Plenty of Publibike bikes are suddenly missing. The council is furious. Barbara Emmenegger, you are familiar with social phenomena in cities. What happened?
In the end, Publibike eventually took the bikes out of circulation, without knowing exactly how many of the bikes were missing.
That is not true: the locks were easy to crack. That spoke in no time …
Yes, that is really remarkable – from a distance, almost funny.
Maybe for you. It is a fiasco for Publibike and the city.
If a lock is so easy to crack, there is a temptation to do it too. But I can not give you a quick answer. To do that, one should first talk to those who have stolen a bicycle. Are they individual perpetrators? Were there gangs on the way or was it even a form of "Reclaim the Street"?
Are not you serious?
It would be a possibility. Publibike actually claims public space. In Zurich, where I live, there were also these bikes from the O-bike from Singapore, which suddenly stood in the public space.
The city council member Ursula Wyss denounces the lack of respect for public goods. Is that it?
The question is how the public interest is defined. Is a Publibike bicycle included? The PostBus subsidiary does an enterprise by parking bicycles in the public space, which is public property.
Do you justify thefts with them?
No of course not! But I think it is wrong, if now from the side of the city and the postbus deliberately put forward the moral index finger. In my opinion, a step back would be good to analyze the situation further. The phenomenon can be used to think about what is public
Goods and spaces are and how we treat them.
You criticize that the administration says what works and what does not?
An important question is actually who defines that. But I have good experiences with larger cities such as Bern or Zurich. Here we think carefully about what public space is and how it should be designed. New ideas are used to involve the population in these processes.
Let's stay with the public ground: typical urbanites, typically Bern, is another reaction that was often heard. What do you answer?
Those who want to interpret the incidents around Publibike as proof of a progressive decline in morale in the cities are wrong. 95 percent of all interactions are absolutely unproblematic. Surprisingly, very little happens despite the many people in a small space. My observations in different cities show that conflicts are rare.
The theory of "broken windows" is more pessimistic: garbage attracts waste, where rules are violated, but it also animates others. Do not trivialize too much?
The catch of this theory is that it could never be confirmed empirically. It was founded in America in the 1880s and became a leading slogan by the then mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani.
Does: with hardness and cleanliness for more safety?
Exactly. "Zero Tolerance" caused many setbacks, such as the resurgent stigmatization and exclusion of colored people. However, the number of serious crimes was demonstrably not reduced on the basis of zero tolerance, but because of the economic revival.
The theory does not have to be measured on the basis of drastic examples: in Bern, the "Casablanca" campaign covers clean facades.
Behind it is the opinion that a graffiti animate another nozzle to imitate. Recent research shows that this tends to be true, but not everywhere. Above all, the conclusions of the theory are always wrong: that would result in a downward spiral, leading to more serious crime.
What do you think of more video surveillance for prevention?
Cameras are certainly not a panacea. For example, there is no evidence that the near-national monitoring of the number of crimes would have changed anything.
Red-green governments like Bern do it differently: they provide streets and squares with chairs, even billiard tables. Is that better?
Yes. The question is, how do you do that? When people are involved in the design, it also reduces the risk of damage. Recording and interaction are more effective than any surveillance camera.
In fact, the red chairs from Ursula Wyss are clearly less stolen than bicycles.
This also corresponds to the experiences with the seats at the Sechseläuteplatz in Zurich.
How far does the interaction go? Do you have to accept that an old bank suddenly appears?
No. The public space is not a storage place.
Then a parking order is needed?
I would not say that. But it needs more and more discussions and negotiation processes.
Recently the ETH city researcher Christian Schmid suspected in the "Bund" fear of urbanity, the unspeakable behind such actions. In the end there is something small-bourgeois behind.
That is too much for me. For example, I think the chairs at Sechseläutenplatz are very positive. They encourage spontaneous conversations. But I also have a reservation: the design and stimulation of public space by Buvetten should not lead to even more marginalization of marginalized people, but to their integration. Good standards must be measured on the basis of this claim.
Let's go back to the Publibikes. Everything was useless here. In the end, better locks must come here – so more safety. Does the project work afterwards?
I hope so. Because Publibike won a public tender, the bicycles in the public space are better legitimized in my opinion. This is in contrast to the now missing O & # 39; Bikes in Zurich. But it would be naïve to believe that nothing would be stolen in a furnished city.
(The federal government)
Created: 28.08.2018, 06:59 clock