1. Lessons learnt from CEE countries on public transport in the last 15 years Wojciech Suchorzewski, Warsaw University of Technology, Poland Regional Meeting on Sustainable Urban Transport Policies in South Eastern Europe Budapest, 21-22 June 2007

2. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 2 History  1990 Centrally planned economy:  reliance on mass transport  car ownership - low  fares - low  subsidies 70-80%  monopolistic UPT companies  State - generous - owner and financier ambitious investment plans - not implemented

3. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 3 Transition 1990+ Economic shock therapy !! Systemic changes: – decentralization – liberalization/commercialisation – transformation of public enterprises Impact on UPT  prices reflect true costs  decentralisation  private sector encouraged to grow  municipalities forced to reduce subsidies

4. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 4 Impact of reforms on UT  in some CEE countries the State withdrew - anomaly in UE15!!  total responsibility to cities  growth of motorization  congestion/parking problems  private sector – buses and paratransit – self-sustainable!!!!

5. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 5 Impact on UTP - negative:  sharp fare increases  modal shift: 80-85 %  50-60%  ageing fleet and deteriorating infrastructure  growing congestion => speed, reliability  role of suburban railways reduced, shift to car and buses/minibuses.  Poland -number of passengers 9  4 billion per year

6. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 6 UPT financing system Self-financing (from farebox):  Poland from 40%  75%  63% Prague - 30 % Bratislava - 40 %  Amsterdam - 25 %,  Vienna – 40%  Belgrade – 65%, Skopje – 100%!!  Istambul - 135??? Investment reduced Annual municipal budgeting Lack of compensation for services provided for social reasons!!!!

7. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 7 The road to ruin? (J.Pucher, 1995) Deteriorating infrastructure Ageing fleet Investment almost stopped Falling patronage Worsening operational conditions because of congestion ONLY PARTIALLY TRUE !!!!

8. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 8 Great efforts of cities  separation of functions  companies restructured  contracts !!!  competition started  bus fleet renewal  priorities for PT  trams – change of treatment!!!

9. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 9 Progress adoption of sustainable UT policies restructuring of the sector increased efficiency of companies growing use of marketing and quality management progress in fare systems and operation control

10. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 10 Sustainable urban transport policy adopted by city councils:  Kraków (1993)  Warszawa (1995) Strategy of sustainable development limiting the role of a car in a city and giving priority to mass transport and pedestrians/cycling Prague Budapest Tallin (ring toll!!)

11. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 11

12. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 12 Measures difficult to implement priorities for public transport in traffic management: bus lanes, traffic ligths speed limit 50 km/h parking charging common ticket (rail/UPT)

13. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 13 Other problems problem of inter-settlement transport services: good co-operation between neighbouring municipalities rare crisis in co-operation of railways and municipalities and urban and sub-urban transport companies attitude of staff and trade unions - deterrent role in transformations

14. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 14 Summary 1990 - 2007 POSITIVE !? –restructuring PT –separation of management and operation –contracts – growing productivity and quality –involvement of private sector –local initiatives - search for solutions –growing understanding that even motorized cities cannot function without good PT  growing interest in Sustainable Transport concepts –participation of the public

15. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 15 Investment in public transport Historically, many cities in CEE countries planned metro construction (7 in Poland) In some constructed, but: high costs draining city resources deterioration of other means of rail transport share much lower than costs Generally highly valued by the public and politicians but viability of heavy rail projects discussed !!!

16. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 16 Investment in public transport - 2 Changing attitude towards trams: In many cities extensive networks of tramway – deteriorated Renaissance of tramways in several EU cities - good example for planners and decision- makers Upgrading started in many cities (e.g. in Katowice and Warsaw). In some cities construction of new fast tram (Prague, Krakow, Poznan)

17. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 17 Prague

18. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 18 Prague

19. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 19 Dresden

20. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 20 Dresden

21. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 21 Karlsruhre

22. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 22 Lyon

23. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 23 Lyon

24. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 24 Clermont-ferrand

25. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 25 Krakow

26. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 26 Warsaw – Solidarity arterial – Tram/bus lane Bankowy Sq, Railway station Length of section 2,6 km Metro Ratusz Stare Miasto Park Praski Dw. Wileński

27. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 27 Warsaw – E-W Bridge – Tram/bus lane TYPOWY PRZEKRÓJ PRZYSTANEK STARE MIASTO

28. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 28 Prospects The future of UPT not clear Growing understanding of UPT role even in motorized city but: –strong pressure to develop road systems –opposition of some groups against preference for UPT Preferences of the city inhabitants not taken into consideration

29. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 29 Prospects - Reasons for optimism so far no proposals to change policies formulated earlier growing number of cities adopt sustainable transport policies growing capacity of city governments to manage UPT restructuring of companies fleet renewal  share of modern vehicles, including AFV (alternative fuel vehicles) change in treatment of tram systems!!!

30. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 30 Warsaw: Are you in favour of priorities for trams and buses even it will worsen traffic conditions for private car?

31. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 31 Issue: Role of the State  since 1990 - no responsibility for UPT  situation considered as anomalous  impact on urban finances - discount fares and other privileges - no compensation  no assistance: guidance, data, R@D, etc.  few exceptions: co-financing metro projects: Prague, Warsaw. Bucarest  role of NGO's

32. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 32 Example Poland: National Transport Policy 2001 and 2005 Promotion of PT, especially in cities and metropolitan areas - one of 4 main challenges State will:  participate in financing selected PT projects  provide loan guaranties for upgrading projects  promote best practices in UT  arm municipalities with measures to generate financial resources (Parking charging, congestion pricing!!!) Implementation ???

33. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 33 Ways to improve sustainability of transportation decisions and their implementation National transport policy needed!!!! Co-operation at the regional/local level: –within municipality –within metropolitan area –within the region Participation of stakeholders Education/communication

34. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 34 Desirable involvement of central government:  guidelines/recommending UT policies  legislative initiatives  regulations/specifications  financial support of strategic and pilot projects  sectoral databases  research and development  training/education

35. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 35 Impact of international cooperation  UNCHS Habitat  World Bank, EBRD (national, cities)  ECMT/OECD Projects on Sustainable Urban Travel Policies  European Commission – policy and projects  REC – project „Supporting Public Transport in CEE” Exchange of experience

36. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 36 Findings of ECMT/OECD project INDENTIFIED BARRIERS TO IMPLEMENTATION  poor policy integration and co-ordination;  Inefficient or counterproductive institutional roles and procedures, including inadequate or lack of co-ordination, (for example decentralisation of responsibilities for urban travel);  an unsupportive legal or regulatory framework;  weaknesses in the pricing/fiscal framework;  poor data quality and quantity.

37. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 37 Recomendations of ECMT/OECD WHAT CAN GOVERNMENTS DO?  Develop a national policy framework for sustainable urban travel;  Co-ordinate national policy approaches on urban land-use, travel, health and the environment;  Encourage effective public participation, partnerships and communication;  Provide a supportive legal and regulatory framework;  Ensure a comprehensive pricing and fiscal structure;  Rationalise financing and investment streams;  Improve data collection, monitoring and research.

38. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 38 Impact of EC policy EU assistance/funds: first phase – mostly long-distance l transport infrastructure second phase – as above plus EDRF EDRF requirements: local policy and long-term plans and programs socio-economic efficiency

39. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 39 Impact of EC policy White Paper–CTP till 2010 - time to decide: urban transport problems on the list Public Transport as a main mean to solve congestion problems tramways:”revitalisation – with a decidedly futuristic look” Ranking of proposals – examples-Poland: - Urban Traffic Management Systems and trams in Warsaw and Krakow on the top of the list

40. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 40 Examples of EC projects POSSUM-Policy Scenarios for Sustainable Development QUATTRO -Quality in UT through Tendering and Contracting BEST/BOB - benchmarking REVENUE – 5FP - Revenue Use from Transport Pricing BESTUFS – urban freight transport NICHES- 6FP - Innovative Concepts for Sustainable Urban Mobility PILOT CURACAO SILENCE

41. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 41 Niches-basic information 6. PR UE project, priority 1.6.2 Sustainable land transport, Co-ordinating Action (CA) Consortium NICHES: urban transport experts: - consulting (Rupprecht Consul, PTV) - experience of cities (Sztokholm) - use of networking effect (POLIS, EUROCITIES, CMR) - academy (Warsaw University of Technology) Duration: 1 November 2004 – 31 March 2007

42. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 42 Work steps. Step 1 - Establish the state of the art · Step 2 - Assess success factors, barriers and transferability of innovative concepts · Step 3 - Integrated innovative concepts to coherent transport strategies · Step 4 - Derive roadmaps and policy recommendations · Step 5 - Disseminate and exploit the results

43. W. Suchorzewski Budapest 21-22 June 2007 43 Thematic Areas

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