Refine
Year of Publication
Document Type
- Working Paper (230) (remove)
Language
- English (230) (remove)
Germany's waste management system is one of the world's most advanced - its primary objective is to dispose of waste in a way that is safe for both people and the environ- ment. However, only about 14 per cent of the raw materials used in industry are derived from recycling processes; the remainder are still sourced from primary materials. The circular economy is not yet being implemented on a large enough scale. Recyclates or recycled materials, i.e. secondary raw materials recovered from waste, are being fed back into production and usage processes at volumes that are far below what is possible. If this system were to be improved, loss of value, dependence on volatile commodity markets, lower resource productivity, and externalities in the form of environmental pollution could be avoided. A drive towards digitalisation in industry and the waste management sector could make this happen. A study by the German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and Nuclear Safety (BMUB) indicates that no other lead market in the environmental sector stands to benefit from digitalisation more than the circular economy - and that, at the same time, no sector has ever been so poorly positioned.
The objectives of the urban mobility transition have been clearly set out: gaining more space for urban living, reducing noise and emissions that have a negative impact on the climate and improving air quality. That means less traffic in cities and more trips made using environmentally-friendly modes of transport - i.e., walking, cycling or foot scooters or public transport. In transport policy, the focus is generally on innovative approaches to shaping the mobility transition.
This paper aims to explain the concept of exnovation in the context of the urban mobility transition and to underpin it using specific practical examples. In the course of this process, it is intended to identify the obstacles that stand in the way of rolling out the concept on an area-wide basis in order to deduce strategies and courses of action for expanding the concept in the future.
The transformation of urban mobility systems causes financial costs for the procurement and operation of innovative products and services and for the adaptation of existing infrastructure. While public budgets are limited, investments in infrastructure and transport services compete against other spending priorities, and private investors often are reluctant to invest into sustainable transport projects. Thus, cities need to seek additional funding and financing options and to develop business models to attract private sector investments in the development of the urban transport system. Moreover, financing schemes should cover the entire SUMP (Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning) cycle, starting from planning, to project implementation and procurement up to the operation and maintenance of services and infrastructures.
This requires the blending of different revenue sources, including:
project related revenue sources such as public transport fares and the lease of advertising space in buses;
the extension of the local tax base, for example through the introduction of road user charges and parking fees or the use of value capture mechanisms;
National, bilateral, and European grants;
Debt financing through loans and other instruments such as issuing green bonds. Finally, a prudential engagement of the private sector in infrastructure development and service provision can reduce the direct burden on public budgets while enhancing service quality. The applicability of specific financing options critically depends on the national legislative environment. Many of the instruments and case examples presented here may not be transferred to other Member States due to the different distribution of responsibilities and powers between the political levels in the Member States. This report, however, can inspire the search for potential funding and financing sources and is therefore aimed not only at local and regional authorities but also at decisionmakers at the national level. Still, whether a specific instrument can be used in a Member State needs to be assessed on a case-by-case base.