1. 1 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context The Dimensions and Context of Transport Decision Making 15 March 2010 Thomas B Fischer Department of Civic Design

2. Contents Introduction Hypothesis and approach The ‘structuredness’ of different types of transport decision making and associated acting strategies (context) How does decision making work? Contingency model of organisational decision making Towards the development of a situation-driven approach for the selection of indicators Some dimensions characterising decision making situations Survey  Percentage of documents that use an indicator (for different tiers)  Why do you think indicators were used for climate change, air pollution, noise pollution, and habitat loss? Conclusions 2 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

3. Introduction Aim is to empirically test theoretical thinking on situation specific indicator selection (based on survey). 3 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

4. Hypothesis and approach A good understanding of the dimensions and context of transport decision making can support the choice of environmental indicators. An analytical rather than descriptive approach is taken and recommendations are given on how the transport decision making situation might help to prescribe the choice of specific environmental indicators. 4 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

5. The ‘structuredness’ of different types of transport decision making and associated acting strategies 5 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

6. The ‘structuredness’ of different types of transport decision making and associated acting strategies similar suggestions also made in the environmental indicator literature. Lehtonen (2009), referring to the energy sector connected the purpose of indicators with the stage of policy making.  For first three policy stages ( ‘emergence of the problem’, ‘legitimisation’ and ‘mobilisation of the public for action’), he suggested that the role of indicators would be of a discursive nature. At the following two stages ‘formation of an official plan of action’ and ‘implementation of the plan’, he suggested that whether the role of indicators is more of an instrumental/rational or ‘political’ nature depends on whether there is overall consensus (the former) or controversy (the latter). 6 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

7. How does decision making work? Rational model  Indicators with decision making function Bounded rational model  More ad-hoc indicator usage Garbage can model  four independent streams:problems, solutions, participants, and choice opportunities  Effective role of indicators? – only genric measurement? Political or coalition approach Communicative planning 7 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

8. Contingency model of organisational decision making 8 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

9. Towards the development of a situation-driven approach for the selection of indicators Approaches:  Theory driven  Data drive  Politically driven 9 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

10. 10 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context Some dimensions characterising decision making situations

11. Survey on 21 transport policies, plans, programmes and projects were presented, using five situational factors, including:  the decision making tier  the stage of the decision making cycle  the administrative level  the instruments  transport modes indicators for four environmental issues were considered; climate change, air pollution, noise pollution and habitats loss. 11 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context Towards the development of a situation-driven approach for the selection of indicators

12. Percentage of documents that use an indicator (for different tiers) 12 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context

13. Why do you think indicators were used for climate change, air pollution, noise pollution, and habitat loss? 13 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context N legal reasons data exists Political reasons public request Theoretical reasons Common practice easy to communic ate other climate change1636 %50 % 36 %79 %57 %43 %21 % air pollution1662 %38 % 46 %85 %62 %38 %15 % noise pollution1250 % 70 %100 %80 %30 %10 % habitat loss860 %20 %60 %20 %100 %40 %20 %

14. Conclusions Only the decision tier appeared to play a clear role in indicator selection. The more geographically limited impacts of noise and air pollution were more frequently considered at programme and project levels than at policy and plan levels of decision making. However, this wasn’t the only factor able to explain the choice of indicators and there appeared to be an overlap with other factors. It was suggested that these may include in particular the political dimension, as climate change was an issue consistently considered at all levels. 14 Thomas B Fischer, dimensions and context