Methodology for controlling circular mass handling in the Swedish Transport Administration is focused on elements that are carried out in the design phase. There is a lack of methodology for how indicators and key performance indicator can be transferred to the contractor. To improve requirements and incentives in contract procurements, requirements that are procurable and which can be followed-up must be developed. 

The purpose of this project is to, in a feasibility study, develop proposals for indicators and key performance indicators for procurement that can be used to set requirements and provide incentives that can be introduced in the Swedish Transport Administration's procurements to improve mass management, both in the planning of projects and in the actual execution. Future requirements and incentives should be able to be used in procurements and thus contribute to entrepreneurs working more circularly, sustainably and innovatively with mass handling than at present. The main purpose is that the procurement procedure should contribute to achieving the Swedish Transport Administration's goal: the infrastructure should be climate neutral by 2045. 

The work consists of an analysis based on international and national literature, mass management reporting and interviews. 

Based on the collected material, it appears that the regulations regarding excavated masses are not clear, and that the masses are classified as waste in most countries. This, in turn, leads to excavated masses not being recycled as much as is theoretically possible, nor as optimally as possible according to the value chain. To improve this, clearer incentives, indicators and key performance indicators are required, as well as accounting tools and guidance material from the Swedish Transport Administration. In this project, proposals for indicators and key performance indicators have been developed. In addition, an Excel based prototype for how several of these indicators can be reported both before a procurement and to be used to follow up and evaluate mass management in a project has been developed. The report also provides suggestions for continued work to develop the prototype for evaluating mass management at the project level and from a socio-economic perspective.

Urban environments are challenged with a plethora of wicked problems in the face of rapid urbanization and land use change, not least natural capital degradation and widespread land and water contamination. Brownfields, under-used sites with real or perceived contamination, are significant urban and peri-urban land resources which, with well-designed remediation and management strategies can address these concerns. Gentle remediation options (GRO) are scalable nature-based techniques which provide significant opportunities for multi-functionality: managing risks posed by contaminants and at the same time enhance ecosystem services (ES) by improving the soil ecosystem in a low-impact, cost-effective manner. GRO align with an increasing interest in taking a holistic view on soil and land management to protect and improve the soil ecosystem for direct human benefit in the form of ES as well as for its indirect, intrinsic value as a haven for biodiversity. This short review aims to present a synthesis of ideas to raise awareness for urban planners about GRO techniques as nature-based solutions which can promote green infrastructure in the urban environment. © Published under licence by IOP Publishing Ltd.

Knowledge about how implemented policy instruments have performed is important for designing effective and efficient policy instruments that contribute to reductions of greenhouse gas emissions. This paper carries out a meta-evaluation of ex-post evaluations of climate policy instruments in the freight transport sector. By analysing the outcomes and quality of evaluations, the aim is to identify whether estimated effects of policy instruments can be compared between evaluations and if the results are appropriate to use for evidence-based decision making. To analyse these aspects, commonly applied evaluation criteria are assessed and classified according to an assessment scale. We confirm that few ex-post evaluations are carried out and that there is a gap between evaluation theory and how ex-post policy evaluations are performed in practice, where evaluation criteria recommended in policy evaluation guidelines are found to often be neglected in evaluations. The result is a lack of systematic climate policy evaluation which hinders reliable conclusions about the effect of policy instruments. There is a need for more systematic monitoring and evaluation of implemented policy instruments and we suggest that evidence-based decision making can be improved by adjusting current policy evaluation guidelines and by introducing an evaluation obligation.