U.S. Department of Transportation
Federal Highway Administration
1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE
Washington, DC 20590
202-366-4000
A trend toward greater public accountability and transparency in decision-making has been an important characteristic of U.S. transportation planning, decision-making; and organizational management over the past 10 years. One way this has been accomplished is through the use of performance measures,indicators of transportation system and organizational performance that provide decision makers with a sense of whether their decisions are improving transportation system performance or organizational productivity. By monitoring such indicators, other officials, legislators, and the general public can also follow the continuing efforts of transportation agencies to improve the performance of the transportation system.
This international scan investigated the best-case use of performance measures in transportation planning and decision-making around the world. Lessons from this scan can help U.S. transportation professionals better understand how performance measures could be used to enhance the effectiveness of decision-making and organizational management in Federal, State, regional, and local transportation agencies.
This scan was timely because many transportation officials are thinking about ways to get the best use of the limited funds available for investment. In addition, the transportation profession is devoting considerable attention to how performance measures can improve the technical foundation for decision-making (e.g., a second national conference on performance measures was held four months after the scan).
Performance measures can relate to many different aspects of, as well as be applied at, different levels of decision-making. The scan panel, therefore, represented a diverse set of interests and concerns for national and State-level transportation decisions.
In addition to representatives from the Federal Highway Administration ( FHWA ) and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) , the panel included officials from State transportation agencies in Maryland, Minnesota, Virginia, and Washington; representatives of the International Bridge, Tunnel, and Turnpike Association and the American Council of Engineering Companies; and university professors of transportation engineering and policy.
These panel members represented a diverse set of interests and expertise in the areas of engineering, intelligent transportation systems, policy, planning, safety, and system operations (see Appendix A). FHWA and AASHTO jointly sponsored this scan.
The scan team met with the following types of representatives during its 2.5- week study in Australia, Canada, Japan, and New Zealand:
Given the limited time available to the scan team, several important stakeholders in performance management were not part of the meetings. For example, the team did not meet with representatives from civic, shipper, freight handler, or environmental groups, each of which could have an important role in influencing the development and use of a performance measurement system.
Before the scan, the team sent a set of amplifying questions to those on the itinerary to clarify the types of information desired. These amplifying questions are in Appendix B.
Chapter Two of this report presents the information gathered from the four countries visited, in the order of the scan team's visits. Thus, the chapter discusses the results of the British Columbia visit, followed by Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. The decision to visit these countries was based on professional communications, literature reviews, and Web searches, and each presented a unique experience with performance measurement that would be of interest to the U.S. transportation community.
Chapter Three focuses on the use of performance measurement for safety programs, which the scan team found to be one of the most impressive uses of performance- based planning and decision-making. The final chapters present general observations, overall lessons for the United States, and recommendations for implementing the scan results.
In each of the cases described in the following pages, monetary amounts are reported in the country's own currency unit, followed by a conversion to U.S. dollars. Similar conversions are shown for metric distance measurements. In the case of currency, although much of the financing information is reported from planning and budgetary documents prepared over the past 10 years, the conversion rates used were those for April 20, 2004. Although this suggests the buying power of the monetary estimates might be different from that intended in these documents, it serves the purpose of comparing investment levels consistently from one country to another.
| << Previous | Contents | Next >> |
