VIKING Overview of Evaluations, MIP2005

An action for Co-ordinated Road Traffic Management Implementation in northern Europe

VIKING

Overview of evaluations, MIP2005

Version 1.0 - April 2006

VIKING Overview of evaluations, MIP2005 Ver 1.0 26/04/06

Document Information

Document:Euro-Regional Project VIKING – MIP

VIKING Overview of evaluations, MIP2005

Date of issue:26/04/2006

Author:Lone Dörge

Genua Consult, Denmark

Contributors:Risto Kulmala (FI)

Gunnar Lind (SE)

Christer Rydmell (SE)

Håkon Wold (NO)

Dieter Sage (DE)

Status:1.0

Document history:

VersionDateDistribution

Ver 0.12005-12-29VIKING Evaluation Group

Ver 0.52006-03-31VIKING Evaluation Group

Ver 1.02006-04-26Public, VIKING web external

Executive summary

The objective of this report is to provide an overview of ITS evaluations in the VIKING area i.e. Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Northern Germany. The report covers the results and reports produced until the end of 2005, as well as earlier evaluations regarded as important key evaluations. The report also mentions the on-going evaluations.

The overview may be used as a supporting tool for ITS decision makers and professionals to find ITS evaluation results achieved by others and to inform about what have actually been conducted in the field of ITS evaluation in the VIKING area.

The dissemination of ITS evaluation results has also been highlighted by DG-TREN of the European Commission.

Table of contents

1.Introduction

1.1Purpose and scope of the report

1.2Background and methodology

1.3The VIKING Evaluation tool box

2.Evaluation results

2.1Area 1: Provide electronic payment facilities

2.1.1Finalised evaluations

2.1.1.1PROGRESS in Gothenburg (Sweden)

2.1.1.2PROGRESS in Greater Copenhagen (Denmark)

2.1.1.3PROGRESS in Trondheim (Norway)

2.1.1.4AIP – AutoPASS Interoperable Payment (Norway)

2.1.2On-going evaluations

2.1.2.1Congestion charging (Sweden)

2.2Area 2: Provide safety and emergency facilities

2.2.1Finalised evaluations

2.2.1.1Road assistance in Gothenburg region (Sweden)

2.2.1.2eCall safety effects (Finland)

2.2.2On-going evaluations

2.3Area 3: Manage traffic

2.3.1Finalised evaluations

2.3.1.1DigiTraffic - On-line Traffic Modelling for Telematics Services Feasibility Study (Finland)

2.3.1.2MCS A1 Bremen/Niedersachsen (Germany)

2.3.1.3Traffic management on the Køge Bugt Motorway during road works (Denmark)

2.3.1.4Speed reminding VMS in Rävlanda (Sweden)

2.3.1.5Queue warning system on the E6 in Gothenburg (Sweden)

2.3.1.6Variable speed limits on main roads (Finland)

2.3.2On-going evaluations

2.3.2.1Swedish large-scale trial on Variable Speed Limits (Sweden)

2.3.2.2Evaluation of Traffic Management on M3 (Denmark)

2.3.2.3Optimisation of configuration of Line Control (Germany)

2.3.2.4Use of the Emergency Lane on A7 (Germany)

2.3.2.5MCS A1 Bremen/Niedersachsen (Germany)

2.4Area 4: Manage public transport operations

2.4.1Finalised evaluations

2.4.1.1SPOT/UTOPIA (Norway)

2.4.2On-going evaluations

2.5Area 5: Provide advanced driver assistance systems

2.5.1Finalised evaluations

2.5.1.1Intelligent Speed Adaptation, ISA (Sweden)

2.5.2On-going evaluations

2.6Area 6: Provide traveller journey assistance

2.6.1Finalised evaluations

2.6.1.1OPTIS – Optimised traffic in Sweden

2.6.1.2Parking Information in Gothenburg (Sweden)

2.6.1.3Personal commuter information (Sweden)

2.6.1.4IBIS – Real-time travel information for the public transport in Trondheim (Norway)

2.6.1.5ICT in Road Traffic (Norway)

2.6.1.6TRIM Travel Time (Denmark)

2.6.1.7TRIM (Denmark)

2.6.1.8Traffic information in congestion management (Finland)

2.6.1.9Assessment of impacts and socio-economical profitability of real-time passenger information system(ELMI) (Finland)

2.6.1.10Intelligent transport services. User needs and transport policy goals (Finland)

2.6.1.11Road traffic information. Preliminary study (Finland)

2.6.1.12Success rate and accuracy of the incident information for road users (Finland)

2.6.1.13Travel time service utilising mobile phones (Finland)

2.6.1.14An assessment of the effects and cost-effectiveness of a public transport journey planner (Finland)

2.6.1.15Quo Vadis VMS system with delay information (Denmark)

2.6.2On-going evaluations

2.6.2.1IT based Public transport information systems (Sweden)

2.7Area 7: Provide support for law enforcement

2.7.1Finalised evaluations

2.7.1.1Automatic Speed Enforcement, Pilot trials (Denmark)

2.7.1.2Speed effects of automatic camera enforcement on main road no. 51 (Finland)

2.7.2On-going evaluations

2.8Area 8: Manage freight and fleet operations

2.8.1Finalised evaluations

2.8.1.1PortNet impact evaluation (Finland)

2.8.1.2Use of electronic container seal in traffic through Finnish ports (Finland)

2.8.1.3Freight transport telematics architecture (Finland)

2.8.2On-going evaluations

3.General evaluations and evaluation tools

3.1Overviews

3.1.1Impacts of ITS applications (Sweden)

3.1.2Economic feasibility of ITS applications in Finnish conditions

3.1.3Does ITS work in practice? (Sweden)

3.1.4Evaluation of Traffic Management in Sweden

3.1.5ITS costs (Sweden)

3.2Guidelines and other supporting tools

3.2.1PLUTO – ITS Evaluation Planning Handbook (Sweden)

3.2.2Guidelines for evaluation of ITS projects (Finland)

3.2.3Pre-Assessment of effects of ITS implementation (Sweden)

3.2.4Tool for evaluation of ITS services (Finland)

4.National practices

4.1Evaluation strategy in Sweden

5.Conclusions and remarks

1.Introduction

1.1Purpose and scope of the report

The purpose of this report is to provide an overview of ITS evaluations in the VIKING area i.e. Finland, Sweden, Norway, Denmark and Northern Germany.

The report contains the latest evaluation results from up till the end of 2005 and in addition earlier evaluations that are regarded as key evaluations. The report also mentions briefly the on-going evaluations within VIKING.

The report contains both evaluations conducted within the VIKING project and evaluations conducted outside the project. The evaluations cover not only the VIKING network, but the entire VIKING area, in order to give an overall idea of the results and impacts to expect as well as to achieve knowledge of the nature of the results and how they depend upon local characteristics etc.

1.2Background and methodology

The VIKING Evaluation Group has produced two earlier overview reports with evaluations since the beginning of VIKING (i.e. 1996). The reports are publicly available at the VIKING web site

Most of the national evaluation reports are written in the national languages and in the very first report it was not attempted to harmonize the national descriptions. But as part of the horizontal work the VIKING Evaluation Group has agreed on a common format for short English abstracts (1-2 pages) of ITS evaluations. The format is in accordance with the TEMPO template for reporting evaluation results, i.e. the abstracts do have the same headlines as are in the evaluation reports in TEMPO format.

Each country representative in the VIKING Evaluation Group has had the responsibility of providing input on the national evaluations to the report.

The evaluations are categorized according to the FRAME / KAREN function groups as this structure is regarded as an appropriate basis for the grouping. Some evaluations will always be difficult to put in a certain category because they cover several ITS services or functions, but in most cases the category is quite obvious. The dilemma mentioned will be there no matter which grouping is used.

1.3The VIKING Evaluation tool box

The VIKING Evaluation Group has recognised the need for decision support in different phases of a project:

Project phase / Decision support / Desired tools
Idea generation / Best practice, Good examples / Toolbox of ITS applications
Planning, arguing, financing, decision on implementation / Feasibility study, Ex-ante evaluation / Overview of impacts, Ex-ante evaluation methodology, Socio-economic cost-benefit analysis
Planning of evaluation / Evaluation plan / Ex-post evaluation methodology
Project realisation / Managing guidelines / Project handbook
Analysis of results, feed-back / Ex-post evaluation, Presentation of results / Guidelines for analysis and reporting
Further implementation / Long-term experience, Monitoring of impacts, Maintenance costs, Transferability of results / Links to users, META analysis of similar projects

The VIKING Evaluation Group recommends the use of the VIKING evaluation package, which address the need for overview of impacts, ex-ante and ex-post evaluations as well as feedback from finalised evaluations. The package consists of tools to support ITS evaluations and to harmonize reporting of evaluation results. The toolbox consists of three parts:

TEMPO Framework (version 1.0)
VIKING Guidelines for evaluation of ITS projects (April 2002)
TEMPO Reporting guidelines (version 4)

1. TEMPO Framework

This note summarises a generic approach and principles for the evaluation of Euro-regional projects.

Evaluation is required in Euro-regional projects, in order to:

Justify EU and National Government expenditure on the projects;
Demonstrate the benefits (financial and socio-economic) of individual applications;
Demonstrate the benefits of the Euro-regional projects as a whole; and
Increase understanding of the impacts of ITS services.

Results should be easily understandable and comparable in order to allow best practice to be widely disseminated and to ensure that those reading the results of others’ work can interpret it correctly.

2. VIKING Guidelines for evaluation of ITS projects

These VIKING Evaluation guidelines are recommended as a tool for evaluation of ITS projects. These guidelines are an updated version of the earlier VIKING Guidelines (1999). The guidelines present a systematic method for dealing with impacts, which ensures that all projects cover the essential points for decision-making. The guidelines present extensive checklists of the possible impacts of ITS on the transport system and its users (end users, operators, authorities etc.) as well as on all the actors linked to logistics systems. The guidelines apply to all modes of transport.

A good complement to the VIKING Guidelines is the national Swedish planning handbook PLUTO, guidelines for ex-post evaluation, in English. The target group is project leaders without expertise in evaluation. It describes the procedure in stages and provides useful examples of data that may be worth collecting, how this can be done and how the material is analysed. It should also serve as a source of ideas and a checklist. A number of pitfalls that should be avoided are listed.

3. TEMPO Reporting guidelines (currently out in a version 4)

This note presents a standardised framework or template for the reporting of results and has been developed by the TEMPO Evaluation Expert Group for use in all Euro-regional projects and recommended by the Commission, DG-TREN.

It is important to remember that those likely to benefit most from the results of the evaluation, those who may be considering implementing a similar application to address their own, specific local problems may well be unfamiliar with the ITS application implemented and the area in which it has been deployed. Similarly, the reader may well be unfamiliar with the general principles of evaluation and the parameters which impact on system performance. It is imperative, therefore, that results are clearly presented with the necessary supporting information to enable the ‘transferability’ of results to be assessed.

The evaluation package is expected to be complemented with an Evaluation Best Practice document after that has been developed by the Euro-regional Evaluation Expert Group.

The dissemination of ITS evaluation results has been highlighted by DG-TREN of the European Commission, and many of the evaluation reports mentioned in this report are publicly available at the VIKING web site

2.Evaluation results

2.1Area 1: Provide electronic payment facilities

2.1.1Finalised evaluations

2.1.1.1PROGRESS in Gothenburg (Sweden)

Description of the problem:

The overall purpose of the project was to fill a knowledge lacuna dealing with congestion fees, foremost with regard to drivers’ reactions and attitudes to road pricing and technical possibilities.

Description of the ITS project:

PROGRESS was initiated in 2000 being a four-year European cooperative project into road pricing with eight participating cities. Within the framework of the project, the cities chose to test different systems and technical solutions. Within the Swedish part of Progress, a largely complete road pricing system was created and tested.

Evaluation (timing, type, methods):

In Gothenburg, the project involved about one hundred voluntary test drivers who tested how it is to drive when faced with road pricing. The drivers were given experimental equipment that was installed in their cars and a sum of money with which the charges were to be paid. The test drivers were told to test two different payment structures: Congestion, where high charges were levied during weekdays in the rush-hour, and Environment, where lower charges were levied throughout day and night on all days of the week. The system tested in Gothenburg was based on the Internet, using GPS for positioning (satellites send coordinates to the car’s computer system) and communicating via a cell phone system.

Impact of the project (technical performance, impacts):

Although the system cannot be regarded as mature for introduction on a large scale, important experiences can be identified. In the “Environmental” scenario the journeys by car decreased by almost 10 % per day, foremost the long journeys. Particularly with regard to journeys made in connection with work, there was a large move from cars to other means of transport. Most motorists in Gothenburg consider that road pricing is not justified today as the traffic does not imply any particular problem. In the “Congestion” scenario, where charging was imposed during the rush hour instead of during the whole day and night, there was a reduction in car traffic during the rush hour by about 15 %, because many drivers avoided the charges by travelling at a different time of day.

Transferability of results:

A general finding is that the drivers are ready to consider road pricing if petrol and vehicle taxes were simultaneously reduced, or that public transport and air quality were improved. A condition, however, is that the revenues from road charging were returned to the traffic system. Integrity is often mentioned as a problem in the debate but the trial indicated that this problem is over-estimated.

Reference:

Transek (2004). Progress 2000-2004. (in Swedish, English summary). Ett fältförsök med vägavgifter i Göteborg.

2.1.1.2PROGRESS in Greater Copenhagen (Denmark)

Description of the problem:

The overall purpose of the project was evaluation of road pricing strategies in relation to travel patterns, network and mobility effects. The purpose was also to explore the technical possibilities.

Description of the ITS project:

AKTA is the Danish part study of the PROGRESS project ( which again is part of the EU 5th Framework programme.

In PROGRESS, eight European cities assess in different ways impacts of different urban pricing schemes, Copenhagen being one.

Evaluation (timing, type, methods):

In the EFC trials Greater Copenhagen is equipped with virtual cordon rings and pricing zones, and 500 test drivers have a GPS-based vehicle position system installed in their own cars, logging all movements and pricing every trip. All subjects reside or have their workplace within the road pricing zones, and all have a daily need for transport. The EFC trials have been running from October 2001 to August 2003.

Impact of the project (technical performance, impacts):

Although the system cannot be regarded as mature for introduction on a large scale, important experiences were identified and lessons learned.

The Danish programme demonstrated that it is possible to develop a road pricing system which charges a kilometre rate based on time, place and distance driven. It also demonstrated that road pricing affected the driving pattern of the test drivers. The GPS-based system was widely understood and accepted, and a large proportion of road users in Denmark found variable taxes on car driving more acceptable than the fixed ones. However, payment, security and control functions were not considered at a level of detail that showed that such a scheme is practical. As these functions are vital to the feasibility of a road pricing system, there is a need for further technical development.

The Copenhagen trial demonstrated that road user charging does affect behaviour; it is not considered as another fixed cost, but as a marginal cost that drivers respond to. But the pricing level needs to be high if road users are to change behaviour, (0.13-0.67 Euros/km in the peak hours and half price in non-peak hours). Hence the high km-based pricing level clearly made an impression on the participants. Even if they could not change behaviour, they had examined alternative travel options before rejecting these. The low km-based pricing level was in general not sufficiently high to change behaviour, although a few participants made some minor changes when it was easy. The km-based schemes were in general considered to be more fair than the cordon-based. About 50% of the test drivers in some way changed behaviour, and the main changes were:

Choice of different (cheaper) route - mostly for non-commutingtrips
Increased use of kiss-and-ride facilities (more passengers in the test cars)
Changes in destination and time of day for non-commuting trips

Transferability of results:

Reference:

Progress Main Project Report, Version 1.0. July 2004. Published and available at

2.1.1.3PROGRESS in Trondheim (Norway)

Overall and local project objectives:

PROGRESS was a reasearch project supported by the EU, for the years 2000 - 2004. The overall purpose of the project was “to demonstrate and evaluate the effectiveness and acceptance of integrated urban transport pricing schemes to achieve transport goals and raise revenue”.

Each of the eight participating cities had specific objectives and requirements for the respective sites, based on local conditions. The local Trondheim objectives were mainly to explore effects of the ongoing charging scheme and possible development/use of the charging system after 2005.

Evaluation:

The Trondheim evaluation activities in the PROGRESS project covered:

long term effects of the Trondheim Tolling system since the start in 1991
short-term effects of the 2003 revision of the Trondheim Tolling system
acceptance and possible effects of future Road User Charging alternatives

The main focus of the evaluation of the Tolling system was changes in: