Berlin is the dirtiest city in Germany in terms of air quality. The height of its particulate matter figures can exceed 20 to 40 times the EU’s maximum thresholds [1]. The realisation of these alarming figures was accelerated by the Dieselgate scandal, which exposed diesel cars as one of the key contributors to the city’s bad air pollution. So, what has Berlin done to address this public health issue?
Well, to put it blunt, their response essentially disregarded the health of the public while avidly displaying their close alliance with automobile companies under Angela Merkel’s instruction [1]. With Germans being notoriously known for their thriving automobile industry, Berlin interrogated the European Commission regarding their Nitrogen Dioxide pollution limits and attempted to negotiate on the thresholds of this regulation [2]. It took a combined grassroots effort of several environmental campaigners to sue the government and apply political pressure for the state to address the breaching of EU emission regulations. Such involvement signified the important role of non-governmental organisations in addressing the governments discursive strategies to avoid policy implementation. After a court ruling in 2018, Berlin and was given the ability to ban diesel cars [3]. The video linked below will tell you more about the diesel ban more generally.
Despite their disturbing levels of air pollution, the decision to not implement a blanket ban across the city meant that a number of other measures were taken to ensure air pollution is kept low. These include a reduction in speed limit, a 50% increase in parking fees and a ban of old diesel cars on several roads in the city centre [4]. What’s interesting to note is the collusive actions of the state and the auto industry, and how that’s resulted in the requirement of legal action to induce policy formation. It depicts how power relationships are unequal in the facilitation of environmental change. It also reiterates the idea that governance is not just a governmental process, and is a strong example to show that collective action can result in some forms of environmental justice. The actions of non-political organisations have encouraged wider policy formation and political action which addresses the varying levels of exposure of Berliners to pollutants in the city. For example, the city has begun implementing improvements to public transport infrastructure to further promote a reduction in particulates and Nitrogen Dioxide levels [4]. This is a theme I dedicated a blog post to, and can be found on the homepage.
Overall, this shows the complications of ensuring effective environmental governance and the complex interactions involved in order for it to happen. It shows how the governments vested interest in the automobile industry can supersede the safety and quality of life of Berliners. However, the grassroots efforts explored operate as a collective to enforce political pressure on the federal government and undertake effective checks and balances. As shown in the video, these groups of campaigners can result in the government being sued and taken to court, thus highlighting the strength of collective governance. It is important to note that such actions are underpinned by democracy and freedom of speech, which facilitate this ‘bottom up’ approach. In terms of the future, I’d expect to see the gradual phasing out of diesel cars in Berlin, which will work in conjunction with the projected investment into Berlin’s public transport infrastructure.
Here are the references used:
[1] – https://berlinspectator.com/2020/01/11/berlin-air-quality-improved-particulate-matter-level-drops-1/
[2] – https://www.dw.com/en/eu-takes-germany-to-court-over-air-pollution/a-42351552
Urban Political Ecology UCL 