Mobility in Swiss cities

Public transport remains the foundation of urban mobility, especially during rush hour. Buses, trams and trains are used by the majority of people, while cars play a more or less central role depending on the city. Bicycles are particularly popular in cities with well-developed infrastructure, while walking dominates leisure travel.

Despite the advantages, some people deliberately choose not to use bicycles or e-bikes – mainly due to safety concerns, heavy traffic, a lack of infrastructure or because they prefer other modes of transport. Walking is not an option for everyone either – long distances and lack of time are common reasons for not walking. At the same time, the study shows that many people can imagine switching to public transport more often in the future or walking more, while e-scooters will continue to play a niche role.

Overall satisfaction with the traffic situation is high, although this varies greatly between cities. In particular, well-functioning public transport and attractive conditions for pedestrians and cyclists ensure high satisfaction ratings, while traffic jams and overloaded infrastructure are frequently cited points of criticism.

The situation is particularly acute during rush hour: in many cities, roads and public transport are overcrowded, which reduces overall satisfaction. The impact of traffic in residential areas is also perceived differently depending on the city – ranging from noise and traffic congestion to problems with illegally parked bicycles and scooters.

The design of public spaces and road safety are key issues. Many cyclists and pedestrians feel unsafe, especially at junctions and on main roads. At the same time, there is clear majority support for traffic-calmed shared spaces, which are intended to improve the distribution of road space.

All cities want more space for bikes, pedestrians and public transport – but depending on the city, some people also want more space for motorised traffic. Satisfaction with existing speed limits is generally high, but in some cities many people are calling for further reductions in the maximum speed in residential areas.

The use of bike rental services is increasing, especially in cities with dense networks. A quarter of respondents already use such services, and the majority consider them useful.

The situation is different for e-scooters: while they enjoy a certain popularity among younger people, most respondents tend to view them critically. Stationless systems in particular are relatively unpopular. At the same time, mobility hubs are seen as a possible addition to the transport network, but so far they have hardly led to any fundamental change in car use.

When it comes to future investments, many agree that sustainability and liveable urban spaces are top priorities. There is particular demand for more green spaces along roads, better cycling infrastructure and attractive neighbourhoods with less motorised traffic.

In certain cities, there is strong support for modernising main roads, for example by converting car lanes for public transport or bicycle traffic, while in other cities, the expansion of public transport is considered particularly important. The desire for more environmentally friendly and safer mobility is growing – but implementation varies from city to city.

The study on mobility in Swiss cities was conducted by gfs.bern on behalf of the Conference of Cities on Mobility and 17 participating cities and urban municipalities. The data was collected between 28 October and 22 December 2024 and is based on an online survey of 15,372 residents.

The sample was quota-weighted by age and gender and weighted according to the demographic characteristics of the cities. A representative random selection of respondents was drawn from the population registers of the respective cities. In Zug and the neighbouring municipalities, addresses from an address broker were used.

The statistical error of the survey is ±1.1 percentage points with a 95 per cent probability. In cities with a smaller sample size, the margin of error is slightly higher.