At COP28, is Europe’s guiding light actually blinding?

Receive the Transport Brief in your inbox by subscribing here.

At COP28, the global climate conference, the European Union held its own day of transport side-events on 6 December, discussing mobility topics ranging from ramping up sustainable aviation fuel to protecting transport infrastructure from climate change.

However, the prominent gap between Europe’s regulatory approach to climate action and that of other nations raises questions as to what lessons others can practically glean from the EU example.

Earlier this year, I was invited to moderate a session at a large transport event in Barcelona on the role public transport can play in reaching climate goals.

International in focus, the discussion included panellists from Colombia, the Ghanaian municipality of Kumasi, and the Indian state of Punjab, in addition to two European speakers – one from Amsterdam and the other representing a French mobility data company.

During the event, a discussion was sparked on the degree to which fares should be subsidised to encourage drivers to leave their car at home.

On the question of ticket prices, the French speaker argued that completely free public transport is actually a poor choice for most cities, as it tends to attract those who would have walked or cycled rather than driven.

The speaker from Amsterdam also weighed in on whether public money should be used to shape transport choices.

But for those in other parts of the globe, the discussion was close to irrelevant. The situation they face is very different.

Kumasi, for example, lacks a formally regulated public transport network. Instead, there is a “popular” transport system, in which people with private minivans or motorbikes may decide to offer lifts to others for a negotiated price. Some paint the word “taxi” on their vehicle to make it easier to spot.

“We have no formal register of who is engaging in this,” said the representative from the Kumasi municipality. “So even if we wanted to subsidise drivers to make it cheaper to use their service, we wouldn’t be sure we were giving the funds to the right people”.

The situation is similar in many Latin American cities, with an unofficial taxi network filling residents’ mobility needs.

Indeed, the example of Europe – with its well-developed bureaucratic culture, comparatively deep financial reserves, and emphasis on regulation to achieve goals – is alien to billions of people.

The EU’s Transport Day, held as a side event on the margin of the COP28 congress in Dubai, sought to show the global community the progress that Europe is making in cutting emissions from the transport sector.

It put the continent forward as a beacon of mobility climate action, with talks held on issues including green fuels for shipping and aviation, connecting hydrogen valleys, and the role of critical raw materials in future transport.

But the truth is that those without comparable financial clout are unlikely to copy the example of the largest single market in the world.

Europe can afford to dictate that all planes landing in their airports must refuel with their favoured blend of sustainable aviation fuel. Smaller, poorer countries simply cannot (lest they be bullied by the big players).

Europe is right to push the global community to take meaningful climate action (one could argue Europe owes a special debt to much of the developed world after its legacy of colonialism). But that also means recognising that not all nations can afford to take the climate steps of Europe, or even to afford the subject the same political capital.

The challenge for Europe is to meet countries where they are, adapting the knowledge of Europe for a global audience. And, of course, to provide funds so that developing countries can leapfrog the transport mistakes of the past (as embodied by the West), going directly for cleaner options.

Europe must work to take the global community with it on its climate journey. If the EU reaches its net-zero goal as an island, it will not stop the waters rising over its head.

– Sean Goulding Carroll

Mandatory medical checks for driving licences unlikely to survive Council negotiations unscathed

The European Parliament’s Transport Committee made a stir last week when it agreed its position on the driving licence directive update – though to be fair, “agreed” is perhaps a strong word as the final vote was won by just a single vote, demonstrating the gulf between MEPs on the left and right of the committee.

One of the most controversial aspects of the TRAN committee position was the inclusion of mandatory medical checks for those looking to obtain or renew a licence.

The exact nature of these medical checks, as well as who would be qualified to perform them, would be up to member states, but it is expected that an eye check would be required at minimum.

In supporting the measure, the Greens’ Karima Dalli, the lead lawmaker on the file, framed it as an additional safety step that will help to prevent accidents.

However, the centre-right EPP group blasted it as an unacceptable intrusion, making it clear that they will attempt to overturn the measure at plenary.

It all may be a moot point anyway.

In the position of the Council of the EU, which represents member states, mandatory medical checks are also included but with an important opt out clause – countries may apply for a “self-assessment” option, which would likely involve drivers filling in a form declaring themselves fit to operate a vehicle from a medical and mental standpoint.

Not all countries are happy with this. Germany has called the mandatory medical check intrusive and the self-assessment pointless paperwork (though as someone who has gone through the process of registering at a German Bürgerservicezentrum, I am surprised by this stance against pointless paperwork).

So even if the TRAN committee’s stance on obligatory medical checks is agreed during the Parliament’s plenary vote, expect member states to tack on a “self-assessment” derogation option.

– Sean Goulding Carroll

A roundup of the most captivating transport news.

Lawmakers narrowly back mandatory medical checks for EU driving licences

By a single vote, the European Parliament’s transport committee agreed its position on the EU driving licence directive update on Thursday (7 December), supporting controversial provisions that would make medical checks obligatory to obtain a new licence.

EU Council leaves mandatory driving licence medical tests up to member states

EU countries agreed their position on new rules to make driving in the bloc safer on Monday (4 December), backing provisions that would allow member states to choose between mandatory medical checks and “self-assessment” to obtain a drivers licence.

What previous failures tell us about Europe’s green steel ambitions

While Europe has neither the cash bazooka of the United States Inflation Reduction Act, nor the state capitalism of China, the automotive industry can be the lead market to boost Europe’s green steel plans, writes Julia Poliscanova of Transport & Environment.

Danish union joins Swedish colleagues in tug of war with Tesla

Danish transport union 3F Transport has joined the dispute between Swedish union IF Metall and Elon Musk’s Tesla over the latter’s refusal to sign a collective agreement.

EU’s critical minerals act welcome but falling short, say green groups and industry

The EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act, adopted on Thursday (7 December), aims to reduce permitting times for domestic mining and recycling projects but fails to create the broader conditions necessary for companies to make those investments, the industry says – a warning echoed by green activists.

[Edited by Zoran Radosavljevic]

Read more with Euractiv