lessons learnt from cee countries on public transport in the last 15 years

Lessons learnt from CEE countries on public transport

in the last 15 years

Wojciech Suchorzewski, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland

Regional Meeting on Sustainable Urban Transport Policies in South Eastern Europe

Budapest, 21-22 June 2007

W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007

2

History 1990

• Centrally planned economy: reliance on mass transport car ownership - low fares - low subsidies 70-80% monopolistic UPT companies State - generous - owner and financier

• ambitious investment plans - not implemented


3

Transition 1990+ Economic shock therapy !!Systemic changes:– decentralization – liberalization/commercialisation– transformation of public enterprises

Impact on UPT prices reflect true costs decentralisation private sector encouraged to grow municipalities forced to reduce subsidies


4

Impact of reforms on UT in some CEE countries the State

withdrew - anomaly in UE15!!

total responsibility to cities

growth of motorization

congestion/parking problems

private sector – buses and paratransit – self-sustainable!!!!


5

Impact on UTP - negative:

sharp fare increases modal shift: 80-85 % 50-60% ageing fleet and deteriorating

infrastructure growing congestion => speed, reliability role of suburban railways reduced, shift

to car and buses/minibuses. Poland -number of passengers 9 4

billion per year


6

UPT financing systemSelf-financing (from farebox):

Poland from 40% 75% 63% • Prague - 30 %• Bratislava - 40 % Amsterdam - 25 %, Vienna – 40% Belgrade – 65%, Skopje – 100%!! Istambul - 135???

Investment reduced

Annual municipal budgeting

Lack of compensation for services provided for social reasons!!!!


7

The road to ruin? (J.Pucher, 1995)

• Deteriorating infrastructure

• Ageing fleet

• Investment almost stopped

• Falling patronage

• Worsening operational conditions because of congestion

ONLY PARTIALLY TRUE !!!!


8

Great efforts of cities

separation of functions companies restructured contracts !!! competition started bus fleet renewal priorities for PT trams – change of treatment!!!


9

Progress

• adoption of sustainable UT policies

• restructuring of the sector

• increased efficiency of companies• growing use of marketing and quality

management• progress in fare systems and operation

control


10

Sustainable urban transport policy adopted by city councils:

Kraków (1993) Warszawa (1995)

Strategy of sustainable development limiting the role of a car in a city and giving priority to mass transport and pedestrians/cycling

• Prague• Budapest• Tallin (ring toll!!)


11

LESSONS LEARNT Adoption of policy is not enough Causes of limited success:

in transition countries CAR is the KING

society not prepared for constraints

politicians afraid of reaction to radical measures

spectacular projects attract more attention

conservative thinking of professionals

inadequate communication with the public, politicians, mass media


12

Measures difficult to implement • priorities for public transport

in traffic management:• bus lanes,• traffic ligths

• speed limit 50 km/h • parking charging• common ticket (rail/UPT)


13

Other problems• problem of inter-settlement transport services:

• good co-operation between neighbouring municipalities rare

• crisis in co-operation of railways and municipalities and urban and sub-urban transport companies

• attitude of staff and trade unions - deterrent role in transformations


14

Summary 1990 - 2007

POSITIVE !?– restructuring PT– separation of management and operation – contracts – growing productivity and quality – involvement of private sector– local initiatives - search for solutions– growing understanding that even motorized cities

cannot function without good PT growing interest in Sustainable Transport concepts

– participation of the public


15

Investment in public transport

Historically, many cities in CEE countries planned metro construction (7 in Poland)

In some constructed, but:• high costs• draining city resources• deterioration of other means of rail transport• share much lower than costs

Generally highly valued by the public and politicians but viability of heavy rail projects discussed !!!


16

Investment in public transport - 2

Changing attitude towards trams: • In many cities extensive networks of tramway –

deteriorated • Renaissance of tramways in several EU cities -

good example for planners and decision-makers• Upgrading started in many cities (e.g. in

Katowice and Warsaw). • In some cities construction of new fast tram

(Prague, Krakow, Poznan)


17

Prague


18

Prague


19

Dresden


20

Dresden


21

Karlsruhre


22

Lyon


23

Lyon


24

Clermont-ferrand


25

Krakow


26

Warsaw – Solidarity arterial – Tram/bus lane

Bankowy Sq,

Railway station

Length of section 2,6 km

Metro Ratusz

Stare Miasto

Park Praski

Dw. Wileński


27

Warsaw – E-W Bridge – Tram/bus lane

TYPOWY PRZEKRÓJ

PRZYSTANEK STARE MIASTO


28

Prospects

• The future of UPT not clear• Growing understanding of UPT role

even in motorized city but:– strong pressure to develop road systems– opposition of some groups against

preference for UPT • Preferences of the city inhabitants not

taken into consideration


29

Prospects - Reasons for optimism

• so far no proposals to change policies formulated earlier

• growing number of cities adopt sustainable transport policies

• growing capacity of city governments to manage UPT

• restructuring of companies

• fleet renewal share of modern vehicles, including AFV (alternative fuel vehicles)

• change in treatment of tram systems!!!


30

Warsaw: Are you in favour of priorities for trams and buses even it will worsen traffic conditions for private car?

64,0 65,8

81,4

19,9 21,010,9

16,1 13,2

7,7

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

1993 1998 2005

YEAR

NO OPINION

NO

YES


31

Issue: Role of the State

since 1990 - no responsibility for UPT situation considered as anomalous impact on urban finances - discount fares

and other privileges - no compensation no assistance: guidance, data, R@D, etc. few exceptions: co-financing metro

projects: Prague, Warsaw. Bucarest role of NGO's


32

Example Poland: National Transport Policy 2001 and 2005

• Promotion of PT, especially in cities and metropolitan areas - one of 4 main challenges

• State will: participate in financing selected PT projects provide loan guaranties for upgrading projects promote best practices in UT arm municipalities with measures to generate

financial resources (Parking charging, congestion pricing!!!)

Implementation ???


33

Ways to improve sustainability of transportation decisions and their

implementation

• National transport policy needed!!!!

• Co-operation at the regional/local level:– within municipality– within metropolitan area– within the region

• Participation of stakeholders

• Education/communication


34

Desirable involvement of central government:

guidelines/recommending UT policies legislative initiatives regulations/specifications financial support of strategic and pilot projects sectoral databases research and development training/education


35

Impact of international cooperation

UNCHS Habitat World Bank, EBRD (national, cities) ECMT/OECD Projects on Sustainable Urban Travel Policies European Commission – policy and projects REC – project „Supporting Public Transport in CEE” Exchange of experience


36

Findings of ECMT/OECD projectINDENTIFIED BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION

poor policy integration and co-ordination; Inefficient or counterproductive institutional

roles and procedures, including inadequate or lack of co-ordination, (for example decentralisation of responsibilities for urban travel);

an unsupportive legal or regulatory framework;

weaknesses in the pricing/fiscal framework; poor data quality and quantity.


37

Recomendations of ECMT/OECD

WHAT CAN GOVERNMENTS DO? Develop a national policy framework for sustainable

urban travel;Co-ordinate national policy approaches on urban

land-use, travel, health and the environment;Encourage effective public participation,

partnerships and communication;Provide a supportive legal and regulatory

framework;Ensure a comprehensive pricing and fiscal structure;Rationalise financing and investment streams;Improve data collection, monitoring and research.


38

Impact of EC policy

• EU assistance/funds:• first phase – mostly long-distance l

transport infrastructure • second phase – as above plus EDRF • EDRF requirements:

• local policy and long-term plans and programs

• socio-economic efficiency


39

Impact of EC policy

• White Paper–CTP till 2010 - time to decide:• urban transport problems on the list• Public Transport as a main mean to solve

congestion problems• tramways:”revitalisation – with a decidedly

futuristic look”• Ranking of proposals – examples-Poland: -

Urban Traffic Management Systems and trams in Warsaw and Krakow on the top of the list


40

Examples of EC projects

• POSSUM-Policy Scenarios for Sustainable Development • QUATTRO -Quality in UT through Tendering and

Contracting • BEST/BOB - benchmarking• REVENUE – 5FP - Revenue Use from Transport Pricing• BESTUFS – urban freight transport• NICHES- 6FP - Innovative Concepts for Sustainable

Urban Mobility• PILOT• CURACAO• SILENCE


41

Niches-basic information

• 6. PR UE project, priority 1.6.2 Sustainable land transport , Co-ordinating Action (CA)

• Consortium NICHES: urban transport experts: - consulting (Rupprecht Consul, PTV) - experience of cities (Sztokholm) - use of networking effect (POLIS, EUROCITIES,

CMR) - academy (Warsaw University of Technology)• Duration: 1 November 2004 – 31 March 2007


42

Work steps

. Step 1 - Establish the state of the art

· Step 2 - Assess success factors, barriers and transferability of innovative concepts

· Step 3 - Integrated innovative concepts to coherent transport strategies

· Step 4 - Derive roadmaps and policy recommendations

· Step 5 - Disseminate and exploit the results


43

Thematic AreasWG 1

New seamless mobility services

WG 2

Innovative approaches in city

logistics

WG 3

New non-polluting and energy efficient

vehicles

WG 4

Innovative demand management

strategies

Urban lift-sharing services

Space management for urban delivery

Policy strategy to deploy private sector AFVs

Transportation Management Associations

Public bicycles Inner city night delivery Biogas in captive fleets Local taxes or charges, ring fenced for transport

Call-a-bus services Home delivery using locker boxes

Joint procurement of AFVs

City-wide campaigns using marketing and branding


Thank you for your attention !!!Wojciech Suchorzewski Warsaw University of Technology & Suchorzewski [email protected]

lessons learnt from cee countries on public transport in the last 15 years

Documents

suchorzewski budapest

years wojciech suchorzewski

public transport

south eastern europe

transition countries

cee countries

paratransit selfsustainable

mass media measures