1. Long run impacts assessment of planned R52/A5 expressway as one of two core road connection between Austria and Czech Republic Milan Viturka, Vilém Pařil, Petr Halámek Faculty of Economics and Public Administration of Masaryk´s University, Brno – Czech Republic 8th Geoffrey J. D. Hewings Regional Workshop „Services and Regional Growth“, organised by WIFO Wien, September 2015

2. Proposal of single method of evaluation of transport projects - example of highways (motorways and expressways) Main objective – design of investment priorities by men of multi-criteria analysis of technical, economic, political, environmental and spatial aspects of planned projects. Method – ranking of the projects within the criteria and consecutive aggregation of partial ranks: – The criterion of relevance reflects the traffic intensity as basic factor which determinates the technical usefulness of construction – The criterion of usefulness reflects the savings of time both passenger and freight traffic generated by the projects (relative value of savings time in comparison with the currently most rapid transport link) – The criterion of integration reflects the strategic importance of the projects for internal (high-quality transport connections of the major cities) and external (high-quality transport connections with the neighbouring countries) – The criterion of stimulation reflects the potential impacts of the projects on stimulation of regional quality of business environment (contribution to an increase of the value of roads and railways quality) – The sustainability criterion reflects the potential impacts of the projects on residental (an increase in levels of noise and air pollution) and natural (disturbance of protected areas of nature conservation and water resources) environment.

3. Model scheme of investment preferences Under the relatively stable conditions of developed countries, the relevant preferences can be chronologically interpreted using the following scheme relevance usefulness integration stimulation sustainability

4. Core Road Network in Austria and the Czech Republic with Natura 2000 and Nationally Protected Areas

5. Criterion of purposefulness - Potential Time Savings Version - type Maximum Speed Theoretical Speed Theoretical Travel time (min.) Real Travel time (min.) Time Savings (min.) Time Savings (%) 1st class907483,92103,99-16,99-19,53% Motorway12010956,9770,6016,4018,85% Highway13011952,1864,6622,3425,67% Current--70,2187,000,000,00% Relevance criterion - Traffic Intensity SectionIntensity Section in Brno27 295 Section Motorway19 009 Section 1st class to the border8 058 CZ - average15 087 AT - average25 137

6. Integration criterion missing highway connection with Austria – which is considered as a major deficit another factor is the low degree of urbanization on the route R52 / A5 The application of the gravity model shows Prague-Brno-Wien as 3rd most important supranational metropolitan axis in the Czech R. business environment quality (16 criterias) 205 microregion MECs potential to stimulate regional development has the secondary importance Stimulation criterion

7. Sustainability criterion

8. Impacts of R52-A5 on Nationally Protected Areas and Natura 2000 Cat.Category description Area (ha)Weighted impact ATCZTotalTotal (%)ATCZTotalTotal (%) IUCN IVHabitat/Species Management Area0,00128,89 11,82%0,00127,81 12,99% IUCN VProtected Landscape/ Seascape0,45366,49366,9433,66%0,35315,85316,2032,13% SPASpecial Protection Area0,00489,83 44,94%0,00446,14 45,33% SCI ISites of Community Importance I0,00104,43 9,58%0,0094,03 9,55% Total impact0,451 089,641 090,09100,00%0,35983,82984,17100,00% Impacts of R52-A5 on Population CountryArea (km2)Density in Urban AreaPopulation Austria10,612 046,9121 728 Czech Republic5,632 156,6612 137 Total16,24-33 865

9. Conclusion Drucker (1967): “Efficiency is doing things right, effectiveness is doing the right things” effectiveness of the project R52 depends on the results of – (significantly) integration criterion connection to the Austrian motorway network – relevance criterion, usefulness and sustainability criterion of stimulation is not significant

10. Thank you for your attention