Search

This following special issue of the European Journal of Transport Infrastructure Research (EJTIR) containing 4 scientific papers is the result of the work conducted under the research project 'National Transport Planning - Sustainability, Institutions and Tools' (SUSTAIN) (2012-2017) financed by the Danish Innovation Fund. SUSTAIN was coordinated by first the Department of Transport of the Technical University of Denmark (DTU Transport) and later as the result of a reorganisation of the transport research at DTU by the Department of Management Engineering (DTU Management Engineering). The project was carried out in cooperation with several Danish and international partners. In SUSTAIN the following definition of national sustainable transport planning (NSTP) was adopted: deliberate, knowledge-based, and strategic endeavours to integrate sustainability principles, criteria and goals in the development, management, regulation and assessment of nationally significant transport systems and services. This paper presents the research outcome by reviewing some of the major findings and seeing these collectively as a basis for promoting sustainability through the formulated research topic of NSTP. This basis includes defining criteria and indicators for use in NSTP combining evidence-based and performance oriented planning approaches. Furthermore, it contains a flexible evaluation framework that includes a decision support model that when informed by criteria and indicators can structure and assist an NSTP practice. This practice can support a planning process aiming at realising a sustainable transport development. Finally, the basis comprises a review of the complex political and administrative fabric in which NSTP is embedded, and thereby it can condition the ability to promote sustainability in practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT Indicators are considered a key tool in assessing whether societies are progressing towards sustainability. In indicator development, the main emphasis has been on the production of new indicators. Various kinds of sustainable development indicators and indicator sets have been developed to describe and assess key trends at local, national and global level. We argue that it is at least equally important to focus on how, when and by whom indicators are actually used. In addition, the focus should be on what kinds of desirable and undesirable effects are related to the use or non-use of indicators. Here, attention is paid to the negative, unintended effects of sustainability indicators in communication processes. Starting from an earlier typology focusing on health communication, various types of negative unintended effects of sustainable development indicators are identified and discussed. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: The paper focuses on the use and influence of indicators in European sustainable transport policy from a ‘knowledge utilization’ research point of view. The starting point is the contrast between the widely held idea that indicators are important tools for sustainable transport policy making, versus ‘knowledge utilization’ oriented research, which has often demonstrated that formal technical knowledge is used much less, or at least differently, than expected in policy and decision making. The paper looks at two cases of indicators applied for strategic policy making within the sustainable transport agenda. The first case concerns indicators tracking the fulfillment of national transport policy objectives in Sweden. The case explores the use and influence of an annual monitoring and evaluation report produced for this purpose, within a general ‘Management-by-Objectives’ regime. The second case deals with indicators applied for the Mid-Term Review of the European Commission's transport policy White Paper ‘Time to Decide’ (issued in 2001). The focus in this case is on a particular indicator based study conducted in 2005 by a group of consultants in close collaboration with European Commission staff. It is found that several indicators in both cases are actually used in policy processes, with evidence of use found in documents as well as interviews. However, ‘use’ does not automatically mean ‘influence’ on policies or processes in more than a superficial manner. Indicators seem to play a very limited direct instrumental role, while some signs of symbolic, conceptual and process roles are found. In the EU case we identify what is called a rationalization role of indicators, meaning that indicators inform and help to rationalize a change in the position towards key objectives. Several factors that characterize the indicators, the users, and policy context are found to contribute to understand the type of use and influence observed in both cases. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]