Spillover Effect Details
- Policy
-
Swiss Roads Initiative
- Alternative
-
A1 Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Promotion Initiative
- Dimension
- Infrastructure
- Criteria
-
- Resilience to climate risks
- Time Frame
- 0
- Score
-
- PositiveImpact
- Promoting non-motorized transport could lead to healthier lifestyle choices for individuals, enhancing public health and reducing healthcare costs in the long term. It could also lessen the carbon footprint and contribute to the overall sustainability goals of Switzerland, preserving a cleaner environment for future generations.
- NegativeImpact
- The A1 Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Promotion Initiative could potentially lead to reduced investments in critical infrastructure expansion that may still be required to handle existing traffic volumes. It might also result in insufficient support for daily commuters relying on automobiles, creating disparities in transit accessibility and further marginalizing certain communities, especially those not served by bike infrastructure.
- Description
- While the A1 Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Promotion Initiative has noble intentions to alleviate traffic congestion and environmental impact, its overall effectiveness may fall short compared to other alternatives such as smart traffic management and integrated public transport enhancements. These alternatives offer more immediate and comprehensive solutions to current transportation challenges without risking the alienation of the worker class reliant on the A1. Considering three potential failures of the initiative, firstly, the infrastructure for cycling and micro-mobility may not be fully developed in time to meet immediate demands, causing continued congestion. Secondly, the promotion of cycling could lead to safety concerns if infrastructure is not adequately designed. Finally, the initiative may not significantly change commuter behavior due to a lack of awareness or reluctance to shift from traditional transport, leading to underutilization and wasted investment. Thus, it receives a score of 'bad' for current impact and ranks poorly against viable alternatives that address immediate infrastructure needs without neglecting essential transit requirements.