摘要：AbstractIn Austria exists – as in other countries – a variety of different funding schemes for co-funding urban transport projects (ministry of transport, ministry of environment, ministry of economics, funding from provincial budget, special funds, e. g. for climate protection, etc.). All of these with different sets of criteria and different funding schemes. Therefore it is not sure over all, if the most efficient projects for transport in cities will be funded within the existing funding architecture. This situation is unsatisfying and not transparent, therefore the Austrian Association of Cities commissioned the Institute for Transport Studies to develop a standardised ranking model for urban transport measures. This model makes different projects comparable, starting with bicycle measures, mobility management, measures for pedestrians and ending with public transport infrastructure measures or new public transport vehicles. The ranking model is based on four pillars: (1) contribution of the measure to the actual transport master plan in the city (2) total economic cost and benefit ratio of the measure (3) expected environmental benefit of the measure and (4) degree of return of investment targeted by the municipality. Key evaluation indicators for the model are developed to make possible a comparison of the measures and a ranking, which measures to prefer. The challenge is to bridge the gap between a serious estimation of impacts and a reasonable effort of data collection for those who apply for funding. During a test phase, four measures were tested and analyzed with the model developed - two public transport measures (a rail-based and a bus scheme), one bicycle measure and one mobility management measure. The final version of the model is ready since mid 2011. With the ranking model as proposal the Austrian Association of Cities will put pressure on the responsible departments to establish a transparent and cost efficient funding scheme in Austria in the future.
关键词：Evaluation scheme;Simulation of measures;Impact assessment in economical;social and ecological aspects
