Research Theme Analysis Report Urban Mobility

Recommendations

Info

44 R e s e a r c h T h e m e A n a l y s i s R e p o r t U r b a n M o b i l i t y Table 3-6 (continued) Projects identified under the sustainable urban mobility plan sub-theme Project acronym Project name Project duration Source of funding Main aim/relevance to SUMP CH4LLENGE Addressing the four Key Challenges of Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning 03/2013-03/2016 IEE Stakeholder participation and citizen involvement; Institutional cooperation between sectors and disciplines; Identification of the most effective policy measures; Monitoring and evaluation of progress in SUMP development BUMP Boosting Urban Mobility Plans 05/2013-05/2016 IEE Support to local authorities in the development of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans ENDURANCE EVIDENCE EU-wide establishment of enduring national and European support networks for sustainable urban mobility Evidence of the Proven Economic Benefits of Sustainable Transport Initiatives to Facilitate Effective Integration in Urban Mobility Plans 05/2013-05/2016 IEE Building of 25 national networks on SUMPs; trainings and policy exchange for transport experts and cities on SUMP 03/2014-02/2017 IEE Compelling evidence to demonstrate the economic benefits of delivering transport investment through a SUMP framework; show the economic value of successful sustainable transport schemes Of these 32 projects, only eight were focused solely and comprehensively on SUMPs: • ‘Auditing and Certification Scheme to Increase the Quality of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans in Cities’ (ADVANCE, 2014); • ‘Boosting Urban Mobility Plans’ (BUMP, 2013); • ‘Addressing Key Challenges of Sustainable Urban Mobility Planning’ (CH4LLENGE, 2013); • ‘Support and Dissemination of Information, Knowledge and Experiences in the Field of Sustainable Urban Mobility’ (Eltisplus, 2013); • ‘Evidence of the Proven Economic Benefits of Sustainable Transport Initiatives to Facilitate Effective Integration in Urban Mobility Plans’ (EVIDENCE, 2014); • ENDURANCE; • ‘Polycentric Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans’ (POLY-SUMP, 2014); • ‘Urban Platform for Advanced and Sustainable Mobility’ (PUMAS). Most of these projects are still running or recently completed. The other analysed projects include at least some aspects of SUMPs, including approaches to the plan. However, there is no evident topic continuity in research projects among these projects from this sub-cluster over time. Various similar topics were the subjects of projects during the period since 2004. The oldest analysed projects under this sub-theme are national projects focused on the preparation of plans of rail interchange improvements (station building capacity enhancements, signage, ticketing and passenger information improvements, provision of park-and-ride, provision of bus facilities, provision of car and taxi turnabout facility, and designated areas for passenger pick up and drop off and cycle and pedestrian access), analysis of the consequences of residential relocation for mobility and the built environment, and how to promote pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Between 2005 and 2009, three CIVITAS projects also took place. Projects that started in 2006 were focused on the analysis of specific measures and policies to enhance sustainable urban mobility including road-user charging and support of cycling. A project analysing behavioural patterns on a weekly basis, and two projects analysing and developing commuting and mobility plans of companies belong to this time period as well. The newest projects include increasing awareness and participation in the field of mobility and tourism, multimodal journey planning, energy efficient mobility in an ageing society, automated transport systems in sustainable mobility, and multimodal interfaces. During the most recent time period analysed, the European guidelines on SUMPs were prepared. Furthermore a methodology specifically for polycentric regions was formulated, and an audit and certification process was developed. ENDURANCE focuses on establishing 25 national networks supporting the implementation of SUMPs and disseminating knowledge and best practice on SUMPs. There are some recommendations on particular research topics that need further actions. The project ‘Concerted coordination for the promotion of efficient multimodal interfaces’ (DELTA, 2010) focused on efficient multimodal interfaces in tourist regions and identified the following issues as the further main research needs: • the understanding of seasonal traffic peaks in the concerned regions, especially tourist destinations; • further analysis of existing mobility schemes and identifying new ones in these areas;
R e s e a r c h T h e m e A n a l y s i s R e p o r t U r b a n M o b i l i t y 45 • tools for seasonal mobility management; • investigating the possibility of exploiting new social networks acting as tools providing real-time information successfully to the relevant target groups; • promoting research on ITS applications, standardisation and normalisation. • It is very important to integrate cycling, walking and other soft modes into urban transport, and to integrate urban transport mobility into city planning and city policy. • Relationships and interdependencies should be examined between ticketing, infrastructure, passenger information, safety and security, and public transport use. The project ‘New and Innovative Concepts for Helping European Transport Sustainability’ (NICHES, 2007) suggested the following recommendations for further research: • The European Commission should provide financial support and guidance for local governments to study behavioural issues. They are very important in seeking to develop a walking and cycling travel culture and to influence private car users to change to soft (‘sustainable’) modes. The ‘Coordination of Urban Road-User Charging Organisational Issues’ project (CURACAO, 2009) which analysed road-user charging, described a number of topics for further research to increase knowledge and understanding of road-user charging according to high, medium and low priority. These are: 1. High priority • the interaction between acceptability and effectiveness; • the extent to which results in one city can be transferred to another; • the implications of design and technology for enforcement; • the application of new developments in technology and in business systems; • ways of reducing the costs of technology and business system applications; • the impacts on the urban economy and, in particular, the differential effects by economic sector and size of firm; • the effects of road-user charging on different impact groups; • the interaction between acceptability, equity and, in particular, the impact of scheme design on perceived inequities; • the requirements for sustaining and adapting road-user charging schemes once implemented; • comparisons between predicted and actual impacts. 2. Medium priority • approaches to the design of overall strategies which include road-user charging; • methods for the design of road-user charging schemes; • prediction methods; • understanding of behaviour and, particularly, second-order responses and the behaviour of users of other modes; • the impacts of road-user charging on liveability and health; • the dynamics of acceptability over time and the particular role of referenda in testing and promoting acceptability; • the specification of appropriate timescales and sequences for the implementing urban roaduser charging schemes. 3. Low priority • the measurement of congestion and travel time reliability; • development of best practices for evaluating road-user charging schemes; • methods of appraising secondorder effects.
Page 1 and 2: Research Theme Analysis Report Urba
Page 3 and 4: R e s e a r c h T h e m e A n a l y
Page 45: R e s e a r c h T h e m e A n a l y

Research Theme Analysis Report Urban Mobility

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?