2024)
LSE Cities, 2007 ‘Berlin’s governance structure’ Available online at:
https://urbanage.lsecities.net/data/berlin-s-governance-structure-2007 (Accessed: 8 April 2024)
Huskies. S, Gerner. K, 2019 Berlin - Growth and Climate Change’ Available online at:
https://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/rest/cms/upload/07102019_092653_Berlin%20-%20presentation.pdf (Accessed: 27 March 2024)
Menge. J, Horn. B, Beck. B, 2014, ‘Berlin’s Urban Transportation Development Plan 2025 - Sustainable Mobility’ Available online at:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265342163_Berlins_Urban_Transportation_Development_Plan_2025_-_Sustainable_Mobility (Accessed: 28 March 2024)
Glucroft. W, 2020 ‘Berlin’s new airport: a story of failure and embarrassment’ Available online at: https://www.dw.com/en/berlins-new-airport-finally-opens-a-story-of-failure-and-embarrassment/a-55446329 (Accessed: 19 April 2024)
Bowlby. C, 2019 ‘Berlin Brandenburg: the airport with half a million faults’ Available online at:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-48527308 (Accessed: 10 April 2024)
Papadopulos. L, 2021 ‘Here’s how Berlin Brandenburg airport became one of the biggest engineering failures’ Available online at:
https://interestingengineering.com/science/heres-how-berlin-brandenburg-airport-became-one-of-the-biggest-engineering-failures (Accessed: 9 April 2024)
OECD, 2016 ‘Country Case: Governance failures in the management of the Berlin-Brandenburg International Airport’ Available online at:
https://www.oecd.org/governance/procurement/toolbox/search/governance-failures-management-berlin-brandenburg-international-airport.pdf (Accessed: 11 April 2024)
Urry. J, 2007, ‘Mobilities’ Available online at:
https://books.google.co.uk/books/about/Mobilities.html?id=Oxdp7ss-aNkC&redir_esc=y
(Accessed: 15 April 2024)
Oliver Wyman Forum, 2024, ‘Challenges and Opportunities for Berlin’s Transportation System’ Available online at:
https://www.oliverwymanforum.com/mobility/urban-mobility-readiness-index/berlin.html#:~:text=Despite%20a%20strong%20and%20affordable,longer%20and%20less%20convenient%20commutes. (Accessed: 21 April 2024)
Amelang. S, 2022 ‘Germany will miss 2030 e-car target due to lack of charging points’ Available online at:
https://www.cleanenergywire.org/news/germany-will-miss-2030-e-car-target-due-lack-charging-points-consultancy (Accessed 21 April 2024)
Walker. J, 2021 ‘Berlin Becomes First German city with a Specific Pedestrian Law’ Available online at:
https://walk21.com/2021/03/17/berlin-becomes-first-german-city-with-a-specific-pedestrian-law/#:~:text=At%20the%20end%20of%20January,for%20improved%20accessibility%3B%20maintaining%20safe (Accessed: 21 April 2024)
Ellis. A, 2023 ‘Berlin: A Sustainable Global Powerhouse’ Available online at:
https://euroweeklynews.com/2023/10/26/berlin-a-sustainable-global-powerhouse/ (Accessed: 22 April 2024)
Bond. B, 2017 ‘ Urban Theory and the Urban Experience’ Available online at: https://docplayer.net/40227422-Urban-theory-and-the-urban-experience.html (Accessed: 17 April 2024)
Purcell. M, 2013 ‘Possible Worlds: Henri Lefebvre and the right to the city’ Available online at:
https://onlinelibrary-wiley-com.sussex.idm.oclc.org/doi/full/10.1111/juaf.12034 (Accessed: 24 April 2024)
Scott. N, 2013 ‘Like a Fish Needs a Bicycle: Henri Lefebvre and the Liberation of Transportation’ Available online at:
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1206331213487062?casa_token=Xsf03ny-z1gAAAAA:LuRO1EyraeLx_Voez6nRaqNBFU1papUJHBN8oucc8nEuDr1auFh59T-7Tl4KDjAC1ZeI5LiX9Q (Accessed: 24 April 2024)
Lefebvre. H, 1991 ‘The Production of Space’ Available online at: https://philpapers.org/archive/LEFTPO-4.pdf (Accessed: 23 April 2024)
Oltermann. P, 2023 ‘Berlin’s plan for a car-free city prompts bitter war of words’ Available online at:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/11/berlin-car-free-city-plan-culture-war (Accessed: 19 April 2024)
Frearson. A, 2022 ‘Berlin citizens propose law to ban cars from city centre’ Available online at:
https://www.dezeen.com/2022/01/28/car-free-berlin-autofrei/ (Accessed 1 May 2024)
