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