1. The TIDE impact assessment methodology TIDE Final Conference Barcelona, 14-15 September 2015 Wuppertal Institute for Climate, Environment and Energy Oliver Lah

2. Overview  Rationale  Key characteristics  Assessment steps  Summary

3. 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.

4. 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,

5. 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

6. 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)

7. 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

8. The TIDE impact assessment method Key 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

9. STEP 1 Describe 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

10. STEP 2 Identify the relevant effects and indicators  Quantified vs. qualitative effects  Cluster the effects thematically

11. 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: Monetisation

12. 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

13. 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

14. 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: -676Score: -442

15. 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.)

16. TIDE impact assessment tool Manual for users Standalone document Integrated in tool spreadsheet Simplification/standardisation of data entry Calculators Discounting HEATCO effects (nominal & discounted) Country specific VTTS GHGs Air pollutants Injuries & deaths Further developments

20. 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

21.  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/www.tide-innovation.eu/en/Results/Impact-assessment- methodology-for-urban-transport-innovations-A-handbook-for-local- practitioners/ Hanna Hüging hanna.hueging@wupperinst.org Kain Glensor kain.glensor@wupperinst.org Oliver Lah oliver.lah@wupperinst.org