Is the right to mobility a right to the city? Examining a well-accepted planning paradigm

Abstract

In many countries mobility is one of the pillars of public policies for urban development. The “right to mobility” has been assimilated to the very concept of the “right to the city” put forward by Henri Lefebvre a half century ago. However, based on recent surveys, the present paper intends to show that a greater offer of mobility can have the opposite effect of increasing the economic dependence of poor peripheries, thus contributing to the phenomenon of socio-spatial segregation. To show this perverse effect of mobility, we use the results drawn out from case studies located in the Metropolitan Region of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. In this context, the areas with the greatest mobility offer correspond to those that are now more dependent and emptied of employment and daily urban life. This greater accessibility has the effect of transforming these better served areas into dormitory peripheries. In contrast, other areas, with much less mobility offer, are able to avoid this direct competition with the city center. In conclusion, the paper proposes a necessary revision of the concept of mobility as a foundation for urban development which became even more pressing under the current COVID-19 crisis.