Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Green paper: Towards a new culture for urban mobility COM(2007) 551 final
Date: 2008-05-29
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: air quality, common transport policy, financing, new technology, public transport, sustainable development, transport infrastructure, transport safety, urban transport

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/39

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Proposal for a Directive of the
European Parliament and of the Council relating to insurance against civil liability in respect of the
use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability
(Codified version)

COM(2008) 98 final — 2008/0037 (COD)

(2008/C 224/08)

On 22 April 2008, the Council of the European Union decided to consult the European Economic and
Social Committee, under Article 95 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Proposal for a Directive of the European Parliament and of the Council relating to insurance against civil liability in
respect of the use of motor vehicles, and the enforcement of the obligation to insure against such liability (Codified
version)

Since the Committee unreservedly endorses the content of the proposal and feels that it requires no
comment on its part, it decided, at its 445th plenary session of 28 and 29 May 2008 (meeting of 29 May),
by 80 votes and 3 abstentions, to issue an opinion endorsing the proposed text.

Brussels, 29 May 2008.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the Green paper: Towards a new
culture for urban mobility

COM(2007) 551 final

(2008/C 224/09)

On 25 September 2007, the European Commission decided to consult the European Economic and Social
Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the

Green paper: Towards a new culture for urban mobility

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 8 May 2008. The rapporteur was
Mr Hernández Bataller and the co-rapporteur was Mr Barbadillo López.

At its 445th plenary session, held on 28 and 29 May 2008 (meeting of 29 May), the European Economic
and Social Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1. Conclusions and recommendations

quality and protection for passengers, and promoting cycling
and walking.

1.1
The EESC considers that urban mobility policy should
prioritise in particular urban planning, the information society
and information technologies, good practice, especially involving
the creation of public areas for pedestrians and cyclists, and an
integrated approach to infrastructure.

1.3
This will require planning towns and cities in an appro-
priate and compact manner and restricting demand for private,
motorised transport, on the basis of consistent, rational spatial
and urban planning.

1.2
The EESC offers its support to the Commission and
hopes that it will boost Community measures for mobility, in
particular to prioritise public transport with a high level of

The EESC considers that, regardless of any other type of
1.4
measure
85/377/EEC and Directive
2001/42/EC should be amended in the form set out in this
opinion.

adopted, Directive

C 224/40

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

The EESC endorses the use of

1.5
procurement
programmes, and calls for the removal of existing obstacles.

for
relating to infrastructure funded by European

‘green purchases’

1.6
Creating a European Observatory on Sustainable Urban
Mobility would bring added value, as it could gather data and
facilitate the exchange of experiences.

1.7
The EESC believes that there should be general legislation
at European level for the harmonisation of criteria for calcu-
lating charges and statistical data.

2. Introduction

2.1
Both within and outside urban areas, the last few years
have witnessed a generally strong growth in traffic and often a
dramatic change in the modal split, with car journeys constantly
on the increase and those by public transport constantly
declining in relative or absolute terms.

In 2006, when it presented the mid-term review of the
2.2
White Paper on Transport (1),
the European Commission
announced its intention to draw up a green paper on urban
transport. It has conducted a broad public consultation over the
last few months, on which the EESC has also expressed its
views (2).

2.2.1
The EESC considers that Community action in the field
of urban mobility is needed and would prove useful, and that
adopting decisions at Community level (3) provides European
added value that could cover a wide range of both binding and
non-binding measures.

3. The substance of the Green paper: Towards a new

culture for urban mobility

The consultation process conducted by the Commission
3.1
has confirmed certain strong expectations for the formulation
of a genuine European urban mobility policy.

3.2
Rethinking urban mobility involves optimising the use of
all the various modes of transport and organising ‘co-modality’
between the different modes of collective transport (train, tram,
metro, bus, taxi) and the different modes of individual transport
(car, cycle, walking, etc.).

3.3
Urban mobility is recognised as an important facilitator
of growth and employment with a strong impact on sustainable
development in the EU.

European added

3.4
promoting the exchange of good practice at all
regional or national); underpinning the

forms:
levels (local,
establishment of

value may

various

take

common standards and the harmonisation of standards if neces-
sary; offering financial support to those who are in greatest
need of such support; encouraging research, the applications of
which will make it possible to bring about improvements in
mobility safety and the environment; simplifying legislation and,
in some cases, repealing existing legislation or adopting new
legislation.

3.5
The Green Paper, by means of 25 questions, deals with
how to confront the challenges of creating free-flowing cities,
greener cities, smarter, more accessible, safe, secure urban trans-
port, and a new culture of urban mobility and the resources
needed to achieve it. Unfortunately the Commission does not
put forward a range of specific vertical and horizontal measures
for urban transport.

4. Responses to the Green Paper

This opinion will aim to respond to all the questions put by the
Commission.

4.1 Question 1: Should a ‘labelling'’ scheme be envisaged to recog-
nise the efforts of pioneering cities to combat congestion and improve
living conditions?

4.1.1
set up,
compatibility with them.

The EESC considers that a labelling scheme could be
taking account of existing systems and displaying

4.1.2
At Community level, it would be useful if the Commis-
sion were to set down indicators for performance, planning and
development, creating a harmonised reference framework.

Voluntary quality labels, rather than incentives, could
4.1.3
also be set up, such as those used in the field of tourism policy.

4.1.4
In all cases, the systems set up should be based on
objective, transparent criteria, and should be regularly assessed
and, if appropriate, reviewed, and sufficiently publicised.

4.2 Question 2: What measures
walking and cycling as real alternatives to car?

could be taken to promote

(1) COM(2006) 314 final. Communication from the Commission to the
Council and the European Parliament — Keep Europe moving — Sustain-
able mobility for our continent — Mid-term review of the European Commis-
sion's 2001 Transport White Paper.

(2) Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on Transport
in urban and metropolitan areas, (Rapporteur: Mr Ribbe) OJ C 168,
27.7.2007, p. 74

(3) Taking account of Protocol (No 30) on the application of the principles
of subsidiarity and proportionality and the Interinstitutional agreement
of 25 October 1993 between the European Parliament, the Council
and the Commission.

Given the proportion of transport that they represent,
4.2.1
walking and cycling cannot on the whole be considered as alter-
natives to the use of private vehicles, unless the home and work-
place are very close to each other and weather conditions are
favourable. Moreover, cycling is not a universal activity as it
excludes those with reduced mobility or disabilities, minors and
older people. Nonetheless, in connection with public transport,
walking and cycling could become viable alternatives in some
cities.

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/41

4.2.2 Municipalities should draw up sustainable urban trans-
port plans, including cycle paths, with the binding objective of
successfully switching to environmentally friendly transport
modes that meet minimum European requirements (which
remain to be established). These plans should address situations
jeopardising pedestrian safety and seek to avoid conflicts
between different transport modes.

4.2.3
To this end, a quantitative target should be introduced
in order to increase the proportion of transport represented by
public passenger transport, cycling and walking. Failure to draw
up such plans should result in loss of eligibility for financial aid
from Community funds. The Commission should also verify the
information that these plans contain with regard to green areas
and cycle paths.

4.3 Question 3: What could be done to promote a modal shift
towards sustainable transport modes in cities?

4.3.1
Possible solutions depend, to a large extent, on the size
(area and population) of the city, bearing in mind that pollution
also results from shortcomings in land-use planning, not solely
from transport.

4.3.2
Considering the problem and its possible solutions
through land-use and urban planning; providing secure public
car parks on access routes to cities; arterial network of dedicated
public transport lanes linked to different modes of transport
(car parks, rail and metro), by building interchanges which
encourage intermodality so as
to facilitate transfers, and
improving the quality of service in order to ensure that public
transport is attractive for users.

4.3.3 With regard to freight
the Commission
should promote the exchange of best practices in the field of
urban logistics, such as in the Italian city of Siena where freight
transport authorisations are only granted on a temporary basis.

transport,

4.4 Question 4: How could the use of clean and energy efficient
technologies in urban transport be further increased?

4.4.1
By setting up a tax policy for transport that promotes
the purchasing and use of new technologies that can reduce
pollution and increase energy savings.

4.5.2
defined and, where necessary, harmonised.

At Community level, common standards should be

4.6 Question 6: Should criteria or guidance be set out for the defi-
nition of Green Zones and their restriction measures? What is the best
way to ensure their compatibility with free circulation? Is there an issue
of cross border enforcement of local rules governing Green Zones?

4.6.1
The EESC believes that access to these zones should be
significantly reduced. However, there is need for harmonisation
in order to prevent differing legislation from hindering the free
movement of people and unnecessarily restricting urban mobi-
lity.

4.7 Question 7: How could eco-driving be further promoted?

Eco-driving should be covered by duly extended
4.7.1
mandatory instruction programmes for the initial and further
qualification of drivers, and by setting up tax concessions for
companies that take steps to monitor and measure driving.
Directive on driving training could be amended to include these
criteria.

4.8 Question 8: Should better information services for travellers be
developed and promoted?

4.8.1
Yes, with regard to safety on board, waiting and transit
times, passenger behaviour in emergencies, and all existing
transport options and conditions.

4.9 Question 9: Are further actions needed to ensure standardisa-
tion of interfaces and interoperability of ITS applications in towns and
cities? Which applications should take priority when action is taken?

By

gathering

environmental
4.4.2
conduct of cities: calculation of transport emissions per inhabi-
tant, and yearly campaigns to publicise the results.

information on the

4.5 Question 5: How could joint green procurement be promoted?

4.5.1
By imposing the use of ‘green purchases’ for procure-
ment relating to infrastructure funded by European programmes
and eliminating existing barriers (4).

(4) See the ECJ ‘Concordia Bus’ case and the criteria applied thereto.

The various ITS applications should be fully compatible
4.9.1
so that different technologies can be used, particularly with
regard to transport documents, thus facilitating transfers and
improving transport access times, which would lead to quicker
journeys on public transport. It is important for ITSs to support
they do not quickly
technological
become obsolete and their cost may be duly redeemed.

improvements,

so that

The EESC considers that information and communication tech-
nologies should be used to improve traffic and the organisation
of transport.

C 224/42

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

4.10 Question 10: Regarding ITS, how could the exchange of
information and best practices between all
involved parties be
improved?

It is proposed that a new indent be added to this first point of
Annex III, expressly mentioning the breakdown of the mobility
map (projected users of facilities, place of residence, etc.).

4.10.1
tices, which is regularly updated and can be consulted online.

By publishing a digital catalogue of good ITS prac-

4.11.4.2
in Annex IV, the directive sets out the
information that must be included in the environmental report.

Secondly,

4.11 Question 11: How can the quality of collective transport in
European towns and cities be increased?

4.11.1
By creating bodies to coordinate the different public
transport services, establishing fare integration systems, and
(greenest and best
requiring optimum transport equipment
suited to people with reduced mobility), increasing the number
of departures or frequency so as to reduce passenger waiting
times, setting up dedicated bus platforms (improved safety,
comfort and speed, greater energy efficiency which translates to
lower pollution), building interchanges to facilitate transfers,
improving training of professionals in the sector, informing and
raising awareness among users, providing infrastructure for the
proper distribution of traffic in transit within cities, providing
park and ride facilities and applying incentives to encourage
their use, setting up priority signage for public transport,
creating proper areas for picking up and setting down passen-
gers safely.

4.11.2
One method that would prove effective is to assess
the impact that specific plans, programmes and projects must
have on mobility.

The EESC proposes that:

a) a new indent be added to the fourth point of Annex IV, or
that
the third indent be amended, so as to specifically
mention emissions caused by the transportation of the habi-
tual users of the facilities;

b) point 5 of Annex IV be extended so that it covers not only
the implementation of the project but also the subsequent
operation of facilities and corrective measures relating to
emissions caused by transport for these facilities.

Lastly, Annex III(1) and Annex IV(4) and (5)
85/337/EEC should be amended as suggested.

to Directive

4.11.4.3
Thirdly, with regard to Directive 2001/42/EC on the
assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on
the environment, similar inclusions could be made (mandatory
criteria and information relating to mobility and transport
it
modes required in the environmental report). In this case,
would make sense to include the plans' effects on mobility, as
suggested, specifically in Annex I(f) and in Annex II(2).

4.12 Question 12: Should the development of dedicated lanes for
collective transport be encouraged?

In this context, it is useful to note the judgment of
4.11.3
the ECJ (case C-322-04) regarding the omission of the environ-
mental assessment in a project to build a shopping and leisure
centre in an urban area: it was the estimated volume of passen-
gers that would be accessing the centre by private vehicle that
determined its impact on the environment and the need for an
assessment.

4.12.1
Yes, this measure is essential and has a strong impact
on mobility. Dedicated lanes or platforms mean increased safety
and speed, and less congestion and energy consumption, as well
as greater comfort for passengers. This measure can help to win
over private vehicle users.

4.11.4
could be threefold:

Therefore, the amendment of the existing directives

4.13 Question 13:
Is there a need to introduce a European
Charter on rights and obligations for passengers using collective trans-
port?

Directive 85/337/EEC on the assessment of

4.11.4.1
the
effects of certain public and private projects on the environment
establishes, in Annex III, the criteria that Member States must
apply to determine whether certain projects have a significant
effect on the environment.

rights

Strengthening passengers'

4.13.1
to
ensuring that all modes of public transport improve the quality
of their service (frequency, punctuality, comfort for all types of
users, safety, fare policy, etc.). The Committee urges that this be
done, taking into account the features of each transport mode,
particularly those which share infrastructure.

essential

is

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/43

Given the wide range of

4.13.2
legislation existing in
different texts and for different modes of transport, all the rights
of passengers on public transport should be brought together in
a single ‘charter of rights’; scope should remain for this to be
supplemented by Member States and by self-regulation through
codes of conduct (5) followed by economic players and orga-
nised civil society (consumer bodies, environmental bodies, busi-
ness organisations, trade unions, etc.). The EESC emphasises the
importance of dialogue between these bodies and public trans-
port firms, in particular, in order to improve quality of service.

Action should be taken at Community level to recast and conso-
lidate the rights that already exist in the different legal texts, to
be complemented by action on the part of the Member States
and civil society organisations. The EESC stresses the need for
flexible, simple instruments to ensure that passengers' rights are
exercised.

4.14 Question 14: What measures could be undertaken to better
integrate passenger and freight transport in research and in urban
mobility planning?

Urban mobility plans in metropolitan areas should
4.14.1
cover both passenger and freight
to ensure that
freight logistics can operate without hindering passenger mobi-
lity.

transport,

4.14.2
loading and unloading bays should be increased.

Therefore, the number of agents to monitor dedicated

4.14.3
Creation of mechanisms to facilitate and speed up
offender reporting systems, so that offending vehicles can be
removed as quickly as possible from dedicated bays, rendering
them operational again.

4.14.4
Creation of effective mechanisms for penalising offen-
ders, from removal of the vehicle to effective collection of fines.

Public

4.14.5
campaign to
information and awareness
achieve general acceptance and involvement in meeting defined
goals, such as gaining the cooperation of local shopkeepers to
monitor dedicated loading/unloading bays, by showing them
how illegal parking in these spots could be detrimental for their
businesses.

loading/unloading operations.

4.14.6
Restriction of authorised stopping time in dedicated
loading/unloading bays, more in line with the time taken for
It could be possible to
most
request special permission to increase the authorised stopping
time, so as not to hamper certain types of transportation (e.g.
removals) which require longer to load and unload goods. Also,
specific time slots could be established for
loading and
unloading.

(5) See opinion OJ C 151, 17.6.2008 on The European Charter on the Rights

of Energy Consumers (Rapporteur: Mr Iozia).

4.15 Question 15: How can better coordination between urban
and interurban transport and land use planning be achieved? What
type of organisational structure could be appropriate?

Through proper coordination in the following areas:

a) Coordination between the different bodies:

— In some European cities, the creation of transport coordi-
nation bodies has greatly improved the coordination and
planning of transport, ensuring that high-quality services
are implemented efficiently and effectively.

— As concerns coordination with other modes of transport,
there should be greater transparency in cost allocation
for different transport modes.

— It would be useful for interurban transport services to
have the necessary infrastructure for modal interchanges,
so as to facilitate transfers between different modes of
public transport, thus preventing passengers from having
to use additional transport to connect from one mode to
another.

b) Coordination with planning instruments:

— Taking account of

the impact on mobility of certain
plans and projects is a requirement already established by
the landmark Court of Justice ruling of 16 March 2006
(case C-332/04): the obligation to submit a controversial
project for environmental evaluation was based essen-
tially on its estimated impact on mobility. This criterion
has not yet been incorporated into positive law, however.

— As a result, two changes specific to Community legisla-
tion on environmental evaluation are considered neces-
sary if the plan or programme's effect on mobility is to
is
be included amongst the impacts to be considered.
proposed in particular that the changes set out in the
answer to question 11 be made.

— Strategic spatial planning must be implemented in a
consistent manner in order to ensure rational land use
by regional authorities.

4.16 Question 16: What further actions should be undertaken to
help cities and towns meet their road safety and personal security chal-
lenges in urban transport?

4.16.1
Road safety: at European level, promote good prac-
tices and more intensive, structured dialogue with regional and
local stakeholders and Member States on new technologies
(particularly ITS) in order to improve safety. Also, increase the
level of driving training for industry professionals. The establish-
ment of dissuasive measures should also be regulated to prevent
cross-border traffic offences from going unpenalised.

C 224/44

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

30.8.2008

4.16.2
Personal protection: in order to encourage good prac-
tices, physical police presence should be stepped up on public
transport, particularly at night or on lines that travel to areas
with higher levels of unrest and social exclusion, and the use of
information technology and passenger information should be
increased.

4.20.2
A European Observatory on Sustainable Urban Mobi-
lity would be a useful initiative and would bring added value, as
it could gather data, track changes in transport demand and
It would also help to
facilitate the exchange of experiences.
improve knowledge of mobility problems and apply policies to
resolve these.

4.17 Question 17: How can operators and citizens be better
informed on the potential of advanced infrastructure management and
vehicle technologies for safety?

There is a need for harmonisation of urban assessment measures
at European level, and the EESC would welcome the unification
of criteria in this field.

4.17.1
By raising public awareness through education and
information campaigns, particularly those aimed at young
people; and through activities to generalise the use of enforce-
ment devices in cities for all road users. In general the EESC
considers it particularly important to adopt measures aimed at
strengthening the cultural and civic education aspects of all
issues connected with urban mobility.

4.18 Question 18: Should automatic radar devices adapted to the
urban environment be developed and should their use be promoted?

4.18.1
Depending on the end requirements, these devices
must always be geared towards improving mobility and opti-
mising journey speeds. Good practices should be encouraged to
increase safety, as should the use of intelligent systems.

4.19 Question 19: Is video surveillance a good tool for safety and
security in urban transport?

4.19.1
Installation of new technology-based emergency
systems in public transport vehicles, so as to warn emergency
services in the event of vandalism or accidents and provide
information on the situation of the vehicle, and transmission of
voice and image data showing what is happening inside the
vehicle.

4.19.2
invasion of privacy, which is a fundamental human right.

Adequate measures must be adopted to avoid the

4.20 Question 20: Should all stakeholders work together in devel-
oping a new mobility culture in Europe? Based on the model of the
European Road Safety Observatory, could a European Observatory on
Urban Mobility be a useful initiative to support this cooperation?

4.21 Question 21: How could existing financial instruments such
as structural and cohesion funds be better used in a coherent way to
support integrated and sustainable urban transport?

By making an improvement in urban mobility and
4.21.1
the gradual shift towards clean public transport facilities (low
fuel consumption,
low emission) objectives of the funds, and
ensuring a greater return on investment for every euro spent.

The EESC is in favour of increasing the percentage of funds
earmarked for education and research.

4.21.2
Financial contributions should also be reduced by
establishing objective scales that allow the most cost-effective
solution for the Community to be selected, in order to provide
citizens with high-quality transport at an affordable price. Effi-
ciency and compliance with public service obligations should be
key concerns.

4.22 Question 22: How could economic instruments, in particular
market-based instruments, support clean and energy efficient urban
transport?

4.22.1
contracts
funded by European programmes.

By requiring the inclusion of green clauses
for equipment

in
relating to infrastructure projects

Another possibility would be to include the criteria
4.22.2
from Buying green. A handbook on environmental public procurement
[SEC (2004) 1050] in a COM document, adding green public
purchasing of transport equipment.

A new culture for urban mobility will require the
4.20.1
cooperation of the European institutions and Member States,
regions and local authorities, along with civil society organisa-
tions.

Like the public transport vehicle market, the private vehicle
market is becoming more eco-friendly. The purchase of cleaner
cars (fuels, engines) should be promoted, and the financial
efforts made by those who buy them should be rewarded by
giving these vehicles specific treatment in policies for access to
city centres.

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/45

4.23 Question 23: How could targeted research activities help
more in integrating urban constraints and urban traffic development?

By clearly establishing the category of projects eligible
4.23.1
for Community public aid, and making it mandatory (with due
verification) to comply (within a specific timeframe) with the
objectives of such projects, so that in the event of non-compli-
ance any funding could be recovered.

4.24 Question 24: Should towns and cities be encouraged to use
urban charging? Is there a need for a general
framework and/or
guidance for urban charging? Should the revenues be earmarked to
improve collective urban transport? Should external costs be interna-
lised?

4.24.1
There should be common rules at European level,
through the harmonisation of criteria for calculating charges
and assessment of the useful density threshold of the public
transport network.

4.24.2
However, the EESC considers that charging or toll
systems for access to city centres are in the public interest and
have satisfactory immediate results, but discriminate against
those with lower incomes, and have little dissuasive effect on
those in higher income bands.

Local authorities should adopt measures to overcome any nega-
tive effects, for example by promoting the use of public trans-
port or providing reduced rate passes.

Brussels, 29 May 2008.

4.24.3
An alternative with ‘cross-cutting’ effects across all
income bands would be a ‘toll’ at access points. Rather than
charging a sum of money, it would calculate the available urban
mileage assigned to each driver. In other words, the proposal
would be to ‘ration’ access (mileage per unit of time). This
would mean ‘selecting’ and managing city journeys by private
vehicle, although it should be borne in mind that there would
be some discrimination on the basis of place of residence/
origin/destination.

4.24.4
to the proposed ‘low-traffic zones’
essentially restricted to public transport and residents.

Naturally, this would mean further zoning in addition
in which traffic would be

4.25 Question 25: What added value could, in the longer term,
for financing clean and energy efficient
targeted European support
urban transport, bring?

4.25.1
The added value is enormous, although difficult to
calculate, if we take health and hygiene factors (both physical
and psychological) into account, along with the value of people's
time (an aspect which varies depending on the time needed to
get from home to work and back, which when added to the
working day can create a wide range of negative factors).

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Dimitris DIMITRIADIS