Identifying barriers, hooks and opportunities – WP4COUNTRY PROFILE REPORT

SLOVENIA

1. INTRODUCTIONThis report is aimed at providing the information about local, regional and national barriers to the better integration of sustainable transport and mobility measures into urban mobility plans. It identifies the target areas in which to market the benefits of sustainable mobility.

The information is based on the interviews with the following groups of professionals in the field of sustainable mobility:

i) Decision makers and policy influencers - to encourage them to take advantage of opportunities to maximise return on transport investment;

ii) Practitioners – so they understand the value and significance of sustainable transport investment when developing strategies and advising clients;

The list of interviewees consisted of the members of the following institutions/organisations and positions:

DECISION MAKERS AND POLICY INFLUENCERS

- Members of Slovene Parliament;- Ministry of transport; National secretary for public transport, national coordinator of

the European Mobility Week, consultant for public transport and railways;- Municipality of Ljubljana; Vice Major, Head of the Development Projects and

Investments Office, senior consultant in the Department of environment and spatial planning;

- Municipality of Ljutomer; senior consultant for transport infrastructure, investment, planning and design of public spaces;

- Municipality of Nova Gorica; senior consultant in the Department of environment and spatial planning.

PROFESSIONAL PRACTITIONERS AND THEMATIC EXPERTS - University of Ljubljana - Faculty of civil and geodetic engineering; professors, senior

researchers;

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

- Institute for spatial politics; project manager;- Institute of Traffic and Transport; researcher in transport economics and law,

economists;- REC Slovenia - Regional environmental centre; project manager;- Municipality of Ljubljana; senior consultant for spatial/urban planning;- RRA LUR - Regional development agency; project manager for spatial planning;- Various NGOs: Ljubljana cycling network; Maribor cycling network; FOCUS –

association for sustainable development; presidents of NGOs, head of business unit, leader of mobility programme;

- Institute for geography; researcher in the field of transport;- Various consulting companies in the field of transport/urbanism/architecture

planning: project manager for civil engineering, project manager for road and railway, planner, designer, project manager for spatial planning, project manager for urban planning and landscape architecture, head of unit for spatial planning, designer for civil engineering, head of unit for civil engineering, head of department for traffic and ecology sector.

The interviewees consisted of people who are leaders in the field of (sustainable) transport planning and implementation. The majority of them have participated in sustainable mobility oriented initiatives e.g. Civitas ELAN, Champ, Bike2Work, Pumas etc. which helped to get a broad overview of the practice in this field.

The information contained in this report is based on a series of personal and telephone interviews with a broad mix of mobility experts and decision makers conducted between March and July 2015.

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

2. STATUS OF SUMP IN SLOVENIAThe concept of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMP) was successfully adopted in Slovenia and is becoming more and more a part of regular planning practice. The country not only successfully tested and implemented the new concept but also presented an innovative web platform for promoting sustainable mobility, which serves as a model for other EU countries and regions.

The SUMP concept was implemented at several different levels – at the level of city size recommended by the EU (above 100.000 inhabitants), but also in a small municipality and in a region. Until mid of 2015 some 11 municipalities out of 212 have developed their own SUMP (6 of them in a common regional SUMP), and there are now more than 60 that have decided to follow suit. Most of the credit for this goes to the on-going financial support from EU mobility projects (i.e. CIVITAS, IEE and Alpine space programmes) and recently to Cohesion funds, which now represent a basic backbone for the future development of these themes in Slovenia. An important reason for success was also an early decision by the Ministry responsible for transport to get actively involved in the process.

As a pilot city, the capital city of Ljubljana (300,000 inhabitants) was chosen in 2006. Preparation of its SUMP began within the CIVITAS Elan project, which brought together five different European cities with similar challenges in urban mobility.

Since Slovenia has only two cities (Ljubljana and Maribor) of the size of over 100,000 inhabitants (a lower limit in EU guidelines for SUMP), the guidelines for Slovenian conditions and for country’s typically rather smaller settlements had to be modified in order to cover also the smaller cities/towns.

For testing of the SUMP concept at a small scale, the municipality of Ljutomer in north-eastern Slovenia was chosen as a pilot in national SUMP project. It has approximately 12,000 inhabitants and faces a number of mobility challenges. Ljutomer’s SUMP addresses these main mobility challenges together with the problem of decreasing population. The early inclusion of residents in the planning process ensured enough time to find appropriate and widely supported solutions.

One of the conclusions of SUMP testing in Ljutomer was that cross-municipal cooperation must be encouraged in future to be able to implement more demanding measures and to overcome the lack of capacity in smaller municipalities. Therefore the next step introduced the testing of the concept at both regional and international cross border levels as part of the PUMAS project, which coordinates SUM planning in the Alpine Space. The regional implementation included the city of Nova Gorica (32,000 inhabitants), its 5 surrounding Slovenian municipalities (with a total of 26,900 inhabitants), and its counterpart across the Italian border, the city of Gorizia (36,000 inhabitants). A number of stakeholders were involved in the process of drafting of the SUMP vision, objectives and measures. Their face-to-face meetings created the opportunity to provide essential information on the content of

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

the draft report and to establish a direct dialogue with stakeholders. Although Slovenia had no prior experience of regional SUMPs, and despite the language barrier, Nova Gorica successfully produced an integrated cross-border SUMP for seven municipalities. The draft SUMP has recently entered the local political decision-making process.

With the creation of the Slovenian Platform for Sustainable Mobility in 2012, Slovenia presented an advanced approach towards supporting cities and experts in developing and implementing their SUMP, something that has become interesting and relevant for the EU as a whole. The national web-based platform is a service for cities, municipalities and regions in the process of developing SUMP. It provides them with useful information and tools, such as national SUMP guidelines, regular lectures, trainings and workshops, newsletters, study visits, and coordination of European Mobility Week etc. In recent years, the platform was supported by the European project PUMAS, which coordinates the development of SUMPs in different environments of the Alpine Space. Following its success, the project will use the Slovenian platform as a model for the Alpine Platform for Sustainable Mobility, which is going to be launched shortly.

The latest achievement of the Slovenian Ministry responsible for transportation was the decision to assign a part of its EU Cohesion funds for the development of more than 30 SUMP documents and for the implementation of sustainable mobility measures based on them. This programme is starting in 2015 and is co-financed by an Operational programme for implementation of European cohesion policy in the period 2014–2020. For the purpose of the preparation of a large number of SUMPs in the following year more than 20 experts were trained by the Slovene Platform for Sustainable Mobility. These experts will be able to apply for municipal tenders for assistance required in the production of the SUMP documents. With this training, professionals in the field of transport planning gained new knowledge and insights into how to deliver an improved approach to transport planning.

EXPECTATIONS OF EVIDENCE

It is expected that this programme will ensure that developing a SUMP will now become part of standard urban planning practice in Slovenia.

It is believed that the biggest barrier in implementing sustainable mobility measures is that decision makers as well as the potential users are afraid of the possible changes without knowing exactly what to expect in terms of results/benefits. In this regard, it is expected that evidence will provide the necessary data that for a more effective initial stage of the projects related to sustainable mobility - serving as an important and much needed driver.

On a technical side, what is expected is easily accessible archive of data that can be applied to any specific mobility planning situation – the data should be organised in such a manner to allow comparison of data for various mobility modes and various (geographical) environments.

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

3. PESTLE ANALYSISThe PESTLE analysis has been performed, as it was foreseen in the Description of work.

PESTLE analysis is a concept used as a tool to track the environment in which a new project/product/service etc. is to be launched.

It provides a general overview of the situation from Political, Economic, Social, Technological, Legal and Environmental perspective.

POLITICAL

Generally, the political will in Slovenia is oriented towards sustainability. But as experience shows, the understanding is lacking a broader picture of sustainability, focusing only on CO2 emissions, often overlooking the important aspects – i.e. society, economy and environment (in broader scale). The discussions about sustainability are therefore often narrow and vague.

The decisions about transport are made solely in political circles – rarely influenced by expert consultancy. However, rarely are these viewpoints different. Political leaders have often followed their visions without serious overview of the state-of-the-art (supported by arguments and evidence). In many cases the expert opinions were considered as the support for the already existing ideas. On the other hand, if a successful relationship has been established between the politicians and sustainable transport experts (as a result of various EU initiatives – Civitas, Pumas…) it is easier to get the politicians attention when a new set of sustainable transport measures is planned.

Lobbying is still an important part of the decision-making processes. A potentially important decision influencer is also the public – the political bodies wish to comply with the viewpoints of the majority of voters (the conformity of politics).

In this regard it must also be emphasised, that strategic planning level does not have its true place/meaning/function in Slovenia lately; the majority of proposals/ideas/plans are made on a sectorial or even more often on a local (municipal) level and are later imported into strategic documents. In general there exists a positive attitude towards strategic initiatives, but in most cases these remain on a stage of ideology, and not as actual strategic planning proposals.

ECONOMIC

Economy has been the key barrier in implementing larger transport measures in recent years. However, recently the Ministry responsible for transport has assigned a part of its EU Cohesion funds for the development of more than 60 SUMP documents and for the implementation of related measures.

Economic aspect holds an important potential to change the attitude towards sustainable mobility – with a difference concerning the micro-economic (e.g. households) and macro-

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

economic level (e.g. national). In the micro-economic level there exists a strong NIMBY effect, therefore the evidence about potential savings when adopting the sustainable transport modes could be a driver for changing people’s habits in this regard. In combination with the appropriate dissemination of the economic benefits of sustainable transport the critical mass for changes could be achieved (“bottom-up” approach).

SOCIAL

Society is in general very keen on sustainable mobility, as long as it doesn’t force them to change their travel habits. Therefore, if changes are applied with appropriate tact, the public will soon grasp their benefits. This is a key to acquiring the critical mass, which will desire (and demand) changes – this is crucial to start the wheel spinning in an accelerated rate. The experience of Civitas, Champ, B2W, Push&Pull, Pumas and other initiatives for sustainable transport has shown that this is to be realised by using the “bottom –up” approach. The dissemination of the evidence should follow this agenda through identifying the target groups and through designing appropriate messages. Also important is a careful selection and influence of media to help spreading the information.

An important driver in this aspect are the health-related reasons for changing the attitude regarding mobility. Society is more and more aware of adverse effects of air pollution and the benefits of daily exercise as a result of cycling, walking etc. More attention is being paid to air pollution monitoring and dissemination of data. This has also been an important basis for propagation of sustainable transport.

TECHNOLOGICAL

In terms of technological framework of sustainable transport it is important to present it as a way of life (holistic approach) and not only as an introduction of special and technologically advanced optimisation of the existing transport modes (e.g. hybrid propulsion, real-life information systems for PT, etc.). In terms of technological adaptations on a larger scale, there exists a question of how the introduction of alternative means of transport will fit to the existing infrastructure – in case that the introduction of alternative means will require the transformation of the approach to civil engineering, this will also need to be addressed in future (education, construction business…).

LEGISLATIVE

The issue of lower levels of government (local, regional) is in fact, that they follow the incentives of higher hierarchical levels. If the sustainable transport would have a stronger strategy on national level, the political barriers on local level would be diminished. There should exist some guidelines, decrees etc. which the local governments would act upon. As these are currently missing in a sustainable transport realm, therefore the progress (empowered by the decision-making process) is hindered. Municipalities have recently shown a great interest for sustainable mobility and have been trying to find the means for the implementation within their own legislative and administrative framework.

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

ENVIRONMENTAL

The environmental issues are proven to be less important as an indicator for sustainable mobility. More often health issues are pointed out as an important factor in this regard. The most often mentioned environmental parameters mentioned include noise and particulate matter; CO2 was not expressed as an important parameter. There exists a strong motivation to acquire the background data about the status of environment (i.e. without the burden of transport). This could be an important incentive to identify the highest potential for improvement.

Spatial / land-use issues are also identified as a very significant issue since the majority of transport infrastructure related issues have a direct link with their use and dedication of space. It is envisaged, that the introduction of sustainable transport measures will improve the quality of life in that particular area.

4. STATUS BASED ON ANSWERS TO CORE QUESTIONSThe chapter follows the process of decision-making (with political background) and funding of SUMP and provides the main findings in terms of barriers that prevent the realisation of a full potential of sustainable mobility to be implemented.

4.1 Power structures/decision-makingThe main reason for implementing new measures is minimising congestion and increasing transport safety.

Usually the ideas about the transport measures come from political circles, sometimes influenced by the expert opinions. There are practically no strategic analysis/appraisals prior to implementation; some are done when the measure has already been chosen and their purpose is mainly to support the decisions. The decision-making process is not transparent and there is no clear point how the decisions are influenced, once the process has started. However, it has been emphasised that political bodies often act as conformists, acting upon the will of the voters. Here we can seek the potential to really influence decisions – by presenting the evidence for benefits of sustainable transport to the public, who in turn demand changes from decision makers (i.e. “bottom-up” approach); in this process clear arguments must be provided to the experts, who can then act as additional supporters of these incentives.

The decision-making regarding the sustainable transport lies predominantly within the framework of municipalities (also as a result of lack of strategic planning in Slovenia in recent years). During the interviews it has been recognised, that the smaller municipalities (in terms of organisation) are more prone to accepting and implementing sustainable transport

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

measures due to easier communication within their hierarchy. As a result of this, ideas and state-of-the-art in the field of sustainable transport move faster and more efficiently from practitioners (i.e. relevant municipal departments) to the decision-makers.

The most important barriers in related to the decision-making are definitely social; related mostly to the cultural aspects (predominant car usage, cycling and PT perceived as an inferior mode of transport etc.) as well as the fact that changes in people’s habits are hard to come around. This is the limiting factor because the politicians are reluctant to upset their voters. This, in fact decelerates the wide-scale adoption of sustainable mobility measures.

The driver for adopting the sustainable mobility measures is linked primarily to the desire for reduction of CO2 emissions. However, it must be emphasised, that the context of this is predominantly political – in order to comply with the EU incentives – and not as a real concern.

Another important driver is the fact that when political circles see the positive results from the previous sustainable mobility schemes they are more keen on accepting the new ideas.

4.2 FundingThe funding is primarily based on EU sources (Cohesion funds) in combination with national or local (municipal) budgets.

The budget allocated to transport measures is uniform - the distinction between the amount of funds earmarked for infrastructure or sustainable transport measures is therefore currently impossible. This presents a drawback in the evaluation process when determining how the things have changed towards sustainable mobility in terms of availability/earmark of funding.

The driver in this context is that the funding is readily available, once the decision for sustainable measures is taken. It is an integrative process.

5. Using EVIDENCE to support future SUMP development and implementation in Slovenia

This section provides an overview on how Evidence Project set out to provide objective, robust information to support Slovenian local and national policy initiatives seeking a substantial change in the flow of funding towards sustainable urban transport investments. In the Organogram attached to the end of this report, one can see which deliverable is most useful for which stakeholder.

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

Responding to SUMP aspirations and goals

The EVIDENCE resources, such as the Measure Reviews, explore interventions at a range of scales, allowing municipalities of differing sizes to make use of the material, thus supporting the aspirations to extend SUMP activities beyond the major cities in Slovenia. Smaller communities will be able to find support for more sustainable mobility interventions that could be appropriate to their situation, and at the same time material pertinent to co-operative implementations across towns and cities is also evidenced – for example in measures such as e-ticketing (Measure No.15).

EVIDENCE documentation also contributes to the growing SUMP and sustainable mobility resources available to policy-makers, planners and the public in Slovenia, with the database of evidence sources a key addition. This, alongside the Measure Reviews offers real-life experience of the implementation of interventions, with the results, and the benefits achieved. Such material will be useful for those in Slovenia engaged in the SUMP development programmes, and the EVIDENCE training resources will provide an input to any future expansion of training schemes for experts in the country.

Encouraging aspirations for more sustainable mobility

Whilst the focus for EVIDENCE was economic benefits, social and environmental outcomes have also been highlighted. This helps to broaden the understanding of those using the material in respect of the true definition of sustainability (economic, social and environmental elements), and to position mobility interventions in a wider context. The EVIDENCE training and academic materials could be particularly important here, providing a resource to be used widely to inform current and future participants in the urban mobility-planning arena.

By making the sources of evidence available through the online EVIDENCE database, and delivering this material through the two-page summaries and the Measure Reviews, it will also be possible for the public and NGOs in Slovenia to access the same information as policy-makers. This will provide an opportunity for a more inclusive process of delivering sustainable mobility – and identifying responses to issues such as air quality and road safety. EVIDENCE material will also hopefully help to overcome prejudice that modes other than the car might be inferior – where there is evidence of good quality and successful solutions elsewhere.

Addressing barriers to sustainable mobility interventions

EVIDENCE will help to overcome what is seen to be a key barrier by some in Slovenia, concerns over the economic costs and benefits of deploying sustainable mobility solutions, and clarify the sorts of benefits that are likely to emerge. It will also highlight how ‘packages’ of measures being deployed in an area can achieve greater results. Many of these benefits will relate to health, seen as an important driver of change, with air quality and physical exercise important factors considered across EVIDENCE and the Measure Reviews (e.g. Measure No.6 Environmental Zones, No.19 Walking and No.20 Cycling). There are also a range of measures such as inclusive urban design (No.22), new public transport networks

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

(No.13) and access restrictions (No.4) that address another key area of concern in Slovenia around spatial planning issues, and people’s quality of life.

Amongst the different types of intervention considered, a number draw on new technologies, and their application to mobility. Further exploration of topics such as electric vehicles (Measure No.1) and ‘smart ticketing’ (Measure No.15), and how they might fit with other measures in a holistic approach to mobility in a city will potentially counter concerns in Slovenia over how to integrate such new technology into their SUMPs.

EVIDENCE has also identified the shortcomings of existing appraisal methods such as cost benefit analysis, and in response has proposed more extensive and inclusive alternatives. Looking to these broader factors when making decisions about sustainable mobility, and particularly considering the impacts of a range of measures deployed in an integrated way will help decision makers in Slovenia in their adoption of SUMPs.

5.1 Data requirements

The most required data in order to move planning/implementation of sustainable transport measures forward is a description of best practises with a clear definition of context for each case. This would help to avoid the issue of incomparability of data, as is often used as a counter-argument.

The data within the description of best practices should include: - methodology/approach; a detailed description of the methodology of acquiring,

analysing of data is expected;- numerical evidence of benefits (economic, social, environmental – pollution, health,

spatial…); expressed through a CBA results from past examples to show the relation between various transport modes;

- benefits (based on external costs) of changes in modal split ; expressed through a CBA results from past examples to show the combined effect of systematic change (a combination of measures);

- external costs of each modal share (normalised); primarily for motorised vehicles – this was emphasised during interviews as a crucial piece of information that will show the car drivers and decision-makers that the costs of car use are far greater than the direct cost of car purchase, use, maintenance, etc.;

- description of a process of planning/implementation/operation – barriers, drivers.

The presentation of data should be distinct, based on the target audience. Interviewees have expressed that easy accessibility of data is crucial. Web-based data archives were recognised as the most appropriate form. The organisation of data should provide comparability, transferability and up-scaling, meaning that datasets should be available for all modes/measures of sustainable transport (e.g. walking, cycling, PT, car pooling/sharing…); data should be normalised (to be used on various scales) and should cover various

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

environments (e.g. different economic, social, political etc. backgrounds in order to be applicable in various geographical locations).

This is seen as a very important output of Evidence, since the argument that the data behind a selected measure of sustainable transport is not applicable for a certain city has been a very common one. An effort should be made to gather, organise and present the evidence in such manner that such arguments would be eliminated in the future.

5.2 Data disseminationThe majority of practitioners have their education background in traffic sciences, civil engineering and geography. Some of the respondents come from backgrounds such as spatial planning/architecture/urbanism and economy.

Also, an important role in their professional life is a membership in various networks – the predominant ones include:

o National Engineering Chambero Chamber for civil engineeringo ZAPS – chamber of architecture and spatial planning of Sloveniao National association of landscape architectso National Engineering Chambero Ljubljana Cycling networko Road association, regional

Current sources of information are:

o mobility platforms (ELTIS, CIVITAS…)o internal communication (e.g. City administration)o conferenceso internet

6. CONCLUSIONS

There exist a strong motivation among the practitioners and decision makers to provide the background for implementing the changes toward sustainable mobility. All of them were very interested in receiving the feedback of Evidence project to help them continue their work with greater success. The dissemination in the identified target groups will play a crucial role in this together with identifying the process barriers with means of overcoming them and drivers to build upon their benefits.

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

A synergy must be made among the best practices already implemented in Slovenia and the state-of-the-art from the leaders in the field of sustainable mobility. The communication channels that were re-opened with EVIDENCE PROJECT must be used to their full potential in terms of changing the mind-sets of the cautious stakeholders and further stimulation of the ones that act as the motivators for change.

Report completed and finalised in November 2015

EVIDENCE

ORGANOGRAM – EVIDENCE Materials Needs Analysis

Report completed and finalised in November 2015