International Experience and Best Practices - Clean Air Initiative

Some of the existing literature on I/M does not convey fully the difficulty of these
challenges and presents a variety of best practices without highlighting those that are
most critical to implementing an effective program. This report identifies a handful of
“essential” best practices that rise above the others in importance. Policymakers in the
developing world should recognize that I/M programs incorporating these essential best
practices have a much greater chance of succeeding than programs in which these
practices are missing. There is, in fact, a high likelihood of greatly diminished benefits
for programs without these practices. The report also identifies other “ordinary” best
practices that enhance program effectiveness.
1.4. Assessing I/M Program Performance
In selecting best practices, this report labels individual I/M programs effective/
ineffective, successful/failed, etc., and inferences are made about the underlying causes
related to policy and program design. Unfortunately, there is a dearth of quantitative
data that would allow ideal program evaluations of I/M in developing countries. Instead,
experts in the field (and this report) must rely largely on qualitative and anecdotal data to
assess program performance. When experts find a prevalence of any of the following in
their field work, they will conclude that a program is not effective:
• Vehicles not displaying an I/M sticker
• Vehicles belching smoke despite displaying an I/M sticker
• Absence of police or other authorities paying attention to I/M stickers or smoke
belching vehicles
• Test facilities that pass virtually all vehicles regardless of their emissions
• I/M test lanes that are clearly in disrepair
• I/M test equipment that is not functioning or not calibrated properly
• I/M facility staff who are incapable of performing their duties
• I/M staff who have come to view their job as helping drivers pass the I/M test by
manipulating the vehicle or the test
• I/M staff who take bribes and issue stickers
• Absence of any oversight of, or quality assurance procedures for, test facilities
And so on. All of the above are real-world examples. They are useful, if imperfect,
indicators of program performance. Donors should consider funding more rigorous
program evaluations along with the data collection efforts that would support them.
1.5. Key Questions for Policymakers
The challenges involved in I/M also require policymakers to reflect on the alternatives
and on timing. The remainder of this opening chapter poses some key questions that
policy-makers should ask before launching a new I/M program (or strengthening an
existing one). First, what impact can I/M have on vehicle emissions and at what cost? 16
The cost-effectiveness of different air pollution control options should form a basis
16 The cost side of the equation is much clearer, but typically ignores the time that drivers spend in
securing their I/M stickers. These costs are not trivial and must be an important factor in determining
the number and location of test centers. For example, Taipei has located its I/M stations 15 miles
outside of the central city area causing long trips for drivers (K.G. Duleep, personal communication).
17