"Searching for the Grand Paris" "What part did innovation play in the evolution of mobility, and especially cars?" -One thing is sure, technical innovation does play a part. Adapting the Parisian métro system heavily influences mass public transportation. But public transportation is quickly challenged by new modes of transport, which are automobiles, and beyond, motoring. I do not necessarily mean individual cars, but the first step of the generalization which led to the spread of cars, inclusive of many usages, was one that had to do with professional usages and public usages. Public transportation and buses are automobiles in that sense. So this mode of transport started to play a significant part because the criteria for travel comfort and speed were established by modern motoring. So this mode of transport also played an incentive role for all other modes and it made some redundant. Trams were dying because they were not suited for a faster surface network. Its routes and capacity were poorly-suited. So the kind of tram which reemerges in the late 1990s is radically different. It is technically very different. So technical innovation is essential and the main one was motoring. During the early 20th century, it spread through the generalization of its usages, and after World War II, if we jump to some time later, through the generalization of car ownership. But it comes after usage generalization which dates back to before World War I. During the post-war economic boom, there was what I referred to as a 10-year motoring boom, when the ring road was built. Then, during the 1970s, we reached a sort of automobile black hole which could not handle the inner traffic. So the completion of the ring road in 1973 led to the end of the temptation, and some engineer were very tempted, to make everything about cars. But transportation was never exclusively about cars. Automobiles did allow for easier access to the city. Here is an example. One element is often disdainfully and casually dismissed when we make cars out to be only a cause for issues, but they are coveted. It should be taken into account. Paris hosts the first motor show in the world, the Mondial, which has over 1 million visitors. So it reflects this idea of individual desire. We should also remember that cars made the octroi outdated. The octroi existed until 1943. But it became impossible to keep when exchanges with the suburbs increased. Lastly, through major infrastructure with a paradoxical fate and image, the ring road for instance, Paris no longer had the image of a closed-off city. Instinctively, we tend to see the ring road as a new city wall, which is wrong and shows a misunderstanding of the real usage for the ring road, which, through interchanges and gates, opened up the capital more than ever. Paris had never been as open has it has been since it was built. It is obvious that we have to rethink the urban fabric based on its gates, but the ring road should have been considered as a resilient equipment, which it is. The ring road was undoubtedly a major impulsion for the growth of automobile, and for Paris's influence at a local level first, as it is a local road, at a regional, of course, but also national and European levels. Its architects connected it to the main highways which travel through France and connect it to European countries. Automobile is an emotional topic, and as I wrote abundantly about, it causes a kind of schizophrenia. We use automobiles and today, we may wonder how carpooling and the uberization of short-distance travels within the city give automobiles a new impulsion. Automobiles were thought to be archaic but are rejuvenated by new technologies as even the major companies understood. The aspect of desire and individual emancipation is not outdated, on the contrary. So even if the use of cars is outdated in central spaces, and although in Paris, slightly less than half of the population has a car, a lot more do have access to a car, which is an important distinction. We should distinguish between households and people owning a car. Households in Paris are very specific as it is the area with the most childless or isolated households. So some of its usages are specific to it and as soon as we are past the ring road, automobile usages are similar to the rest of the country and much more important. Jean-Pierre Orfeuil and I wrote "Vive la route ! Vive la République !" because roads are not just about individual vehicles and modes of transport, but they can be used by public transportation. The roads are essential to connect territories, and to provide access to activities and employment. At the level of the inner and outer suburbs, automobiles are still relevant. They shaped the urban landscape in Ile-de-France. "Spatial segregation" seems to me too strong a word against the automobile system. Why? Because it became a social mode of transport. And all the debates about diesel bring the issue back on the table. We are ostracizing people who need cars because they have no alternative, because they do not have what I call provocatively town center mobile gadgets, which are aimed at wealthy inhabitants such as all sharing systems, which are not economically valid on the scale of the Grand Paris. We should tread carefully because if history worked rationally, cars would have disappeared from cities. The desire for this object has to be taken into account. Then, we have to choose the fate of the budding Grand Paris, but there are pockets of resistance. Historical and touristic Paris still exists, but it is different from the Grand Paris and its industrial activities.
