A participative procedure to select indicators of policies for sustainable urban mobility. Outcomes of a national test.

Marletto, Gerardo and Mameli, Francesca (2012): A participative procedure to select indicators of policies for sustainable urban mobility. Outcomes of a national test. Published in: European Transport Research Review

Abstract

The assessment of policies for sustainable urban mobility features two basic characteristics: incommensurability and strong uncertainty. This is why multiple dimensions of evaluation and a structured room for collective deliberation and learning should be considered. A participative procedure is used to select a core set of performance indicators of policies for sustainable urban mobility. Citizen participation and stakeholder involvement are obtained through a national sample survey and a deliberative multi-criteria analysis, respectively. This procedure is applied to the Italian case. Citizens are more oriented towards reducing private transport costs, air pollution and traffic accidents; stakeholders are more in favour of improving car-free accessibility and reducing the consumption of land and public space generated by urban mobility. The resulting core sets of indicators are highly sensitive to the threshold chosen for the selection. Using a lower cut-off threshold, four performance indicators are shared between the two sets: ‘CO2 from transport’, ‘Quantity and quality of public transport’, ‘PMx, COVNM, NOx, CO from transport’, ‘Death and injuries from traffic accident’; using a higher cut-off threshold the two sets feature no intersection. Further testing at a local scale is needed in order to explicitly consider context-specific objectives, indicators and data; stronger interactions among experts, citizens and stakeholders are needed in order to avoid the generation of equivocal results.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Participation; Urban mobility; Sustainability indicators; National survey
• Subjects: Q - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics ; Environmental and Ecological Economics > Q5 - Environmental Economics > Q51 - Valuation of Environmental Effects; R - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics > R4 - Transportation Economics > R41 - Transportation: Demand, Supply, and Congestion ; Travel Time ; Safety and Accidents ; Transportation Noise

References

CEC—Commission of the European Communities (2006) Thematic strategy on the urban environment. COM (2005) 718 final, Brussels

CEC—Commission of the European Communities (2007) Towards a new culture for urban mobility. COM (2007) 551 final, Brussels

ECMT—European Conference of Ministers of Transport (2002) Implementing sustainable urban travel policies. OECD, Paris

ECMT—European Conference of Ministers of Transport (2002) Implementing sustainable urban travel policies: applying the 2001 key messages. OECD, Paris

Martinez-Alier J, Munda G, O’Neill J (1998) Weak comparability of values as a foundation for ecological economics. Ecol Econ 26:277–86

Simon HA (1982) Models of bounded rationality. MIT, Cambridge

Vatn A (2009) An institutional analysis of methods for environmental appraisal. Ecol Econ 68:2207–2215

Stagl S (2007) Emerging methods for sustainability valuation and appraisal. Final Report. SDRN—Sustainable Development Research Network, London

Booth C, Richardson T (2001) Placing the public in integrated transport planning. Transp Policy 8:141–149

Banister D (2008) The sustainable mobility paradigm. Transp Policy 15:73–80

May AD (2009) Improving decision-making for sustainable urban transport: an introduction to the DISTILLATE research programme. Eur J Transp Infrastruct Res 9:184–201

Joumard R, Gudmundsson H (eds) (2010) Indicators of environmental sustainability in transport. Les collections de l’INRETS, Lyon-Bron

Pearce B (2005) The use and abuse of indicators for evaluating land use and environmental planning—experience from the UK. In: Miller D, Patassini D (eds) Beyond benefit cost analysis. Ashgate, Aldershot, pp 127–150

Reed MS, Fraser EDG, Dougill AJ (2006) An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities. Ecol Econ 59:406–418

Federico A, Barbabella A (2006) Gli indicatori di valutazione delle politiche (Assessment indicators of policies). In: Marletto G (Ed) Gli strumenti per la programmazione (Tools for planning). Rapporti periodici, 5, Isfort, Roma

UNCSD-United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (2001) Indicators of sustainable development: framework and methodologies. Background paper No. 3. United Nations, New York

EEA—European Environment Agency (1995) Europe’s environment: the Dobris assessment. Copenhagen

Mameli F, Marletto G (2009) Can national survey data be used to select a core set of indicators formonitoring the sustainability of urban mobility policies? Crenos Working Papers, 2009/11. CUEC, Cagliari

Geurs KT, van Wee B (2004) Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions. J Transp Geogr 12:127–140

Clark J, Burgess J, Dando N, Bhattachar D, Heppel K, Jones P, Murlis J, Wood P (1998) Prioritising the issues in local environment agency plans through consensus building with stakeholder groups. Technical Report w114. Environment Agency, Bristol

CIRT—Central Institute for Road Transport (2005) Sustainable urban transport for Pune metropolitan area. Final Report, Pune

Castillo H, Pitfield DE (2010) ELASTIC—A methodological framework for identifying and selecting sustainable transport indicators. Transp Res D 15:179–188

Davies G, Burgess J, Eames M, Mayer S, Staley K, Stirling A, Williamson S (2003) Deliberative mapping: appraising options for addressing “the kidney gap”. Final Report to the Wellcome Trust, London

Kenyon W, Hanley N, Ceara N (2003) Citizens’ juries: an aid to environmental valuation? Environ Plann C: Gov Policy 19:557–566

EEA—European Environmental Agency (2001–2010) TERM Reports 2000–2009, Copenhagen

Imran M, Low N (2003) Time to change the old paradigm: promoting sustainable urban transport in Lahore, Pakistan. World Transp Policy Pract 9:32–39

Nicolas JP, Pochet P, Poimboeuf H (2003) Towards sustainable mobility indicators: application to the Lyons conurbation. Transp Policy 10:197–208

Lautso K, Spiekermann K, Wegener M, Sheppard I, Steadman P, Martino A, Domingo R, Gayda S (2004) PROPOLIS: planning and research of policies for land use and transport for increasing urban sustainability. Final Report, Helsinki

Barker WG (2005) Can a sustainable transportation system be developed for San Antonio, Texas? Transp Res Rec 1924:120–128

Costa MS, Silva ANR, Ramos RAR (2005) Sustainable urban mobility: a comparative study and the basis for a management system in Brazil and Portugal. In: Brebbia CA, Wadhwa LC (eds) Urban transport and the environment in the 21st century. WIT, Southampton, pp 323–332

Rassafi AA, Vasiri M (2005) Sustainable transport indicators: definition and integration. Int J Environ Sci Tech 2:83–96

Frei F (2006) Sampling mobility index: case study in Assis— Brazil. Transp Res A-Pol 40:792–799

Zhang Y, Guindon B (2006) Using satellite remote sensing to survey transport-related urban sustainability—Part 1: methodologies for indicator quantification. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf 8:149–164

Häkkinen T (Ed) (2007) Trends and indicators for monitoring the EU thematic strategy on sustainable development of urban environment. Final report, Summary and recommendations. VTT Publications 643, Finland

Litman T (2008) Well measured—developing indicators for comprehensive and sustainable transport planning. Victoria Transport Policy Institute, Victoria