Introduction and Methodology

The present report concerns six concluded and nine ongoing INTERREG IVC ‘SUSTAINABLE TRANSPORT’ projects. The 15 projects involve a total of 168 PARTNERS (averaging 11 partners per project) see Annexe 1 – Cluster Fact Sheet and Annexe 2 – Cluster Map. The projects worked on 94 + 150 Good Practices (concluded / ongoing projects; 150 is an approximate figure since not all the projects have yet definitively identified all their Good Practices). Each of the selected projects explored between eight and 23 Good Practices (an average of 16 Good Practices per project); Some Good Practices have already been transferred within and even outside the projects.

The report starts, in Chapter 2, by looking at the policy context (see also Annexe 5 – International Policy Context). In Chapter 3, the analysis of each project is summarised with regard to project aims, main Good Practices, relevance of the topics addressed, and transferability / drivers / barriers. The complete analysis can be found in Annexe 3, broken down into the following aspects: impact, capitalisation, innovation, and transferability. Chapter 3 also presents selected Good Practices and their respective recommendations, a thematic cross-analysis by Topic, and answers to the core questions. Finally, Chapter 4 presents the key policy messages and conclusions.

METHODOLOGY

It has to be borne in mind that the analysis could not be carried out for the ongoing projects in the same detailed manner as for the concluded ones, as the Good Practices for ongoing projects – albeit, in most cases, having already pre-selected from a long list (except for the projects ECOTALE and CYCLE CITIES) – had not yet undergone the exchange of experiences, networking, and transfer, nor produced the expected outcomes (such as case study collections, policy recommendations, strategic guidelines, or Action Plans).

The methodology adopted to assess the projects with regard to benchmarking and possible capitalisation is explained below.

In the specific thematic area of Sustainable Transport, the large majority of the solutions (both Good Practices and policies) outlined by the projects are based on the use of technologies or specific support methodologies. This implies that any transfer process requires considering socio-economic and policy/political factors and often includes a high level of ‘engineering’ analysis and conceptual work. Even when using consolidated and standard practices, it is necessary to adapt technologies and adjust the methodologies to each specific situation and context. Moreover, all the policies must be analysed, taking account of their adaptation to the local circumstances. The main factors that generally affect the tailoring of policy design include:

  • the territory in which the intervention is carried out;
  • the level and characteristics of transport demand;
  • the economic and environmental constraints and the need to reconcile the two;
  • the social and political constraints and potentials.

The above-mentioned factors must be specifically considered each time we apply new methodologies, technologies or experiences, which must be adapted on an individual case basis. Only a very limited number of solutions and products available on the market can escape this rule.

This means that simply identifying Good Practices is not enough to obtain an indication of their transferability and, above all, of the possibility of ‘capitalising’ on them, and thereby making them suitable outside the project environment. It is quite common that a Good Practice identified in one place is not applicable elsewhere or may even be counter-productive in different contexts.

In order to achieve a potential for ‘capitalisation’, it is not sufficient to describe, however accurately, the identified Good Practices, their implementation, and the related benefits. It is very important to ascertain the conditions under which transferability can occur and the methodologies needed to achieve the desired results. Therefore, the ideal solution is to supplement the identified Good Practice with more general documentation, such as position papers, guidelines, site evaluations, feasibility studies and policy recommendations. In fact, if the good practice assessment can persuade the importing region  to consider adopting a specific experience, a more analytical documentation can provide useful information for evaluating the real applicability and expected results.

With this general consideration in mind, each Good Practice was analysed according to its relevance in terms of capitalisation, taking account of several points:

  • the level of innovation, from different perspectives. In fact, we cannot only consider the ’absolute level’ of innovation with respect to the European state-of-the-art. Local conditions must be taken into account, and the level of innovation must also be defined in relation to the application environment;
  • the potential impact that their application can have in new environments. Good Practices with a high potential impact on the state of mobility are of course more interesting than the ones with a limited impact;
  • the level of difficulty in transferring the identified Good Practice/policies relevance of the Topics addressed by the single Good Practice/policy with respect to European priorities and the policies defined in the European position papers.

Following a general evaluation of the characteristics of the various Good Practices and policies, a qualitative assessment of their degree of interest/relevance was performed.

All the Good Practices were analysed and clustered into nine Topics, as shown in the graph. Each Good Practice was only classified according to its primary Topic, although many Good Practices include aspects related to several Topics.

Naturally, the number of Good Practices per Topic varies considerably, as shown in the figure on the left, and not all the projects cover all the Topics: while the Good Practices in four Projects are spread over a large number of Topics (dark green), the remaining (light green) focus on a lower number of specific Topics, as is clearly shown in the following table, which maps Good Practices against Topics, for the 15 projects.
 

OBS.: The dark green colour indicates projects with good practices that address seven or more of the Topics. The light green colour indicates projects with Good Practices covering fewer than seven Topics.

The analysis of the projects presented in Section 3.1 (and Annexe 3 – Project Assessment Files) was carried out accounting for the following aspects:

  • Thematic areas and main Topics addressed and their relevance;
  • Good Practices and project findings;
  • Degree of interest, innovation and impact;
  • Transferability, transferability methodology (handbooks, manuals, tools), and drivers and barriers (Policy/ culture / methodologies for design/ analysis/ implementation / applications products, new solutions, innovative approaches to existing markets/products, etc.);
  • Relationships/linkages with other INTERREG IVC programme projects;
  • Relationships/linkages with other European projects and initiatives and significance vis-à-vis the five themes of the 2011 Transport White Paper (Single Transport Area / Innovating technology and behaviour / Modern Infrastructure / Smart Pricing / Smart Funding).

Each Project Assessment File also contains a fact sheet, a project synopsis, and a list of documents.

Some more specific methodological notes can be found in Chapter 3. Other instruments aimed at strengthening the knowledge on the projects were the thematic workshop (Annexe 6 – Thematic Workshop Report), online survey (Annexe 7– Online Survey) and the face-to-face interviews (Annexe 8 – Face-to-Face Interviews). In addition, the research data are compiled in Annexe 9 - Database. Annexe 10 - Terms and Definitions contains a glossary.

Previous chapter

As of 31 December 2015, this website is no longer updated. Follow news on interregional cooperation at www.interregeurope.eu