Most of the present strategic environmental assessments do not take into account properly the variety of the environmental impacts, or are using markers, indices and more generally tools which do not represent the impacts. A correct representation of the whole range of impacts is necessary to ensure that sustainability takes into account environmental issues to a satisfactory degree. This is especially important for the transport sector where the concerns and the stakes are important.

The main objective of the action is to design harmonised methods to build better environmental indicators by using existing European indices, and to build methods to be applied to the decision making process of the transport sector in the different European countries, in order to contribute to a systemic approach to environmental and transportation issues.

Besides and beyond the previous COST 350 activity more focussed on the user's point of view, this action deals with the scientific analysis and design of tools for environmental impact assessment, focussing on the representativeness of the methods, either for evaluating sub-impacts such as health impacts, or for aggregating by a multi-criteria analysis the different sub-impact indices.

Output will be valuable for policy analysts (forecasting or back-casting), transport planners, decision-makers, etc...

Finally the objectives of the action are:

The objectives and the initial work programme of COST 356 are described in detail in a so-called Memorandum of Understanding or MoU. The finalised work programme is presented in the next section.

The duration of the action is October 14, 2005 - January 15, 2010.

 

The structure (as the MoU) organises the work in 3 parts: An initial methodological part (network building, methodological building), the core of the scientific work (indicators as measurement tools, integration in the decision making), and a final part (research needs, synthesis, dissemination).

The core of the scientific work is organised in one WG (WG2) working from the environmental or natural science point of view, discussing what impacts are important and relevant, and how they could and should be described and measured within an indicator system, while the other WG (WG3) starts from the planning and decision making point of view, discussing indicator requirements from that point of view, and then discusses this related to options and methods used today. Even if the work is split in two WGs, an important part of the work is to be found in the room between the agendas of the groups. What is the gap between the WG views on indicator requirements etc., how can it be closed or reduced? For that, both approaches must be described in detail and analysed before being compared in task 3.3 and 4.2.

It is the reason why WG2 and WG3 should work in parallel but with some common participants. In addition, the different tasks of these WG are corresponding as drawn in the table below: 2.1 - 2.3 and 3.1 - 3.2 have similar objectives, but from different points of view (natural sciences / social sciences); The task 3.3 should merge both points of view around case studies.

 

1.1. Network building	1.2. Methodological guidance
	2.1. Chain of causalities		3.1. Requirements from planning point of view		1.3. Sustainable development
	2.2. Criteria from environment. p. of v.
	2.3. Indicators per impact		3.2. Integration of indicators
	3.3. Case studies
4.1. Further research needs		4.2. Synthesis		4.3. Dissemination

 

The timetable translates this structure, with the same duration for parallel tasks.

WG tasks and outputs (WG tasks outputs.pdf)

WG 1: Network building and methodological guidance

Task 1.1     Network building

Main purpose

To develop a network of researchers working on environmentally sustainable transport assessment in Europe (and elsewhere) in order to:

• Identify information sources for the Action’s work
• Identify main target group for dissemination
• Prepare for future research collaboration
• Three levels of network membership are foreseen: I) the active participants in the action through its working groups, ii) the researchers in the field of the action, providing input but not participating actively to the working groups, and iii) the people only interested in the outputs which are essential for the dissemination. The levels 2 and 3 give feedback to level 1.

Output

• Lists of persons with contact info and main fields of expertise
• Events to consolidate the network, in connection with task 4.3

Activities needed to deliver output

• Name responsible participant(s) in the action to collect and co-ordinate
• Consideration of possible networking events, consider funding options
• The participation of users is encouraged through national networks.
• A way to build the COST network is to identify and utilize existing national networks.

Task 1.2     Methodological guidance

Main purpose

To generate consensus between participants on the basic concepts to be used throughout the project and to define the detailed structure of the work

Output

• Concept notes
• Detailed structure of tasks

Activities needed to deliver output

• Identify need for concept notes
• Writing teams for notes
• Design and reach agreement on tasks

Task 1.3     Transport and environment in the concept of sustainable development

Main purpose

• To analyse the concept of sustainable development in relation to transport and environment, taking into account environmental aspects, their link to social and economic aspects, decision making processes.
• To ensure that the wider debates about sustainability are known and understood by participants

Output

A report with review and critical evaluation of the state-of-the-art of sustainable transport definitions and concepts

Activities needed to deliver output

• Putting together team for writing the report
• Considering if report can be made into article

 

WG 2: Environmental assessment (indicators as measurement tools)

Task 2.1     Analysis of the chain of causalities for each environmental impact

Main purpose

• To analyse the chain of causalities for the full range of transport-related impacts on humans and ecosystems, from the driving parameters of the long-term dynamics of the transportation system to the final impacts.
• Starting for instance from the 16 impact categories listed in the summary of WG3 of COST 350

Output

A report describing the chain of causalities, from the transport activities to the final impacts

Activities needed to deliver output

• Identify and attract specialists who could take part in review for each major impact
• Undertaking state-of-the-art reviews  for each major impact based on the literature

Task 2.2    Defining criteria for environmental indicator quality assessment

Main purpose

To identify operational quality criteria needed for assessing indicators from a scientific perspective (representativity, simplicity, transparency etc) based on available literature – thus forming the basis for task 2.3

Output

A working note summarising criteria for good quality indicators

Activities needed to deliver output

• Putting together a team to review criteria
• Writing the working note

Task 2.3    State of the art of building indicators per individual impact

Main purpose

• To identify relevant indicators that can represent and measure each impact
• To review the different scientific approaches for each impact category considering their underlying assumptions, applicability and constraints, including natural and social science based methods
• Methods to move from basic impacts to next level.

Output

A report including:

• A list of indicators per environmental impact, with an analysis of their building method
• A choice of the ‘best’ indicators according to task 2.2 or/and proposals of building of new ones
• Pros and cons of aggregation methods from the natural sciences perspective.

Activities needed to deliver output

• Review of literature
• A selection procedure

 

WG 3: Integration in decision making (indicators as decision making tools)

Task 3.1    Defining requirements of EST indicators from the planning and decision making point of view

Main purpose

• To define (from literature) functional criteria for indicators to be used in various policy making frameworks for sustainable transport (including ex ante assessment/scenarios, continuous monitoring and ex post evaluation)
• To identify (from literature) factors that matter for making indicators actually useful, applied, and influential in planning and decision making

Output

A report with a framework for understanding ‘policy and decision making related’ conditions for indicator use.

Activities needed to deliver output

Review of literature built on the output of the task 1.3.

Task 3.2    Options for integrating EST indicators

Main purpose

To analyse options and methods for aggregation (e.g. cost-benefit, multi-criteria decision methods), or selection (e.g. based on participatory process), or other ways to create integrated measures of environmentally sustainable transport, based on individual (non-aggregated) impact indicators.

Output

A report with:

• Pros and cons of the aggregation or selection methods available in the social sciences literature
• A choice of the ‘best’ methods or/and proposals of building of new ones

Activities needed to deliver output

• Review of literature
• A selection procedure

Task 3.3   Case studies: Applications of EST indicators in decision making

Main purpose

• To select practical sustainable transport assessments examples /cases, including EU, national and local projects
• To review the examples/cases with regard to the identification and application of environmental sustainability indicators and indicator systems
• To analyse in each case the potential application of relevant indicators as reviewed in tasks 2.3 and 3.2, while taking into account criteria and research reviewed in both tasks 2.2 and 3.1

Output

A report with case study results and recommendations for the application of indicators and indicator systems in policy making.

Activities needed to deliver output

Undertaking analysis of the ability of environmental indicators (non-aggregated, integrated) to be used for each (relevant) case of assessment.

 

WG 4: Integrative synthesis, research needs and dissemination

Task 4.1   Further research needs

Main purpose

Identifying white spots and research needs

Task 4.2   Synthesis

Main purpose

Synthesis of the whole Action

Output of tasks 4.1 and 4.2

Final report

Task 4.3   Dissemination

Main purpose

Dissemination of the results

Output

Papers, Internet, CD-ROM, short focussed syntheses

Activities needed to deliver output

Assign person responsible for each dissemination function

 

Founded in 1971, COST is an intergovernmental framework for European Co-operation in the field of Scientific and Technical Research, allowing the co-ordination of nationally funded research on a European level. COST Actions cover basic and pre-competitive research as well as activities of public utility.

Therefore COST is one of the longest-running instruments supporting co-operation among scientists and researchers across Europe. COST now covers 35 member countries and enables scientists to collaborate in a wide spectrum of activities in research and technology. COST also welcomes the participation of interested institutions and scientists from non-COST member states without any geographical restriction.

COST is based on so-called "actions". These are networks of co-ordinated national research projects in a given field, which is of interest to a minimum number of participants (at least 5) from different member states. Each action is built by scientists in a bottom-up way, and is defined by a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed by the Governments of the COST states wishing to participate in the action. The duration of an action is generally 4 years.

A detailed description of COST is available.

A given COST action contains:

The COST rules are available on the COST website (section 2: Instruments for financing of COST Actions activities).

 

4. Who do participate to COST 356?

• Active participation through the working groups, by providing data, analyses, comments...
• As user, providing user's demand, and mainly interested by the outputs of the action.
• By participating to the management committee (signatory countries only). Its members are listed in the MC membership.

 

5. Outputs, reports

6. Conferences, links, literature

7. Who to contact?

8. Private area for the action members only

9. Your comments on this web site

 for printing this page