1 / 14

Developing Sustainable Appraisal Methods for Small Local Schemes: Final Workshop Insights

This final workshop of the DISTILLATE programme, held on January 22, 2008, at Great Minster House in London, focused on creating effective appraisal methods that align with sustainability goals for small and local schemes. Led by Matthew Page from the University of Leeds, the workshop addressed inconsistencies between appraisal targets and actual sustainability outcomes. Participants discussed decision support tools tailored for local authorities, enhancing transparency and efficiency in evaluating transport schemes, and explored the balance between appraisal and policy alignment.

bat
Télécharger la présentation

Developing Sustainable Appraisal Methods for Small Local Schemes: Final Workshop Insights

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Small and local scheme assessment Final workshop of the DISTILLATE programme Great Minster House, London Tuesday 22nd January 2008 Matthew Page ITS, University of Leeds

  2. Objectives • Overall Project G objective: • To develop appraisal methods which reflect the requirements of sustainability • Small and local scheme assessment: • Methods for appraising small schemes • Looking at the inconsistencies between targets and appraisal: • Appraisal methods and sustainability

  3. Small and local scheme assessment Motivation came from local authority requirements: • Proper assessment of small (non major) schemes • prioritisation • analysis • assessment of behavioural and attitudinal measures • publicity campaigns • intensive marketing • targeted travel advice • Assessment against targets/indicators (not formal appraisal) • Transparent process • A number of methods had been developed for individual authorities but worked as a black box • Authorities wanted a decision support tool NOT a decision making tool

  4. Methodology The tool is an (Excel based) assessment matrix with the following stages: 1. Select indicators to be included in assessment 2. Weight the indicators on a scale of importance to the LA (1-5) 3. Assess the impact of each proposed scheme against the indicators (scale -3 to + 3) 4. Score = ∑importance*impact score for all indicators for each scheme 5. Estimate cost of scheme 6. Compare score and cost across all potential schemes

  5. Screenshot – assessing the impact

  6. Screenshot – final screen

  7. Use • The tool can be used to: • Compare individual schemes • Compare packages of schemes • Provide a quick NATA style assessment using the NATA indicators • Pick lists of indicators to select from are provided from a range of sources e.g.BVPI, Local Area Agreement, quality of life • Can tailor indicators to the scenario • It produces a total score against the selected indicators which can be compared with the estimated cost of the scheme (s)

  8. Output: Score vs Cost per scheme

  9. Output: Score by Indicator

  10. Looking at the inconsistencies between targets and appraisal Motivation came from local authority concerns: • Formal appraisal (NATA) as a barrier to the delivery of sustainable transport schemes • Role of appraisal in decision making • Particular concerns: • Importance of travel time savings (and treatment of fuel duty) • Value for Money and achievement of objectives

  11. Exploration of the issues • Partly looking at the political and practical issues around appraisal • What should the relationship be between appraisal, VfM, and the choice of schemes to deliver policy? • the potential inconsistences between appraisal/VfM and “policy fit” (or achievement of targets)

  12. Nottingham Turning Point • “ticked all the boxes” in terms of policy (good “policy fit”) • Poor VfM (BCR -1.65) • Built despite this Widely regarded as a successful scheme

  13. Addressing the problem • Review of possible approaches: • Aligning the indicators used, their relative weights and the target values with the criteria used in appraisal • Setting targets to be consistent with the outcome of an appraisal of a complete strategy to achieve sustainability objectives • The aim will be to increase the consistency and transparency with which decision making is carried out and raise awareness of this important issue No easy answers!

  14. Questions? Contact Matthew Page Institute for Transport Studies M.Page@its.leeds.ac.uk Tel: 0113 343 1789 www.distillate.ac.uk

More Related