DGResearch
propolis
Planning and Research of Policies for Land
Use and Transport for Increasing Urban
Sustainability
Fifth Framework Programme
Thematic Programme:
Energy, Environment and Sustainable
Development
Key Action:
City of Tomorrow and Cultural Heritage
1
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
WEBSITES
http://www.wspgroup.fi/lt/propolis/
http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/propolis/
http://www.vtt.fi/rte/projects/yki4/spartacus.htm
http://www.casa.ucl.ac.uk/propolis/gis.htm
2
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
The Consortium
LT
IRPUD
S&W
ME&P
UCL
TRT
MECSA
STR
LT Consultants Ltd, Finland
Co-ordinator
Universität Dortmund, Institut für Raumplanung, Germany
Spiekermann & Wegener, Urban and Regional Research,
Germany, Subcontractor to IRPUD
Marcial Echenique and Partners, UK
University College London, Institution incorporated by Royal Charter,
UK
TRT Trasporti e Territorio, Italy
Marcial Echenique y Compañía S.A., Spain
STRATEC S.A., Belgium
Scientific Officer of DG Research
Dr. Eric Ponthieu,
European Commission
3
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Structure of the presentation
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The objectives
The case cities
The PROPOLIS approach
The indicators
The tools
The policies
Evaluation of policy options
Inercity comparisons
Conclusions, recommendations and further work
4
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Objectives
The objective of PROPOLIS is to research, develop and test
integrated land use and transport policies, tools and
comprehensive assessment methodologies in order to define
sustainable long term urban strategies and to demonstrate their
effects in European cities by:
- developing further the theory of urban transport and land use systems and
enhancing existing planning and assessment methodologies
- executing a policy testing process in 7 European urban regions, by
analysing the test results and by aiming at generalised conclusions
- identifying policy packages that are likely to achieve the environmental goals
without compromising economic efficiency and social sustainability
- establishing close contacts with policy and decision makers and users of the
system and by adopting an effective dissemination and exploitation
programme.
5
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Objectives: What are the current trends what do we try to achieve?
Sustainability
PROPOLIS goal
Continuation of
existing policies
Do nothing
Time
2000
2020
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
6
DGResearch
The PROPOLIS
case cities
7
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Case Cities:
The settlement
structure and
population of
the case city
regions
Helsinki 0.9
Dortmund 2,5
Inverness 0,1
Naples 3,0
Vicenza 0,8
Bilbao 1,1
8
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
Brussels 2,9
DGResearch
9
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
The PROPOLIS approach to sustainability
Institutional framework
Environmental
sustainability
Comprehensive
sustainability
Economic
efficiency
For a city to be sustainable
it needs to use resources
in an efficient and equitable
way within the carrying
capacities of the
environmental and social
systems it is dependent on.
Social
sustainability
10
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
The PROPOLIS approach, process and system
Alternative Futures
Strategies, Pol icies
Ec onomic, Demographic
Lifestyles etc.
Land use, transpor t,
pricing, fisca l, investment
Datab as es
GIS, model
Mod els
3 types in 7 cities
Helsinki Metropolitan Region
Bac kgr ound va riables
Maps, Ta bles, Graphs
Evaluation
Decision support tool,
sustainability indices,
a nalysis, presenta tion
and interne t tools
The
PR OPOLIS
s ystem
Identification of negative side eff ects,
combination and refinement of policies
Indicators
Envir onmental
Social, Economic
Replanning of policies, strategies
Tools/modules
Raster, GIS, Inter net
Satisfactory results?
Comparisons with goals
and be nchmarks.
Inter-c ity comparisons.
yes
Evidenced
Recommendations
and C onclusions
General and city-specif ic
no
Client Par tner
input
Th e
PROPOLIS
process
11
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
12
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
INDICATORS are used to measure the three
dimensions of sustainability
- Conditions for selecting indicators:
• Relevance. PROPOLIS can only concentrate on the most relevant indicators
• Policy sensitiveness. Only indicators that are sensitive to the policies to be tested
are of interest
• Predictability. A lot of indicators are suitable for monitoring but for the PROPOLIS
approach it is essential that the indicator values can be forecast into the future. This
condition leaves a lot of indicators out of the scope of PROPOLIS
• From the evaluation point of view, the indicators should be independent and measure
different aspects of sustainability
• They should also follow the impact chain as far as possible, for example, instead of
measuring noise levels they should rather measure exposure to noise
• Concerning the social indicators PROPOLIS can only try to measure the objective
conditions of social environment whereas the subjective dimension of social welfare
is left out of the scope.
• Finally, the indicators should be selected so that each of the city models should be
able to produce values for them.
13
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
The indicator themes are:
ENVIRONMENTAL
Global climate change
Air pollution
Consumption of natural sources
Environmental quality
SOCIAL
Health
Equity
Opportunities
Accessibility and traffic
ECONOMIC
Total net benefit from transport
14
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Environmental indicators
Global climate change
Greenhouse gases from transport
Air pollution
Acidifying gases from transport
Volatile organic compounds from transport
Consumption of natural sources
Consumption of mineral oil products, transport
Land coverage
Need for additional new construction
Environmental quality
Fragmentation of open space
Quality of open space
15
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Social indicators
Health
Exposure to particulate matter
from transport in the living environment
Exposure to nitrogen dioxide
from transport in the living environment
Exposure to traffic noise
Traffic deaths
Traffic injuries
Equity
Justice of distribution of economic benefits
Justice of exposure to particulates
Justice of exposure to nitrogen dioxides
Justice of exposure to noise
Segregation
16
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Social indicators
Opportunities
Housing standard
Vitality of city centre
Vitality of surrounding region
Productivity gain from land use
Accessibility
Total time spent in traffic
Level of service of public transport and slow modes
Accessibility to city centre
Accessibility to services
Accessibility to open space
17
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Economic indicators
Transport user benefits
Transport operator benefits
Government benefits from transport
Transport investment costs
Transport external accidents costs
Transport external emissions costs
Transport external greenhouse gases
Transport external noise costs
Economic index: total savings €/inhabitant (NPV)
18
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
19
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
20
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
21
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
22
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
23
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
3 Types of Land Use and Transport Models
are used to predict long term changes in the transport and land
use systems.
0
20
40
kilometres
Relative change
Relative change (%)
PP214
EM214
5 ...
2,5 ... 5
0,5 ... 2,5
-0,5 ... 0,5
-2,5 ... -0,5
-5 ... -2,5
... -5
5 ...
2,5 ... 5
0,5 ... 2,5
-0,5 ... 0,5
-2,5 ... -0,5
-5 ... -2,5
... -5
5
10
40
Absolute change
Absolute change
0
20
0
kilometres
Pricing policy, car
costs up by 75%.
Difference in the
number of
inhabitants and
employment
compared with
the Reference
Scenario.
PP214
EM214
5000 ...
5000 ...
2500 ... 5000
500 ... 2500
-2500 ... -500
-5000 ... -2500
2500 ... 5000
500 ... 2500
-2500 ... -500
-5000 ... -2500
... -5000
... -5000
0
kilometres
5
10
kilometres
24
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
25
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
26
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
27
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
28
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
29
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
30
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
31
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Tools: Model inputs and outputs are harmonised for harmonised results
18
links
HELSINKI
19
links
BILBAO
19
links
INVERNESS
17
links
DORTMUND
Aggregated links
MOTORWAY
MAJOR URBAN ROAD
OTHER ROADS
RAILWAY SERVICE
METRO SERVICE
RAILWAY TRACK
METRO TRACK
BUS AND TRAM
BUS AND TRAM LINES
CAR PARK/ACCESS
TRAIN & BUS ACCESS/WAIT
FERRY SERVICE
WALK
INTRAZONAL
14
49
links
NAPLES
27
links
VICENZA
19
links
BRUSSELS
32
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
33
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
34
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Tools: GIS-tools are used to improve the
spatial disaggregation
Raster Module:
Quality of open space
35
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Tools: GIS applications - exposure to noise
36
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Tools: Analysis tools are used to identify short and
long term effects
37
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Tools: Illustration methods are important
instruments when communicating with the public
IRPUD
38
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
39
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
40
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Tools: Economic evaluations are made in
a special module
TRT
41
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
POLICIES: What are the instruments what types of policies are addressed?
• Infrastructure investments: rail, road, bus
• Land use strategies, theories
• Pricing policies (tolls, congestion, fuel, parking)
• Public transport policies
(fares, speeds, service)
• Regulatory policies
(speeds, parking,
land use restrictions etc.)
• Policy combinations
42
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
POLICIES: Policy runs implemented in all case cities
2001
POLICY
Code POLICY
Type
Base
000
Scenario
Investments
111 Local investment plans
policies
Pricing
2006
Base year
2011
2016
Intermediate
year
2021
Horizon
year
City
specific
211 Car operating costs +25%
25%
25%
25%
25%
212 Car operating costs +50%
25%
50%
50%
50%
213 Car operating costs +100%
25%
50%
100%
100%
214 Car operating costs +75%
50%
75%
75%
75%
Parking price increase, + 20/10 minutes
time value
Parking price increase, + 60/30 minutes
222
time value
221
X
X
231 Cordon pricing, + 20 minutes time value
X
232 Cordon pricing, + 60 minutes time value
X
43
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
2001
POLICY
Type
Regulation
Public
transport
Land use
policies
Combined
policies
Base year
Code POLICY
311 Max speed - 10%, all road network
321
2006
Max speed -20% on other than motorway
and main roads
411 PT travel time –10%
2011
2016
Intermediate
year
2021
Horizon
year
X
X
5%
10%
10%
10%
412 PT travel time –5%
-2.5%
-5%
-5%
-5%
421 PT fares –50%
-50%
-50%
-50%
-50%
50% /
-50%
50% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
50% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
75% /
-50%
511 Increase housing density in the city core
Concentrate the expansion of the
521 residential/tertiary in the zones with
relevant public transport facilities
Increase car operating cost + lower PT
711
fares using local optimums
Increase car operating cost + lower PT
712
fares + decrease PT travel time
Increase car operating cost + lower PT
713 fares + decrease PT travel time + restrict
peripheral land use
X
X
44
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Evaluation of indicator sets, the USE-IT
evaluation structure
45
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
USE-IT evaluation output after the indicators’
weighting process
46
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
Policy
comparisons
using indicators
and indices
DGResearch
47
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Evaluation: Problems to be
faced
• What are the socio-economic
footprints?
• Conflicting short and
long term effects
• Policy combinations - cumulative or neutralising effects
• Mitigation of negative side effects
• Conflicting goals - is there an optimum?
48
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
EVALUATION PROBLEMS:
-
How to balance between conflicting goals?
Is there an optimum?
Can all dimensions of sustainability be
improved at the same time?
Env/Soc
index
Car Pricing Policies
0,8
0,7
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
Econ. index
savings
euro/inh/a
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
-100
Env
Soc
Eco
%
%
%
0%
0%
5%
rio
0
5
0
5
0
2
0
a
5
7
1
2
t+
+1
en
t+
t+
t+
t+
s
c
s
s
t
s
s
o
s
os
co
co
e
co
co
rc
c
r
r
c
r
r
a
n
C
ar
Ca
Ca
Ca
Ca
re
C
e
f
Re
Car operating cost increase (%)
49
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Intercity comparisons
50
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Development of environmental and social sustainability of the
Reference Scenarios in PROPOLIS case cities (2021=1,0)
1
0,8
0,6
Global climate change
0,4
Air Pollution
Consumption of natural
sources
0,2
Environmental quality
0
1
0,8
0,6
0,4
Health
Equity
0,2
Opportunity
Accessibility
0
1 21
1 21
1 21
1 21
01 21
-0
-0
-0
-0
i - ki s
s
s
s
d
d
a
k
s es
z nza
n un
n
n
le ple
i
i
e
n
u
p
s
s
a
a
rn
rn
ce ice
el
el
tm tm
N
N
H
H
ve nve
Vi
V
or or
n
I
I
D
D
ao
lb
i
B
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
1
-2
1 21
-0
s
s
l
e sel
s
us us
Br Br
51
DGResearch
Selected key indicators’ changes in key policies by case city
(Policy x 2021 versus Reference Scenario 2021)
212 Car operating cost +50%
Greenhouse gases Exposure to traffic
from transport
noise
0%
0%
-5 %
-1 %
-10 %
-2 %
-15 %
-3 %
-20 %
-4 %
-25 %
-5 %
-30 %
-6 %
Helsinki
Dortmund
Traffic deaths
0%
Total time spent
in traffic
0%
-2 %
-5 %
-4 %
-10 %
-6 %
Inverness
-15 %
-8 %
-20 %
-10 %
Naples
Vicenza
Bilbao
Brussels
52
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Selected key indicators’ changes in key policies by case city
(Policy x 2021 versus Reference Scenario 2021)
212 Car operating cost +50%
Accessibility to
city centre
(travel time
reduction)
Modal share in
peak, private
motorised
0%
0,0%
-2 %
-2,0%
-4 %
-4,0%
-6 %
-6,0%
-8 %
-8,0%
-10 %
Helsinki
Population, city
centre + inner
urban
8%
20 %
6%
15 %
4%
10 %
2%
5%
0%
-10,0 %
Dortmund
Employment, city
centre + inner
urban
Inverness
-2 %
0%
-4 %
-5 %
Naples
Vicenza
Bilbao
Brussels
53
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Selected key indicators’ changes in key policies by case city
(Policy x 2021 versus Reference Scenario 2021)
221 Parking cost +0.85/0.42 euro
Greenhouse gases
from transport
Total time spent
in traffic
5%
0,0%
0%
-0,5%
-5 %
-1,0%
-10 %
-1,5%
-15 %
-2,0%
-20 %
-2,5%
Helsinki
Dortmund
Modal share in
peak, private
motorised
0%
-1 %
-2 %
-3 %
-4 %
-5 %
-6 %
-7 %
-8 %
Inverness
Employment, city
centre + inner
urban
Population, city
centre + inner
urban
0%
1%
-2 %
0%
-1 %
-4 %
-2 %
-6 %
Naples
-3 %
-8 %
-4 %
-10 %
-5 %
Vicenza
Bilbao
Brussels
54
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Selected key indicators’ changes in key policies by case city
(Policy x 2021 versus Reference Scenario 2021)
311 Decreasing max speed by 10% on the whole road network
Greenhouse gases Exposure to traffic
from transport
noise
0%
10 %
Traffic deaths
0%
-2 %
0%
-3 %
-5 %
-4 %
-5 %
-10 %
5%
-2 %
4%
3%
-4 %
2%
-6 %
1%
-6 %
-15 %
-7 %
Helsinki
Dortmund
0%
-8 %
Inverness
Naples
Vicenza
Modal share in
peak, private
motorised
0,0%
-1,0%
-2,0%
-3,0%
-4,0%
-5,0%
-6,0%
-7,0%
6%
-1 %
5%
Total time spent
in traffic
-8,0%
Bilbao
Brussels
55
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Selected key indicators’ changes in key policies by case city
(Policy x 2021 versus Reference Scenario 2021)
421 PT fare - 50% (Helsinki -40%)
Greenhouse gases
from transport
0%
Traffic deaths
2%
0%
-5 %
-2 %
-10 %
-4 %
-6 %
-15 %
-8 %
-20 %
-10 %
Helsinki
Dortmund
Total time spent
in traffic
Accessibility to
city centre
(travel time
reduction)
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
0%
3%
Inverness
Modal share in
peak, private
motorised
0%
2%
1%
-2 %
0%
-4 %
-1 q%
-6 %
-2 %
-3 %
-8 %
-4 %
-10 %
-5 %
Naples
Vicenza
Bilbao
Brussels
56
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Selected key indicators’ changes in key policies by case city
(Policy x 2021 versus Reference Scenario 2021)
Accessibility to
city centre
(travel time
reduction)
Modal share in
peak, private
motorised
0%
0%
0%
-5 %
-1 %
-5 %
-10 %
-2 %
-10 %
-15 %
-3 %
-15 %
-20 %
-4 %
-20 %
-25 %
-5 %
-25 %
-30 %
-6 %
-30 %
Greenhouse gases Exposure to traffic
from transport
noise
0%
1%
0%
-1 %
-2 %
-3 %
-4 %
-5 %
-6 %
-5 %
-10 %
-15 %
-20 %
-25 %
Helsinki
Dortmund
Traffic deaths
Inverness
Naples
Vicenza
Bilbao
Brussels
57
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Common policy
Intercity
comparisons of
key policies by
case city
Helsinki
212 Car operating
cost +50%
Env
Soc
Eco
221 Parking cost
+0.85/0.42 euro
Env
Soc
Eco
412 5% increase of
PT speed/service
(Inverness, Bilbao,
Brussels 10%)
Env
Soc
Eco
421 PT fare - 50%
(Helsinki -40%)
Env
Soc
Eco
511 Increase the
residential density in
the city core
Env
Soc
Eco
711 Car operating
cost +75%(214), PT
fares - 50%(421)
Env
Soc
Eco
712 Car operating
cost +75%(214), PT
fares - 50%(421), PT
speed +5%(412)
Env
Soc
Eco
Dortmund Inverness
Naples
Vicenza
Bilbao
Brussels
posive effect compared with reference scenario 2021/economic index clearly positive
insignificant effect compared with reference scenario 2021/economic index around zero
negative effect compared with reference scenario 2021/economic index clearly negative
not applicable
current situation improved
58
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
General conclusions and
recommendations,
Further work
59
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Conclusions - the approach
• PROPOLIS has maintained and further developed the general comprehensive approach
and the methodologies, originally developed in the SPARTACUS project, for studying
sustainable urban policies.
• The PROPOLIS system produces large amounts of information, but it also makes
possible a drastic stepwise aggregation of the data—down to three sustainability index
values per policy based on the preferences of the user or client of the system. In this way
also the transparency of the system is maintained.
• Theoretical, methodological and data limitations mean that some care is required in the
interpretation of the results. In addition, any policy should always be examined in relation
to the local conditions before planning its implementation. Despite these reservations
many of the results in different types of cities, in different cultures and achieved using
different types of models point in the same direction, are understandable and confirm the
underlying theoretical considerations, thus making the conclusions more reliable.
60
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Conclusions - results and recommendations
• The results show that the environmental sustainability deteriorates in all case cities
compared with the current situation if no actions are taken and even if city specific
reference scenarios, including local investment programmes, are adopted. This is mainly
due to the deteriorating global climate change and the environmental quality indicators
as well as the increased consumption of natural resources. Air quality indicators may
improve together with the assumed future improvements of the car fleet. Also the social
index tends to deteriorate.
• The aim of PROPOLIS was to find policies that could, in an ideal case,
simultaneously improve all dimensions of sustainability compared with the reference
solution and, if possible, even improve the current level of sustainability. This goal
was reached in most of the case cities using a same type of approach. This
indicates that the approach could work in other European cities, as well, and that the
results could thus be transferable.
61
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Conclusions - results and recommendations
• The local investment plans, normally consisting of an investment programme for both public
transport and road investments, performed in the right direction. However, they were not
enough to maintain the current level of sustainability. Investment programmes should be
designed to be consistent with the general goals set for the transport-land use system.
• Regulating car speed policies had positive effects on traffic accidents, as intended, but they
were not enough to compensate the effects of the worsening opportunity, accessibility and air
pollution related indicators.
• Different types of individual land use policies did not produce significant positive effects.
• Different car pricing methods were able to produce positive results. However, their effects on
land use have to be separately assessed.
• Also the tested public transport policies, increasing speed and service and reducing fares,
worked well. In most cases they were environmentally, socially and economically feasible.
However, also here special attention has to be paid to the land use effects.
62
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Conclusions - results and recommendations
• Best results are achieved by using policy combinations, i.e. push and pull
measures consisting of car pricing policies and simultaneous improvements of
public transport through reduced fares and better speed and service. They produce
cumulative positive results and the negative land use effects of the individual
policies can be avoided or mitigated.
• Adopting the above line of actions leads in the PROPOLIS case cities to a
• 15-20% reduction in CO2 emissions,
• 8-17% reduction in traffic accidents and
• reductions in exposure to noise, pollutants and the total time spent in traffic
• improved accessibility to the city centre and services
• socio-economic benefits of 1000 – 3000 euro/inhabitant (net present value)
• The results can be further improved by adopting supporting land use policies and by
finding local optimum levels for the pricing actions
63
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Conclusions - results and recommendations
• A good urban policy consists of co-ordinated elements that work together to produce
cumulative long-term effects that attain a balanced set of environmental, social and
economic goals. These elements may include:
o
o
o
Combination of pricing policies directed at car users, with differentiation
between peak and other hours as well as congested and non-congested areas,
with an appropriate level of pricing of public transport fares
Investment programmes supporting the changes in demand caused by the
above policies and especially responding to the increased demand for better
public transport speed and service
A land use plan supporting the new need for people to live near central areas, in
satellite cities or along well served public transport corridors and the people’s
increased need and opportunity to use public transport
64
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Conclusions - further work
• The main concept for further development builds on the premises that urban
transport and land use form one integrated environmental, social and economic
system that interacts with the surrounding region without a clear border.
• Theoretical research is still needed to better understand the reciprocal economic
flows between land use activities and transport systems.
• Similarly, more research is needed to better understand and model the interaction
between environmental quality and land use.
• More efficient use of GIS and, in particular, a more radical move towards microsimulation models would bring several benefits.
• The indicator system associated with the transport and land use modelling
framework should be further developed in order to include additional important social
and environmental indicators.
65
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Conclusions - further work
• Real-life tests with authentic audiences should be made with the assessment
system.
• More research is needed to define the optimum method and level of pricing
policies and especially for their combinations, to carefully analyse the negative
side effects of the pricing policies and, finally, to determine suitable
countermeasures to mitigate these side effects.
• The PROPOLIS system is tested and operational and could be used for analysing
a wider set of policies in the seven case cities when searching for new and more
effective measures and especially for more complex policy combinations.
66
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
What are the socio-economic effects?
The new innovative policies are likely to add to:
• More safe and healthy environment
• More efficient economy
• Fair and equitable
distribution of effects
• And...
67
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
...Improve the Quality of Life
in the City of Tomorrow
68
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW
DGResearch
Thank you for your attention!
LT
LT Consultants Ltd, Finland, Co-ordinator
IRPUD
Universität Dortmund, Institut für Raumplanung, Germany
S&W
Spiekermann & Wegener, Urban and Regional Research, Germany,
Subcontractor to IRPUD
ME&P
Marcial Echenique and Partners, UK
UCL
University College London, Institution incorporated by Royal Charter, UK
TRT
TRT Trasporti e Territorio, Italy
MECSA
Marcial Echenique y Compañía S.A., Spain
STR
STRATEC S.A., Belgium
Kari Lautso
PROPOLIS Co-ordinator
69
PROPOLIS SLIDESHOW