8 lessons learnt from nms

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

History 1990: 

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

Transition 1990+: 

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

Slide4: 

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!!!!

Impact on UTP - negative:: 

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

UPT financing system: 

UPT financing system Self-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!!!!

Slide7: 

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 !!!!

Slide8: 

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

Progress: 

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

Slide10: 

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!!)

Slide12: 

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)

Other problems: 

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

Summary 1990 - 2007: 

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

Investment in public transport: 

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 !!!

Investment in public transport - 2: 

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)

Prague: 

Prague

Prague: 

Prague

Dresden: 

Dresden

Dresden: 

Dresden

Karlsruhre: 

Karlsruhre

Lyon: 

Lyon

Lyon: 

Lyon

Clermont-ferrand: 

Clermont-ferrand

Krakow: 

Krakow

Warsaw – Solidarity arterial – Tram/bus lane: 

Warsaw – Solidarity arterial – Tram/bus lane Bankowy Sq, Railway station Length of section 2,6 km Metro Ratusz Stare Miasto Park Praski Dw. Wileński

Warsaw – E-W Bridge – Tram/bus lane: 

Warsaw – E-W Bridge – Tram/bus lane TYPOWY PRZEKRÓJ PRZYSTANEK STARE MIASTO

Prospects: 

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

Prospects - Reasons for optimism: 

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!!!

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

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

Issue: Role of the State: 

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

Example Poland: National Transport Policy 2001 and 2005: 

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 ???

Ways to improve sustainability of transportation decisions and their implementation: 

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

Slide34: 

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

Slide35: 

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

Findings of ECMT/OECD projectINDENTIFIED BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION: 

Findings of ECMT/OECD project INDENTIFIED 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.

Recomendations of ECMT/OECD WHAT CAN GOVERNMENTS DO? : 

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.

Impact of EC policy: 

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

Impact of EC policy : 

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

Examples of EC projects: 

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

Niches-basic information: 

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

Work steps: 

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

Thematic Areas: 

Thematic Areas

Slide44: 

Thank you for your attention !!! Wojciech Suchorzewski Warsaw University of Technology & Suchorzewski Konsulting W.Suchorzewski@il.pw.edu.pl