What continuum exists between social mobility and geographical mobility?

In this interview, Margaux Nebout tells us about the link between social mobility and geographical mobility.

By adopting an urban perspective, I was able to make an initial observation: in the space of several years, we have moved from an offer mainly centred on public transport to a highly developed offer in terms of cyclability.

By trying to shift the focus towards an experience in looser territories, we have gone from the ease of travelling by car to a more complex situation relating to the question of the cost of travel and therefore of purchasing power. Ultimately, the question is how do people who travel manage to get by and manage to travel from point A (where they live) to point B every day? Point A has to be within their housing budget and their purchasing power. As for point B, they already have to have a job and be able to get there properly.

What struck me when reflecting on the current debate is that we now have too much of a tendency to want to set urban and rural against each other. Whereas they both adopt a fairly individualistic point of view. For example, there is the cyclist in the city who sometimes doesn't care about road safety or red lights. Whereas the motorist in a medium-sized town or village will say, "Urban ecology, OK, but I need to get to work".

How do we go about reconciling these opposing positions today, and how do we manage to find common ground in a mobility project? That's what strikes me a lot today, I feel that we have lost the sense of common ground in the issue of mobility. Personally, I don't take the metro much anymore, so I'm quite an individualist when it comes to travelling. In the same way that someone who travels by car doesn't have this commonality. Transport is therefore no longer a place of commonality, or how can it continue to become one?

This equation also links to urban design, on how to make people want to use public transport again.

Watch Margaux Nebout 's complete interview >