The Economist - UK (2019-06-01)

The EconomistJune 1st 2019 Europe 31

T

herainclearsandthelavishopen-

ingceremonycanbegin.Princesand

presidents,princessesandregentsare

greeted,dancerstwirlandstompandan

Olympicflameislitatopa 17th-century

tower.ForathletesfromEurope’snine

smallestcountriesthegames,which

openedintheMontenegrinresortof

BudvaonMay27th,aretheirchanceto

wingold.It istheonlygroupofcountries

whereCyprusisa superpowerandLiech-

tenstein,whichhasnocoast,isa serious

competitoratbeachvolleyball.

TobeeligiblefortheGamesofthe

SmallStatesofEurope,yourcountry

needsanOlympicCommitteeanda

populationoflessthana million.“But

whoiscounting?”laughsJanezKoci-

jancic,presidentoftheEuropeanOlym-

picCommittees.Turksfromnorthern

Cyprusdon’ttakepart;if theydid,Cyprus

wouldbewelloverthelimit.A majority

ofMonaco’sathletesareactuallyFrench

buttoqualifymustliveinmunicipalities

neighbouringtheprincipality.

TheVatican’spriestswouldliketo

participate,aswouldtheFaroeIslanders.

Butalthoughtheformerisindependent,

thePopehasnoOlympicCommitteeyet.

TheFaroesarepartofDenmark.

“Olé,allezMonaco!” whoopsthecrowd

astheirbeach-volleyballplayersgetone

overtheMaltese.A six-carmotorcade

purrstoa haltandouthopstheprinci-

pality’sPrinceAlbert,sportinga bright

orangeteamshirt,tocongratulatehis

players.Theyarecold,andthesandis

sludgy.Ina nearbysportshalltheIce-

landershavebroughta drummertowhip

upsupportastheyplaytheMontene-

grins,whotaketheirvolleyballextreme-

lyseriously.Besidetheseathesoundof

genteelclonksaccompaniesa knife-edge

bowlsmatchpittingAndorraagainst

Luxembourg.

Thegameshavebeenheldeverytwo

yearssince1985.Thisyeartheyhavecost

€2.5m, andinvolve 835 athletes.Mostof

Europe’smicrostatesgetgoldmedals

onlyforsolvingtrickytaxproblemsfor

theirwealthyresidents,butthegames

givetheirathletesa chancetocompete

ona moreevenplaying-field.Still,Gian

PrimoGiardi,thepresidentoftheSan

MarinoOlympicCommittee,makesclear

thereisa gulfbetweenwhathecallsthe

citystatesandthe“big”countrieslike

MontenegroandLuxembourg.Allin-

volvedbelongtoa mateycirclethough.

AfterBudvamanywillmeetagainin

threeweeksinBelarus,where,atthe

EuropeanGames,theywillcompetewith

therestofEuropeandgobacktowinning

onlytheveryoccasionalmedal.

Smallisbeautiful

Europe’smini-Olympicgames

BUDVA

Europe’stinieststatessquareoff

C

oncerned aboutpollution and con-

gestion, a growing number of local gov-

ernments are trying to reduce the number

of drivers in Europe’s big cities. Some, like

London and Stockholm, have imposed

congestion charges to discourage driving

during peak hours. Paris has tried banning

cars from driving on certain days, depend-

ing on whether they have even or odd num-

ber plates. Perhaps the most ambitious

plan to curb cars comes from Oslo.

The most visible change in Norway’s

capital has been the removal of public

parking. Late last year, the government re-

moved some 700 parking spaces from the

city centre, replacing them with benches,

bicycle docks and more pavement. The

mere 50 or so spots that remain are largely

reserved for handicapped residents and lo-

cal businesses that rely on deliveries.

Another big change has come in the

form of zoning reform. Some roads in the

city centre have been closed off to private

cars; others have been changed so that traf-

fic can only flow in one direction. Enforce-

ment has been lax, though. The city gov-

ernment has placed signs informing

drivers of the new rules, but not everyone

has paid them much heed. It did not help

that Google maps was rather slow to take in

the new laws. The city council is due to vote

on further reforms later this summer.

Oslo’s plans have often been billed as a

“car ban” by the press and driving enthusi-

asts. This overstates the magnitude of the

changes. For one thing, the city’s new anti-

car policies mainly affect only the compact

city centre. Moreover, cars are hardly

banned—walk through the streets of Oslo

today and you will find there are still plenty

zipping about.

The reforms have not come easily, how-

ever. Norway’s conservatives are deeply

wedded to the idea of car ownership, and

shopkeepers worry that fewer cars might

mean fewer customers. It is still too early to

assess how effective the new measures

have been. Still, early data show that pedes-

trian traffic in the city centre was up by 10%

in the fourth quarter of 2018 over a year ear-

lier, which suggests the reforms are work-

ing as intended.

Hanna Marcussen, vice-mayor for ur-

ban development and a member of the

Green Party, notes that Oslo’s most success-

ful shops are on the high street, where

most customers are pedestrians anyway.

The government is busy compiling tax re-

cords to measure the economic impact of

its reforms. Research on Stockholm’s con-

gestion-pricing scheme finds that the

benefits from factors such as shorter travel

times and safer roads far outweigh the fees

paid by drivers.

Oslo’s new traffic policies represent a

rare break for the Green Party. Although the

left has dominated Norway’s national poli-

tics since 1927, it is actually the Conserva-

tives who have governed Oslo for most of

the past three decades. A change came in

2015, when the city made a leftward turn.

The Labour and Socialist parties form the

biggest coalition on the city council, but

they were only able to take power with help

from the Green Party, giving it extra politi-

cal clout.

The fact that the city’s efforts to curb

traffic have been so controversial has

forced the government to take an incre-

mental approach, constantly negotiating

with suspicious business owners. Local

elections are due in September, but the

Greens are confident they will stay in pow-

er. Ms Marcussen likens her government’s

traffic reforms to Norway’s public-smok-

ing ban, which was enacted in 2004. Many

grumbled before the law was passed, but

few today would clamour to let people

smoke in pubs again. 7

OSLO

Norway’s capital curbs cars

Traffic policy

An enemy of the

people-carrier