The essence of the economic analysis is the pilots’ contribution to the economic welfare of the broader society, i.e., the region or the country. The economic analysis extends the financial analysis by considering broader costs and benefits that relate to the innovation but are not reflected in direct financing costs due to market imperfections (so called accounting prices). For example, suppose a new mobility solution emits less CO₂ per service unit compared to the old solution. In that case, those benefits are not (or only incompletely) reflected in the financing costs (market prices) of the mobility solution.

The Economic Net Present Value (ENPV) is a quantitative indicator that shows the economic performance of an investment alternative in the form of accounting prices. Besides financial investments, it also includes estimations of shadow prices and external costs (referred to as externalities).

Many impacts of investments or projects, such as avoided or increased emissions of CO₂, air pollutants or noise, or road accidents, are absent or insufficiently expressed in monetary units. However, to determine the desirability of a new mobility solution, those effects need to be considered in the assessment. So, to integrate them into the CBA framework, they need to be translated into monetary values.

The ENPV represents the most reliable social CBA indicator and should be used as the primary reference of economic performances for pilot estimation. Data requirements to assess the ENPV comprise:

• Quantification and monetisation of non-market impacts (external effects);
• Inclusion of additional indirect effects;
• Social discount rate;
• Economic performance indicators.

The monetisation of external costs is explored in the following section on Environmental and Social KPIs. Social discounting is needed to put a present value on those costs and benefits linked to a project or an investment, but it will only occur later. There is no standard suggestion for which social discounting rate to choose. A high discount rate implies that less importance is given to future developments, while using a low discount rate promotes quick action to mitigate the long-term impacts that affect future generations.  In 2015, an economists’ survey suggested a social discount rate of ca. 2%. The discount rate differs from the financial discount rate in cases when the market of capital is inefficient.

The economic analysis can show that if a project is not financially viable, it still can be economically beneficial, i.e. desirable from a broader social perspective. However, in those cases, making the new solution permanently available beyond the pilot stage will require a continuous flow of public subsidies. For example, the assessment of the SPROUT Pilot “intermodal bike parkings in Valencia” suggested that, based on financial assessment, users should be charged between €1.64 and €2.19 for using the bike parking facilities, it was decided to retain this service free of cots for public transport users due to the positive sustainability impacts.

A list of possible questions to assess the legal and operational feasibility is provided in the SPROUT Recommended Indicators for Assessing the Financial and Economic Performance, the Operational Feasibility, and the Environmental and Social Impacts of Mobility Solutions

For assessing pilots’ sustainability impacts and translating them into monetary costs and benefits, the SPROUT project relies on the European Commission’s Handbook on the External Costs of Transport. The Handbook provides a set of cost-related indicators and default values on transport-related greenhouse gas emissions, air pollution, accidents, noise, and congestion.

In order to facilitate the collection of relevant data and the calculation of related external costs, the SPROUT team has created a Sustainability Impact Assessment Tool for the following impact areas: Climate Change, Well-to-tank emissions, air pollution, noise, accidents, and congestion. Required input data are the number of kilometers (pkm, tkm, vkm) for different vehicle categories.

Moreover, to ensure the inclusivity and general accessibility of new mobility solutions, the INDIMO Inclusive Digital Mobility Toolbox provides an evaluation system to assess the technical accessibility of digital components. The toolbox offers an interactive set of 5 online tools, with an emphasis on ensuring the accessibility and inclusiveness of mobility solutions especially those of users who experience barriers in using digital services.

This assessment explores whether

1. the pilot is in line with the legal framework, for example whether cities have the legal competence to implement an innovative solution and/or related policies; whether any regulations – or the lack of such – hinder the adoption of a policy. For example, cities may not be allowed to implement a zero-emission zone, or to set a general speed limit of 30km/h; or certain components of the pilot may not be allowed. The Budapest pilot demonstrated, for example, that the re-allocation of urban space is in the competence of city districts rather than of the city; or that e-scooters are not categorised as vehicles in Hungary, which led to ambiguities and uncertainties in the implementation of shared mobility points.
2. the city has enough financial resources to cover implementation and, if necessary, operating costs over the long run;
3. the solution attracts enough users and generates sufficient revenues to be upheld.

A list of possible questions to assess the legal and operational feasibility is provided in Annex 3 of D4.1 Pilot Evaluation Framework (page 62)

The collection of data requires a combination of methods. The following example from the Budapest use case 1 (pedestrianisation of a street) illustrates a variety of approaches that have been followed, ranging from systematic observation to sensors and local workshops:

“Different data collection methods were used. This included Gehl’s stationary activity mapping in order to measure the usage of public space. Usual traffic counting was used to measure the different types of vehicles. To measure the changes of air pollution within the pilot area, data was collected on airborne dust and NOx concentration levels. In addition, surveys were made and local workshops were organised to measure citizens’ and users’ acceptance of the pilot project. Data was also collected on how cargo loading methods and behaviours were changed.”  (Source: SPROUT D4.9, p.19)

Other data sources comprise the use of vehicle data, data from mobility providers, or modelling results (mostly in cases where due to the Covid Pandemic the pilot could not be realised in time).