POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

POLICY FORMULATION AND

IMPLEMENTATION

TRANSPORT TEACHING MATERIAL Transparencies 2003

EU-funded Urban Transport Research Project Results

www.eu-portal.net
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

OVERVIEW: FROM THE STRATEGIC PLANNING PROCESS TO THE

IMPLEMENTATION IN LOCAL OR REGIONAL TRANSPORT POLICY
Key topics Steps of the process Output

Policy Strategic planning Transport policy

formulation in process formulation
transport General concept of
planning measures
Political Decision Transport masterplan
Planning process of the
allocated measures
Design
of the measures
Political Decision

Implementation Implementation Concept of

of transport process implementation
measures - Information
Realised / implemented - Awareness raising
measures

Evaluation of success,
quality control

BOKU-ITS
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

STRUCTURE/CONTENTS OF POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

Transport Planning

Policy Formulation Implementation

 Planning process  Realisation of defined
 Goals of policy measures / plans
formulation  Paying attention to
 Problem analysis social & political
acceptability
 Development of
scenarios  Quality control
 etc.  etc.

Tools for Policy Tools for

Formulation Implementation

Scenario Participation Awareness Participation Awareness

technique process raising process raising

Project etc. Project etc.

management management

BOKU-ITS
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

TRANSPORT POLICY FORMULATION

Vision of a
Desirable Future
Current Development

Current Situation

Trend Development

(Drawing: DIETIKER, LOOSER 1985)

 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

WHICH SCENARIO DO WE WANT TO FOLLOW?

WHAT IS THE ”RIGHT” POLICY FORMULATION
FOR OUR REGION OR CITY?

Current Development Possible Future Scenario

“Car Friendly City”

Possible Future Scenario Possible Future

“Environmentally Scenario “Trend”
Friendly Transport Possible Future
System” Scenario “Soft
Mobility”

(Drawing DIETIKER, LOOSER 1985)

 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

ALTERNATIVES AND SCENARIOS – DEFINED INDICATORS

Defined indicators

Determination of the defined indicators

under the conditions / measures
of each scenario / alternative

Description of each scenario by the

indicators

Comparison of the impacts / indicators

of each scenario with the defined goals
 Evaluation

Ranking of scenarios
depending on the fulfilment of the goals

(BOKU-ITS; adapted from RVS 2.1, 1984)

 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

ACCEPTABILITY vs. EFFICIENCY

OF FUEL SAVING MEASURES
Fuel
Fuelsaving vs.
saving Public
vs. Publicacceptability
acceptabilityofofmeasures
measures
(% with respect to

roadpricing
Road pricing
(% with respect to reference)

35
30 Park pricing
parking pricing
Range of saving

25 Fuel
Fuel+ +50%
50%
reference)

20
Traffic
trafficcalming
calming
15
Range of Saving

Pedestrianisation &
10 pedestrianisation &
bicycle lanes
bicycle lanes
5 Reduce
reducebus fares
bus & &
fares
new
new PT-supply
PT-supply
0
buspriority
Bus priority
0 20 40 60 80 100

Acceptability
Acceptability (% of(% of acceptance,
acceptance, citizens)
citizens)

EU-PROJECT REFLEX
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

FUEL SAVINGS OF THE ER (ENERGY CONSUMPTION REDUCING) –

PACKAGES EXAMPLE WIENER NEUSTADT/AUSTRIA
Ib/ Fuel-tax + 100% 1528t/a (-24.1%)
X/ All measures 1018t/a (-16.1%)
Ib/ Fuel-tax + 50% 784t/a (-12.4%)
IVb/ Non-motorised traffic 268t/a (-4.2%)
Vb/ Parking management 258t/a (-4.1%)
II/ Vehicle Tax 192t/a (-3.0%)

Va/ Parking management 174t/a (-2.7%)

IX/ Transport masterplan 164t/a (-2.6%)
IVa/ Non-motorised traffic 134t/a (-2.1%)
VIII/ PT-priority+ 100t/a (-1.6%)
III/ Speed limit 68t/a (-1.1%)
VI/ PT-priority 62t/a (-1.0%)
Fuel-saving in ton per year (1996)
VII/ Through ticketing 36t/a (-0.6%)
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600

EU-PROJECT REFLEX
POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

REASONS FOR DEFICIENCIES IN

IMPLEMENTATION
• Insufficient awareness of the problem among decision makers
• Insufficient persuasive power of traffic experts
• Too little acceptance by authorities and the public
• No awareness of the problems among media representatives
• Gap between attitudes and real behaviour of transport users
(attitudes are dominated by social values, personal behaviour is
dominated by personal interests)

• Lack of acceptance for unpopular, but necessary measures /

transport policies for an environmentally friendly and sustainable
transport development
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

EXAMPLES OF MEASURES/INSTRUMENTS
OF TRANSPORT POLICY (1)

Investment & Services Planning Information &

Information Policies

• Transport infrastructure • Improvement of the PT • Information &

network network awareness
• Co-ordination of different • Combination of campaigns
transport modes environmentally friendly • Mobility
transport modes management
• Transport system
operation • Co-ordination of • etc.
transport planning with
• Rationalisation of PT
urban development
• etc.
• etc.

EU-PROJECT TRANSLAND
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

EXAMPLES OF MEASURES/ INSTRUMENTS

OF TRANSPORT POLICY (2)
Regulation Pricing
• Access restrictions for motorised • Subsidies
traffic
• Parking space management • Restrictive pricing
policies – vehicle tax,
• Parking licenses linked to car
fuel tax, parking
ownership
charges, road pricing,
• Speed limits impact fees
• Traffic calming
• etc.
• Vehicle manufacturing & emission
standards

EU-PROJECT TRANSLAND
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

EXAMPLE: ACCEPTABILITY OF TDM-MEASURES

BY TRANSPORT USERS IN SIX EUROPEAN CITIES
1) Package Approach 43,7

Access Restriction 59,1  Low acceptability

Park & Ride
Improve Public Transport
Distance based Pricing
Congestion Pricing
(approval rate) for restrictive
92,0 measures for car traffic
95,9  High acceptability for
9,4 promoting measures of
alternative modes
14,3

Cordon Pricing 16,5

Increasing parking cost 15,6

Reducing parking space 19,2

1) Transport pricing package. In:
0,0 20,0 40,0 60,0 80,0 100,0 120,0
TRANSPRICE report – Public
Acceptability of TDM- measures Acceptability of TDM (traffic
by the population [%] demand management) in Europe.

EU-PROJECT TRANSPRICE
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

EXAMPLE: HOW TO INCREASE

ACCEPTABILITY?
• Objectives reflecting public concerns, positive aims
• Perceived traffic problems
• Perception of pricing policies as effective solutions
• Package approach – providing alternatives
• Trust in the proposed measures and in the use of the
revenues
• Guarantee of equity
• Freedom of choice
• New cognitive image of the mobility situation

EU-PROJECT TRANSPRICE
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

SNAP-SHOT OF A PARTICIPATION WORKSHOP

We Request:
Sufficient space for cars Integration of all
Less separation transport modes
Save are
Strict caused by traffic
attractive areas Promotion of
adherence to
for pedestrians cycling
threshold Traffic safety
Priority
values of Safe
for PT
pollutants ways to
school

(Drawing: DIETIKER, LOOSER; in: SELLE 1996)

POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

PARTICIPATION IN THE PLANNING PROCESS -

GOALS
• Inclusion of all stakeholders
• Planning as a joint process
• Identification of the stakeholders’ needs
• Information of the stakeholders about the planning process
• Creation of trust between decision makers, planners and stakeholders
• Gaining consensus by balancing of interests during the planning process
• Participation as a democratic principle to raise awareness and
acceptance of decisions
• Mediation and conflict management
• Harmony between individual interests and social values
(awareness raising helps to harmonise both)
 POLICY FORMULATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

BASIC PRINCIPLES
PROCESS OF INFORMATION EXCHANGE
AND MESSAGE TRANSFER
Message

Containing four elements:

- objective contents of the message
- subjective ”revelation” / input of the
Transmitting ”transmitter” Receiving
person person
- relationship between the
”transmitter” and the ”receiver”
- appeal by the ”transmitter” to the
”receiver”

is influenced by the manner of

information and public relation

BOKU-ITS