Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The TIDE impact assessment methodology
TIDE Final Conference Barcelona, 14-15 September 2015
Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and EnergyOliver Lah
Overview
Rationale
Key characteristics
Assessment steps
Summary
Background
Local authorities need guidance on the costs, benefits and overall impacts of innovative urban transport measures
Different approaches exist (e.g. CBA, MCA)
Practices regarding the appraisal of transport projects vary among cities
Premise: develop a simplified tool for impact analysis that fits a variety of measures and considers quantified and qualitative effects
The rationale behind the impact assessment methodology
We don‘t have a standard appraisal
method for transport projects.
Financial viability checks are
conducted for important projects
but not CBAs.
The major challenge is
data availability.
A regular CBA usually ignores
a measure’s advanced benefits.
The major challenge will be to monetise
qualitative externalities and
not-clear impacts.
Innovation as trigger for sustainable development
A selection of policy issues for sustainable transport:
• Air quality, • Safety, • Congestion, • Energy security, • Access and mobility,• Productivity,• Climate change, • Quality of life,
Avoiding trade-offs and generating synergies
• High risk of generating trade-offs in isolation
• Great opportunities to generate synergies and co-benefits in an integrated and strategic package of measures• SUMP as framework to ensure all
sustainable development objectives are met
• Cooperation between the local, national and European level is essential to complement mutually reinforce measures
Examples of measures that can potentially generate trade-offs
Examples:
Fuel switch (e.g. electric mobility based on coal-fired power)
Environmental zones (longer trips around the city centre/switch from diesel to petrol)
Shift from Petrol to Diesel (higher efficiency, but also higher emission of air pollutants)
Helping to make informed decisions
• Provide an overview of potential costs and benefits of planned measures in a transparent and integrated way
• Give equal weight to “soft” and “hard” evidence
• Provide a sustainable development perspective
The TIDE impact assessment tool
The TIDE impact assessment methodKey characteristics
It is based on a combination of Multi-Criteria Analysis and Cost-Benefit Analysis
Its complexity is adaptable to the proposed measure’s size and the amount of data available
Quantified and qualitative effects are assessed
It visualises the economic, social and environmental effects of a measure
Calculation of economic viability indicators (BCR, NPV) is also possible
STEP 1Describe the project and alternatives
Specify the measures and a business-as-usual case (BAU)
Define the assessment’s physical boundaries (e.g. within the city limits)
Determine the assessment perspective (e.g. society as a whole)
Identify relevant stakeholders
Example:
CNGDiesel
Measure A (BAU) Measure B
STEP 2Identify the relevant effects and indicators
Quantified vs. qualitative effects
Cluster the effects thematically
STEP 3 Assess the individual impacts
Determine the performance of the measures for the indicators
Quantified impacts – use the known quantities
Qualitative impacts
Assign scores according to a scoring system (e.g. -10 to 10)
This can be done by (external) experts or based on a literature review
Summarise these in an impact summary table
Optional: MonetisationOptional: Monetisation
STEP 4 Normalisation
This allows comparison of different types of effect (qualitative & quantified)
All performance scores are converted to a unitless score related to the maximum score for each effect
STEP 5 Effect weighting
Each effect is assigned a weighting score related to it’s relative importance in the city (ideally with input from the public)
Weighting points (e.g. 100) are distributed among the effects
STEP 6 Results and visualisation
Overall scores are calculated by multiplying measures’ performance scores by the corresponding effect weighting scores and adding these together for each measure
Only the relative scores are important!
The results can be presentated in graphs
And compiled in an impact summary table
Also, economic indicators (BCR, NPV) for measure against the BAU can be calculated
CNGDiesel
Measure A (BAU) Measure B
Score: -676 Score: -442
STEP 7 Sensitivity analysis
Used to calculate the effect of uncertain input values, or those based on weak assumptions on the overall results
The assessment is re-run with values altered (e.g. ±20%) and the effect on the end-result noted
STEP 8 Communicate results Don’t present the overall scores in isolation!
Explain the results and the way they were calculated (assumptions, weaknesses etc.)
TIDE impact assessment tool
Manual for usersStandalone document Integrated in tool spreadsheet
Simplification/standardisation of data entry
CalculatorsDiscountingHEATCO effects (nominal &
discounted)Country specificVTTSGHGsAir pollutantsInjuries & deaths
Further developments
Strengths and weaknesses
Strengths
The method can be applied to most measures
It reflects quantified and qualitative effects
It can also incorporate an economic assessment
It can be adapted according to assessment budget and data availability
Weaknesses
The results are assessment specific: any change may change the overall score of all measures
Normalisation may lead to strange results
For more information, see the TIDE Impact Assessment Handbook for Local Practitioners: www.tide-innovation.eu/en/Results/Impact-assessment-methodology-for-urban-transport-innovations-A-handbook-for-local-practitioners/
Hanna Hü[email protected]
Kain [email protected]
Oliver [email protected]
