Sustainable Urban Transport in New Member States

1
Sustainable Urban Transport in New Member States
Rob Sangen Chairman Expert Group on
Sustainable Urban Transportation Plans
2
New member states

• Large share PT
• Lack of money for construction / maintenance
• Car ultimate freedom, PT is opposite
• Politicians not informed about long-term effects
• Prevent making same mistakes EU15 makes/made
• Good practices in NMS

3
Definition Council of Ministers (1/3)

• Sustainable transport
• Allows the basic access and development needs of
  individuals, companies, and societies to be met
  safely and in a manner consistent with human and
  ecosystem health, and promises equity within and
  between successive generations

4
Definition Council of Ministers (2/3)

• Sustainable transport
• Is affordable, operates fairly and efficiently,
  offers choice of transport mode, and supports a
  competitive economy, as well as balanced regional
  development

5
Definition Council of Ministers (3/3)

• Sustainable transport
• Limits emissions and waste within the planets
  ability to absorb them, uses renewable resources
  at or below their rates of generation, and uses
  non-renewable resources at or below the rates of
  development of renewable substitutes while
  maintaining the impact on land and the generation
  of noise.

6
Transport versus Access or Mobility

• Access
• Basic needs?
• Fair and efficient pricing
• Inclusive
• Within certain ecological boundaries
• Address citizens

7
Fair prices / real costs

• Framework should stimulate sustainable urban
  mobility situation
• External effects included
• Price of fuel and environment
• Promotes use of fuels efficient vehicles and
  innovation thereof
• Road charging with accessibility
• Construction, maintenance, noise, safety, quality
  of urban environment

8
Quality of government

• European funds available for urban transportation
• SUT obligatory and evaluated by independent
  organization
• Assessment of projects / spending
• Social, environmental and economic aspects
• Call on cities to favour
• Clean and small vehicles

9
Competent authority

• Guaranteed income
• Responsibility for integrated policy
• Land use and transportation planning
• Controlled competitive tendering

10
Recommendations (1/6)

• We welcome and endorse the possibility to use
  structural funds for urban projects. Hereby it is
  important that the environmental, social and
  economic effects of Structural Funds spending are
  studied and that priorities are changed if
  results indicate the need. This accounts for both
  effects of spending in NMS and those with
  previous accessions.

11
Recommendations (2/6)

• Call on cities to use the possibilities of
  controlled competitive tendering to include
  environmental requirements. NMS cities have aging
  stock and scarce funds for renewal, but often a
  high share of PT. Structural Funds should be used
  for quality improvement of PT and renewal of city
  owned fleets (also use coordinated procurement).

12
Recommendations (3/6)

• Call on cities to favour clean vehicles with
  privileges like low emission zones, parking
  benefits, et cetera. Aim for coordination with
  other cities to increase the market. Need for
  consistency with tax benefits for clean vehicles
  and fuels. Hereby, those that are affected in a
  disproportional way could be compensated.

13
Recommendations (4/6)

• Funding for getting the most polluting vehicles
  off the road or retrofitted.

14
Recommendations (5/6)

• Call on cities to keep the use of space compact
  by requirements in spatial planning. Public
  transport has a better chance of surviving when
  use of space is compact. Relate this to the
  thematic strategy on the urban environment.

15
Recommendations (6/6)

• Generous funding schemes for capacity building
  and cross-Europe learning about good and bad
  practices concerning sustainable mobility. Hereby
  it should be stressed that there are many good
  practices in the NMS that could be very valuable
  for all European cities.