Looking at the SUMP guidelines, Step 2.3.1 is connected to Looking at the SUMP guidelines, as previously mentioned under Step 2.1.1 of these guidelines, Step 2.3.1 is connected to Phase I: ‘Preparing well’ - Step 1 ‘Determine your potential for a successful SUMP’ - Activity 1.1 ‘Commit to overall sustainable mobility principles’ and Step 2 ‘Define the development process and scope of plan’ - Activity 2.2 ‘Strive for policy coordination and an integrated planning approach’ as well as Phase II ‘Rational and transparent goal setting’ - Step 4 ‘Develop a common vision of mobility and engage citizens’ - Activity 4.1 ‘Develop a common vision of mobility and beyond’ and Activity 5.1 ‘Identify the priorities for mobility’.
Looking at the SEAP/SECAP guidelines (How to develop a Sustainable Energy Action Plan Guidebook part I), chapters 6.1 and 6.2 call for a vision and specific objectives towards a sustainable energy future.
The vision guiding the harmonized drafting/re-elaboration of strategic energy, transport and mobility plans in any local authority should reflect a clear political statement, a route to steer strategic as well as operational choices.
Defining a strategic vision of what the city should look like in ten years’ time generates a common framework in which SECAPs’ and SUMPs’ visions contribute to the achievement of the same strategic goals.
This is why the elaboration of such a vision needs to take into account the views of stakeholders and main territorial actors and strive to provide an overarching, common orientation for policies and measures, encompassing bipartisan consensus as much as possible to guarantee ample, long-lasting ownership of the plans.
Defining a vision for the harmonization of SECAPs and SUMPs may draw from previous political statements which decision makers prompted, for instance during their electoral campaign (such as a mandate program or similar) or may provide the opportunity to design a wider, more comprehensive orientation, encompassing a whole set of policies and measures in several interrelated fields besides energy and mobility (e.g. urban planning, city logistics, city’s quality and attractiveness for citizens and visitors). The “vision” chapter of SECAP and SUMP has to be consistent with the Vision produced in Step1.
If necessary, in order to successfully perform the harmonization of the programmatic vision to be included in the plans, it is possible to compare the strategic objectives based on the results obtained comparing the data contained in both plans. Looking at both plans, the joint analysis of data, identified and read with different planning purposes, could bring out some critical issues in the city leading to a review of both vision and strategic objectives.