A participative procedure to select indicators of sustainable urban mobility policies

Starting from an original framework based on four dimensions and thirteen objectives of sustainable urban mobility policies, this paper advocates the selection of a core set of performance indicators founded on a participative procedure. Citizen participation and stakeholder involvement is made possible by a national sample survey and a deliberative multi-criteria analysis, respectively. Such a procedure is applied to the Italian case and it shows that the set of indicators based on citizen evaluations radically differs from that based on stakeholders' opinions - 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. For further testing at a local scale, a more articulated procedure is proposed in order to increase the role of citizens and to help generate unequivocal results.

[1]  A. Vatn.  An institutional analysis of methods for environmental appraisal , 2009 .

[2]  Angela Hull,et al.  Developing a set of decision-support tools for sustainable urban transport in the UK , 2008 .

[3]  David Banister,et al.  The sustainable mobility paradigm , 2008 .

[4]  Fernando Frei,et al.  Sampling mobility index: Case study in Assis—Brazil , 2006 .

[5]  Mark Reed,et al.  An adaptive learning process for developing and applying sustainability indicators with local communities , 2006 .

[6]  Bert Guindon,et al.  Using satellite remote sensing to survey transport-related urban sustainability: Part 1: Methodologies for indicator quantification , 2006 .

[7]  Todd Litman,et al.  Developing Indicators for Comprehensive and Sustainable Transport Planning , 2005 .

[8]  Rui A. R. Ramos,et al.  Sustainable urban mobility: a comparative study and the basis for a management system in Brazil and Portugal , 2005 .

[9]  Bert van Wee,et al.  Accessibility evaluation of land-use and transport strategies: review and research directions , 2004 .

[10]  Pascal Pochet,et al.  Towards Sustainable Mobility Indicators: Application to the Lyons Conurbation , 2003 .

[11]  J. Martínez-Alier,et al.  Weak Comparability of Values as a Foundation for Ecological Economics , 1998 .

[12]  H. Simon,et al.  Models of Bounded Rationality: Empirically Grounded Economic Reason , 1997 .

[13]  P. Lecca,et al.  Impact Analysis of Regional Knowledge Subsidy: a CGE Approach , 2008 .

[14]  D. Paolini.  SCREENING AND SHORT-TERM CONTRACTS , 2008 .

[15]  Sigrid Stagl,et al.  SDRN Rapid Research and Evidence Review on Emerging Methods for Sustainability Valuation and Appraisal , 2007 .

[16]  William G Barker,et al.  Can a Sustainable Transportation System be Developed for San Antonio, Texas? , 2005 .

[17]  Michael Wegener,et al.  PROPOLIS: Planning and Research of Policies for Land Use and Transport for Increasing Urban Sustainability , 2004 .

[18]  Andrew Stirling,et al.  Deliberative Mapping: Appraising options for addressing the kidney gap, final report prepared for the Wellcome Trust , 2003 .

[19]  Jacquelin Burgess,et al.  Prioritising the issues in Local Environment Agency Plans through consensus building with stakeholder groups , 1998 .