The International Technology Scanning Program
1 / 22

The International Technology Scanning Program Understanding the Policy and Program Structure of National and Internation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

The International Technology Scanning Program Understanding the Policy and Program Structure of National and International Freight Corridor Programs European Union. Objectives. Purpose Learn from the EU and member countries experiences on freight corridor planning and implementation

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'The International Technology Scanning Program Understanding the Policy and Program Structure of National and Internation' - coyne

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
The international technology scanning program understanding the policy and program structure of national and international freight corridor programs

The International Technology Scanning Program

Understanding the Policy and Program Structure of National and International Freight Corridor Programs

European Union



  • Learn from the EU and member countries experiences on freight corridor planning and implementation

  • Understand how programs were developed, evolved and implemented on a national level and across jurisdictional levels

    Specific Objectives

  • Understand how specific corridors are selected and prioritized

  • Understand how corridor improvements and operations are financed

  • Understand leadership required to develop and implement policy

  • Identify how performance standards/measures are developed

  • Identify ways to foster international collaborations on freight corridor issues

Sponsors and participants
Sponsors and Participants

North American Participation – U.S., Canada and Mexico

  • Anthony T. Furst (FHWA Co-chair)

  • Eric G. Madden (AASHTO Co-chair), Pennsylvania DOT

  • Monica M. Blaney, Transport Canada

  • Bernardo J. Ortiz, Mexico Ministry of Comm. and Transport (SCT).

  • Kenneth L. Sweeney, Maine DOT

  • B. Renee Sigel, FHWA

  • Ernie B. Perry, Missouri DOT

  • Spencer L. Stevens, FHWA

  • Robert L. Penne, AASHTO

  • David F. Long, US Department of Commerce

  • George E. Schoener, I-95 Corridor Coalition

  • Eduardo Asperó, Mexico Intermodal Transportation Association (AMTI).

  • Juan C. Villa (Report Facilitator), TTI

Scan tour countries
Scan Tour Countries

  • Belgium – European Union

  • New Members

  • Hungary

  • Poland

  • Founding and Old Members

  • Germany

  • The Netherlands

  • Austria

Key topics of interest
Key Topics of Interest

Policies: Identify novel freight policy issues and understand benefits corridor programs

Planning Process: Identify corridor selection and prioritization, and project selection processes

Sustainability: Identify role that environmental aspects play

Funding: Understand how corridors and projects are financed and managed

Operation: Identify freight corridor operation strategies

The european union
The European Union

EU Enlargement in the 2000s

  • The EU is not a federation, nor an organization for cooperation

  • Member States remain independent sovereign nations

  • Member States delegate some of their decision-making powers to gain strength and world influence none of them could have on their own

Eu s trans european transport network
EU’s Trans-European Transport Network

  • Goal of creating an internal market and reinforcing the economic and social cohesion

  • 1993 TEN policy into the EC Treaty

  • 1995 Financial Regulation to support TEN projects

  • 1996 TEN-T Guidelines adopted to determine network and priorities covering the EU15

  • 2004 Major revision of the TEN-T Guidelines to integrate the 10 + 2 new Members

  • 2006 Communication on the extension of the major TEN-T axes to the neighboring countries

  • 2009 Green Paper on the Future of the TEN-T

  • 2011 Revision of the Guidelines

Freight transportation corridor policies
Freight Transportation Corridor Policies

  • For the common European market to function smoothly there is a need for an integrated transport system

  • Freight Transport Challenges:

  • Congestion is affecting costs/travel time, increasing fuel consumption

  • Need to reduce emissions to meet climate change targets

  • Highly dependent on fossil fuels, a large proportion of which are imported.

  • Safety and security need to be further enhanced

Freight transportation corridor policies1
Freight Transportation Corridor Policies

  • Opportunities:

  • Heterogeneity of the EU has increased with enlargements and new logistics techniques and best practices are implemented

  • European companies have established themselves as world leaders in freight transport logistics.

  • Prospects of enhancing trade relations with countries outside the EU are relevant

Freight transportation corridor policies2
Freight Transportation Corridor Policies

  • A common approach:

  • Focus on corridors, also connecting the transport chains to and from the neighboring countries and overseas

  • Promotion of innovative technologies and practices in infrastructure, transport modes and freight management.

  • Simplification and facilitation of freight transport chains and related administrative procedures

  • Improving the quality of transportation services

Policy findings
Policy Findings

  • The Trans European Network concept serves as a unifying vision for the EU

  • The long-term vision of the TEN-T is constant

  • Transportation infrastructure is a key national asset

  • The strategic vision integrates transportation policy

    • Connectivity/access.

    • Economic development/commerce.

    • Environment/sustainability.

  •  Policy coordination affects outcomes

    • Germany’s tolling scheme has been instrumental in driving the fleet to cleaner engines

    • Diversion from truck to rail or water transport has not worked

  • Need for a focused corridor level system.

Planning process key findings
Planning Process Key Findings

  • Project application process is transparent and well defined.

    Selection criteria

    • Relevance to the TEN-T priorities and policy objectives.

    • Maturity.

    • Impact—particularly on the environment.

    • Quality (completeness, clarity, soundness, and coherence).

      Independent observers

  • Planning processes at the Member States vary.

Planning process key findings1
Planning Process Key Findings

  • Alignment of Member States priorities and EU priorities is a challenge.

Poland is aligning its transportation infrastructure eastward and southward

€8B tunnel through the Alps has limited value to Austria


  • Road transport is the dominant mode, with 84% of CO2 emissions in the EU

  • The 2001 Transport White Paper aimed to restore the balance between road and other modes by:

    • Promoting co-modality.

    • Developing infrastructure charging.

      • model to calculate internalization of external costs

    • Promoting the use of cleaner cars and fuels.

Sustainability key findings
Sustainability Key Findings

  • Strong linkage of transportation policy to environmental, social, and sustainability aspects -- “Decarbonization”

  • Aligning theory and practice is always a challenge

    • Good alignment:

      • Germany’s Toll Collect system links toll amounts to emissions

      • Port of Rotterdam new terminal leases require mode split (35% truck, 45% barge, and 20% rail)

    • Challenging alignment:

      • policy position to move cargo from trucks to rail or water transport

        • Passenger traffic is prioritized on the EU rail system.

        • Newly admitted Member States wish to expand road networks at the expense of an extensive rail network


The cost of the 30 priority axes is approximately €250B

Funding of TEN-T projects mostly comes from the national budgets

Cohesion and Structural Funds can go up to 85% for cohesion countries

Funding key findings
Funding Key Findings

  • Multiple funding sources are available to meet project needs

    • Partnerships between government, private, and quasi-governmental entities with a mix of grants, bonds, loans, user fees (tolls), and taxes

  • Multi-year funding to bring a project to completion is necessary

  • Different funding opportunities reflect TEN-T implementation

    • TEN-T Funds and Cohesion Funds

  • Tolling Policy varies by country

    • Hungary is solidly onboard with the “user pays” principle

    • Germany has a policy to “facilitate rather than prevent mobility.”

Implementation and operation
Implementation and Operation

Coordination Issues

  • Coordination on cross-border projects is the most complex aspect of TEN-T projects

    • lack of joint traffic forecasts and general project development approaches

    • differing investment plans, contradictory timelines, capacity planning, alignment, technical and interoperability characteristics, and environmental assessments.

  • Solution: European Coordinators

    • Goal to accelerate project implementation, especially in cross-border projects.

    • Political appointees with sufficient credibility

Implementation and operation key findings
Implementation and Operation Key Findings

  • Greater harmonization of technology and operations is necessary to ensure success of a national vision.

    • Roadway issues related to tolling and the various methods of collecting the tolls 

    • Rail interoperability

  • Corridor Coalitions and Project Coordinators play an important role in project development.


Importance of a unifying vision linking transportation and the economy

Challenges of multijurisdictional transportation planning and implementation

Evolution from exclusively national/local to international understanding

Create foundation for fact-based policy decisions

Aligning benefits and costs

Aligning policies

Reinforce the value of multi-year stable funding