BYPAD (Bicycle Policy Audit): cycling policy as a dynamic processECOMM Groningen, 12th May 2006 BYPAD (Bicycle Policy Audit): cycling policy as a dynamic

BYPAD (Bicycle Policy Audit): cycling policy as a dynamic process ECOMM Groningen, 12th May 2006

BYPAD (Bicycle Policy Audit): cycling policy as a dynamic process

Evelyne Sauvage (VECTRIS, Belgium),

Tim Asperges (IMOB-Hasselt University, Belgium)ECOMM Groningen, 12th May 2006


Content

Short history BYPAD Fundamentals of BYPAD Good practice examples Conclusions


Short history of BYPAD

BYPAD

Research project SAVE 1999-2001

Development of self-evaluation instrument for local cycle policy

Target group: mid-sized cities (50.000 – 500.000 inhabitants)

Partners: Langzaam Verkeer (now Vectris and Mobiel 21), AMOR, ECF + 7 cities

BYPAD+

Dissemination of method SAVE 2003-2004

Goal

Improving the BYPAD-method

Building a network of national contact points (consultants)

Spreading the BYPAD-method in European cities via national contact points Partners : core-consortium, national contactpoints (auditors), cities


BYPAD-platform

Further dissemination of BYPAD Intelligent Energy - Europe 2006-2008

New targets groups:

small towns

regions

Spatial coverage:

new countries in Southern and Eastern Europe: Greece, Spain, Hungary, Poland, Estonia

new cities and regions in existing Bypad-countries

Exchange of knowledge and dissemination of results via a wide European network

website and newsletters, good practise database

promotion material (leaflet, posters,…) in all EU-languages

regional workshops and international seminars

network partners: ECF, ICLEI, POLIS, Energie-Cités


Anno 2004 - BYPAD/BYPAD+

65 cities – nearly all certified 15 countries 16 auditors

Anno 2006 - BYPAD Platform

25-35 new cities 27 - 30 regions 5 new countries 7-12 new auditors


Fundamentals of BYPAD

Quality management Dynamic process Integrated approach


Cycling policy as a dynamic process


‘fire brigade principle’

We do our job to the best of our knowledge ‘Robinson Crusoe principle’

We are pulling in the same direction! Look beyond one’s own ‘back yard’

We wont’ stay at the top by resting on our laurels! ‘Winner principle’

Level 1: Ad hoc approach

Level 2: Isolated approach

Level 3: System oriented

Level 4: Integrated approach


Integrated approach: the BYPAD evaluation group & process

Politicians Civil servants User groups Supervised by certified BYPAD auditors

Meet to find a consensus on the quality levelreached for each aspect of cycling policy

Jointly develop quality objectives and measures Resulting in common agreed cycling action plan


The BYPAD Evaluation Process

Process supervisor (external consultant)

Individual Assessment by members of evaluation group

Meeting 1: Joint Assessment by evaluation groupObjective: Consensus on Level of Cycling Policy

Audit Report and Quality Plan

Meeting 2: Agreement on Quality Objectives and Measures

Politician(s) Officials User Group(s)


Principal item: the BYPAD questionnaire• 35 questions in 9 fields

of cycling policy

• Closed answers describemeasures which havesuccessfully been put into effect in European cities

• 4 quality levels

• Direct proposals for measures to be taken

• Giving inspiration for quality improvement


Local evaluation group

External process supervisor

Direct dialogue• Decison makers, policy makers & executive staff, ‘clients’ strive for a consensus on the quality of the cycling policy so far• assign scores to questions and modules• define quality objectives together Strengthening the political will, improving the quality of decisions

Learning• Assessment in a moderated process• Both questionnaire and auditor present successful examples• Good examples are visualised Strengthening the effect of learning


Detailed Results:BYPAD audit report and quality plan

As a starting point of an improved cycling policy:

• Inventory of the cycling policy so far

• Documentation of the audit per question

• Agreement on objectives, measures, fields of action per question and module and its documentation


BYPAD Certificate


Example of Gent


BYPAD-Gent 2001 - 2004

0,00%

10,00%

20,00%

30,00%

40,00%

50,00%

60,00%

70,00%

80,00%

90,00%

100,00%

User N

eeds

Lead

ersh

ip

Policy

on

pape

r

Mea

ns a

nd p

erso

nel

Infra

struc

ture

, ser

vices

& sa

fety

Commun

icatio

n & ed

ucat

ion

Targe

t gro

ups &

partn

ersh

ips

com

plem

entar

y acti

ons

Evalua

tion &

effe

cts

Total q

uality

cycli

ng p

olicy

GENT

2001

2004

0,00%

10,00%

20,00%

30,00%

40,00%

50,00%

60,00%

70,00%

80,00%

90,00%

100,00%

User N

eeds

Lead

ersh

ip

Policy

on

pape

r

Mea

ns a

nd p

erso

nel

Infra

struc

ture

, ser

vices

& sa

fety

Commun

icatio

n & ed

ucat

ion

Targe

t gro

ups &

partn

ersh

ips

com

plem

entar

y acti

ons

Evalua

tion &

effe

cts

Total q

uality

cycli

ng p

olicy

GENT

2001

2004


• Medium-sized Flemish citywith 230,000 inhabitants

• University and highschools:40,000 students

• Capital of the Province East-Flanders

• Considered as one of themost dynamic cities in thedomain of mobility policyin Flanders

Gent


Collecting background informationhistory of cycling policy

1992: Need for a bicycle policy plan

1993: Start of bicycle policy planFormation of a bicycle cell (political initiative)

1994: Appointment of a bicycle officerLocal elections: cycling and mobility policy is main theme of the elected coalition

1995: High level of complaints about bicycle problems

Appointment of a communication officer

Need for integrating the cycling policy in a broader mobility policy

1996: Setting up a mobility department

1997: Implementation of mobility plan

Organization of a Bicycle Forum with different other cities

1998: Working group student and mobility

1999: Employment programs to fulfill the sustainable mobility need

1992: Need for a bicycle policy plan

1993: Start of bicycle policy planFormation of a bicycle cell (political initiative)

1994: Appointment of a bicycle officerLocal elections: cycling and mobility policy is main theme of the elected coalition

1995: High level of complaints about bicycle problems

Appointment of a communication officer

Need for integrating the cycling policy in a broader mobility policy

1996: Setting up a mobility department

1997: Implementation of mobility plan

Organization of a Bicycle Forum with different other cities

1998: Working group student and mobility

1999: Employment programs to fulfill the sustainable mobility need

Last decade a lot of organizational changes in favour of cycling and mobility policy

Impact on the results of cycling policy


Director of themobility department

Mobility department - 11 persons

Bicycleofficer

Public transportofficer

Communicationofficer

Landscapearchitect

plus:4 administrative fellow workers2 fellow workers for counting and listing of

found or left bicycles


Smart travelling club: commitment individual users

• Travel with sustainable transport• Drive carefully• Follow traffic rules

• +/- 1.300 • regular consultation of users on mobility/cycling policy


• Bicycle (mobility) policy is pulled by the whole city council

Module 2: Leadership

• The major and the chief alderman responsible for traffic safety, traffic planning, spatial planning and trades people.

• Bicycle department integrated in mobility department

• City has an active role in inter-municipal networks (bicycle forum, Belgium cycle cities, cities for cyclists...)

• Bicycle (mobility) policy is pulled by the whole city council

• The major and the chief alderman responsible for traffic safety, traffic planning, spatial planning and trades people.

• Bicycle department integrated in mobility department

• City has an active role in inter-municipal networks (bicycle forum, Belgium cycle cities, cities for cyclists...)

• Standing advisory group (mainly intern actors)

• Standing advisory group (mainly intern actors)

Level reached:3

Actions:Extern partnershipsmust be strengthened(e.g. public transport companies, higher authorities)


Module Actions• Bicycle route network on planning level

(4 main routes have been realized)

• Provelo project: a complete prevention program

• 4000 bicycle parkings at 200 locations 1000 planned (two types of bicycle sheds: type Gent, type Pedalo)

• Residents’ bicycle parking goal 1 car-place on 10 for bicycles

• Guarded bicycle parking

• Bicycle workshop(bicycle maintenance, registration)

• Bicycle depot


Module Actions

• Efforts for stimulating the city personnel for cycling to work:

• 800 bikes for personnel

• price reductions at bicycle traders

• bicycle fee of 0,15 Eur / km,tax-free

• Guarded bicycle parking

• Douches and lockers

• Parking fee for employees coming to work by car: No bicycle policy without a good parking policy


Module Actions

• No efforts towards other local employers

• Car-free city center of 35 ha

• Bicycle pump

• Very strict parking policy

• Logistical support of bicycle taxi

• No efforts towards other local employers

• Car-free city center of 35 ha

• Bicycle pump

• Very strict parking policy

• Logistical support of bicycle taxi

Level reached:3

Actions:• Expanding bicycle parking for residents,• Improving transfert points, • Bicycle signace, • Education program for pupils, • Stimulating local employers for bicycle

incentives




Exchange of experiences between BYPAD cities, towns, regions, auditors: Regional workshops in six language regions: cities exchange their experiences with BYPAD e.g. Recklinghausen, 25 Nov 2004 for Germany, Austria, Switzerland


E.g. Regional workshop in ‘s Hertogenbosch (NL),8 June 2004, for BYPAD cities from Belgium and The Netherlands

Site visit at Oss: handing out the BYPAD certificate, learning from each other‘s experience


Regional workshop in ‘s Hertogenbosch (NL),8 June 2004, for BYPAD cities from Belgium and The Netherlands

Getting an idea of how King Cyclist is feeling: cycling the cycle street of Oss


Publicity: BYPAD in the media


Conclusions

BYPAD public involvement

BYPAD facilitates/improves co-operation among different actors Users play a crucial role in BYPAD

BYPAD influencing individual choices

Cycling use stands or falls through the quality of local cycling policy

Quality local cycling policy

Cycle useCycle safety


Documents

BYPAD (Bicycle Policy Audit): cycling policy as a dynamic processECOMM Groningen, 12th May 2006 BYPAD (Bicycle Policy Audit): cycling policy as a dynamic