Home > Guidelines > Activity 6.3: Consider best value for money

Activity 6.3: Consider best value for money


The aim of the SUMP Glossary is to provide a brief explanation of specialist words, terms and abbreviations relating to the subject of sustainable urban mobility planning. The Glossary has been prepared by the CH4LLENGE project and as a result, there is a particular focus on defining terms relating to the four key challenges of plan development studied by the project, namely: participation, cooperation, measure selection and monitoring & evaluation. It is envisaged that, over time, the international community of mobility practitioners will add to the content of the online Glossary and produce versions in different languages.
A simple structure has been followed so that users can search for words, terms and abbreviations in a standard alphabetic format. For each Glossary term, the following information is provided:
• a general definition and, where available, a specific definition relating to transport and mobility planning;
• an explanation of why the term is relevant to sustainable urban mobility planning; and
• references to sources.
The preparation of the Glossary, including the selection of terms and drafting of definitions, has been informed by a review of relevant reports, guidance documents and existing glossaries. The key reference is the European Union “Guidelines - Developing and implementing a Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan” prepared for the EC’s Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) programme by Rupprecht Consult (January 2014) and therefore this has not been identified as a source throughout the document. The outputs of the CH4LLENGE project have also provided a principal source of information and the official documents can be found at www.sump-challenges.eu.

Please note that not all the explanatory text is taken directly from the listed sources. The authors have sought to take established definitions and information as the basis and explain these in simple terms and relate them to the context of sustainable urban mobility planning where this was not previously the case.

By Admin Eltis / Updated: 11 Nov 2015


Measureinfo-icon selection will be guided not only by effectiveness, but also by value for money. Especially in times of tight budgets for urban transport and mobilityinfo-icon, it is crucial to get the most impact possible for the resources spent. This will require a basic assessmentinfo-icon of options with an eye on costs and benefits. This will also help you be realistic about what measures can be implemented and to avoid “pie-in-the-sky projects,” i.e. to choose only measures that seem financially feasible.



  • Ensure efficient use of available resources.
  • Avoid selection of financially unrealistic measures.
  • Strengthen the credibilityinfo-icon of the implementation of measures.



  • Select only affordable and effective measures and packages of measures.
  • Assess the proposed measures with an eye to realistic and timely implementation with given resources. The choice of methodology depends on your experience and available resources and may include both qualitative and quantitative approaches. In some places, a full cost-benefit-analysis may be too costly. In such cases, a focus on the most important measures, simpler approaches and/or estimates could be applied.
  • Ensure that all costs and benefits – not just those that can be easily measured or valued – are taken into account.
  • Ensure that both people (passengers) and freight transport flows are considered,
  • Ensure that greenhouse gas and air quality impacts are considered.
  • Ensure that all modes are equally considered and compared in assessing costs and benefits.
  • Take maintenance needs into consideration.


Timing and coordination

  • After initial identification of optional measures – running in parallel to Activities 6.1 Identify the most effective measures and 6.2 Learn from others’ experience.



Suitable measures (and packages of measures) assessed with an eye to costs and benefits as well as value for money.
Results summarised for discussion on final measure selection.


For more information

Transport Analysis Guidance – WebTAG

This UK guidance includes or provides links to advice on how to:

  • set objectives and identify problems;
  • develop potential solutions; and
  • create a transport model for the appraisalinfo-icon of the alternative solutions.

Unit 2.5 of WebTAG gives a particularly useful introduction to the appraisal process.

For details see: www.dft.gov.uk/webtag



Greater Nottingham, England: Local Transport Plan 2 – Major Scheme Assessment

The Greater Nottingham LTP2 (a Sustainable Urban Mobility Planinfo-icon in England) includes a section assessing its major scheme proposals against objectives to demonstrate that they all make a significant contribution to most LTP objectives.

It also explains how schemes are planned and integrated with others to maximise benefits and therefore value for money. Finally, lower-cost alternatives to major schemes are identified to show what could be achieved with less money. This can be seen at www.nottinghamshire.gov.uk/chapter12-implementationprogramme.pdf, pages 334-336.

Source: Tom Rye, Lund University