How do you evaluate transportation mitigation strategies?

1 Why evaluate mitigation strategies?

Evaluating transportation mitigation strategies is essential for several reasons. First, it helps to compare the costs and benefits of different options and prioritize the most effective and feasible ones. Second, it helps to monitor and report the progress and outcomes of the implemented strategies and identify any gaps or challenges. Third, it helps to communicate and justify the value and impact of the mitigation strategies to various stakeholders, such as decision-makers, funders, users, and the public.

2 How to define evaluation criteria?

Before evaluating transportation mitigation strategies, it is important to define the evaluation criteria that will guide the analysis and judgment. Evaluation criteria refer to the standards or measures used to assess the performance or quality of the mitigation strategies. These criteria can be based on GHG emission reduction potential, cost-effectiveness, co-benefits, and feasibility. For instance, GHG emission reduction potential looks at how much the mitigation strategy can reduce emissions from transportation sources or enhance carbon sinks from transportation activities. Cost-effectiveness examines how much the mitigation strategy can achieve the GHG emission reduction goal with the least cost or highest benefit. Co-benefits assess how much the mitigation strategy can contribute to other environmental, social, or economic goals such as air quality, health, safety, accessibility, equity, or economic development. Lastly, feasibility evaluates how easy or difficult it is to implement the mitigation strategy in terms of technical, institutional, political, or behavioral factors.

3 How to select evaluation methods?

After defining the evaluation criteria, the next step is to select the evaluation methods that will be used to collect and analyze the data and information related to the mitigation strategies. These methods can be qualitative or quantitative, depending on the nature and availability of the data and information. Examples of evaluation methods include life cycle analysis, which calculates GHG emissions from all stages of a transportation system or service; cost-benefit analysis, which compares costs and benefits in monetary terms; multi-criteria analysis, which evaluates a mitigation strategy based on multiple criteria; and surveys, which collects opinions, preferences, behaviors, or experiences through questionnaires or interviews. Each method has its own advantages and disadvantages; thus, it is important to choose the right one for your evaluation.

4 How to report evaluation results?

The final step of evaluating transportation mitigation strategies is to report the evaluation results in a way that can inform and influence decision-making. This involves presenting and interpreting the data and information collected and analyzed using the evaluation methods and criteria, as well as discussing the implications, limitations, and recommendations of the evaluation findings. To do so effectively, it's important to use visuals like tables, charts, graphs, or maps to visualize and summarize the data in an easy and attractive way. Narrative or descriptive text should be used to explain and highlight the main points, trends, or patterns of the data. Evidence or examples should also be used to support or illustrate the claims or arguments of the evaluation results. Lastly, clear and simple language should be used while avoiding jargon or technical terms that may confuse or alienate the audience.

5 How to improve evaluation practice?

Evaluating transportation mitigation strategies is not a one-time or static process, but a continuous and dynamic one that can be improved over time. To do so, it is important to learn from the feedback, experience, or best practices of previous or ongoing evaluations and apply them to future or current ones. Additionally, updating or adjusting the evaluation criteria, methods, or results according to the changing context, needs, or goals of transportation planning is essential. To further improve evaluation practice, it is beneficial to seek input or feedback from relevant stakeholders such as transportation planners, decision-makers, funders, users, or experts on the design, implementation, or results of the evaluation. Furthermore, reviewing or benchmarking the evaluation practice against other similar or successful evaluations in terms of scope, quality, or impact can be beneficial. Moreover, incorporating new or emerging data sources, technologies, or methods that can enhance the accuracy, reliability, or efficiency of the evaluation is recommended. Finally, evaluating the evaluation process itself and identifying the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, or challenges of the evaluation practice is also important.

6 Here’s what else to consider

This is a space to share examples, stories, or insights that don’t fit into any of the previous sections. What else would you like to add?