the case of railways, as a new system, the track, means of transport, operating and safety systems, and interfaces with the surrounding environment had to be considered from the outset. This resulted in a “closed system” with defined and controlled entry and exit points for the transport of people and goods. Motorized private transport, on the other hand, initially developed on the entire existing historical road network, 1. Preliminary remark Paradigm was not a standard term in sciences with a focus on practical application, such as construction or planning disciplines. Due to the rapid technical development of means of transport during the industrialization period and thereafter, it was first necessary to develop the foundations for their infrastructure, legal basis, space requirements, and operating conditions. In which was not designed for the new vehicles and speeds. Over time, adaptation to the demands of cars and car traffic led to an “open system” without controllable entry and exit points, designed according to the individual ideas of various decision-makers across different disciplines and without clear lines of responsibility. This development was largely influenced by the economic interests of the industries involved. This had an impact The Paradigm Shift in Transportation: Progress for Science, but a Revolution for Practice. A summary Paradigm shift, core hypotheses, system behavior, evolution, consequences for practice The concepts of mobility, space-time-speed, and freedom of choice as core hypotheses in motorized transport correspond to our worldview. This paradigm brings with it new problems such as traffic jams, traffic fatalities, climate damage, and urban sprawl. However, technological and cultural development is exceeding the limits of our evolutionary capabilities. The paradigm shift was brought about by insights into system behavior and our own core hypotheses, which have been empirically confirmed. These can be described as scientific progress, but they represent a revolution in practice. Hermann Knoflacher DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0075 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 18 on the research branches and institutes at universities as well as the technical colleges that were gradually established. In the process, existing modes of transport were subordinated to the requirements of car traffic or, in the phase of rapid motorization, were often simply forgotten[1]. As an open system, unlike railways, motorized road traffic was designed by various disciplines. In addition to engineers, these included urban planners, architects, lawyers, and later also spatial planners. They all shared ideas about the motorization of the population, the development of “mobility,” speeds, and the optimization of private car use[2]. The planning and design of facilities and operating conditions were based on experience, successful assumptions, and legal conditions that were only established in the course of motorization in the first half of the 20th century. Driving dynamics and traffic flow were at the center of this sectoral way of working and thinking, which also included legally securing and massively subsidizing the space requirements for passenger cars. “The car is part of the home” was the attitude of teachers and professionals not only in the 1970s, but one that is still reflected in building and garage regulations today. 2. The paradigm of the transport system The unquestioned basic assumptions on which most of today’s (not only) road traffic is based are essentially the following: ƒ Growth in the mobility of the population with increasing prosperity. ƒ Economic benefits of fast transport systems through travel time savings. ƒ Omnipresence and priority of motorized transport. Justifications are primarily derived from the analysis of data such as the relationship between gross national product and the level of motorization[3] as an argument for the growth of mobility with increasing prosperity[4], the individual experience of shorter travel times between source and destination due to higher speeds, which can be used to calculate and justify the benefits of faster transport systems[5], and the population’s desire to own a private car[6]. The legal system for road traffic was designed in accordance with these conditions, so as the technical guidelines that determine the physical design of traffic facilities and operating conditions. The basic assumptions for the design of the transport system, which have also been adopted in teaching and administrative practice, were and are so convincing from individual experience that they have not been questioned and still provide the political justification for the transformation of the world from a people-friendly to a car-friendly one. They can be described as the core hypotheses of transport[7] on which today’s transport system is based. 3. The problem in practice: not everything works as predicted The methods[8] of this paradigm have reduced some of the problems of transport in the industrial society, but they have created new ones, which have been perceived as symptoms and are being mitigated but without system-thinking in mind. Thus, neither the expansion nor the electronic control of traffic signal systems has prevented traffic jams under the existing premises but has instead increased them to new dimensions. Added to this were the problems with general noise pollution[9] from this system, changes in settlement and economic structures[10] and [11] that had not been anticipated, the release of greenhouse gases[12] with serious consequences for climate change[13]. These are terms that do not describe a static state, but processes that have been created by modern technical transport systems. Even such elementary principles as the preservation of human life and health have literally “fallen by the wayside” when more than 1.2 million people are killed in the system[14] and tens of millions suffer serious, sometimes irreversible, damage to their health[15] per year. However, this only concerns the direct effect on life and health and not the indirect effects on the main causes of death in today’s society, such as cardiovascular disease caused by exhaust fumes[16] and traffic noise[17] [18]. One of the best documents on this subject is the book published by Dinesh Mohan in 2014, “Traffic Safety, Sustainability, and the Future of Urban Transportation”[19], which covers a wide range of measures within the old paradigm. At that time, however, the paradigm shift that was fundamentally changing the concepts, views, and responsibilities within the disciplines was already recognized scientifically. 4. The emergence of the paradigm shift has several sources In transportation, too, the paradigm shift did not arise intentionally, but rather from efforts to improve the prevailing assumptions, limits, methods, and procedures. In retrospect, it is clear that the paradigm shift in transportation did not emerge from a single discipline or science, but is supported by research findings from several disciplines and is also linked to practice, where questions arose and continue to arise from doubts and contradictions between expectations and experience[20]. Looking back, the following “roots” can be identified: ƒ Contradictions between urban planners[21] and transport planners[22]. ƒ Contradictions between historical urban structures and the demands of car traffic[23]. ƒ Contradictions between observation and fundamental assumptions about the performance of roads[27] and their geometric dimensions[28]. ƒ Questions in laws[24], ordinances[25] and guidelines[26]. ƒ Discoveries in the data : route consistency, mobility purposes[29] and time consistency[30]. ƒ Discoveries of the effects of fundamental evolutionary laws of behavior[31] , even in the technically altered environment of transportation[32] , and even more importantly the realization of where and how cars affect the human brain[33] : Behavior is structurally determined and therefore the responsibility of those responsible for structural design. ƒ The findings of evolutionary theory and evolutionary epistemology as well as systems theory[34]. ƒ Plausibility and logic[35], forecasting and actual development[36]. This opened up opportunities to test scientific insights into the processes of car traffic as a basis for political decisions and their review through practical implementation. The traditional boundaries between disciplines and even between universities (at that time) could be crossed more easily, at least in Austria, if the resources developed in the mainstream could be used to address new issues. The period between 1970 and 1990 and the political conditions and scientific freedoms of the time were the prerequisites for the development, testing, and verification of those research results that can be described as core hypotheses for the paradigm shift 5. Core hypotheses of the new paradigm Some of the findings from various disciplines were already made more than half a century ago, but the connections were not recognized due to the division of disciplines. For example, Lill’s law of travel, which is well known in transportation, can be traced back to fundamental psycho-physiological laws of behavior developed by Weber-Fechner[37] (1846-1872) in the same century. However, it took several more years before the concept of paradigm shift in transportation emerged in 2005, which was not published until 2016[38]. The technical content, including some of the practical consequences, had already been part of the author’s teaching at the institute since 1975, and the principle was published in a paper in 1985[39]. DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0075 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 19 Paradigm Shift  MOBILITY ing them. Neither the existing paradigm nor the associated methods are questioned. The causes of the problems this creates remain undetected, partly because the repercussions on the transport system occur via other disciplines and sciences that lie far beyond the boundaries of professional perception.[45] Above all, however, the measures resulting from T1 fit in with the ideology of unlimited growth of the global economic system, the consequences of which are practically demonstrable in T2. The new paradigm has proven itself in practice. The new paradigm can therefore be assessed as scientific progress according to the criteria of Kuhn and Lakatos. 7. Why is the paradigm shift in transportation a revolution for practice? Unlike the paradigm shifts in astronomy or physics, which primarily affected the scientific community, these shifts took place in systems that were not designed, planned, or projected by humans, but initially only provided new insights into existing natural systems, from the universe to human health. They expanded the possibilities of technical progress, improved the use of existing resources (agriculture[46]), and facilitated and enhanced human living conditions. In the longer term they also led to changes in power relations, such as the overcoming of feudal rule. The paradigm shift in transportation, on the other hand, affects many familiar relationships that were shaped by the myths of the old paradigm, and thus also the relations between people, working conditions, and the economy. Transport can no longer be treated as a playground for unchecked political decision-making, because scientific progresses are revealing the flaws of the old system and demanding more responsible action. There is no longer any justification for “mobility growth” by replacing environmentally, socially, urban and cli- 6. Is the paradigm shift in transportation a scientific advance? According to Lakatos, the following conditions must be met in order for a sequence of theories to be reconstructed as scientific progress: A newer theory T2 predicts facts that would not be expected from the standpoint of an earlier theory T1 (“theoretically progressive”); Such hypotheses are partially confirmed empirically (“empirically progressive”); T2 can explain why T1 has proven itself empirically so far [40]. In our case, T1 is the old, still prevailing paradigm, and T2 is the new paradigm. T2 not only predicts that traffic jams are caused by the T1 method[41], but can also justify this theoretically. Similarly, the “death of city centres”[42] and urban sprawl[43] or the flaws of the “economy of scale”[44] in economics can also be theoretically justified. The new paradigm is “theoretically progressive” - and not only in these cases. The hypotheses of T2 have been empirically confirmed in many cases. Forecasts on traffic jams, urban sprawl, the decline and/ or revitalization of city centers, economic centralization, employment effects, mobility costs, accidents, environmental pollution, and climate change can be empirically verified in many cases. What were forecasted in T1 can now be partially predicted in T2 based on system behavior. The new paradigm is “empirically progressive.” T2 can explain why T1 has proven itself empirically so far: The measures in T1 relate to the level of symptoms and are successful in the short term. For example, the prediction that congestion will be eliminated by adding more lanes is usually immediately confirmed. However, the mediumand longterm effects of these forecasts are not only neglected; they are often used as a pretext to repeat or intensify the same short-term measure, instead of investigating the underlying causes of the failure and addressmate-friendly, safe forms of transport such as walking, cycling and public transport with environmentally, socially, urban and climate-unfriendly car traffic, which additionally threatens the life and health of the population and restricts their freedom of mobility. Due to the constancy of travel time budgets and equal travel time distributions of individual mobility, no benefit from higher speeds in the system can be rationally justified[47], because these always lead to cost increases directly through expenditure (laws of physics) and indirectly through negative external effects, land consumption, noise, exhaust gases and undesirable structural changes[48]. The economic theory of “economies of scale” is flawed, incomplete and therefore misleading[49]. Taking the real effects into account, on the other hand, leads to the fundamental evolutionary principle of optimizing resources, energy, spatial diversity and resilience. These facts demand new foundations for teaching, administration, planning, politics, and economics. Cause-related solution by separating private parking spaces from human settlements and activities. The attachment of cars to people changes their behavior in such a way that fundamental social (consideration for the free and safe mobility of unprotected road users), civilizational (structures of cities, villages, local jobs, etc.) and cultural ties (sedentariness, environmental awareness, ethical responsibility, polluter pays principle) are altered and even lost. Millennia of experience with pedestrian-scaled and community-oriented environments were not considered in the last century. Safe and healthy living conditions in human settlements are incompatible with the omnipresence of private motor vehicles. It was only through the excessive destruction of human dimensions in the new development areas of the 20th century as a result of the possibilities offered by private car transport that local, regional, and global problems were created, which are becoming increasingly destructive in ecological, social, economic, climatic, and cultural dynamics. The challenge of car-free settlements, villages, and cities cannot be met by declarations, but requires practical measures in the legal, financial, administrative, and political systems with effective sanctions. The problems must be solved where they arise and not by driving away, as has been the case in the last two centuries. In order not to be accused of fundamentalism, it should be emphasized that this is not fundamentally about every car, but about private or privately used cars. It is not about the use of motor vehicles that facilitate the lives of disabled people as a means of mobility, nor about “working traffic.” Reference values System behavior The unit of measurement is the human being. It adapts to the requirements of humans and their Society. The standard speed is that of a pedestrian. Safe diversity and density of functions. Separation of human activities and private parking spaces. Car-free human settlements. Humans in their life phases and environment. “Mobility in space” is purpose-oriented. Constancy of the average number of trips per day. The transport system must be geared towards functional diversity, proximity, social relationships, safety, nature, and a sustainable economy. There is no time saving through speed in the system. Fast means of transport become disruptive factors. In addition to the laws of nature, the biological laws governing living beings, human behavior and the limits of our senses must be taken into account and accepted. The bond between cars and people leads to fundamental changes in individual and systemic behaviour and prevents free choice of mode. Table 1 Core hypotheses of the new paradigm MOBILITY  Paradigm Shift DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0075 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 20 Both account for less than 10% of today’s car traffic and are usually compatible with public transport or can be integrated into pedestrian traffic. 8. Responsibility for the environment as a catalyst for a sustainable and climate-friendly behavior “Catalysts occur in nature in many different ways. In living organisms, almost all chemical reactions that are essential for life are catalyzed (for example, in photosynthesis, respiration, or energy production from food). The catalysts used are usually specific proteins, such as enzymes.” It should be noted that this is a very ancient evolutionary environment in which these processes take place as described and illustrated[50], in which the respective catalyst influences the decisions of the further course. If the result proves successful under the given conditions, it also produces repercussions in the system. This can be seen in many examples in industry, such as the Haber-Bosch process for synthesizing ammonia from the elements oxygen and hydrogen [51]. From the perspective of the new paradigm, the transportation system involves processes in the formation of relationships between living beings and their environment. Under today’s conditions, this environment is mostly artificially altered, having been optimized for cars and car traffic over the last century. As demonstrated in the third core hypothesis, the bonds between people and cars are so deeply rooted in evolutionary terms due to the way parking spaces are arranged that the “activation energy” required to travel by private car is reduced far more than for any other forms of mobility. This, in turn, encourages thinking, planning, projecting, financing, legitimizing, and organizing mobility in favor of private car travel as the “natural” way to meet human needs. Today’s transportation systems thus emerged from the sum of the individual needs of a motorized society, neglecting all other forms of mobility, construction, settlement, administration, and even economic activity. And this is established, defended, and legally secured by alternating feedback from within the oldest evolutionary layer and from outside by the seemingly rational actions of science, research, teaching, administration, industry, the media, and politics. The fact that human rights have fallen by the wayside in the process is no longer even noticed[52]. The new paradigm makes it possible to hold those responsible for reestablishing the catalysts for behavior that is humane, socially, environmentally, and economically compatible, sustainable, and enforceable in a climate-friendly manner. 9. Practical consequences of the paradigm shift When we, as a society, have spent over 100 years building a world and have become accustomed to the individual advantages that are believed to be progress, the difficulty lies in realizing that the system behaves differently than previously assumed. Mobility becomes personand purpose-oriented and thus detached from the means of transport and can be evaluated and accounted for in a largely ideology-free manner using system indicators such as land use, energy consumption, social impacts, etc. Due to the constancy of time spent in mobility, speed is losing its central importance in planning and project management. When one considers the effort that has been made for more than half a century to introduce or reduce speed limits, one can imagine what a revolution this fact means in practice. Even more difficult is to understand the limits of our evolutionary makeup and the emerging interrelationship between our energy consumption and the mobility energy of cars on our oldest evolutionary brain layer and, from there, on all higher levels of our behavior in feeling and thinking. Regaining freedom requires a physical separation of parking spaces and human activities or settlements. 10. Summary of the effects of the paradigm shift The complex effects of the new paradigm affect not only transportation but all related disciplines. Neither urban sprawl nor the decline of city centers and villages is possible with the separation of car parking spaces and the spatial functions of human activities. The goals of spatial planning can thus be achieved. Spatial planning methods that separate functions in space are no longer justifiable. Settlements will once again be supported by vibrant social and economic relationships, enabling them to become sustainable again. Traffic congestion is not a problem, but rather an indication of a demand for car travel that has been created. It is not a cause for concern, but rather a reason to eliminate the causes of this undesirable development in the system. Public transport can be planned and operated at an appropriate level largely without subsidies. Improvement of quality of life through the elimination of noise, exhaust fumes, and accident risks in public spaces. Strengthening of local autonomy and diversity against corporate encroachment. Wherever cars have been removed from cities, they have been filled with life. Wherever this has not been the case, spatial and urban structures are inadequate. These must be remedied, not further concealed by car traffic, as has been the case up to now. Areas of responsibility become visible with the new paradigm, and competencies shift accordingly. Academic curricula must be redesigned. Measures must be realigned, and those that destroy the system must be made visible and sanctioned. Measures must be reviewed for their compatibility with nature, social behavior, system efficiency, and local economic cycles. Morality and ethics thus become part of practical decisions and measures. [53] ▪ REFERENCES: [1] Highway Capacity Manual (1949), “Published in Public roads, vol. 25, no. 10, October 1949. and no. 11, December 1949.” [2] Reichsgaragenordnung (1939), Ordinance of the Reich Minister of Labor of February 17, 1939, on garages and parking spaces (Reichsgaragenordnung - RGaO), dRGBl. I p. 219/ 1939 [3] World Bank (2021), https: / / blogs.worldbank. org/ en/ transpor t / 500 -million -vehicle ques tion-what-will-it-take-china-decarbonize-transport [4] World Bank (2022), Motorization Management for Development. An integrated Approach to improving Vehicles for sustainable Mobility. [5] Holz-Rau, Christian / Scheiner, Joachim (2011), Sicherheit und Reisezeit in der Kosten-Nutzen-Analyse: eine Sensitivitätsanalyse für Nordrhein-Westfalen. In: Transport Policy 18(2), S. 336-346. [6] Soza-Parra, J., & Cats, O. (2023), The role of personal motives in determining car ownership and use: a literature review. Transport Reviews, 44(3), 591-611. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1080/ 01441647.2023 .2278445 [7] Knoflacher Hermann (2017), Road Traffic Engineering, Vol. 61/ 3, Kirschbaum Verlag, ISSN: 0039-2219 [8] Highway Capacity Manuals, 1950 - 2022, https: / / mctrans.ce.ufl.edu/ evolution-of-hcm-methodologies/ [9] Too much traffic noise for one in five Europeans, 2025, EU report. https: / / science.orf.at/ stories/ 3230807/ [10] Roman Nestler (2019), Einzelhandel im Wandel - Entwicklungen in Innenstädten und mögliche Handlungsfelder. Illustriert am Beispiel von Neustadt a. d. Aisch. Seminararbeit in Geografie. https: / / www.hans-riegel-fachpreise.com/ fileadmin/ hans-riegel-fachpreise/ Module/ ausgezeichnete-arbeiten/ hans-riegel-fachpreise-seminararbeit-vwa-2020-nestler.pdf [11] Mattias Kärrholm & Katarina Nylund (2011), Escalating Consumption and Spatial Planning: Notes on the Evolution of Swedish Retail Spaces, European Planning Studies, 19: 6,1043-1059 (PDF) DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0075 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 21 Paradigm Shift  MOBILITY [44] Knoflacher Hermann (1995), „Economy of Scale - Transport Kosten und das Ökosystem” GAIA - Ökologische Perspektiven in Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft, Schweiz, Nr. 4 (1995) S. 100 [45] Knoflacher Hermann, (2017) The role of Engineers and their tools in the transport sector after Paradigm change: From Assumptions and Extrapoletions to Science. Engineering Tools and Solutions for Sustainable Transportation Planning, IGI global. (Chapter 1) [46] Liebig, Justus von, (1840), Die organische Chemie in ihrer Anwendung auf Agricultur und Physiologie, Braunschweig,. [47] Knoflacher Hermann, (1986) „Kann der Straßenbau durch Zeitersparnis gerechtfertigt werden? “ Internationales Transportwesen 38, Ausgabe 6/ 1986, Nov./ Dez. [48] Lee Timothy B. (2020), The donut effect: How the pandemic hollowed out America’s biggest cities. Major downtowns have lost 8 percent of their population since March 2020. https: / / www.fullstackeconomics.com/ p/ the-donut-effect-howthe-pandemic-hollowed-out-americas-biggestcities [49] Knoflacher Hermann, (1995), „Economy of Scale - Transport Kosten und das Ökosystem” GAIA - Ökologische Perspektiven in Wissenschaft und Wirtschaft, Schweiz, Nr. 4 (1995) S. 100 [50] Katalysatoren, Wikipedia https: / / www.schullv. de/ chemie/ basiswissen/ chemische_ gleichgewichte/ katalysator [51] Haber-Bosch-Verfahren, https: / / de.wikipedia. org/ wiki/ Haber-Bosch-Verfahren [52] Knoflacher Hermann, (2025) Kapitel: Ingenieurwissenschaften und Verkehrstechnik: Analyse einer Machtbeziehung, Handbuch Verkehrspolitik, Springer, Wiesbaden. [53] Knoflacher Hermann, Schopf Josef M, eds. (2009), Ethik und Technik, LIT-Verlag, Wien Cover image: © iStock.com/ ilbusca Acknowledgement: Assistant Prof. Bingyu Zhao kindly edited the article. [27] Traffic capacity of major routes. (1983), OECD Scientific Expert Group, Paris [28] Knoflacher Hermann, (1976), Beitrag zum Seitenabstandsverhalten auf offenen Straßen, Straßenverkehrstechnik, Ausgabe 1/ 1976 [29] Konsulentengutachten zum Fahrradverkehr in Wien (1979) ,MA 18, Stadtplanung Wien. [30] Zahavi Jakub 1975 (1974), Travel time budgets and mobility in urban areas , Report prepared for the U.S Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C. and Ministry of Transport, Federal Republic of Germany, Bonn (7) (PDF) Travel Time Budget - Decomposition of the Worldwide Mean [31] Lill’s law of travel, (1889) https: / / de.wikipedia. org/ wiki/ Lillsches_Gesetz [32] Peperna Otto (1982) Die Einzugsgebiete von Haltestellen des öffentlichen Nahverkehrs im Straßenbahn- und Busverkehr, Diplomarbeit, TU Wien [33] Knoflacher H. (1995), Lill’s law of travel - Weber-Fechner’s law of perception and its implications. Mobilita 1995, Bratislava [34] Riedl Rupert, (1975), Die Ordnung der Lebendigen: Systembedingungen der Evolution. Parey, Hamburg/ Berlin [35] Knoflacher Hermann, Nadler Friedrich, (1979) Acceleration of public transport. Consultant’s report commissioned by MA 18, City Planning Vienna [36] Knoflacher Hermann (1977) Knoflacher Hermann (1977) Vorher-Nachher-Studie A20-A3-A23, SO Tangente. Knoflacher Hermann (1971), Wien VO 1. Bezirk, Stadtplanung Wien, MA 18, 1971 [37] Weber-Fechner law, https: / / de.wikipedia.org/ wiki/ Weber-Fechner-Gesetz [38] Knoflacher H. Frey H. (2016), Paradigmenwechsel im Verkehrswesen, Österreichische Verkehrswissenschaftliche Gesellschaft - ÖVG [39] Knoflacher Hermann, (1985), Katalysatoren für Nichtmotorisierte. Erfahrungen - Erwartungen, Selbstverlag, Wien. [40] I. Lakatos, A. Musgrave: Critique and Progress of Knowledge. Braunschweig (1974) (English original 1970). [41] Highway Capacity Manual (1965), Level of Service. [42] Knoflacher Hermann, (1990) Einzelhandel, Verkehrssystemgeschwindigkeit und Einkaufszentren, Salzburger Institut für Raumforschung, Mitteilungen und Berichte, 1-4/ 1990 [43] Behnisch M, Krüger T, Jaeger JAG (2022) Rapid rise in urban sprawl: Global hotspots and trends since 1990. PLOS Sustain Transform 1(11): e0000034. https: / / doi.org/ 10.1371/ journal.pstr.0000034 Escalating Consumption and Spatial Planning: Notes on the Evolution of Swedish Retail Spaces. [12] Verkehrsclub Österreich VCÖ, (2020), Der Verkehr ist auch die größte Quelle für Stickoxidemissionen. [13] Der Verkehr beeinflusst das Klima, (2022), Umweltbundesamt, Österreich, https: / / www.umweltbundesamt.at/ umweltthemen/ mobilitaet/ mobilitaetsdaten/ verkehr-treibhausgase [14] WHO, (2023) Road Traffic Deaths, Fact Sheets, https: / / www.who.int/ news-room/ fact-sheets/ detail/ road-traffic-injuries/ [15] Our World in DATA (2025), https: / / ourworldindata. org/ causes-of-death [16] Yutong Cai, Susan Hodgson, Marta Blangiardo, John Gulliver, David Morley, Daniela Fecht, Danielle Vienneau, Kees de Hoogh, Tim Key, Kristian Hveem, Paul Elliott, Anna L. Hansell (2018) Road traffic noise, air pollution and incident cardiovascular disease: A joint analysis of the HUNT, EP- IC-Oxford and UK Biobank cohorts, Environment International, Volume 114, 2018, Pages 191-201, ISSN 0160-4120, https: / / doi.org/ 10.1016/ j.envint.2018.02.048 [17] Guang Hao, Lei Zuo, Xueqiong Weng, Qiaoyuan Fei, Zugui Zhang, Li Chen, Zengwu Wang, Chunxia Jing, (2022), Associations of road traffic noise with cardiovascular diseases and mortality: Longitudinal results from UK Biobank and meta-analysis, Environmental Research, Volume 212, Part A, 2022, 113129, [18] Pershagen G, Pyko A, Aasvang GM, Ögren M, Tiittanen P, Lanki T, Sørensen M. (2025) Road traffic noise and incident ischemic heart disease, myocardial infarction, and stroke: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Environ Epidemiol. May 28; 9(3): e400. [19] Mohan Dinesh (2014), Safety, Sustainability & Future Urban Transport, Eicher, New Delhi [20] Knoflacher Hermann, (1969), Performance and layout of lanes less than 3 m wide. Road Traffic Engineering, Issue 2/ 1969. [21] Appleyard Donald (1981), Livable Streets, University of California Press, Berkeley, [22] Highway Capacity Manual (2000), Transportation Research Board, National Academy of Science. [23] Jacobs Jane, (1961), The Death and Life of Great American Cities. [24] Knoflacher Hermann, (1976), Law as a cause of accidents, Journal of Traffic Law, Issue 6/ 1976 [25] Reichsgaragenordnung (Reich Garage Regulations) (1939). [26] Knoflacher Hermann, (1975), Wechselbeziehungen zwischen Straßenbau und Verkehrssicherheit, Straße und Verkehr, 10/ 1975 Hermann Knoflacher, Em. o.Univ. Prof. Dipl. Ing. Dr. tech, Research Unit of Transport Planning and Traffic Engineering Institute of Transportation, TU Wien MOBILITY  Paradigm Shift DOI: 10.24053/ IV-2025-0075 International Transportation (77) Collection ǀ 2025 22