Vision of Alpine Combined Transport after 2030€¦ · Vision of Alpine Combined Transport after 2030 . Deliverable D.T.3.3.1 . May 2018 . EDIT BY: TRAFFIX Verkehrsplanung GmbH Bernhard

AlpInnoCT Vision of Alpine Combined

Transport after 2030

Deliverable D.T.3.3.1

May 2018

EDIT BY: TRAFFIX Verkehrsplanung GmbH

Bernhard Fürst Gumpendorfer Str. 21/6A, 1060 Vienna

(A) T: +43 01 586 41 81M: [email protected]

Document Title: Vision of Alpine Combined Transport after 2030 Sub Title: -

Document History Version Comments Date Done by 1) Elaboration of draft version

(bmvit, TRAFFIX)Draft Report 23/04/2018 Julia Elsinger

Bernhard Fürst 1) PPs comments (PPs)2) Finalization according to PPs

contributions (TRAFFIX)

Final Report 15/05/2018 Bernhard Fürst

Published final deliverable Deliverable (D.T.3.3.1) 15/05/2018 Julia Elsinger

Number of pages: 107 Number of annexes: 4

Prepared by: Julia Elsinger / bmvit

Contribution: AlpInnoCT Project Partners

Principal Author: Bernhard Fürst / TRAFFIX

Contributing Authors: David Wurz-Hermann / TRAFFIX Herbert Peherstorfer / TRAFFIX Patrick Schnötzlinger / TRAFFIX Andreas Käfer / TRAFFIX

Approval for delivery AlpInnoCT Coordinator Date

Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology Unit I/K4 – Combined Transport

AlpInnoCT Vision of Alpine Combined Transport after 2030

Final Report

Contracting entity: Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport,

Innovation and Technology Unit I/K4 – Combined Transport Represented by: Julia Elsinger, Dipl.-Ing. 1030 Vienna, Radetzkystraße 2 Contractor: TRAFFIX Verkehrsplanung GmbH 1060 Vienna, Gumpendorfer Str. 21/6A Phone: +43 1 586 41 81, Fax: +43 1 586 41 81-10 E-Mail: [email protected] Authors: Bernhard Fürst, Mag. (Project leader) David Wurz-Hermann, MSc. Herbert Peherstorfer, Dr. Patrick Schnötzlinger, BSc. Andreas Käfer, Dipl.-Ing. (Project controlling)

Cover photos: Pic 1: AlpInnoCT / © Mario H. Photography, Pic 2, 3, 5: PIXABAY, Pic 4: B. Fürst

Vienna, May 15th 2018 GZ: 1251 AlpInnoCT Final Report D1 180515

Vision of Alpine Combined Transport after 2030 Final Report

T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 4 of 107

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................... 7

1 INITIAL POSITION AND DEFINITION OF TASKS .............................. 10

2 METHODICAL APPROACH ............................................................. 12

3 CURRENT SITUATION OF ALPINE COMBINED TRANSPORT ......... 13

3.1 Overview of relevant literature sources ..................................... 13

3.2 Current development of freight transport volumes ................. 15

3.3 Current measures for promotion of CT ....................................... 19

3.4 Strengths and weaknesses of Combined Transport ................ 20

4 SURVEY REGARDING EXPECTATIONS IN CT SECTOR ................. 23

4.1 Online survey ................................................................................... 23

4.1.1 Survey design, target groups and participants ........................ 23

4.1.2 Survey results .................................................................................... 28

4.1.2.1 Topic area transport policy .......................................................... 30

4.1.2.2 Topic area infrastructure ............................................................... 34

4.1.2.3 Topic area technology and innovation ..................................... 37

4.1.2.4 Questions regarding mode choice ............................................. 40

4.2 In-depth expert interviews ............................................................ 42

4.2.1 Interview design .............................................................................. 42

4.2.2 Interview Results .............................................................................. 43

4.3 “Wish list” from the perspective of stakeholders ...................... 52

5 ANALYSIS OF OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS............................... 53

5.1 Economic development and transport volumes ..................... 55

5.1.1 Opportunities ................................................................................... 55

5.1.2 Threats ............................................................................................... 56

5.2 Infrastructure .................................................................................... 56

5.2.1 Opportunities ................................................................................... 57


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 5 of 107

5.2.1.1 Base tunnels ..................................................................................... 57

5.2.1.2 Upgrade of railway network ......................................................... 57

5.2.1.3 Technology ...................................................................................... 58

5.2.1.4 Terminals ........................................................................................... 58

5.2.1.5 General developments ................................................................. 59

5.2.2 Threats ............................................................................................... 59

5.2.2.1 Base tunnels ..................................................................................... 60

5.2.2.2 Upgrade of railway network ......................................................... 60

5.2.2.3 Technology ...................................................................................... 60

5.2.2.4 Terminals ........................................................................................... 60

5.2.2.5 General developments ................................................................. 61

5.3 Transport policy ............................................................................... 61

5.3.1 Opportunities ................................................................................... 61

5.3.2 Threats ............................................................................................... 63

5.4 Innovations ....................................................................................... 64

5.4.1 Opportunities ................................................................................... 64

5.4.2 Threats ............................................................................................... 68

6 ELABORATION OF SCENARIOS AND VISIONS ............................. 69

6.1 Scenario 1 – “Optimistic” .............................................................. 69

6.2 Scenario 2 – “Pessimistic” .............................................................. 71

6.3 Scenario 3 – “Balanced” ............................................................... 73

7 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................. 75

7.1 General recommendations .......................................................... 75

7.2 Overview of CT promotion measures and suggestions for prioritization ................................................................................ 76

ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................... 79

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................... 81

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ 85

LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................. 88


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 6 of 107

APPENDIX .......................................................................................................... 89

Transport volumes by Alpine crossing ......................................................... 90

Online survey results by sector: Transport sector ...................................... 92

Online survey results by sector: Governmental institutions ..................... 97

Online survey results by sector: Other sectors ......................................... 102


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 7 of 107

ABSTRACT

The present study has been carried out as contribution of the unit I/K4 – Combined Transport of the Austrian Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology to the EU-funded interregional project AlpInnoCT. Its aim was to elaborate scenarios for Com-bined Transport in the Alpine Space after 2030. As key elements of the study a basic research regarding the current situation of CT, a survey about expectations of the CT sector, an analysis of opportunities and threats and finally the elaboration of a future vision based on development scenarios have been conducted.

Taking into account the relevant topic areas “economy” (including economic devel-opment and transport volumes), “infrastructure”, “transport policy” and “innovations”, a comprehensive analysis of opportunities and threats regarding future development of Alpine CT has been elaborated. Subsequently, the possible developments (either in a positive or in a negative direction) have been combined and condensed into a “posi-tive”, a “negative” and a “balanced” scenario for 2030.

According to the optimistic scenario, until 2030 transport policy will make substantial contributions to the competitiveness of rail freight transport. The market position of CT will be strengthened by the provision of an adequate and efficient infrastructure as well as by the implementation of innovative technologies, especially in the context of Logis-tics 4.0. Influenced by largely positive impacts related to economic development, infra-structure, transport policy and innovations, rail freight volumes in transalpine Combined Transport and especially the mode share of CT will increase substantially. Based on an approximate estimation, the market share of CT in transalpine freight transport could rise to a range of 25 – 30 % until 2030 (compared to 18 % in 2014).

According to the pessimistic scenario, until 2030 transport policy will fail to efficiently promote environmental-friendly transport modes and will leave freight transport com-pletely to the private market. The upgrading of railway infrastructure will largely stop after completion of the base tunnels that are already under construction. Many innova-tive technologies in the context of “Logistics 4.0” will more or less remain in an experi-mental stage, at least regarding CT. Regarding economic development, demand segments with a higher rail affinity will be performing underproportionally. Largely nega-tive impacts in the fields of transport policy, infrastructure and innovations will prevent a


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 8 of 107

further shift of transport volumes from road to rail. Under these circumstances, the trans-alpine CT market share could decrease to a range of 13 – 18 % until 2030.

According to the balanced scenario, until 2030 transport policy will try to further foster the competitiveness of rail transport, but can only partly fulfill its intentions. The most important infrastructure projects, especially those that are currently already under con-struction, will be in operation, but apart from that, only few additional improvements will have been made. Innovative technologies will be operating in niche segments of CT, but a comprehensive introduction that can lead to an overall productivity improve-ment will still be pending. A mix of rather positive and rather negative influences in the fields of transport policy, infrastructure and innovations will lead to a stagnating or only slightly positive development. This implies that the goal of a substantial shift from road to rail can hardly be fulfilled. Based on an approximate estimation, in 2030 the market share of CT in transalpine transport could lie between 18 and 25 % (compared to 18 % in 2014).

With a view to recommendations, it becomes obvious that the intended direction should follow the “optimistic” scenario as far as possible. Ideally, a comprehensive im-plementation of the following recommendations should lead to a development ac-cording to the optimistic scenario, at least the pessimistic scenario should be avoided.

Recommendations to work towards a positive development of CT in the Alpine Region:

General upgrade of rail infrastructure with a special focus on relevant feeder lines

Area-wide implementation of ETCS in order to increase efficiency

Significant upgrade and/or expansion of terminal infrastructure

International cooperation regarding infrastructure projects

Infrastructure harmonization (e.g. regarding maximum train lengths and weights)

Higher prioritization of rail freight transport compared to passenger transport

Continuation of financial CT promotion measures as long as required

Continuation of regulatory promotion measures and exemptions for CT

International (Alpine-wide) harmonization of framework conditions, financial and regulatory promotion measures as far as possible

Effective lobbying activities for rail and Combined Transport

Public relation and public awareness measures as well as CT-specific curricula programs


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 9 of 107

Dismantling of partially still existing barriers in the light of a fully liberalized railway market

Considering a possible implementation of more or less restrictive steering instru-ments for road transport (e.g. Toll+ or Alpine Crossing Exchange) in order to ac-celerate the intended shift from road to rail

Stricter enforcement of existing regulations in road transport

Turn developments in e-mobility into an advantage for CT

Extensive support of CT-related research & development activities


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 10 of 107

1 INITIAL POSITION AND DEFINITION OF TASKS

The Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology (represented by the Unit I/K4 – Combined Transport) is one of 15 public and private partners from the Alpine Space participating in the EU-funded project AlpInnoCT. The project is supported by a wide number of stakeholders in Combined Transport (40 observers) and aims at increasing the efficiency of Combined Transport (CT) in the Alpine Region by innovative approaches in a sustainable and economic way. According to the EU White Paper on mobility and transport 2011 and the EU strategy for the Alpine Space (EUSALP) the fur-ther development of intermodal and Combined Transport is considered as an appro-priate way to make freight transport across the Alps more sustainable as well as to min-imize negative impacts on climate and environment in the Alpine Space.

Generally speaking, the AlpInnoCT project aims at transferring know-how from the field of industrial production to Combined Transport in order to improve the efficiency of CT processes. The output of the project is intended to provide a description of the current situation of Alpine Combined Transport, recommendations for an ideal CT-model taking into account expertise from the industrial sector, guidelines for transferring innovative approaches into daily CT business, to establish Alpine-wide dialogue platforms for the exchange of views on specific issues and to elaborate a so called “toolbox of actions”.

The present study called “Vision of Alpine Combined Transport after 2030” is elaborated as part of the AlpInnoCT project and will, among others, serve as a background for two pilot projects to be developed within AlpInnoCT. The aim of the study is to elaborate scenarios for Alpine Combined Transport in the whole Alpine Space after 2030, includ-ing the consideration of relevant infrastructure projects as well as innovative ap-proaches.

The study is connected to work package 3 of AlpInnoCT as described in the approved project application form and considers relevant information and results provided from other work packages and activities of the project. In particular, a collection of studies as well as a summary of CT promotion measures (provided by WP 1) and a so called “wish list” from the perspective of stakeholders along the transport chain (provided by WP 3) are taken into account.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 11 of 107

The main parts and key elements of the present study are:

Basic research regarding the current situation of CT

Survey about expectations of the CT sector

Analysis of opportunities and threats for CT

Elaboration of a future vision based on development scenarios

On the one hand, the results of the study shall be of substantial use for the further elabo-ration of the upcoming AlpInnoCT activities and tasks. On the other hand, a general source of information regarding the potential future development of Alpine CT shall be provided for stakeholders, decision makers and authorities in the Alpine Space.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 12 of 107

2 METHODICAL APPROACH

Figure 2-1 presents an overview of the methodical approach. Following a basic re-search regarding the current situation of CT (item A), a comprehensive survey about expectations of stakeholders in the CT sector concerning possible future developments and their impacts has been conducted (item B). The results of this survey have been used as a direct input to the following work steps, namely the analysis of opportunities and threats in CT (item C) and the elaboration of a future vision (item D). Because of the strong content-related interlinkages between the items C and D, an integrated procession of these steps was necessary. Precisely, the analysis of opportunities and threats on the one hand as well as the elaboration of scenarios for the future vision on the other hand have been structured along the following topics: economic develop-ment and transport volumes, infrastructure, transport policy and innovations. Eventually, recommendations from the results of the preceding steps were derived (item E).

Figure 2-1: Methodical approach

A | Basic research current situation

B | Survey about expectations of CT sector

C | Analysis of opportunities and threats in CT

D | Elaboration of future vision

E | Recommendations

Opp

ortu

nitie

s &

thre

ats

anal

ysis

Deriv

atio

n of

de

velo

pmen

t sce

nario

s

Economic development

Infrastructure

Transport policy

Innovations

Ana

lysis

by

topi

c ar

eas


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 13 of 107

3 CURRENT SITUATION OF ALPINE COMBINED TRANSPORT

Chapter 3 provides a brief overview regarding the current situation of Alpine Combined Transport based on a desk research on recent literature sources and statistics. Due to the fact that a wide range of information regarding these issues is already available in several national and international studies as well as in documents prepared in preced-ing activities of the AlpInnoCT project, the intention of this chapter primarily is to give a brief overview as an introduction to the subject. The present study synthesized all this valuable input and based its work on this scientific foundation.

3.1 Overview of relevant literature sources

The following paragraphs give a summary of the most relevant literature sources and provide the corresponding references.

In the framework of the Declaration of Zurich, the working group “Heavy Vehicle Transport Management Instruments” has been dealing with the issue of the pos-sible future implementation of steering instruments for transalpine road transport.

Concerning this matter, a major study called ALBATRAS1 has been published in 2011, providing an analysis of the instruments ACE, AETS and Toll+, a profound traffic study as well as several development scenarios with a scope until 2030 and beyond.

Building on the results of ALBATRAS, the EFFINALP2 study analyzed several scenar-ios regarding possible economic impacts on the transport sector in general and the road transport sector in particular as well as on transport at regional level. In 2017 another study was assigned with the aim of providing an in-depth analysis regarding a possible implementation of the steering instrument Toll+. The final report of this study will be available in spring 2018.

The Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology recently assigned a study about the effects of infrastructural measures on the market conditions of Accompanied Combined Transport in Austria3. This study presents

1 ALBATRAS: Neuenschwander R. et al. 2011 2 EFFINALP: Maibach M. et al. 2012

3 KombiConsult 2016


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 14 of 107

statistical data until 2014 and provides a forecast up to 2030. It analyzes several relevant input factors for future development, but no general scenarios were developed.

The most comprehensive recent EU-wide study concerning Combined Transport was assigned by the European Commission in 20154. It contributes towards the aims of the EU White Paper on mobility and transport 2011 and the common CT Directive and provides some critical perspectives. The scope of this study focus-es on current developments as of 2015 and looks into the future until 2030. Unlike most of the other references mentioned, this study deals solely and exclusively with Combined Transport. It lists external and internal factors that have a certain influence on CT and addresses several aspects that could have been done bet-ter by various stakeholders in the past.

In 2014 the working group “Heavy Vehicle Transport Management Instruments” within the Declaration of Zurich prepared a comprehensive report entitled “Re-view on Combined Transport in Alpine countries”5 about existing policies and measures for the promotion of Combined Transport in the member states Aus-tria, France, Germany, Italy, Liechtenstein, Slovenia and Switzerland. Moreover, as far as possible, an outlook regarding the political intentions up to 2030 is giv-en.

In a German study6 from 2012 the focus lies on the development of Combined Transport in Germany until 2025. It points out the necessities to improve the pro-duction systems and makes recommendations for the upgrade of infrastructure capacities.

A similar study for CT development in Switzerland, especially focussing on Unac-companied Combined Transport, was published in 20107. The scope of this doc-ument considers several scenarios and reaches from 2008 until 2030, analyzing the impact of CT development on different segments of freight transport, name-ly transit, bilateral and national. Implications for infrastructure are described, too.

The iMONITRAF! Network8 periodically publishes monitoring data mainly on transalpine road transport and draws up recommendations for decisions-makers on the level of Alpine regions with the aim to push forward certain initiatives like e.g. Toll+.

4 KombiConsult et al. 2015

5 Suivi de Zurich 2014 6 Gaidzik M. et al. 2012

7 KombiConsult, K+P Transport Consultants 2010 8 iMONITRAF!: Lückge H. et al. 2016


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 15 of 107

3.2 Current development of freight transport volumes

As Figure 3-1 shows, the total European CT market increased by approx. 48 % between 2005 and 2015, whereby UCT (unaccompanied Combined Transport) achieved a growth of 50 % and ACT (accompanied Combined Transport) a growth of 27 %. After a general decrease in the year 2009, caused by the impacts of the economic crises 2008, the UCT sector has shown considerable annual growth rates of around 5 % per year in average. The ACT volumes in 2015 were still lower than they were in 2009. In terms of absolute volumes (in million tons/a), the unaccompanied CT segment amounted to approx. 94 % of the total CT market in 2015.

Figure 3-1: European CT freight transport volume 2005-2015

* Net-net tons

Figure 3-2 shows the overall transalpine freight transport volume in 2014 by transport mode, summing up all Alpine crossings. In total, a share of 66 % of the whole volume is covered by the road sector. The remaining third is covered by rail transport, whereby 48 % are apportioned to conventional transport, 43 % to unaccompanied and 9 % to accompanied CT.

10,2 13,6 15,1 14,9 10,8 13,0

145,5

181,5 164,6191,8 203,0

218,0

0

50

100

150

200

250

2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015

milli

on t/

a*

AlpInnoCTTotal CT volume 2005-2015Europe

UCT

ACT

Source: UIC 2017


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 16 of 107

Figure 3-2: Transalpine freight transport volume 2014 – all Alpine crossings

* Net-net tons

Table 3-1 shows the transalpine freight transport volume 2014 across the Inner Alpine Arc by country, again differentiated by road, conventional rail, UCT and ACT. Here, the rail segment reaches a market share of 40 % of the overall transport volume (with re-gard to all countries).

Table 3-1: Transalpine freight transport volume 2014 – Inner Alpine Arc by country

Transalpine freight transport volume 2014 – Inner Alpine Arc by country

Transport sector France Switzerland Austria

[million t*] [%] [million t*] [%] [million t*] [%]

Road 18,4 85 % 12,5 32 % 31,3 72 %

Rail conventional 2,1 10% 7,5 19 % 2,1 5 %

UCT 0,6 3 % 16,9 44 % 6,5 15 %

ACT 0,6 3 % 1,9 5 % 3,4 8 %

Total 21,7 100 % 38,7 100 % 43,3 100 %

Source: BAV 20169 * Net-net tons

9 The yearly publication “Alpinfo” differentiates between 3 Alpine arcs. This table deals only with the Inner

Alpine arc. It includes in Austria the Alpine crossings Brenner and Reschen, in Switzerland Grand-St-Bernard, Simplon, Gotthard and San Bernardino and in France Mont-Cenis, Fréjus and Mont Blanc.

146

36 32

7

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

milli

on t/

a*

AlpInnoCTTransalpine freight transport volume 2014All crossing points

Road

Rail conventional

UCT

ACT

Source: BAV 2016


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 17 of 107

As the main focus of this chapter lies on the current situation of Combined Transport, the following section discusses the development of Alpine-crossing UCT and ACT com-pared to road transport. Figure 3-3, Figure 3-4 and Figure 3-5 give an overview of the corresponding development on (from west to east) French, Swiss and Austrian Alpine crossings between 1999 and 2014.

On French corridors, the transalpine transport volume between 1999 and 2014 has in general decreased. While the road sector more or less has stagnated and ranged from around 35 to 40 million t/a, the UCT sector showed a massive decline from 2000 until 2010 (-80 % in ten years). Since 2010, UCT has been rising again on a quite low level. ACT is almost completely negligible on French corridors.

Figure 3-3: Transalpine freight transport volumes 1999-2014 – French Alpine crossings

* Net-net tons

In contrast to French and Austrian Alpine crossings, Swiss corridors (see Figure 3-4) hold a special position due to the fact that the shares of road and UCT have more or less been at similar levels for the whole period considered. On Swiss corridors, we have the unique situation that UCT has surpassed road transport already in 2004. Except for a short reversal in 2009, UCT managed to constantly remain above the road transport volume since then. In fact, the gap has been widening since 2010, whereat road transport has been decreasing even in absolute numbers since 2011. ACT has remained relatively stable over ten years.

0,0

5,0

10,0

15,0

20,0

25,0

30,0

35,0

40,0

45,0

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

milli

on t/

a*

AlpInnoCTTransalpine freight transport 1999-2014France

Road UCT ACTSource: CE CS OFT 2016, BAV 2016


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 18 of 107

Figure 3-4: Transalpine freight transport volumes 1999-2014 – Swiss Alpine crossings

* Net-net tons

On Austrian corridors, road and UCT have (on different absolute levels) been increasing quite constantly since 1999, except for a temporary decrease caused by the economic crises in 2008/2009. While ACT and UCT were at very similar levels until 2003, UCT has increased more than ACT since then. Additional figures presenting the development of transport volumes on specific Alpine crossings are provided in the annex.

Figure 3-5: Transalpine freight transport volume 1999-2014 – Austrian Alpine crossings

* Net-net tons

-

2,0

4,0

6,0

8,0

10,0

12,0

14,0

16,0

18,0

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

milli

on t/

a*

AlpInnoCTTransalpine freight transport 1999-2014Switzerland


0,0

20,0

40,0

60,0

80,0

100,0

120,0

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

milli

on t/

a*

AlpInnoCTTransalpine freight transport 1999-2014Austria



T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 19 of 107

3.3 Current measures for promotion of CT

A preceding activity of the AlpInnoCT project10 provides a summary regarding the cur-rent situation relating to CT promotion measures and refers to the most important poli-cies in the Alpine states. In this document, the concerned measures are classified into so called push- and pull-measures. The former try to “push” the whole transport sector towards a higher degree of sustainability, while the latter intend to “pull” transport vol-ume away from road transport by increasing the attractiveness of existing alternatives, especially Combined Transport. The following section tries to provide a brief overview of relevant measures and their categorization. For further details refer to the mentioned reference11.

Push-measures can be further classified into:

Restrictions including measures like weight limits, speed limits, bans depending on the Euro standard of vehicles and specific goods or driving bans on specific days and time slots

Financial instruments including taxations and charges referring to the internalization of external costs (implemented in all Alpine countries; revision of the Eurovignette Di-rective is currently pending) and fines applied in the context of enforcement

Pull-measures are classified into:

Exemptions from driving bans for road vehicles involved in CT operations: They allow higher weights or dimensions of HGVs in CT operations and provide exemptions from traffic bans in almost all Alpine countries. In Austria for example exemptions from the weekend and holiday driving bans are foreseen for vehicles involved in CT and Slo-venia provides exemptions referring to services of local importance.

Financial support either by tax incentives or by subsidies: This includes reduction or reimbursement of vehicle taxes or road charges for vehicles in CT as well as finan-cial aids for infrastructure, related equipment, operations/services, promotion and research & development.

Regulatory support measures: E.g. in Austria, Germany, Slovenia and Switzerland time spent by a lorry driver on the rolling motorway is credited for the mandatory rest period.

10 AlpInnoCT : Cavallaro F. et al. 2017 11 AlpInnoCT: Cavallaro F. et al. 2017


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 20 of 107

Liberalization: Includes improved access to inland waterway transport, to rail net-works etc. Furthermore, liberalization applies e.g. to the initial and final road leg in CT for vehicles registered within EU or EEA countries.

Infrastructural development consists of renewal, upgrading or construction of infra-structures.

3.4 Strengths and weaknesses of Combined Transport

In order to give a general overview of major strengths and weaknesses of Combined Transport, in particular the following sources have been taken into account:

a SWOT analysis conducted within the research project ILKOE12

a study from 201513 that carried out a comparison between the aims of the EU White Paper on mobility and transport 2011 and the existing situation of CT in Europe

a corresponding elaboration provided by a previous activity of the AlpInnoCT14 project.

Table 3-1 and Table 3-2 provide a summarizing overview of the main strengths and weaknesses of Combined Transport. Regarding strengths, it seems appropriate to dis-tinguish between strength in terms of general advantages for environment and society on the one hand and strength in terms of individual operational and/or economic ad-vantages for the users of CT (e.g. shippers, carriers) on the other hand.

12 ILKÖ: Käfer A., Fürst B. et al. 2016

13 KombiConsult et al. 2015 14 AlpInnoCT: Cavallaro F. et al. 2017


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 21 of 107

Table 3-1: Strengths of Combined Transport

Strengths of Combined Transport

Strengths in terms of general advantages for environment and society:

As CT helps substantially to achieve a higher mode share of the rail sector, it contributes directly to increasing environmental friendliness and safety of freight transport and pro-

motes sustainable transport in general. This has especially positive effects on the envi-

ronmentally sensitive Alpine region. Several negative impacts of road freight transport

can be reduced, e.g.:

o Minimize energy consumption

o Reduce CO2 emissions and prevent climate change

o Reduce emission of air pollutants

o Reduce noise

o Minimize space usage

CT creates synergies in the transport sector and enables to combine the specific strengths of different transport modes.

CT helps to reduce road congestions.

CT provides a higher reliability of transport services in terms of less risk of congestion, de-lays and accidents compared to road transport.

Strengths in terms of individual operational and/or economic advantages for CT users:

The use of CT provides the possibility to benefit from exemptions from regulations like driving bans, transport restrictions, vehicle taxes or HGV tolls.

Fixed timetables provide a high reliability of the transport chain.

Reduction of variable and fix vehicle costs

Easier handling regarding labour-law provisions (e.g. driving and rest periods for HGV drivers)

Transnational transport can be performed with less controls.

Combined Transport provides area-wide flexibility of road transport in combination with the efficiency and reliability of the rail service.

Transport capacities are higher compared to road transport.

From a political point of view, financial funding of CT on national and European level encourages stakeholders to make long-term investments.

Increasing research and development activities ensure an on-going development of CT as a relatively young freight transport mode.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 22 of 107

Table 3-2: Weaknesses of Combined Transport

Weaknesses of Combined Transport

Interoperability deficits regarding general rail infrastructure, e.g.

o concerning differences in energy and signaling systems within the European

Union

o concerning different constraints related to maximum weight or maximum train

length

Partially insufficient train path capacity for CT trains (due to the lack of separate train paths for passengers and freight traffic)

A relatively low density of inland CT terminals in the EU on average is accompanied by partly restricted access to terminals, which hinders competition on a free, liberal-

ized market. (Remark: There are quite big differences between EU-member states.)

The maintenance of CT-terminals is rather expensive.

Partially, long transportation times weaken market position of CT, especially with a view to specific industrial sectors.

Concerning operation, there is still a lack of open-access in the form of market en-try barriers. (According to the report “Analysis of the EU Combined Transport”15, cur-

rently such barriers seem to be even higher as they were when liberalization efforts

started.)

Relatively expensive initial and final legs of CT weaken financial advantages of rail transport.

Several stakeholders are involved in the process of preparing an offer for CT ser-vices, which is time-consuming and contributes to the general complexity of CT.

In services, there are deficits in cost-efficiency and constraints of loading gauges.

In CT there is less flexibility compared to road transport. From a customer’s point of view, the provided services (compared to road transport) partially are still not relia-

ble, predictable, flexible, fast and cheap enough.

A lack of digitalization (regarding infrastructure of information and communication technology (ICT)) leads to less interoperability in intermodal transport. In general,

there is more research done and innovation happening in road transport than in rail

transport.

From a political point of view, there is a better established lobby for road transport than for rail transport on various levels.

15 KombiConsult et al. 2015


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 23 of 107

4 SURVEY REGARDING EXPECTATIONS IN CT SECTOR

The main part of the survey done for the present study regarding expectations of stake-holders in the CT sector (especially concerning possible future developments and their impacts) comprised a comprehensive online survey. The survey design and the ob-tained results are described in detail in the chapters 4.1.1 and 4.1.2. In addition to the online survey, in-depth interviews with selected stakeholders and experts have been conducted. The interview design is described in chapter 4.2.1, the summary of the cor-responding results can be found in chapter 4.2.2.

Subsequently, the results of these surveys have been used as a direct input to the fol-lowing work steps, namely the analysis of opportunities and threats in CT (see chapter 5) and the elaboration of scenarios (see chapter 6).

4.1 Online survey

4.1.1 Survey design, target groups and participants

In order to be able to elaborate a suitable survey design, first of all the relevant stake-holder groups had to be identified and categorized as follows:

Freight forwarders

CT operators

Railway companies

Operators of terminals/ports

Shippers / industry

Lobbying organizations

Technology/equipment sector (including hardware and software)

Public authorities / governmental institutions

Scientific institutions


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 24 of 107

From a geographical point of view, it was attempted to cover all countries of the Alpine Space (Austria, France, Germany, Italy, Liechtenstein, Slovenia and Switzerland) in a proportional manner as much as possible.

Due to the mixture of sectors concerning the stakeholders, some of them are not locat-ed in countries of the Alpine Space because their headquarters are in other countries or the institution acts supranationally (i.e. EU or EEA). Based on a comprehensive re-search of relevant stakeholders, among others especially with the help of the associa-tion CombiNet (which represents the interests of the Austrian CT sector) as well as in close cooperation with partners of the AlpInnoCT project, a sample consisting of a total number of 234 institutions and companies has been collected. In the course of the composition of the sample, the aim to achieve a proportional distribution regarding categories and countries has been kept in mind. The following figures provide an over-view of the stakeholders (by category and country) that have been invited to partici-pate in the online survey.

Figure 4-1: Contacted stakeholders for online survey – number by category

51

39

21

34

14

26

18

19

12

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Freight Forwarder

Pure CT-Operator

Railway Company

Terminals/Ports

Shipper/Industry

Representation of interests

Technology/Equipment/Hardware/Software

Governmentalinstitution/authority

Scientific institution

AlpInnoCTContacted Stakeholders for Online-surveyNumber by sector

Sum: 234 Stakeholders


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 25 of 107

Figure 4-2: Contacted stakeholders for online survey – number by country

Figure 4-3: Contacted stakeholders for online survey – total share by category and country

Referring to the methodical approach described in chapter 2, four major topic areas have been identified as a structural basis for the survey design. Regarding the type of questions, a reasonable mix of quantitative ratings and qualitative open answers seemed to be appropriate. Another important aspect was the need to find a suitable balance between the demand for as much detailed information as possible on the one

51

33

58

11

52

12

17

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

AT

CH+LI

DE

FR

IT

SI

Supranational/Others

AlpInnoCTContacted Stakeholders for Online-surveyNumber by country


25%

5%

29%

15%

57%

12%

44%

21%

17%

14%

13%

19%

15%

21%

12%

6%

11%

25%

31%

13%

24%

32%

21%

27%

28%

11%

33%

2%

8%

5%

3%

0%

8%

11%

5%

0%

25%

49%

14%

9%

19%

42%

8%

3%

10%

6%

12%

11%

17%

2%

10%

0%

21%

0%

12%

11%

0%

0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Freight Forwarder

Pure CT-Operator

Railway Company

Terminals/Ports

Shipper/Industry





AT CH+LI DE FR IT SI Supranational/Others

AlpInnoCTContacted Stakeholders for Online-surveyShare of total by sector and country



T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 26 of 107

hand and a high practicability (to ensure a reasonable response rate) of the survey on the other hand. Therefore, the survey was intended to take not more than 15 minutes. Figure 4-4 provides an overview of the general logical structure of the survey design.

Figure 4-4: General structure of the online survey

As indicated in Figure 4-4, the structure of the survey was designed taking into account the relevance of specific topics and question blocks to different stakeholder catego-ries. In practice, that means that each respondent was provided with a specific set of questions depending on the specified stakeholder group.

The following Figure 4-5 shows the detailed question structure of the online survey by stakeholder group. The arrows indicate which questions were presented depending on the stakeholder category declared by the respondents. As basically the same structure was applicable for freight forwarders, CT operators, railway companies and termi-nals/ports, they have been summarized in the category “transport sector”. The survey was anonymous.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 27 of 107

Figure 4-5: Question structure by stakeholder category


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 28 of 107

After finalization of the survey design as well as of the sample of potential participants, the online survey started on the 20th of July and was open until 25th of September 2017. The online-link to the survey was embedded in a covering letter and sent out via e-mail by the Austrian Ministry of Transport, Innovation and Technology. In order to ensure the highest possible response rate as well as high-quality results, the survey was provided in five languages, namely English, German, French, Italian and Slovenian. A reminder, with a special focus on certain parts of the sample that seemed to be underrepresented, was sent out on the 7th of September 2017.

4.1.2 Survey results

Table 4-1 shows the overall response rate of the online survey. 104 participants replied at least to single questions, while 53 participants completed the entire questionnaire. On this account, each question has a different number of replies, ranging between 53 and 104.

Table 4-1: Response rates of online survey

Response rates of online survey

Contacted stakeholders/institutions 234

Visitors of online survey 144

Participants replying at least to single questions 104

Participants replying to all questions 53

The declaration to a group of stakeholders and to a country given by the participants leads to the results about the participation as shown in the following figures. Compared to the selected contacts, it can be seen that the response rate of governmental institu-tions and authorities is disproportionately high. In contrast, lobbying organizations are underrepresented in relative terms.

In absolute terms, the category shippers/industry is placed in last position. As only four participants declared themselves to this category, the questions concerning economic development and transport volumes (which were only provided for shippers/industry) have not been considered in the analysis. Assumptions about the economic develop-ment and transport volumes for this study and its scenarios were mainly based on the study ALBATRAS (see chapter 5.1).


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 29 of 107

Figure 4-6: Number of responses by category

Figure 4-7: Number of responses by country

13

10

6

15

4

5

9

19

5

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

Freight Forwarder

Pure CT-Operator

Railway Company

Terminals/Ports

Shipper/Industry





AlpInnoCTResponses of stakeholders for online-surveyNumber of responses by sector


35

9

29

1

9

5

2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

AT

CH+LI

DE

FR

IT

SI

Supranational/Others

AlpInnoCTResponses of stakeholders for online-surveyNumber of responses by country



T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 30 of 107

The results of selected questions per topic area are illustrated in the sections below. In addition, more detailed results are provided in the annex. In the presented figures, col-oring schemes have been chosen according to the type of question respectively the given answer scale. Ratings in terms of estimations of probability or impacts follow a blue to orange scheme, representing e.g. “high” to “low” probability or “strong” to “weak” impacts. In contrast, bipolar ratings in terms of “positive” or “negative” assess-ments are colored from green to orange.

Short summary of the outcome of the Online-survey

In general, the participants think that transport policy will follow a CT-friendly path with regulatory and financial promotion measures, and many of them also provide ideas regarding specific measures. Conventional road transport is expected to become more expensive and in terms of regulations more restricted, although the permission of LHVs is expected in the medium term. In terms of infrastructural measures, participants expect the most important impact through the upgrade of terminals and the completion of base tunnels in the medium term, whereas new and/or upgraded railway lines will af-fect their businesses in the long run. Referring to technology and innovations, transship-ment technologies, tracking & tracing and “making loading units more intelligent” are expected in short to medium term. The most important visions for the timescale after 2030 are automatization of trucks and terminals, the former with expected negative impacts on CT. Affecting several topic areas like transport policy, infrastructure and innovations, longer and heavier trains are expected to play a role in the future.

4.1.2.1 Topic area transport policy

Online survey, Question 6: Please estimate the probability that certain measures con-cerning transport policy will be implemented in Alpine Space16

As Figure 4-8 and Figure 4-9 show, an increase of HGV tolls is the most probable meas-ure in the opinion of the respondents. The sum of the answers “certainly” and “proba-bly” increases from 75 % regarding the medium term to 80 % regarding the long term. More than half of the participants are of the opinion that more regulatory promotion measures for Combined Transport will be applied together with an intensification of HGV driving bans and higher social standards especially for truck drivers. However, more than 50 % expect a permission of LHV across Europe in a large extent, at least in

16 In the online survey a choice of measures was listed (see Figure 4-8 and 4-9).


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 31 of 107

the long term. A little less than half of the participants expect neither an increase nor a reduction of financial funding of Combined Transport. In the long term, they are a little bit more optimistic concerning the interests of the CT sector.

Figure 4-8: Share of answers to question 6 over all sectors [%] medium term

n = 84

Figure 4-9: Share of answers to question 6 over all sectors [%] long term

n = 84

21% 15% 2% 6% 2% 13% 4%

14%38%

16% 8%22%

15%

35%

12%

21%

19%

32%15%

27%21%

21%

22%

40%19%

39%

50%

35%43%

17%

45%

5% 9% 14%25%

10% 19% 15% 16%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Incr

ease

of f

ina

ncia

len

cour

ag

emen

t of

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Red

uctio

n of

fina

ncia

len

cour

ag

emen

t of

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Reg

ula

tory

enc

oura

gem

ent

of C

omb

ined

Tra

nspo

rt

Incr

ease

of t

ruck

toll

New

, mor

e re

stric

tive

dire

ctiv

e m

easu

res f

or th

em

ana

gem

ent o

f hea

vytra

ffic

in A

lpin

e Sp

ace

Inte

nsifi

catio

n of

HG

V d

rivin

gb

an

Perm

issio

n of

LH

V w

idel

y ov

erEu

rope

Hig

her s

ocia

l sta

ndar

ds,

espe

cia

lly fo

r tru

ck d

river

s

AlpInnoCTAll sectors question 6: medium term

certainly not rather not neutral probably certainly

21% 10% 4% 2% 2% 11% 7%

17% 33%

6%15% 9%

30%

9%

19% 17%

34%16%

17% 17%

30%

13%

31% 29%

40%

43%

46% 46%

11%

50%

12% 10% 21%37%

21% 26% 18% 22%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Incr

ease

of f

ina

ncia

len

cour

ag

emen

t of

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Red

uctio

n of

fina

ncia

len

cour

ag

emen

t of

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Reg

ula

tory

enc

oura

gem

ent

of C

omb

ined

Tra

nspo

rt

Incr

ease

of t

ruck

toll

New

, mor

e re

stric

tive

dire

ctiv

e m

easu

res f

or th

em

ana

gem

ent o

f hea

vytra

ffic

in A

lpin

e Sp

ace

Inte

nsifi

catio

n of

HG

V d

rivin

gb

an

Perm

issio

n of

LH

V w

idel

y ov

erEu

rope

Hig

her s

ocia

l sta

ndar

ds,

espe

cia

lly fo

r tru

ck d

river

s

AlpInnoCTAll sectors question 6: long term



T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 32 of 107

Online survey, Questions 7 and 9: Here you may mention and rate additional measures concerning transport policy from your point of view (Questions 7 and 9)

42 statements regarding this question were given by the participants. In the course of analysis, they were summed up according to the categorization used in question 6. The table below shows that regulatory measures are seen as highly important. However, many statements like e.g. “changes in liability for railway companies”, “encourage-ment of digital networks” or “harmonization of tolls in Europe” were clustered to 3 new categories from which “governmental intervention / legal acts” is the most important one. All entries were rated as highly probable by their nominators (see Table 4-2).

Table 4-2: Number of entries summed up to categories to questions 7 and 9

Number of entries summed up to categories to question 7 and 9

Governmental intervention/legal acts 9

Regulatory encouragement of Combined Transport 8

Encouragement of e-mobility, partly automated driving, digitalization 5

Increase of truck toll 3

International harmonization 3

Increase of financial encouragement of Combined Transport 2

New, more restrictive directive measures for the management of heavy traffic in Alpine Space 2

Permission of LHV (Gigaliner) widely over Europe 1

Intensification of HGV driving ban 0

Reduction of financial encouragement of Combined Transport 0

Higher social standards, especially for truck drivers 0

Remark: 9 answers didn’t adequately address the question and were classified as “not suitable”

Online survey, Question 8: Please estimate the possible impact of the implementation of certain measures concerning transport policy to the market share of Alpine Combined Transport

A vast majority of the participants thinks that a reduction of financial funding of Com-bined Transport and a permission of LHV will have negative effects on the market share of Alpine Combined Transport. All other measures are perceived positively.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 33 of 107

Figure 4-10: Share of answers to question 8 over all sectors [%]

n = 68

Online survey, Question 10: Which concrete suggestions concerning transport policy to support a positive development of Alpine Combined Transport do you have?

Regarding this question, 60 suggestions were provided by the participants. The answers have been summed up according to the categories of questions 6 and 7 and again regulatory encouragement seems to be the most popular category. Statements like “make more attractive” or “improve reliability” were summed up in a general, not ex-actly definable new category “Improvement of system/others” (see Table 4-3).

44%2%

4% 2%

41%

2%2%

32%

2% 4%

22%

2%

18%

4%

2%2%

16%

4%10%

4%

15% 4% 4% 4%

12%

20%23%

28%31% 38% 29%

2%

36%27%

2%

28%27%

27% 38%

2%

24%37%

25% 33% 27%21%

4% 13%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Incr

ease

of f

ina

ncia

len

cour

ag

emen

t of

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Red

uctio

n of

fina

ncia

len

cour

ag

emen

t of

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Reg

ula

tory

enc

oura

gem

ent

of C

omb

ined

Tra

nspo

rt

Incr

ease

of t

ruck

toll

New

, mor

e re

stric

tive

dire

ctiv

e m

easu

res f

or th

em

ana

gem

ent o

f hea

vytra

ffic

in A

lpin

e Sp

ace

Inte

nsifi

catio

n of

HG

V d

rivin

gb

an

Perm

issio

n of

LH

V (G

iga

liner

)w

idel

y ov

er E

urop

e

Hig

her s

ocia

l sta

ndar

ds,

espe

cia

lly fo

r tru

ck d

river

s

AlpInnoCTAll sectors question 8

negative rather negative few negative neutral few positive rather positive positive


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 34 of 107

Table 4-3: Number of entries summed up to categories to question 10

Number of entries summed up to categories to question 10

Improvement of system/others 15

Regulatory encouragement of Combined Transport 12

Increase of financial encouragement of Combined Transport 7

New, more restrictive directive measures for the management of heavy traffic in Alpine Space 4

Governmental intervention/legal acts 4

Intensification of HGV driving ban 3

International harmonisation 2

Encouragement of e-mobility, partly automated driving, digitisation 1

Reduction of financial encouragement of Combined Transport 0

Increase of truck toll 0

Permission of LHV (Gigaliner) widely over Europe 0

Higher social standards, especially for truck drivers 0


4.1.2.2 Topic area infrastructure

Online survey, Question 12: In which sectors do you expect infrastructural emphases in Alpine Combined Transport in the medium term / in the long term?

Figure 4-11 and Figure 4-12 show that the expectation of construction or upgrading of base tunnels, terminals and hubs is relatively high for a majority of the participants in-stead of new railway lines. However, the railway lines gain more emphasis in long term scope.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 35 of 107


n = 63


n = 63

16%30% 30% 23%

30%14%

30%26%

23% 33%26%

19%

30% 23%14%

33%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%C

onst

ruct

ion/

upg

rad

ing

ofb

ase

railw

ay tu

nnel

s

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

railw

ay

lines

Upgr

ad

ing/

cons

truct

ion

ofra

ilwa

y a

cces

s lin

es

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

term

ina

ls/hu

bs


Rank 4 Rank 3 Rank 2 Rank 1

29%15%

37%20%

27%

20%

24%

29%

15%44%

27%

15%

29% 22%12%

37%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

ba

se ra

ilway

tunn

els

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

railw

ay

lines

Upgr

ad

ing/

cons

truct

ion

ofra

ilwa

y a

cces

s lin

es

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

term

ina

ls/hu

bs


Rank 4 Rank 3 Rank 2 Rank 1


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 36 of 107

Online survey, Question 13: How do you rate the impact of infrastructural measures in the following categories to the market share of Alpine Combined Transport? Similar to the preceding question, the participants expect the highest impacts on the market share of Alpine CT by new terminals and hubs. Generally, the impact of infra-structural measures is mentioned as significant for the development of Alpine CT.


n = 62


n = 62

2%7%

2% 7% 12%

27%27% 22% 14%

40% 45% 51%37%

24% 25% 20%37%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

ba

se ra

ilway

tunn

els

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

railw

ay

lines

Upgr

ad

ing/

cons

truct

ion

ofra

ilwa

y a

cces

s lin

es

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

term

ina

ls/hu

bs


low rather low medium rather high high

3% 2%10%

2% 7%12%

15% 26% 23% 12%

44% 47% 40%33%

28% 26% 30%42%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

ba

se ra

ilway

tunn

els

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

railw

ay

lines

Upgr

ad

ing/

cons

truct

ion

ofra

ilwa

y a

cces

s lin

es

Con

stru

ctio

n/up

gra

din

g of

term

ina

ls/hu

bs


low rather low medium rather high high


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 37 of 107

4.1.2.3 Topic area technology and innovation

Online Survey, Question 16: Please estimate the probability that certain technologies and innovations occur in the Alpine Space.

Logistics 4.0 can be seen as a common keyword for many single technological devel-opments and therefore many participants expect expansive developments in that field, of course to a much higher degree in the long term (after 2030). Tracking & tracing in combination with the innovation of “intelligent containers” is currently developing to-wards a standard feature in Combined Transport. In the medium term, participants seem to be slightly optimistic concerning new transshipment technologies and auton-omous driving trucks (high share of answers “probably”), but in the long term their con-fidence increases. Participants expect a longer period to come from simply new trans-shipment technologies to fully automatic terminals. Those seem to be part of the most utopic vision. Participants seem to be rather pessimistic concerning new service con-cepts but on the other hand they obviously expect real progress in the upgrade of in-frastructure because they definitely expect longer and heavier trains in the future.


n = 58

8% 2% 8% 8%10% 6%

24%14%

5%21% 18% 14% 13%

13% 14%15%34%

32%

24%

10%

15% 15%33%

47% 31% 25%

55%49%

32%57%

55%

49% 50%43%

34%28%

47%

20% 11%3% 2%

30%15% 18% 10%

5%21%

6%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Ind

ustry

4.0

/ L

ogist

ics 4

.0(In

tern

et o

f thi

ngs)

ETC

S (E

urop

ean

Tra

in C

ontro

lSy

stem

)

Fully

aut

omat

ic te

rmin

als

New

/inno

vativ

e re

loa

din

gte

chno

logi

es

Tra

ckin

g &

Tra

cing

inC

omb

ined

Tra

nsp

ort,

inte

lligen

t con

tain

er

Inte

lligen

t fre

ight

wa

gon

long

er/h

eavi

er tr

ain

s

New

bus

ines

s mod

els i

nC

omb

ined

Tra

nsp

ort

Inno

vativ

e se

rvic

e co

ncep

tsin

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Pla

toon

ing

(tru

ck)

Aut

onom

ous d

rivin

g (t

ruck

)

AlpInnoCTAll sector question 16: medium term



T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 38 of 107


n = 58

Online survey, Question 18: Please estimate the possible impact of a wide realization of the following innovations to the market share of Alpine Combined Transport.

As Figure 4-17 shows, most innovations have at least positive impacts to Alpine Com-bined Transport due to the estimation of the participants representing their sector, ex-cept for the technical innovations in road transport like platooning and autonomous driving. Again, innovations summed up under the keyword “logistics 4.0” have been assessed more carefully (although mostly positive, too).

2% 3%3%2%

10% 2% 12% 5% 2%11% 12%13%

24%32% 15%

13%29% 12% 28% 34%

18% 15%35%

37%34% 51%

29%19% 36%

40% 41% 32% 37%

50% 39%29% 23%

58% 50%40%

28% 22% 37% 37%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Ind

ustry

4.0

/ L

ogist

ics 4

.0(In

tern

et o

f thi

ngs)

ETC

S (E

urop

ean

Tra

in C

ontro

lSy

stem

)

Fully

aut

omat

ic te

rmin

als

New

/inno

vativ

e re

loa

din

gte

chno

logi

es

Tra

ckin

g &

Tra

cing

inC

omb

ined

Tra

nsp

ort,

inte

lligen

t con

tain

er

Inte

lligen

t fre

ight

wa

gon

long

er/h

eavi

er tr

ain

s

New

bus

ines

s mod

els i

nC

omb

ined

Tra

nsp

ort

Inno

vativ

e se

rvic

e co

ncep

tsin

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Pla

toon

ing

(tru

ck)

Aut

onom

ous d

rivin

g (t

ruck

)




T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 39 of 107


n = 58

Online survey, Question 20: On what kind of developments/technologies with relevance for Combined Transport is your company currently working?

45 answers were given to that question, which were summed up according to the cat-egories of question 16. Exemplary answers to the additional categories were “future trailer”, “e-business” or “automatic train formation”.

Table 4-4: Number of entries summed up to categories according to question 16

Number of entries summed up to categories to question 16

Industry 4.0 / Logistics 4.0 (Internet of things) 8

Fully automatic terminals 5

New/innovative transshipment technologies 5

Trailers 5

Tracking & Tracing in Combined Transport, intelligent container 4

Intelligent freight wagons 3

New business models in Combined Transport 2

Innovative service concepts in Combined Transport 2

Others 2

Longer/heavier trains 1


5% 3%28% 28%

3% 3%

23% 26%

8% 3% 3%3%

20% 18%

28%

8% 15% 11% 13% 10% 10%25%

24%

10% 10%

42%

41% 26% 29% 26%40%

20%

33%32%

13% 13%8%

36% 41% 39%33%

28%

39%

28%26%

8%3%

11% 13% 13% 18% 28% 20% 32%10% 18% 3%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Ind

ustry

4.0

/ L

ogist

ics 4

.0(In

tern

et o

f thi

ngs)

ETC

S (E

urop

ean

Tra

in C

ontro

lSy

stem

)

Fully

aut

omat

ic te

rmin

als

New

/inno

vativ

e re

loa

din

gte

chno

logi

es

Tra

ckin

g &

Tra

cing

inC

omb

ined

Tra

nsp

ort,

inte

lligen

t con

tain

er

Inte

lligen

t fre

ight

wa

gon

long

er/h

eavi

er tr

ain

s

New

bus

ines

s mod

els i

nC

omb

ined

Tra

nsp

ort

Inno

vativ

e se

rvic

e co

ncep

tsin

Com

bin

ed T

rans

por

t

Pla

toon

ing

(tru

ck)

Aut

onom

ous d

rivin

g (t

ruck

)


negative rather negative few negative neutral few positive rather positive positive


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 40 of 107

4.1.2.4 Questions regarding mode choice

Online survey, Question 21: To what extent do the following factors influence mode choice in freight transport today in your point of view?

Online survey, Question 22: To what extent do the following factors influence the mode choice in freight transport in the future in your point of view (compared to today)?

The following figures show the assessment of the participants regarding the influence of selected factors on mode choice in freight transport today and how it will change in the future. The most important factors are price and service quality and in the opinion of the participants both factors will become even more important. It is estimated that the influence of quality will increase stronger than the influence of price. The influence of transport time is by far not as strong as price or quality, but a vast majority of partici-pants thinks that it will also become more important. Furthermore, a majority is of the opinion that the frequency of service has also a strong influence, staying rather equal in the future.

A slightly higher rank than transport time and frequency is given to flexibility of service in the present. However, participants think that flexibility will also become more important. Environmental issues are expected to be more important in the future than nowadays. But, regarding to the current situation, environment is the only factor assigned with a “medium” or “weak” influence. An overall assessment shows that stakeholders expect a high performance of Alpine CT in the future, especially concerning quality, punctuality and reliability. Obviously, they see high potential of improvement which should lead to a common strategy of all stakeholders together.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 41 of 107


n = 56


n = 56

2% 2% 7%17%

2% 7% 16% 7%

27%

5%15%

26%

7%

15%

7% 19%

37%

34%

40%

27%

24%

50%

27%11%

24%

5%

62%

29%12% 13% 21%

2%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%Pr

ice

Qua

lity/

pun

ctua

lity/

relia

bilit

y

Tra

nsit

time

Freq

uenc

y

Flex

ibilit

y

Envi

ronm

enta

l sa

fety


absolutely not very weak weak medium strong very strong fully

3%3%3%

2% 8% 12% 5% 5%10%

20%32%

12%15%21%

17%

33%32%

20%

35%26%32%

15%7%

32%

28%43% 49%23% 17% 32%

13%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Pric

e

Qua

lity/

pun

ctua

lity/

relia

bilit

y

Tra

nsit

time

Freq

uenc

y

Flex

ibilit

y

Envi

ronm

enta

l sa

fety


less rather less little less equal little more rather more more


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 42 of 107

4.2 In-depth expert interviews

4.2.1 Interview design

In September and November 2017, after completion of the online survey, additional in-depth-interviews with 11 selected experts and stakeholders have been conducted. The following table presents an overview of the interview partners (in alphabetical order).

Table 4-5: List of experts interviewed

Name Company/Institution Stakeholder category Location

René Dancet CEO / RAlpin AG CT-operator Olten/Switzerland

Florence Delalande

Director Business Unit – Rail / TRAXENS

Technology/ Equipment

Marseille/France

Gernot Liedtke Head of the Department Commercial transport, Institute of Transport Research / DLR (German Aerospace Center)

Scientific institution Cologne/ Germany

Peter Lüttjohann

Head of unit G22 – Freight transport and logistics / Federal Ministry of Transport and Digital Infrastructure

Governmental institution

Berlin/Germany

Janez Merlak COO / Adria kombi d.o.o. CT operator Ljubljana/Slovenia

Ewald Moser Head of EUSALP AG4 Mobility, Groupe Environment, land use planning and transport / Regional Authority of Tyrol


Innsbruck/Austria

Alfred Pitnik Head of International Affairs / Rail Cargo Austria AG

Railway company Vienna/Austria

Armin Riedl CEO / kombiverkehr – German society for com-bined freight transport mbH & Co. KG

CT operator Frankfurt am Main/Germany

Martin Ruesch Head of Traffic and Transport Consulting / Rapp Ltd.

Consultancy Basel/Switzerland

Reto Schletti Head of Section Freight Transport / Federal Office of Transport (BAV)


Berne/Switzerland

Carmen Springer Vice Director Unit Mobility / Regional Authority of South Tyrol / Autonomous province Bozen-South Tyrol


Bolzano/Italy


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 43 of 107

The chosen approach was to roll up the topic areas that have been addressed in the online survey again and collect corresponding verbal statements and opinions of the selected experts. The focus was laid on estimations and suggestions concerning the topics “transport policy”, “infrastructure” and “technology”, combined with the most relevant topics mentioned in the open questions of the online survey.

4.2.2 Interview Results

Which other measures of transport policy except those rated in the online survey do you think will be implemented in the future and what specific comments do you have to exemplary topics?

Generally, technology will force politics to adjust legal conditions for the development. In addition, experts think that road transport will be much more present and flexible concerning technological innovations and that dynamics in rail transport are not as high. Climate goals will intensify the efforts of transport policy in the future. However, there is a substantial need for innovation, because promotion of CT operating with conventional methods will not be enough in the future. Many aspects concerning da-ta-technology will become more relevant. Transport policy is generally expected to have a stronger focus on freight transport, especially in the rail segment (e.g. prioritizing freight trains vs. passenger trains). In addition, restrictions regarding access to terminals and hubs from and to state-owned and/or monopolistic companies will decrease.

Longer and heavier vehicles (LHVs)

A general or widespread permission of LHVs over the Alpine Space is not expected. The impact on the transport sector by LHVs should not be overestimated, but the issue will certainly stay on the agenda and the demand will increase.

Internalization of external costs / tolls

Electronic toll collection as well as the internalization of external costs will be pushed forward, whereby in that context also a higher attention will have to be paid to noise on railway lines in Alpine Space. An increase of road charges, as expected by many experts, will possibly be accompanied by a decrease of railway infrastructure charges. At present, there seem to be considerations regarding that issue in Germany. Environ-mental costs must be calculated depending on the attributes of different types of emis-sions.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 44 of 107

The idea of possible toll exemptions for the initial and final leg in CT is not given a high probability of implementation. Most experts are of the opinion that financial funding or tax exemptions can be a stronger contribution to the promotion of CT than toll exemp-tions.

Taxes

It is expected that a possible increase of fuel prices in the future will mainly be driven by transport policy (i.e. higher taxes), whereas the influence of a possible shortage (“peak oil”) seems to be neglectable because of new exploitation methods emerging all over the world.

Financial support of CT

Relating to the issue of intentions regarding a further financial promotion of CT in the future, Switzerland takes an exceptional position among the Alpine countries. Some of the interviewees pointed out that Switzerland intends to decrease the funding of CT per consignment within 4 years after finalization of the Gotthard-corridor including the re-spective tunnels, which is seen as the right political decision by a majority of the experts. They expect the productivity in the CT-sector to increase as soon as important infra-structural measures will be implemented. Nevertheless, Swiss transport policy will contin-ue to promote innovative logistic concepts regarding the rail sector in general and with a special focus on certain innovations like automatic CT facilities. From today’s per-spective, transport policy in other Alpine countries still sees the need for financial CT promotion measures in the short and medium term.

Road transport and enforcement

From time to time in Switzerland there are approaches to reduce the night driving ban from seven hours to four hours, but that will not be implemented. Some experts do not think that the EU will come to a common regulatory of night and holiday driving bans in the Alpine Space. In Germany there is a trend to increasing fatal accidents caused by trucks, hence the enforcement will become stronger and the road transport sector will be affected by the corresponding measures. One expert estimates the increase of costs from 10 to 20 % due to stronger enforcement.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 45 of 107

Transport limitations

Especially in Switzerland, the concept of a so called ACE (“Alpine Crossing Exchange” or Alpine transit rights trade) is being discussed. The overall aim of this approach is to limit the number of Alpine crossing truck trips in Switzerland to 650,000 per year. Some respondents think that sooner or later an ACE will be implemented in Switzerland. Sub-sequently, this could serve as a kind of “benchmark” for the whole Alpine Space, but from today’s perspective, a practical feasibility is questionable, especially with a view to the existing EU legal framework.

In contrast to other Alpine countries, freedom of cabotage is not intended to be estab-lished in Switzerland, although in the opinion of one of the interviewed experts in the long term “it maybe cannot be stopped”. Concerning the EU member states, there are contradictory opinions among the interviewees. On the one hand, some of them be-lieve that the currently existing freedom of cabotage will more or less remain un-changed. On the other hand, it is argued that current political tendencies might strengthen lobbies that are interested in more restrictions for cabotage. In any case, an important aspect related to cabotage is the issue of systematic wage dumping by companies and/or drivers from low-wage countries. In the medium term, it can be as-sumed that this issue will become less important as economic disparities between Euro-pean countries will decrease.

E-Mobility and new technologies in road transport

Transport policy will push forward especially platooning or electric power supply by pro-vision of infrastructure (e.g. exit gates from motorways, aerial lines). From the current perspective, the technological challenges seem to be very high (e.g. regarding the quite high number of motorway exits, which is a problem for platooning). Short-term developments regarding innovative vehicles will primarily focus on LGVs. E-mobility could be promoted further by transport policy, with a special view to the situation of municipalities that are strongly affected by heavy traffic. Most experts agree that e-mobility and other new technologies like partly autonomous driving will have negative effects on CT, but some also expect opportunities. Short distances in the initial and final leg of CT seem to be an adequate use case for electric trucks – several projects deal-ing with this topic are currently running. It was also mentioned that e-mobility might not reduce the costs of road transport significantly due to the relatively high share of per-sonnel costs.


T R AF F I X 05 / 2018 Page 46 of 107

Autonomous driving will create huge challenges for accompanied Combined Transport (will self-driving HGVs use the Rolling Motorway and if so, how do they get on the train?). In this context, one interviewee expects a “merging” of accompanied and un-accompanied Combined Transport, enabled through the possibilities offered by auto-matic transshipment technologies.

Which concrete suggestions concerning transport policy to support a positive devel-opment of Alpine Combined Transport do you have?

Alpine transit rights trade

Extension of exemptions from driving bans

Accelerate implementation of revision of Eurovignette Directive

Successful implementation of new promotion instruments

Keep current funding instruments stable

Follow the path of de

Documents

Vision of Alpine Combined Transport after 2030€¦ · Vision of Alpine Combined Transport after 2030 . Deliverable D.T.3.3.1 . May 2018 . EDIT BY: TRAFFIX Verkehrsplanung GmbH Bernhard