Final Report Summary - AIMS (Advanced impacts evaluation methodology for innovative freight transport solutions) This document is the final publishable summary report of the 'AIMS' Coordination Action according to the European Community's (EC) final report template. It describes in a condensed way the project objective, the scientific background and approach for the analyses, the key conclusions from the transport modes and the final version of methodology respectively assessment grid for evaluation. AIMS workplan was set up in six different work packages (WPs). The main research activities in the transport modes were mainly conducted in WP2 and WP3. Within the WP2 'past experiences evaluation' the analyses referred to 30 Fifth and Sixth Framework Programmes (FP5 and FP6) projects in the different modes. Data collection was processed in two main different ways: 1. personal interviews with project participants and coordinators 2. general e-mail survey. The personal interviews turned out to be very useful for the evaluation based on a mode specific questionnaire. The general e-mail survey to a large number of projects in the FPs could not generate sufficient information and data for the AIMS analyses as the response rates in almost all modes were rather low. The application of the techniques, society and territory (TST) approach in the modes was made using mindmap diagrams. These structured the different aspects of the three dimensions. From these experiences important statements could be collected in several modes regarding the needs of stakeholder involvement, consideration of user requirements and fostering the implementation and realisation of innovative research results. In frame of the WP2 'diagnosis of the present' 15 FP7 projects were evaluated analysing the offer and demand side of transport research in the European Union (EU). Naturally the data availability of such running projects could be considered as low depending on the dissemination level of the reports and the willingness of participants and coordinators to communicate about intermediate status of the projects. For the demand side detailed interviews with 43 stakeholders from industry were conducted. At a glance the FP5, FP6 and also FP7 initiatives seemed to meet the market needs; however there was still lack of planned post-project activities for a further implementation process. Expectations of stakeholders on the future development of FPs were collected in WP4 'Assumptions on the future' considering available visions for future transport systems in general and concerning different modes. Apart from the general vision of a sustainable, effective, reliable and safe transport system some key issues for future developments in the modes could be derived. For example, in rail mode education was a key issue. Main question should be answered on how to get qualified employees in rail transport in the next 5 to 10 years, which was also an issue for road mode. Barriers and limitations of research, development and innovation (RDI) management were outlined suggesting a framework for RDI implementation. Research itself could not solve the market needs alone; it should be accompanied by other complementary measures in the fields of standardisation, legislation as well as training and education. Recommendations for implementation on project level were related to the different phases of project lifetime cycle (genesis, realisation and follow-up) and could be differentiated between EC and the beneficiaries. D5.1 developed specific performance indicators for each project phase to assess the relevance and problem solving impact of RDI projects. In the project implementation phase indicators like stability of consortium, consideration of existing technologies, commercialisation and standardisation issues were to be evaluated. A specific care should be given to key enabling factors for further transport market harmonisation. Project Context and Objectives: Freight transport is a key element for the economy, raising various environmental, social, security or safety issues that are severely increasing, and expected to continue increasing in the future. Innovation is a key bridging both streams. High public investments in freight transport research and technology development (RTD) are made; however, various RTD projects have never passed the commercialisation threshold. The main objective of AIMS was therefore to maximise the success of public or private investments in freight transport RTD. Guidelines for current and future FP7 projects were produced and recommendations for the definition of new research policy objectives were provided. The results of AIMS should contribute to creating better chances for commercialisation of research activities and to lead towards innovative and future leading research foci. The ambition of this support action required an approach that could handle the complexity and transversal aspects of innovation in the freight transport system. As well known, the success of innovations is by far not only a question of techniques or technologies. Many non-technological, e.g. social, economic, legislative and other factors have a strong influence. Time is also of major importance; what was valid yesterday might be not in the future. To take into account all these indirect but crucial factors, AIMS relied on an innovative approach combining a systemic approach and a socioeconomic approach, i.e. the TST approach. It permitted a coherent grasping of the real impacts that should be analysed further on, per innovation and axis of RTD envisaged. It allowed highlighting both the advantages and disadvantages or difficulties in implementing innovative concepts when faced with the current market situation and the rigidities of society. AIMS applied this innovative approach to develop a methodology to assess and evaluate research projects related to freight transport in the different transport modes, namely air, inland waterway, maritime, rail, road and also intermodal. The project analyses were structured in 6 WPs. Core research focussed on past experiences evaluation of FP5 and FP6 projects (WP2), the diagnosis of the present regarding FP7 projects and assumptions on the future considering available visions for future transport systems in Europe (WP4). The analyses were performed by high level research institutions for different transport modes and were accompanied by experiences experts. Project Results: On the basis of the guidelines for application of TST the data collection, analyses and interviews were conducted regarding the different projects in the modes. Following sections showed an overview about the analyses performed in the transport modes for FP5 and FP6 projects (WP2, 'Past experiences evaluation') and FP7 (WP3, 'Diagnosis of the current situation'). The analyses were carried out using desktop research, general e-mail survey per mode and face to face interviews. Detailed results of the analyses could be found in deliverable D2.1. As WP3 aimed at assessing the compliance between existing needs of operators, authorities and the society as a whole, and available offer from the market and current FP7 research projects, i.e. projects funded under the FP7, several projects in the transport modes as well as market case studies were scrutinised applying the TST approach and associated analysis process. In that scope, extensive desk researches and interviews process were undertaken. TST models were built and used to pinpoint key factors to be addressed to improve European research, development and innovation for the transport industry, more particularly maximise chances for RDI success, i.e. implementation and endorsement by business parties. For the analyses of the offer side around two projects per mode were selected. In most cases the data availability was too low for detailed analyses. Running projects could not be assessed whether they were successful, only if they were in line with their own planning and the FP objectives. The analyses of the existing demand in freight transport research were made through several interviews with stakeholders from different sectors. Forty three interviews could be realised, the results out of these various perspectives were of highest value for the elaboration of AIMS guidelines and recommendations. It should be noted that the vast majority of this survey was made via face to face interviews, mostly at the offices of the stakeholders throughout Europe. Only in very few cases where timeframe for scheduling a meeting was too tight, a conference call was organised to conduct a telephone interview. In frame of the work of WP4 the objective was to give recommendations to be used in the scope of the definition of new research policy objectives. Therefore several future related perspectives, visions and strategies from different stakeholders were examined: 1. transport professional organisations and actors visions of the future and orientations, e.g. regarding environmental issues 2. research side orientations, e.g. topics to be addressed 3. technology platforms (TPs) and advisory councils (ACs) visions and strategic research agendas (SRA), highlighting innovations planned for the different transport modes 4. public authorities plan for the future, e.g. transport network planning. The TST application in WP4 was done through three stages, namely data collection, data analyses and synthesis. Based on obtained knowledge, scenarios describing 'the' future of the freight transport system and recommendations for the definition of new transport research policy objectives were issued. WP4 was based on knowledge derived from deliverables D2.1 and D3.1 notably WP3 interviews, and from the SRAs of the TPs and ACs, thus allowing the ex-ante study of their consistency and expected impacts. Past experiences evaluation (WP2) TLA was leader of the WP2, assisted by PTV and ICES in the scope of the activities of the AIMS Secretariat, i.e. regarding methodological and formal aspects. Main participants were the members of the researchers group, each in charge of the analyses for a specific transport mode: ETH for the rail, KTI for the road, TUDOR for the air, CETMEF for the inland waterways, ISSUS for the maritime and ULB for the intermodal. Researchers were assisted by their dedicated experts who gave their comments regarding the work progress and contribution to deliverable D2.1. WP2 intended to evaluate the impacts of past transport FP5 and FP6 projects and apprehend the reasons of their failure or success so as to produce guidelines aiming to maximise the chance of success of current and future EU-funded projects. Diagnosis of the present (WP3) This WP intended to make a diagnosis on the current situation in terms of needs related to the freight transport system and offer, from the market and current research projects of FP7. Main dysfunctions or blocking points of the freight transport system were identified. Transport actors demands were aggregated and put into coherence. Current offers were characterised. Notably, different FP7 projects selected by the EC were evaluated under the project methodology and associated assessment grid defined in WP2. AIMS grant beneficiaries took care of feeding back the input of the work carried out in WP2 so as to define an offer or demand situation which fully reflected technological and organisational state of the art in Europe. By doing so, awareness of relevant stakeholders was simultaneously heightened. A diagnosis was then drawn, allowing to highlight the difference between 'what is' and 'what is needed'. It provided notably recommendations for the definition of intermediate FP7 performance targets. Results were then discussed during a second workshop with the experts, end-users, industries, public authorities, TPs and ACs groups for validation. Summary results The conclusions for the different analyses regarding past, present and future had to be differentiated. Concerning the FP5 and FP6 project evaluation it could be concluded that the actors of the selected projects had all expressed that the framework programmes had a positive impact in the transport field, despite some malfunctioning. The actors highlighted that these FPs gave the opportunity to collaborate with knowledgeable partners and create networks. These networks were beneficial in order to move forward the research. The European Research Framework Programme was undoubtedly an essential tool. Maintaining its pertinence and raising continuously its quality level and efficiency was critical to the achievement of the European Transport Policy Objectives. Looking at the work process of data gathering it could be concluded that for a qualified and detailed analyses the appropriate data and information were in most of the cases not or not sufficient available. Even in some cases the minimum required information for a short evaluation was not available. WP3, 'Diagnosis of the present' revealed that RDI demand from actors came from various factors and was mainly shaped by evolutions in legislation and policy, e.g. respect of environment and security. Further drivers were the economic situation and RDI initiatives aiming at optimising the concerned transport operations, improving its image or enhancing its integration into logistic chains. Specific characteristics of the transport systems in Europe affected the competitiveness in the different modes. In some modes there was lack of innovation-friendly environment. Therefore the implementation of enablers seemed essential, aiming notably at harmonising transport market regulations throughout the different member states. Comparing to FP5 and FP6 the research initiatives in FP7 were closer to the market demand than before. This demand was generally covered either by the FP7 activities or by the market. But other aspects were lacking. The project lifecycle perspective should be introduced, the proposed whirlwind model applied and performance indicators for project evaluation developed. The implementation of clear national dissemination strategies for the heterogeneous European transport system was also of great importance The EC was encouraged to be creative and innovative to redesign the FP. As guidelines for implementation of RDI management an innovative approach was proposed to lead European research initiative and projects to a higher level of maturity. The proposed approach could be achieved by a close integration of European projects, research demand from the different actors and professional dissemination activities during and after a research project. There should be a closer loop from real innovations to commercialisation and other innovative ideas to further research activities. Potential Impact: The conclusions for the different analyses regarding past, present and the future had to be differentiated. Concerning the FP5 and FP6 project evaluation it could be concluded that the actors of the selected projects had all expressed that the framework programmes had a positive impact in the transport field, despite some malfunctioning. The actors highlighted that these Framework Programmes gave the opportunity to collaborate with knowledgeable partners and create networks. These networks were beneficial in order to move forward the research. The European Research Framework Programme was undoubtedly an essential tool. Maintaining its pertinence and raising continuously its quality level and efficiency was of great importance for the achievement of the European Transport Policy Objectives. List of Websites: 'http://www.aims-project.net' AIMS coordinator: PTV Planung Transport Verkehr AG Stumpfstrasse 1, 76131 Karlsruhe, Germany Contact person: Marcel Huschebeck, 'marcel.huschebeck@ptv.de' Related documents Final Report - AIMS (Advanced impacts evaluation methodology for innovative freight transport solutions)
