Karin Neergaard, David Scotney, Ilse
Vleugels & Carina Aschan
Programme• Introduction• Schemes for reviewing city performance• Max Q – the swedish experience
• Break-out Groups• Feedback from Groups
• Open floor• Conclusion
Programme• Introduction• Schemes for reviewing city performance• Max Q – the swedish experience
• Break-out Groups• Feedback from Groups
• Open floor• Conclusion
Introduction – what?The mobility challenge for cities –
increasing traffic, chronic congestion, air and noise pollution, increased traffic accidents
against a background of global warming and the need to reduce carbon consumption
Need to alter the balance of priorities from motorised vehicles to more sustainable and active modes
.......The EcoMobility SHIFT project is establishing a process – to help cities to put a process in place to make the change to measure the effectiveness of the change to compare their achievements with other cities ..........which will raise the international status of
successful cities!
Introduction – who?An activity of the Global Alliance for EcoMobility Co-funded by the European Agency for
Competitiveness and Innovation (EACI) - part of its Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) program
Taken forward by eight partners: ICLEI - Local Governments for Sustainability, Edinburgh Napier University, Mobiel 21, Traject, Trivector Traffic, I-CE – Interface for Cycling Expertise, Municipality of Burgas and Municipality of Miskolc
Programme• Introduction• Schemes for reviewing city performance• Max Q – the swedish experience
• Break-out Groups• Feedback from Groups
• Open floor• Conclusion
Ilse Vleugels Mobiel 21
Prerequisites for the scheme? A widely recognized & highly valued Ecomobility
label for urban areas A user friendly Quality Management Scheme for
mobility departments in local authorities so that they can understand where/why they are performing well and how they can improve
So, the scheme should ideally:Cover process, outputs and outcomesBe dynamic (change related) & static (measuring achievements)
Allow for comparison/benchmarkingAward labels to recognise achievements in process, outputs
and/or outcomes
Does this scheme already exist?
• Desktop review of about 25 schemes • Focus on different aspects, e.g. use of
indicators, functioning of QMS, labelling mechanisms, audit procedures, popularity
• Look at transport sector and beyond • Expert interviews
Inspiring list for SHIFT scheme ..
Where? Scope Growth/ static?
Process/Outputs /
Outcomes?
Bench-markin
g?
Label?
1. Car-dependency-scorecard UK Transport Static Output/outcome Yes No
2. Siemens Megacities index
Worldwide46 cities Transport Static Output/outcome yes None
3. PAS500 UKCompany
Travel plans
Static Process/output/Outcome yes
Gold-Silver-Bronze
4. Ecodynamic Company label
Brussels 70 companies
Ecomana-gent Static Process/output/
Outcome3-2-1 stars
5. BypadEU 21 countries/>100cities
Cycling Growth Process/output no Certificate
6. Traffic safety audit
Sweden43 cities
Traffic safety Growth/static Process/output/
Outcomes yesNo but 1 to 5 star
rating7. Cité de L'Energie-EnergiestadtEurop Energy Award
Switz EU (>800cities)
Energy use Growth/static Process/Output yes
‘Gold’ +‘Cite de
L’Energie’
8. MaxQ EUMobility manage-
mentGrowth Process No No
Traffic Safety “culture”
Traffic safety “standard/stat
us”1. Actual level of traffic safety, (accidents,..)
- 1,5(3)
2.Organisation and steering, (Strategy on road safety, Goals/indicators, Action plan, Responsibility, Co-operation within the municipality, Monitoring and evaluation)
3,5(7) -
3.Planning 1,5(3) -4.Traffic planning, traffic safety measures and local traffic regulations
1(4) 5(13)
5.Maintenance of infrastructure 1,5(3) 2,5(5)6.Vehicles, journeys, person transport and goods transport
1(4) 2(4)
7.External cooperation 3(4) -Total points 10,5(25) 11(25)Total stars (out of 5 possible) ** **
Process:-Standard questionnaire on efforts & standards in place-Analysis of quantitative data (accident statistics)-36 indicators in 7 categories-Site visit with individual interviewsLead by external consultant
Traffic safety audit
Existing schemes.................
Review report available from http://www.ecomobility.org/shift/achievements/
Programme• Introduction• Schemes for reviewing city performance• Max Q – the swedish experience
• Break-out Groups• Feedback from Groups
• Open floor• Conclusion
Karin Neergaard, Trivector TrafficCarina Aschan, Sustainable Travel Umeå Region
• Lund, ”test- audit”, 2009
• Region of Umeå, 2010 & 2011
• Varberg, 2010
• Helsingborg, 2011LundHelsingborg
Varberg
Umeå
MaxQ – 4 components– 12 elements (5-7
elements per component)
For each element: up to 10 questions
The region of UmeåEvaluation of the MM process:
MaxQ
Evaluation of the MM effects:
SUMO/MaxSumo
The MaxQ-process in Umeå1. Kick-Off Meeting (Trivector & MM team Umeå)2. MaxQ-questionnaire (MM-team answers individually)3. Trivector analyze questionnaire and documents and
prepare meeting 4. Consensus meeting5. Interviews with partners (the region, the county council,
swedish road and rail administration, the municipalities, the traffic operator)
6. Preliminary report to the MM-team7. Presentation of the result (MM-team and partners)8. Final report on Max Q-result (and in this case SUMO-results)
The MaxQ-questionnaire
MaxQ result
Overview (see chart)
Identification of strengths and weaknesses
Improvement suggestions
0 1 2 3 4 5
Management Review
Stakeholder feedback
Results
MONITORING AND EVALUATION
Supportive measures
MM measures
IMPLEMENTATION
Budget
Human resources
Partnership
MM programme
STRATEGY
Leadership
Policy on paper
User and society needs
POLICY
1. Activity-oriented policy: Ad hoc, short term approach
2. Process-oriented policy: Some knowledge about pre-conditions and needs.
Single measures.
3. System-oriented policy: Same as level 2, but including policy, routines
and organisation
4. Chain-oriented policy: Systematic analysis and evaluation of the MM work; long term commitments
5. Total Quality Management Continuous improvements; innovation; good results
0. No MM work at all
Ladder of development (scale 0-5)
Strengths Weaknesses Improvement suggestions
Ambitions and intentions of sustainable travel/MM stated in business plan
Business plan rooted in steering committee and politicians
Clear organization: project managers, working group, steering committee
Regular activities allocated to policymakers and others relating to mobility management
Working group participates in local and national conferences and networks to share and exchange knowledge
Knowledge and understanding of sustainable travel low for some
Commitment and dissemination of work varies between stakeholders and partners
Working group is not invited to important meetings that influence sustainable travel
Steering committee and partners have no time or limited time to work internally on the issues.
Increase knowledge of mobility management by elected representatives and officials
Let all the partners'organizations participate in the project, “Pilot scheme”, to increase knowledge and understanding
Integrate MM-plan with other municipal programs and plans, such as the use of four-stage principle
The SUMO-evaluation (region of Umeå)
Performed activities Knowledge & spread Use – participants in
activities User satisfaction Behavioural changes CO2-effects
ActivityCO2-effect
during activityCO2-effect 2009
(forecast)
Taxi without idle – Taxi Direkt 7 000 20 000
Test traveller Umeå 3 500 13 000
Sustainable travel in schools 300 11 355
What´s your most ridicilous car journey?- campaign 7 500 44 000
Health cyclists 9 000 11 000
ISA in Umeå kommun (Intelligent Speed adaption) 3 000 3 000
Marketing of carsharing 4 000 9 500
Test travellerVännäs 13 000 36 400
Taxi without idle – Umeå Taxi 23 600 41 200
Pedal for Medal (cycle competition) 24 500 33 600
Totalt 95 400 223 055
What did MaxQ produce? (in the region of Umeå) The MM-team were amazed how the set of questions could
identify their work and the strengths and weaknesses so precisely
All (MM-team and partners) were strengthened by to see the final results, new energy!
Telephone interviews with partners created immediate action by those who were interviewed...
Improvement suggestions in the report were used as points for discussion at a steering group meeting.
Many of the proposals were not the MM-teams responsibility. The responsibilities for proposals were divided among the partners.
Many of the improvements are completed
• Suggestion: ensure that within each municipality there is a responsible organization or individual to manage the MM-issues and increase the understanding of the need for mobility management within each organization.
The call came from several directions and has become a regular item for discussion…
•We do not have to ask for more involvement anymore.•Cooperation between municipalities strengthened, •More people have been involved - MM proliferation.
• Suggestion: Use SUMO to support the planning of projects and for evaluation.
SUMO became an aid when it was put into a context.Motivation to use SUMO on more activities
• Suggestion: Important to involve mobility management in key decisions affecting the travel. Seek to ensure that the intentions and goals of the business plan are integrated with other municipal programs and plans.
A call to all to work with mobility managementMM – team are invited to strategic meetings, to projects in the planning stage Mobility management is on the agenda and the need for our knowledge has increased.
• Suggestion: discuss the importance of long term funding for the mobility management office.
The evaluation report was an important subject when the decision was taken for continued funding of the MM-office.Our, and other new, projects got a different and improved organization.
Programme• Introduction• Schemes for reviewing city performance• Max Q – the swedish experience
• Break-out Groups• Feedback from Groups
• Open floor• Conclusion
Break-out Groupsi. How can the effectiveness of a city’s
mobility policies be identified and measured? – Ilse Vleugels
ii. What is an EcoMobile City? - Karin Neergaard
iii. Why should a city want to get an EcoMobility label and what should it look like? – David Scotney
Please return for Feedback at 16.30!
Programme• Introduction• Schemes for reviewing city performance• Max Q – the swedish experience
• Break-out Groups• Feedback from Groups
• Open floor• Conclusion
Feedback from Groupsi. The effectiveness of a city’s mobility
policies can be identified and measured by.............
ii. An EcoMobile City is .............
iii. A city would want to get an EcoMobility label, looking like........., because..............
Programme• Introduction• Schemes for reviewing city performance• Max Q – the swedish experience
• Break-out Groups• Feedback from Groups
• Open floor• Conclusion
Open floor
• Any additional thoughts..............................
Programme• Introduction• Schemes for reviewing city performance• Max Q – the swedish experience
• Break-out Groups• Feedback from Groups
• Open floor• Conclusion
Conclusion
• With the completion of the development stage of the project in Spring 2013, EcoMobility SHIFT will then be available to assist you in taking forward your city into the future.
Karin Neergaard, David Scotney, Ilse Vleugels & Carina
Aschan