Calls for more bicycle use have been heard from across the political spectrum in Germany for years. Nonetheless, policies that lead to a transition away from car use and toward the bicycle in urban mobility remain absent. Against this background, we explore a mode of citizen engagement in the policy process in which citizens take the initiative and claim a political space to include their user expertise in the policy process. The case is a recent development in the field of urban mobility in Berlin, Germany in which citizen activists directly integrated citizen knowledge into policy outcomes. This was enabled by claiming the political space and thereby determining the spectrum of possibility, ultimately leading to an unprecedented process of co-creative legislation that marked a unique shift in German mobility policy, with the result that Berlin became the first German state to pass a bicycle law in June of 2018. We argue that the political space these citizens claimed was a key factor for enabling policy change, as previous attempts in invited political spaces had not led to a departure from the status quo. In a first empirical step, we establish evidence of citizen knowledge in policy output by comparing the citizen-authored bill with the 2018 Mobility Law. In the second empirical step based on 13 semi-structured interviews with the citizens responsible for the law, we offer a closer look at the type of knowledge relevant for enabling direct integration of user knowledge into policy output. We end with a discussion on the broader importance of the interplay of citizen knowledge for their impact on transformative policymaking.
Abstract In recent years, bottom–up civil society initiatives have advanced urban transformation processes in Berlin. Following previous research suggesting that bottom–up participation could have a positive impact on community resilience (CR), we analyse the impact of engagement on Berlin–based civil society initiatives. Whilst a positive effect on resilience can be found, we identify governance processes that would be necessary to enable the full potential of bottom–up participation for CR. Resilience, understood as the capacity of a community to thrive in times of change and uncertainty, is becoming increasingly important for the functioning of (urban) communities; hence, finding ways of strengthening it is deemed necessary.
In this article, we critically discuss the role of collaboration in Germany’s path towards a post-carbon economy. We consider civic movements and novel forms of collaboration as a potentially transformative challenger to the predominant approach of corporatist collaboration in the mobility and energy sectors. However, while trade unions and employer organizations provide a permanent and active arena for policy-oriented collaboration, civil society groups cannot rely on an equivalently institutionalized corridor to secure policy impact and public resonance. In that sense, conventional forms of collaboration tend to hinder the transformation towards a post-carbon economy. Collaboration in the German corporatist setting is thus, from a sustainability perspective, simultaneously a problem and a solution. We argue for more institutionalized corridors between civil society and state institutions. Co-creation, as we would like to call this methodical approach to collaborating, can be anchored within the environmental and industrial policy arenas.
Accompanying developments in communication technologies and practices, new possibilities emerge for actors to participate in public debate on political issues. While the influence of traditional mass media on public opinion formation processes in the public sphere has been firmly established, the rise of digital media adds complexity to communication processes that are only beginning to be understood. This research aims to add to the understanding of how social media contributes to the normative goals of the public sphere.
Much of the research at the nexus of digital media and the public sphere focuses on extraordinary issues or events such as revolutions or electoral politics, leaving a gap as to how everyday political issues are discussed and debated in a hybrid media context. This research addresses that gap by examining a non-sensational policy issue – bikesharing – in two public sphere arenas. Quantitative and qualitative content analyses of print media and Twitter texts are applied to compare and contrast these two mediums across three cases. This comparative approach using the German, North American, and Spanish cases offers insight into the role of social media in different traditional media systems.
The findings indicate that while framing of the issue of bikesharing in print media is commonly reflected on Twitter, the reverse is seldom the case. Frame and issue spill-over from Twitter to print media was only found in the North American case, where the meaning of bikesharing represents the largest departure from the status-quo. Political and cultural contextual factors led print media frames to go unchallenged on Twitter in the Spanish case and the debate was channeled through a stronger political logic in the German case.
There was an observed preference for obtrusive issue attributes when legitimizing positions for or against bikesharing on Twitter, suggesting a bias for experience-based rationale on that medium. Social media does not have a unified effect on the legitimacy and efficacy of the public sphere, rather political and cultural factors influence the role of social media in public debate as well as the efficacy of social media to help impact political decisions.
Business voices often oppose a redistribution of urban traffic space in favor of active transport modes. We surveyed 145 traders about their perceptions of their customers’ mobility behavior and interviewed 2,019 shoppers on two shopping streets in Berlin, Germany. Our results indicate that traders overestimate car use and underestimate active transport. Further, potential customers more often live close to their shopping destinations than retailers perceive. Our findings can help explain the opposition of local business to sustainable transport infrastructure and offer a knowledge basis for better informed decision-making regarding urban land use in cities.
There are various approaches to facilitation in deliberative mini-publics, yet the scholarly literature remains relatively underdeveloped in identifying which approaches to facilitation are useful in achieving certain deliberative goals. This article compares facilitation approaches based on their potential to achieve different deliberative goals by examining three cases of deliberative mini-publics on urban transformations in the German city of Magdeburg. All three mini-publics were given the same task but were implemented using a particular approach to facilitation: (1) self-organized; (2) a multi-method approach; and (3) dynamic facilitation. We analyzed video recordings and surveys conducted among participants and found that differences in facilitation influence the process of deliberation in numerous ways. While deliberation can happen without a facilitator, certain deliberative goals can be better achieved when the process is professionally facilitated. More stringent or involved facilitation, however, may not serve every purpose of deliberation equally. There are trade-offs when designing, convening, or facilitating deliberative processes, and no approach fits all mini-publics. We conclude the article by identifying the implications of our findings for the scholarship and practice of citizen deliberation in structured forums and beyond.
'%3e%3cpath fill='%23012169' d='M0 0v30h60V0z'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='6' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='4' d='m0 0 60 30m0-30L0 30' clip-path='url(%23b)'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23fff' stroke-width='10' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3cpath stroke='%23C8102E' stroke-width='6' d='M30 0v30M0 15h60'/%3e%3c/g%3e%3c/svg%3e)