By Elena Colli (GO-Mobility)

OK Boomer?

A generational perspective on mobility

In recent years, references to generations have increasingly entered public debate. Terms such as Gen Z, Baby Boomers, and Millennials are now part of everyday language, starting with the catchphrase “OK Boomer,” which made this generation famous (despite itself) in 2019. These categories have often been used to study trends related to specific cohorts and verify their progress over time.

One well-known fact about the Millennial generation in the Western world, for example, is the significant decline in car ownership and use compared to the two previous generations. But what is the reason for this decline? Is it a change in behavior dictated by a voluntary choice, confirming the narrative that describes Millennials as “more sustainable”? Or are we facing a temporary phenomenon, dictated by other factors? In this month’s article, we will attempt to answer these questions with the research “Towards a sustainable mobility transition? A cohort approach for Millennials and Baby Boomers in Europe,” which combines different data sources [1] and methods of analysis [2] in an attempt to provide an answer.

[1] European Commission dataset on longitudinal surveys (EU-SILC) and large-scale travel surveys – EU28 basis; focus groups conducted in Italy.

[2] Quantitative (secondary data analysis, logistic regression model) and qualitative (text analysis).

Why a generational approach?

In a rapidly urbanizing world, managing urban mobility is increasingly crucial. As is well known, a large part of greenhouse gas emissions (24% in 2018) is due to the transport sector, which is the only sector whose share of emissions continues to grow, and at a fairly rapid pace (Figure 1). Significant advances in technology are not enough to offset the environmental impact of the growing demand for global mobility. For this reason, urban mobility policies have (also) focused on another aspect for several decades: changing mobility behaviors. This translates into the implementation of policies aimed at reducing the number of trips and shifting the demand for mobility from private cars to other modes considered more sustainable (active mobility, public transport, sharing, and so on).

Figure 1 – Trend in greenhouse gas emissions in the EU since 1990. UNFCCC data processed by Transport & Environment

Behavior, in turn, is dictated by a combination of various psychological, socio-economic, demographic, and territorial factors. According to a typically sociological approach, what individuals do is never attributable to mere personal choices, but is inevitably shaped by the context: the social structures in which they are immersed, the characteristics of the territory that surrounds them, their personal history, the historical period they are living in, and so on.

For these reasons, it is useful to use a generational approach. First of all, because, in order to have an impact, behavioral changes must be large-scale and long-lasting. Studying them from a generational perspective allows us to go beyond the “static snapshot” that is normally obtained with analyses based on cross-sectional sampling (so-called cross-sections, for example, comparing age groups over a given period of time). On the contrary, a longitudinal study helps to identify trajectories and understand possible future trends. In fact, ‘generation’ refers to a group of people born in the same time frame, who therefore share the same life trajectory. It means living through the same historical period, sharing the same historical, social, and economic events and phenomena at the same age.

Two generations compared: Millennials and Baby Boomers

The study in question set out to understand how much the Millennial generation in the EU is contributing to a transition towards more sustainable mobility styles, using a comparative approach from both a generational (Millennials and Baby Boomers) and territorial (geographical clusters and levels of urbanization) perspective.

But why these two generations in particular?

The so-called Baby Boomers owe their name to the demographic boom that characterized the Western world after World War II: they are people born between 1946 and 1964. They are the first generation to grow up in increasingly car-centric urban systems, at the height of the industrial and symbolic boom of the sector (in the century of the car, as the 20th century is often referred to). They were the protagonists of a prolonged and persistent growth in driving licenses and the use and ownership of cars. For this reason, they are characterized by a high dependence on private cars and a high number of motorized trips, which persist even after retirement into old age, unlike the previous generation (due, among other things, to better economic and health conditions).

Figure 2 – Birth rate index in the EU28 (1957=100). Source: author’s graphic elaboration on Eurostat and UN data processed by Istat

On the other hand, we have the so-called Millennials, generally understood to be the generation that first came of age in the new millennium, and which in this case is considered to have been born between 1983 and 2000 [3]. They are essentially the children of the Baby Boomers. However, unlike their parents, this generation has been noted for a steady decline in car use and ownership compared to the previous generation at their age, which has occurred across several Western countries, as reported in a recent article in The Economist. This has led many scholars to ask: are we facing a peak in car use (the so-called “car peak”)? Has its use and ownership reached a point of saturation and is therefore destined to decline globally?

Figure 3 – Factors related to the decline in car use and ownership among Millennials according to the literature

[3] It is important to emphasize that the temporal boundaries defining generations are an analytical construct. They should therefore be interpreted as a “guideline” and a useful tool for analysis, rather than a rigid distinction between categories of people.

To peak or not to peak?

In light of the above, there are two questions to be understood:

• Is it true that Millennials have more sustainable mobility styles and attitudes?
• Is this characteristic part of a generational change that is set to persist over time, or is it due to temporary circumstances?

To answer this question, the mobility behaviors and life circumstances of each generation were investigated, as well as the main dynamics on which modal choice and travel habits generally depend (e.g., residential choice, socioeconomic status, family status, etc.). This was done through a quantitative analysis of data collected through travel surveys and surveys conducted by the European Commission and Eurostat on large samples of the EU population and a series of ad hoc qualitative studies (focus groups) carried out in Italy.

What did we find?

The results confirm that Millennials have less polluting mobility habits than their predecessors. Looking at a ‘snapshot’ of 2018 (Figure 4), Baby Boomers are more likely to choose the car as their main means of transport (60.4%, compared to 46.1% of Millennials), while Millennials are more inclined towards multimodal transport, public transport (especially the train), and bicycles (slightly).

Figure 4 – Modal choice (relating to the most frequent journey). Travel Survey conducted by the Joint Research Center (JRC) of the European Commission (2018) However, in recent years, this trend has been changing direction. Among Millennials, there has been a general increase in car use and ownership and a gradual shift away from large cities to areas with lower density (Figure 5). Although they are more urbanized, the trends show a constant exodus from large cities: as confirmed by the interviews, the process of starting a family is often linked to the choice to move to less densely urbanized areas in order to raise children more peacefully, thereby changing one’s mobility habits and adapting to places that are more dependent on cars.

Figure 5

Looking at what has changed in the behavior of the population surveyed from 2014 to 2018, there has been a significant decline in multimodality and public transport (respectively -26.4% and -38.7% for Millennials). What has gained passengers, especially among Millennials, has been mainly the car (from 40% in 2014 to 46% in 2018). Millennials remain those with a much smaller share of motorized trips, but these are increasingly short motorized trips (3-10km) with only one occupant per car (“solo driving” from 47.9% to 57.2%), which in 2018 saw them reach the levels of their predecessors.

How can we explain these dynamics? The conditions of Millennials are rapidly changing. At the time of the research, most were still in education or in their first job. The average level of income is in fact constantly growing, due to their mass entry into the world of work. However, these are often precarious contracts (among those in work, in 2018 only 64% had a permanent contract, compared to 89.9% of Baby Boomers) and lag behind their parents (Figure 6).

Figure 6

Figure 7 – Trend in gross wages for Millennials (blue) and Baby Boomers (red) between 2008 and 2018. EU-SILC (Statistics on Income and Living Conditions) data processing

In 2018, almost half of Millennials still lived with their parents, although there were huge differences between the various European regions (in Italy, young people leave home at an average age of 30, compared to 21 in Sweden). However, EU-SILC time series show that the process of leaving the family nest en masse to start their own families was accelerating: from around 80% of Millennials living with their parents in 2008 to 50% in 2018, offset by the growth in cohabitation or single-person households.

Figure 8 – Eurostat data – author’s analysis

No car, yes, but for how long? The above points are confirmed by the fact that in 2018 more than half (51.6%) had intentions to purchase in the short term (in the next 6-24 months) and by the constant growth in car ownership, while the number of those who do not own a car for economic reasons is falling (Figure 9). Among those who do not have a driver’s license, in fact, a good 40.6% say they cannot afford one, confirming the mainly economic reasons behind the lack of car use (a group of people who are therefore likely to become car owners as soon as they can afford it). However, the proportion of those who do not have a license because they are not interested in having one or because they prefer other modes of transport remains high (29.15%).

Figure 9

The generational effect

Is the decline in car use and ownership therefore closely linked to a generational effect that affects all Millennials on average, regardless of other factors? Well, no. Or rather, not so much. The application of a logistic regression model to determine the probability of choosing the car as the main means of transport based on a series of variables shows that the factors that most influence the modal choice remain those established in the literature. The lower probability of choosing the car is in fact linked primarily to employment (being a student), the degree of urbanization (high density), social status (low income), and family status (single and without children). However, the top ten factors also include the generational effect: all other conditions being equal, Baby Boomers are still 1.4 times more likely to choose the car than Millennials. The research therefore shows that there is a generational effect (set of values and symbols, education, cultural contexts of growth) in the formation of people who are more or less dependent on the car. However, it also shows that the strongest factors remain the territorial context (economic/cultural, often influenced by the European region in which one lives, as well as the degree of urbanization) and status (income level; being a student). It therefore suggests that car dependency cannot be overcome unless action is taken first and foremost on the car dependency of places rather than people. This means planning cities where freedom of movement does not depend on owning a private car; places where it is desirable and healthy to start families and raise children. Only then, perhaps, will we be able to avoid a new catchphrase from future generations in a few years’ time: “OK Millennial.”

Are we facing a transition towards more sustainable modes of transport?

As their socio-economic status consolidates, car use among Millennials is essentially tending to increase, reaching the level of previous generations. The end result in Europe is a general increase in car use. Currently, Millennials confirm more sustainable mobility styles than Baby Boomers, but trends suggest a gradual alignment with those of their parents, simply a few years later. Considering the changes taking place in their lives, it is therefore likely that their “sustainability” is set to decline. The ‘peak car’ therefore remains far from being reached. The research brought together different data sources and analysis methods, in line with the GO-Mobility approach, which sees the integration of different approaches (traditional and innovative) and the multidisciplinary nature of the team as an opportunity to enrich perspectives and analysis and planning approaches. Secondary analysis of European datasets and a series of interviews show that Millennials are now more urban, and at the time of analysis, often still in precarious economic conditions. But this is not “forever.” Many of them have the idea of a future in less urban areas and/or an inevitable resort to a private car once they leave their education and their parents’ home. However, especially through the interviews, the study highlighted some peculiarities of Millennials that are often linked to a questioning of a car-centered lifestyle that could remain over time, specifically:

• • more “car-free” life experiences abroad or in other cities, given the greater and more widespread opportunities to travel/live in bike-friendly cities, and the difficulty of returning to a car-dependent lifestyle;

• a more pragmatic relationship with the car (from an interview excerpt: “From the point of view of a 19-year-old from Milan… using a car is a hassle”), given a change in status symbols compared to their parents (is the scooter the new sports car?)

• and conflicting, due to an increasingly widespread sense of guilt linked to car use (“despite myself, I travel by car […] and so you will say that I pollute: it’s true. I am privileged and spoiled“)

Figure 10 – Cities and towns mentioned by interviewees, where they have lived and traveled, discovering car-free lifestyles

However, it also emerges how much they are heirs to the choices and systems of values and habits of their parents, from which it is difficult to break free. One example is the ”suburban” lifestyle:

• “It’s nice to realize that in the end, none of us has abandoned the old suburban dream of a house with a garden.”
• “If I hadn’t had a child, I would have stayed in the city. But when you have children, the best thing you can do is raise them in this kind of environment, even if it means having less to do or no public transportation […] I had a wonderful childhood here.”
• “My travel choices depend on the fact that I live with my parents. And that’s not a choice I made. It’s a choice they made. And I’m definitely not going to make the same choice. Well… until I’ve finished paying off my car, I definitely can’t move out of home.”

However, there remains a clear generational gap in the different meanings attributed to means of transport. For example, the parents of the Millennials interviewed often judge bicycles and public transport to be unsafe and/or linked to their own past of deprivation. In fact, they are the ones who encourage their children to get a driver’s license and buy a car (or give them one directly). In light of this, it is also true that Millennials are increasingly passing on to their parents the values most characteristic of their generation, such as concern for the environment or the use of means of transport other than cars: sometimes with good results (a classic example is parents who visit their son or daughter on Erasmus in a big city and are invited to use efficient public transport, which amazes them). In conclusion: let’s dispel the myth that Millennials are more sustainable simply because they are Millennials. What really changes behavior towards more sustainable lifestyles is above all direct experience with efficient and well-functioning alternatives to cars, which render the current model of mobility obsolete and no longer desirable.