- Focusing on Korean Cases and its Practice -
1. Introduction of SUTE
1) What is SUTE?
2) What are components of SUTE? Korea government implements the Sustainable Urban Transport Evaluation(SUTE) annually since 2014 after 4-year pilot evaluation project by KOTI.
Evaluation is implemented at the base of central government law. - Article 15 of ‘Promotional Law on the Sustainable Transport and Logistics System’ stipulates that central government should practice the evaluation on sustainability .
Sustainable Transportation System is important to meet citizens’ demand of the current generation while not compromising those of future generations.
4 Sustainable Urban Transport Evaluation(SUTE) is composed of two parts. Evaluation on sustainable transportation system and Best Practice Contest
Mandatory Voluntary
Evaluation on Sustainable Best Practice Transportation System Contest (status+ policy)
Incentive
Enviro Econo A B C D Society nment my Group Group Group Group
5 Evaluation - Component : Status Evaluation + Policy Evaluation - Method : Evaluation by Group (mandatory) and based on indicators - Expectation: Central government obtains a clear assessment of status and policies of cities Local governments diagnoses and improves their transportation condition and policies
Best Practice Contest - Purpose: Identify and share best practices(BP) to help city governments to build efficient transportation policies reflecting their conditions - Method : No By-group Evaluation, Incentives for Winners (voluntary) - Expectation: Discover, promote and spread successful and desirable practices Encourage city governments’ efforts to build sustainable transportation systems
6 2. Implementation of 2015 SUTE
1) Evaluation Target Cities 2) Evaluation Indicators 3) Evaluation Process 4) Best Practice Contest 74 Cities with a Population over 100,000 Four Groups Divided by Population Size and City Attributes - A Group: Special/Metropolitan Cities over 1 million (7 cities) - B Group: Urban Cities with a Population over 300,000 (10 cities) - C Group: Urban-rural Consolidated Cities with a Population over 300,000 (16 cities) - D Group: Cities with a Population less than 300,000 (41 cities)
Cities with a Population over 300,000 Classification Special / Metropolitan Cities Urban-rural Consolidated Cities with a Population less than 300,000 Urban Cities Cities Group(No) A (7) B(10) C(16) D(41)
Guri, Osan, Gunpo, Uiwang, Hanam, Icheon, Seoul(special city) Changwon, Yongin, Suwon, Bucheon, Anseong, Gwangju, Yangju, Pocheon, Chuncheon, Pyeongtaek, Gimpo, Gangneung, Chungju, Jecheon, Gongju, Boryeong, Seongnam, Siheung, Jeonju, Cities Busan, Daegu, Incheon, Pohang, Namyangju, Asan, Seosan, Nonsan, Dangjin, Gunsan, Jeongeup, Uijeongbu, Ansan, Anyang, Gwangju, Daejeon, Cheongju, Hwaseong, Mokpo, Yeosu, Suncheon, Gwanyang, Gyeongju, Gwangmyeong, Goyang Gimcheon, Andong, Yeongju, Yeongcheon, Sangju, Ulsan(metropolitan citiy) Wonju, Gimhae, Paju, etc etc
8 24 Indicators of Evaluation: 12 for Status evaluation + 12 for Policy evaluation Each Evaluation is composed of 3 sectors: Environmental, Social, Economic Status Evaluation is evaluating for status(and improvement) transport condition of cities - Status Evaluation Ratio: 60% (Status of this year 36% + Improvement compared to last year 24%) - Use reliable data such as KOSTAT(Korea Statistics) Policy Evaluation is evaluating efforts of local governments regarding sustainable transport - Policy Evaluation Ratio: 40% - Use the documents that are submitted by local government
Evaluation
Status Evaluation(12 Indicators, 60%) Policy Evaluation(12 Indicators, 40%)
Environment Society Economy Environment Society Economy
4 Indicators 4 Indicators 4 Indicators 4 Indicators 4 Indicators 4 Indicators
9 1) Status Evaluation: the list of 12 indicators
- Environmental sector is a group of indicators for evaluating status regarding reduction on CO2 emissions and securing for clean air - Social sector is a set for evaluating status of transport system’s safety and livelihood - Economic sector is a set for evaluating status of reduction on transport cost and reinforcing transport system competitiveness
Classification Indicator . CO2 Emissions of Car per capita Environ- Reduction on CO2 Emissions . CO2 Emissions divided by population and area mental . CO2 Emissions per GRDP Securing for Clean Air . Air Pollutants Emissions per capita . Road Traffic Accident Fatalities divided by population and cars Status Safety Transport System . Transport Culture Index Evaluation Social (60%) Transport System for . Accessibility of public transportation Livelihood-Connected service . Modal share of Green-transport(bicycle+walk) Reduction on social . Road Congestion Cost per capita transport cost . Modal share of public transport Economic Reinforcing Transport System . Average Travel Time per capita Competitiveness . The results of Satisfaction Survey of public transport
10 1) Status Evaluation: the methodology and sources of indicators
11 2) Policy Evaluation: the list of 12 indicators - Environmental sector is set for evaluating policy efforts for supply of environmental-friendly vehicle and reinforcing transport demand management - Social sector is set for evaluating policy efforts for improving safety and transport equity and encouraging use of Non-motorized vehicle - Economic sector is set for evaluating policy efforts for improving infrastructure and transportation system efficiently
Classification Indicator
Supply of environmental- . Policy efforts for reducing CO2 emissions and air pollutants Environ- friendly vehicle . Policy efforts for supplying environmental-friendly cars mental Reinforcing transport . Policy efforts for reducing users of cars demand management . Policy efforts for parking demand management Improving Safety and . Policy efforts for the handicapped Policy Equity . Policy efforts for improving transport safety Evaluation Social . Policy efforts for pedestrians (40%) Non-motorized vehicle . Policy efforts for bicycle-users . Policy efforts for improving public transport competitiveness Infrastructure Improvement . Policy efforts for encouraging transfer fare and supplying BIS system etc. Economic Efficient Transportation . Policy efforts for improving transport connection such as Transfer-terminals System . Policy efforts for governance effort between adjacent cities and central government
12 2) Policy Evaluation
(40%)
13 3) Differentiated Adoption of Indicators according to groups
- To better reflect each city’s characteristics: A Group(24), B&C Groups (19), D Group (14)
14 1. Status Evaluation - Evaluation organization: KOTI - Data from KOSTAT, KTDB and etc. - Status Evaluation : 60%/Total (Status 36% + Improvement 24%) - Normalization of the score (Average Score: 70) - Relative Evaluation
2. Policy Evaluation
- Evaluation organization: Special Evaluation Committee(12 members) - Policy Evaluation: 40%/Total - Each Committee member assigned with each indicator gives scores - Score: 100pt Scale with 5pt Interval(Average Score: 70)
15 3. Weighing of Each Indicator (set by Evaluation Committee)
16 4. Final Result
1st Combine Status(based on data) and Policy Evaluation Scores (convert the combined score into a 100pt-scale score with 70 average)
2nd Calculate Weighing-adjusted Score
3th Final Ranking and Grade (based on a city’s location within standard normal distribution)
4th Reward Awards and Incentives for Excellent Cities