title: Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions - Intermodality and intermodal freight transport in the European Union - A systems approach to freight transport. Strategies and actions to enhance efficiency, services and sustainability'

eurovoc_concepts:
carriage of goods
combined transport

text: 14. 7. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 198/21 Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions — Intermodality and intermodal freight transport in the European Union — A systems approach to freight transport. Strategies and actions to enhance efficiency, services and sustainability’ (1999/C 198/05) THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, having regard to the Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on Intermodality and intermodal freight transport in the European Union — A systems approach to freight transport. Strategies and actions to enhance efficiency, services and sustainability (COM(97) 243 final); having regard to the decision taken by the Commission on 5 June 1997, under the first paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult the Committee of the Regions on the matter; having regard to the decision of its bureau on 15 July 1998 to direct Commission 3 for Trans-European Networks, Transport and Information Society to draw up the relevant opinion; having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 398/98 rev. 1) adopted by Commission 3 on 22 January 1999 (rapporteur: Mr Lanzuela Marina), unanimously adopted the following opinion at its 28th plenary session on 10 and 11 March 1999 (meeting of 11 March). 1. Introduction 2. General comments An efficient transport system is an essential prerequisite 1. 1. for the European Union’s competitiveness. 1. 2. European freight transport, which has grown by 70 % since 1970, is set to continue growing according to projections of increases in international trade, the possible extension of the Union to the central and eastern European countries and enhanced cooperation with the Mediterranean countries. 1. 3. This increase cannot and must not be borne by road transport alone. In order to achieve socio-economically and environmentally sustainable growth, the efficient and balanced use of existing capacities throughout the European transport system, boosting use of all modes, is essential. 1. 4. Intermodality is a basic strategic tool for the optimum use of the different modes of transport, enabling a systems approach to transport and offering transport services as a mode-independent door-to-door connection. The Committee of the Regions agrees with the Com- 2. 1. mission that freight transport by road increasingly appears as a source of environmental and social costs to citizens; but at the same time the Committee would stress that transport in general, and freight transport in particular, is a factor which life, employment and company is essential competitiveness and, consequently, a source of regional devel- opment. to quality of 2. 2. Transport infrastructures are a prerequisite for econ- omic development as they can generate major structural savings, depending on the territorial and economic character- istics of each area. The European Commission must therefore strive to remove restrictions on interchange in order to ensure more effective integration of the Member States and, more specifically, of cross-border regions. By facilitating movement of goods and persons, these regions can become focal points for European-level competitiveness, and a step will have been taken towards the goal of a regional balance, encouraging the creation of robust urban systems. 1. 5. In order to bring intermodality into general use, the main obstacles have been identified and basic strategies and key elements for its development have been laid down. These are analysed below. European territorial 2. 3. strategy is based on comp- lementarity of infrastructure, regional and sectoral policies. The COR believes that forging efficient links between European regions and localities is one of the keys to improving the European economy’s competitiveness. C 198/22 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 14. 7. 1999 2. 4. The Committee of the Regions agrees with the Com- mission on the need to alter the present structure of freight transport. The current system, which is in practice road-based, is unsustainable from the energy and environmental points of view, and in terms of quality of life. 2. 5. An economic development model, which is sustainable in the long-term and is based on more competitive local production systems and improved access to and connections between urban and other areas, needs to be introduced. A package of coordinated priority investment, based on a system of transport and communications axes connecting different areas, is a prerequisite for this. 2. 6. The Committee of the Regions looks with favour upon a system using different modes of transport in accordance with the definition of intermodality given by the Commission (1), but at the same time would emphasize, in the interests of economic rationality, that within the intermodal chain, priority use of the most environment-friendly modes — rail, inland waterways or sea — must be encouraged and road use specifically limited, in keeping with Directive 92/106/EEC. 2. 7. It is a matter of concern that while 50 % of tonnage/km effected in the European Union involves journeys of more than 150 km, rail’s market share continues to decline, falling from 32 to 15 % between 1979 and 1995. In the Committee’s view, it is most important not only 2. 8. that integration of different modes takes place in terms of infrastructure and other physical components, but that special attention is also given to integrating operations and services, as well as regulatory provisions, at national and local as well as Community level. 2. 9. Against a backdrop of economic globalization and EU consolidation, spatial structuring is more than ever one of the most urgent challenges facing European territorial strategy. For this reason, the major structural networks across Europe’s regions have become a benchmark of development. 2. 10. This major strategic objective must, however, be tied in with others which support it in spatial terms. Firstly, territorial integration and filling the gaps left by the rather loose fabric of major infrastructures both demand public action to plug local and regional units into major networks. Moreover, infrastructure efficacy and effectiveness require integrating all the modes existing in localities and regions. By the same token, improved competitiveness depends on complementarity of transport and communications networks. (1) Point 15 of the communication. 2. 11. The Committee of the Regions would also emphasize the huge effort which the various public authorities will need to make if transport users themselves are to decide the optimal use of the different transport modes, as urged by point 17 of the communication. In the fiercely competitive environment in which freight transport operates, users will choose the economically cheapest mode of transport: in most cases this continues to be road transport. As pointed out at the meeting of spatial planning ministers in Glasgow on 8 June 1998, under market conditions only natural barriers such as the North Sea, the Baltic or the Alps can make combined transport competitive in comparison with road transport. 3. Specific comments 3. 1. Logistics: the complexity of demand The Committee of 3. 1. 1. the Regions agrees with the Commission that freight transport is a derived demand and has to meet increasing quality requirements in terms of flexibility, speed and reliability by adjusting to the complexity of demand. Despite this, freight transport’s impact on society (2) is so great that rules are needed to ensure that not only the market costs, but also the social costs, of the mode of transport used are taken into consideration. 3. 1. 2. The Committee is aware of the complexity of the logistical chains involved in freight distribution, driven by the changes in industrial processes over the last ten years and the large number of operators involved in the overall process, together with the growing importance of transport services. Nevertheless, the Committee believes it is essential to increase the ratio of loaded road journeys and reduce the number of empty journeys (3). 3. 2. Obstacles to the use of Intermodal Freight Transport The Committee of 3. 2. 1. the Regions agrees with the Commission that currently any change of transport mode involves substantial costs, and that these must be identified, quantified and reduced, and it would draw attention to the major investment effort that will be needed to achieve this. 3. 2. 2. Concerning infrastructures and means of transport, the Committee wishes to highlight the need to encourage the creation of the best possible rail and inland waterway freight (2) According to the Green Paper on fair and efficient pricing in transport, the annual cost of congestion in the European Union reaches ECU 250 000 million, with road users accounting for some 90 % of this amount. (3) According to freight transport sector calculations in the United Kingdom, approximately 62 % of available capacity is utilized. If empty journeys are added, this figure falls to 44 %. 14. 7. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 198/23 networks, as well as appropriate access to transfer points between different modes. This is the only possible solution if intermodality is to foster the ‘cleaner’ modes: rail and water- ways. It is necessary to develop alternative routes to ease the pressure on major centres by encouraging their modernization. The latter must be included in the European combined transport blueprint at the next meeting of spatial planning ministers. 3. 2. 3. The Committee points out that it must be clearly defined who is responsible for guaranteeing and providing finance for intermodal links. It is also necessary to standardize: — the currently differing forms of infrastructure and terminal ownership and usage charging; — technical specifications for transport means, which are regulated differently by country and mode; and — increasingly specialized loading units, leading to frequent empty returns. 3. 2. 4. Turning to infrastructure operation and use, the Committee of the Regions notes in particular the importance of strengthening the weakest elements in the current intermodal transport system: transfer points. For this reason, the policy of interchange centres must define who is responsible for funding and managing them. 3. 2. 5. Transport nodes must be fully integrated into the areas immediately surrounding them, so that the local com- munity can benefit from the economic development, while efforts are made to reduce adverse environmental effects. They must be centres for employment and investment, so that the surrounding population can enjoy the advantages, and not only suffer the disadvantages, of living close by. In view of the environmental damage caused by transport special consider- ation should be given to the population living in the immediate vicinity of the interchange centres. 3. 2. 6. The Committee of the Regions believes that road haulage, which the communication describes as the benchmark for freight transport in Europe, is a competitive mode because its costs do not include such important parameters as atmos- pheric pollution, noise pollution, land use and others. It is therefore essential that all these social costs be directly charged to the mode of transport that causes them. Internalization of costs cannot be achieved evenly throughout the Union on the basis of a linear charge on all transport operators, but must be adjusted in line with two factors: b) the existence of alternative efficient modes of public transport. This internalization of costs must be adjusted so as to reconcile territorial cohesion with intermodal development of the European area as noted in points 2. 2, 3. 3. 1. 2 and 3. 3. 1. 6 of this opinion. Similarly, a problem specific to road transport is the working conditions of drivers, as a result of the fierce competition in the sector, and which is reflected in their frequent protests, sometimes at European level. Driving and rest periods must consequently be adequately monitored and legal sanctions imposed in the event of infringement, as the Commission has already stipulated in other documents (1). The Committee shares the Commission’s view that 3. 2. 7. operators who own their own fleets or infrastructure keep to a single mode of transport in order to maximize profitability. The Committee considers that the public authorities should commit themselves to promoting intermodality. 3. 2. 8. Regarding the difficulties caused at transfer points by the complexity of aligning the different modes with one another, the Committee feels that the various management and funding options for these centres should be examined, so that they can comply with working and efficiency conditions favouring intermodality. The Committee of the Regions would point 3. 2. 9. to modal-based services and regulations as perhaps the most important element transport, on account of their administrative complexity. It therefore con- siders the following to be essential: in achieving intermodal — establishment of the necessary networks for the exchange of information along the entire intermodal chain, and — alignment of the currently different liability conventions for each mode, establishment of an intermodal convention, and definition of the role of transfer centres within such a convention. 3. 3. Europe’s Intermodal Freight Transport System: Steps towards realization 3. 3. 1. I n t e g r a t e d i n f r a s t r u c t u r e p o r t m e a n s a n d t r a n s - 3. 3. 1. 1. With regard to the integration of infrastructures and transport means, the Committee of the Regions believes a) actual congestion existing in designated areas or zones of the EU; (1) Commission Working Paper: Towards a framework for the solution of the environmental problems caused by traffic of heavy goods vehicles (COM(1998) 444 final). C 198/24 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 14. 7. 1999 that the European Union and the Member States, in cooper- ation with regional and local authorities, should work together across a broad spectrum on a transmodal basis, in order to establish: — a network of freight infrastructures which favours intermodal transport, particularly in terms of constructing new transport routes capable of absorbing the forecast traffic flow increase over the coming years; transport — a European network of transhipment centres meeting the requirements of interoperability and interconnectivity between modes. This is a particularly sensitive point, since it must be borne in mind that the trans-European transport network does not embody specific criteria for the develop- ment and location of the main transport nodes or intercon- nection points, and that although it is designed as a multimodal network facilitating switching from one mode to another, it is still based in outline on sections or routes. 3. 3. 1. 2. Improving transport infrastructures will facilitate interregional connections and, at the same time, accelerate economic development, avoiding excessive concentration of activities in currently over-populated regions where the costs of pollution and excessively intensive land use are high and often poorly evaluated, because external costs are not internalized in decision-making processes. Concerning value adding interconnections and 3. 3. 1. 3. nodes, the Committee would stress the importance of network nodes serving as real centres of economic activity and not simply exchange centres. These nodes must become employ- ment generators, stimulating business initiatives of regional scope. The COR advocates carrying out studies and demon- stration projects on the potential opportunities created in intermodal exchange centres and on the definition of their operating requirements, evaluating their economic efficacy. 3. 3. 1. 4. The spread of high speed trains will strengthen multi-centred urban systems by reinforcing intermodal con- nection points. The creation of new commercial nodes and services will, however, require supplementary transport infra- structures if the urban development process is to be sustained. In other words, the positive effects of new infrastructures will generate new demand for public investment. social progress which is balanced and sustainable (Title I, Article B of the Treaty on European Union), together with the reduction of disparities between the levels of development of the various regions (Title XIV, Article 130a), means avoiding excessive polarization and, consequently, seeking an urban model which is relatively balanced and based on multiple focal points across EU territory, supporting growth in metropolitan areas and revitalizing and strengthening the weaker urban centres, especially those in low population density areas. In this respect, strengthening intermediate-size towns is crucial. 3. 3. 1. 7. Economic internationalization and employment creation demand territorial solutions, since when a given area adopts economic development instruments such as access to communications and telecommunications networks, human resource upgrading and company research and services centres, it is in a position to attract both independent businesses and companies linked to multinationals who will tailor their production to world market needs. All sector policies must therefore be examined in terms of their impact on territorial development, in accordance with the principle of integrated development and territorial cohesion, and must foster interre- gional, cross-border and transnational cooperation between regional and local bodies. This is crucial to the development of transport and communications corridors. The aim is to strengthen links between peripheral regions and the centre, since transport and telecommunications infrastructures should be connected with secondary networks and contribute to local economies. 3. 3. 1. 8. The Committee views the harmonization of stan- dards for loading units as vital to the success of intermodality, and supports granting economic assistance to help operators take the necessary steps. 3. 3. 2. I n t e r o p e r a b l e o p e r a t i o n s a n d i n t e r c o n n e c t e d 3. 3. 2. 1. The Committee of the Regions believes that the Commission should specify how operators are to be encour- aged to use intermodal freight transport. Market studies are essential here, as is extension and intensification of the PACT programme. 3. 3. 1. 5. In this regard, the Committee of the Regions is strongly in favour of planning for the various interchange points, so that the economic conditions required to maximize the benefits of using this kind of infrastructure can be built up at regional level. 3. 3. 1. 6. The principle of cohesion, the creation of an area without internal frontiers and the promotion of economic and Regarding free access to infrastructures, the Com- 3. 3. 2. 2. mittee considers that all Member States should apply the rail transport directives (Directives 91/440/EEC, 95/19/EC and 95/18/EC) strictly, in order to ensure genuinely free movement or cooperation. Similarly, the appropriate steps should be taken for the technical standardization of rail networks, enabling the various operators to move across the entire European network. 14. 7. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 198/25 3. 3. 2. 3. The Committee of the Regions emphasizes that infrastructure charging and transport pricing are the key elements in achieving intermodal transport and, consequently, the growth of sustainable transport in the EU. It therefore believes that each mode of transport must internalize the costs it generates for society as a whole: this is the only way of ensuring that rail transport can compete with road transport. 3. 3. 2. 4. The Committee agrees with the Commission on the need to regulate state aids to transport by means of guidelines for intermodal cooperation agreements, in order to clarify the application of competition rules. The Committee backs the Commission’s plan to 3. 3. 2. 5. promote an electronic forum to align timetables, highlighting the need to set up the information networks required at European level. 3. 3. 4. H o r i z o n t a l a c t i v i t i e s The Committee of the Regions supports the Com- 3. 3. 4. 1. mission’s efforts to encourage research projects under the various framework programmes and demonstration projects showcasing the opportunities and benefits of intermodal transport. 3. 3. 4. 2. The Committee also supports the establishment of a European Intermodal Reference Centre for Freight Transport. It also believes it would be useful to build upon the experience of existing regional and local transport groups and help organize, where necessary, national round tables within the Member States, with the aim of facilitating the formation of regional or local intermodal communities. 3. 4. Intermodality and other policy areas 3. 3. 2. 6. Smart systems can secure improved use of existing infrastructure and prevent excessive pressure on the environ- ment. The Committee of the Regions therefore backs the growing use of telematics and other leading-edge technologies, such as new methods which can facilitate cross-border operabi- lity between national transport networks. 3. 4. 1. The Committee of the Regions is convinced that interchange nodes must be set up in such a way that they can lead to greater cohesion and regional development, by giving them the means to generate employment and economic activity, and to be active participants in spatial planning policy. 3. 3. 3. M o d e - i n d e p e n d e n t s e r v i c e s a n d r e g u - l a t i o n s The Committee of the Regions shares the Com- 3. 3. 3. 1. mission’s view that the formulation of a common architecture for intermodal real-time electronic information systems, which are fundamental to viable and competitive intermodal trans- port, is a priority. To this end, clients must have access to their continuous data on each stage of consignment, as well as information on prices, invoices, rail traffic and availability. the progress of 3. 3. 3. 2. The Committee would draw attention to the oppor- tunity which paperless transport operations offer for creating a uniform system for electronic transport documents and procedures, introducing real transparency to the transport market and supporting intermodal transport. It must, however, also point to the lack of regulation in this field. 3. 3. 3. 3. Turning to the question of liability to third parties, the Committee is concerned at the fact that cover for the entire operation, regardless of where damage occurs, does not affect the cost of insurance or, consequently, of transport. It feels that it would be advisable to limit the liability of the various parties concerned for delay or damage to goods, particularly with regard to transport centres. 3. 4. 2. If intermodal transport is to develop successfully, SMEs must be integrated and make a contribution. The various administrations must put in place the necessary machinery to ensure that changes in the transport system do not worsen the economic position of these firms, as they are often vulnerable to small variations in cost as a result of a highly competitive market. 3. 4. 3. As mentioned earlier, the Committee believes that institutional support is needed in order for the transport market to move towards environment-friendly modes of transport and reverse the trend of recent years towards increasing road transport. 4. Conclusions In conclusion, the Commission’s decision to promote 4. 1. intermodal transport is welcomed. This will allow transport not to be a factor for regional deterioration, but rather for preservation by creating interchange nodes and developing telecommunications. The Committee of the Regions would, however, make the following points. 4. 2. The EU and the Member States, in cooperation with regional and local authorities, must be involved in improving the conditions under which intermodal transport operates: in many cases problems are on a local scale. C 198/26 EN Official Journal of the European Communities 14. 7. 1999 4. 3. The measures adopted to foster intermodality should aim for the greatest possible use of those transport modes which are least harmful to the environment and to quality of life: in particular rail, inland waterways and sea. Intermodal integration should not be restricted to 4. 4. infrastructures. A major effort needs to be made on operations and services and, crucially, in the area of regulatory provisions, with uniformization making transfer between modes easier and cheaper. if level, intermodal 4. 5. The Committee of the Regions would place particular emphasis on the economic and management efforts which will have to be made by the various public authorities at Community, national and regional the logistical support is to be provided without which, the Communication claims, transfer cannot be effected except by compulsion. It must be borne in mind that the trend is towards continuing growth in the use of road transport (1). As the White Paper on a strategy for revitalizing the Community’s railways (2) noted ‘. while unease is growing about the negative effects of transport, rail’s market share still declines. The main reason is dissatisfaction with the price and quality of rail transport. ’. The Committee of the Regions considers that in view 4. 6. of the impact of transport on the quality of life, measures should be taken with regard to freight transport which lead to the use of rational, balanced transport. However, transport should not be entirely subordinate to industrial and commercial demand. 4. 7. As indicated in the Communication from the Com- mission on transport and CO2 (3), research into the relations between transport and the production/consumption cycle should provide pointers on how to dissociate increasing road traffic from economic growth. 4. 8. Intermodal freight transport today fails to meet the increasing logistics requirements of an economy which oper- ates in a competitive and global market. At the same time it is essential to achieve sustainable growth. The Committee of the Regions therefore believes that: (1) Road haulage accounts for 70 % of compared with only 50 % in 1950. the transport market, (2) White Paper: A strategy for revitalizing the Community’s railways. EC Commission (COM(96) 421 final). (3) Transport and CO2 — Developing a Community Approach (COM(1998) 204 final). — It is essential to push ahead with developing a strong rail freight network and to upgrade inland waterway transport. — Arrangements for all modes of transport to pay for their effects are crucial. The road transport sector is currently competitive firstly because it does not pay for all the negative environmental effects it generates, and, in some cases, because of the poor conditions under which its employees work. Each mode of transport should reflect its real costs. The economic effects must, however, be taken into consideration in the process. — Transfer points must be made far more numerous, while clearly defining who is responsible for funding and man- agement, and which style of management will best help them to adjust to the specific features of each mode. — An information network servicing all the operators involved in the logistics chain and enabling the various parameters to be optimized must be mapped out. It must also be ensured that this network is accessible to users. — Standardization of technical characteristics, administrative procedures and sharing of risks between different countries and administrative levels is vital. The Committee would focus attention on the following 4. 9. necessary steps in creating an efficient European intermodal transport system: — The need to reinforce the rail and inland waterway transport networks. — The need to clarify the conditions under which interchange centres would operate. — Support for research and development work, accompanied by widespread application of technological and telematics solutions which could facilitate transport intermodality. The COR lends complete support to initiatives such as the Pilot Actions for Combined Transport (PACT programme). As the Committee has pointed out in previous opinions (4), it would welcome a greater financial commitment to the PACT programme, and would like to see support for other combined transport projects, that are more local in focus and do not belong to international routes of European interest, but do have relevance for cities and regions Europe-wide. — Development of technological tools operating detailed and precise price differentiation systems. These systems are an important tool in achieving the target of internalization of external transport costs. (4) Opinion on a sustainable transport strategy for local and regional authorities and the European Union. 14. 7. 1999 EN Official Journal of the European Communities C 198/27 4. 10. Transport should no longer be viewed as subsidiary to industrial and commercial activity, and initiatives must be taken in support of rational and environment-friendly transport. Brussels, 11 March 1999. The President of the Committee of the Regions Manfred DAMMEYER Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Council Directive on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues’ (1999/C 198/06) THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS, having regard to the Proposal for a Council Directive on port reception facilities for ship-generated waste and cargo residues [COM(1998) 452 final — 98/0249 (SYN)] (1); having regard to the decision taken by the Council on 6 August 1998 requesting it to draw up an opinion in accordance with the first paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community; having regard to the decision taken by its Bureau on 15 July 1998 instructing Commission 3 on Trans-European Networks, Transport and Information Society to prepare the opinion; having regard to the draft opinion (CdR 362/98 rev. 1), adopted by Commission 3 on 22 January 1999 (rapporteurs: Mr Niederbremer and Mr Ervelä); considering the Council Resolution on a ‘common policy on safe seas’ of 8 June 1993 (2), which took the view that improvements in the availability and use of port reception facilities within the Community were among the Community’s priority tasks; considering Council Directive 95/21/EC on the enforcement — in respect of shipping using Community ports and sailing in the waters under the jurisdiction of the Member States — of international standards for ship safety, pollution prevention and shipboard living and working conditions (port State control) (3), which took the line that such ships should not be allowed to put to sea if they pose an ‘unreasonable threat of harm to the marine environment’; considering the International Convention of 1973 on the prevention of marine pollution from ships, as modified by the 1978 Protocol (MARPOL 73/78), which laid down, inter alia, standards and conditions for the discharge of waste and residues at sea, as well as requiring the parties to the Convention to ensure the provision of port facilities; mindful of the Convention on the protection of the Baltic marine environment (Helsinki Conventions 1974/1992), which will impose stringent discharge requirements on all ships using Baltic ports when it comes into force on 1 January 2000; taking into account Helsinki Commission Recommendation No 17/11 (HELCOM, Commission on the protection of the Baltic’s marine environment) of 13 March 1996, introducing a uniform system of fees for the handling and disposal of ship-generated waste; (1) OJ C 271, 31. 8. 1998, p. 79. (2) OJ C 271, 7. 10. 1993, p. 1. (3) OJ L 157, 7. 7. 1995, p. 1