1 / 68

CIVITAS VANGUARD Meeting – WP 2 1 th of April 2009 Brussels

CIVITAS VANGUARD Meeting – WP 2 1 th of April 2009 Brussels Annemie Van Uytven and Elke Franchois, Mobiel 21. Introduction (1). Overview Survey background Background CIVITAS cities Results that feed into: WP3 WP4 WP5 Comparison of results Conclusions Further steps:

quinto
Télécharger la présentation

CIVITAS VANGUARD Meeting – WP 2 1 th of April 2009 Brussels

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. CIVITAS VANGUARD Meeting – WP 2 1th of April 2009 Brussels Annemie Van Uytven and Elke Franchois, Mobiel 21

  2. Introduction (1) Overview • Survey background • Background CIVITAS cities • Results that feed into: • WP3 • WP4 • WP5 • Comparison of results • Conclusions • Further steps: • continuous assessment and adaptation (task 2.3) • stakeholder consultation (task 3.5)

  3. Introduction (2) Methodology used • 2 surveys in • 25 CIVITAS Plus cities (+ 5 CIVITAS Plus project dissemination managers) • 37 non - CIVITAS cities in 19 countries Timing • 19th January 2009 – 20th February 2009

  4. Introduction (3)

  5. Introduction (4) Research questions • To understand the CP dissemination managers’ needs in terms of information, marketing and training • How do city decision makers and mobility departments get their information and how can VANGUARD penetrate that information process?

  6. Survey 1 (1) Survey 1 – CIVITAS Plus cities • Target groups • Project dissemination managers • Local dissemination managers • Local mobility department • Local decision maker • Methodology • 4 online questionnaires - possibility of telephone interview • VANGUARD partners contact cities they liase with

  7. Survey 1 (2) Survey 1 - CIVITAS Plus cities • Project & local dissemination managers - content of questionnaires • Training needs • VANGUARD information and communication/marketing materials needs • Support to CIVITAS VANGUARD

  8. Survey 1 (3) Survey 1 - CIVITAS Plus cities • Mobility department and decision maker - content of questionnaire • Knowledge CIVITAS Initiative • Sustainable mobility activities • Information sources and topics of interest on sustainable mobility • CIVITAS information sources

  9. S1 – response PDM • 100% response rate

  10. S1 – response LDM • 20 of 25 LDM’s responded • 80% response rate

  11. S1 – response CIVITAS local mobility department 18 of 25 local mobility departments CIVITAS cities Response rate of 72%

  12. S1 – CIVITAS local decision makers - response 10 decision makers from 25 CIVITAS Plus cities – 40% response rate

  13. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS mobility departments Aware of CIVITAS? 47% of the responding CIVITAS mobility departments became aware of the CIVITAS Initiative via colleagues 18% were introduced to the initiative by an organisation (, Umbria Region ICE in Brussels, Lombardia region national government department and EUROCITIES 18% became aware of CIVITAS through a (CIVITAS) conference 33% became aware in 2006; 22% in 2007

  14. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local decision makers Aware of CIVITAS? • 31% of the responding decision makers became aware of the CIVITAS Initiative via the CIVITAS website • 25% of politicians were introduced to the initiative by an organisation (NEA organisation, EUROCITIES, Umbria Region ICE in Brussels, SMTUC) • 70% became aware after 2006

  15. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local mobility departments Why apply CIVITAS? • High importance: need for funding (67%) and info on sustainable mobility (61%) • Low importance: external European stamp on work performed (11% high importance) CIVITAS history? • 2 in 3 first time CIVITAS application • 72% no earlier CIVITAS involvement

  16. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local mobility departments

  17. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local mobility departments

  18. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local mobility departments

  19. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local mobility departments

  20. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local decision makers

  21. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local decision makers – objectives

  22. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local decision makers Themes already worked on: • collective passenger transport : 50% of respondents indicated this as a theme on which they have been working to a high extent. Success factors working on sustainable mobility • 50% of the respondents indicated confidence in sustainable mobility as a policy is a success factor to a high extent for working on sustainable mobility. • Communication and collaboration with local key stakeholders on the topic of sustainable mobility is indicated by 60% of the respondents as a success factor to a medium extent.

  23. S1 – Background CIVITAS cities – CIVITAS local decision makers

  24. S1 – WP3 – results PDM CIVITAS Training topics • Most popular: • marketing & branding techniques (80%), • stakeholder consultation methods (80%) and • social inclusion (80%) • Least popular • collective passenger transport (0%) • less car intensive lifestyle (0%) • integrated pricing (0%) • Interaction level trainings • Medium (workshop) or high (debate) - (both 40%)

  25. S1 – WP3 – results PDM

  26. S1 – WP3 – results PDM Expectations towards • DLG • learning from other experiences; • exchanging knowledge and experiences, especially best practices; • support and advice • VANGUARD • creating cohesion between projects and CIVITAS I & II and Plus; • making exchanges possible

  27. S1 – WP3 – results LDM CIVITAS Training topics • Most popular: • marketing & branding techniques (75%), • evaluation of measures (65%), • cultural differences in Europe (55%), • stakeholder consultation methods (50%) • Least popular • integrated pricing (25%) • access restrictions (20%) • gender issues (10%) • Interaction level trainings • medium (workshop) – (70%)

  28. S1 – WP3 – results LDM

  29. S1 – WP3 – results LDM LDM support to VANGUARD • Write case study on a city measure (80%) • Write a report on a city measure (75%) • Write a news item on a city measure (70%) • Act as a multiplier (60%) • Timing of support: after measure implementation

  30. S1 – WP3 – results CIVITAS mobility department CIVITAS Training topics • Most popular: • Collective passenger transport (72%), • Evaluation of measures (67%) and • Transport management (67%) • Least popular • Cultural differences in Europe (17%) • Gender issues (6%) • Interaction level trainings • Medium (workshop) (80%)

  31. S1 – WP3 – results CIVITAS mobility department

  32. S1 – WP3 –CIVITAS local decision makers - results CIVITAS Training topics • Most popular: • Transport management (60%) • Social inclusion (50%) • Collective passenger transport (50%) • Least popular • Cultural differences in Europe (10%) • Gender issues (0%) • Interaction level trainings • Medium (workshop) (80%)

  33. S1 – WP3 –CIVITAS local decision makers - results

  34. S1 – WP 4 – CIVITAS mobility departments Currently used information sources

  35. S1 – WP 4 – CIVITAS mobility departments Importance currently used information sources

  36. S1 – WP 4 – CIVITAS local decision makers

  37. S1 – WP4 – results PDM CIVITAS information services preferred • Most popular: • CIVITAS events calendar (100% very useful) • Detailed CIVITAS case studies (100% very useful) • Good/bad practices learned (100% very useful) • Case studies on CIVITAS topics (100% very useful) • Least popular • Fact sheets on CIVITAS topics (20% very useful), • CIVITAS gadgets (20% very useful), • CIVITAS postcards (20% very useful), • CIVITAS printed newsletters (20% very useful), • tailor-made guidelines to promote CIVITAS at the local level (0% very useful)

  38. S1 – WP4 – results PDM

  39. S1 – WP4 – results LDM CIVITAS Information services preferred • Most popular: • CIVITAS events calendar (70% very useful) • Detailed CIVITAS case studies (65% very useful) • General guidelines on how to promote CIVITAS at the local level (65% very useful) • Good/bad practices learned (60% very useful) • Least popular • CIVITAS printed newsletters (40% not useful) • Pop-up displays (30% not useful) • CIVITAS postcards (25% not useful) • CIVITAS gadgets (15% not useful)

  40. S1 – WP4 – results LDM

  41. S1 – WP4 – results CIVITAS mobility department CIVITAS Information services preferred • Most popular: • Good/bad practices learned (67% highly useful) • Documented case studies (67% highly useful) • Online library (56% highly useful) • Staff exchanges (50% highly useful) • Least popular • Online conferences • Online discussions

  42. S1 – WP4 – results CIVITAS mobility department

  43. S1 – WP 4 – CIVITAS local decision makers • 90% indicated electronic alerts as a highly interesting service. • good/bad practiceslearned and European funding opportunities are indicated by 80% of local decision makers. • Online networking is indicated by 80% as an interesting information service to a medium extent • Some 50% of respondents indicated online measure database and experiences arranged thematically as an interesting service to a low extent.

  44. S1 – WP4 – results PDM CIVITAS website • All are familiar • All visit website several times a week • All read news and general sections • In general website scores good marks • Some neutral and bad scores on structure and navigation • Suggestions for improvement: forum, interactive, more images, more colour • Think website mainly targets people interested in CIVITAS and CIVITAS cities (both 80%)

  45. S1 – WP4 – results LDM CIVITAS website • 85% are familiar • 45% visit website several times a week • Most read cities, members area and news section • In general website scores good marks • Some neutral and bad scores on structure and navigation • Suggestions for improvement: more photos, better graphics, better CMS, thematic entries, etc. • Think website mainly targets people interested in CIVITAS (70%)

  46. S1 – WP4 – results CIVITAS mobility department CIVITAS website • 83% are familiar • 44% visit website several times a month • 61% read news and general sections • In general website scores good marks • Some neutral scores on vocabulary used and graphics • Think website mainly targets people interested in CIVITAS (61%) • Website improvements: • More general information about sustainable mobility or links to such information • Supported with extra content • Make more use of multimedia, flashes, videos, etc.

  47. S1 – WP 4 – CIVITAS local decision makers CIVITAS Website: • All decision makers are familiar with the website • All visit the website at least once a month • CIVITAS projects, CIVITAS cities, CIVITAS news and CIVITAS measures are the most read topics

  48. Survey 2 TARGET GROUP: Survey 2 – 37 non-CIVITAS cities in 19 countries

  49. S2 – target group, methodology and questionnaire • Target group • 37 cities in 19 countries ‘non-CIVITAS countries’ • local mobility department • local decision maker • Methodology • online questionnaires • contacted by VANGUARD partners • Content of questionnaires • Knowledge CIVITAS Initiative • Sustainable mobility activities in the city • Information sources and topics of interest on sustainable mobility • Interest in CIVITAS Initiative

  50. S2 - response

More Related