|
|
|
The main objective of WP 2 was to identify the practicalities
of introducing a successful and effective Mobility Management scheme
in an area, taking into account different circumstances, the so-called
framework conditions for Mobility Management. Barriers to successful
implementation have been analysed using a Total Quality Tool.
|
| Framework
Conditions
Mobility Management is implemented at a local or regional level,
close to the user. MOST has analysed many framework conditions –
those factors beyond control of practitioners. Examples range from
national funding programmes for local mobility managers to the more
indirect influence of tax relief for commuters. Here, a short overview
is given on how to improve political, regulatory, financial, educational
and organisational frameworks. See the table below for highlights.
|
Policy Highlights in Support of Mobility Management
|
|
United Kingdom: Over 1,000 government buildings have
developed travel plans. Grants of £9m over three years have
enabled local authorities to employ 111 travel plan advisors.
Employer subsidies for public transport and cycling equipment
for employees are no longer taxed.
Austria: The first training for mobility consultants
was conceived in Austria and is still being offered.
Spain: Two main nation-wide trade unions have undertaken
pilot projects on company Mobility Management in the 1990’s.
This has led to the publication of a guide and further development
of mobility plans for large business parks in the Madrid and
Barcelona region.
Germany: VDV, the association of public transport
companies, publishes guidance on mobility centres; the car
users association, ACE, actively promotes Mobility Management
for companies.
Italy: As company plans are mandatory since 1998
(for companies with more than 300 staff in cities with a population
of more than 150,000), more than 1,200 mobility managers have
been appointed using € 15 Mio. national funding.
France: National guidelines on mobility plans are
expected for 2003. Under an urban mobility master plan (PDU),
60 urban public transport authorities (in cities with a population
of more than 100,000) are introducing mobility consulting.
|
Sweden: The “four-stage” principle introduced new
directives for the road administration in 2002. Priorities
are now to influence transport demand and increase efficiency,
rather than build new roads.
The Netherlands: The Environmental Management Act
gives regional and local authorities the authority to demand
mobility plans from companies. This has happened in Amsterdam.
Since 2001, only public transport users and cyclists (travelling
more than 10km) can deduct commuting costs from their taxable
income. Certain commuting benefits for employees are non-taxable.
Switzerland: Since 1992 the Ministry for Energy supports
local and regional Mobility Management initiatives (Programme
“Energie 2000”, followed in 2001 by“Energie_Switzerland”).
Current focus is on the promotion of Mobility Management for
companies and in leisure traffic.
Belgium: In Flanders, agreements between the regional
authorities, the local public transport company and the municipality
(mobility covenants) lead to local mobility plans, which incorporate
Mobility Management measures.
Specific associations in the Netherlands: VMNL, Italy:
Euromobility and the United Kingdom: ACT, organise
Mobility Management professionals.
|
|
At the European level, demand-oriented
strategies are recognised as a complementary approach to tackling
traffic problems (e.g. EPOMM, CIVITAS). However, in some cases a more
explicit inclusion of Mobility Management in European transport policy
could improve the overall framework.
At a national level the situation is still diverse – and there are
differences within a country according to the policy field (political,
organisational, financial etc.). For example, in France grants are
now available for mobility consulting but the organisational conditions
are unfavourable as several government departments are responsible.
The policies of the national government are a key factor. A distinction
can be made between three groups of countries. Catalyst countries
(e.g. The Netherlands, Switzerland, Belgium and United Kingdom) have
included Mobility Management in policy statements and action. In threshold
countries (e.g. Italy, Sweden, France and Germany), references at
a national level are more indirect, but there has been progress in
recent years. In other countries, we find an absence of national Mobility
Management policies. Funding for national initiatives (as seen in
NL, IT, UK, FR) is exceptional. Support usually comes from private-non-profit
organisations, especially smaller user groups. Generally, organisational
frameworks explicitly dedicated to Mobility Management have not yet
developed.
In terms of the legal framework, regulations exist in Italy, Sweden,
France, the Netherlands, Belgium and the United Kingdom, which have
a direct influence on Mobility Management. Often environmental legislation
or planning laws are being used to promote Mobility Management. The
current fiscal situation provides both incentives and disincentives
towards a more sustainable transport. This is especially evident in
the fiscal treatment of the commute, where incentives often underlie
fringe-benefit taxation – whereas free workplace parking does not.
On a local level, the political framework is the strongest factor
to influence development and effectiveness of Mobility Management.
If the political atmosphere is positive, other framework conditions
will develop.
Recommendations
To establish Mobility Management within policy on all levels,
the P.A.I.R. scheme was devised (see graph).
|
|
|
|
The P.A.I.R. scheme detects barriers and improves the overall
framework. In all, 23 conditions in six different areas have been
identified as crucial for success.
The most urgent are:
- Leading policy documents must feature Mobility Management;
- Responsibilities must be assigned between public and private
sectors and between levels of government;
- “Anchor points” are essential for successful organisation;
- Co-operative and communicative mode of governance is needed;
- Key personnel should be specially qualified thanks to proper,
dedicated training;
- Policies must be multi-modal;
- There is a need for a combination of push and pull measures;
- There should be links to non-transport policy areas;
- Financing needs to be long-term.
Basic conditions for successful Mobility Management schemes are:
- Sufficient and quality supply of alternative transport modes;
- General objective of a sustainable transport system;
- Development of a “mobility culture” regarding alternatives
to the car.
In order to strengthen Mobility Management, transport and non-transport
policies should be reviewed for any (unintentional) effects contrary
to the objectives of Mobility Management (= inverse policies). Examples
are extensive road building programmes, fiscal treatment of company
cars, high mandatory parking standards.
|
| Total
Quality in MM |
|
How to apply total quality to Mobility Management? A framework
for self-assessment, based on the model of the European Foundation
for Quality Management (EFQM), was developed to examine the management
process of five MOST projects. Five criteria were addressed:
- project co-ordination or leadership;
- project design and strategy;
- human resources management;
- management of partnerships and finances;
- and the implementation process.
All major project stakeholders were involved in the self-assessment
procedure, which consisted of a written survey followed by a moderated
round-table discussion. A scoring scheme was adopted to present
the results of the written survey as input for the round-table discussions.
This assessment method has proved useful for projects in the initial
stage of the Mobility Management process, and for brainstorming
between the project partners about future activities. It has also
helped give a balanced overview of a project’s strengths and weaknesses,
and served as a starting base for future action plans.
Applied to five Mobility Management projects and their main stakeholders,
the exercise has proven how important it is to:
- involve the target group from the planning phase of the project;
- have a detailed action plan of all planned mobility services;
- have a working group established and to have one person in place
who can co-ordinate all activities within the project on a day-to-day
basis.
|
| |
|
Workpackage
Partners:
CH2MHill (WP Leader)
LV Leuven
FIT consulting S.R.L.
ILS
FGM-AMOR
Nottingham
CERTU Lyon
CDV Brno
Access
|
WP2
Deliverable
Download
D 6 (~80 pp.): The MOST report on the framework for Mobility Management
across Europe summarises the results of an analysis of frameworks
on a European level as well as for 14 European countries. The results
of the policy research have led to a model for the analysis of framework
conditions (P.A.I.R.-scheme), which can help to identify strengths
and weaknesses. |
Download
Questionnaire to assess your project according to these principles
(in Final Report Annex VI) |
|
