Figure 37

Figure 37. Overview of Vienna STEP UMP s Phase 2 analyses. Source: Author Thus, even completing the second phase milestone reaching the middle of the SUMP cycle this open target could compromise the monitoring progress (Phase 4) since it is unclear how much the plan expects to achieve. For instance, if it rises or declines just a little, it could be considered to have reached its goals, even if that would not mean much progress. Hence, this could be a point to be improved for the following plans.

4.1.3. Phase 3 | Measure Planning

The STEP UMP has presented its measuring plan mainly in the second part, divided into nine chapters, Space: Organization lity n Furthermore, as earlier stated in Chapter 2 (Figure 4), the SUMP cycle Phase 3, Measure Planning, also has three steps, which summary analyses results have been shown below.

Step 7 select measure packages with stakeholders: STEP UMP has not shared much information regarding the assessment of long lists of measures recommended activity by the SUMP guidelines that possibly have been done before the selection of the 50 ones presented in the document. Nevertheless, it does not mean that this activity did not occur, but rather that it might not have been published in the final paper since some lists of measures have not been selected for the shortlist a similar assumption to Step 4. Although, it is essential to highlight that according to Figure 35, stakeholders have been very involved in the measures process, which is a positive outcome for this step.

Furthermore, the 50 selected measures have been packed and presented into nine action chapters, striving to integrate all transport modes with land-use and other urban sectors, following the SUMP guidelines. Hence, they have been displayed in three ways throughout the document:

i. In a summary table where the 50 measures have been linked to their contribution to achieving the six objectives ii. In a descriptive manner with more details regarding each of them iii. At the end of the document, grouped by transport modes

However, the SUMP guidelines reinforce that a detailed cost estimation should be presented along with the measure packages, although this information has hardly been seen through the document. Hence, this is a critical point that needs improvement in further plans.

Likewise, monitoring and evaluation arrangements have been generically mentioned. There is a lack of details regarding the format and the frequency each data will be measured, but it also is missing the responsibilities and allocation budget specifics. STEP UMP has mainly mentioned that the City of Vienna Administration is the one in charge of frequently monitoring and keeping track of the implementation of measures; however, it does not point out which department is responsible for what nor define the frequency which the indicators will be updated. It has only mentioned that ry 5 years, an extensive evaluation is carried out and the result is submitted to the Municipal Council, with (Vienna City Administration, 2014a, p. 28).

Step 8 agree actions and responsibilities: STEP UMP has described all actions in the second part of the document, divided into nine fields. However, it lacks many essential data that the SUMP guidelines have recommended in this Step. For instance, it lacks detailed information for most actions related to budget and funding sources (identifying potential financial resources), priorities, responsibilities, and timeline. Although, as has been already mentioned in the previous Step, according to Figure 35, the stakeholders have been involved in many measures planning, which helps ensure public support, and further facilitates the adoption of the plan, the lack of details related to actions could compromise a lot the plan implementation. Hence, this Step needs to be improved in the further updates of the STEP UMP.

Step 9 prepare for adoption and financing: STEP UMP has not presented concrete financial plans for all actions, as has been already stated in Steps 7 and 8. In the document, it has been mentioned that (Vienna City Administration, 2014a, p. 58). Moreover, some other parts of STEP UMP also mention funding and financing, but always in a very generically/broad way without sharing many details about it. Most of the time, it has just referred to as or as a for those purposes/actions; however, it has not been clear nor explicitly addressed how much funding, or which type, or who is truly responsible for them, or who is in charge of requiring them. Additionally, the author even researched the possibility of this financial resources part being in another document, as an annex, such as a road map or action plan detached from STEP UMP. Still, not much luck has been made through this desk research which has been done in English and German to avoid missing any data about it.

Furthermore, the last activity suggested by the SUMP guidelines for this Step is related to it has incorporated the participatory approach from citizens and stakeholders to receive political and public support. For this reason, STEP UMP has discussed the interim document in a fora before its approval, and a has also been conducted through the plan to guarantee gender and diversity inclusion. In summary, Figure 38 compiles the STEP UMP analyses from SUMP Cycle Phase 3, where only two activities have been covered, three others have been partially covered, and another four have stayed unclear.