FI-PI-LI, Tuscany at a crossroads: young people and the service sector demand more public transport, while the third lane fails to convince

Transport in Tuscany is at a turning point. This is what emerges from the SAMPLE project, carried out by the Institute of Management of the Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies and the North-West Tuscany Chamber of Commerce, which collected 1,995 responses from citizens and 134 from businesses to assess perceptions, preferences and priorities regarding the future of one of the strategic hubs for transport in the Tuscany region: the Florence-Pisa-Livorno motorway. The study evaluated three possible scenarios: Business as Usual, which involves maintaining the infrastructure as it is, with minimal interventions; Road, which involves building a third lane and expanding the capacity of the motorway; and Contextual, which focuses on public transport, cycling and intermodality.

The study reveals an unequivocal verdict: the status quo is by far the least popular scenario. Maintaining the current situation is met with the most outright rejection by citizens and businesses, undermined above all by serious concerns about road safety, which reduce its acceptability by 14%.

The clearest data concerns young people: those under 40 with a high level of education (degree or higher) show marked enthusiasm for the Contextual Scenario (public transport, cycling and intermodality). For them, the acceptability of the scenario reaches around 70%. This preference is not only based on the present, but also on the future mobility of the Tuscany region: more sustainable, safer and more connected.

The position of middle-aged adults with lower educational qualifications is different, as they favour the Road Scenario (construction of the third lane), which in this case has an acceptability rating of 66%. However, as the report points out, investing in the third lane would involve long timescales, high costs and significant environmental impacts, with no possibility of future rethinking. This rigidity contrasts with the modular and scalable approach of the Contextual scenario.

On the business side, the analysis highlights differences linked to different priorities that reflect sector-specific characteristics: 43.9% of manufacturers prefer the road solution, while commerce (46.15%), services (38%), education and healthcare (45.5%) favour enhanced public mobility. Size also matters: the road-based approach grows with the size of the business (from 33.3% of micro-businesses to 62.5% of large businesses).

The project's advanced statistical analyses confirm a key finding: the acceptability of the scenarios is driven by citizens' behavioural habits. Those who habitually use cars are more inclined towards the Road scenario, while those who use bicycles or public transport are the main supporters of the Contextual scenario.

The picture that emerges is clear: Tuscany must decide which economic development model it wants to pursue.

‘We promoted this study,’ emphasises Valter Tamburini, President of the North-West Tuscany Chamber of Commerce, "with a specific objective: to give a voice to businesses and provide politicians with data-based decision-making tools, overcoming the logic of feelings. The verdict is unequivocal: immobility is rejected without appeal. Citizens and businesses demand safety and efficiency, but with different emphases: while industry favours road improvements, the service sector and young people call for a shift towards intermodality. The real challenge today is not to choose sides, but to manage this complexity with a long-term vision that ensures the competitiveness of our entire economic system."

‘Focusing on sustainable mobility solutions has broader potential implications: an efficient transport system attracts talent and generates a virtuous circle between training, business and innovation,’ says Professor Francesco Rizzi of the Sant'Anna School, who led the study with the support of his research team composed of researchers Francesco Ghezzi and Giovanni Gesiot.

Following the demand of younger generations and sectors with higher added value means investing in a more efficient, integrated and sustainable public system. Continuing on the path of traditional infrastructure expansion, on the other hand, entails high risks, irreversible costs and unevenly distributed benefits. The choice is not only technical: it is strategic, social and political.