Workshop on Public Transport Quality Monitoring

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Workshop on Public Transport Quality Monitoring


A workshop on the public transport quality performance monitoring was held in Brussels on 14 March 2016.  




The JASPERS Networking Platform was created to complement JASPERS project advisory operations by implementing knowledge sharing and capacity building activities, as well as fostering dissemination of good practices and exchange of experiences among all EU member states, pre-accession countries and other JASPERS Stakeholders.



The JASPERS Networking Platform is open to relevant authorities from all EU Member States (EU 28), as well as pre-accession Countries.

The aim of the workshop was to support competent authorities in setting appropriate quality objectives in the PSO contract or other contractual instruments and in monitoring the achievement of those objectives. 


The workshop was jointly organised with UITP and is targeted to representatives from local and regional public transport authorities, representatives of public transport companies and representatives from managing authorities and line ministries responsible for ESI funds in favour of public transport service assets.



The workshop included four sessions on the following topics: Urban Mobility Objectives and Public Transport Quality; Performance and Monitoring requirements in the PSC; Performance Monitoring Technologies; and Non-technical Performance Monitoring Methods.

The potential need for general guidance at European level to be adapted at national/local level was also addressed during the workshop. The event concluded with an exchange of views and recommendations.


For more information and a tentative agenda please see the Workshop Description available on this page.

For any further enquiry on this workshop and in general on the activities of the JASPERS Networking Platform please write an email to

Description of the Workshop sessions

Urban Mobility Objectives and Public Transport Quality

Objectives and performances for Public Transport services at local and regional level should be defined on the basis of:

  • good knowledge about the local transport reality
  • available financial  means at local level (municipal budget, EU and/or national investment funds, third party sources)
  • obstacles and drivers of an increased public transport market share, possibly in combination with other means of transport.


The well-known problems affecting our cities (motorisation rate, traffic congestion, pollution, scarce public transport coverage in time and space, fatalities and induced health diseases, etc.) can be faced through enhanced public transport quality and efficiency, interoperability of different mobility services, “clean” vehicles, integrated land use and transport planning. The essential prerequisites are strong coordination, cooperation among the different actors active on the same network and the integration of data and systems. Public Funding of Public Transport at EU and national/local level should encourage smart solutions to increase quality and efficiency.


Performance and monitoring requirements in the PSC

The defined Public Transport quality objectives should be specified and codified in the PSO contracts with the transport operators at local or regional level. Experience with the process of specification, codification and implementation shall be presented and discussed through experienced representatives of authorities and operators.


Topics of the discussion will include:

  • Quantitative performance indicators including basic indicators as availability, access, affordability, safety, comfort, convenience and reliability.
  • Quality performance indicators, related to customer satisfaction: Quality of the operated service; Quality of information provided to the users; Impacts of promotion campaigns, etc.
  • Provision and discussion of a set of performance indicators in relation to the type of services contracted

  • Sustainability indicators: are maintenance and renewal activities sufficient to maintain or even improve the current quality levels in the long-term?

  • Calculus of monthly payments to PT operators, Remuneration of PT operators, Forecasts System of penalties and calculation methods (bonus/malus calculation, related to indicators and targets above) – both for service quantitative and qualitative aspects.


Performance monitoring technologies

The role of information and communication technologies (ICT) and, in particular, the developments of the last 5 years (big data open architecture, internet of “things”, cloud platform, smart phone and visual graphic interface, UMTS and Wi-Fi network, sensors and location devices, social media, etc.), play a significant role in planning/implementing/managing mobility and transport services. They should be used to the extent possible and reasonable for quality monitoring purposes. Technical developments and application experience will be presented and discussed through experienced representatives of authorities and operators.


Topics of the discussion will include:

  • ICT, AVM, ticketing systems, Application of AVL systems to the certification of PSC KPIs and the calculation of payments/penalties
  • Technical and technological data and indicators related to the specific technological system.


Non-technical performance monitoring methods

Apart from technology based performance monitoring methods, PSO contracts include reporting requirements of the transport operator. They may also request the establishment of user surveys and other forms of user feedback. If not foreseen in the contract transport authorities may carry those surveys out themselves.  Experienced speakers from authorities, companies and JASPERS /UITP experts will present their findings.


Topics of the discussion will include:

  • Reporting stipulations and experience in PSO contracts. What can we expect from companies and how can we incentivise good reporting?
  • Impact of user feedback on the measurement of contractual quality requirements – experience, conclusions, recommendations. User surveys under the responsibility of the contracting authority – relevance for the preparation of new and the monitoring of existing contracts.

  • The role of organisation and the related technical and financial impacts of performance monitoring: Presentation and discussion of the relative impact of soft and technical performance measures (On-field Performance Control measures (Periodic (weekly or monthly) reports, Control rides, …) and the related costs and organizational requirements. Experience with all three monitoring methods


Conclusions and recommendations

EU funding programmes have played and still play a key role in stimulating the city in implementing Sustainable Urban Mobility. Conclusions and recommendations aim among others at the question whether guidance, based on existing experience, may provide added value to the market participants and serve also as reference for ESIF contributions to the sector.



Videos of the workshop

Opening and introduction

Effectiveness of EU-supported public urban transport projects


The economics of quality




Quantifiable targets and monitoring: experience in Germany and in Europe


How smart can a bus be and at which cost?


Relevance and impact of technical versus non-technical monitoring methods


Questions and Answers - session 4

Urban mobility planning and Quality Indicators


Definition of objectives, contractual implementation and performance monitoring


Operator experience in definition of objectives and reporting


Question and answers - session 2


 Costs versus reliability



Monitoring techniques, quality impacts and cost



Service quality versus infrastructure quality monitoring


Urban mobility planning and EU funded Investments


Question and answers - session 1

Authority experience - setting performance requirements and monitoring


Are AVM enough to allow quality monitoring and service validation?


Questions and answers - session 3


Impact of user surveys, reporting, organisation and performance monitoring


Conclusions and Recommendations


  • No labels