Luxembourg, May CIECA « Eco-driving » project & report (2007)

Luxembourg I May CIECA Eco-driving report (2007) Compilation of findings based on: –Visits to expert countries (Germany, Finland, Netherlands, Switzerland) –Literature Available in French, German and English Only 23 pages

Luxembourg I May Overview of presentation 1.The “environment” in the context of driver training and testing 2.Examples of how eco-driving is addressed in a range of countries 3.How is eco-driving assessed in the test? 4.Does it work? 5.Possible conflicts between eco-driving and safe driving? 6.Disincentives (for eco-driving in training/testing) 7.Reports, documents online

Luxembourg I May The New Driving Style video Clips from the Dutch “Het nieuwe Rijden” campaign Designed for experienced drivers more than novice drivers Nevertheless, good examples of effective ‘eco-driving’ communication to the public Thanks to SenterNovem (NL)

Luxembourg I May The environment & transport 1.GENERAL PRINCIPLES: –Alternative transport modes –Avoiding unnecessary travel 2.CAR-RELATED: –Choice of car (eco-rating) –Trip planning (avoiding jams) –Vehicle maintenance (e.g. tyre pressure) 3.DRIVING TECHNIQUES: –Driving in the highest possible gear –Early gear changes –Coasting Difficult message ‘to sell’ in driver training? Can be addressed in theory lessons, theory test and practical test Most ‘hands-on’ dimension of eco-driving: at least for countries with strong tradition of driving school training.

Luxembourg I May Eco-driving in specific driver training and testing regimes Easier in countries with obligatory theory and practical lessons, or strong driving school tradition: e.g. Germany, Netherlands, Finland, Switzerland

Luxembourg I May Eco-driving in specific driver training and testing regimes: obligatory components Germany: theory training + practical training + test Finland: theory training + practical training + test + 2 nd phase Switzerland: theory training (Verkehrskunde) + test + 2 nd phase Netherlands: practical training + test Sweden: practical training + test

Luxembourg I May Eco-driving in specific driver training and testing regimes: obligatory components Germany: theory training + practical training + test Finland: theory training + practical training + test + 2 nd phase Switzerland: theory training + test + 2 nd phase Netherlands: practical training + test Sweden: practical training + test

Luxembourg I May Example: Germany (theory training) THEME: “My passengers should always feel comfortable” And how to handle situations when you are uncomfortable as a passenger (= clear link with safe driving behaviour) THEME: “Defending the new driving style” ‘Trigger situations’ are addressed in video scenarios from the Cool fahren – Sprit sparen campaign* (visiting the parents, mother-daughter, etc) involving friends, parents, etc to prepare youngsters for defending / maintaining the new driving style *

Luxembourg I May Examples from Finnish & Swiss 2 nd phase programmes Novice drivers will have learned the basics (bit of theory, bit of practice) in pre-test training and will have been assessed on this criterion during the theory/practical test But, the 2 nd phase appears to be a particularly good time to (a) remind novice drivers of environmental issues / eco-driving, and (b) improve their eco-driving skills now they are ‘more experienced’ drivers.

Luxembourg I May Example: Finland’s 2 nd phase ‘Before-and-after comparison’ in on-road feedback drive* (normal drive + eco-driving tips + practice with fuel consumption comparison) Written feedback after the drive: including tips for economical driving and a recording of the exact fuel consumption (litres per 100km) in the first and second drives. ‘Econen’ (Autokoululiitto) * Not currently part of Luxembourg’s 2 nd phase

Luxembourg I May Example: Swiss 2 nd phase ‘Before-and-after comparison’ in on-road feedback drive (normal drive + eco-driving brainstorming session in groups + practice + fuel consumption comparison) On-road drives with up to 3 novice drivers + trainer Eco-driving simulator (Veltheim) Veltheim Driving Center

Luxembourg I May Eco-driving in the practical test Differences between rules on paper and application in practice? Differences in approach from one country to another: 1.Not admissible as reason for failing test 2.Included as a reason, but in combination with other faults 3.A reason in itself for failure Relative weight of eco-driving in the test may depend on focus elsewhere in the regime

Luxembourg I May Eco-driving training for learners: does it work? No research exists on novice drivers’ application of eco-driving principles and techniques when driving solo (a Swiss project is underway…)

Luxembourg I May Eco-driving and safe driving: are they the same? Potential conflicts identified in Finnish study (Turku, 2004):  ‘Avoiding stopping’ – risky near pedestrian crossings or intersections.  Early release of accelerator can upset traffic pattern to the rear  Rapid acceleration causing shorter safety margins?  Coming too close to vehicle in front in attempt to maintain evenness of speed (Full report on the CIECA website – details at end of presentation)

Luxembourg I May Eco-driving and safe driving: are they the same (III)? These conflicts appear to be more the exception than the norm Nevertheless, these findings underline the importance of the right messages being transmitted to the target group of learner drivers, and to proper training and quality assurance of driving instructors.

Luxembourg I May Disincentives for introducing eco-driving? LACK OF EVIDENCE: No evidence that novice drivers maintain eco-driving attitudes and techniques once they are driving solo. STRUCTURAL DIFFICULTY: More difficult to introduce eco-driving into a liberal training and testing regime POOR QUALITY OF DRIVING INSTRUCTION: Current training goals are not even being met, let alone more complex ones. OTHER PRIORITIES: Priority given to improving other areas of the practical driving test, such as reflecting typical accident scenarios of novice drivers LACK OF COST INCENTIVES: Fuel is cheaper in some countries than others, and in cheap-fuel countries there is less of an incentive to cut costs through eco-driving. TECHNICAL PROGRESS: Perception that future advances in vehicle technology will contribute more towards emission reductions than changes in driver behaviour.

Luxembourg I May Keeping up with technological change! Modern cars (1990+) are not supposed to be driven like older ones Testing and training regimes have a responsibility to keep up with technological change! Example of slow reaction to change: in practice, examiners in France will often ‘mark down’ (count as a fault) the candidate in the practical test if he/she does NOT change down through the gears when coming to a stop. This is in contradiction with eco-driving.

Luxembourg I May The Eco-driving report ( ) 1.Basic principles of eco-driving – from a range of countries / organisations 2.Benefits of eco-driving 3.Marketing and communications, particularly for youngsters 4.Research on effectiveness of eco-driving training (experienced drivers only) 5.Summary of experiences of ‘expert countries’ (Germany, Finland, Switzerland, etc) 6.Possible conflict areas 7.Conclusions and Recommendations + Visit reports, literature, useful websites and technical tips…

Luxembourg I May CIECA members only (but username and password available from Guy H / J-P Gillen)

Luxembourg I May Conclusions 1.The environment is taken seriously in the driver training and testing regimes of an increasing number of European countries (particularly eco-driving techniques) 2.No knowledge yet of sustainable effects of such training / testing 3.Potential conflicts between eco-driving and safe driving to be aware of.

Luxembourg I May