- Campuses :
- Twin Cities
- Crookston
- Duluth
- Morris
- Rochester
- Other Locations
Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, June 19, 2008.
Opening remarks by Laurie McGinnis, Center for Transportation Studies (CTS)
Laurie opens the meeting by welcoming everyone and having the participants and audience members introduce themselves. She then touches on the importance of the research conducted through the TechPlan and how it relates to the broader mission and work of the ITS (Intelligent Transportation Systems) Institute, the State and Local Policy Program, and the Center for Transportation Studies.
Presentation session was then moderated by Jan Lucke (CTS)
“ITS and Transportation Safety: EMS System Data Integration to Improve Crash Emergency Response and Treatment," by Tom Horan, Associate Professor and Executive Director of the Claremont Information and Technology Institute
Hoping to discover new frontiers in which ITS (Intelligent Transportation Systems) can deliver safety benefits, Dr. Horan’s research explores the potential for linking ITS to EMS technologies. His objective is to make linkages between ITS, 911 and trauma systems in order to create safer roads, quicker response times and better response practices.
Currently some states are considering state wide trauma systems which can service rural areas by giving efficient routing information and hospital locations. Consideration of the data linking traffic accident’s emergency response times and the trauma outcomes needed to be further analyzed, and hence his research focused on the thirty minutes or more responses.
According to Dr. Horan, the research identified the metrics used to evaluate the individual steps in the emergency response system, and found they needed to be merged into a larger metric for evaluation of the overall end to end process.
Dr. Horan’s research included working with many stakeholders, many of which had positive reactions to the idea of large integrated systems. “Crash help” is now the name of the potential service with a real time list of the incoming traumas and vital emergency responder information sharing technologies.
The potential for such a system is real, however comparative steps need to be taken, as well as a clinical studies about the practical steps in the deployment of such a system.
“Effect of Education Policy and Urban Form on Elementary-age School Travel,” by Elizabeth Wilson, Associate Professor, Energy and Environmental Policy and Law, Humphrey School
Dr. Wilson’s research considers the question of how school choice impacts transit options. Travel and environmental implications of school choice have not been looked at very closely before this work. Her research looks at the potential for technology to assist in educational transportation policies.
Her first survey in St. Paul demonstrated:
They hope to continue to work with the districts so that they can consider how to implement and take advantage of technologies that will allow the environmental and transportation impacts of school choice to be minimized.
Q: How does weather impact transportation choices?
A: There is a donut effect in the data from weather impacting whether a student would choose to walk.
“The Implications of Current and Emerging Privacy Law for ITS,” by Frank Douma, Assistant Director, State and Local Policy Program, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Mr. Douma starts by sharing a hypothetical, describing a future where your vehicle will note every law broken while it is being driven, resulting in automatic tickets. The capacity and potential for developing ITS technologies to conduct these activities are real and raises questions about what is considered to be proper use of ITS technologies. Specifically, one should ask what changes should the legal system undertake in order to make sure ITS does not run into privacy obstacles?
The collection of personal information carries potential privacy implications. Federal law sets the floor for privacy, state laws build upon it. Federal court rulings say public behavior is not private (like driving). States expand the federal zone of privacy to technologies used everyday in our lives. State statutes limit secondary use at times. Torts also provide a route for protecting privacy. Opt in vs. Opt out determines the level of liability. Private vs. Public collection impact the legal realities faced by ITS technologies. Automatic enforcement issues raise questions of vicarious criminal liability, require legal attention. Congress should reform overarching laws on privacy and give ITS information safe harbor. Until then developers can utilize the tool box we have developed.
Legal question comes down to policy questions:
“Technology and Collaboration in Effective Transportation Policy Development and Implementation,” by John Bryson, Associate Dean for Research, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Dr. Bryson’s research examines the collaboration throughout the UPA application process in Minnesota. Findings have demonstrated that the success of the UPA collaboration process have depended on factors such as initial conditions, people, organizations, processes, structures and the media.
While conducting the research, there was some push back and jockeying from the more powerful players observed initially. Policy entrepreneurs helped push along new ideas. It became apparent that it was important for neutral conveners to establish a place and time for people and organizations to gather and discuss policy ideas and solutions.
Process factors:
There were also structural factors at play, including horizontal and vertical relationships. Concentration of power and decision making authority were effective (i.e., MNDOT, legislature, etc.) Technology played a huge role in the ability for this to move forward in a timely way. Media coverage was very sparse, which had its benefits. Building coalitions, framing issues persuasively, timely grant writing and the ability of markets to make rational choices all helped Minnesota’s UPA.
Conclusions: Collaborations usually should assume failure, and then consider the potential ways for those failures to be overcome.
“Technology in Planning and Participatory Processes: Identifying New Synergies through Real World Application,” by Carrissa Schively Slotterback: Assistant Professor, Humphrey School of Public Affairs.
Dr. Slotterback’s research aims to examine technology in transportation and other planning processes. Professional practitioners’ input on how participation should work was gathered. There was also secondary consideration given to how technology might contribute to that process.
Technologies were most often used in combination, as technologies can be used for preparation, execution and analysis of participatory planning process and outcomes. How might technologies be used? Projecting future impacts, visualizing scenarios, tallying votes, etc.
As part of the research, focus groups were used to gather professional opinions on how participation is encouraged and the role technology might play. Focus group questions:
Assumption that technology might be the best fix is not always right. Training and facilitation might be necessary when working with public groups. Next step is the follow up study of scenarios that could happen in the real world. Continued feedback is needed. Consideration of both opportunities and constraints needs to continue.
Humphrey School of Public Affairs | 130 Humphrey School, 301 19th Ave. S., Minneapolis, MN 55455