T R A N S P O R T
O F
M I N I S T E R S
E U R O P E A N

C O N F E R E N C E

O FTRANSPORTECONOMICS RESEARCH
AND POLICYMAKING

INTERNATIONALSEMINAR
Paris,
10-11 May 1999

 OECD, 1999.
 Software: 1987-1996, Acrobat is a trademark of ADOBE.
All rights reserved. OECD grants you the right to use one copy of this Program for your personal use only. Unauthorised reproduction,
lending, hiring, transmission or distribution of any data or software is prohibited. You must treat the Program and associated materials and any
elements thereof like any other copyrighted material.
All requests should be made to:
Head of Publications Service,
OECD Publications Service,
2, rue André-Pascal, 75775 Paris
Cedex 16, France.

EUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS OF TRANSPORT

TRANSPORT ECONOMICSRESEARCH AND POLICYMAKING

Summary of Discussions
and Introductory Reports
Paris, 10-11 May 1999

EUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS OF TRANSPORT (ECMT)The European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) is an inter-governmental organisation
established by a Protocol signed in Brussels on 17 October 1953. It is a forum in which Ministers responsible fortransport, and more specifically the inland transport sector, can co-operate on policy. Within this forum, Ministers
can openly discuss current problems and agree upon joint approaches aimed at improving the utilisation and atensuring the rational development of European transport systems of international importance.
At present, the ECMT’s role primarily consists of:– helping to create an integrated transport system throughout the enlarged Europe that is economically andtechnically efficient, meets the highest possible safety and environmental standards and takes full accountof the social dimension;– helping also to build a bridge between the European Union and the rest of the continent at a politicallevel.
The Council of the Conference comprises the Ministers of Transport of 39 full Member countries: Albania,
Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark,Estonia, Finland, France, FYR Macedonia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia,
Lithuania, Luxembourg, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, the Russian Federation, theSlovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine and the United Kingdom. There are
five Associate member countries (Australia, Canada, Japan, New Zealand and the United States) and three
Observer countries (Armenia, Liechtenstein and Morocco).
A Committee of Deputies, composed of senior civil servants representing Ministers, prepares proposals forconsideration by the Council of Ministers. The Committee is assisted by working groups, each of which has a
specific mandate.
The issues currently being studied – on which policy decisions by Ministers will be required – include thedevelopment and implementation of a pan-European transport policy; the integration of Central and Eastern
European Countries into the European transport market; specific issues relating to transport by rail, road andwaterway; combined transport; transport and the environment; the social costs of transport; trends in internationaltransport and infrastructure needs; transport for people with mobility handicaps; road safety; traffic management;road traffic information and new communications technologies.
Statistical analyses of trends in traffic and investment are published regularly by the ECMT and provide aclear indication of the situation, on a trimestrial or annual basis, in the transport sector in different European
countries.
As part of its research activities, the ECMT holds regular Symposia, Seminars and Round Tables ontransport economics issues. Their conclusions are considered by the competent organs of the Conference under
the authority of the Committee of Deputies and serve as a basis for formulating proposals for policy decisions tobe submitted to Ministers.
The ECMT’s Documentation Service has extensive information available concerning the transport sector.
This information is accessible on the ECMT Internet site.
For administrative purposes the ECMT’s Secretariat is attached to the Organisation for Economic
Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Publié en français sous le titre :RECHERCHE EN ÉCONOMIE DES TRANSPORTS ET DÉCISION POLITIQUE
Synthèse des discussions et rapports introductifs

Further information about the ECMT is available on Internet at the following address:
http://www.oecd.org/cem/

 ECMT 1999
ECMT Publications are distributed by:OECD Publications Service,
2, rue André Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16, France.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS ................................................................................................................7

INTRODUCTORY REPORTS.................................................................................................................15
Rapporteurs from administrative organisations:
GERMANY

R. KRUPP - BAST ...........................................................................19

UNITED STATES

N. FOSTER - Minnesota Department of Transportation ................29

RUSSIAN FEDERATION

O. AGAPOV - Ministry of Transport ..............................................37

FRANCE

Y. GEFFRIN - Ministère de l'Equipement, des Transports
et du Tourisme ..................................................................................41

NETHERLANDS

A. BAANDERS - Transport Research Centre AVV.......................71

CZECH REPUBLIC

J. MATEJOVIC - Ministry of Transport and Communications .....87

UNITED KINGDOM

R. KIMBER - Transport Research Laboratory................................95

SWEDEN

U. KARLSTRÖM - KFB ...............................................................101

SWITZERLAND

F. WALTER - ECOPLAN .............................................................111

Rapporteurs from universities:
GERMANY

W. ROTHENGATTER - University of Karlsruhe ........................121

FRANCE

A. BONNAFOUS - LET/MRASH ................................................127

POLAND

J. ENGELHARDT - University of Szczecin .................................135

PORTUGAL

J.M. VIEGAS - CESUR/IST..........................................................151

UNITED KINGDOM

P.GOODWIN - University College London..................................157

3

4

SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS

5

6

On 10 and 11 May 1999, the ECMT held a Seminar in Paris on the topic “Improving thecontribution of transport economics research to policymaking”. Chaired by D. Bjørnland (N), theSeminar opened with papers by Messrs. A. Baanders (NL), A. Bonnafous (F), J. Engelhardt (PL),Mr. N. Foster (USA), Y. Geffrin (F), P. Goodwin (UK), U. Karlström (S), R.M. Kimber (UK),Mr. R. Krupp (D), J. Matejovic (CZ) and W. Rothengatter (D). All of these speakers were either fromthe academic research field or from research-commissioning government departments or agencies.
National papers, outlining the situation in a number of countries, were also distributed at the Seminar.
The main conclusions of the Seminar are briefly outlined below.

1. GENERATING AND ORGANISING RESEARCH

1.1. Participants in favour of public/private partnerships
Some countries have research systems that are fragmented and that lack coherence, a situation
which eventually leads to problems. This is because there are large numbers of actors sharing
piecemeal contracts, which is not conducive to the formulation of an overall approach or to theemergence of long-term basic research. While the same comment does not apply equally to transport
research in all of the countries of Europe, it does reflect a state of affairs which, in many respects,
precludes a swift response to policymakers’ problems and cannot provide answers to society’s mostfundamental concerns.
The question that arises, therefore, is whether or not there should be a dedicated body fortransport research to generate a steady stream of transport issues for analysis.
There can be no all-embracing answer, as the variety of situations encountered in the countries ofEurope shows. Nevertheless, it is possible to formulate some comments on this issue.
 If a single body were responsible for transport research, it would have a monopoly on suchresearch. This is never a good idea. It would inevitably become set in its ways and in thelong run would cease to be effective. In seeking appropriate structures, a framework thatenables constant creativity should be the guiding principle for policymakers.
 While there should not be a monopoly on the supply side, there should not be one on the
demand side either. Indeed, even the best structure for commissioning research will neglect
important issues that it has not been able to foresee. It is also important to involve private
institutes in defining demand. What is needed is multiple research initiators and sources offunding. The ideal would be to have three or four separate funding sources in each country.
 The operative word for governments should be complementarity. Complementarity among
universities, public research institutes and consultants can ensure that competition elicits
the best from each. Research contracts can forge links between all these different suppliers
7









and commissioners of research. The most effective way to commission research is not tocall on a single institute, but to arrange for competition to elicit the best studies, based onalternative approaches.
Although demand and supply are quite well matched when it comes to short-term research,basic research is a more problematic area and may warrant a dedicated body or,
alternatively, adequate programmes, since there is no doubt a critical size for carrying
forward long-term activities. Clearly, in this respect, it is difficult to think of researchdemand as distinct from research supply.
The advantage of a subsidised public body is that it can concentrate on basic research. It isessential to anticipate the issues that policymakers will have to deal with a few years down
the line, avoiding a solely short-term approach. This is where a public body could help.
Another possibility would be to award contracts through some more streamlined structure
than a public body. With this approach, it would be important that the commissioning bodyitself undertake some research in order to be able to foresee the issues that may arise.
Generally, whatever body initiates the research should itself have research experience, if
not, misunderstandings will soon arise.
If a public research body is set up, policymakers should be under no obligation to use its
services. Any such body must stand on its own merits. This is part of a positive andcompetitive procurement strategy in which the final selection of actors is based on soundcriteria. There is no ideal way of organising research, but even if we cannot plan thecontents of research programmes to be as relevant as possible, we can still optimise
research structures.
The quality of a research programme is related to how clearly the policy concerns on which
it is based are formulated. A clearly stated policy strategy that precisely maps out the scopeof the research is vital for a high-quality research programme. Clarity makes for a virtuous
circle.

The majority of participants at the Seminar supported the idea of a public body, but one that
included structures for co-operating with consultants, private sector researchers, research laboratories,
etc., i.e. they were in favour of a genuine partnership between the private and public sectors.
Calling on different institutes, or indeed research programmes, can lead to duplication andoverlaps. Not that either approach is open to question on these grounds, since overlaps can provide
confirmation that a given policy response is correct or indeed, where responses differ, point to theneed to cross-check them. As a rule, unlike oversights, overlaps do no harm. However, duplication
may be due to a lack of diversity among the bodies responding to calls for proposals. Ideally, we
should be able to encourage new players to enter into the research field, since multiple actors inclosely related fields of research can spark off new ideas. Care must nonetheless be taken not towaste resources and duplication must therefore be kept in check. It is important not to have too greata number of funding recipients, but small and medium enterprises (SMEs) can and, what is more,should be used in research. Original thinking has nothing to do with size and may even be inversely
proportionate to it in that small structures can focus all their energies on certain specific issues
without acquiring attitudes and habits that stifle initiative. One of the issues to be resolved from thisstandpoint is the red tape that accompanies many research contracts: SMEs cannot afford to devote
too many resources to administering these contracts. SME involvement is a feasible idea no matter
what the size of the country concerned. Of course, one may wonder just how small a firm can bewithout quality suffering, but experience has shown that small firms that also invest in maintaining
high levels of expertise are rarely inferior. Consequently, finding an appropriate structure for
integrating SMEs into research programmes could prove worthwhile. On this point, the evaluation of8the European Union’s Framework Programmes is not yet conclusive enough. Integrating SMEs invast research programmes is a difficult exercise in itself: small- and medium-sized firms can be put
off by all the administrative formalities, by the need to secure co-funding where this is an explicit
requirement -- which is a problem for small teams and not always appropriate for solving policy
problems (it means shared teamwork) -- and by the problem of inadequate monitoring. One final
criticism that could be levelled at many current programmes is that researchers’ fees are generally
based on quantity, not quality.

1.2.

The need for a national programme

Another issue is whether there is a need for a research programme providing funding on acontinuing basis that confers a degree of stability as regards policy concerns in the field of transporteconomics and sociology. In practice, research always has to compete for a budget and a research
programme does provide some budgetary stability. Further, a programme focuses the attention ofdecisionmakers and can provide a constant flow of ideas in a given field; it is an effective way ofintegrating strategic research. A programme that gives policymakers a voice ensures the stability
essential for research. However, a programme should not be so inflexible that it precludes dealing
with current issues or responding to the urgent issues that are typically high on the list ofpolicymakers’ concerns. So, it must be possible to alter the priorities without reference to the main
research themes -- which tend to be on-going -- that inform longer-term policy interests. In order toavoid slippage, it is important to establish the overall budget ceiling within which priorities can bealtered when a new project is added.
A national programme promotes a country’s expertise and keeps its knowledge base up to date.
It has an educational value and helps in training young researchers: it also contributes to the expertiseand training of government administrators. A national programme ensures that a country is able toappropriate research and also enables it to transpose the results of international research at national
level, transport being not only a highly specific field but also highly country-specific. Consequently,
it is vital to strike the right balance between national and international programmes. This could havea positive impact on training and the dissemination of knowledge. Generally, consideration should begiven not only to research but also to the dissemination of research findings, and in this respect anational programme can be an effective tool.
Programmes must be formulated in terms of the actual issues facing society, not in terms ofconcepts. Once we begin to talk of stability as regards policy concerns, we may well ask ourselves
whether stable concepts – such as permanent indicators for measuring transport activities – are strictly
necessary. Indeed, the concepts that we define may well no longer apply by the time a project iscompleted. All the evidence is that problems are less prone to change and are more permanent thanconcepts, so we would be well advised to approach research studies from a problem-solving rather
than a concept-based approach.

1.3. The size of countries and the organisation of research
Sometimes what is feasible in a large country can be difficult in a small country. In fact, it
would be absurd to try to apply formulae that can only be effective in a large country to a small
country. On this point, the Seminar stressed that quality of research carried out by small countries isjust as high as that of larger countries.
9

Often, small countries remain open to research conducted in other countries. As a result, they do
not have to reinvent the same concepts or repeat the same cycle of research. However, as a country’s
experience is unique, models cannot be transposed without exercising caution and prudence.
Solutions that other countries have used can be adapted sensibly. Another possibility for small
countries is to take part in the work conducted by a larger country, either by contributing to funding
or by joining international teams, as is the case with the European Union’s Framework Programmes.
At any rate, the experts attending the Seminar considered that even small countries were capable ofputting in place procedures to encourage competition and reliance on the creativity of small
structures. Open debate is one way of always ensuring that overlaps or diverging opinions, which canbe mutually instructive, are identified, provided that the co-operative framework is properlyorganised. However, in the view of some of the experts at the Seminar, there are countries which,because of the size factor, have no need to conduct their own transport economics research and which
can simply base their planning on examples taken from other countries. A small country does notalways need to conduct its own national economic research, provided that research findings are
disseminated properly. Small countries clearly cannot do everything, but this still does not prevent
them from conducting research on their own account, which must nonetheless be to the highest
standards.

2. EVALUATION AND DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH

2.1. Relations between researchers and policymakers
The lack of understanding between the research and policy spheres is, in many respects, astructural problem: researchers have compartmentalised their particular fields of research (forexample, modal research) whereas policymakers are interested in the overall operation of thetransport sector, i.e. in economic, land-use planning and environmental aspects. Decisionmakers tend
to think that there has been too much “speculative” research and not enough into the issues-- inevitably urgent and extremely relevant -- that are of concern to them. Researchers, on the other
hand, think that advances often depend on carrying out long-term research. The last bone ofcontention is that the findings of scientific research are often not what policymakers want. It is
important to monitor research as it progresses so that the end-product is not too far removed from theneeds of the research initiators. The best approach is to have an appropriate oversight structure,composed of a mix of actors from different backgrounds and specialist fields. Likewise, new faces
from the scientific community should be called in to avoid perpetuating stale ideas around which a
consensus can build up too easily.
The aim should be to break down the barriers between policy and research. Perhaps when
research is privatised, contact with policymakers is more direct. The United Kingdom model tends tobear this out. Contact is a key factor. Depending on the structure adopted, there may be several
intervening levels between decisionmakers and researchers. This is precisely what should be avoided,
since each of the intermediate actors distorts the issues by adding their own interpretation of the issue.
The way they view the issues depends on what their job is. On the face of it, direct contact between
policymakers and researchers is a sensitive area, but it can also prove very productive.
Communications specialists, skilled in presenting results, can also be called in. Another aspect that isalways important is knowing how to present basic research to the public. However, before basic
research can begin, we need institutes to enter the field on a long-term basis so that some experience10can be gained. This is tantamount to saying that it should be possible to initiate research for which
there is no policy mandate, simply on the basis of recognised specialists’ professional judgement.
This is the prerequisite for accumulating knowledge and skills. The scale of research programmes isalso a factor: it is only by ensuring some stability over time that teams can be encouraged to enter thetransport field on a long-term basis. A specific problem arises for countries that have opted for
all-out regionalisation of their public institutions in that it might be difficult for them to design
research programmes to tackle problems at national level. It could also be more difficult for them toshare operational conclusions.
A crucial point is that the people who present research findings to policymakers are not thepeople who were responsible for translating their policy concerns into research. This is acceptable if
the presentation of research results is handled by communications specialists and the presentation ofpolicymakers’ concerns is handled by research specialists. However, if we add to the intermediatelevels and compartmentalise communications, we can easily add to the misunderstandings between
policymakers and the research community. To ensure that research findings are fully understood andthat policymakers’ concerns are properly addressed, the intermediate levels must be kept to aminimum. Forging direct links between researchers and policymakers can initiate dialogue, reducing
the time it takes until the findings can be factored into the problem evaluation process. Otherwise, theincubation period, before research can influence the policy context, will be one of several years.
Admittedly, there is often a conflict between the academic and the social utility of research, apoint that was made several times in the course of the Seminar. The assessment of academic utility isbased on formal criteria, while social utility is assessed on the basis of the relevance of research. To
end this conflict, a culture of exchange, in which people move from one field to another, must be
fostered; i.e. professional mobility and new lines of inquiry should be encouraged. By setting up
forums in which each can present its work, the two spheres of research (academic and policy), whichusually ignore each other, could be reconciled. From this standpoint, Europe lacks an equivalent to
the Transportation Research Board. Attitudes have to change, starting in the academic world, where
being both a faculty member and a consultant is frowned upon. With this in mind, the gap that
separates professional and scientific journals would have to be narrowed.

2.2. Evaluation
No sooner are a study’s findings mentioned than the subject of its evaluation comes up. This is asensitive subject, given the gulf that can separate scientific or academic evaluations, which are basedon formal criteria, and the practical relevance of the conclusions of a study to solving a problem or setof problems. Academic evaluation can be criticised for focusing too much on formal criteria, which
do not always guarantee a study’s relevance, i.e. what it tells us and how relevant it is when it comesto effecting change in the particular field of application. As far as transport is concerned, a study’s
input in decisionmaking is certainly more important than any purely intellectual appeal it may have.
This is why evaluations of research quality cannot be left solely to the academic community.
However, while it is possible to verify the scientific relevance of an econometric forecasting model inthe medium term, when it comes to issues such as optimum infrastructure pricing or environmental
economic theory, which have an irreversible impact on decisionmaking, then it is still very difficult toassess the relevance of certain conclusions. In any case, research findings should be disseminated sothat they can be discussed widely outside the immediate circle. Wider dissemination could usefully
supplement direct quality control by the commissioning customer and indirect quality control by the
research community. Evaluation can indeed be a sensitive subject since it can encourage conservative
attitudes and the status quo. What is really needed, if attitudes and approaches to analysis are to11change, is, on the contrary, broad-based evaluation. This is the only way to avoid self-evaluation.
Where there is a public institute, it is essential that evaluations be conducted not by its own staff but
by specialists who are not involved in any internal disputes. Lastly, research programmes should be
evaluated, as well as the actual research conducted.
To assess research quality, international evaluation is needed. However, to avoid the situation inwhich research is assessed only after it has delivered its findings, with the risks of disappointmentthat this entails, it is advisable to:define clear key stages at which reviews can be carried out at regular intervals;
ensure that the research is monitored very closely;
involve the client right from the beginning; andestablish criteria for selecting research organisations working in similar areas to evaluate theend product.

A review culture, bringing together funding sources and research suppliers, should be developed.
The tendency of universities to allow critical review only once work is complete is counterproductive.
It is essential that people other than the commissioning customer take part in evaluations. Thissecond line of indirect control by independent third parties, generally from the international
community, supplements direct quality control by the commissioning customer. Evaluations should
cover not only scientific quality but also the relevance of the research to the transport sector.
Furthermore, research findings should be presented to the wider scientific community, which
would then be able to assimilate the main results rapidly. At any rate, the evaluation process should
be factored in from the outset and an evaluation climate should be fostered as an integral part of theresearch process. Evaluations can be very costly, hence the need to define strategies clearly. Foreign
researchers who are recognised experts in this field could be called in for this purpose. Clearly, abudget should be earmarked from the outset for this purpose: evaluations cannot be conducted on a
voluntary basis alone. Provision should be made for paying those conducting the evaluation and forcovering their expenses.

2.3. Dissemination
Researchers find it difficult to break out of their isolation, all the more so because often they do
not really think that their work has an impact. They may lack the necessary communication skills to
explain their work. The readership of scientific papers is small, a state of affairs that seems unlikely
to improve in the near future. All of the above points are related to the communications policy of theinstitute to which the researcher belongs. The best approach would be for research laboratories to
employ qualified communications staff to disseminate the operational conclusions of their research
work to the media and opinion-formers.
There is real potential for communications in scientific research: the public is increasingly
aware of the implications for society and decisionmakers are increasingly qualified. Hence the needfor specialists in communications problems to disseminate results. Moreover, since the scope ofdecisionmaking is wider these days, the researcher’s ability to analyse and synthesise is valuable topolicymakers, even if the actual decision still calls for a policymaker’s intuition (where there arefactors that go beyond pure economic logic). We should also bear in mind that research taken in
isolation can never explain more than a few aspects of a global process. The knowledge that flows
12

from one piece of research is relatively small, compared with the stock of knowledge required toobtain the overall understanding that the problem requires. This is why it takes time for research to
become relevant. It could also make it more difficult to recognise the value of a piece of research andtherefore could affect whether or not it is publicised beyond the circle of insiders. Evaluation, it
should be noted, is a key factor in changing mentalities.
It is vital to think about disseminating results when defining research objectives. Researchers
should be aware of the importance of practical applications and the dissemination of their work at avery early stage in the process. This issue also concerns institutions, inasmuch as researchorganisations are responsible for publicising the quality of the work that they conduct. Four basic
principles should be priorities for dissemination:• Target groups, to which the results of research should be disseminated, must be defined;• Not everything should be disseminated, only essential information should be selected;• A separate budget for dissemination is essential, otherwise those communicating theinformation will be too close to the researchers and not close enough to decisionmakers;• Preliminary results should be published, without waiting until the final results are known todisseminate conclusions.
By staying in constant contact with opinion formers, i.e. the media, it is possible to build up aconsensus on research conclusions. Newspapers, television and open forums can be springboards forgetting research findings across to the public. In fact, it may also be important to take a hands-on
approach to some of the means of informing the public debate in order to raise the standards of thatdebate. It is clear, too, that private sector actors, such as industrialists, have a duty to disseminate theresearch carried out by their companies. While it is not necessary to disseminate all researchfindings, industrialists nonetheless have a duty to carefully select the information that should be
released for public debate. The process of translating research into material for public debate calls for
specialist journalistic skills. The content should be concise in order to avoid overloading people withinformation but, in general, those providing information should be willing to discuss their research
results. Preferably, information should be disseminated directly through researchers and not throughministries.

3. NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONSWhenever researchers approach a problem they tend to simplify it, which leads them to produce
simplistic solutions to the problems. While this is not a widespread trend, it is a trap into which any
researcher may fall. For the participants at the Seminar, research should focus on solving problems
one step at a time. In contrast to pure research scientists, consultants have to talk to their customers
and identify an approach suited to the latters’ requirements. Without in any way wishing to draw
comparisons between consultancy and basic research, it would be fair to say that each is suited todifferent circumstances. What matters most is that the two worlds meet and communicate. Both areoperating in a context in which the search for new methodological tools and reliable data on transport
is the overriding concern.

133.1. New methodological tools
Transport policy in European countries has seen very real changes in recent years. It is now
addressing the issues of infrastructure pricing for all modes, sustainable development, theprivatisation of certain public services, ‘traffic calming’, improving public transport, etc. This list is
not exhaustive and European transport policy offers many other opportunities for multidisciplinary
work. In contrast, some, not to say the majority, of the participants at the Seminar thought that themethodological tools used had not changed at the same rate. The implications of the prevailingresearch paradigm are that choices are irreversible and that the order in which decisions are
implemented does not influence the outcome, simply because the concept of equilibrium has left its
mark on the research community. This is a tempting concept and one that pervades all the models,
but it is misleading, since it does not really represent reality. In real life, choices can vary, lag times
and dynamic processes – phenomena not frequently addressed by researchers – are important. It canbe argued that simplifying economic theory does not work, we should start again with new
instruments, based on tools from different disciplines, that will enable us to take into account theasymmetry of effects, reversibility, the importance of sequence, time lags and cumulative phenomena.
To be effective from a policy standpoint, new dynamic concepts must be developed. Research into
process, not end-states, should be developed and would require a fundamental shift in the type of datacollected and the procedures used to analyse them. The foregoing warrants a radical rethink of how
research is organised. Among the new directions, today we should be focussing more on the
problems of redistribution than maximisation, or on developing real-time continuous monitoring, notjust ex post monitoring. This said, the integration of the different disciplines is not easy – thescientific community has been proposing integration for years now without any very positive results –but it is a sufficiently promising area to warrant allocating resources to it.

3.2. Appropriate statistical data
One point strongly emphasized during the Seminar was that the limited statistical data available
made it extremely difficult to carry out effective and meaningful research. With the deregulation oftransport and the regionalisation of certain decisionmaking processes, the situation is getting worse.
Although some data are too detailed or too expensive to collect, the gaps in statistical coverage are
too large to be ignored. Some transport policy decisions cannot be evaluated without at least a basic
statistical apparatus. Governments have a duty to address this issue and to take vigorous action, forexample, when a sector is about to be deregulated, to request operators to supply statistics. The data
must be made available and must not be allowed to become proprietary. Generally, it is apparent thatdecisionmakers will have to be convinced that they should invest money in data collection.

14

INTRODUCTORY REPORTS

15

16

RAPPORTEURS FROM ADMINISTRATIVES ORGANISATIONS

17

18

GERMANY
Rudolf KRUPP
BASt
Federal Highway Research InstituteBergisch Gladbach

INTRODUCTORY PAPER ON GERMANY(FOCUSING ON ROAD TRANSPORT RESEARCH)

PREFACEThe main guideline in Germany’s transport policy is to reconcile ecology with the economy, theaim being to maintain the mobility necessary for economic activity and at the same time to reduce thedisamenities caused by traffic flows [1, p. 2].
The transport research conducted by the Federal Ministry of Transport (BMV) plays an importantrole in this respect. This role is reflected firstly by the fact that, within its sphere of activities, theBMV runs five bodies engaged in transport research:------

the Federal Hydraulic Engineering and Hydrology Office;the Federal Maritime Shipping and Hydrography Agency;
the Federal Highways Office;the German Meteorological Service;
the Federal Aviation Office.

In addition to the internal resources provided for research activities within these bodies, the BMV
has a budget for external activities of about DM 40-50 million a year, which is used for researchcontracts with outside bodies (universities, engineering consultants, etc.).
This external BMV research represents an important sub-sector in German transport research,
particularly since university transport research in Germany is not concentrated within transport
faculties proper but is distributed among many different faculties specialising in various disciplines(engineering, computer science, economics, sociology, psychology, etc.1)
As a result of this wide distribution of transport research among many different disciplines andfaculties, transport research in Germany is in most cases poorly co-ordinated [2, p. 395].
The research sponsored by the BMV has a quite special place within this decentralised research
environment. It is a significant component in the German transport research system, but cannot be
isolated from the research activities of other departments.

19

It is very closely connected with the research programme of the Federal Ministry of Education
and Research (BMBF), which is responsible for basic research on transport and the technologicaldevelopment of transport systems. In addition, the complexity of transport research requires close
co-ordination with the Federal Economics, Agriculture, Environment and Construction Ministries[1, p. 2].
Unlike the BMBF, which conducts basic research, the BMV is concerned with applied transport
research. It therefore provides practical decision aids for the technical issues involved in transport
policy, as well as a sound scientific basis for the definition of transport policy measures and themonitoring of their efficiency [1, p. 3].

1. OBJECTIVES OF BMV’S TRANSPORT RESEARCH ACTIVITIESFive objectives have been set for BMV’s various transport research activities [1, p. 4]:
1.1. Integration of transport in economic and social systems with the focus on:----

The interaction between transport, economic activity and society;
The development of passenger and freight traffic;
International development.

1.2. Environment-friendly mobility and sparing of resources with the focus on:-----Modern vehicle technologies to reduce CO2 emissions from traffic;
Pricing policy measures to reduce CO2 emissions;Improved interaction between modern vehicle technologies and optimised transport
infrastructure;
Reduction of traffic in towns.

1.3. Ensuring environment-friendly mobility via co-operation among carriers and byincorporating them within a transport management system by means of:
--

--

--

Telematics.
Technical feasibility of an automatic toll system for motorways, effects of a toll system,
satellite and communication and navigation systems, and navigation systems operating
independently of the vehicle type with the use of digital road maps;
Optimisation of transport chains.
Possibilities of transfers between carriers, creation of international forwarding networks,
concentration of delivery traffic via inner-city terminals, multimodal transport chains;.
Infrastructure networking:•improvement of federal infrastructure planning with a view to optimising the entire
transport system;•
networking in short-distance transport;•
rail/road co-operation;•
local public passenger transport (use of electronic payment systems);

20

•
•

integrated transport management (e.g. car sharing);
improved facilities for cyclists.

1.4. Ensuring mobility via optimal networking arrangements involving every individual carrier,as well as maintaining and developing an integrated transport infrastructure network
--

---

--

Improving infrastructure efficiency:•
better use of existing capacity;•
development where appropriate;
Improved financing schemes with the use of private capital;
Improved maintenance and development of transport infrastructure:•forecasting procedures;•
evaluation criteria and computation methods in federal transport infrastructure planning;•route studies;
Infrastructure financing and privatisation:•
methods of financing infrastructure projects;•
planning long-term and complex licensing contracts;•
legal basis for the construction of the Transrapid magnetic cushion train.

1.5. Improvement of safety------

in road transport;
in rail transport;
in shipping;in air transport;
in the transport of dangerous goods.
***

Narrowing down the issue to road transport research by the Federal Highways Office
In connection with these overall objectives in transport research by the BMV, the Federal
Highways Office (BASt) has been given special responsibilities which are described below.

2. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE FEDERAL HIGHWAYS OFFICE (BAST)

The BASt is a federal technical and scientific establishment. It was originally set up by the BMV
in 1951 as the Federal Highway Construction Office and was responsible on the engineering side forpromoting the construction of federal motorways and highways. In 1965, it was also instructed toundertake research, testing and advisory activities -- especially to improve road capacity and safety.
The change of name to the Federal Highways Office was also connected with these wider
responsibilities.
In 1970 its range of activities was extended when it became the central body for road accident
research as a result of a decision by the German Lower House.

21

The BASt is based in Bergisch Gladbach. It has a staff of some 350-400, of whom 120 work in
the Scientific Service.
The BASt is responsible for promoting the development of highways and providing scientificallysound decision aids on current transport policy and technical issues involving highways. In order tocarry out this task, the BASt conducts its own research and contracts out research projects to external
research bodies (universities, technical universities, engineering consultants, etc.).

2.1. Objectives of research
The objectives of the research conducted by the BASt are as follows:
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)

Cost-effective and functional road and bridge engineering.
Systematic and efficient road and bridge maintenance.
Improvement of transport safety.
Efficient use of the road network, maintenance of transport quality.
Prevention and/or reduction of environmental damage caused by traffic.
Integration of roads in the overall transport system.

2.2. Research fields
In order to achieve these objectives, the BASt defines and carries out research projects which canbe allocated to the following sixteen research fields, depending on the main aspect of the activity:(1) Quality assurance and test methods in road and bridge engineering;(2) Construction methods and techniques, building materials, dimensioning and standardization;(3) Recycling, industrial by-products in highway engineering;(4) Management of road and bridge maintenance;(5) Road and traffic statistics;(6) Road design, road equipment;(7) Traffic control, telematics;(8) Road maintenance;(9) Analysis of transport users’ behaviour;(10) Accident statistics, safety analyses, safety measures;(11) User education, driver training, information, supervision, aptitude for driving;(12) Medical services in connection with accidents, emergency services, disabled people;(13) Active and passive vehicle safety;(14) Environmental damage caused by roads and vehicles;(15) Environmental protection measures involving roads and vehicles, impact assessments;(16) Mobility needs and modal choice.

22

3. FINANCING OF BAST RESEARCH

BASt research projects are integrated within programmes. A distinction is to be drawn between:

Research and development work carried out by BASt (budget of about DM 60 million ayear); andBASt external research projects (current budget of about DM 17 million a year) contracted
out under the following financial arrangements:•
About DM 7 million a year are allocated from the BMV budget to the highways research
programme;•
About DM 7 million a year are allocated from the BASt budget to the road transport
safety programme;•
About DM 3 million a year are allocated from the BMV budget to the urban transport
programme;•
About DM 0.35 million a year are allocated from the BMV budget to the emergency
service programme;•
DM 1 million a year have been allocated for the period 1996 to 1999 from the BAStbudget to the efficiency monitoring project relating to the special exhaust gas study.

4. RESEARCH PLANNING

In order to answer questions and resolve problems, research projects are worked out and definedwith regard to:






the precise problem or question;
the objective;
the utility;
the intended approach; andthe planned work, time and cost framework.

When working out projects, the BASt co-operates closely with the BMV and other bodies -- inparticular with the Association for Research on Road and Transport Systems (FGSV) -- on research on
highway and traffic engineering. The Cologne-based FGSV is a non-profit body which is mainly
concerned with developing practical knowledge in all road and transport systems by poolingknow-how in the scientific, economics and management fields.

4.1. Internal research
Proposals for the various research projects are made by the BMV, the BASt or, in exceptional
cases, by third parties (technical universities, the German Transport Safety Board, etc.). Internal
research is not based on periodic research programmes, but focuses on current issues, which in 50 to
60 per cent of cases are defined by the BMV; some 33 per cent of the projects are initiated by theBASt itself; the remainder are proposed by other bodies.

23

Projects initiated by the BMV must be carried out. In the case of projects initiated by the BASt
as well as those proposed by outside bodies, the operational section makes a preliminary choice anddefines priorities. The projects proposed are listed and the BASt’s management then examines themwith regard to their compliance with BASt objectives and their priority. The projects concerned arethen submitted to the BMV for approval.
Work on the BASt’s internal research accounts for about 60 per cent of the operational
departments’ capacity. At present, work is being carried out on some 220 projects.
The BASt’s own research is extremely flexible, since work can be started immediately on urgent
research -- e.g. for the BMV -- by spreading out in-house projects over a longer period or postponing
them. Work for outside bodies, which can be carried out only if the costs are refunded, is usually notso flexible for reasons involving contract law. Since, however, it has such a small share in total
capacity, it does not affect the operational departments’ flexibility.

4.2. External research
Owing to the different funding sources, external research is broken down among several research
programmes.
4.2.1.

The road system research programme

The road system research programme is planned by the BMV. It is in two parts:

One part is planned with the participation of the Association for Research on Road andTransport Systems (FGSV) as a combined BMV-FGSV programme;
Another part is planned by the operational sections in the BMV’s road engineering
department as a departmental programme.

The outside contractors are:

universities and technical universities in 60 per cent of cases;
private firms (engineering consultants, etc.) in 40 per cent of cases.

At present, work is being carried out on 180 projects.
4.2.2.

The road transport safety research programme

The road transport safety research programme is planned by the BASt and submitted to the BMV
for approval. The BMV can influence the choice of subjects or eliminate proposed subjects and bringin its own ideas for projects.
The programme is planned for a two-year period and then carried out according to the schedule.
Flexibility is guaranteed by ensuring that current research requirements which are not included in the
two-year programme can be incorporated as priority projects and given preference over planned
projects.

24

The outside contractors are:

universities and technical universities in 45 per cent of cases;
private firms (engineering consultants, etc.) in 55 per cent of cases.

At present, work is being carried out on 130 projects.
4.2.3.

The urban transport research programme

The urban transport research programme is planned and contracted out by BMV. In thisprogramme, the BASt is responsible for supervising only those projects which come within its special
technical field.
At present, the BASt is supervising some 25 projects.
4.2.4.

Other programmes

The German Lower House has instructed the BASt to study the efficiency of the compulsory
exhaust gas tests for all cars and lorries as part of its technical supervisory role. The objective is toestimate the amount of pollution which is avoided by means of these exhaust gas tests and thus provetheir utility.
On behalf of the BMV, the BASt also awards and supervises contracts on projects to improve theefficiency of emergency services.

5. RESEARCH MONITORING AND PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS

To improve the focus on objectives in the exercise of its responsibilities and efficiency in the useof its resources, the BASt has started to set up information services and regularly to provide
monitoring information.
Four of the scientific staff’s main fields of activity, for which the objectives and content are
mainly determined by standards set by the BMV, are continuously monitored at central level:BASt internal research, which accounts for up to 60 per cent of scientific capacity;
Supervision of BASt external research, which at present accounts for about 7 per cent ofscientific capacity;
A small programme of work, covering answers to queries from and advice to the BMV,
which accounts for up to 8 per cent of scientific capacity;
Committee work by BASt staff at national and international level for the conversion ofresearch findings into standards and directives, or for the co-ordination of new research
activities, which accounts for about 6 per cent of scientific capacity.

In all, some 80 per cent of all scientific activities are therefore already monitored.

25

5.1. Monitoring instruments
In a “programme budget”, which is drawn up every year, the expected costs (payroll and material
costs including the costs of external research and investment) for all the planned activities by theoperational departments are broken down by research field for the following year.
The programme budget is supplemented by a regular report on the last quarter. These quarterly
reports give an overview of the:
BASt’s in-house research projects which have been completed or recently started;
External research projects which had been completed or recently contracted out;
Reports and statements drawn up in connection with the “small programme of work”;
Committee membership activities which have been completed or recently taken up.

For all projects there are detailed project descriptions including work, time and cost plans, bymeans of which progress on projects can be monitored.
Progress in BASt in-house research is monitored with regard to form and particularly schedules
by a member of the staff who works full-time on this activity; changes to the schedule and plan ofwork must be notified and approved. Projects are examined in detail and the necessary adjustments
discussed in half-yearly talks with the management.
In the case of BASt external research, a scientific supervisor from the operational departments
and a project supervisor from the central department are appointed for each project. They are
responsible for monitoring the progress of work which is legally binding on the contractor and, where
necessary, to take action by playing a co-ordinating role.

5.2. Assessment of research findings
On completion of the research projects, the research reports are assessed by considering:(1) The content of the research project;(2) Its scientific value:a) critical statements on the research findings obtained (including problems which are still
pending);b) conclusions from the research findings (including repercussions on other research
projects);c) proposals for the practical use of the research findings;d) proposals for supplementary or new research topics and their priorities;(3) The justification for publication or non-publication.

26

6. USE OF THE RESEARCH FINDINGSThe results of the assessment are passed on to the BMV. Two publication series are available:


The BMV series of research reports relating to the road system research programme, with
500 copies per report,



The BASt series of research reports on BASt’s in-house research and on the road transport
safety research programme; it covers the following 6 areas with up to 250 copies per report:•
general;•bridges and civil engineering;•vehicle technology;•
user safety;•
highway engineering;•traffic engineering.

The research findings have various repercussions. In a particular case,they may contributedirectly to policy decisions. For example, many statutory rules for road users (use of a seatbelt, therequirement for drivers of motorised two-wheelers to wear a helmet, the 100-km speed limit on
motorways) have been based on the BASt’s research findings. Very frequently, the research findings
are used to work out rules and standards, including those in the international field.

7. ASSESSMENT OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM

The advantage of the present system is its great flexibility, which makes it possible to react at any
time to problems raised by the BMV. With the mix of BASt’s internal and external research, it ispossible to cover a very wide range of specialised research as well as to adapt quickly to any change inthe range of research problems.

NOTE

1.

One exception is the “Friedrich List” Faculty of Transport in the Dresden Technical University.

27

REFERENCES[1] Forschungskonzept des Bundesministeriums für Verkehr, A24/14.00.00-02, 14 December 1995.
[2] Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft:Weinheim, 1997.

Perspektiven der Forschung und ihrer Förderung,28

UNITED STATESNorman S.J. FOSTER
Chairman of the TRB Committee on
Transportation and Economic Development
Minnesota Department of Transportation
St. Paul

UPDATE ON NORTH AMERICAN RESEARCH INTO TRANSPORT ECONOMICSINTRODUCTION

This presentation describes recent economic research relating to transportation that has been
conducted in the United States and, in some cases, Canada. The author would like to thank theEuropean Conference of Ministers of Transport for inviting TRB to take part in this Seminar and to
exchange research results.
The Transportation Research Board’s mission is to promote innovation and progress intransportation through research. The Board accomplishes this mission by stimulating needed
research, managing research programs (http://www4.nas.edu/trb/crp.nsf/), disseminating research
results and conducting studies on major transportation policy issues. Information on most TRB
publications is available on the Internet (http://www2.nas.edu/trbbooks/). The table presented below
shows the intervention of the TRB compared with other bodies which undertake research in transporteconomics.
The author works as an Economist with the Minnesota Department of Transportation and serves
as chair of the TRB Committee on Transportation and Economic Development. Dr. DavidForkenbrock, who chairs the Committee on Transportation Economics, regretted that he could notattend the Round Table and he has greatly assisted the author in reviewing these remarks.

Type of research
TRB Special Report
NCHRP/TCRP
State research
University
Transportation Centres

ECONOMIC RESEARCH
SponsorSelection
TRB
TRB
AASHTOAASHTOState DOT
State DOT
US DOT
Universities

29

Undertake
TRB
Consultant, Universities
Consultant, Universities
Universities

OVERVIEW

This presentation covers a number of major areas: pricing of transportation facilities, theeconomic impact of transportation, incorporating environmental issues into policymaking, financing,transportation and land use, and freight issues. A number of these areas overlap to a large degree so
the areas are simply broad descriptions rather than fixed and independent topics. Internet addresses
are included where appropriate for those who wish to explore any of these issues in more depth.

1. PRICINGThe issue of transportation pricing continues to generate a large number of studies and feasibility
analyses but relatively few actual cases of implementation and thus measurement of effects andimpacts. In the past few years the focus of attention has been on HOT lanes--high occupancy tolllanes. These projects involve the conversion of an existing or the building of a new HOV -- highoccupancy vehicle or car-pool -- lane, with single drivers being allowed to pay a toll to use the facility.
The most visible projects have been in California, especially the SR91 project. This 10-mile(16 km) construction of two HOT lanes in each direction was privately financed and uses variablepricing by time of day. An extensive evaluation of this project was undertaken by the University ofCalifornia at San Luis Obispo (http://airship.calpoly.edu/~jwhanson/sr91.html). It is interesting tonote that this evaluation found that users of the toll lanes tended to use them on a selective basis, notevery day, and represented a reasonable mix of incomes for the corridor, which overall is relatively
affluent. Travel delays in the non-priced lanes fell quite substantially with the addition of the two
HOT lanes.
Other important HOT lane projects have been undertaken in Texas and in San Diego in Southern
California. These projects involved the use of existing HOV lanes, not the construction of new lanes.
One very interesting finding in San Diego is that allowing single drivers to pay to use an HOV lane
actually led to a greater number of carpools using the lane than previously. Perhaps the fact that thevalue of the lane is clearly established at $2 per trip encouraged people to realize the monetary benefitof ridesharing. Even more intriguingly, in the initial stages, the project reduced violations of the HOV
lane by more than the additional single driver vehicles added, so traffic flow was actually improved.
A wide range of updates and reports on congestion pricing is available at the Congestion Pricing
Internet web site (http://www.hhh.umn.edu/Centers/SLP/Conpric/conpric.htm).
Some observers have commented that much of the work on pricing is now overly focussed on
HOT lanes. Market research and surveys of local opinion have indicated that people desire additional
choices, rather than controls on driving. HOT lanes address this desire in at least some circumstances,although there is little enthusiasm for converting general-purpose lanes to HOT lanes -- the trend has
been to add new HOT lanes or convert existing HOV lanes. Whether this is a viable long-term
effective strategy remains to be seen.

30

2. ECONOMIC IMPACTS OF TRANSPORTATION

Throughout the 1990s, a number of researchers have been engaged in a set of studies to determine
the macroeconomic relationship between transportation and economic output or performance.
Important work in this area was carried out by Ashauer, Munnell, Holtz-Eakin, Eberts, Garcia-Milaand McGuire, Deno, Bell and many others.
In recent years, three important studies have been added to this literature. First, Bell and
McGuire’s Macroeconomic Analysis of the Linkages Between Transportation Investments andEconomic Performance (TRB NCHRP Report 389, 1997) assessed the state of the literature,developed a new disaggregated data set of transportation infrastructure investment and capital stocks
for 1950 to 1992, by mode and state, and tested models against this new data set. The relationships
found varied by mode, industry and state and showed the importance of demographic and economic
trends in determining relative economic performance.
Second, Nadiri used a cost function approach to examine how different industries were affected bychanges in transportation infrastructure (see Economic Returns from Transportation Investment, Eno
Transportation Foundation, Lansdowne, Virginia, 1996). He found that the economic return on total
highway capital was highest in the 1950s and 1960s (about 35 per cent) and declined to about 10 per
cent in the 1980s, as the interstate system neared completion.
Third, Bedi (bedi@mto.gov.on.ca) and Gillen have developed estimates of the value of the
highway system for the province of Ontario, Canada, using a willingness-to-pay approach to measure“value”, including both the household and industrial/commercial sectors. Bedi and Gillen estimatethat the conventional capital stock measure in 1992 for Ontario’s highways was $12.5 billion (1986
Canadian dollars) versus about $41 billion when valued from the users’ perspective.
In the past year, a new study has been completed that gives an overview of Research on the
Relationship Between Economic Development and Transportation Investment (TRB NCHRP
Report 418, 1998). This report proposes that future research look at the economic implications ofcongestion on businesses (which was an issue at the ECMT Round Table 110 on The Spread ofCongestion in Europe), communication issues with policymakers and the public, macroeconomic
impacts of public transportation, project and program evaluation (including indirect effects),
multimodal and intermodal assessment and social impacts. This program of future work suggests that
not every question has been answered fully up to this point.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS AND IMPACTS

During the 1990s, a number of important studies have been undertaken to investigate the impacts
that transportation has on the environment. Mark Delucchi of the University of California-Davis was thelead researcher on the most important of these studies: the monumental The Annualized Social Cost ofMotor-Vehicle Use in the US, 1990-91, which resulted in twenty separate volumes published in 1996,
covering topics as broad as Personal Nonmonetary Costs of Motor-Vehicle Use, Motor-Vehicle Goods
and Services Priced in the Private Sector and Monetary Externalities of Motor-Vehicle Use, as well as
relatively new areas such as The Cost of Reduced Visibility Due to Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles.

31

These volumes have been the standard against which most other studies are compared. A full listing ofthese studies is available (http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~uctc/text/papersuctc.html). The summary reportis also available as an Adobe Acrobat file (http://socrates.berkeley.edu/~uctc/text/papers/311.pdf).

Table 1. Summary of the costs of motor-vehicle use
Total cost ($billion)
Low
High
$544
$953

(1) Personal nonmonetary costs of motor-vehicle use(2) Motor-vehicle goods and services produced$807
and priced in the private sector(3) Motor-vehicle goods and services bundled in the$76
private sector(4) Motor-vehicle infrastructure and services provided$132
by the public sector(5) Monetary externalities of motor-vehicle use$30(6) Nonmonetary externalities of motor-vehicle use$69
Grand Total Social cost of highway transportation$1 658

Share of total
Low
High
33%
29%

$919

49%

28%

$279

5%

9%

$241

8%

7%

$124
$755
$3 272

2%
4%
100%

4%
23%
100%

Source: Annualized Social Cost of Motor-Vehicle Use in the US, 1990-1991: Summary of Theory,
Data, Methods, and Results, Mark A. Delucchi, June 1997, p. 47.

Other researchers have made estimates of the full cost of transportation, including Lee (Full Cost
Pricing of Highways, Research and Special Programs Administration, US Department ofTransportation, Cambridge, Massachusetts, November 1994) and Littman has produced a number ofreports on full costs of transportation, automobile insurance reform and many facets of public transit
and alternative modes (see http://www.islandnet.com/~litman/homepage.html for Adobe Acrobat
versions).
A number of important studies have also begun to expand our knowledge of the economic cost of
the environmental impact of particular policies or transportation tradeoffs. See, for example, Smalland Kazimi’s article, “On the Costs of Air Pollution from Motor Vehicles,” in the Journal ofTransport Economics and Policy 29: 7-32 (1995).
A very useful collection of articles was published in Germany, edited by Greene, Jones andDelucchi: Measuring the Full Social Costs and Benefits of Transportation (Springer-Verlag,
Heidelberg, Germany, 1997). It includes articles on safety by Miller (“Societal Costs ofTransportation Crashes”), Gomez-Ibanez (“Estimating Whether Transport Users Pay Their Way: The
State of the Art”) and Anderson and Mohring (“Congestion Cost and Congestion Pricing”), work thatwas in part sponsored by the Minnesota Department of Transportation.
TRB has also been very active in addressing the role of sustainability in transportation
policymaking. In 1997, Toward A Sustainable Future: Addressing the Long-Term Effects of Motor
Vehicle Transportation on Climate and Ecology (TRB Special Report 251) was released.

32

4. FINANCING

A number of interesting developments are being explored in the area of transportation finance.
I will mention two issues that represent an interesting development on past practice, building on thefull cost work mentioned earlier, and an examination of the future of surface transportation financing
in the next century.
First, the US Federal Highway Administration periodically conducts a Highway Cost Allocation
Study to estimate the relative damage caused and revenue attributed to various classes of vehicles,
such as cars, light trucks and different kinds of large trucks. In the latest update, conducted in 1997,
the study extended beyond the traditional costs of pavement, bridge and right of way to consider
environmental and other external costs. The initial national estimates for these external costs total
about $400 billion, with air pollution not yet released.

Table 2Type of cost

US $ billions

Air pollution

Not yet released

Noise

4.3

Congestion

61.8

Safety (user)

294.6

Safety (non user)

45.2

TOTAL

406.0

This broadening of traditional economic and financial analyses within transportation to coverexternal costs is growing and greatly helping policymakers understand the full effects of transportation
systems and uses on society at large.
Second, there has been concern about the financing system for transportation over the medium
and long term in light of likely advances in fuel efficiency and in the growing use of alternative fuels,
since the tax on gasoline represents a major portion of highway and transit financing in the UnitedStates.
In 1995, TRB looked at this question in a report on Alternatives to Motor Fuel Taxes for
Financing Surface Transportation Improvements (TRB NCHRP Report 377, 1995). That report foundthat the United States needs to explore alternatives to motor fuel taxes because of the emergence ofvehicles powered by electricity or special fuels. It concluded that Intelligent Systems Technology
offers promising approaches to charging road users.
This year, a new study is beginning, sponsored by a number of states led by Minnesota, which
will examine the potential of new technology both in vehicles and satellites, to develop a completely
33new financing system that would vary by time and place of roadway use. This research, led by
Dr. Forkenbrock at the University of Iowa, promises to open up new options for developing financing
systems that will be sustainable over the long run. Similar to approaches being tried in the
Netherlands and Australia, the new system would use global positioning technology and a small,on-board computer to establish road user charges.

5. TRANSPORTATION AND LAND USE

The general relationship of transportation and land use, questions of “sprawl” and concepts suchas Livable Communities have continued to be important topics for research. In January 1999,
Vice President Al Gore announced a new Livability Agenda and he has indicated that this will be a
key issue in the next presidential election, which he incidentally hopes to take a major role in. Amongthe major issues identified in the Agenda are two that relate directly to transportation and land use:-

Ease traffic congestion by improving road planning, strengthening existing transportation
systems and expanding use of alternative transportation;
Promote collaboration among neighboring communities -- cities, suburbs or rural areas -- todevelop regional growth strategies and address common issues like crime.

The general term that describes this approach is Smart Growth and, as befits an important newissue, Internet web pages are already plentiful (such as http://www.smartgrowth.org/index_text.html).
Among the large number of research projects completed or underway on the general issues oftransportation and land use that bring an economic perspective to the debate is The Costs of Sprawl-- Revisited (TRB TCRP Report 39, 1998). This extensive literature review summarized two decadesof studies on alleged positive and negative impacts of sprawl on public and private costs, the naturalenvironment, quality of life and social issues. The report discusses whether each impact has beenfound to exist and how strongly it is linked to sprawl.
Current research efforts are underway to incorporate land use, transportation planning and the fullcost approaches described earlier. The Federal Highway Administration has sponsored thedevelopment of a prototype model to estimate the full cost of alternative land use patterns. The
Excel-based spreadsheet is called the Social Cost of Alternative Land Development Scenarios(SCALDS) model. The model builds on three areas of research -- least cost planning which has beenused by electric utilities for a number of years, full cost of travel studies and cost of service/cost of
sprawl research (http://www.ota.fhwa.dot.gov/scalds/).
One issue that is gaining increasing attention is the question of induced traffic after transportation
infrastructure is improved. Europe has probably done the most work in this area, as evidenced by the
SACTRA research in the UK, and the ECMT Round Table 105 on Infrastructure-induced Mobility.
TRB has issued a circular on Highway Capacity Expansion and Induced Travel: Evidence andImplications (Circular 481, 1998) that presents some analysis of North American case studies.

34

6. FREIGHT ISSUES

The movement of freight continues to be an area of extensive study, especially with growinginternational trade and continuing interest in modal tradeoffs. In 1996, a TRB panel examined theexternal costs associated with freight movements in Paying Our Way: Estimating Marginal Social
Costs of Freight Transportation (TRB Special Report 246, 1996). This report compared a number ofdifferent origin-destination pairs and types of freight and estimated the private and external costs
associated with various modal alternatives. The report found that shippers are paying less than thecosts transportation imposes on society.
Forkenbrock has also estimated the external costs of trucks and rail for moving freight in External
Costs of Truck and Rail Freight Transportation (1998), Forkenbrock estimates four general types ofexternal costs for a ton-mile of freight shipped by truck or rail: accidents (fatalities, injuries andproperty damage); emissions (air pollution and greenhouse gases); noise; and unrecovered costs
associated with the provision, operation, and maintenance of public facilities (primarily roads andbridges). He focuses on intercity freight truck and rail transportation and concludes that external costs
are about equal to 10 to 20 per cent of the private costs shippers now pay. On a ton-mile basis, trucks
create external costs that are five times as large as those of rail (http://www.uiowa.edu/~ppc/trans.html).
At a more national policy level, a 1998 study on Policy Options for Intermodal FreightTransportation (TRB Special Report 252) recommended that freight facilities should continue to belargely privately financed and justified, but that important external benefits could justify public sector
participation in particular cases.

7. THE CASE OF MINNESOTAIn closing, let me describe a few efforts underway in Minnesota on this issue. Over the past few
years, Mn/DOT has been increasingly using economics to evaluate transportation policies, projects
and plans. In terms of the particular topics presented here, Minnesota has examined proposals todevelop privately funded toll roads, a HOT lane project and other pricing proposals. None has been
implemented to date. A major study of Transportation and Regional Growth is underway at the
University of Minnesota (http://www1.umn.edu/cts/TRG/TRG.html), covering development patterns,
full costs of transportation, transportation demand modelling, financing of transportation systems andother issues.
As some of you may have heard, the State of Minnesota has recently elected a new Governor,
Jesse Ventura, who had previously been a city mayor, radio talk show host, movie actor andprofessional wrestler. Governor Ventura has developed a set of budget principles to guide his
administration, which are:-Be fiscally conservative and prudent -- Never forget it’s the people’s money;Do the right things and do them well;
Provide incentives for desirable behavior.

35

In transportation, Governor Ventura is pursuing Minnesota’s first Light Rail Transit (LRT) line,
supports efforts to limit urban sprawl, and has proposed reducing the fixed tax that automobile owners
pay to register their vehicles.

36

RUSSIAN FEDERATION
Oleg AGAPOVMinistry of Transports
Moscow

1. INTRODUCTION

The question of improving the effectiveness of transport economics research is one of particularimportance, given the prospects for the growth of transport; likewise, the safe and stable operation oftransport depends to a considerable degree on the contribution made by research to transport
policymaking.
The Ministry of Transport of the Russian Federation oversees the transport sector, which consistsof legal persons and individual entrepreneurs engaged in transport and transport-related activities: sea,inland waterway, road, municipal passenger and industrial rail transport.
The research and technical capability of the Ministry comprises 43 research organisations invarious forms of ownership, employing more than 3 000 people or 0.2 per cent of the total number ofworkers in the transport sector.
Research is conducted in accordance with an annual plan, which is divided into general researchand research by mode. Priority research areas are: improving the legislative and regulatory
framework of transport, the development of information technology, improving the safety of thetransport system and environmental protection, implementation of a system of monitoring thetransport market, co-ordination of the functioning and development of the transport sector, scientificback-up for specific federal programmes.
Annual spending on research accounts for more than 2 per cent of total federal spending on thetransport sector.

2. PRESENT SYSTEM OF ECONOMIC RESEARCH

Under the present system of economic research in the Ministry, research for which funding has
been provided is contracted out on a competitive basis.

37

In contrast with the previous system of setting rigid research assignments to departmental
scientific organisations financed out of the budget, the current system of co-operation between the
Ministry and the scientific community is based on the principle of selecting the best providers andpayment according to results.
Research institutes are being broken up into smaller units, independent business entities andscientific groups are being spun off, and small enterprises operating on a commercial basis are being
set up.
To a certain extent, the new commercial orientation of research has helped to make researchorganisations more efficient and brought the structure of the scientific community closer into line withthat in countries with developed economies.
Also, the difficulties being experienced by Russia during the transitional period, together with thedestabilization of its social and economic situation, are having a damaging impact on the country’s
scientific potential and disrupting efforts to equip scientific organisations with modern computer
technology.
The Scientific and Technical Policy Division, in conjunction with other departments of the
Ministry, organises the implementation of scientific research, draws up the Ministry’s R&D plan,
determines the allocation of funding with the Ministry of Science and Technology and prepares andorganises competitive bidding for research contracts.
Each department submits proposals for R&D in accordance with the transport policy objectives it
has been set, and which require scientific input.
Nearly 10 per cent of research is financed by an off-budget fund financed by transport
enterprises. Similar funds exist in the sea and inland waterway transport departments of the Ministry.
In the framing of transport policy, an important place is given to consultation with transport
associations and unions and to co-ordination with regional administrations. Legislation relating to thetax, contractual and legal framework for transport undertakings is jointly formulated.

3. COMMISSIONING OF RESEARCH

Research is commissioned by legislative acts of the supreme state organs orby decisions ofministerial boards regarding the preparation and implementation of transport regulation measures.
The departmental heads of the Ministry decide whether those decisions need to be accompanied byresearch.
Contracts concluded between research organisations and the Ministry, represented by the head of
the scientific and technical policy division, stipulate the main aims and stages of the research to be
carried out and the form of the final documents. During the bid selection process, the Ministry checks
that the bidder complies with these requirements.

38

With a view to framing a unified scientific and technical policy, consistent with the social andeconomic prospects for the transport sector, programmes and forecasts, sub-divided by scientific andtechnical area, are periodically drawn up; a medium-term document entitled "Main orientations ofscientific and technical policy regarding transport" and an annual R&D plan, are also prepared.
With a view to the development of international transport corridors, research is also being doneon the creation of transnational transport links on Russian territory.

4. ACCEPTANCE AND EVALUATION OF RESEARCH

Acceptance and evaluation of research is carried out by the department of the Ministry which
commissioned it, in conjunction with the scientific and technical policy division.
The main criteria for evaluating research are conformity with specifications and timely
submission of reports for each stage of the work. The specifications stipulate basic documents,
legislation, programmes, other sources and provisions that should guide the research and be reflectedin the reports.
The department commissioning the research supplies the organisation carrying out the researchwith the basic reference materials and monitors the progress of research and, if necessary, co-ordinatesinterim research findings with other departments of the Ministry.
If the research is to be performed by several parties, the contract stipulates the lead organisationand the partners. The lead organisation co-ordinates the research and the preparation of the reports.
Under current legislation, state and private organisations, as well as individuals, are equallyentitled to tender for research contracts.
State organisations currently account for less than one-quarter of the organisations undertaking
research in the transport sector. The bulk of research is carried out by non-state scientific collectives.

5. RESEARCH FINDINGS USED BY THE MINISTRY

Research findings are used by the Ministry to promote the development of the transport sector incollaboration with legislative and executive bodies, to co-ordinate the activity of regional
administrations and transport management bodies, to regulate and oversee the transport sector, tolicence transport undertakings and to deal with transport administration on the ground.
Research findings are used to elaborate a legal environment for transport, such an environment
being considered the prerequisite for increasing the effectiveness of the system of state control and thestable functioning of the transport sector.
The effectiveness of the present system of transport research depends, to a large extent, on theconditions of funding research, equipping research organisations with network software, access to39

systemic information about the operation of the transport sector and developments in transportlegislation, the main problems that exist and the measures planned to resolve them.
The current system of monitoring the transport market does not reflect the actual situation, since
it does not take account of the considerable changes that have taken place in the transport system sinceeconomic reforms were launched.
In order to provide feedback to enterprises and to enable them to compile complete indicators of
their financial and business activity, it is planned to introduce a number of measures to improvetransport statistics and to develop licensing.
The difficulties Russia is currently experiencing in collecting tax revenue are having an impact on
the funding allocated to science; as a result, research that has been completed remains unpaid.
The funding situation will be improved by making greater use of off-budget financing,
contributions from transport undertakings to the Ministry’s off-budget R&D funds and disbursementsfrom funds specialised in providing support for scientific projects.

40

FRANCE
Yves GEFFRIN 1
Direction de la Recherche et des Affaires
Scientifiques et Techniques
Ministère de l'Équipement, des Transports
et du Tourisme
Paris

A CASE STUDY OF FRANCEINTRODUCTION

It is by no means easy to give a precise definition of the area covered by research into transporteconomics, in that the terms “research” and “transport economics” are both open to widely differinginterpretations. It is also more than possible that definitions of these terms will vary from one country
to another. The following discussion will explain the sense in which these terms have beeninterpreted with regard to the situation in France.
However, in order to understand the situation in France in this area, or rather the peculiarities ofthe situation in France, it is worth drawing attention to a number of distinctive national
characteristics. France is a country which:
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−
−

produces cars, railway locomotives and rolling stock;builds motorways and nuclear power plants;
has a low population density;
has recently (and partially) devolved administrative power to the regions;has a powerful government administration, staffed almost exclusively by the graduates of avery small number of grandes écoles (engineering schools);
has a Transport Ministry which is divided into sectoral directorates by mode and whose
remit is limited strictly to transport;
is divided into a large number of basic territorial units (36 000 communes);
has a large public and quasi-public sector (SNCF, RATP, Highway Operators, etc.);
draws a schizophrenic distinction between “studies” and “research”, i.e. between “theorists”
and “practitioners”. This latter distinction is perhaps the one that is hardest for foreigners tounderstand since it reflects the structure of the French educational system in which theuniversities co-exist with grandes écoles, whose graduates have a very different type ofculture and, above all, pursue very different types of career.

41

It is almost tempting to complete this eclectic and somewhat idiosyncratic list of attributes withthe fact that France also produces a large variety of cheeses and fine wines!
However, to return to more serious matters, it would be fair to say that these characteristics havean impact on the structure (or lack of structure) of the social and economic research system: Powerful lobbies opposed to research (or the application of research findings);
 The difficulty of pursuing an overall approach; Far-reaching structural changes in public procurement with the increased importance at thenational level of the Ministries of Urban Development and the Environment and, at the local
level, of the demand for expert services from public authorities;
 Weaker and later impact of “sustainability”;
Against this background, it is hardly surprising that transport, unlike the situation in
English-speaking countries, has not been organised into a separate area of scientific study (with its
own elite, schools and publications), but is instead usually grouped together with sociology to form
the not so much meaningless as indeterminate subject of the socioeconomic analysis of transport, an
area that is highly sensitive to changes in the economic climate with regard to public procurement.
It would only be a very mild exaggeration to say that, in line with the distinction drawn above,for many years transport was not considered to be a “scientific field” worthy of interest to“theoretical” university researchers and that “practical” engineers had no need to devote time tosocioeconomic considerations in order to keep traffic flowing and design infrastructure.
It might be helpful at this stage to look briefly at the historical background before describing thecurrent system and analysing its strengths and weaknesses.

2

1. RECENT HISTORY OF THE SOCIOECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORT

1.1. The 1970s
The initial basis for the current organisation of the socioeconomic analysis of transport in theearly 1970s may be seen in the creation of the Institut de Recherche des Transports (IRT), which waslater to become the INRETS in 1985 after merging with the ONSER and, above all, with theintroduction by the Ministry of Research in 1973 of the “special research theme programme” (action
thématique programmé -- ATP) for the socioeconomic analysis of transport.
Aided by the events of May 1968, there was a sea-change in this area which led to theintroduction of sociological and economic considerations into transport research studies.
This change in emphasis is largely attributable to a number of strong-minded academics who
based their professional case on a high degree of personal militancy that was highly unlikely to have
any lasting impact on an administration dominated by civil servants recruited from the grandesécoles.

42

Two vestiges nonetheless remain of this period: the first and most obvious example is the
INRETS, but the second and perhaps the most important is a certain degree of recognition bytechnical and administrative circles of the need for an overall approach, at least with regard to urban
development. The CETUR (later to become the CERTU), established in 1976, is the most obvious
indication of the account taken by the technology community of the need for such an overall approach
incorporating socioeconomic elements to urban mobility.
However, apart from these two bodies, both of which are administered directly by the Ministryof Transport, there has been no lasting creation of a scientific community for the study of transporteconomics, the one notable exception being the Institut d’Etudes Economiques de l’Université deLyon II which later produced the LET (Laboratoire d’Economie des Transports), set up incollaboration with the ENTPE.
It would be fair to say that the efforts in the early 1980s to construct a research base in responseto the ATP on the socioeconomic analysis of transport simply died a death ... and that for some timethese efforts would remain a marginal “sub-product” of the five-year technology-oriented plans that
we shall now examine.

1.2. The PRDTTT (1983-1988)
While the ministries had already identified a number of research areas pursued in conjunction
with major industrial programmes but treated separately, the PRDTTT, the first technological R&D
programme for inland transport, was launched by joint decision of the Minister responsible fortransport and the Minister responsible for industry and research in November 1983. This programme
first introduced what was later to become a tradition in the field of transport research, the idea of a“mobilising”, “target-oriented” or even “priority” programme, the latter being a term already in use inother research sectors.
The programme was largely managed by an Evaluation and Prospective Studies Committee,
made up of twenty or so well-known figures and chaired by Mr. Lagasse (Director of scientific andtechnical affairs at Renault and the author of a preliminary report to the PRDTTT) and a liaison teamdrawn from administrative departments and major project monitoring committees.
The first programme designed to ensure the co-ordinated mobilisation of public authorities,
industry and research bodies, the PRDTTT, was divided into four subject areas: rail transport (A),road traffic management (B), organisation of transport systems (C) and automobile technology (D).
Research area (C) covered all the social and organisational aspects of urban and regionaltransport, nuisances and comfort, freight transport and social sciences applied to transport. The latter
topic was subsequently described as “heterogeneous” in later assessment and an analysis made of its
primary dysfunctions; the main cause of the difficulties encountered with this topic, in addition to acertain degree of anger felt towards the mobilisation of teams through successive calls for tender, wasattributed to “the excessive dissipation of research teams ... leading to a large number of actions
receiving lower levels of funding.”
However, this programme clearly paved the way for the account taken of socioeconomic analysis
in subsequent interministerial programmes and the emphasis of its distinctive characteristics innational policy towards transport research.
43

The PRDTTT was to be periodically assessed and the main conclusions drawn from theseassessments incorporated into the mission statement regarding the contents and management
3
procedures for the following programme, to be directed by Mr. Payan . In addition to thedevelopment of working themes, it will be noted that the management systems were kept in place andexpanded and that there was already a need to set up a database and make special recommendations
with regard to the social sciences:− “creation of a committee, funded under a specific budget, for each theme”;− “discontinuation of the tendering procedure with regard to social sciences applied to thetransport sector and replacement with two new procedures: ‘pluriannual funding for a small
number of strong teams’ and a simplified and standing ‘one-shop’ procedure, provided thatthe future programme meets the specified requirements and that proof can be shown of apartnership agreement.”
The Payan report concluded by stating that the efforts undertaken during this initial phase had tobe pursued and built upon and, in order to achieve this goal, recommended the adoption of an overall
approach in which reliance would be placed on the “government’s ability to distribute rapidly,
without the customary administrative delays, the funding promised ... .” This latter recommendation
was aimed at the programme as a whole and therefore undoubtedly targeted industrial research rather
than socioeconomic research.

1.3. The first PREDIT programme (1990-1994)
This first programme was launched under heads of agreement signed in March 1990 between theministries responsible for industry, research and transport, respectively. It was divided into fiveresearch areas: rail transport (1); road vehicle technology (2); freight transport (3); road traffic
management systems and technology (4) and a fifth theme entitled “organisation of transport systems
ensuring mobility”.
Despite being organised exactly along the lines recommended by previous assessments, this firstversion of the PREDIT, chaired by Mr. Payan, the Head of Research at Renault, was to run into
management problems, exacerbated by the withdrawal of support by the ministries due to shortage offunds.
The problems that dogged the previous programme were to recur with the following programme,
which was faced with the same need to find solutions:−−−−“The lack of incentives provided by the State”, which instead concentrated resources onproviding support for industry or prominent operators;“The lack of an inventory of work covered by the PREDIT, which precluded the effective
4
monitoring of such a large (FF 2.4 billion) and complex programme ”;“The fact that the only way in which the experts on the Evaluation and Prospective Studies
Committee could work was by offering their services free of charge; even getting the5experts’ travel expenses reimbursed posed problems and led to kafkaesque ramifications ”;“The co-ordination of government departments is starting to fall into worrying disarray ...
6
we cannot but note that administrative delays and errors are starting to accumulate ”.

44In particular, despite the quality of the research projects carried out, a number of negative
7
comments were to be made with regard to socioeconomic analysis and theme 5 :
−
−
−
−
−
−
−

Irreversible deviation from the initial objectives;
Lack of coherence and lack of firm directions for the mobilisation of resources;
Major organisational and budgetary problems;
In procedural terms, a return to the oft-decried tendering system and piecemeal approvalof projects negotiated with administrations;
The low profile given to research theme 5, low funding and low level ofapplication/dissemination of research findings;
No standing structure for the programme secretariat;
No organisation or expansion of the research community.

Why such criticism? It would seem that what could be forgiven the first time around in a newprogramme, the PRDTTT, could not be forgiven a second time if not put right; or had the assessment
criteria become more stringent for the second programme or perhaps the method of managing thisfirst PREDIT programme had genuinely deteriorated compared with the earlier PRDTTT phase?
This brief review of the historical background is not intended to cast light on the reasons behindthese events but simply to learn lessons from what happened:−−

Failure to place the current PREDIT programme properly into its historical context would
run the risk of overlooking the fact that, in terms of both content and forms of organisationor procedures, the current system has been designed in reaction to the criticisms levelled atit; since one thing explains another, it is possible to gain a better insight into theoccasionally painstakingly slow process of targeting objectives and planning, the large
number of systems needed to both organise and ensure flexibility, the integration into
upstream planning of the need for communication and the application of findings, the will to
break out of a bureaucratic determinism in order to cope with variety and complexity.
Now that the new PREDIT programme has been running for two years and, at a time when
the half-way stage assessment systems are starting to be put in place, rereading an accountof the endemic weaknesses to have plagued earlier programmes should give us no cause forjoy in that many of these problems remain topical and should encourage us to remain
vigilant. Although a fuller discussion will follow later in this paper, it is worth mentioning,for example, some of the potential problems that lie ahead:•
The apparently smooth functioning of the PREDIT programme may be hiding
weaknesses in the partnership arrangements (no specific budget for the programme andthe possibility that the policy directions and options taken with regard to the PREDIT
programme may not be taken into account in the annual budget programmes ofministries and agencies);•
The lack of resources allocated to standing managerial structures means that work must
either be carried out free of charge or given to sub-contractors and trainees;•
The partnership arrangements between administrations have been unable to overcome
the prerogatives, grading systems and independence of certain sectors of ministries;•
There is a structural mismatch between the selection of research projects under the
PREDIT programme and the procedures employed by government departments tocommit funding, given the failure to match funding rules to the programme’s objectives;

45

•

•

The complexity of the organisational structures leads to delays and limits ability torespond (several hundred experts have been called upon to take part in the various
groups set up under this new PREDIT);The linkage to other programmes, at both national and European level, still remains
limited.

Treading a middle path between the two extremes of the fatalistic “bad luck always comes inthrees” and the “this time things will be different” siren-call of novelty, continuity and improvement
are undoubtedly the two cornerstones that will provide the basis for further planning and action withregard to the management of public research. In other words, as part of the continual process ofwhich it is part, the current stage of the PREDIT programme, regardless of its own internal dynamics,
must be understood as the outcome of the previous efforts reviewed above. However, the current
situation must also be seen as the new foundation on which the next programme will be established,either as a complement to or a reaction against what has preceded but nonetheless as part of acontinual process.

2. THE SCOPE FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF PUBLIC RESEARCH
AS MATTERS STAND AT PRESENT

It is clear from the above that, following the implementation of the socioeconomic ATP and thenthe PRDTTT and PREDIT 1 programmes, the transport economics research community is notable for,firstly, the strong dilution of research potential between different bodies, which nonetheless remain
highly polarised around the Ministry of Transport and, secondly, the low number of potential
researchers actually mobilised.

2.1. Large number of bodies
Starting inside the Ministry of Transport and then moving outwards we find the following:
2.1.1.
a)Within the Ministry of Transport

A directorate of research and scientific and technical affairs (DRAST) responsible for:−−firstly, supervising the science and engineering network run by the Ministry ofDevelopment, Housing and Transport. This network includes bodies such as INRETS(National Institute for Research into Transport and Safety, a research body supervised
jointly by the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Research), the CERTU (Centre for
Research into Networks, Transport, Urban Development and Public Building, a departmentof the Ministry of Transport) and SETRA (Roads and Highways Engineering Department);
secondly, supervising and co-ordinating the work carried out by the Ministry under theinterministerial transport research programme (PREDIT 1996-2000). It also provides thestaff and resources needed to run the standing secretariat for this programme. In particular,
the DRAST is responsible, in connection with the PREDIT programme, for supervising thestrategic research and urban travel management research themes which cover research
relating to socioeconomics;
46

b)

The other sectoral directorates (Directorate of Inland Transport, Highways Directorate, Safety
and Road Traffic Directorate, General Directorate of Civil Aviation, Directorate of Maritime
Transport, Ports and the Coastline) have study budgets, and sometimes research budgets too,
which allow them to fund socioeconomic studies and research. A committee, made up of all the
directors with responsibilities for transport, ensures the necessary co-ordination even though, by
all accounts, this committee gives priority to operational rather than research issues;c)Technical bodies such as SETRA, CERTU, CETE, etc.;d)

Ministerial departments at the level of the départements and regions (regional directorates fordevelopment, departmental directorates for development) fund studies relating to the territory
under their jurisdiction.

2.1.2.

The following actors also work in conjunction with the Ministries:e)

Scientific bodies administered jointly by the Ministry of Transport and the Ministry of Research:
INRETS, Ecole Nationale des Ponts et Chaussées;f)

Major public bodies and enterprises: Réseau Ferré de France (manager of rail infrastructure),
SNCF, RATP, which carry out or commission third parties to carry out transport economics
projects or studies for their own needs.

2.1.3.

Not administered by the Ministryg)Universities working in the transport field: Lyon 2 (Laboratoire d’Economie des Transports-- LET), Aix Marseille (Centre de Recherche en Economie des Transports), Toulouse, Cergy,
etc. Some grandes écoles such as Mines de Paris, Ecole Polytechnique, etc.;h)Research bodies such as the CNRS (Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique);i)

Various public bodies: urban development agencies (particularly in Brest, but also Bordeauxand Strasbourg);

j)Local and in particular regional authorities, which may fund research infrastructure (provision ofpremises, equipment, etc.) or research projects;k)

A large number of design and engineering consultancies which have developed research
capacities in this area, usually as a sideline to their main activity.

2.2. The potential for public research
A survey of public research bodies [which include in particular the bodies specified inparagraphs (e), (g) and (h) above] carried out under the PREDIT programme made it possible todetermine the potential number of researchers in such bodies involved in research into inlandtransport. A table summarising the results of this survey is attached in Annex 1.

47

Clearly, this general survey does not address directly those areas of concern to the ECMT.
However, it would seem possible to obtain a fairly reliable approximation of the potential number of
researchers involved if account is taken of the fact that the classification used in this survey covers
the following aspects of economic research and corresponding full-time equivalents (FTE):
1.

5.

Mobility and its determinants .......................................................................... 46.50 FTE, of which
1.1 Economic determinants ................................................................................................. 8.3 FTE
1.2 Life-styles, behaviour, location................................................................................... 20.7 FTE
1.3 Outlook........................................................................................................................ 17.5 FTE
Policy, regulation and economy of the sector .................................................... 44.0 FTE, of which
5.1 Public policy................................................................................................................ 24.8 FTE
5.2 Legal and institutional aspects ...................................................................................... 6.3 FTE
5.3 Economy of the sector................................................................................................. 12.9 FTEThis yields a total of 90 full-time equivalent researchers within public research bodies involvedin transport economics in the broad sense of the term, compared with 1 100 active researchers in theinland transport sector.
This extremely low percentage, merely 8 per cent of public research into the most “public” ofdomains, does not seem likely to change in the near future, given the number of doctoral students inthis area: 76 FTE out of 830 FTE are currently working in the transport economics sector in the
broad sense of the term as defined above.
Two pessimistic comments may be made at this point:−−

Economics in the strict sense of the term only has 13 FTE workers;
There would appear to be absolutely nobody working in what is held to be thefundamentally important field of the legal and institutional aspects of intermodality!

However, these two pessimistic observations may be offset by two rather more optimistic ones:−−

Since the figures represent full-time equivalents, it would be fair to assume, as a first
approximation, that the researchers surveyed spend between a third and a half of their timeworking on these topics. The “human” potential that can be harnessed should therefore inpractice be between two and three times larger;
The survey does not properly take account of the potential that can be mobilised outside thetraditional transport sphere (such as lawyers or economists who have never worked in thisarea but who might do so in the future). In addition, the survey takes absolutely no accountof the research potential of the private sector.

Clearly, the current PREDIT is attempting to work in the most “optimistic” directions byembracing an increasingly wide range of actors. This aspect is the one that we shall now examine.

48

3. SOCIAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS IN THE PREDIT 1996-2000 PROGRAMME

A brief general presentation of the PREDIT programme is given in annex and we shall therefore
limit our discussion here to “socioeconomic” aspects and the problem over definitions mentioned anumber of times above. We shall reverse the order of presentation previously adopted by attempting
to show how the structure of the programme -- in terms of both contents and management -- has been
designed to attempt to obtain more relevant replies by harnessing a broader segment of the “world of
research”.
By analogy with the 4th R&D framework programme, socioeconomics may be considered to be8
dealt with under the “strategic research” theme , even though, in the PREDIT as in the 4th R&D
framework programme, other themes also address socioeconomic issues.

3.1. A three-fold objective: to understand, help and provide insightTransport interacts strongly with changes in life-style or production, urban or demographic
change, environmental constraints or those relating to energy and technological, organisational or
financial changes in the sector. The general objective of “strategic research” is therefore to improve
the overall understanding of the transport system and its environment; to do that, it is necessary to: collect data and carry out relevant analyses;
 develop the benchmarks and tools needed to assist the decisionmaking process; plot the possible future development of mobility in the long run.
A steering committee, consisting of some 15 leading experts and chaired by Maurice Bernadet
from the Laboratoire d’Economie des Transports (LET), was set up to address the issue of strategic
research. This committee lays down the directions for the Strategic Research theme and either selects
research projects directly or delegates that task to the working parties for mobilising programmes.
The steering committee meets three or four times a year and is assisted in its daily work by ascience secretariat supplied by the Directorate of Research in the Ministry of Transport (DRAST) and
responsible for managing the programme (funding commitments and follow-up of research, relations
between administrations, logistics, logbooks, co-ordination and overviews, communications).
This system complies with that planned for the PREDIT programme as a whole, namely:−−−−a general framework set out in an interministerial protocol;
the lines of research of the 13 themes covered by the programme are set out in a statementof objectives approved by a planning council;
the steering committee for each theme clearly identifies the lines of research and in somecases may break them down into “mobilising programmes”;
the “mobilising programme sub-committees” draw up calls for proposals, choose proposals
and follow up on approved projects under the supervision of the theme steering committee.

In the case of the strategic research theme, the possibility of stepping down managerial focus has
been used to apply “mobilising programmes” to only part of the field. In practice, there are therefore
three types of organisation operating in parallel:
49

−

−

−

mobilising programmes, with clearly identified political or societal objectives which allow
scientific advances to be made in a given research area while leaving scope for action in the
short term. Most of the funding effort and supervisory activities, as well as thedevelopments outlined in this paper, are directed towards such mobilising programmes;
complementary research, which makes it possible to investigate in greater depth certain
themes addressed by work programmes in progress, encourages the emergence of innovativeideas arising from research activities or their users, or allows technology watches and futurestudies to be initiated;accompanying measures for research programmes, aimed at the logistical aspects ofresearch management and co-ordination, the organisation of or participation in various typesof activity and the growing work involved in communicating and capitalising on researchfindings. These systems are an indispensable complement to research actions and play an
9increasingly important role in the success and impact of programmes .

3.2. Mobilising programmes
These eight priority programmes, despite being completely separate from each other, cannonetheless be divided into three categories:−−−

The first two groups, “information systems” and “employment and social watch”, arerelatively new topics within the field of transport research and are designed to lend structure
and provide knowledge input in their area;
These first two groups are followed by a further three, “decisionmaking and assessment
processes”, “costing the external effects of transport” and the “socioeconomic relevance of
new technologies, innovation time-scales”, are designed to assist in decisionmaking andassessment, either through an analysis of the interactions between actions or by new formsof economic calculation or through new methods of assessing technological choices;
The last three groups, “mobility, economic development”, “transport locations: continuity
and breaks” and “non-motorised travel and non-private use of private cars”, addressing
topics that link mobility and territorial management at different levels, are aimed atmonitoring possible trends in mobility in the medium and long terms.

Mandated by the steering committee, each of the “programme groups”, which are also made up
of a chairman, secretary and panel of experts, sets priorities, organises calls for proposals, selects
research projects and supervises the research programme in order to ensure the application anddissemination of research findings.
Each of these mobilising programmes will now be examined in greater detail below.
3.2.1.

New fields of research aimed at providing an insight into complexity

Information systems
While the changes made to transport monitoring systems must reflect the changes in the needs ofthe transport sector itself and its environment, they must also remain consistent over long periods oftime in order to allow the requisite comparisons to be made over the long term.

50

Moreover, information systems must reconcile growing demands and technical feasibilities withthe diminution of the statistical system, due as much to increased competition as to institutionalchange or the opening of borders ...
The Information Systems theme has, for the first time in France, been incorporated into anational research programme. The scope of the work of the group, based on the experience gained
from earlier work (CEDIT), must match demand from other PREDIT groups in terms of databases aswell as linkage with EU projects under the 4th R&D framework programme.
Employment and social watch
While the transport sector is a net creator of jobs, the disparities and differences in forms ofdevelopment between types of enterprise, jobs or skills identified in the sector are such that thisrelatively new area in transport research needs to be brought properly into focus through the three
inputs contained in the first call for proposals:
 Quantitative trends in branches of the sector, modes of regulation and various forms oforganisational innovation;
 Qualitative and sociological investigations of changes in jobs, trades and qualifications withreference to organisational, technological and social changes;
 A more diffuse social demand as a result of “new requirements” (security, new services,
exclusion), giving rise to new types of job, primarily in the area of urban public transport.
3.2.2.

Assistance with decisionmaking -- development of tools

Decisionmaking and assessment processes
The crisis in economic methodology and the crisis over the notion of general interest areseriously undermining the concept of “assistance with decisionmaking”, both from a technical andfrom a political standpoint. The general objective of the programme is to “attempt to produce fairer
assessment and better-founded decisions in order to ensure more consistent policies.”
This group addresses the various stages in the provision of aid with the decisionmaking process
and assessment of projects or transport policies, in terms of both procedures and processes(comparison, choice, selection, follow-up, overall result, impact) and is broken down in terms of the10
spatial scale (urban, regional or intercity, national, international) .
To ensure that decisionmaking is both reliable and acceptable, the first call for proposals for the
programme is aimed initially at analysing practices concerning the design and implementation ofprojects and transport policies such as major transport projects or Urban Mobility Plans.
Socioeconomic relevance of new technologies, time-scales and innovation in decisionmaking andassessment processes11

Due to past mistakes, the current wave of new technologies (notably NICTs ) and the risk of
rapid obsolescence associated with the latter, there is considerable social demand for the choice oftechnology to be properly assessed. The aim of the programme is to develop tools or procedures that
can help in the supervision of projects involving technological innovation in the field of transport on
the basis of socioeconomic analyses addressing the following:51 The management of innovation in response to organisational and institutional change
focused on the end-user; The integration of “off-the-shelf” technologies from other areas, notably telematics;
 Local innovation networks versus traditional, single-mode institutions; The new time-scales applicable to decisionmaking processes and project financing.
The call for proposals made it possible to select several research proposals based on case studies
of technological products or systems, whether they are successful or not, or rather more prospective
or comparative case studies of technology supply and its environment.
The initial work primarily addressed projects involving breaks in technology, systemic analysisof the freight sector or innovation policy with regard to privatisation.
Costing the external effects of transport
There is a strong demand for tools capable of assessing and costing the external effects oftransport, i.e. tools that can take account of noise, pollution, health impacts of transport, thegreenhouse effect, etc., in economic calculations.
Current economic calculation methods have reached their limits and the aim of this researchgroup is to find new approaches that can provide national values for such costing exercises.
Further to the identification of various methods (avoidance cost, cost of personal injury anddamage to property, depreciation of real estate values (hedonistic values), willingness to pay and toreceive compensation (contingency assessment), a call for research proposals was issued. The initial
work addresses the costing of the noise generated by rail and road traffic as well as state-of-the-art
measures to combat air pollution, severance effects and the impacts on public parks and gardens or
the landscape.
3.2.3.

Mobility and territorial developments -- some insights and recommendations

Mobility, economic development, upgrading
Research has already been conducted into this theme, whose importance with regard to the future
development of cities and urban mobility is universally recognised, but has not been properlyorganised into a coherent whole. The group therefore defined its general programme as research into
the major determinants of mobility and analysis of the influence of transport on the urban system andthe location of activities:
 Strategies aimed at siting household service activities in peripheral areas of urban centres: acall for proposals enabled research projects to be launched with regard to most of thecommercial, cultural, public, etc., services considered to be new sources of mobility inperipheral areas (cinema complexes, fast-food outlets, educational or employment services,
shopping mall, etc.);
 The links between forms of development in peripheral urban areas, strategies adopted by
local authorities and their implications with regard to mobility; Assessment and understanding of congestion.

52

Transport locations -- continuity and breaks
From the standpoint of both passenger and freight transport, the strategic importance of sites
undergoing comprehensive redevelopment (platforms, stations, transhipment centres) merits further
analysis and promotion. The group, which noted the emergence of problems common to suchtheoretically disparate universes and objects as those relating to passenger and freight transport,
issued a call for proposals and selected research projects addressing the following issues:
 The distinctive characteristics of intermodal connection sites (architectural aspects andassociated services);
 Location (economic aspects, design partnerships, integration into the urban environment); Operation and management (everyday and emergency management, organisation ofoperators and co-operation between operators);
 Attractiveness of sites (user-friendliness, urban sophistication, residential or professional use).
Forthcoming projects will address the linkage between inland transport systems and port or
airport platforms.
Non-motorised travel and non-private use of private cars
Car traffic is currently the main source of damage to the environment in urban settings.
However, unlike the situation in other countries, knowledge about and use of non-motorised modes oftransport is not yet widespread among planners, a fact reflected in proposals regarding changes inurban transport policy. An initial series of research projects addressing non-motorised modes oftransport has been launched with a view to obtaining detailed information regarding the practices andbehaviour of users of non-motorised modes of transport or the savings afforded by measures such as
reserved lanes or car-sharing.

53

THE PREDIT STRATEGIC RESEARCH PROGRAMME

Steering committee,lines of approach
validation

Science secretariat(management)
8 mobilising programmes

Information systems
Employment and social
watch
Costing
Evaluation anddecisionmaking
Socio-economic aspectsof new technologies
Mobility and development

Accompanying measures(assistance, communication,
applications)

Transport locations
Non-motorised transport

Complementary researchIn-depth work,
innovative ideas
prospective work

3.3. An initial evaluation in 1997
If we were to succumb to the temptation to blow our own trumpet in public, we could point to
the fact that, in 1997 alone, the strategic research group undoubtedly held more seminars to exchange
information and follow up on findings than were held during the fifteen previous years since the
PRDTTT programme was first launched in 1983! However, those whom this might offend would
instantly retort -- and quite rightly -- that starting with nothing we have not yet accomplished much.
A cynic might say that that was already quite a lot.
On a more serious note, however, there have been advances which reflect a break with the past,even though what has been achieved still remains to be consolidated. In particular:

54

3.3.1.

A clear programme of scientific research and a simple modus operandi

It might seem odd but it is worth recalling that the PRDTTT and PREDIT 90-94 programmes did
not actually produce a programme as such but “simply” an interministerial protocol referring
non-explicitly to a preliminary report. PREDIT 1996-2000 would seem to be the first programme to
be based on a document whose science content has been properly validated and which in addition
explains how it is designed to work. This advance has made it possible to set up a decentralised
supervisory system which (to a certain extent) allows monolithic managerial structure to be broken
down into smaller elements.
3.3.2.

Decentralised supervision

At the beginning of the year, the theme steering committee and the eight programme groups
produced initial “lines of approach”, a synthesis of programme work and a framework for the future;in the course of 1997, over fifty meetings to organise the work of programming, selecting andsupervising research activities were held between researchers, experts and government departments,
bringing together 140 experts in the various levels of supervision of the strategic research programme.
The eight programme groups manage their theme under the supervision of the steering committee, but
are afforded a large degree of autonomy. Meetings between the steering committee and the chairmenof the programme groups ensure consistency without any undue degree of formality.
3.3.3.

A co-ordination and outreach system

The strategic research group organised four seminars in 1997, aimed at presenting its
programmes to the socioeconomic research community and its users. In addition, it carried out anaudit of other PREDIT groups in order to be able to respond more effectively to demand forsocioeconomic and prospective research.
In addition to the lines of approach document mentioned above, the group published a four-pagebilingual document in French and English. It also published a report on its activities in 1997, with adescription of the research in progress or completed. This report is available on the Internet.
In more quantitative terms, compared with the situation outlined in the 2nd and 3rd section ofthis paper, it should be noted that:−−

3.3.4.

20 out of the 41 research projects funded in 1997 were conducted by teams that had not had
a contract under the previous PREDIT;
25 projects were conducted in the private sector, compared with “merely” 16 in the public
sector.
Success of calls for proposals

The procedure for issuing calls for proposals in the socioeconomic research field had been
decried and even condemned in assessments of, or preliminary reports on, the previous programmes.
The routine use of this procedure has been the rule for all the mobilising programmes and has had two
major benefits:55

 It has opened up the programme to new teams: over 130 proposals were received;
 Most of the research effort (two-thirds) has remained focused on the lines of approach
determined beforehand12.
Furthermore, competition between proposals followed by appraisals by different experts would,
in principle, seem to be a guarantee of higher quality than that afforded by “administrative despotism,
even if it is enlightened”.
The mistake made in the previous appraisal of the PRDTTT and PREDIT 1 is doubtless due tothe fairly obvious benefits of hindsight: it is easier to mobilise unknown teams to pursue research in
known lines of direction than to mobilise known teams to work in unknown lines of direction.
3.3.5.

The system nonetheless still remains highly fragile

The first comment which needs to be made is that this system is based on skill and in many cases
the free provision of services by a few individuals. It would probably be fair to say that thefunctioning of the system relies upon fewer than a dozen motivated individuals, without any real
support from a consolidating organisational structure. It is clear, on the other hand, that the resources
needed to manage a research programme and to capitalise on the resultant findings increase at muchthe same speed as ... the interest shown by the politicians and decisionmakers who initiated theprogramme wanes.

4. VALUE JUDGEMENT ON THE CURRENT SYSTEM AND THE OUTLOOKFOR ITS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT

The preceding comments obviously display a personal bias that many people might feelmisplaced or simply wrong, but until the findings of the half-way stage assessment of the entire
PREDIT programme are available, in principle by the end of 1998, it is nonetheless possible to makea few tentative comments, in a personal capacity, of what might be held to be the strengths andweaknesses of this system.

4.1. Strengths
Without any doubt, the main strength lies in the organisation of the research themes put in place.
Although the structural complexity of the system as it stands makes it necessary to devote substantial
time and effort to explaining how it works, after two years of operation it would seem that thestructure is basically sound and that people are starting to learn how to use it. Evidence of this may
be seen in the following:−−−

A satisfactory level of mobilisation of research teams, which have replied in large numbers
to the proposals launched under the programme;
Renewed contracts with many research teams, and notably new entrants in the field;
Satisfactory operation of the “programming, publication of calls for proposals, selection”
procedure;

56

−
−

−

−

A fairly satisfactory level of co-ordination of funding decisions between partners in theadministration;
The structure of the programme makes it possible both to raise the profile, over time, ofresearch priorities and to maintain a certain degree of flexibility over the choice of projects,
including those relating to new themes, through calls for innovative ideas and throughinvestigation of themes in greater depth;
The active efforts made to co-ordinate the programme with the 4th R&D frameworkprogramme are exemplary and have included contacts between officials and the organisationof meetings and seminars, even though the results in practical terms are still at arudimentary stage;The benefits derived from the programme, its objectives and operating procedures are
satisfactory at this stage of the programme. It is planned to make a major effort to capitalise
fully on the results, notably with a view to using them to formulate public policy.

4.2. Weaknesses
Besides the weaknesses outlined in paragraph 1.3 above, the following points are probably worth
mentioning:
−

−

−
−
−
−

A survey carried out at the request of the steering group has revealed the chasm that still lies
between strategic research and those who conduct it and the researchers involved in projects
with a more technological slant. The cultural divide between these two communities still
remains wide and efforts are currently being made to present and summarise the work ofboth sides in order to remedy the situation;
The ability of strategic research to influence the decisionmaking process, at the European,national, regional or local level, still remains to be demonstrated. There is a certain degreeof incompatibility between researchers who aim to become part of a leading elite in order tobe recognised by their peers and decisionmakers who want a pragmatic and comprehensive
approach in order to be able to come to grips properly with all the aspects of a given
situation;
The organisation that has been put in place is based upon a small number of individuals
who, over time, have become accustomed to exchange information and to work together.
As a result of this, the organisation is far too tenuous and fragile;
The PREDIT is neither designed or able to co-ordinate all the economic research carried out
in the transport field. A certain number of research projects remain outside its scope ofaction. Linkage with the 4th R&D framework programme, in particular, remains too weak;
The number of proposals made by pluridisciplinary teams remains very low, a result
attributable as much to the working practices of research laboratories as to theadministrative difficulties in processing such proposals;Some areas attract little interest (modelling, taxation, prospective studies, etc.). A call for
proposals in specific areas was in fact issued in 1998 in order to lend impetus to suchresearch. The question now is to what point the number of mobilising programmes can beincreased without spreading efforts too thinly .. but can we reasonably deny ourselves theinsights that research can bring in such areas?

In view of what we know about similar systems in other countries, notably within Europe, it isreasonable to think that many lessons can be learned for France’s organisation of research from57

Sweden’s experience with regard to the assessment of transport research and the experience of theNetherlands with regard to the emergence of new topics and original themes.

4.3. Conclusion
Since we opened this paper with a few comments aimed at explaining the peculiarities of theFrench system and the weakness of the socioeconomic research sector, we shall complete the circle
by ending with a review of a number of developments which might help to dilute these particularities
and at the same time to enhance the research potential. The following comments are not intended to
be exhaustive and are not ranked by order of importance:
−

−
−

−

−

EU framework programmes of research have already substantially modified both thecontents of programmes and the practices of research teams at the national level in France.
In purely practical terms, it is likely that the practices of issuing calls for proposals would
have been universally condemned had it not been for the “Brussels precedent”;
The emergence (at long last) of environmental issues in the transport sector, whichchallenges previous practices (hence the emergence of new research topics) by involving
outside teams in the traditional field of transport;
The gathering pace of decentralisation and associated redefinition of powers, which isfuelling demand for counter-appraisals (favourable to the development of research) andgreater concern over operational aspects (better liaison between the research sector and thedecisionmaking process);
The emergence of competition (deregulation, etc.), which is prompting operators to ask
questions regarding their future and the Government to ask questions regarding its role.
Now that market forces have started to appear in the transport sector, “real” economists arestarting to take an interest, particularly in the economics of regulation. Since transport is nolonger a sector administered by government, there is an even greater need for economic
analysis of trends in the transport sector and, by the same token, the administrations
responsible for regulating the sector;
Problems in urban areas have become such pressing issues that the Government can nolonger afford to ignore them and a macroeconomic approach has now become essential, thus
going once again beyond traditional approaches based on the internal profitability of modal
projects. At the other extreme, the globalisation of the economy also calls for global
approaches.

In short, it would clearly seem that the over-determination of the transport sector through thethree components of sustainability (economic, social and environmental aspects) is increasingly
becoming a daily reality in the unstoppable opening-up of the sector to competition.
The climate was right for the practices established under the previous programmes to bechallenged and the strategic research group was able and willing to grasp this opportunity to redefine
the issues in the field of transport socioeconomic analysis by bringing in new research teams.
Will the superstructure be able to evolve in a way which will ensure that knowledge can becapitalised upon in order to improve public decisionmaking?
Unfortunately, there is as yet no answer to this question.

58

NOTES

1.

Ce texte reprend très largement des éléments d'une note interne de P. FIGUERAS (Secrétariat
permanent du PREDIT) et surtout d'un document-bilan (à paraître) établi par A. PENY,(Secrétaire scientifique du thème Recherches Stratégiques).
Ce texte a de plus bénéficié des remarques de A. BIEBER, C. BERLIOZ (SNCF),
M. BERNADET (LET-PREDIT), G. BOURGEOIS (RATP), J. COLIN (CRET), Y. CROZET(LET), M.-C. GRIMA (DAEI), G. JOIGNAUX (INRETS), A. MORCHEOINE (ADEME),
J.-M. OFFNER (LATTS), E. QUINET (CGPC), mais bien entendu les idées exprimées ici
n'engagent que leur auteur.

2.

For more information please consult:−Jean-Marc Offner, 20 ans de socioéconomie des transports urbains en France, Les Cahiers
Scientifiques du Transport, pp. 125-140, No. 22/1990.

−

The various reports presenting and/or assessing various programmes (the Lagasse report on
PRDTTT, the Payan report on PREDIT 1, the Causse assessment).

3.

The information given in this chapter has been drawn from “Les transports terrestres, recherche
et développement”, report by the Commission chaired by J.J. Payan, La Documentation
Française, Paris, 1990.

4.

This diplomatically worded comment simply means that there was no reliable list of the research
projects funded!

5.

Final report on the PREDIT programme (1990-94), Messrs. Causse, Bellec and Smagghe.

6.

Report on activities in 1993 by the PREDIT Evaluation and Prospective Studies Committee.

7.

Taken from the assessment made by R. Fichelet: “Elements pour un bilan du PREDIT, thème 5 :Organisation des transports et systèmes de mobilité”, 1994 report by the DRAST, No. 42.

8.

It would not be appropriate here to hold forth on the effect of this change of terminology, either
in terms of the “empowerment” of researchers or “consideration” by the theoretically hostile
world of “engineers” ... However, what ranked bottom in the previous programme is now ranked
first!

59

9.

Further information on the planning and organisation of the programme may be found in the
document “Recherches Stratégiques, document d’orientation”, published by the DRAST in May
1997 (Tel. 01 40 81 14 30; fax 01 40 81 14 44).

10. A seminar was organised in February 1997, when the group was launched, in order to conduct athorough survey of the field of research. The proceedings of this seminar were published incollaboration with the DRAST and PREDIT under the title “Evaluer et décider dans lestransports” in issue No. 106/107 of Metropolis Review, June 1998.
11. New information and communications technologies.
12. “When attempts start to be made to change the lines of approach of a given research
programme, the speed at which the directions of research change rapidly overtakes the speed atwhich the research progresses”, Yves Dubreuil, Renault, member of the steering committee forstrategic research.

60

ANNEXES61

Total bodies
Number of researchers (FTE)

Transport system components
A – Transport system
as a whole

C – Rail component:
train and others

B – Road component

A3
UndifferentiatedB1
Infrastructure(ex. civil
works)

B2
Freight
vehiclesB3
Passengers
vehiclesC1
C2
Infrastructure
Vehicles(ex. civil(passenger,
works)
freight)

0
0
0
0

1
0
1
0

0.75
0
0.5
0.25

41.7
8
18.5
15.2

11

31

0

1.7

0

1

524.8

68.7
62.87
22.3
43.03

7.5
0
0
3.5

21.7
5.2
0
4.1

0
0
0
0

1
0
0
0.7

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
1

213.7
128.2
87.4
95.5

4.5
0

27
15

1
0

14
3

1.5
0.5

0
0

4
4

4.5
3

107.7
29

1

2.5

6

0

5.5

0

0

0

0

29

23.2

1

2

6

1

4.5

1

0

0

0

47.2

0

0

0

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

1.5

2.5

2
0
0
0
0
2
0

6.25
3.25
0
1
0
0
2

46.55
10.25
5
16
5.3
5
5

6.5
4
0
0.5
0.5
0
1.5

11.4
1.5
0
6.27
3.33
0.3
0

31.55
12.25
0
13.03
3.87
2.4
0

2.5
0
0
0
1.5
0
1

9.6
7.1
0
0
2.5
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0

1
1
0
0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0
0
0
0

3.75
3.75
0
0
0
0
0

121.1
43.1
5
36.8
17
9.7
9.5

7

6

14.75

0.75

1

2.25

0.75

0

0

0

0

2.25

34.75

2
2
3

2
2
2

5.75
2
7

0.25
0
0.5

0
0
1

0.25
0
2

0.25
0
0.5

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

2.25
0
0

12.75
6
16

20.75

42.25

315.8

24.75

73.3

260.9

15.25

54.6

2.5

2.7

5

12.25

830.05

18
2
8
8

1
1
0
0

0
0
0
0

3.2
0
0
3.2

0
0
0
0

1

12

200.8

13

56.4

196.9

1
0
0
0

7
4
1
0

68.3
44
53
35.5

11.5
0
0
1.5

27
12.13
11.1
6.17

7
0

5
0.5

35.7
1.5

3.5
1.5

0

3

11

7

1.5

0

Impacts of the transport system
Risks, safety
HealthAir pollution
Noise pollution
Wastes and recycling
Environment, other

Policy, regulation and economics
in the transport sector
5.1 Public policy
5.2 Legal and institutional aspects
5.3 Economics of the sector

Design and developmentof technical ressources
Structural components and materials
Engines and transmission systems
Energy and fuel supply chain
Sensors, automatic systems, other

2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4

62

1
0
1
0

13
3
7.25
2.75

2

3
Organisation, operation
3.1 Quality of services, comfort, qualityof usage
3.2 Operations engineering, traffic
management
3.3 Communications systems, logistics,
telematics
3.4 Work organisation
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
5

Total

E2
E1
Drivers
Passengers,(professional,
charterers
individuals)

0
0
0
0

3.75
2
0.75
1

Mobility and its determinants
Economic determinantsLife-styles, behaviour, location
Outlook

Total

D2
Other
modes

A2
Passengers

1
1.1
1.2
1.3

E – Users, drivers

D1
Terminals

A1
Freight

Aspect of research

D – Intermodality,
other modesTotal bodies
Number of staff preparing doctorates

Aspect of research

Transport system components
A – Transport system
as a whole

C – Rail component:
train and others

B – Road component

A1
Freight

A2
Passengers

A3
UndifferentiatedB1
Infrastructure(ex. civil
works)

B2
Freight
vehiclesB3
Passengers
vehiclesC1
C2
Infrastructure
Vehicles(ex. civil(passenger,
works)
freight)

D – Intermodality,
other modes
D1
Terminals

D2
Other
modes

E – Users, drivers

Total

E2
E1
Drivers
Passengers,(professional,
charterers
individuals)

1
1.1
1.2
1.3

Mobility and its determinants
Economic determinantsLife-styles, behaviour, location
Outlook

7.5
4.0
2.0
1.5

24.3
2.0
12.5
9.8

11.7
1.5
5.2
5.0

0.3
0.3
0
0.1

0
0
0
0

0.9
0
0
0.9

1.0
0.5
0.5
0

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
0

0.8
0
0.5
0.3

46.5
8.3
20.7
17.5

2

Design and developmentof technical ressources
Structural components and materials
Engines and transmission systems
Energy and fuel supply chain
Sensors, automatic systems, other

0.2

12.3

196.5

18.6

70.7

286.6

11.3

46.4

0

2.1

0

2.0

646.5

0.2
0
0
0

7.5
4.0
0.8
0

72.1
35.8
50.5
38.1

16.7
0
0
1.9

9.2
12.6
39.8
9.1

50.3
127.4
60.7
48.1

7.3
0
0
4.0

29.9
10.3
0.3
5.9

0
0
0
0

0.5
0
0
1.6

0
0
0
0

0
0
0
2.0

193.7
190.1
152.1
110.6

3.0
0

5.3
1.2

26.4
2.0

10.6
6.1

8.2
1.1

34.5
16.5

1.2
0.5

15.6
3.9

4.5
1.5

0.5
0

4.4
4.4

15.8
6.8

129.8
43.8

0

3.3

9.0

2.6

4.1

12.4

0.1

5.5

1.0

0

0

0

37.9

3.0

0.8

15.0

1.9

3.0

5.7

0.7

5.9

1.5

0.5

0

3.0

40.9

0

0

0.5

0

0

0

0

0.4

0.5

0

0

6.0

7.4

Impacts of the transport system
Risks, safety
HealthAir pollution
Noise pollution
Wastes and recycling
Environment, other

1.5
0
0
0
0
1.0
0.5

3.8
1.1
0
0.8
0
0
2.0

86.1
18.5
16.3
25.4
11.6
8.3
6.0

16.7
6.2
0
2.7
6.3
0
1.5

21.8
2.9
0
13.2
4.2
1.6
0

45.5
19.4
1.0
18.2
3.3
3.3
0.3

6.7
0.1
0
0
6.0
0
0.7

15.1
10.3
0
0
4.8
0
0

0.2
0.2
0
0
0
0
0

2.0
2.0
0
0
0
0
0

2.5
2.5
0
0
0
0
0

13.8
13.8
0
0
0
0
0

215.5
76.9
17.3
60.2
36.1
14.1
11.0

Policy, regulation and economics
in the transport sector
5.1 Public policy
5.2 Legal and institutional aspects
5.3 Economics of the sector

3.1

6.5

22.6

0.8

1.5

2.6

0.8

0

0

0

0.5

5.8

44.0

1.4
0.8
0.9

3.5
1.0
2.0

12.9
4.5
5.2

0.3
0
0.5

0
0
1.5

0.8
0
1.8

0.3
0
0.5

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0

0
0
0.5

5.8
0
0

24.8
6.3
12.9

Total

15.3

52.1

343.3

46.9

102.2

370.0

20.9

77.0

4.7

4.6

7.4

38.0

1 082.3

2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4

63

3
Organisation, operation
3.1 Quality of services, comfort, qualityof usage
3.2 Operations engineering, traffic
management
3.3 Communications systems, logistics,
telematics
3.4 Work organisation
4
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
5

Annex 2

A framework for the co-ordination of research in the field of
inland transport: PREDIT 1996-2000

The PREDIT, which was launched at the initiative of the Ministries of Research, Transport,
Industry and the Environment, with the support of the ADEME and ANVAR, is designed toco-ordinate public funding for research in the field of inland transport. Over the period 1996-2000,
the programme will oversee the award of over FF 7 billion of funding for research projects, of which
FF 2.5 billion francs of public aid.

1. AIMS OF THE PREDIT

Develop the quality of public transport services in order to make them more accessible,
comfortable and reliable;

Speed up the time needed to bring to the market new vehicles and cleaner, quieter and more
fuel-efficient transport systems;



Improve the overall safety of vehicles and networks, particularly in the road transport
sector;Enhance the performance of French companies on international markets, notably by
reducing the cost of equipment and operating systems;

Promote the construction of major European transport networks by harmonizing operating
conditions and by ensuring that they blend properly into the environment.

2. PRINCIPLES OF IMPLEMENTATION

Improve the focus of research projects in relation to the needs of end users;

Produce projects, prototypes or demonstrations that can validate the concepts developed
from the standpoint of usage and the market;



Mobilise the public research sector to a much higher degree;Establish linkages between national and European programmes.

64

3. ORGANISATION OF THE PROGRAMME A steering committee made up of industrialists, operators, research centres andgovernment administrations; A restricted executive office to take decisions; A permanent secretariat made up of funding providers (ministries and agencies); A theme group has been set up for each research theme in the programme and given thetask of drawing up and implementing a programme of work.

4. FINANCIAL FORECASTS

Programme domains(FF millions)

Programme
BudgetTotal

1. Strategic research
2. Science and technology
3. Technological objects
4. Transport systems
5. Management of programme

200
1 300
3 800
2 000
20

150
650
1 145
685
20

Public funding
Of which R&D
framework
programme
40
190
95
200
-

Total

7 320

2 650

525

Of whichnational aid
110
460
1 050
485
2 125

5. AREAS COVERED BY THEMES

5.1. Strategic research
As both a field of research and a theme for the programme, strategic research (which is modelledon the section of the same name in the 4th EU framework programme) occupies a place slightly apartin the PREDIT. This theme is designed to provide other PREDIT groups, and indeed all researchusers, with benchmarks in the field of transport economics and the environment of the latter(determinants and impacts) over the medium and long term; it is aimed at providing an insight into
the strategies pursued by actors and to provide an overview of the main challenges in the area.
•

Theme group 1: Strategic research

655.2. Science and technology
This field of research aims to add to the basic science and technology data used in the field of
inland transport. The research organised around the three theme groups attempts to promotetechnological breakthroughs in areas of major concern to the public authorities and firms and to pave
the way for the development of new products, equipment or services in ten years’ time.
•••

Theme group 2.1: Energy, Environment.
Theme group 2.2: Safety, Ergonomics, Comfort
Theme group 2.3: Design, Production.

5.3. Technological products
The field of research addresses the development of new products, vehicles or equipment which
will constitute the next generation of transport systems. The projects concern either components andsub-systems which can improve the performance of vehicles in terms of safety, the environment andquality of service, or new generations of cleaner and safer vehicles, and more efficient rolling stock
for mainline rail services and urban light rail systems.
••••

Theme group 3.1: Components and sub-systems.
Theme group 3.2: Clean and safe vehicles.
Theme group 3.3: Railway rolling stock.
Theme group 3.4: Rolling stock for urban light rail systems.

5.4. Transport systems
The work planned in this area is designed to field test the new transport systems or services
proposed to users, in collaboration with local authorities, operators and manufacturers. Each of theseexperiments will comprise a number of preliminary economic studies, one or more “pilot” operations
and detailed assessment of the results obtained.
The research work is divided into five theme groups:
•
•
•
•
•

Theme group 4.1: Management of urban trips.
Theme group 4.2: Smart roads.
Theme group 4.3: Freight transport.
Theme group 4.4: Instrumentation and control systems for rail operations.
Theme group 4.5: New services to users.

66

ANNEX 3

List of research work undertaken in 1997 in connection with the “Strategic Research” theme(the author, title of the proposal and PREDIT funding agency for each project are given below).

MOBILISING PROGRAMME No. 1
INFORMATION SYSTEMSINRETS/DEST : Préparation d'une nouvelle enquête auprès des chargeurs (DTT);CRÉDOC : Les « profils globaux de mobilité » (ADEME 50%, DRAST 50%);



INRETS/DEST : Analyse de trafic observé par GPS et comparaison avec d’autres sources
statistiques (ADEME);ITHAQUE : De l’offre à la demande de production de connaissances sociales dans letransport routier de marchandises (DRAST).

MOBILISING PROGRAMME No. 2
EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIAL WATCH
CEREBE/CNRS : Impacts sociaux, organisationnels et commerciaux de l’automatisation
des métiers de la conduite (DRAST);



TRANS/FORMATION : Solitude et conflictualité dans le transport collectif (DRAST);ECONOMIE ET HUMANISME : Agents d’ambiance( DRAST);

ITHAQUE : De l’offre à la demande de production de connaissances dans le TRM :contribution à la définition de systèmes d’observation (DRAST).

MOBILISING PROGRAMME No. 3
DECISIONMAKING AND ASSESSMENT PROCESSESINRETS/DEST : Evaluer, débattre ou négocier l’utilité publique ? Conflits d’aménagement
et pratiques de conduite de projet (DTT);SET (CNRS) : La constitution d’une expertise environnementale transalpine et sa portée
sur les conduites de projets en France (DRAST);
67



ARCH’URBA : Politiques de transport des villes moyennes : la décision entre pression
associative locale et contraintes supra communales (DRAST);ENTPE/RIVES : Des politiques locales de déplacements urbains en quête de cohérence etde coordination : Le Plan de Déplacement Urbain de Lyon (DTT);ESSEC : Le modèle de Conflict Resolution, comme aide au management des grands projets
de transport (DRAST).

MOBILISING PROGRAMME No. 4
MOBILITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTL’OEIL : Coût de la congestion en France (DRAST);ADEUP’a : Forme et intensité de la périurbanisation et aptitude à la canaliser(DRAST 50%, ADEME 50%);



MESTRANS : Stratégies de localisation des complexes cinématographiques et médiastores(DRAST);EPPA : Stratégie de localisation de l’hôtellerie-restauration en IDF et conséquences sur lamobilité (DREIF + INRETS);CRÉDOC : Etude prospective des stratégies de localisation de la grande distribution et
impact sur la mobilité des consommateurs (DRAST);ARAUC : multiplex périphériques : mobilité, urbanisation et action des pouvoirs publics(DRAST);CERFISE : Localisations et circulations dans le procès de production des services publics(DRAST).

MOBILISING PROGRAMME No. 5
SOCIOECONOMIC RELEVANCE OF NEW TECHNOLOGIES,INNOVATION TIME-SCALESENOES : Recherche état de l’art sur la pertinence socioéconomique des nouvelles
technologies (DRAST);SNCF : Analyse systématique du produit transport combiné (DRAST).

68

MOBILISING PROGRAMME No. 6
TRASPORT LOCATIONS: CONTINUITY AND BREAKSAtelier d’Urbanisme de l’Agglomération de Tours : Les petites gares du périurbain en
région Tourangelle « Continuité territoriale et rupture de charge » (DRAST);Cynthia GHORRA-GOBIN : Le lieu du transport : aide à la conception d’un objet hybrideà partir d’un centre commercial américain (DRAST);

Prospective RATP : La gestion des espaces publics de transport et les métiers del’accessibilité dans les pôles d’échanges (DRAST);METROPOLIS : Les lieux du transport : passerelles méthodologiques entre le fret et letransport de voyageurs (DRAST).

MOBILISING PROGRAMME No. 7
NON-MOTORISED TRAVEL, PARKING AND NON-PRIVATE USE OF PRIVATE CARSBEAUVAIS CONSULTANTS : Recherche sur le comportement des familles non
motorisées (DRAST 50%, Env. 50%);



EPFL : De l’automobilité à l’écomobilité (Env. 50%, ADEME 50%);



INRETS DERA : Connaissance fine des trajets des cyclistes (DRAST);CNRS - LTMU : La pratique de la bicyclette dans les villes nouvelles (Environnement).

COMPLEMENTARY RESEARCH

GIP-RECLUS : L’inégale accessibilité des villes françaises face à l’offre de transport(DRAST);GDR RESEAUX : Réseau de communication et aménagement du territoire (DRAST);



SARECO : La surveillance du stationnement payant sur voirie (DRAST);BERTIN : Optimisation des coûts de transports urbains (DRAST);CERNA : Les péages d’accès au réseau ferroviaire (DRAST);69

UTP : Recherche sur la clientèle des seniors (DRAST);CODRA : Définition d’indicateurs de la part de marché réelle des transports publics
urbains (ADEME);

INRETS : Distribution géographique des émissions polluantes dans les grands bassins
d’emploi français (ADEME).

ACCOMPANYING MEASURES

BDCC : Conseil et assistance au pilotage du groupe R S du PREDIT (DRAST);

CRISTAL : Recherche exploratoire en vue d’élaborer de nouveaux axes de travail pour le
PREDIT : liens entre Recherches Stratégiques et les autre groupes (DRAST).

70

NETHERLANDS

Ambrosius BAANDERS
Transport Research Centre (AVV)
Ministry of Transport, Public Works
and Water Management
Rotterdam- THE EXPERIENCE IN THE NETHERLANDS -INTRODUCTION

This paper describes the experience in the Netherlands with organising and programming
research related to the making of transport policies at the national level. Its principal emphasis is on
the Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management, the author’s employer, but it
also describes the wider field of transport policy research in the Netherlands, with its many actors, asseen from the national level. Although the title of the ECMT Seminar mentions “transport economics
research”, the scope of this paper is broader. In the practice of transport policymaking it is difficult todistinguish economics from the other relevant disciplines (technical, sociological, psychological, etc.)
and therefore all relevant disciplines are, in principle, covered in this paper.
The paper consists of three parts. Part 1 describes the market for transport research in the
Netherlands. Where is the demand for such research and who are the suppliers? It goes on todescribe some of the past attempts and the present plans to diminish the fragmentation of this market.
Part 2 deals with a very important player in this market: the Ministry of Transport. It gives a brief
description of the way the transport research is organised, which is performed on behalf of the
Ministry. It indicates the way the research agenda is defined, the research is funded and the results
are disseminated. It describes the role of the Ministry's Transport Research Centre AVV and the way
the other services of the Ministry use the results and influence the agenda. In Part 3, someconclusions are given.
This paper only reflects the personal views of the author and not necessarily those of the Dutch
Ministry of Transport, nor of the Transport Research Centre AVV.

71

1. THE MARKET FOR TRANSPORT RESEARCH IN THE NETHERLANDS-- DEMAND AND SUPPLY

1.1. Supply and demand for transport research -- an overview
In the Netherlands, as in other countries, economic and other research related to transport can beseen as a market. There are parties supplying research and there are parties who have a demand forresearch. In some cases, organisations satisfy their own needs by doing research in house. But inmost cases, there are different parties on the demand and on the supply side. On the demand side, wefind organisations like transport companies, providers of transport-related services, central and local
public authorities and shippers. On the supply side, there are quasi-public and private research
institutes, consultancy firms and universities.
In-house research is mainly carried out by large organisations (e.g. the Ministry of Transport, themunicipal Port Authority of Rotterdam, the national railway company, NS). But probably in none ofthose cases is the need for transport research satisfied solely by in-house research work. The needs
are spread over a wider field than any of the organisations are able to cover on their own.
Although there are no clear figures, both on the volume of in-house research and on thecontracted work, it is safe to say that far more than half the volume (in man-hours) is indeed governedby contracts between market parties.
The universities also analyse transport problems at their own initiative. But in the last two
decades, the structure of university funding has changed and they have become more and more
dependent on outside sources for the funding of their research. In theory, university research shouldhave a more fundamental character than the research performed by other institutes and consultancies.
In practice, however, this is only partly the case. In a number of specialised fields, university projects
are hardly more fundamental than some of the work crried out by commercial consultancies.
It may be said that, in general, the market for transport research is a particularly fragmented one,with many actors both on the demand and on the supply side. On the demand side, there is one actor
which has a more substantial demand than all others, namely, the Ministry of Transport. The way this
Ministry manages its research and acts in the market is described in Part 2 of this paper. On the
supply side, there are larger and smaller institutes and consultancies, some having transport as justone of their lines of interest, others specialising in transport only. Some of the suppliers are relatively
dominant in certain parts of the market, but there are no really dominant suppliers in the transport
research market in general.

1.2. The quest for co-ordination -- the intermediary organisations
The idea that this market is too fragmented is not new. It has been the inspiration for a numberof efforts to co-ordinate transport research in the Netherlands. On a number of occasions, these
efforts have resulted in the founding of intermediary organisations. To give a complete history ofthese organisations is outside the scope of this paper. Some were reorganised and merged with others
and new ones were founded recently. In most cases, they cover one or some aspects of the transportsystem and the Ministry of Transport or another Ministry participated in founding and funding theorganisation.
72

Again, in most cases, these intermediary organisations have been set up as public-private
partnerships, in which the partners define a problem to be researched and pool their funds, after which
the organisation finds a research supplier to do the work. The results then become available to allpartners. It should be noted, however, that these intermediary organisations vary widely in scope, inlegal form and in the way they function and are funded.
The intermediary organisations that are most relevant for the purpose of this paper at the moment1
are listed below. Acronyms are used and a translation of the full Dutch names is given . The very
short descriptions of their activities do not do full justice to their work, but only serve to illustrate thevariation that exists: CROW:“Information and Technology Centre for Transport and Infrastructure”,
developing regulations in civil engineering and earth moving, organising research into civilengineering and earth moving as well as transport, and organising the transfer of knowledge,
on behalf of the authorities who own and operate infrastructure and of the building and civilengineering companies; NIM: “Netherlands Institute for Maritime Research”, dealing with the problems ofmaritime shipping companies; KMR: “Knowledge Infrastructure Main Port Rotterdam”, furthering the knowledge neededby the actors in the Port of Rotterdam (this has more of an education than a research focus);
 CTT: “Centre for Transport Technology”, dealing with technical development in freighttransport;
 ITS-Nederland:“Intelligent Transport Systems -- Netherlands”, working on thedevelopment and application of intelligent transport systems, especially in road trafficengineering.
Two intermediary organisations which have a more public character should also be mentioned:
 NOVEM: “Dutch Company for Energy and Environment”, dealing with issues of energy
conservation and environmental protection, of which transport is an aspect. This is fundedby the ministries responsible for energy policy and for the environment, but its activities are
aimed at both private and public actors, including those active in transport. NOVEM’s main
activity is to manage a subsidy programme, but it also funds some research anddevelopment; Projectbureau IVVS: “Project Bureau for Integrated Transport Studies”, dealing withlong-term questions of the interaction between transport, land use and environment policy.
This is a co-operation between ministries, namely, those responsible for transport, for landuse, for the environment and for economic development, with participation from thenational railway company, NS. It manages a research programme. One or two staff
members from each of the participants are seconded with the Project Bureau.
As can be seen from this list, even the co-ordination efforts show a rather fragmented landscape.

731.3. Developing co-operation on the supply side of the market
Towards the end of the 1980s, both the Ministry of Education, Science and Culture and theMinistry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management came to the conclusion that, despite theexistence of the intermediary organisations, there still was too much fragmentation. Dutch society
was faced with enormous challenges with regard to transport. More and better focused research anddevelopment were one of the prerequisites to meet this challenge. It was thought that the large
number of actors, both on the demand and on the supply sides, meant that the research effort was too
dispersed, that it lacked focus and that it was not fundamental enough. Particularly, universities were
not doing enough fundamental research on transport, despite these challenges and the fact thattransport is one of the key sectors of the Dutch economy.
In 1988, both ministries started some working parties to look into possible solutions. One of theconclusions was that it was difficult for universities to increase the amount of fundamental research in
the field of transport, if the demand for this research would remain as fragmented as it was. With theincreasing dependency on outside funding for their research, universities were inclined to use theirown resources to improve their competitive position for contract work. This meant that thefundamental work was done in those fields where there was a clear and strong demand for contract
research. This was not the case in the field of transport, because of the fragmented demand, spreadover too many actors. Thus, the conclusion was that a better co-operation between the actors on the
demand side would produce a more focused and less fragmented demand and this, in turn, would
incite the actors on the supply side to co-operate more fully.
Subsequently, during the 1990s, two successive committees were instituted by the four Ministersof Transport, Public Works and Water Management; of Housing, Land Use Planning andEnvironment; of Education, Science and Culture and of Economic Affairs. These committees werechaired by a politician, Mr. J. Laan, and are best known as “Committee Laan 1” and “Committee
Laan 2”. The members of these committees included representatives of the public and private actors
in the transport sector. The committees were asked to produce a programme for transport researchthat would appeal to both private and public parties on the demand side and would result in acommitment from these parties to jointly fund this programme. The projects from this programme
would then be contracted to universities, institutes and consultancies on the supply side. In this way
research in the field of transport would get the desired clearer focus and also the volume of transport
research would increase, helping policymakers to meet the long-term challenges posed by the rapidlychanging social demands.
The work of both committees proved to be difficult and progress was slow. They did not
succeed in producing a programme which the private sector would be willing to fund together withthe public sector. The “Committee Laan 2” concluded its work in 1997 by presenting a draft R&D
programme. But this did not receive a firm commitment from the private sector to fund it jointly withthe public sector.
In the meantime, the Dutch Government had initiated a policy to strengthen what was called the“knowledge infrastructure” of the Netherlands, i.e. the entire framework of institutes and actors, thatcauses knowledge to play a role in the economic development of the country. Part of the nation’s
profits from the exploitation of natural gas had been set aside for proposals to strengthen thisinfrastructure and in a number of sectors successful bids had been rewarded. One such initiative
should be mentioned here: COB, the “Centre for Underground Construction”. This has the task tofurther innovation in the (mostly technical) disciplines relevant to underground construction and is74therefore very important to transport infrastructure development. Constructing tunnels in the weakDutch soils is a big challenge. However, some bids that came directly from the transport sector had
not been successful.

1.4. A new plan to strengthen transport research
After the “Committee Laan 2” had finished its work, a new initiative was clearly needed. This
was taken in 1997 by the Ministry of Transport, in the shape of a plan to found a “Knowledge Centre
for Transport” (CONNEKT). At the time of writing, this CONNEKT is being developed. The logic
is still the same as in the committees “Laan 1” and “Laan 2”, i.e. produce a coherent and clearly
focused programme on the demand side of the transport research market and the supply side will
follow this. The difference is, however, that the programme will not be funded solely by theparticipating partners, but that extra public funds will be made available to stimulate the relevant
private and public parties to commit their own funds. In the autumn of 1998 a bid for the “knowledge
infrastructure” funds, mentioned in 1.3, was made and in early 1999 a provisional decision was taken
to honour this bid.
A draft R&D programme for CONNEKT was written earlier in 1998 and this will be elaborated
during 1999. It draws heavily on the conclusions of the “Committee Laan 2”. It is not intended tooffer short-term solutions, but to address long-term strategic questions. The main themes are:
 The burden transport imposes on society (environment, land use, safety, finite natural
resources); The integral costs of transport, including the external costs;
 Distribution of goods in urban areas; Transfer points and intermodal linkages;
 Mass customisation;
 Supply chain optimisation.
CONNEKT is being set up as a public-private partnership. The intention is that both public andprivate parties will commit themselves to funding the programme and that members of their staff will
be seconded with CONNEKT. The preparations include consultations with the intermediaryorganisations mentioned above. For the time being, aviation is not covered. CONNEKT should notjust become another intermediary organisation, but instead lead to a reduction in the number ofintermediary organisations. CTT, ITS-Nederland and Projectbureau IVVS will become part of
CONNEKT and cease to function independently. The other four organisations mentioned in section
1.2 will enter into co-operation agreements for those parts of their work that are related to the
CONNEKT programme. The four ministries involved are prepared to make part of their funds
available to help finance the programme. A similar commitment from the private sector is actively
being sought.
At the time of writing, it is hoped that CONNEKT will start to function before the end of 1999.
It is, of course, too early to say whether it will indeed be successful in reducing the fragmentation on
the demand side of the transport research market.

751.5. The international aspects of the Dutch transport research market
As is the case in many countries, Dutch transport R&D is heavily influenced by the work done inother countries, in the international organisations and by multinational companies. This is not
surprising, especially in freight transport, as international freight transport is very important in the
Dutch economy.
On the supply side of the market, Dutch transport research institutes (universities, consultancies)
have always been very open to international influences and co-operation, particularly with theEnglish-speaking world (probably because English is the most common second language). Some
consultancies have developed important activities in other countries and some foreign consultancies
have conquered a market in the Netherlands. But Dutch institutes are still very dominant on the
supply side of the Dutch market and they seem to hold a rather stable position.
The Framework Programmes (FPs) of the European Commission (EC) are an increasinglyndimportant source of international experience. The transport-related parts of the 2 FP, APAS and theth
4 FP, managed by DG VII and DG XIII, provided opportunities for Dutch research suppliers, as they
did for researchers in other EU countries, to improve their international networks and theirunderstanding of the research that was done in other countries. This will no doubt continue under theth
5 FP. A limited number of Dutch research institutes was rather successful in the competition for FP
contracts. To a larger number, however, the FP procedures present too much of a risk to consider
taking part in the competing consortia, despite some efforts by the EC to facilitate this. This may
create the danger in the future that these institutes will not be able to follow the movement towards amore international market.
The international orientation of the actors on the demand side of the market is also quite wellestablished. As far as the public authorities are concerned, this does not mean that many contracts areconcluded with foreign suppliers of research, despite the fact that the EC procedures are being
followed. The co-operation mostly takes place through international exchange programmes andconferences.

2. THE EXPERIENCE IN THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT

2.1. Tasks and organisation of the Ministry
As the purpose of transport research done by or on behalf of the Ministry of Transport, Public
Works and Water Management is to assist in policymaking, it is important to understand how themechanisms for policymaking work. Therefore, this section starts by indicating the tasks and theinternal organisation of the Ministry.
The formulation of the national policies for which the Ministry is responsible is done by the2
Policy Units within the Ministry : DGP: D-G (=Directorate-General) for Passenger Transport (all private and public transportmodes: car, bicycle, bus, tramway, railway, including infrastructure and safety);76

 DGG: D-G for Freight Transport (all modes of inland and maritime transport: lorry, barge,
railway, coastal and ocean shipping, including port policies);
 RLD: D-G for Civil Aviation (including airport policies);
 DGTP: D-G for Telecommunications and Postal Services.
The implementation of most of the policies, notably those of the first two Policy Units, DGP and
DGG, is the responsibility of another branch of the Ministry: Rijkswaterstaat (RWS): D-G for Public Works and Water Management.
Rijkswaterstaat is by far the largest unit in the Ministry (some 10,000 employees). It is
responsible for the state-owned infrastructure (there is also infrastructure owned by provinces andmunicipalities). This infrastructure includes the national highway and waterway network and (veryimportant in the Low Countries) the dikes and coastal water protection works. This responsibility
covers management and maintenance of the existing network and design and construction of newnational infrastructure. Another task of Rijkswaterstaat is the development and management of theknowledge necessary for all of these tasks: policy, infrastructure management and construction.
The Ministry sees itself as having three core areas of competence: policy development,
implementation and knowledge. The former is the responsibility of the Policy Units and the latter
two of Rijkswaterstaat. All three core competencies serve each other.
The internal organisation of Rijkswaterstaat reflects this. Apart from the headquarters, there areten Regional Directorates responsible for policy implementation, infrastructure management andinfrastructure construction in their region. There are also six Specialist Directorates, which furnish
specialist knowledge to the Regional Directorates and the Policy Units. Their specialities include, forexample, road and waterway construction techniques, geodetic services, water dynamics, water
environmental protection. One of the specialities is transport and traffic and this is the responsibilityof the Transport Research Centre AVV (AVV = Adviesdienst Verkeer en Vervoer).

2.2. Tasks and position of the Transport Research Centre AVV
2.2.1.

AVV and its clients

The Transport Research Centre AVV was constituted in 1993 by bringing together a number ofunits responsible for parts of the knowledge about and the research into inland transport. It is one of
the Specialist Directorates of Rijkswaterstaat. What was developed was a “demand driven”
organisation, i.e. each project is undertaken at the demand of a “client”.
Clients are the Policy Units of the Ministry and the Regional Directorates which are part of
Rijkswaterstaat. They demand specialist advice in the field of transport, which may be given either
on the basis of new research or on the basis of existing knowledge. This existing knowledge comesfrom earlier research or from work done elsewhere (nationally or internationally) which AVV isfamiliar with. A part of the new research is done by AVV’s own staff; an important part of it iscontracted in the market, to universities, research institutes and consultancies.

77

In fact, AVV’s work is divided into three categories: Advice and development for clients (see subsection 2.2.2);
 Basic information (see 2.2.3);
 Research in anticipation (see 2.2.4).
2.2.2.

Advice and development for clients“Advice and development for clients” is the work commissioned to the Transport ResearchCentre AVV by the Policy Units and the Regional Directorates. For each client, an annual work
programme is developed. AVV has an account manager for each client, who is responsible for the
co-operation with that client and who develops the programme as part of this co-operation. The work
programme specifies the projects that will be undertaken that year (with some attention to futureyears) and the amount of research and development that is necessary. It also specifies the staff
capacity reserved for this work at AVV and the budgets for the external R&D contracts. Thosebudgets are furnished by the client and passed on to AVV, which concludes the contracts with the
suppliers in the market.
Before starting a project, AVV staff normally first scan the information they have alreadyavailable on the subject. This may come from earlier research by AVV, but also from work done
elsewhere, which they know through the contacts AVV maintains with other institutes, through theconferences in which AVV staff take part and through literature study. In many cases, an outsidecontractor is hired to do some (or a lot of) research or development. When the work of the outsidecontractor is finished, AVV uses the results in its advice to the client (in many cases, the consultant
report goes directly to the client, but it is always accompanied by the advice from AVV).
In practice, it proves to be very difficult for a client to plan his needs for policy advice for morethan a couple of months ahead. This is especially true for the Policy Units. Therefore, the annual
programme has to be flexible. AVV achieves this in two ways. First, during the year, changes are
made in the programme. As AVV also has programmes for other clients, the total staff capacity forthis client should remain the same. In practice this means that when a client wants AVV to start a
new project, which is not in the programme, he indicates which other project is given a lower priority(i.e. is deleted or postponed). Second, AVV reserves a part of its staff capacity for “ad hoc advice”,
quick answers to urgent questions. The ad hoc advice only involves AVV’s own staff, no outsidecontractors, and is based on its accumulated knowledge and experience. In most cases it represents
no more than a few days' work.
2.2.3.

Basic information“Basic information” involves data and statistics that are collected. To a large extent, these aretime series and there is a long-running programme for this. As most of the data sets are useful toseveral or many of AVV’s clients, the Rijkswaterstaat headquarters act as a client for all of this workand there are no separate programmes for each client. A large part of this data collection work isdone by AVV’s own staff, but another part is contracted to outside parties.
Basic information is also an important input to many projects of advice for clients, e.g. theprojects to monitor policy implementation.

78

2.2.4.

Research in anticipation“Research in anticipation” is the work which the Transport Research Centre AVV does at its
own initiative. Often, a Policy Unit requires advice at short notice, but the research work that isneeded would take much longer. However, Policy Units tend to be very occupied by the immediate
questions they are facing and it is difficult to have them accept projects in the programme which are
not of immediate interest, or which take a long time to produce results. Therefore, each Specialist
Directorate has a part of its capacity (in staff and in budget for external contracts) reserved for“research in anticipation”.
Each Specialist Directorate uses this for projects for which there is no current policy demand,but of which it (by its own professional judgement) estimates that there will be a demand in, say,
2-3 years' time. The Rijkswaterstaat headquarters act as a client for this work and provide the budget.
As the programme is agreed at a level of rather widely formulated themes, the Specialist Directorate
has some freedom to decide on the content of the actual projects within these themes.
The freedom this creates for the Transport Research Centre AVV is limited, however, by the fact
that, as part of the civil service, its work is always subject to political control by the Minister.
Therefore, before starting a project “in anticipation”, AVV staff discuss it with the relevant Policy
Unit. If they feel that it would be politically inopportune, AVV will not start it. But the Policy Unit
staff do not decide on the priority of the project; in fact, they give it a low priority as it is not in the
programme AVV agreed with them.
How does this system work in practice? On the one hand, the results of the projects “inanticipation”, once finished, generate in many cases much interest with the relevant Policy Unit orRegional Directorate. Hardly ever is it questioned afterwards if the project warranted the priority.
This category of work is important for AVV, as it provides room for innovation and fosters its staff’s
creativity as well as that of the external contractors. On the other hand, the absence of an immediatedemand means that it is sometimes difficult to give this work sufficient priority. This holds for
Rijkswaterstaat headquarters, when they have to decide about the budgets, as well as for AVV itself,
when other projects have to be done at the same time, for which there are clients with a pressing
demand.
2.2.5.

Volume and organisation of the work at AVV

It is beyond the scope of this paper to give an overview of the contents of the programmes of theTransport Research Centre AVV. Part of the work has the character of technological development,
particularly in the field of dynamic traffic management: new technologies to increase the capacity ofthe existing motorway network. Another part can be qualified as policy research. Here, apart fromtechnical disciplines, the economic and social sciences are also important.
The staff of AVV totals over 450 people. Apart from the overhead, about 59 per cent of theirtime is spent on “advice and development for clients”, 32 per cent on “basic information” and 9 percent on “research in anticipation” (planning figures for 1998). The total budget for external contracts
is about 54 million ECU in 1998. Of this about 82 per cent is used in “advice and development forclients”, 15 per cent in “basic information” and 3 per cent in “research in anticipation”.

79The annual programmes that are established for each client mean that there is a constant sourceof funding for the parties on the supply side of the market in the relevant field. In many fields, AVV
is one of the most important parties on the demand side.
An important function of the Specialist Directorates is to accumulate all knowledge gained in the
R&D projects and to keep it accessible for future use. At AVV this is done in “knowledge centres”,
i.e. teams of staff members with a certain speciality, who keep the knowledge of AVV in their field
up to date and accessible.
Especially in policy research, the AVV staff are often highly involved in the work of the outsidecontractors. This means they follow the external work very closely. The advantage is that theexperience from the project can easily be used for other work, without contacting the contractor
again.
In the “research in anticipation” programme, there are some developments of models and other
instruments that have been sustained over long periods. For instance, AVV maintains a national
travel model system that is capable of forecasting travel flows by car and public transport on the main
network on a nationwide scale. The development of this system started in the 1970s and is still goingon. It is now very sophisticated and many policies can be and have been tested on it. Such along-term development could never have been justified on policy demands alone, even though its use
in “advice to clients” is now very important. A degree of freedom for the research managers to use
their own professional judgement was necessary for sustaining this development.
The international activities of the Transport Research Centre AVV should also be mentioned
briefly. AVV takes part in the research programming discussions with the European Commission(DG VII, DG XII and DG XIII). It also participates in the OECD Road Transport Research Steering
Committee, in the ECMT Economic Research Committee, in PIARC, PIANC, etc. Moreover, there
are bilateral contacts with similar ministerial institutes in other countries. These activities allow AVV
to put its work in a wider context and to take account of developments elsewhere.
2.2.6.

Dissemination of results

In the “demand driven” model of the Transport Research Centre AVV, the main target for the
dissemination of the results is the “client”. In the category “advice and development for clients”,
each project ends, of course, with a final report to the client. But also reports from “basic
information” and “research in anticipation” projects are presented to the relevant clients within the
Ministry. Frequently, oral presentations to ministerial staff complement the reports.
The decision about publication outside the Ministry (to the politicians, to the public, to thescientific community) has to be taken by the relevant Policy Unit or Regional Directorate. In the
majority of cases, all results are made public in some way or another. The outside contractors and
AVV’s staff often write articles about their work. They also present papers at conferences, where
they exchange experiences.

80

2.3. The evolution to the present situation in the Ministry
2.3.1.

A concentration of transport research management

It is beyond the purpose of this paper to give a full description of how the Ministry evolved into
the present situation, but some elements of this are worth highlighting, because they illustrate theissues of programming transport research for policymaking.
Rijkswaterstaat has had Specialist Directorates for a long time. They were responsible for the
research and development that was needed for the tasks of Rijkswaterstaat: infrastructure design,
construction and maintenance, sea and river water management and water quality. In the beginningof the 1970s, the Traffic Engineering Division (DVK) was founded as a new Specialist Directorate,dealing with traffic engineering and traffic management on the national highway network and alsowith the need for and design of, the future motorway network. In this period, a major extension of the
motorway network was started, leading to the very dense network that the Netherlands has at present.
Public transport and freight transport (by rail, road or water) were the responsibility of other Policy
Units. They did not have Specialist Directorates, but had a small number of staff that did passcontracts in the research market in support of policy development. However, these Policy Units did
not have a tradition of supporting this policy development with research and efforts to bring more
continuity in the programming were not very successful.
Since the 1970s, the transport system in the Netherlands, as in many other countries, has
increasingly become a concern to the public and the politicians. The burden it imposes on Dutch
society has increased: land use in a very densely populated country, environmental impacts,
congestion, safety, etc. But it is also clear that a well-functioning transport system is important for
the economy and for society in general. This increasing concern had two consequences: It became impossible to just study highway traffic and car use, public transport and freighttransport separately. The term “integrated transport research” became fashionable toindicate the simultaneous consideration of all modes; and the term was subsequently
extended to the effects on land use and spatial planning, on the environment, on theeconomy and on society in general; The building of new infrastructure and the policies of the Ministry were more and more
contested in society. Each measure now has to be accompanied by extensive demonstrationof the benefits, consideration of the alternatives, attenuation of the negative impacts, etc. In
other words, the need for policy research has increased. The question “Do we need all thisresearch?” arises frequently within the Ministry. But still there is a steadily upwards trend
in the demand for it, and this is in line with what can be observed in many other countries.
In a reaction to this, it was decided at the beginning of the 1990s to concentrate all the Ministry’s
transport research and development and its management in one Specialist Directorate, working bothfor Rijkswaterstaat (including the Regional Directorates) and for the Policy Units in the other parts of
the Ministry. Thus the Transport Research Centre AVV was formed in 1993 by bringing together all
relevant units. This enabled a more “integral” way of working in all study and R&D projects. It also
allowed the capacity for research of public transport and freight transport to be extended.

812.3.2.

The co-operation between AVV and its clients

In order to keep as much co-operation as possible with the Policy Units, which were afraid oflosing control over the research they needed, the “client driven” system was developed. Clearly, theco-operation has to be learned. The account managers appointed by the Transport Research Centre
AVV play an important role in this respect. One of the lessons is that it is very difficult for a Policy
Unit to plan its research needs more than a year ahead. New needs frequently come up at very short
notice and the programme therefore has to be flexible. In a number of cases, it has been very difficult
to agree with an individual Policy Unit upon a balanced programme, different parts of the Unit having
opposing interests. On the other hand, it was found that as soon as the management of a Policy Unit
undertakes an effort to define or redefine its strategies, the definition of a balanced programme ofresearch and specialist advice becomes much easier.
The Transport Research Centre AVV sees it as its role to watch over the balance of the
programme from a scientific angle. This means, for example:
 Questions that need thorough research should not be addressed by quick studies only; The methods should be scientifically appropriate, not chosen only considering the speed ofproducing results;
 Results should also be published (and the lessons learned!) if they are not liked by thepolicymakers.
If the need arises, AVV uses its capacity for “research in anticipation” to try and redress thebalance. This role may inspire discussion with its clients. But in the final analysis they agree that
AVV has to play this critical role. In some instances they have asked AVV to be more critical thanit was.
2.3.3.

The position of AVV: the results of discussion

It took a lot of discussion within the Ministry for the Transport Research Centre AVV to arrive
at its present position. A few of the discussion points are worth mentioning here.
There was the question from many Policy Unit staff members (“policymakers”) as to why it isnecessary to have a Specialist Directorate. Agreeing on a contract with an outside contractor does notseem very complicated and in doing so, the policymaker keeps direct control over the way hisquestions are answered. The answer was that AVV provides added value (as do the other Specialist
Directorates). AVV has an extensive experience with the parties that operate on the supply side in the
research market and knows who does what kind of research best. The policymakers do not have thetime or the interest to document their experience with research in their project; when it is over, theytend to move on to other projects. It needs organisational measures to accumulate the experience andto keep it accessible. This is the function of the “knowledge centres” described in subsection 2.2.5.
AVV staff also have the insights in scientific developments that allow them to place the policyquestion in a scientific context; they are thus able to judge how the question should best be
approached. In this way, knowledge as one of the three core areas of competence of the Ministry (seesection 2.1.) is assured.

82

Another question is the volume of “research in anticipation”. The fact that it is generally seen as
important, does not mean that it gets priority in the budget allocation process. This is the object of aconstant struggle. The Director-General of Rijkswaterstaat formulated a norm some years ago, of
10 per cent of staff capacity and of budget for research in anticipation. For AVV, the present figures
are lower (9 per cent and 3 per cent respectively in 1998, see section 2.2.5), as they have always been.
Should the clients be obliged to use the services of the Transport Research Centre AVV? Should
there be some kind of truck system? The argument has been put forward that it does not seem very
efficient if the Ministry pays for the AVV staff costs and then does not use it for the tasks it is
supposed to perform. At first sight, an obligation to use its services looks very comfortable for AVV.
But experience shows that in such a situation the clients (who feel limited in their choices) would
immediately value AVV’s services less. AVV therefore prefers a situation where the Policy Units
and Regional Directorates are free to use its services or not and where it constantly has to “earn” its
position.
Should the Transport Research Centre AVV work for parties outside the Ministry of Transport?
This is a question that has arisen a couple of times in the past. AVV’s policy is to work only for third
parties when there is an instruction from the relevant Policy Unit to do so. This happens, e.g., when
the Policy Units involve AVV in public-private partnerships. But it means that AVV, as part of thecivil service, does not compete with the supply side of the market.
Some partnerships with other public authorities in which AVV is involved are worth mentioning: The Projectbureau IVVS (on “Integrated Transport Studies”) was already mentioned in
section 1.2. This is a co-operation between a number of Ministries; In 1997, an agreement was concluded between the Ministry of Transport on the one hand
and the provinces and municipalities on the other, about the decentralisation of a number of
powers. As part of this agreement, the Ministry is making its knowledge on transportavailable to the provinces and municipalities. To this end the Transport Research Centre
AVV has, in co-operation with the provinces and municipalities, set up an informationtransfer desk for the benefit of these authorities;
 A similar information transfer desk was set up by AVV around the same time as part of aprogramme for “Sustainable Traffic Safety”, at the request of the Policy Unit DGP. This
also involves the local authorities;
 A third area of co-operation with the local authorities concerns decentralisation with regard
to public transport. Under a new law, the market regulations for urban and regional public
transport will be changed from a highly centralised regime to a more decentralised one, inwhich public transport operators will compete for fixed duration contracts passed byprovinces and large municipalities. This kind of competition is new in the Netherlands andthere is little experience in this matter. Therefore, AVV has been charged to set up, together
with the provinces and municipalities, an office to do research, to monitor and to transfer
knowledge concerning these new forms of decentralisation and competition.

83

3. CONCLUSIONSThe Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management in the Netherlands hasdeveloped a system for managing its transport research and development, which works relatively
well. In this system, the “demand driven” Transport Research Centre AVV plays a key role.
However, this has not brought sufficient change in the Dutch transport research market as a whole. In
the eyes of many observers, Dutch transport research is too fragmented and lacks a clear focus. A
new “Knowledge Centre” (“CONNEKT”), set up as a public-private partnership, is being developed
at the moment, in the hope that this will improve the situation. It is too early, however, to say if itwill be successful.

NOTES

1.

In Annex, a glossary of the English and the official Dutch names of all organisations
mentioned in this paper is given.

2.

See the glossary in Annex for the official Dutch names.

84

ANNEXGLOSSARY OF ORGANISATIONS
For the benefit of those readers who have an understanding of the Dutch language, the Dutch andEnglish names of the organisations mentioned in this paper are given below.
Acronym
EnglishDutch
Adviesdienst Verkeer en Vervoer“Transport Research Centre AVV”
AVV
COB

“Centre for Underground Construction”

Centrum voor Ondergronds Bouwen

CONNEKT“Knowledge Centre for Transport”

Centrum voor Onderzoek en Kennis op
het gebied van Transport

CROW“Information and Technology Centre for Centrum voor Regelgeving en
Onderzoek in de Verkeerstechniek en deTransport and Infrastructure”
Grond- Weg en Waterbouw

CTT“Centre for Transport Technology”

Centrum voor Transporttechnologie

DGG“Directorate-General for FreightTransport”

Directoraat-Generaal voor
Goederenvervoer

DGP“Directorate-General for Passenger
Transport”

Directoraat-Generaal voor
Personenvervoer

DGTP“Directorate-General for
Telecommunications and Postal
Services”

Directoraat-Generaal voor
Telecommunicatie en Post

ITS-NL“Intelligent Transport Systems –Netherlands”

Intelligente Transportsystemen –Nederland

KMR“Knowledge Infrastructure Main Port
Rotterdam”

Kennisinfrastructuur Mainport
Rotterdam

NIM“Netherlands Institute for Maritime
Research”

Nederlands Instituut voor Maritiem
Onderzoek

NOVEM“Dutch Company for Energy andEnvironment”

Nederlandse Onderneming voor
Energie en Milieu

Project-bureau “Project Bureau for Integrated Transport Projectbureau Integrale Verkeers- en
Vervoersstudies
Studies”
IVVS
RLD“Directorate-General for Civil Aviation” Directoraat-Generaal
Rijksluchtvaartdienst

RWS“Directorate-General for Public Works
and Water Management”
85

Directoraat-Generaal Rijkswaterstaat

86

CZECH REPUBLIC

Jiri MATEJOVIC
Ministry of Transport and Communications
PraguePUBLIC TRANSPORT RESEARCH IN THE TRANSPORT ECONOMIC FIELD-- THE CASE OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC --1. THE CURRENT SYSTEM OF TRANSPORT ECONOMICS RESEARCH

1.1. Current organisation of the Ministry of Transport and Communications
The Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Czech Republic is divided into seven Divisions-- Division of the Minister and Divisions 1 to 6 (see Annex 1).
The Transport Policy, International Relations and Environment Department (Division 2) plays a
key role as contractor in matters of economic transport research projects. Obviously, this department isclosely associated with the Department of Finance and Economics. The principal orientation andactivity of this Department is the creation of specific research tasks and co-ordination between individual
departments.

1.2. Research bodies which work with the Ministry of Transport and Communications








Centrum dopravního výzkumu (Transport Research Centre – the only state transport researchorganisation);Transconsult, s. r. o., Hradec Králové;
Dopravní rozvojové stredisko Ceské republiky;
CITYPLAN, s.r.o.;
SBP (Sofretu Bceom Praha), s.r.o.;
SUDOP PRAHA, a.s.
Univerzita Pardubice.

Transport economics research is divided mainly among the above-mentioned bodies. The role of thelocal authorities in the present system is minimal.

871.3. Links with other ministries and public bodies
Transport economics research is also carried out by other ministries: the Ministry of Finance, theMinistry of Industry and Business, and the Czech railways. Transport problems are also mentioned inthese projects.

1.4. Fields covered by research
The research covers all transport modes including questions of transport policy issues. Short- andmedium-term projects are generally involved.

1.5. Budget, sources
Projects are financed from a state budget through the partial budgets of individual ministries.

2. COMMISSIONING OF RESEARCH

2.1. Definition of main lines of research
The main principles of transport research are defined by State transport policy. Specific projects areannounced annually by the Ministry of Transport and Communications in the framework of transport
research programmes. The projects are linked with the main EU programmes (4 FP and 5 FP) and otherinternational research activities.

2.2. Research clients
The main clients for research are state administration authorities, which are also the contractors of the
projects.

2.3. Links with other programmes
All projects are co-ordinated by the Ministry of Transport and Communications respectively withother responsible authorities.

3. RESEARCH MONITORING AND EVALUATION

3.1. Starting process and scheduling of research operations
The Ministry of Transport and Communications annually announces a public tender to solve theresearch projects for own purposes. The system guidance for solution/scheduling remains with the
Ministry of Transport and Communications.
883.2. Monitoring of research operations
The monitoring during the project is carried out according to an approved timetable by the contractor
or sub-contractor. The financial questions, stage of solutions and other problems are controlled at work
meetings.

3.3. Assessment criteria for evaluation
The results of the research project are evaluated by the contractor. Assessment is provided annually
by a commission for projects financed from the state budget.

4. USE OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

4.1. Dissemination
The research results – mainly final research reports -- are divided by contractor. Other disseminationis realised by the public media, depending on the type of result.

4.2. Exploitation and impact of research activities
The research results are usually used immediately by the contractor and for other research activities.
The results are also used in the decision process -- transport policymaking -- by the state authorities.

5. VALUE JUDGEMENT ON THE PRESENT SYSTEM

The process of evaluation and co-ordination among different contractors requires improvement.
It is also necessary to widely improve the exploitation of transport research results. Economictransport research must provide a better base for policymakers, especially in the field of modelling andforecasting transport developments, as mentioned in the document “Transport Policy of the Czech
Republic”. Chapter 13 of the document is entitled “Research, Development and Technological Policy in
the Transport Sector” and an abbreviated version can be found in Annex 2.
For the list of projects commissioned by the Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Czech
Republic, see Annex 3.

89

ANNEX 1
STRUCTURE OF THE MINISTRY OF TRANSPORT AND COMMUNICATIONS OF THE CZECH REPUBLIC

0010
Office of the Minister0020
Dept. of Integration into theEuropean Union

0030
Dept. of Crisis Management

Division 1
Division of road transport,
road communications, tracks
and railway transport, public
transport and main transport
authority project0110
Dept. of Road Transport

Division 2
Division of transport policy,
internatinal relations,environment, civil aviation,navigation and waterways

Division 3
Division of post,
telecommunications andinformation systems

Division 4
Division of finance,
economics and internal
administration

Division 5
Legislative Division

Division 6
Czech Telecommunications
Authority0210
Dept. of Transport Policy,
International relations andEnvironment0310
Dept. of Telecommunications

0410
Dept. of Finance andEconomics

0510
Legislative Department

60
Section of the Managing
Director

0120
Dept. of Road
Communications

0220
Dept. of Civil Aviation

0320
Postal Department0420
Dept. of Internal
Administration

0130
Dept. of Tracks and Railway
Transport

0230
Dept. of Navigation andWaterways

0330
Dept. of Information Systems

0140
Dept. of Public Transport
0150
Main transport authority
project

0040
Dept. of Inspection

61
Section of Regulation
62
Section of State
Administration and Inspection

ANNEX 2
Chapter 13 from “The Transport Policy of the Czech Republic”
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT AND TECHNOLOGICAL POLICY IN
THE TRANSPORT SECTOR

The current status of the transport sector as regards research and development management in the
Czech Republic is not satisfactory.
In general, emphasis is to be laid on strategic research and complex transport issues demanding a large
share of forecasting. At the same time, it is necessary to take a greater share in the supra-national researchin co-operation with other transport entities and supply organisations.
The objective of the reorganisation of the research must be an efficient interconnection of research
institutes and universities and their involvement in international co-operation. This means the generationof a research and development management system in the transport sector based on:









The creation of preconditions for the participation of the Czech Republic in selected research anddevelopment projects organised by international organisations, especially by the EU and UN/EEC;
The creation of a long-term research plan in the transport sector for the needs of the Czech
Republic and the establishment of a co-ordinator from the staff of some dominating and prestigious
research organisations or universities (who would be also able to substitute the co-ordinating
function of the Czech Academy of Sciences, where the transport sector is not represented so far);to create space also for dealing with topical issues;
To specify means for tackling (through project proceedings) newly emerging problems (withsubstantial preservation of current processes but in a restricted manner for projects that are subject
to examination – not by substituting research capacities for the decisionmaking of the stateadministration);
To invite for open tenders concerning any material grant, including principal selection criteria. In
this context, to follow the Act No. 2/1995 Coll., on state support for research and development,
and the system of research and development projects of the Ministry of Transport andCommunications of the Czech Republic. To use experiences of the hitherto existing evaluationcommittees related to such projects in order to innovate the whole system and, in particular, toachieve greater involvement of research capacities of transport-oriented universities;
To define more precisely the technical standards and conditions for the development and operationof means of transport and to gradually adopt, for the whole of the transport sector, technicalstandards of the EC and other international organisations.

Apart from this, it is necessary to systematically improve the education of transport specialists,
including their further training, career rules and their preparation for entry into the EU in particular.
With regard to the fact that the Czech Republic does not dispose of departmental or state testing
facilities for technical design tests and for checks on technical requirements placed on road vehicles (suchactivities are performed by authorised private organisations), it is necessary to completely resolve the roleof the state in this field.

91

ANNEX 3
List of projects commissioned by the
Ministry of Transport and Communications of the Czech Republic

The projects listed below were commissioned by the Czech Ministry of Transport andCommunications through a public call for tender. The topics were taken from the Transport Research
Programme and are those which it was felt most needed to be addressed in order to solve current and futuretransport problems in the Czech Republic.
PD101330603
STUDY OF COMBINED AND INTEGRATED TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE WITH A
VIEW TO MAKING GREATER USE OF TRANSPORT AND LOGISTICS SYSTEMS
Design of road/rail and road/inland waterway combined transport infrastructure in relation to logistics
systems and investigation of the scope for the development of combined and integrated transport systems
in the transport market. Specification of infrastructure requirements with a view to further developing
combined transport and logistics systems. Assessment of infrastructure needs with regard to thedevelopment of urban areas, the Czech transport network and links between the latter and the European
combined transport network.
Contractor: Transconsult s.r.o.
Duration of contract: 3 years.
PD103120602
FORECASTING FUTURE TRENDS IN ROAD TRAFFIC DENSITY
Development of mathematical models to forecast future trends in road traffic on the basis of different
scenarios for the construction of new motorways and four-lane highways in the Czech Republic in
accordance with Acts Nos. 631/1993 and 513/1994.
Contractor: Centrum dopravního výzkumu (Transport Research Centre)
Duration of contract: 2 years
PD103130604
DEVELOPMENT OF AN ECONOMIC MODEL OF THE CIVIL AVIATION SECTOR AND
MACROECONOMIC MODELS TO FORECAST OPERATIONAL OUTPUTS
Forecasting of operational and economic indicators for the civil aviation sector on the basis ofmacroeconomic indicators. Determination of the relations and ratios between operational and economic
indicators, on the one hand, and macroeconomic indicators on the other through comparison with
developed economies in Europe (Austria). Determination of anticipated trajectories in accordance with
future trends in the civil aviation sector.
Contractor: Ing. Drahoslav Koláø
Duration of contract: 4 years

92

PD103330601
ALTERNATIVE TRENDS IN THE MODAL SPLIT
Analysis of trends in transport modes and the transport market. Forecast scenarios. Model for the creation
and analysis of different scenarios. Network development and trends in financial requirements.
Contractor: BSP (Sofretu BCEOM Praha) s.r.o.
Duration of contract: 3 years
PD103330603
FORECASTING MODEL FOR ROAD TRANSPORT EXTERNALITIESAssessment of trends in growth in road traffic, the impact of such growth on road accident rates and theenvironment, comparison with other European countries, development of a model to forecast trends in
accident rates and the environmental impact of road traffic.
Contractor: Centrum dopravního výzkumu
Duration of contract: 3 years
PD201330601
HARMONISATIONEXTERNALITIES

OF

THE

CZECH

TRANSPORT

MARKETAND

ASSOCIATED

Harmonisation of Czech transport legislation with EU directives. Analysis of Czech transport policy.
Market trends in the Czech Republic and infrastructure requirements. Government funding. Transport
externalities.
Contractor: BSP (Sofretu BCEOM Praha) s.r.o.
Duration of contract: 2 years
PD401330601
STABILISATION AND GRADUAL REDUCTION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL BURDENATTRIBUTABLE TO TRANSPORT IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Working papers will be drawn up on the basis of an analysis of the environmental burden attributable toroad traffic in the Czech Republic in order to determine how this burden might be stabilised and gradually
reduced in the following areas: adoption of UN/ECE and EU regulations in the Czech Republic,
introduction of measures to reduce the impact of transport on the environment, proposal of effective
economic instruments and criteria, application of external costs with regard to international development,
methods of investigating emissions from mobile sources and involvement in international activities in thisarea.
Contractor: Centrum dopravního výzkumu
Duration of contract: 6 years

93PD408220601
RESEARCH INTO THE CHANGES IN VEHICLE FLEET COMPOSITION REQUIRED FOR
COMBINED TRANSPORT OPERATIONS -- SWAP BODIES
Designing of measures to develop combined transport by optimising fleet composition;
economic and legal conditions.
Contractor: Centrum dopravního výzkumu
Duration of contract: 3 years

technical,

PD501220601
DEVELOPMENT OF A DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM FOR USE IN AN EXPANDEDCOMBINED (ROAD/RAIL) TRANSPORT SECTOR IN THE LIBERALISED TRANSPORT
MARKET IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Support for the development of combined transport and integration of the combined transport sector into
the Trans-European network. Different scenarios of how to achieve this goal. Series of measures.
Flexible computer model.
Contractor: BSP (Sofretu BCEOM Praha) s.r.o.
Duration of contract: 3 years
PD501220602
THE ROLE THAT GREATER MARKET PRESENCE FOR COMBINED TRANSPORT CAN
PLAY IN STRENGTHENING TRANSPORT CHAINS
Analysis of the transport market and proposed solutions to problems currently preventing transport quality
from being enhanced and optimised in a way that will ensure adequate levels of mobility and that isenvironmentally friendly.
Contractor: Dopravní rozvojové støedisko Èeské republiky
Duration of contract: 3 years
PD503330601
PROPOSED METHODOLOGY FOR THE MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORT ON
THE BASIS OF ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL DATA
Application of management theory to the transport sector. Information systems and decision support
systems. Use of multicriteria analysis to develop and evaluate different scenarios.
Contractor: BSP (Sofretu BCEOM Praha) s.r.o.
Duration of contract: 3 years
PD503330702
GREEN PAPER ON PASSENGER TRANSPORT IN THE CZECH REPUBLIC
Design of a strategy towards passenger transport in the Czech Republic on the basis of an analysis of
anticipated changes in the macroeconomic environment and population growth in the Czech Republic, in
accordance with the Government’s basic policy instruments and the EU traffic policy programme of action.
Contractor: Centrum dopravního výzkumu
Duration of contract: 2 years

94UNITED KINGDOMRod M. KIMBER
Transport Research Laboratory
Crowthorne

THE ORGANISATION OF RESEARCH

1. CONTEXTUAL BACKGROUND

Transport economics research has underpinned policy decisionmaking primarily by evaluating
value-for-money in infrastructure investment and other operational and social factors in surface
transport, as well as contributing towards appraisal in airport provision and maritime provision. Thechanging emphasis in high-level political objectives has brought a changing context: sustainability
and social inclusion need to be taken into account by encompassing them in the broad economic
concepts. A further complication is the changing commercial status of railway provision in Britain.
The Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR) is a major instigator oftransport economics research. Its annual research budget is established by policy divisions identifying
which research they think is likely to be required, establishing the likely costs and submitting spending
proposals. The amount of funding actually provided is determined firstly by priorities within the
Department and eventually by the requirements of the Government’s overall spending programme.
For surface transport, Directorate Research Committees (DRCs) determine the strategies forresearch, and from time to time publish Research Strategies which lay out the overall directions ofresearch. There are two DRCs: the joint Integrated and Local Transport and Roads and Traffic(ILT/RT) Research Committee and the Road Safety and Environment (RSED) Committee. The
research programme is managed by these committees; membership is typically drawn from senior
officials within each Directorate, other research customers in DETR and the Highways Agency (HA)
and representatives from the Scottish Office, the Welsh Office and the Department of the Environment(Northern Ireland). The process of identifying research needs is driven by “theme co-ordinators”
identifying research needs and priorities, on the basis of input from external research advisors, inaddition to suggestions by project officers and policy staff. The DRCs determine overall priorities andallocate budgets to individual “customer” divisions. Increasingly, government is involving bothresearchers and policymakers in the process of establishing research needs.
The DRCs’ interests include a wide range of issues relating to transport economics. On the
highways side, the recent themes include the appraisal of trunk road schemes; the wider role of theroad programme, road pricing and road funding and commercialisation. For urban and local transport,
the themes include urban transport management, driver information, environmental issues andmobility and social policy.

95

Research priorities have also been identified through the Foresight Programme, operating under
the auspices of the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI). This aims to improve the competitive
drive of the UK economy, and enhance the quality of life, by bringing together business, the sciencebase and government to identify and respond to emerging opportunities in markets and technologies.
The programme is spearheaded by sixteen panels, each representing an important sector of theeconomy. Transport is one such panel. The panels comprise representatives from business, thescience base and government. Foresight is to be relaunched early in 1999.
Research strategies are currently being re-examined in the light of the Government’s recent White
1
Paper . This White Paper provides a radical agenda for action at national, regional and local andindividual level. It sets out a wide range of policy initiatives, many of which will need to be informedby focused research, both now and in the future. This has altered the research agenda, and the DETR
is consulting widely on the research required to implement provisions in the White Paper. Key areas
will include: developing and enhancing appraisal frameworks; investigating links between regional
economic growth and transport supply; addressing the trade-offs between the movement of people
and goods and services; demand management; modal shift (including less use of the car); and roaduser charging.
There have already been changes in the emphasis of transport scheme appraisal. The DETR has
recently set out a new approach to the appraisal of a wide range of road investment proposals, withgreater emphasis on the non-money costs and benefits. A central element is the provision of an
Appraisal Summary Table, which allows the relative merits of different options to be exposed moreclearly. The information presented in this Table is generally acquired by established techniques toassess the environmental, economic and social consequences of options. The White Paper is likely tolead to further examination of the structure of investment appraisal methodologies.
The DETR is also concerned with the more “macro” aspects of transport investment. In
particular, the Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment (SACTRA) is currently
studying for DETR the relationship between transport provision, user costs and economic growth. It is
examining the effectiveness of conventional appraisal methods in measuring the effects on economic
growth of improvements in transport provision, and the appraisal of the effects on economic growth ofmeasures to reduce transport intensity.
The Highways Agency, an Agency of the DETR, is also a significant commissioner of research.
The majority of its transport economics research is commissioned by the Traffic Appraisal, Modellingand Economics Division, largely in support of methods for the appraisal of highway infrastructure
projects.
The other primary commissioners of research are the publicly-funded Science Research Councils,
most particularly for transport economics the Economic and Social Science Research Council (ESRC)
and the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC). These support research andtraining, mainly at higher education and research institutions, under a number of different
programmes.
The DETR (and other government departments) have joint programmes with the Science
Research Councils and private-sector organisations for the commissioning of research (see below).
Local authorities, particularly the larger metropolitan authorities, may also commission research,
but this tends to be relatively short term and application based. Relatively little transport economics
research is funded in this way.

96

2. COMMISSIONING OF RESEARCH
Within DETR, research projects are commissioned to help policy divisions meet their objectives
and discharge their functions. Generally, individual projects are grouped into research themes, with
the intention of allowing projects which address broadly similar issues to be brigaded together toestablish the link between research and the wider objectives of the Directorate.
Until 1992, much of the Department’s (i.e. DETR) research programme was channelled throughthe Transport Research Laboratory, which was the land transport “research arm” of the former
Department of Transport. While the main directions of research were then, as now, determined by therequirements of policy, the execution and management of the research programme, including thefunding, was devolved to the Laboratory. In 1992, however, the TRL was converted to an Agency of
the Department. The funding was then administered by customer divisions within the central
Department and a “customer-contractor” type of relationship between the Department and its researchcontractors (including TRL) was established. Further change occurred in 1996, when the TRL entered
the private sector under the ownership of the Transport Research Foundation, a non-profit distributing
company limited by guarantee. Relationships with the Department are now fully commercial.
Since the Department’s research is determined by the requirements of policy, it tends to berelatively clearly focused on particular issues, with a view to developing understanding andmethodology which will feed into, inform and underpin policy initiatives and decisions.
The contractors for DETR-commissioned work can come from all sectors, including bothacademic institutions and private institutions. It may be that the more theoretical economic studies arecarried out by universities, and the more applied work by consultants, but this is more to do with thenature of the expertise available rather than features of the procurement system. The contractual
arrangements are similar whether consultants or universities are involved.
However, the DETR has also invited proposals (i.e. a “responsive” mode) through a “seedcorn”
programme. While broad indications of topics which might be suitable for study were given, theprocess was that researchers could apply for funding for proposals which were less tightly related topolicy interests and which often had a longer-term aspect. The availability of such funding was,however, tightly limited both in total and on an individual project level. Applicants could be fromboth the public and private sectors and, once a proposal was accepted, the contractual process was asfor any other Department contract. The scheme is being evaluated to inform consideration of a
successor “seedcorn” programme.
It is also possible for the DETR to consider that a proposal developed and speculatively submitted
by a research organisation is particularly relevant to its interests and merits full or partial financial
support. Again, the resulting contractual process is common.
The Science Research Councils, especially ESRC and EPSRC, support research and training,
mainly at higher education and research institutions, under a number of different programmes. In
general, research grants can be made in two ways: firstly, where the choice of subject is determinedby the applicant and, secondly, where calls for proposals are made for specified areas of research,which are often interdisciplinary and involve a third-party funder. Priorities for research are
determined by panels who consult widely within the profession and outside; often they reflect thecurrent and foreseen government policy interests. For the Research Councils, the programme themes
are generally set over a specified number of years.

97

Involving both government departments and the Research Councils is the LINK Programme,
co-ordinated by the OST (Office of Science and Technology -- part of the DTI). The LINK
Programme is funded by departments and Research Councils and aims to promote partnership in
research between industry and the research base, and thus to stimulate innovation and wealth creation.
There are several LINK programmes, each of which supports a number of research projects, including
LINK-IST (i.e. Inland Surface Transport: sponsored by EPSRC, ESRC, DTI and DETR), addressing
land transport issues. Government generally funds up to 50 per cent of eligible costs of these projects.
The DETR also supports, and is sometimes actively involved in, projects being carried out for the
EU’s Framework and other programmes. Where support is given, it is generally for those projects
which are perceived as having particular policy relevance for the UK.
Academic institutions and research organisations, and, indeed, private sector bodies, also
undertake their own internally supported research. For non-public organisations, this is usually toinvest in their own intellectual property, sometimes with a view to the development of a marketable“product”.

3. RESEARCH MONITORING AND EVALUATIONFor DETR-commissioned research, the objectives, outputs, timescales and costs are determinedby the client, taking into account the requirements of the work and the contractors’ recommended
approach. The schedules and outputs are determined by the policy interests under which their work is
conducted. Some small items of research may be pursued within the Department, but most iscontracted out, as described above. Each project is managed by a designated Project Officer, who is
responsible for ensuring delivery of the research in time and to satisfactory quality. In general,
individual project officers with the Department work closely with their contractors to ensure that the
research is not only conducted to a good standard but also to ensure that it is directed to theappropriate policy interests. For the ILT/RT Research Committee, an evaluation subgroup looks at a
final report by each project officer on the completion of the project, and again after some time toassess longer-term lessons.
For the Research Councils, each project is evaluated to ensure that research has been properly
conducted and to make an assessment of its quality. There are no formal assessment criteria, althoughreviewers are required to judge the research under a number of headings, including potential
beneficiaries. This is achieved through a peer review process.

4. USE OF RESEARCH FINDINGS

Generally, the DETR encourages its contractors to publish its results, but retains the right towithhold permission in special circumstances. The research may be publicised through a variety ofchannels, especially the technical press and conferences. These outputs are clearly easily accessible.
DETR also makes information about completed, current and prospective research available throughnewsletters and compendia as well as through the DETR Website. Wide dissemination througharticles and conferences is a requirement of Research Council sponsored research.

98

As it tends to be commissioned as a result of a policy interest, research funded by DETR is more
likely to influence and inform policy decisions, although the degree to which this occurs directly
depends much on the nature of the research itself. Pilot trials are usually preceded by a whole raft ofbackground research, which may have been undertaken over a number of years and for a variety ofdifferent objectives. However, the Department recognises that there may come a point within aresearch programme when pilot trials are necessary as being the only way in which necessary data andother information can be obtained.
Being rather further removed from policymaking, Research Council and other research conductedby research organisations tends to have less immediate impact on policy decisions, but they do provide
some of the very important bedrock of understanding and background which helps ensure that policy
is properly founded on what is achievable. Nevertheless, it is also clear that some fundamental andimportant research projects which might, for instance, demonstrate some clear consequences offollowing particular courses of actions, can lead to direct and sometimes immediate changes in policy.

5. VALUE JUDGEMENT ON THE PRESENT SYSTEM
In general, the various channels through which transport economics research is identified andcommissioned ensures that the research is closely related to policy interests. Increasingly, there arestrong and beneficial links between government, industry and the science base. Nevertheless, someissues do arise: It is necessary to distinguish between the short-term research needs, which will help getpolicies and plans forward into implementation, and the longer-term research needs. The
management of long-term research can, however, be difficult. The pressures are forshort-term research -- the funding mechanisms (especially where, for instance, it is necessary
to find commercial partners) often contribute to this. There is also tension between
government’s requirement for “early wins” and the fact that research projects begun now
may not bring results for many years. There are often differing views on where the priorities
should lie between getting such “early wins” and longer-term research.
 Transport economics research in the Research Councils is competing with funding for awhole range of programmes and disciplines. This means that the quality of proposals is
extremely important; proposals to which limited effort has been devoted have a much
weaker chance of succeeding, even if the research proposed is important.
 However, the Research Councils do support quality research which will help provide thetools, knowledge and understanding that will inform decisionmaking in the longer term.
They have the opportunity to fund innovation and speculative “blue skies” research.
 Transport economics research is often conducted in conjunction with, or as part of, research
addressing wider issues. This raises challenges for the research community in putting
together appropriate partnerships for delivering some research. Such partnerships may need
to be forged across some fairly traditional boundaries, both in terms of the academic
disciplines and between different transport sectors and modes.

99 The methods and sources by which transport research is funded can lead to fragmentation ofknowledge and experience. A key issue is the need not just to undertake new work but toconsolidate and summarise past and present work. This would aid the identification of gaps
and weaknesses and prioritise future research activities.
 While the funding system ensures that the research community accumulates knowledge,
there can be difficulties in communicating that knowledge in an accessible andunderstandable way to decisionmakers.

NOTE
1.

DETR (1998), A New Deal for Transport: Better for Everyone. The Government’s White Paperon the Future of Transport.

100

SWEDEN

Urban KARLSTRÖM
Director General
Swedish Transport and Communications
Research Board
Stockholm

TRANSPORT RESEARCH IN SWEDENINTRODUCTION
Sweden invests substantial amounts in research. Measured as a proportion of GDP, Sweden is in
the forefront amongst OECD countries with its overall investment of some 3.3 per cent of GDP in
research and development (R&D). Swedish R&D investments are based on the major contribution inthis field of industry, which accounts for about 70 per cent of Sweden’s total research.
The main research performers in Sweden are, as in most other countries, industry and universities
and colleges. Sweden has a relatively small institutional sector.

1. SWEDISH RESEARCH FUNDING

The Government’s investment in research at universities and colleges has a turnover of about
SKr 15 billion per year. Publicly financed research at universities obtains its resources from four
different sources today:

Universities’ own faculty budgets;
Research councils;
Sector research organs and other state authorities;
Research foundations with resources drawn from the former employee investment funds.

The Ministry of Education has responsibility for basic research and postgraduate studies andallots resources directly to universities and colleges (faculty budgets). These faculty budgets areallocated to different universities to enable them to distribute their resources according to their own
priorities; this enables the universities to keep up their own activities and initiate their own research
programmes.

101

In addition, the Ministry of Education allocates resources to the research councils. These
research councils fund R&D at universities and colleges or at research institutes. The researchcouncils’ main function is to support scientifically motivated research and serve as national agencies
for the distribution of research funds within various areas.
The structure of the research council system is in accordance with the scientific subject areas.
Postgraduates at universities elect the majority of the research councils’ boards via a system ofelectoral colleges.
Sector research agencies support research directly based on the needs of various sectors ofsociety, such as communications, energy, construction and housing, technology and industrial
development, working life and the labour market and the environment. The basic idea is that withineach sector of society there is a need for an overall research-based information strategy. The various
sector research organs are government authorities receiving their funds directly from the Government.
However, they are not accountable to the Ministry of Education, but to the respective government
departments. The research resources at the disposal of the sector research organs have been budgetedwith the various departmental areas in competition with other purposes. They serve to balance the“free” researcher-controlled research and are motivated by the need to conduct research within various
areas of society.
The fourth source of funding emerged at the beginning of the 1990s, when some vaststate-controlled investment trusts, known as employee investment funds, were wound up and some of
their financial resources were allocated to research. A number of different research foundations havebeen established, each with a different research focus. The Government appoints the boards of thefoundations, but otherwise they function autonomously on the basis of the assignments they receive.
The main features of the current structure of Swedish research funding date back to themid-1960s. They are characterised by a balance between researcher-controlled research andproblem-oriented sector research. Sector research has resulted in close involvement within many
sectors of society in the funding of research programmes and the creation of research environments ofparticular interest to the sectors in question. By the same token, this has resulted in fragmentation ofresearch funding. The number of authorities which fund research is remarkably large, and it isdifficult to get a general view of what is happening. The Government has taken various measures toco-ordinate investments in research in order to give coherence to research policy. The Government
now presents a co-ordinated research policy bill to the Swedish Parliament every third year.

2. CURRENT SYSTEM OF TRANSPORT RESEARCH

The publicly motivated transport research in Sweden is mainly financed via the system for sector
research. KFB, Kommunikationsforskningsberedningen (the Swedish Transport and Communications
Research Board), is the key purchaser and funder of governmental transport and communications
research, i.e. research within the areas of transport, postal services, telecommunications and IT. In
addition to KFB, Vägverket (the National Highways Administration) and Banverket (National
Railtrack Administration) also fund research within the transport field.

102

KFB has received 180 million kronor for 1999, which is an increase of almost 100 per centduring the 1990s. In addition to these funds, Vägverket and Banverket fund research and development
programmes for some 200 million kronor. Furthermore, the Government makes a direct grant of some
30 million kronor to VTI (Väg och transportforskningsintitutet -- the Road and Transport ResearchInstitute), the leading research institute within the transport field. Swedish transport research isfinanced mainly with these funds. Certain other sector research agencies within adjacent fields are,however, in a position to finance research of relevance to the transport sector.
KFB’s research contracts are in accordance with the goals established by the Government andParliament in these fields. They serve as the point of departure for state communications research, forboth the purpose and problem areas of the research.
The Government’s general guidelines are based on two different bills. Matters of organisational
principle for transport research are discussed in the Research Policy Bill. The object of the research is,on the other hand, considered within the framework of transport policy. In connection with theGovernment’s and Parliament’s decisions on a new transportation policy, certain guidelines forresearch goals within the transport field were also established.
The underlying principle is that the research should help to develop the information base needed
for reaching the political goals established for the transport sector. However, it is also established that
research should not only be focused on this. Another important task is to increase readiness to takeaction in the event of problems arising that cannot presently be foreseen by investments in research.
This is accomplished by building up a base of knowledge and competence for the future. A furtherrole of this type of research is to initiate “questioning” research.
Two basic demands are therefore made on transport research. Firstly, it shall develop the factualbase for measures needed to achieve the goals established by Parliament in the transport field, andsecondly, it shall create a state of readiness to handle problems that cannot currently be foreseen bybuilding up a base of knowledge and competence for the future. It is also laid down in the
Government bill that the knowledge and competence developed via publicly financed transport
research must be particularly broad ranging and cover different aspects of the transport sector and its
interaction with other sectors. In order to follow up on the effects of government decisions,continuous analysis of the effects of policy on the transport sector and related sectors is a further
research task of great importance.
The role of the Government and Parliament in terms of controlling transport research is to
stipulate the overall financial constraints and guidelines for the research and to take responsibility forensuring that an effective organisation is created for administering the resources budgeted for thispurpose. The planning and implementation of the research should, on the other hand, be delegated to
the relevant authorities and to scientists. However, certain guidelines have been laid down for theirwork.
The Government has established that one of the aims of research within the transport field is thatit should help to achieve the goals of transport policy. The overall transport policy goal has beenformulated by the Government as follows: “the goal of transport policy shall be to ensure theprovision of national, economically efficient and sustainable transport for the public and the businesssector throughout the entire country.”
The Government decided on a new transport policy in the spring of 1998. Certain overall
guidelines for the goals of transport research were included in the decision. The following areas weresome of those highlighted.
103

2.1. Strategic transport research
The area shall help to increase understanding of the role of communications in society, forinstance, what the driving forces are and what consequences transport systems have on individuals andsociety as a whole. Strategic transport research spans a wide area of problems and touches on many
subjects and disciplines.

2.2. “Eco-friendly” means of transport and fuels
In the long term, the existing transport system will not be sustainable, as it is based on
non-renewable energy resources and causes adverse effects on the environment locally, regionally andglobally. Many different types of input are required to bring about cost-effective and sustainabletransport solutions.

2.3. Public transport and publicly-financed travel
R & D investments are important if public transport and other types of publicly-financed travel
are to be developed and become more effective and attractive. It is important that we know more
about the travel requirements of different groups in society as well as how different transport systems
can develop new types of service. It is also becoming increasingly important to develop information
systems and new forms of co-ordination.

2.4. Safety in transport
So far, research into transport safety has, in all essentials, been focused on road safety. Thisranking of priorities is understandable in view of the number of road accidents. It is, however,important to broaden this research to include other types of traffic and to highlight issues pertaining torisk management and security.

2.5. Logistics and joint solutions for freight transport
The rapid changes in society and industry’s production of goods will present the freight transport
sector with major challenges. Logistics has an overriding role when it comes to the control of flows ofmaterials, from raw material to finished product and delivery to the customer. The recycling of waste
products must also be incorporated into this chain. Co-ordination between various types of transport isimportant, as is environmentally-adapted freight transport within built-up areas.

2.6. Transport informatics
The combination of information and communications technology will give rise to new systems
and services. This will improve the chances of reaching the transport policy goals. An important task
for research within this area is to demonstrate what the societal effects will be of the introduction of
intelligent systems.

1042.7. Management and maintenance of infrastructure
Research in this area should be given priority as a means of reducing costs, improving safety,
improving accessibility and reducing environmental pollution. The connection between capital costs
and future maintenance costs needs highlighting, as does the connection between the design of theinfrastructure and the actual traffic process.
However, the Government also underlines the interaction between transport and IT. It is no
accident that the Government is endeavouring to co-ordinate the goals for passenger and freighttransport with those for the communication of information within a single communications policy.
Advances within the field of IT are leading to the closer integration of telecommunications andcomputer-based information processing. More and more information is now being transmitted via thevarious telecom networks, which is broadening the scope for communications policy-based research.
The mutual dependence of passenger and freight transport on the one hand and information transfer on
the other, is becoming increasingly evident. This interaction may mean that they can bothcomplement and replace each other. The rapid developments in information technology also present
new opportunities to reduce the adverse effects of the transport system on the environment and in theform of accidents. These new opportunities are an important precondition for Swedish researchstrategy in the communications field.

3. COMMISSIONING OF RESEARCHKFB will perform its role of initiating, funding and evaluating research, development anddemonstration activities within the area of communications on the basis of these general directives.
The guidelines provided are general and do not involve detailed political control of research.
KFB is run by a board of directors and a director-general appointed by the Government. The Swedish
authorities act autonomously within the limits laid down by the Government. KFB thus has ample
freedom, in common with other sector research agencies, to operationalise the goals and transformthem into concrete research projects.
If it is to carry out its duties, KFB must be well informed about the area and the research required
there, as well as about the ability of the research community to satisfy this research requirement. It isin this unique intermediate position that KFB’s strength lies. To use a modern expression, KFB is avirtual organisation. This means that KFB functions as the hub in a system which includes key
players and processes in the communications field, and that KFB is in a position to influence theseplayers and events outside their own organisation. A virtual organisation possesses a larger andbroader competence than is at its disposal within its own organisation. KFB will achieve this by: Engaging external experts for assessments of the relevance and quality of applications of andfor evaluations of completed research; Expanding the financial resources by means of joint funding of projects together with otherfinanciers.

105How well KFB succeeds in helping to achieve the goals of communications policy depends on
how well the whole chain works, from the interpretation of problems and statement of political intent,
via various types of initiative, research, results and dissemination of knowledge, to the intended effect.
This chain of activities from problem to evaluation can be described in six stages. The various stages
thus also describe the different roles performed by KFB.

3.1. To demonstrate the need for and initiate new research
KFB has established the direction of its activities in the form of an operational plan whichindicates both its working practices and the structure of the research programmes. The plan isestimated to have a duration of some five years. More detailed research programmes have been drawn
up for each of the programme areas. The programmes are developed in close contact with bothresearchers and problem-owners and are established by KFB’s board. The programmes then serve as
the basis for the various research projects funded by KFB.
An important aspect of the task of demonstrating the need for research is to continually gather
information on the international research situation within specific areas. This task is becoming
increasingly important, especially within areas that are developing rapidly, such as IT.
3.2. Financing high-quality research
In KFB’s instruction, great importance is attached to the long-term build-up of knowledge.
Sweden needs research environments which can provide a knowledge base for the communications
sector and which focus on issues involving the development of theory and methods. Consequently,
the funding of transport research is becoming increasingly concentrated on certain environments as ameans of giving the research activities greater stability. KFB is able to budget resources for a periodof six years. For this to be possible, the Government has, in addition to the annual financial resources,
also allotted KFB a financial budget for a period of six years. Almost 70 per cent of KFB’s resources
are used for projects that last for a minimum of three years.
The greater portion of KFB’s funding (more than 65 per cent) is earmarked for universities andcolleges in Sweden, in addition to which there is a dominating transport research institute, VTI, which
also receives a large proportion of its funds via KFB.
The funding of research projects is decided on the basis of applications submitted to KFB, which
are assessed by one or more of its priorities committees. These committees consist of researchers andproblem-owners. The assessment of research project applications includes an examination ofscientific quality as well as of relevance to the transport sector.

3.3. Implementation of research results
KFB shall take steps to ensure that the research results are put into use effectively. An importanttask, therefore, is to provide information about and facilitate the implementation of research results.
As far as KFB is concerned, this involves increasingly intensive work in identifying target groups
within the communications sector for various research projects, documentation of the research results
and adapting information to the varying needs of different groups of users.

106

Reference groups to which problem-owners belong are often associated with the various research
projects to facilitate contacts between researchers and the various groups with an interest in the
research results. Annual seminars and conferences are also arranged, such as Transportforum, which
is normally attended by some 1 500 delegates.
3.4. Co-ordination of programmes and projects
As there are many bodies involved in the funding of transport research in Sweden, KFB has theimportant task of improving co-ordination between the various financing organs in order to achieve
the greatest possible effect from total state support. There is very close co-operation between KFB,
Vägverket and Banverket, and these authorities often co-finance major R & D investments.
However, co-ordination of programmes and projects also involves KFB in an endeavour toestablish multi-disciplinary research environments. Many central problem areas within the field oftransport require a multi-disciplinary approach.

3.5. Internationalisation of Swedish researchInternationalisation of research is important. KFB’s activities should serve to broaden theinternational connections of Swedish transport research, which is one way of raising its scientificquality. Another goal is to capture and make use of foreign research results for the development of theSwedish communications sector.
Active participation in joint EU research is also important. KFB represents Sweden in those of
the EU’s research programmes which relate to the transport sector.
KFB has also set up an International Scientific Council as a means of facilitating this process ofinternationalisation.

3.6. Evaluation of research
KFB’s role as client includes the need to control orders on the basis of achieved results. Suchcontrol of results requires the research activities to be monitored and evaluated regularly. This should
be done with regard to scientific quality, relevance to society and effective use of resources. The
focus on follow-up and evaluation has assumed growing importance in KFB’s activities during thepast few years.
In KFB’s directive, it is stated that some 20 per cent of the projects supported by KFB should be
evaluated each year. KFB establishes an evaluation plan each year to ensure that this is done.

4. RESEARCH MONITORING AND EVALUATION

Follow-up and evaluation of research is assuming growing importance for the funding of researchwithin the transport sector. Such evaluations are now an integral aspect of KFB’s activities, and theyplay an important role in the assessment of whether the research activities reach the goals establishedby the Government.
107

KFB’s evaluations involve four different dimensions:
1.

Quality -- the scientific quality that the research environments achieve;

2.

Relevance -- to what extent problem areas central to the sector are researched;

3.

Effectiveness -- the relationship between input and output in terms of use of resources;

4.

Efficiency -- the effect of the research on the transport sector.

All these aspects are included in the evaluations that KFB performs on a regular basis.
Evaluations are made not only during the course of a research project, but also ex ante and ex post.
Ex ante evaluations provide the information needed for research funding decisions. This is aprocess that is well regulated and includes all dimensions, although it concentrates on scientific quality
and relevance. KFB’s various priority committees carry out these evaluations.
Ex post evaluations are quite extensive. Various types of evaluation are made to enable KFB tomanage all four evaluation dimensions. The purposes of the evaluations differ and they are therefore
arranged differently.
The following types of evaluations have been carried out by KFB during the past few years:i)

Peer-reviews. This is the most common type of evaluation. In principle, KFB always
engages foreign researchers to evaluate the scientific quality of the various research projects.
This enables KFB to assess Swedish research in its international context. Some research
fields evaluated by KFB in this way over the past few years include public transport, freight
and logistics, road safety, transport and energy related research and road and railtrack
infrastructure techniques.

ii)

User-oriented evaluation. Evaluations of this type focus on the relevance of the research
project to the transport sector. In other words, the utility aspect of the research isemphasized. How useful are the research results? Have the results been achieved? A
necessary first step in these evaluations is to define the target group. If the target group was
already identified prior to the initiation of the research project, then the conditions for
effective dissemination of its results are far better than if this is not done until the evaluation
phase.

iii) Process evaluation. The entire research process is subject to evaluation - from goal
formulation to the practical use of the research results. The results of these evaluations areof great importance in improving KFB’s ability to carry out major research programmes.
Three evaluations of this kind have recently been completed: a programme concerning theuse of biofuels, demonstration inputs to improve the efficiency of public transport, andenergy-related transport research.
iv) Goal-oriented evaluation. These evaluations focus on the goal-effect dimension. It is notalways easy to identify the effects on the transport sector. It is therefore desirable to have abroad approach so that non-predictable effects can also be determined. KFB has recently
carried out an evaluation of this kind in the field of road safety. The object of this evaluation
was formulated in the following way:108

To what extent is the Swedish national traffic safety programme based on scientifically
documented knowledge and what element of this knowledge has been procured by KFB
funded research?
v)

Effective use of resources. This type of evaluation focuses on the cost aspect of the research
project. Each year, all research projects supported by KFB should submit a report of the
progress of the project, with particular emphasis on the consumption of resources. These
reports serve as the basis for an analysis of the effectiveness of the project. Certain in-depth
analyses are also made of how the various research environments have used the economicmeans with the assistance of external auditors.

Some conclusions can be drawn from KFB’s evaluations:a)Sector research aims to fulfil several goals. Therefore, different types of evaluation must be
made.

b)

Ex ante evaluations are very important and must be performed in a transparent manner. The
credibility of the research-funding authority depends on the financial decisions being
characterised by clear quality assessments, objectivity and integrity.

c)

Ex post evaluations, including those that focus on scientific quality as well as those thatassess relevance to society, should be planned before the research work begins. Theseevaluations are important for the further development of the various research environments.

d)

Although evaluations are very expensive, the money is mostly well spent. Ex post
evaluations, if properly used, also provide an excellent basis for decisions on the allocationof research resources.

e)

Evaluating the effects of research is very difficult. Our experience is that initiating
evaluation projects is of great value, even if the measures and analytical methods used are
not always ideal. An evaluation begins a process that is important as such. A great deal of
methodological development is needed in this area.

CONCLUSION

Swedish research policy is based on two different approaches as to how the research should becontrolled. One approach involves each sector of society as having responsibility for the researchneeds of the sector by working out R&D plans and funding the necessary research. The otherapproach involves the allocation of substantial research resources directly to the scientific community
so that researchers can channel the research into the areas where it is required. Transport research in
Sweden is predominantly based on funding received via sector research organs.

109

These two approaches as to how research should be controlled have always been topics of some
controversy. Last December, a parliamentary committee of enquiry put forward proposals for a newresearch policy in Sweden. These proposals included the winding up of sector research and thetransfer of the resources at its disposal to the researcher-controlled system. The committee’s proposals
are now being circulated for comment, and a government decision is expected this spring. The
consensus view within the transport sector is that sector research is necessary if research which isessential for the transport sector is to be carried out.

110

SWITZERLAND
Felix WALTERManager of the
Swiss National Research Programme"Transport and Environment Interactions Switzerland/Europe” (NRP 41)
c/o ECOPLAN
Bern

TRANSPORT RESEARCH AND TRANSPORT POLICYIN SWITZERLAND

INTRODUCTIONIn Switzerland, despite small budgets and rather scattered research activities, transport economics
have had some considerable policy influence, e.g. with regard to external costs and taxes.
A concentration of academic efforts and research programmes seems necessary. Among otherthings, two national research programmes with a number of policy relevant topics and some private
institutes with strong research efforts and consulting activities have contributed to establish quite astrong link from research to policy.

1. SWISS TRANSPORT RESEARCH

As in most countries, Swiss transport research is carried out in various programmes and byvarious institutions with sometimes overlapping topics. The main activities can be categorised asfollows1:

111

Type of researchTechnical basic research

Main financing institutions and programmes
Federal Government

Non technical basic research
Oriented (policy driven)technical research anddevelopment

Cantonal governments
Federal Office of Energy, Research Programmes(for light vehicles, electric and hybrid engines,etc.); Technology and Innovation Programme of
the Federal Government
Oriented (policy driven) non- National Research Programmes (e.g. NRP Transporttechnical research& Environment) of the Swiss National Science
Foundation; COST Actions and EU Programmes; tosome degree studies of the Transport Ministry(Bureau for Transport Studies of the Ministry)
Practical (mostly planningRoad Research Programme of the Federal Road
and engineering) road studies Office
Policy studies

Main research institutes
Federal technical universities(ETH Zurich, EPF Lausanne)
Universities
Technical
highschools,
industry

Universities, private researchand consulting companies

Private research andconsulting companies anduniversities
Several Federal Offices (road, rail, aviation, planning, Private research and consulting
statistics, energy, environment, etc.)
companies and universities

Budgets
Compared to other countries, the research budgets are very small. The total (non-industrial)
Swiss Transport research budget is very roughly about 20 million Euros.
Since the energy research programme involves some technical R&D, its budget is relatively large(about 3 million Euros per year), whereas the National Research Programme on Transport andEnvironment has a budget of about 1.7 million Euros per year (6.7 for four years). The policy studies
on transport are estimated at a volume of about 2 million Euros per year, the road research
programme’s budget is around 2 million Euros as well.

The National Research Programme “Transport and Environment,Interactions Switzerland/Europe” (NRP 41)
Objective:

To improve the scientific basis for a sustainable Swiss transport policy

Projects:

52 research projects are currently at work and the first publications are available.
Keywords of the projects include:------

Social factors influencing mobility;
Modelling freight transport;
Regulatory, fiscal and soft policies;
Environmental impacts;
Technology assessment.

112

Time schedule: Most projects which started in 1997 will end in 1999, the synthesis is planned for theend of 2000. From all projects, comprehensive reports are made available withGerman, French and English summaries on the Web.
Budget:10 Million CHF (for 5 years) = 6.7 million Euros.

Information: -- Call, fax or e-mail:Felix Walter, Programme Manager
ECOPLAN,
Monbijoustr. 26,
CH-301 BERN,
Phone: +41 31 38581 81,
Fax: +41 31 38581 80,
E-Mail: walter@ecoplan.ch-- Find all information on the web: http://www.snf.ch/nfp41/home.htm
All publications include English, French and German summaries which can be
downloaded from the homepage.

Transport economics: Many universities dedicate just a part of a full professorship to transporteconomic research (Basle, Zurich, Saint Gall, Neuchâtel, Lausanne, Lugano, Geneva and the technicaluniversities of Zurich and Lausanne). Transport economics holds quite a strong position in thenational research programme “Transport and Environment” and, to a lesser degree, among the policy
studies from several government offices.
Private institutes: One of the characteristics of the research “scene” is the strong position of some
private consulting and research institutes, which are in some way filling a gap in the portfolio of theuniversities.
European co-operation: Switzerland participates quite successfully in the European Framework
Programmes, especially within the Transport Programme of the 4th Framework Programme and its
economic tasks, again with the successful contribution of private institutes. The fact that Switzerland
is not a member of the European Union does not present a major obstacle (sometimes even a plus for
European consortia, since the Swiss contributions are not paid by the Commission, but directly fromthe Swiss Government). Furthermore, Switzerland is active in many COST actions.
Non-governmental research institute: The only unit dealing to some degree with transport researchis the “Bureau for Transport Studies”, a small unit of about eight persons within the Secretariat
General of the Transport Ministry.

113

2. LINKS BETWEEN POLICY AND RESEARCH

Whereas for the basic research there is no direct government influence, for all other research, theFederal Government has quite an important role in defining the research issues. Examples are:
 Defining the topic of National Research Programmes, which led to the programme “Cities
and Transport” (around 1989-94) and “Transport and Environment” (1996-2000),
co-financing of some studies; Deciding on the studies within the road research programme; Deciding on the studies within the energy/transport research programme; Commissioning a number of studies, especially on external costs, transport modelling,
monitoring and statistics, environmental impacts and mitigation measures, etc.
The National Research Programme “Transport and Environment” is an example of a systematicand very close linkage between government agencies and research institutes:
 The Government is represented in the scientific steering committee (expert group), however,
the majority within the decisive bodies are academics;
 Government officials are invited to take part in the advisory groups of the projects anddiscuss intermediate reports at several stages of the projects;
 Various federal offices have contributed financially to those projects which were of particularinterest to them.

3. SUCCESS STORIES: FROM RESEARCH TO POLICY

There are many examples of a positive interaction between research and policy:
 Studies on the external costs of transport have been carried out partly within National
Research Programmes (Cities and Transport; Transport and Environment), partly throughstudies commissioned by the “Bureau for Transport Studies”; they have led to a circle ofleading transport economists finding a consensus about a lower limit to the external costs oftransport. These figures have been used directly for the justification of the lorry tax (adopted
in a referendum in September 1998)2;
 Studies on the economics of parking fees from the National Research Programme “Cities
and Transport” have contributed substantially to the introduction of systematic and increased
parking fees in cities like Bern and Zurich. The studies have often been quoted in policy
documents and even court decisions3;
 For the assessment of costs and benefits of nature and landscape protection measures, atool developed within the Research programme “Transport and Environment” has been usedby the Federal Environmental Office as well as by the Canton of Thurgau4;114

 A study on indicators of sustainable transport, the research programme “Transport andEnvironment”, has been used for the establishment of the new strategy of the Transport
Ministry5.
Apart from this, policy studies like those on the economic viability of the Alpine Rail Crossings
have, of course, had a strong influence on political decisions.

4. ASSESSMENT: STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSESIn the author’s personal opinion, the following strengths and weaknesses are the most importantones with regard to an optimal contribution of transport economics to policymaking:
Strengths:
 High standard of policy studies commissioned by some Federal Offices (especially Bureau
for Transport Studies, Environmental Office and others);
 Open-minded people with regard to scientific and economic issues, working at key positionsin the Government; Two national research programmes with a strong link from research to policy and vice-versa;
 Compared to other policy areas (economic policy, social policy), a reasonably large(although not very big) budget for policy studies; Competition among institutes and transparency are nowadays an asset, whereas for a longtime, some programmes have been said to be “insider” or even “self-service” programmes;
 Strong efforts in some quarters for the dissemination of results (e.g. seminars of the national
research programmes, Web-sites, etc.).

Weaknesses:
 The various research activities are too scattered, even if considerable co-ordination efforts
have been undertaken in recent years compared to previously; Lack of concentration: no academic centre of any size and importance for transporteconomics, scattered activities at almost all universities; therefore: relatively bad market
position of university institutes and relatively good position of private institutes inpolicy-oriented research; Weak position of economics within government decisions: cost-benefit considerations haveoften been considered as “too economistic” and policy-driven factors from planning or
juridical disciplines or simply policy considerations have been stronger (example: Alpine
Rail Crossings, highway network); however, recently, external cost calculations and otherissues have become very popular compared to other countries;
 Even though the Swiss participation in European programmes is good, Swiss authorities are
somewhat lagging behind with regard to the application of European studies; If the National Research Programme “Transport and Environment” ends (in 2000), thebudget for transport economics will again become relatively small.
115

5. KEY FACTORS FOR AN EFFECTIVE POLICY/RESEARCH INTERACTION
According to our experience, some of the most frequent mistakes in the dissemination of research
results are:
--

-----

---

research teams try to communicate results and hope for a policy impact after the research isaccomplished instead of defining a clear dissemination concept at the beginning and taking
into account the specific needs and questions of the target groups;
results are published regardless of different needs and habits of different target groups;
due to the lack of analysis of target groups and clients, new information channels (bulletins)are created instead of using existing ones which are well known and used by target groups;
everything is disseminated instead of selecting rigorously;
the agenda and the timing is defined by research programmes instead of trying to use"opportunity windows" offered by the political process and relying on the needs expressed by
the clients;
those interested in promoting new ideas (politiclal parties, interest groups) are not addressedenough;too little money is dedicated to managing the dissemination.

Based on the Swiss experience, the following elements may be of importance for a productive
co-operation between research and policy:
Elements already well established: Competition among institutes (the lack of government-owned research institutes has not beena weakness, in our opinion, since a number of institutes have always been able to carry out
the research needed); Reasonable budget and independence for policy studies with a longer time horizon;
 Strong research efforts of institutes involved at the same time in policy consulting; Strong involvement of government officials in ongoing research.
Elements to be improved: Co-ordination of various research programmes and sponsors;
 Dissemination of research (for some programmes); International co-operation; improvement of financial conditions for participation in
European programmes;
 Concentration of skills in transport economics in one or two academic centres; co-operationof transport institutes from various universities.

116

NOTES
1.

An extensive survey in German can be found at www.snf.ch/nfp41/home.htm

2.

For the most recent survey, see ECOPLAN (1998), Externalitaten im Verkehr - methodische
Grundlagen and Externalitaten im Verkehr -- Leitfaden für die Verkehrsplanung; seewww.ecoplan.ch.

3

For an English summary: ECOPLAN (1994), Parking Policy, sub-report within the project“Greening Urban Transport of the European Federation for Transport & Environment (T&E)”;
see www.ecoplan.ch.

4.

Report Cl of NRP 41; see www.snf.ch/nfp4l/home.htm

5.

Reports G5 and Ml, M2, M3 of NRP 41, see www.snf.ch/nfp4l/home.htm

117

118

RAPPORTEURS FROM UNIVERSITIES

119

120

GERMANY
Werner ROTHENGATTER
Professor
Institut für Wirtschaftspolitik und
Wirtschaftsforschung
University of Karlsruhe

1. INTRODUCTION
Three main trends in transport economics and policy can be identified: New economic methods are being developed, helping to solve well-known problems; New technologies and organisational structures are being introduced, which require an
adjustment of economic methods;
 New policy issues are emerging, calling for new types or new packages of economic
instruments.
Examples of the first trend are the development of activity-based modelling of transport choices
and the use of operations research to solve well-defined problems like freight assignment or crewscheduling. The second trend is exemplified by developments in information technology, in particulartelematics, which offer a new choice of alternatives when making decisions or which change thefeatures of existing ones. The third trend stems from changing political challenges, such as European
integration, job creation or environmental conservation.
As the main focus of this paper is on policymaking, it will confine itself to the policy issues
formulated in the European Common Transport Policy (CTP). Section 2 will analyse briefly thecontributions of economics research to the CTP. Section 3 will summarise the findings.

2. POLICY AREAS ADDRESSED BY THE CTP
AND THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF ECONOMIC ANALYSISThe CTP addresses the following policy areas: Market organisation, deregulation, privatisation, harmonization;
 Infrastructure provision, Trans-European Networks and pan-European corridors; New technology, in particular telematics;

121 Intermodality and interoperability of networks;
 Fair and efficient pricing of infrastructure and external diseconomies;
 Environmental sustainability.
It is self-evident that, to take informed decisions, a solid statistical data base is required.
Unfortunately, this basic requirement is not met. Eurostat’s regional and transport statistics are notfully comparable and have many gaps, and the standard compendium on transport statistics is thepocket book produced by DG VII. Little attention is given to traffic surveys, and Member countries
do not seem to be very interested in European initiatives to construct common data bases on travel
behaviour. As regards road freight transport, the statistical situation has deteriorated considerably
since the reporting system was replaced in 1993 by sample surveys of transport companies. In
particular, the gaps in data on international transport, cabotage and transport chains are such as tomake analysis and forecasting of major transport trends subject to a high degree of uncertainty.
The very unsatisfactory situation in the statistical area – despite all the research done under thethCommission’s 4 Framework Programme – is mentioned in order to dampen expectations that rapid
progress in economic research could improve policymaking in the medium term by ensuring thatdecisions are based on hard facts and figures.

2.1. Market organisation, deregulation, privatisation and harmonization
The ruling by the European Court of Justice in 1985 seemed to clear the path for the liberalisationof the European transport sector. But liberalisation has made strides only in the road and airline
sectors, in which market forces have been unleashed. This progress was made at the expense of therailways; also, the potential of inland waterway transport has not been exploited for want of market
harmonization. The result has been a modal shift from rail and inland waterways to road and air,which is contrary to the goal of sustainability. The traditional issue of harmonization will thus become
increasingly important in the future, calling for careful economic analysis of what the market andregulatory framework should look like in order to ensure fair competition without adverse
environmental and social effects. The admission of new countries to the EU will only highlight still
further the urgent need for harmonization.
From the standpoint of economic analysis, this means that the traditional neo-classical theories
which have been dominant in the past will have to be supplemented by the contributions ofinstitutional economics. Institutional economics takes a longer-term view of the incentives
introduced by liberalisation. It addresses the role of the State and the extent to which existing state
institutions are able to perform that role effectively in a dynamic context, i.e. in a world of interest
groups and stakeholders who exert pressure on political bodies.

2.2. Infrastructure provision, Trans-European Networks and pan-European corridors
Until now, thinking on infrastructure planning has been project-oriented; the same holds for the
methods of assessment used. Preliminary ideas for a systemic view of network development can befound in the guidelines of the Commission for TransEuropean Networks (“Strategic Environmental
Assessment“ of TENs) and the decision of the Austrian Ministry of Transport to evaluate federal
infrastructure investment on a network scale. The suggestion of the German Federal Environmental
Agency, that federal infrastructure investment planning be based on a well-defined, integrated
environmental transport concept, may also be mentioned in this connection. A political initiative likethe TENs, which in its present form is little more than a summary of national shopping lists of122

projects, should be subject to systematic review.
extensions of existing methodologies:

This could be performed using the following

Strategic Network Analysis (SNA)
Network modelling has made such rapid progress that it is now possible to study network or
corridor features and to optimise infrastructure with respect to a number of underlying politicalobjectives. Impacts on regions and economic sectors can be studied in a broader context.
Ex-post evaluations
No systematic ex post evaluations of the benefits and costs of projects have been conducted on aEuropean scale. Widely used by the World Bank to measure the effectiveness of its investment policy,
such evaluations could become a standard method of monitoring good and bad practice. Empiricalevidence of the economic effects on regions and sectors is particularly useful.
Institutional conditions for private involvement in planning, operation and financeA drawback of most private/public transport investment partnerships is that the private
contribution is not clearly defined. Usually, the private investors are invited to tender after the project
design has been finalised by the public partner, so that their role is confined to building, operating andfinancing the project and no more. Institutional and organisational theory (principal – agent theory)
can help to define the private partners’ role so that they are included in the planning process from theoutset and financially viable projects can be put together.

2.3. Developing new technology, especially telematics
Technology assessment has proved to be a useful instrument for preparing policy, and can help
to set the direction of future technological development in transport. Nevertheless, there are importantfields in which more use could have been made of it to reduce uncertainty about the impact ofinnovative technologies.
One example is the MAGLEV technology developed in Germany (“Transrapid”), which is underconsideration in Switzerland (“Swiss Metro”) and is also being strongly pushed in Japan (“MLU”). In
all these cases, transport policymaking may be likened to a game between enthusiastic engineers,
rent-seeking companies, sceptical economists and hostile environmentalists. Although this innovativetechnology is said to have many spin-off effects, so that there might be positive impacts beyond thetransportation sector, the technology assessment studies which would be needed to substantiate thisclaim have not been done.
A second example is the new information and communications technologies and their applicationin the transport sector. Many studies exist which show the large potential of telematics to improve
capacity use, traffic guidance and individual travel. But little is known about the limits of thetechnology. We still know little about the counter-productive effects of information overkill or thechanges in the behaviour of people who are subject to user- or systems-optimal guidance strategies.
Technology assessment must take into account not only the potential economic effects but also
the social impacts, e.g. the impact on values and social disparities.

1232.4. Intermodality and network interoperability
In order to be used by many users and operators, transport and communications networks need ahigh degree of standardization. The air traffic sector has paved the way in showing how an efficientsystem of standardized communication technologies can be set up to control air traffic movements
world-wide according to a common set of rules. This would be a realistic ideal for other sectors suchas rail and waterway transport. The co-ordination of activities in a railway network can best be
studied by using network simulation and optimisation techniques. Activity analysis can beextended by means of the constraint-logic programming tools being developed in computer science.
The same holds for intermodality. Intermodal chains are very sensitive to the quality oftranshipment points and the robustness of the transport chain in the event of any disruption. New
intermodal developments are hyper-networks of networks, which can be used for intermodaltransport chains and detailed modelling of transhipment activities. The more detailed the modelling,
the clearer it is why industry is currently not very eager about intermodal transport. In many cases, thecosts of transhipment can be high, reliability low and control of the overall transport chain almost
impossible. To achieve its aims, transport policy must therefore seek the most effective points ofleverage.

2.5. Fair and efficient infrastructure pricing and external diseconomies
In the past two years, the Commission has published a green and a white paper on this subject,but it is still no clearer what “fair” and “efficient” means with respect to infrastructure pricing, or how
to put a price on external diseconomies. Lacking clear definitions of fairness and efficiency andsticking to traditional neoclassical concepts of pricing, such as short-run marginal costing, thepractical feasibility of such pricing is still very much open to question. The design of pricing
arrangements that are adapted to the real world thus represents a major challenge to economists.
Areas of price theory like multi-part tariffs, game-theoretical schemes or other second-best
approaches which take account of the impacts of transport prices on other sectors, in particular landuse, were not given sufficient attention by the EU papers. Studies should focus more on dynamic
incentive effects than on the short-run static impacts that are the focus of marginal cost theory.

2.6. Environmental sustainability
Environmental studies are usually based on forecasts of impacts of exhaust emissions or noise.
Recent research by the EU and the OECD has also used backcasting techniques. Engineers,
ecologists and economists try to define a future state of the world which they regard as sustainable.
A transition path from the present situation to the future state is then drawn, together with a timetableof policy actions conducive to the aim of sustainable development.
Economic analysis is needed for such long-term scenarios, for three reasons: firstly, the futurestate of the world should not only be sustainable from the ecological point of view. The economist has
to answer the question whether it would also be economically and socially sustainable. Secondly, thetransition path has to be evaluated with respect to economic feasibility, because it implies a large
number of actions-responses both within the transport sector and between the transport sector andother sectors. Thirdly, the economist can contribute to the design of policies over time with a view tominimising the negative impacts of regulatory measures on firms and consumers.

124

It may be doubted whether classical methods such as cost-benefit, cost-efficiency or multi-criteria
analysis are effective ways of assessing sustainability. The crucial problem is the long-term horizon
and the speculative character of scenarios which lack parallels in observed developments. Other
approaches such as system dynamic modelling (SDM) are thus more appropriate to this type ofassessment. SDM is intrinsically dynamic and based on feedback mechanisms over time.
Furthermore, it can be composed of modules which are econometrically tested (empirically validated
modules) and others based on expert judgements (mental constructs). New developments in SDM
show that its potential goes far beyond the Club of Rome’s use of it for its long-term world scenarios.

3. SUMMARY
While basic research is conducted to a large extent independently of policy considerations,empirical economic research is largely driven by the perceived demand for practical problem-solving.
A large variety of economic instruments are being developed but a few may be singled out as being
particularly relevant to decisionmaking within the framework of the European CTP. They are:










Institutional economics;
Strategic network analysis;
Ex-post evaluations;Technology assessment of innovative vehicle technology and telematics;
Network simulation and optimisation, using constraint-programming techniques;
Hyper-networks for supply-side modelling;
Second-best pricing strategies;
Backcasting;
System dynamic modelling.

Most of these methods are not new but they can be adjusted to changing policy needs.

125

126

FRANCE
Alain BONNAFOUS
Professor
Laboratoire d'Économie des Transports
Lyons

RESEARCH AND TRANSPORT POLICY

The question as to whether or not transport economics research provides the knowledge thatpolicymakers need to come to properly informed decisions is a valid one. If it does not, then this is an
initial shortcoming that has obvious drawbacks for effective decisionmaking. This first scenario andits implications are addressed in sections 1 and 2 below).
A “yes” answer to this question is contingent upon meeting a number of requirements, which weoutline in section 3. If this is indeed the case, i.e. if research is indeed delivering the informationneeded for sound decisionmaking, we still need to know whether decisionmakers understand themessage that researchers are trying to get across to them. If they are not, we need to examine thereasons for this breakdown in communication and ways in which it might be remedied (section 4).

1. SOCIAL UTILITY AND ACADEMIC UTILITY

One way of analysing the situations we have just outlined is to assess the outputs of research interms of two criteria -- social utility and academic utility -- which may either be correlated or,conversely, diametrically opposed to each other, depending on the individual country, the period oreven the subject concerned. The first of these criteria can be taken to represent society’s need forknowledge and expertise, the second, the specific needs of the scientific community. For the sake ofargument, we will also assume that these are measurable criteria and that all research outputs can beplotted against two axes, representing social utility and academic utility.
First, there are a number of reasons why research should be subject to two distinct types ofcriteria. The social utility of research resides primarily in its ability to provide timely answers toquestions as they arise or when urgent decisions are needed. A good example of research affording ahigh level of social utility would be to devote major resources to generating and processing data inorder to construct a forecasting model that is as consistent as possible. Work on the formal properties
of such a model, on the other hand, would be kept to a bare minimum.

127

Along the same lines, a high level of academic utility would require the development of a much
more sophisticated model that differed, at least formally, from existing tools. Since its academic
utility will primarily depend on how well it meets the criteria of the academic community, whether it
is operational or not will be a secondary consideration compared with its formal properties. Rather
than testing the model against observable data, what is important is how it compares to the “state of
the art”, i.e. what recognised authors have established on the subject. In a way, theory has become asubstitute for empirical analysis.
For a given amount of resources, a curve such as that in Figure 1, representing the two types ofresearch, shows how one criterion can be substituted for another.

Figure 1. Substitutability of criteria

Academic
utilitySocial utility
This curve does not mean to say that the world of academic research is closed to the demand forsocial utility. A university research institute, for example, may divide its activities between research
aimed at producing scientific papers for publication and contract research commissioned and fundedby decisionmakers. Publication provides an incentive for theoretical research and, at the same time,advances the careers of researchers in the academic world. The advantage of contract research is thatit draws researchers towards issues of immediate concern to society and, at the same time, attracts
funding capacities. Without such funding, research programmes would be severely handicapped assoon as there is any need to generate and process specific data.
Conversely, a research consultancy firm will clearly have to cover all of its costs throughcontract work. However, it is also in its interest to devote some of its activities to a science watch andto extending its theoretical knowledge-base, failing which it will run the risk of finding itself limited
to repetitive tasks and to the use of methods that will eventually become obsolete.
By exploring the social utility axis, the academic community ensures that it has the requisite
empirical knowledge. By exploring the academic utility axis, research consultancies ensure that they
are able to renew their theoretical knowledge base. The two movements from opposite directions will128

eventually meet and the language that decisionmakers use to frame their practical questions will finditself confronted with that of scientific publications, with each group contributing in its own way tothe task of translating that work into the “language”of the other.
However, it does not follow from the fact that there is mobility along the substitutability curvethat the resultant dynamics will necessarily be stable. In short, the two professions – research andconsultancy -- do not have the same client base, but each needs the other’s clients in order to secure
its development. Their response may take one of two forms, depending on how they view thelegitimacy of this two-way contest: they will either view each other with suspicion, or they will see
the process as an opportunity and will attempt to emulate each other.

2. THE MUTUAL SUSPICION SCENARIO

The most striking symptom of this hostile dynamic is that players on both the research and thedecision-making sides are only able to influence the “market” that concerns them directly, if only
because they do not know what is going on in the other market. The players on the demand side are
the first to withdraw into their respective spheres.
In the academic sphere, the players are the referees responsible for selecting the papers that willappear in authoritative journals, those who sit on thesis panels or elect young colleagues and those
who allocate public funding to research teams (often these are the same people). Their power derives
from a reputation for being difficult to please, which they have to maintain by rejecting everythingthat is not considered as meeting high academic standards. This is what led to the well-documented
drift in economic science which, in the early 1970s, provoked a healthy backlash from some who
could more legitimately speak out than others.
One such was O. Morgenstern, who, after outlining the difficulties inherent in statistical analysis
in economics, commented that it was no surprise that econometricians found it easier to develop
sophisticated abstract methods than to put them into practice1. W. Leontief was not surprised either
by the fact that many economists at the time seemed quite content with a situation in which they could
demonstrate their prowess by building more and more complicated mathematical models and devisingmore and more sophisticated methods of statistical inference without ever engaging in empiricalresearch2.
The worst about the situation that Leontief objected to is that it can be self-perpetuating. In theacademic world, the criteria for personnel selection are such that there is every reason to believe that
future referees will exacerbate existing trends, since they will be even less familiar than theirpredecessors with the world of empirical data and observable fact. To avoid having to face thisworld, they treat it with disdain and, in order to convince themselves that they are right, criticise it as
second-rate. The requisite vocabulary is to hand: pure research (high-brow), on the one hand, versus
applied research (pedestrian) on the other.
On the academic market, to be published, employed, promoted or eligible for public funding, theauthor-supplier has to demonstrate the formal “prowess” that demand requires. What he has to offer
will be rejected if it does not score well on the academic scale, however socially useful the results
may be. In extreme cases, social utility may even be a handicap.

129

On the second market -- knowledge to inform policy decisions -- demand has been totally
discouraged from using the academic research community. The latter has a reputation for producing
only theoretical constructs that bear little resemblance to reality; constructs that decisionmakers findpainfully abstruse when what they need is something that is readily comprehensible.
Demand from the decisionmakers’ side has no alternative but to turn to its own suppliers, inparticular, consultancy firms specialised in the issues for which that demand is highest. To ensure thedevelopment of methodological tools, decisionmakers can count on the innovative capacity of the bestorganised consultancy firms or, failing this, on their own research delivery system. This is why large
research and consultancy departments have developed within central government and major nationalfirms. The results of their research are measured by their effectiveness in the field and are rarely
published in the scientific press. If they were, decisionmakers would simply ignore them, such is theclimate of distrust between the two markets.
As a result, a no-man’s land emerges between the opposite poles of social utility and academic
utility; which corresponds to the grey area of publications that is not recognised by either market, asshown in Figure 2.

Figure 2. Mutual suspicion scenario

Academic
utility

Grey area

Social utility

Quite clearly, this situation is not conducive to overall effectiveness: deprived of the forum for
debate that books and the field offer, the academic community delights in producing research valued
only for its formal aesthetic; deprived of the conclusions of theoretical debate, the decisionmaking
world has to make do with tools that are seldom updated. Quite the reverse, in short, to what canhappen in a mutual benefit scenario.

1303. THE MUTUAL BENEFIT SCENARIO

As everyone will have realised, the preceding scenario is based on “anthropological”
assumptions about the two groups of actors. Of course, with another set of very different
assumptions, a totally different dynamic is possible.
The differences seem to us to relate essentially to the demands of the academic community. As
soon as the academic sphere chooses to rate the scientific substance of its theories higher than theirformal “prowess”, it inevitably invites comparison of those theories with observable reality and,
therefore, encourages what W. Leontief called “empirical research”. Of course, it is not enough justto organise factual data in an orderly fashion and fool oneself that this is “statistical inference”. It
means building a theoretical, quantitative or causal model by checking it constantly against
observable fact.
Once this requirement -- fundamental to any modern theory of knowledge -- has been met, thegeneration and processing of data assume their rightful importance and require resources thatfrequently exceed those available to academic research. Additional resources can only be found on
the social utility market, where the work of the researcher may coincide with the decisionmakers’
need for knowledge. By allowing research to profit from this (in both senses of the term), thereferees of the academic world will cease censuring work that has an empirical content or even apractical application. Where there is a complete change of attitude, social usefulness may even be
included in the academic evaluation criteria. This will stimulate what is known as the practicalapplication of research work.
Conversely, the more that the operational market finds that innovative concepts or methods fromthe world of research are borne out by its applied work, the more it will open its doors to the latter.
With this sort of dynamic, the two worlds cannot fail to see that they have something to learn fromeach other. What academic research gains in relevance, applied research gains in theoretical power.
Instead of alternative criteria, we have complementary criteria and the output curve of the two markets
falls into areas that are more effective for both criteria, as shown in Figure 3 below.

Figure 3. Climate of dialogue

Academic utility

Social utility131

As the curve suggests, there is still, of course, scope both for purely academic work and for workwith a high social utility content, but that is of little interest to the academic community. These
extreme cases may be short-lived, however, since purely theoretical research may have a positive
impact on methodology and so coincide with the applied field. Equally, strictly empirical work may
produce results that are not clearly understood, giving rise to new questions for research to resolve, or
may even result in new databases, which will provide an untapped resource for innovative research.
Contrary to what happens in the mutual suspicion scenario, it is no longer mutual rejection but
shared curiosity that is the basis for relations between the two markets, to their mutual benefit;
although, for the system to reach its full operational and academic potential, communication has to beestablished between the two communities.

4. COMMUNICATION PROBLEM

Once the obstacles created by the climate of suspicion are removed, information must circulate
between the two sides if any mutual benefit is to be gained from the interplay between policymaking
and scientific issues. This poses three problems: dissemination of knowledge, continuousverification and professional mobility.
The dissemination of the results of transport economics research relies on media that are notdesigned to reach a wide audience. The international journals which have the most well-establishedand authoritative review committees have a readership of barely more than 1 000. The last four
meetings of the World Conference on Transport Research were attended by at most 1 200 people.
These orders of magnitude demonstrate, were proof needed, that the audience interested in this type of
research work is roughly equivalent to the population of people producing it.
Certainly, efforts have been made, particularly by the ECMT, to make this research work
accessible by setting up an efficient documentary database and cataloguing work in progress. In
conjunction with the ECMT database, several university research centres have developed their own
documentation systems. The principal users of these databases are, for the most part, authors of theworks they catalogue and students. This said, an increasing number of users are consultancy firms
providing services for decisionmakers.
The trickle-down of knowledge in this way can hardly be considered adequate and it is up to theacademic community to make a special effort to disseminate the results of its research. Many
research institutes take pains to produce regular newsletters. On the other hand, few researchers
undertake the work of popularisation that would make the main or most recent approaches to an issue
more accessible to the wider public. The reasons are that this is a difficult and laborious exercise andthat this type of publication generally does not receive much attention from academic reviewers.
Conversely, research work specifically commissioned by decisionmakers is rarely published, stillless catalogued. The output of “grey literature” is in fact only catalogued in documentary databases
when it arrives by accident at the research centres administering the databases. It is often only
through special, carefully conducted documentary searches that high value-added studies or studies
that shed some light on the decisionmaking issues that first prompted them can be tracked down.
132

The continuous exchange of experience between the actors in the two markets has probably been
more successful than the dissemination of knowledge. The TRB3 meeting, held every January inWashington, is certainly a model in this area. Topics on transport economics and its tools, alone,bring together several thousand participants from all of the organisations concerned: decisionmaking
centres, consultancy firms, universities, etc.
In Europe, apart from the PTRC -- which, outside of the United Kingdom, only has a modest
following -- there is no equivalent forum for all of the actors concerned. The only regular meetings
that bring together the full range of the actors are the ECMT’s Round Tables. These play a key rolein this exchange of views but are limited to a few topics per year and 30 or so participants at eachRound Table. Symposia that are open to all the actors concerned also play a substantial role.
However, all things considered, there is no European equivalent to the annual meeting of the TRB -- aregular event for which contributions can be scheduled a long time in advance -- always of highstandards and conducted in an atmosphere conducive to an exchange of views between the twoworlds. However, we should note the substantial growth in European research programmes(framework programmes), which have gradually increased in relevance and are becoming steadily
better at encouraging collaboration between consultancy firms and university teams. Decisionmaking
circles are also included, although less directly involved, but academic efficiency and social
efficiency are working well alongside each other in these programmes.
Lastly, the extent of professional mobility between the academic and decision-oriented research
environments varies a great deal from one country to another. Clearly, this would be an excellent wayof transferring experience and, generally, of fostering mutual recognition between the twoenvironments. However, where mobility is particularly low, as in France, the reasons run much too
deep to expect to see them change in the short term.
If my closing remarks have been about communication issues, it is because they are both causes
and symptoms of the poor quality of dialogue that we now have between the research anddecisionmaking spheres. Consequently, we could consider systematic international evaluation of thequality of that dialogue, not directly, but through indicators for each of the three aspects ofcommunication which we have just outlined. How could I possibly close without suggesting further
research, but, typically, for the purposes of informing policy decisions?

133

NOTES

1.

O. Morgenstern (1971), “L’Economie est-elle une science exacte?”, La Recherche, No. 18,
December.

2.

W. Leontief, “Theoretical Assumptions and Nonobserved Facts”, American Economic Review,
March 1971.

3.

Transportation Research Board.

134

POLAND
Juliusz ENGELHARDT
Professor
Transport and Communications Faculty
Szczecin University

RESEARCH IN THE FIELD OF
TRANSPORT ECONOMICS AS A CONTRIBUTION TO THE FRAMING
OF TRANSPORT POLICY IN POLAND

1. INTRODUCTION
Since 1990, social and economic processes have been underway in Poland that are often
succinctly referred to as “transition from socialism to capitalism”. From the economic standpoint, thisprocess is a transition from a planned economy to a market economy.
The declared aim of the centrally-planned control economy was the maximum satisfaction ofneeds, which led to the maximisation of total production and at the same time maximisation of
expenditure. The direct, central planning implied the functioning of a direct, centralised managementof state-owned economic units. This situation created a framework in which the market could not
develop and meant that such financial instruments as money, price, credit, interest rates and taxes wereof only minor importance because they were subordinate to the flows of physical goods and services.
Since the physical production plan was more important than financial planning this meant that there
was not the slightest reason to have strict budget accounting. The rejection of the market mechanism,
the administrative control of prices for investment and consumer goods together with weak budgetary
restrictions for enterprises are the main factors that caused the general shortage of all goods
throughout the whole period of the centrally controlled and administered planned economy. The
availability of financial resources by no means guaranteed that enterprises could obtain the necessary
investment goods and inputs, as this depended on a central distribution system. There is therefore noneed to justify the claim that the so-called shortage economy was economically inefficient, because it
promoted neither the mechanisms of rational management from below, nor technical progress nor
economic growth. Such an economic system was able to last for a few decades only because its
proponents held the political power over the entire country and hence had political supervision overenterprises.
In 1989, Polish society expressed massive support for political forces that were in favour of acomplete change in the social and economic order and the creation of new institutional and legal
structures in order to make social and political relations fully democratic. A return to an efficient
market economy was thus recognised as the normal and natural way to develop. The transformation
taking place is characterised by two aspects: one political and the other socio-economic. In the first, it
is a matter of the radical transformation of the political situation and ownership conditions, reflected in135the development of private ownership, political pluralism and parliamentary democracy. The second
aspect concerns a significant increase in the productivity of the resources available to enterprises, i.e. it
is a matter here of enhancing the efficiency of business management and the economy as a whole.
This means that the system transformation consists of all the political and socio-economic changes
taking place in the post-socialist economy, in which the creation of an efficient market economy is theoverriding factor and a precondition for the success of the system change. In economic theory, at least
three main constitutive characteristics of a market economy are named: Private ownership, which is seen not only as an economic phenomenon, but is also
considered as a philosophical, ethical and legal category; Economic freedom, as a many-faceted phenomenon with politico-economic and institutional
dimensions; Competition, as a process in which buyers and sellers, in order to satisfy their own interests,
seek to present more favourable offers than other buyers and sellers.
Private ownership, economic freedom and competition constitute the foundation for the market
and market mechanisms, which in their turn force all economic actors and households to organise theiractivity according to the principles of rational economic management.
Although the creation of an efficient market economy is the main goal in Poland, this does not in
itself determine the concrete solutions used in the economic structure. There are in fact different typesof market economy, not only in Europe but also in the rest of the world. They are characterised bydifferent property structures, diverse institutional solutions and in the differing extents to whichgovernments intervene in the functioning of the market economy and in the social protection provided
for the poorer strata of the society.
The shaping of the above-mentioned factors and other elements which determine the concrete
form of the market economy is the task of economic policy, which is to be understood as the deliberate
influencing by the State of the economy as a whole, its dynamism, structure and functioning, ofeconomic relations within the country and economic relations with other countries. In the activity of
the State, a distinction can always be made between five basic types of policy:
 Economic stabilization policy, which uses anti-inflation instruments;
 Economic growth policy, which aims at stimulating the economy; Structural policy, concerned with the subject- and object-related restructuring of theeconomy and the pattern of ownership; Trade policy, concerned with economic relations with other countries:
 Social policy.
The above-mentioned policies contain different sub-policies relating to function (e.g. financial,fiscal and customs policies) or branch of activity (e.g. industrial, agricultural, trade and transport
policies).
In the transition from the planned economy to the market economy, the main effort is directed atstructural change, in particular the commercial orientation and privatisation of the public sector. The
concepts discussed here have already become established in the economic vocabulary as the period ofsystem change in Poland, although it is sometimes differently understood and interpreted.
Polish researchers in the field of transport economics have been actively engaged in the processesof system transformation which have been underway since 1990. Here, however, we must point to the136

great variety of fields of activity within the transport sector that have to be covered by scientificresearch and support; in addition, the rapidly developing system transformation had an urgent needfor significant scientific support from the outset. No country had previously completed the phase of
system transformation, so at the beginning of the 90s Poland had no general theoretical transformation
model that it could use.
It is impossible to discuss all scientific research in the field of transport economics or all activities
of Polish economists connected with the framing of transport policy since 1990 in a single paper. The
author has therefore limited himself to describing some areas of his own work which have to someextent helped shape transport policy in Poland.
Specialists in the field of transport economics have been playing an active role in developing
Polish transport policy since 1990. There was initially a broad debate regarding the principles of thispolicy, concerned with two main aspects:
 The general methods of Polish transport policy;
 The aims of Polish transport policy.
Specialists in the different branches of the transport sector tackled the specific problems of theirown fields. As an example of the enormous harnessing of the scientific potential, we can take therailway sector, where three main fields in which scientific research has helped in the framing of Polishtransport policy should be mentioned:
 The restructuring and eventual privatisation of rail transport; The approximation of the operating principles of Polish railways to European Union
requirements;
 The calculation of fees for access to railway infrastructure.
The problem areas listed above, the first two of a general nature, concerned with the transportsystem as a whole, and the second three concerned specifically with rail transport, will be discussed insome detail in what follows. They appear as good examples of the practical involvement of transporteconomists, using the findings of their research to help frame transport policy in Poland.

2. TRANSPORT POLICY METHODS-- RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ECONOMIC PRACTICE
In economic theory, a state can adopt either of two contrasting economic policy models, although
in practice neither exists in pure form: liberalism, or laissez-faire and interventionism. Liberalism isbroadly defined by the following characteristics: limitation of the role of the State to the guidance ofthe economy as a whole, privatisation of formerly state-owned sectors, freedom for all economic
activities, low taxes to promote economic growth, and competition. Interventionism, on the other
hand, is based on a policy of active intervention by the State in the development and functioning of theeconomy, using different instruments such as price and wage control, the instrumental use of taxes,137

direct investment and various administrative measures. Over time, neither of the two economic policy
models can remain in its pure form, so that we can speak only of the more or less liberal orinterventionist nature of an economic policy.
The debate over whether the pursuit of a given transport policy constitutes interventionist
interference in the economy or not, is of a purely rhetorical nature if we take into account thatliberalism itself has no economic policy principles of its own, in particular in individual economic
sectors. It therefore follows that if the State does adopt a policy in an economic sector, for example,
the transport system, using appropriate instruments, this determines the choice of the policy model,
insofar as this policy immediately takes on an interventionist nature. Five preconditions which justify
state intervention in the economy are generally named: The existence of public goods -- these are characterised by the fact that nobody can haveexclusive use of them, i.e. the actors who are potential users are ordinary members ofsociety; External effects -- here, it is a matter of negative and positive effects of the activity ofenterprises which do not impact on the profit and loss account (the best known negative
external effect is environmental pollution, while positive effects are innovations of all kindsthat bring more advantage to the economy as a whole than to the enterprise itself; Natural monopolies -- these are often producer monopolies, where, because of economics ofscale, the supplier concerned can sell its goods or services at the lowest cost. Suchadvantages appear above all in utilities and infrastructure networks (energy, gas,
telecommunications, railways). To a certain extent, it is possible to increase the loading ofthese networks at will with only a small increase in costs. In this case, a monopoly is an
optimal solution for the economy as a whole; Cut-throat competition -- this situation arises where enterprises, whose activity is necessary
to satisfy demand, are not happy with their market position and start competing fiercely on
prices. Big enterprises, whose unit costs are generally lower, are in a position to lower prices
to such a level that not only the weakest but also medium economic actors are forced out of
the market;
 Structural crises -- these are characterised by the fact that a permanent surplus production
capacity has appeared, due to external factors (import bans, embargoes) or internal factors.
The above preconditions for state intervention in the transport sector of the economy are present in
all European countries, including Poland, which justifies specific transport policies. All transport
sector infrastructures -- roads, railway lines and waterways, bus stations, railway stations, airports andseaports -- are public goods. The transport system also causes many negative external effects, such asenvironmental pollution, noise, vibration, land use and the great number of road accidents leading toinjury, mutilation or death. There is natural network monopoly in rail transport. Cut-throat
competition is characteristic of large parts of the road haulage industry. Structural over-capacity ispresent in western Europe mainly in rail, inland waterway and air transport, while in eastern Europe it
has been aggravated as a result of the system transformation policy.
It is also clear that the transport system is one of the economic sectors in which individual
branches meet the objective preconditions that justify the pursuit of a policy of state intervention toeliminate or reduce the impact of phenomena and processes that are negative and undesirable from the138

standpoint of the economy as a whole. If we assume that the State, despite the existence of theabove-mentioned preconditions for intervention in the transport field, in fact does not intervene in thiseconomic sector and does not introduce any special regulations for the transport system (e.g. laws,
regulations, etc.), then this would be a completely liberal policy. However, already with the first
special regulations for this sector, initially in the form of appropriate legislation to create theorganisational and legal framework for the functioning of the entire transport system (e.g. theTransport Act) or its individual branches (e.g. the Railways Act) and later in the form of regulations
and administrative decisions of the supervisory authorities under the provisions of the basic
legislation, we clearly have an interventionist policy.
It is therefore clear that a distinction between a liberal economic policy, which is characterised by
the lack of any intervention in the transport sector, and an overall transport policy or any policy in theindividual transport modes, which simply through its adoption and by its very nature is based on theprinciple of the state intervention, can only be made in the above sense. It thus follows that thetransport policy model is necessarily that of state intervention. The extent of the intervention can vary,
however, according to whether the State’s policy includes many interventionist subsystems with theirvarious instruments. The least possible state intervention in the transport system is therefore that
where only the general organisational and legal frameworks are established for the sector as a whole
and the individual modes, and economic instruments are used extremely sparingly and only inwell-defined cases. In the first place it is a matter of such basic legislation as the above-mentioned
Transport Act, a Road Traffic Act and corresponding laws regulating the operation of rail, road andinternational transport, with just a necessary minimum of economic instruments -- for example, tolimit prices in the case of monopoly formation.
With an increase of state intervention in economic policy, in particular policy in the individual
branches of the economy, the number of instruments used increases, with orders, bans, public service
obligations, detailed tax regulations, price and wage policy measures and other forms of intervention,that end up with negative phenomena such as conflicting effects of individual instruments,
ineffectiveness of certain instruments and general over-regulation of the branches concerned.
Negative phenomena of this type, in particular over-regulation, have been seen in the transport
policies of many countries. With regard to general transport policy and policy in the individualtransport modes, this led in many countries, logically enough, to calls for deregulation, sometimes
called liberalisation, of the transport system. This process consisted in the gradual elimination ofmany interventionist instruments in the transport policies of states and economic groupings, whereby
particular attention was paid to the removal of any kind of obstacles to access to transport markets. In
this sense transport deregulation policy can be equated with a certain liberalisation of its operating
principles, though there can be no talk of a transition of a state or of the European Union to economic
liberalism as the transport policy model so long as the typical organisational and legal regulations of
the transport sector are maintained in these countries.
In Poland, we can scarcely speak of deregulation of the entire transport system in the fullest senseof the word, because the country lacks regulations characteristic of the market economy. The absenceof market mechanisms in Poland over a period of several decades following the second world war was
the result of the type of regulations characteristic of the planned economy. In the process of systemtransformation, it is now a matter of rapidly getting rid of these regulations. In the resulting gaps weneed new legal texts that take account not only of the fact of the transition to market economy
principles but also Poland’s future accession to the European Union. We can therefore say that in
Poland in the 90s it has been more a matter of building an appropriate set of transport policy
instruments taking account of the experience (above all the negative experience) of highly developed139

countries in this connection, than deregulating transport activity (which is indeed the general trend in
the western European countries).
Poland’s transport policy is and will remain a policy based on the principles of state intervention.
The problem lies in deciding the extent of this intervention and the type of instruments used. In order
to avoid over-regulation of the transport system, it would appear to be necessary to base future rail
policy on the principle of “pragmatic intervention”. The essence of this transport policy methodology
is, on the one hand, the withdrawal of the State from intervention in those parts of the transport system
in which this is possible and rational, e.g. through privatisation and the abandonment of price control
but, on the other hand, the maintenance of active intervention to control phenomena and processes
wherever this is necessary in the given stage of material and organisational development, e.g. throughinfrastructure investment, internalisation of external costs, stimulation of restructuring andprivatisation processes, repayment to transport undertakings of the costs associated with the fulfilmentof public service obligations. This means that the direction in which state intervention in the Polishtransport system is going to develop is not clearly determined, i.e. it ranges from over-regulation ofparts of the transport system through various instruments to complete deregulation and liberalisationof the operating principles of this sector. In the system transformation underway in Poland, thechanges in state intervention in the transport system involve doing away with certain instruments but,at the same time, introducing new instruments or increasing or reducing the role of existing ones.
The scientific debate on transport policy that took place in Poland in the 90s, the results of which
included recommendations for economic practice, no doubt led to economic policies in this field now
being approached more pragmatically.
The contribution that scientific circles have made to the Polish transport system lies in theirhaving made the economic policymakers aware that exaggerated liberalism can cause many additionaland often unexpected social and economic problems in Poland.

3. AIMS OF POLISH TRANSPORT POLICY

The scientific debate on the aims and tasks of Polish transport policy was of a practical nature.
Already at the beginning of the 90s, members of the scientific community had begun to discuss the
subject of the aims of Polish transport policy before a broad public. The problems were addressed inmany articles in the specialist press and in contributions to conferences and scientific seminars. There
was no lack of polemical and controversial statements. In 1993, the Ministry for Transport andShipping commissioned transport system experts to produce an official document for the Government
setting out the principles, entitled: “Transport policy -- Action programme for reorganising thetransport system to meet the requirements of the market economy and the new conditions of economic
co-operation in Europe”. This task was taken on by Prof. Jan Burniewicz of the University Gdansk
with a group of collaborators (the author of this paper took part in the first phase of the work on thisdocument). After much discussion, argument and reworking, the final version of the document
appeared in 1995. It was accepted by the Government as the official document setting out Polishtransport policy.
Today, some years later, it is clear that despite various criticisms, the production of this document
was a big success for the experts and for Prof. J. Burniewicz personally.

140

The study discusses many transport policy aims and tasks. The following are the strategic goalsof Polish transport policy for the period 1995-2020:
 Support the privatisation process, restructuring giant transport undertakings and combating
the formation of monopolies; Adjust the Polish transport system to European Union requirements and to the transportsystems of the rest of Europe; Implement technological and organisational progress, in order to make the transport system
more efficient and enhance the transport system contribution to the stimulation of economic
growth.
Having decided on the above strategic goals, the following list of basic aims of the Polishtransport policy programme was adopted:
 Upgrade Polish transport structures and mechanisms to bring capacities up to highperformance requirements;
 Generally improve the financial situation of the transport systems, renew the materiel andcreate better development opportunities for individual actors;
 Increase the economic autonomy and financial equilibrium of the transport system against
the background of international, intersectoral and intrasectoral competition;
 Create equal conditions for competition and ensure fair competition;
 Supervise transport safety and technical standards;
 Create conditions that encourage public and private investment in transport;
 Guarantee economic access to public passenger transport services and enhance their
attractiveness as compared with using private transport;
 Combat monopolist practices on the market and guarantee equality of access to public
infrastructures for all actors;
 Protect national interests against unfair activities of foreign firms and enterprises;
 Revise and extend the commercial law governing the functioning of the transport system inthe transition to the market economy;
 Support the restructuring and privatisation processes in the transport system; Create a transport services market which allows the interplay of supply and demand withminimal regulation by the State; Provide the greatest possible amount of readily accessible state financial resources forinvestment in the development and modernisation of the transport system and, at the sametime, create conditions to encourage greater private and foreign investment in the transportsystem; Create alternative methods of financing the development of the transport system; Make as much use as possible of international co-operation in the transport field, and inparticular take advantage of the aid possibilities available for Polish transport under theEuropean Union association contract.
The achievement of these fifteen basic aims of transport policy will come up against financial andtemporal constraints. The priority aims of transport policy therefore involve projects that: Are characterised by high socio-economic effectiveness (NPV, IRR, PP and B/C indicators);
 Help to eliminate system bottlenecks, reduce incompatibilities and improve transport safety;141 Effectively shorten the distance from the European Union (improve the traffic capacity of
infrastructures, guarantee the continuity of the networks, increase transit traffics, reduce
waiting times at frontier crossings);
 Substantially improve the economic situation of Polish transport enterprises (increase thecompetitiveness of the services, streamline procedures, reduce fuel and energy
consumption); Appear most attractive to private and foreign investors (clearly defined property rights,
satisfactory share of profits, certainty of realisation of the project); Promote the transfer of advanced transport techniques and technologies to Poland(high-speed services, multi-modal transport chains, logistics systems);
 Facilitate the solution of major ecological and social problems (e.g. exhaust emission andnoise reduction, create employment).
The highest priority should be given to those tasks whose realisation meets all the above criteria.
Tasks that meet only one or two criteria will have a correspondingly lower priority. In view of thisranking of transport policy aims, in the above-mentioned document a list of aims/tasks was presented,
divided into urgent, less urgent and least urgent tasks.
The following were categorised as urgent aims/tasks, to be achieved within the next three years:
 The creation of a new transport system at both macro- and microeconomic levels (legislative
work, creation of new financing sources, new tax solutions, restructuring of enterprises,
privatisation processes); Effective investment projects aimed at eliminating the major transport system bottlenecks
and reducing transport delays for the population; The completion of investment projects that involve no new financing requirements(well-advanced sections of motorway, Okêcie II Airport, Œwinoujœcie ferry terminal, manyurban transport systems);
 The implementation of new investment projects which are highly profitable and meet all of
the adopted criteria (new motorway stretches with the highest expected traffic intensity,
frontier-crossing infrastructures); The repair of the roads which have suffered most through neglect and delays in recent years.
Less urgent aims/tasks, to be fulfilled within the next five to ten years, are as follows: Fulfilment of the obligations arising from the international agreements (Europe Agreement,
AGR, AGC and AGTC Contracts), above all, in the case where there is big interest in the
project on the part of private and foreign investors;
 Investment projects that improve and strengthen the competitiveness of Polish transport
services.
The least urgent tasks, which can be fulfilled within the next ten to twenty years, are:
 The less dramatically effective investment projects, for which no financial resources areavailable at present; Radical technological changes that entail high expenditure;
 Environment-friendly measures that will require an evolutionary adjustment of Polishtransport techniques, the work of Polish enterprises and user behaviours.

142

The above classification of the defined aims of transport policy was hotly debated and strongly
criticised after the publication of the document. Attention was drawn to shortcomings in themethodological approach, which should consist in setting a main goal and a set of subsidiary andsupporting goals. The mixing together of aims, measures and implementation methods was also
criticised. Other commentators were of the opinion that the entire government transport policy
programme document, characterised by imprecision and superficiality, contained proposals fordiscussion rather than a set of aims and tasks that could be concretely implemented.
Without getting involved in any detailed argument over the methodology of the setting andranking of the transport policy goals, it can nevertheless be said that the government document only
indirectly defines the aims and tasks relating to the individual transport modes. These can, however,be easily identified by taking the listed strategic goals and the fifteen main aims/tasks andappropriately interpreting and implementing them for the individual transport modes. Such an
approach appears understandable, because the “Transport policy. . . ” list of aims is not concernedwith individual modes, and it can be added that the transport policy goals defined in this document for
the transport sector as a whole cover all important spheres of activity of this sector, and are thus
correctly formulated from the standpoint of the terms of reference. Some reservations may, however,be expressed regarding the ranking of transport policy aims/tasks, because the absolute priority given
to the road transport aims and tasks means that projects in the railway sector are put on the backburner, despite the recommendation that they should be realised “in the case where there is big interestin the project on the part of private and foreign investors”.

4. RESTRUCTURING OF RAIL TRANSPORT

Researchers interested in rail transport have been actively involved in the problem of therestructuring of the railway sector in Poland since the beginning of the 90s. In the first phase of thetransformation of the economy, a number of consultancy firms turned up in Poland and proposed to
the Government various spectacular and thoroughly impressive reforms in rail transport. A common
feature of these studies was their unrealistic nature, because the foreign consultants did not know
enough about the Polish legal system or the economic and social conditions.
In 1992, experts produced a major study: “Strategy of the ‘Polish State Railways’ undertaking-- Polish rail transport to the year 2000”, edited by Professors J. Perenc and W. Morawski. The
Polish writers preferred a more evolutionary but effective approach to the problem of restructuring therailways, recommending certain structural changes, such as privatisation of part of the property of thePolish State Railways (PKP), the transfer of property to local authorities, solution of the social
problems of PKP employees, increased autonomy of decisionmaking for the PKP. All the proposedchanges were oriented according to the already known Directive 91/440 on the development of theCommunity's railways.
This study had a big influence on the direction taken by the subsequent restructuring of the PKP.
There was a series of articles in the specialist press as follow-up to the study. Many seminars were
held on the reform of the PKP. In the railway undertaking itself, people began to prepare forreorganisation and restructuring in line with the general ideas put forward by Polish scientific circles.
As we approach the end of the 90s, it can be said that the model developed by the scientific circles in
Poland of a phased restructuring of the railways is being implemented and will continue. The author143

of this paper was active in the PKP management in 1994 and proposed, in an internal PKP pamphlet“Our railways -- why and how they should be restructured”, that a railway holding company should becreated in Poland, a large part of which could be privatised.
By and large it can be noted with satisfaction that Polish scientific circles have made anenormous contribution in the 90s to the development of the railway restructuring concept. The
researchers thus now form a strong opinion-forming group, which is putting pressure on thepoliticians, and the PKP management, to reform Polish rail transport better and faster, and above all toproceed to at least partial privatisation.

5. HARMONIZATION OF THE OPERATING PRINCIPLES OF
POLISH RAIL TRANSPORT WITH EUROPEAN UNION REQUIREMENTS
On 16 December 1991 in Brussels, Poland signed, for both political and economic reasons, theEurope Agreement, establishing an association between the European Communities and their Member
States and the Republic of Poland, known as the Europe Agreement. After ratification by theparliaments of the states concerned, the Agreement entered into force on 1 February 1994. Since thatmoment it has been of vital importance for the process of Poland’s integration with the European
Union.
In accordance with the Europe Agreement, the Polish economy is being adjusted to therequirements of the European Union in the following respects:








Liberalisation of trade;
Promotion of competition and abolition of monopolies;
Harmonization of the tax systems;
Adjustment of monetary policy;
Adjustment of the banking system;
Adjustments in customs clearance;
Unification of norms and standards.

The most urgent and primary task against the above background is the necessary approximationof Polish legislation to that of the European Union in accordance with Art. 68 of the Europe
Agreement. The adjustment of Polish law is also Poland's most important obligation under the Europe
Agreement. Art. 69 of the Agreement stipulates that: “The approximation of laws shall extend to thefollowing areas in particular: customs law, company law, banking law, company accounts and taxes,
intellectual property, protection of workers at the workplace, financial services, rules on competition,
protection of health and life of humans, animals and plants, consumer protection, indirect taxation,technical rules and standards, transport and the environment.”
The problem of integration with regard to transport services is directly addressed by Articles 56
and 81 of the Europe Agreement and, to some extent, by the provisions of other articles. Article 56.3
states: “With a view to assuring a co-ordinated development and progressive liberalisation oftransport between the Parties adapted to their reciprocal commercial needs, the conditions of mutual
market access in air transport and in inland transport shall be dealt with by special transport
agreements to be negotiated between the Parties after the entry into force of this Agreement.”
Article 56.5 further stipulates that “During the transitional period, Poland shall progressively adapt
144

its legislation including administrative, technical and other rules to that of the Community legislation
existing at any time in the field of air and inland transport insofar as it serves liberalisation purposes
and mutual access to markets of the Parties and facilitates the movement of passengers and of goods.”
With the signing of the Agreement, Poland and the European Union undertook to reduce obstacles toaccess to transport markets. This will be a political and economic process that proceeds relatively
slowly, so that the principle of mutual market access (as mentioned in Article 56.5 of the Europe
Agreement cited above) and the signing of special transport agreements between Poland and theCommunity (Article 56.3) will be of particular importance. Thanks to these provisions, it will bepossible in the future transport agreements to appropriately safeguard Poland’s transport interests.
Until the time when the transport agreements enter into force, there will be a transition period that canlast for a maximum of ten years and during which Poland must fulfil many adjustment tasks in thetransport sector. Taking into account the provisions of the entire Europe Agreement, five basic
adjustment tasks for Poland in the field of transport may be named:
1) Economic, administrative and technical preparation for the need to facilitate market access;2) Adjustment of the infrastructure and the vehicle stock to requirements, norms and standardsof the European Union;3) Realisation of programmes to develop infrastructures of international significance;
4) Promotion of the organisation and use of computerised systems;5) Approximation of Polish laws and regulations to those in force in the EU.
Each of the above aspects is potentially an approach to a detailed programme of adjustment to EU
requirements in the individual transport modes. Such a programme must not only comply with theprovisions of the Europe Agreement, but also take into account the general principles, aims and tasksof Community transport policy.
Scientific circles played a twofold role in the adjustment of the operating rules of Polish railtransport to EU requirements. First, the experts were themselves forced to quickly learn certain
aspects of the EU legal system in order to then be able to present the essence of the regulations anddirectives relevant to transport in many articles and at seminars. In the second role, they again
appeared as transport experts on Parliamentary committees working on the preparation of the newlegislation for the individual transport modes. Such expert contributions were without doubt a big
help in the framing of transport policy in Poland. A good example here is the drafting of legislation in
the railway sector.
In the years 1994-97, the railway sector in Poland was given a new legal basis for its existence.
The solutions adopted took into account the greater part of the rail transport requirements resulting
from the EU legislation. Thus, the obligatory adjustment measures for Poland set out in the Europe
Agreement concerning this field of the transport system are now almost completed.
Directive 91/440 instructs national governments to create conditions for real independence forrailway undertakings. In Poland these conditions have been fulfilled, as the Sejm on 6 July 1995
adopted a new law on the PKP undertaking. According to this law, the PKP is formally given broader
powers of independent decision as a result of the setting up of the PKP Council and PKP Board,
endowed with very broad powers. In view of the fact that the rules for subsidising the PKP
before 1990 differed from the rules governing financial aid for the western European railway
undertakings, in Poland in the 90s, the problem of accumulated indebtedness simply did not exist in
the case of the PKP. Therefore, the reduction of the indebtedness of the railways, covered by Art. 9 of
Directive 91/440, is a problem that does not arise in Poland in the context of the process of adjustment
to EU requirements.

145

An important EU recommendation and, at the same time, an adjustment obligation for Poland is
the separation between infrastructure management and railway operations, i.e. the “use of the railway
infrastructure”, as set out in Articles 6-8 of Directive 91/440. The minimum requirement in this caseis accounting separation of these fields through the organisation of distinct divisions within a single
undertaking. Individual states can go further, separating infrastructure and operations by creatingcompletely separate organisations (enterprises), though this is optional. Aid paid to one of these twoareas of activity may not be transferred to the other and the accounts for the two areas of activity shallbe kept in a way which reflects this prohibition.
A further important obligation for Poland arising from the Europe Agreement regarding railtransport is to grant access to Polish rail infrastructures for the foreign rail operators defined in Art. 10
of Directive 91/440. This right of access and transit is the main rule of European rail transport policy.
According to the provisions of Art. 5 of Directive 91/440, a regulation has to be introduced in Poland
to ensure that railway enterprises are to conclude contracts for the public services obligations imposedby the State.
Under Directive 95/18, Poland is obliged to introduce a licensing system for railway operators.
Directive 95/19, on the other hand, contains the recommendation to delegate to an “allocation body”
designated by the State the right to allocate infrastructure capacity. This body may be a separate
infrastructure manager which is at the same time commissioned (empowered) to perform this function.
According to the provisions of Art. 8 of Directive 91/440 and Directive 95/19, the State shallestablish the principles for the level of fees for the use of the infrastructure by railway operators andshall ensure that there is no discrimination among the railway undertakings in the levying of fees.
The scientists' contribution to the approximation of the operating rules of Polish transport to therequirements of the European Union lies, in the first place, in their function as experts in the draftingof the new commercial law and in the promotion of new ideas and organisational solutions in Poland,as essential conditions for Poland's entry to the EU.

6. CHARGES FOR ACCESS TO RAILWAY INFRASTRUCTURE

The problem of fees for access to railway infrastructure arose in Europe with the adoption of
Directive 91/440. From the standpoint of both research and economic practice, this was a completely
new state of affairs. The managers in the individual railway administrations began to set up special
task forces to create appropriate calculation systems. At the beginning of the 90s, Polish economists
did not have the theoretical background to prepare them for solving this problem. In the course of thenext few years, publications on the technical bases for calculating charges for infrastructure use
appeared in Poland and abroad (e.g. J. Engelhardt, “What charges for access to railway
infrastructure?”, Rail International 1995, No. 11). The Polish legislation was adjusted to therequirements of Directive 95/19 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the charging
of infrastructure fees. In the years 1998-99, the PKP worked out their own system for calculating
charges for access to the infrastructure. Not all the problems were eliminated, however, so that further
scientific support and assistance is still required in this connection.
The shift to organisational separation between “infrastructure management” and “transport
operations” is essential under the terms of Directive 91/440. Thus, even if there is not full-scale
liberalisation in rail transport in the next few years in the individual European countries, the existing146

railway undertakings will nevertheless have to be separated internally and prepare for the need to
introduce an internal charging system. The organisational unit of a railway undertaking that manages
the infrastructure will make the infrastructure available to another organisational unit of the sameundertaking which is responsible for train operation, for a fee. This means that many railway
undertakings in Europe will be faced with a new challenge, i.e. they will have to calculate the fees forthe use of lines (routes) on the basis of the actual costs of these lines. Regardless of the systems used,
all the possible calculations and analyses for the different levels of charges, reductions or discounts
must, in fact, be based on data concerning the maintenance and repair costs of the infrastructure,broken down by individual lines as well as on the basis of the capital assets (including theinfrastructure) in the accounts, again for individual lines.
The creation of such a system is extremely difficult and involves a lot of work and appropriate
electronic data processing systems. Many big railway undertakings in Europe do not at present havedetailed maintenance and repair costs for individual lines and sections, although there has long been
talk of the need for such detailed costs for the maintenance and repair of the infrastructure. For thisreason, calculations for infrastructure use fees are generally based on the average costs of a particular
category of line over which different categories of trains run, not on the actual costs of specific lines.
The recording of at least part of the infrastructure costs for individual lines (direct costs), broken down
into fixed and variable costs, together with a corresponding calculation for the purposes of estimating
the various indirect infrastructure costs and imputing them to the individual lines, including the costsof train control and the overhead costs of the infrastructure management company, is of paramountimportance for the correct calculation of the infrastructure use fee. What is more, the European Union
should introduce measures to unify the principles for the calculation of charges for access to the rail
infrastructure, otherwise it would be difficult to imagine freedom for train operating companies towork on the networks of different countries.
In the 90s, the figures for individual railway undertakings show great differences in infrastructure
costs. Taking for example the figures produced by the SNCF in 1992 for infrastructure maintenancecosts in ECU per kilometre of line, with the SNCF as 100 per cent, the corresponding costs for six
other European railway undertakings were: DB -- 197 per cent, FS -- 344 per cent, SBB -- 276 per
cent, SNCB -- 195 per cent, ÖBB -- 152 per cent, PKP -- 31 per cent. Regarding the problem ofdifferences in infrastructure costs and in the procedures for the collection of fees for railway
infrastructure use, reference should be made to the European Commission White Paper “A strategy forrevitalising the community's railways”. The Commission expressed its concern at the fact that while
Germany and the United Kingdom intended to completely cover the infrastructure costs by means of
their fees, the Netherlands and Spain, on the other hand, allowed operators to use the infrastructure
free of charge, and this was likely to be a major obstacle to the market entry of new train operators. It
should be added that the commission was basically opposed to the possibility of using infrastructures
free of charge, pointing out that in this case mechanisms exerting pressure for rationalisation andinfrastructure cost reduction would not be present.
According to Art. 7 of Directive 95/19 on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and thecharging of infrastructure fees, Member States shall lay down the rules for determining theinfrastructure fees. It is obvious that these rules should be subject to alignment at European Unionlevel. Above all, it would be advisable in this regard to make use of the experience of the Working
Group of experts from the International Union of Railways (UIC), which in 1993 worked out a unified
cost outline to be used to establish the charges for the use of the infrastructure by foreign train
operators. A second relevant element in this alignment should be to agree on the principle that the
infrastructure maintenance and repair costs, possibly together with a capital cost surcharge, should be
the basis for calculating the fees, and this should apply equally in all EU Member States. In this case,fairly strict principles should be laid down and the provisions of Art. 6.1 of Directive 95/19 should be147made more explicit. In this Article there is a general provision which says that income from
infrastructure fees plus State contributions on the one hand and infrastructure expenditure on the othershould balance over a reasonable period of time. But this could also be formally interpreted
differently: the higher the state contributions, the lower the income from the fees can be to balance theoverall infrastructure expenditure, and hence the fees to be collected from train operators can be lower.
Such a situation would then lead to substantial differentiation in the fees for infrastructure access,depending on the level of subsidisation of the rail infrastructure by the State (high subsidies Ð lowfees), while the infrastructure costs remained at a similar level. Divergent policies with respect tocalculating the fees for infrastructure access, with at the same time differences in the approaches andeconomic strengths of states, would certainly do nothing to help the general liberalisation of access torailway networks for different train operators. The European Union should therefore introduce themeasures necessary for harmonization in this field.

7. SUMMARY

In the above we have attempted, by means of selected examples, to show the extent to whichscientific research in the field of transport economics can be used to help frame transport policy. The
examples presented confirm that the scientific potential concentrated on problems of transporteconomics could and should be harnessed for and used by the people responsible for transport policy
in our country. It should also be stressed that the examples presented in this paper were chosen
subjectively and represent only a small part of the research carried out in Poland. It is a fact that after
10 years of system transformation the interests of Polish researchers connected with the transportsystem are no longer restricted solely to problems connected with Polish domestic reforms. Polishresearchers in the transport field are becoming increasingly involved in work on European transport
policy problems in such fields as:







Impact of transport on the environment;
External costs of transport and their internalisation;
Deregulation and liberalisation in the transport system;
Ownership structures and competitiveness in the transport system;
Linked transportation, logistics and telematics;
Changes in the demand structure in the transport system.

The above fields of interest of Polish transport economists indicate possibilities for them to makea contribution to the framing of not only Polish but also European transport policy.

148

ANNEXORGANISATION AND PRINCIPLES OF RESEARCH FINANCING IN
POLAND IN THE FIELD OF TRANSPORT ECONOMICS

Research in the field of transportation in Poland is carried out by specialised research anddevelopment units, institutes and enterprises, as well as by some universities.
The three following research institutes are directly subordinated to the Ministry of Transportationand Maritime Economy:--

Institute of Motor Transportation (ITS) in Warsaw: this unit deals with economic
research and motor technology. The main research fields are as follows:••••

Economics of transportation enterprises;
Individual motorisation;
Motor accidents;
Pollution to the environment caused by vehicles.

Moreover, the ITS fulfils the role of authorised government institution dealing withcertification approval of vehicles.
--

Roads and Bridges Research Institute (IBDM): deals mainly with technical design ofroads and bridges constructions, but also carried out the following:••--

Pre-investment studies on construction of motorways and roads as well as civilengineering constructions;
Studies covering the economic efficiency of the construction of motorways and otherroads.

Maritime Institute (IM): deals with economic and organisational problems pertaining tonavigation and sea ports.

These units function on the basis specified by the Act as so-called “research and development
units”, being state-owned property. Officially, they are subordinate to the Ministry of Transportationand Maritime Economy, which fulfils -- on behalf of the State -- the function of establishing body.
The Ministry partly finances the above-mentioned units; however, they obtain a large part of theirincomes from external sources.
Another R&D unit involved in research in transport economics is the Institute of Environment
Protection (IO•) in Warsaw, subordinate to the Ministry of Environment Protection and Natural
Resources. The Institute deals, inter alia, with research on the impact of transportation on theenvironment.
The Research Centre for Transportation Economics (OBET) has played a significant researchrole in the field of transport economics. Since 1993, the Centre has been an independent andself-reliant state enterprise (not subordinate to the Ministry of Transportation and Maritime Economy).
149

Previously, the Centre was for many years the research centre of the Polish State Railway (PKP).
OBET deals with research comprising organisational and economic problems of overlandtransportation. Among the main research fields of the Centre are the following:---------

Internalisation of external costs of transportation;
Demand forecast for haulage;
Transportation policy;
Economics of transportation enterprises;
Restructuring and privatisation of enterprises;
Internal analysis of enterprises;
Studies on transportation costs;
Pre-investment studies on projects.

Also, university centres in Poland deal with research on transportation economics; however,there are not many of them. It should be emphasized that in the 90s the universities’ role in transporteconomics research has undergone certain changes. During this period, a reform of academic
economic education in Poland was carried out. The idea of the reform was, inter alia, to depart fromeducation in limited (narrow) transportation specialities in favour of more general education. At
present, not many of the economic universities in Poland are offering courses in economic studies
connected with transport, but two leading centres are the University of Szczecin and the University ofGdansk. The professors of these universities who deal with transport economics, participate inprojects carried out by research institutions, often as their research managers. They also directly
co-operate with the Ministry of Transportation or with enterprises. Additionally, the university centres
not only provide young adepts but also offer practically the only possibility to obtain university
degrees by the employees of the institutes.
The financing of research in the field of transport economics is undertaken by the government
branch (ministry) under the name of Research Committee (KBN). The Committee annually divides
the general pool of budget funds into departments. The Ministry of Transportation receives from the
Research Committee (KBN) funds for research in the field of transport economics. The Department ofTransportation Policy -- within the confines of the ministry -- is responsible for the ordering andmonitoring of all research. The subordinate institutes are partly financed by the Ministry ofTransportation from the Research Committee (KBN) funds. The Research Committee (KBN) also
retains part of the funds for its own disposal. These funds are designated for research projects andordered to all interested domestic and foreign institutions -- and universities -- in the form of tender.
Moreover, the Ministry of Transportation can order from the Research Committee (KBN) certain
large, inter-trade research projects. For such projects, the Research Committee invites tenders inwhich foreign institutes can also participate.
Foreign fund sources represent an important part of the financing of Polish research institutions
since the foreign institutions co-operate with the World Bank, participating in studies in theframework of the PHARE projects. The Polish research institutes also participate in the international
consortia which realise specific projects, e.g. OBET (PL) + INRETS (F) + IWW (D) + NEA (NL).
It may be added that the representatives of the research institutes actively take part, as Polish experts,
in negotiations with the European Union.

150

PORTUGAL
José M. VIEGAS
Professor
CESUR-IST
LisbonINTRODUCTION
This paper is based on the conclusions drawn by the author from his own personal experienceand from discussions with colleagues. The author has experience of a wide variety of researchcontexts, ranging from the relative isolation of the academic world to close contacts withdecisionmakers in both government and the highest echelons of corporate management, as well as
discussions with officials working in national and international public administrations.
Inevitably, a number of generalisations have had to be made in the interest of consistency. While
it is possible that none of the statements made in this paper are universally applicable, the author
nonetheless feels that the terms in which they are qualified faithfully reflect the reality of thesituation. The aim of this paper is simply to present the pros and cons of current practice and to
identify the future direction of research activities designed to provide decisionmakers withinformation that will help them better promote the well being of citizens living in democraticsocieties.

1. DEMAND FOR TRANSPORT ECONOMICS RESEARCH

Since it is widely recognised that demand for transport is a derived demand, it might perhaps bethought that demand for research on transport issues would also be derived, i.e. from the failure of thetransport sector to deliver what other sectors and society at large expect from it. This is only partiallytrue, however, since the size of the transport sector is such that it generates its own specific needs andmeeting those needs is also a source of demand for research.
There are, therefore, several groups of initiators of transport (economics) research. The firstgroup, representing society in general and other sectors of the economy, consists of politicians and toa lesser extent (national or multilateral) public agencies and administrations, as well as civil
associations (consumer groups, environmentalists, etc.) which in recent years have started to play amore visible and complementary role. The second group, representing interests within the transport
sector, comprises the same public agencies and administrations, although in a different role, and lobby
groups made up of suppliers to the sector.

151

The universities are also present in both groups in that they are able, to some extent, to choose
their research themes. In the earlier stages of research, each group will choose an issue which it
perceives to be of importance to society and which it feels competent to investigate. In later stages, itis perhaps as much the interest in pursuing the research to greater depth as the need to ensure thesurvival and reputation of the research group which determines the choice of research topic.
Even though there is a danger that research may be pursued out of self interest, the fact that
university groups have scope to develop and pursue their own fields of research is very important, butwould now seem to be under threat in some countries as funding is reduced for research initiated byuniversity groups, who are forced to survive by devoting more time and effort to research into themes
chosen by other actors in society.
If we now address the issue of the purpose of the research currently in progress, it would be fair tosay that the studies currently being conducted fall into two broad categories: those relating to a
specific project (normally initiated by the project promoter, either to comply with a legal requirement
or to ensure that the best choices are being made) and those relating to a given policy issue, which
may either be pressing in the short term or seen as likely to pose problems in the medium or longterm.
A third aspect which merits further investigation is the range of options taken into consideration.
It is common (and normal) practice for the range of options to be wider when it is a matter ofconsidering policy, but much narrower in the case of specific projects. Indeed, in the latter instance,
economic research is commonly carried out simply to validate options that have more or less alreadybeen chosen. It is only if such studies were to demonstrate that this preliminary decision were
substantially mistaken that a different course of action would be adopted.
If we look at the historical background to the decisionmaking process with regard to transportsystems, we can see that, for many years, the main considerations were those relating to engineeringand that the best available technology (preferably with a high level of reliability) would ultimately bechosen. In recent decades and primarily since the end of World War II, economic realism has started
to prevail and although engineering criteria are still applied they are mainly used to define theunderlying set of reasonable choices.
The diffusion of the results of economic research has been facilitated by the emergence ofinternational bodies through which the money needed for investment is channelled. The introductionof a consistent set of rules regarding the selection of projects and the conditions of funding which, tosome extent, corresponds to a number of underlying policy preferences, will thus ensure consistency
in the methods used to assess the economic viability of projects.

2. SUPPLY OF TRANSPORT ECONOMICS RESEARCH

Transport economics research was largely carried out by highly qualified staff working in theinstitutions which had identified a need for such research. All of the larger national administrations
and the international institutions dedicated to financing transport systems therefore built up
significant in-house capacity for this purpose.

152

At the same time, the universities also started to devote more resources to these issues and to press
for their inclusion in research programmes. In most countries, however, the research teams working
within the promoting institutions were far larger than those in the universities and the latter therefore
concentrated primarily on the development of methodological tools.
It is only in recent years that research projects have systematically been entrusted to outside
bodies (universities and consultancy companies), in most cases in the form of a contract for the
performance of a research task specified beforehand by the promoting agency. This is in line with thegeneral economic recommendation to promote efficiency through competitive pressure. Naturally,
most agencies still employ a significant number of researchers on a permanent basis, both for in-housedevelopments and for the specification and monitoring of outsourced studies.
Over the past ten years or so, the European Commission has joined the ranks of the multilateralagencies promoting research into transport economics, but its involvement has one distinctive featurein that the teams it commissions to carry out studies must have a multinational composition. Even
though this requirement was clearly aimed at promoting greater European cohesion, it has led to amuch clearer understanding of the differences in style and content between practices of the mostdeveloped countries, which normally do not have to submit their policy and project decisions tomultilateral agencies. In doing so, it has raised awareness and encouraged debate, both of which may
possibly act as catalysts for the next generation of challenges and results.

3. TRACK RECORD WITH THE PRODUCT DELIVERED(SUCCESSES AND FAILURES)

The quality of the decisions taken in recent decades with regard to transport systems has clearly
improved, mainly due to the greater availability and consistency of the results of economic research.
Several projects and policies were shown not to make economic sense and, as a result, wereabandoned. In other cases, however, projects which were perhaps equally unjustifiable in economic
terms were subsequently implemented because they enjoyed political support from powerful allies.
In conceptual terms, major progress has been made in clarifying issues and in identifying bothmarket failures and the shortcomings of state intervention. Advances in the construction ofmathematical models and the continued application of such models have also led to a better
understanding of behaviour of market actors.
The introduction of standard procedures for the study of certain types of problem has also
facilitated the comparison of results, thus giving analysts and politicians a much better insight into thereal significance of each new project put forward.
This same process of standardization, however, has also led to a certain number of “self-evident
truths”, which the entire profession had perpetuated over a relatively long period of time. These were
accepted far too readily without due consideration of the constraints they would subsequently impose
or the potential drawbacks of application of the policies recommended. Perhaps the best example ofthis trend may be seen in the approach adopted in most urban transport studies published during
the 1970s, and even the 1980s, in which the only solution proposed to the recurrent problem of road153congestion was the construction of additional infrastructure, since, as long as the rate of expansion
exceeded the rate of traffic growth, the models would invariably predict good performance figures,primarily because no account was taken of the possible secondary impacts of such construction.
It should be noted that the perpetuation of such misconceptions is not an adverse effect of research
activities but rather of the way in which research results are disseminated and applied in practice. It isalso because we fail to communicate our results that we so often find ourselves speaking about theneed to "change mentalities". Mentalities change when there is a change in the perception of theforces at work and the dangers and opportunities they present. If this is the case, then either we havenot been clear about those dangers and opportunities (poor signal-to-noise ratio in our message) or the
population, which has already recognised their potential impact, does not consider them as genuine
dangers and opportunities (we may think we have accurately determined their core values, but in fact
we have not).
The difficulties arising from the need to consider the future evolution of various clusters ofvariables, regarding which there are many uncertainties in terms of technology, social organisation,individual and collective preferences, etc., have already been addressed through the development ofmethodologies such as sensitivity analysis, risk analysis and scenario building. While some degree ofmethodological consolidation is currently taking place, we all feel that our models are still very poorin this respect and especially when it comes to assessing mutual interactions between evolving
clusters. Here, it would simply seem that we have not enjoyed a sufficiently long period of systematic
observation and analysis to be able to understand those interactions. Consequently, the managementof risks on this front is still very poor, as it has been so many times in the past in other areas of policy.
In general terms, we have not been capable of dealing adequately with the concerns of citizens
and their elected representatives, frequently producing recommendations which are consideredunrealistic.
This may be due to a over-simplistic representation of reality in our mathematical models, where
we mostly look solely for maximum efficiency. Although this concept is simple to understand andexplain in general terms, it is very difficult to recognise whether such a condition has been reached inany real context, and that makes such a goal difficult to share.
Not only that, there are also other serious weaknesses in our models: here are a couple, just as an
example: We consider that there is a linear relationship between the level of provision of a given item
(e.g. time saved) and the level of utility derived from it, when it is easy to see that in reality
this is far from being the case. However, this hypothesis facilitates aggregation acrosssociety and so we use it (and in many cases, perhaps, abuse it too); We ignore the effect of repetition and memory in the analysis of behaviour in urban settings,
although it is clear to us all that these factors can provide greater insight into such
behaviour. They alter the choice set and the values attached to the attributes of the "utility
function" but, more importantly, they may bring the individual optimum closer to the social
optimum, as has long been recognised in the context of the prisoner’s dilemma.

154

Obviously, other goals as legitimate as efficiency are totally absent from these models. Theseother goals have the advantage of being much easier to communicate and share, and the degree towhich they have achieved is also easier to measure. Taking an example from a recent paper theauthor has prepared on urban road pricing, the following three goals (arguments) can be put forward
on a par with efficiency: Financial effectiveness, that is to say, the level to which investment and traffic control costs
are covered by revenue;
 Fairness, i.e. the extent to which the producers of external costs are made to pay for themand the way in which different groups of citizens (primarily residents and non-residents) aretreated in terms of what they have to pay;
 Quality of the traffic system, i.e. the extent to which the prices charged help to restore
fluidity to traffic movements.
If we neglect these other goals and continue to talk solely in terms of efficiency and marginal
cost pricing, then there is not much hope for either the message or the messenger.
We also frequently forget that society is not a central-command structure and that it is frequently
necessary, when making decisions, to take account of the impact of such decisions on various groupsof stakeholders. In this kind of process we cannot assume that the winners will offset the losers, as
we so readily do in cost-benefit analysis. Even within the same individual or group, a gain or a loss ofsimilar dimensions are not felt to have symmetrical impacts on our wellbeing.
Accordingly, I believe that we clearly need a far more complex representation of thedecisionmaking process than the one we have been using.

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

The first recommendation to be made here is the need for humility: we are no more thanresearchers and technical specialists, whose task is simply to help politicians take decisions that are in
the best interest of society. It is they who have been elected on the basis of the expectations they havebeen able to generate in their electors about the quality of their future under their guidance. If we feel
we have a superior understanding of the needs of society, than we should try to get elected on thebasis of that understanding and not try to force our agenda onto those who were elected on the basisof a different agenda.
Politicians are in the business of providing citizens with positive expectations about their future,and normally make intuitive decisions regarding the best mix of actions and promises. We should see
ourselves as being instrumental in ensuring that scientific knowledge illuminates (that is, it supports
or corrects) those intuitions, and thus helps to secure a better match between what is promised andwhat is achieved. Our basic role is that of making complex systems simpler to understand, namely, by
producing informed assessments of the various responses of those systems when certain stimuli areapplied to them.

155

While we cannot produce optimal packages of "elementary actions", we should be able to steer
this packaging exercise according to the goals put forward by the politicians and to evaluate whateverinterim versions are produced and the various stages reached.
At a more technical level, we would seem to have reached a point in time comparable to one at
which the purely engineering-based approach to the support of transport decisions gave way to amixed engineering and economics approach. We therefore find ourselves on the threshold of anothertransition, given that the basic economic issues have now mostly been solved, and there is increasing
recognition of the need to seek a broader perspective.
Crossing that threshold will mean entering the social and political arena and we therefore need todevelop the tools that will allow us to examine the social and political aspects of decisionmaking on afirmer scientific basis. When engineering criteria alone were applied to the decisionmaking process,economic factors were not ignored but treated in too simplistic a manner -- just as social and politicalfactors are now. At present, as in the past, factors which are not dealt with scientifically are taken
into account intuitively by politicians.
Our recommendation is therefore a simple one: to a large extent, engineering and economics
have become current knowledge and must be incorporated into the decision process as conditions
which define a set of choices based on "good practice". Research in these areas is still needed forsome issues that lie at the boundaries of current knowledge, and indeed many interesting results arelikely to emerge from the continuation of such efforts. But, for better policy decisions, it is essentialthat other scientific fields be brought into the support group from the social and political sciences.
This does not make transport economics poorer just because it has to share the stage with otherperformers. On the contrary, like the synergy that economics brought to engineering, it will provide
new challenges for the advancement of transport economics as a science based on a better
understanding of what makes things move and how best to ensure that they continue to do so.

156

UNITED KINGDOM
P.B. GOODWIN
Professor
ESCR Transport Unit
University College London

NEW POLICIES MEAN NEW RESEARCH REQUIREMENTS

INTRODUCTION
This paper focuses on research which is directly or indirectly related to transport policy. It argues
that there is a new policy context, and the specific nature of the research that is needed derives from that
context. It also summarises some policy-sensitive research already carried out in the past, which gives
insight into the nature of the relationship between research and policy.

1. THE POLICY CONTEXTIn July 1998, the British Government issued a White Paper titled, with deliberate historicalresonance, A New Deal for Transport (DETR, 1998). The Minister in charge was John Prescott, who
combined his responsibility for the new, combined Department of the Environment, Transport and theRegions with the very senior post of Deputy Prime Minister. In his foreword to the White Paper, Prescott
opened with the words:“There is now a consensus for radical change in transport policy. The previous Government’s Green
Paper paved the way with recognition that we needed to improve public transport and reduce
dependence on the car. Businesses, unions, environmental organisations and individuals throughout
Britain share that analysis. This White Paper builds on that foundation.
“For the last two decades, the ideology of privatisation, competition and deregulation has dominatedtransport policy. Bus and rail services have declined whilst traffic growth has resulted in morecongestion and worsening pollution.

157

“This White Paper fulfils our manifesto commitment to create a better, more integrated transportsystem to tackle the problems of congestion and pollution we have inherited. It is timely. In its
Green Paper the previous Government recognised that we could not go on as before, building more
and more new roads to accommodate the growth in traffic. With our new obligations to meet targets
on climate change, the need for a new approach is urgent.”
The central precept of the White Paper is unambiguous: current trends in traffic are unsustainable,from the point of view of the environment, business efficiency, health and the unfeasibility of providing
growth in road capacity that would keep pace with predicted growth in traffic. Much of the policy logic in
the White Paper stems from the explicit abandonment of “predict-and-provide” as a desirable -- or possible-- strategy. This leads to a recognition of the importance of a co-ordinated approach to public transport,
walking and cycling, together with policies aimed at reducing less necessary travel where possible;
ensuring that the costs of congestion and environmental pollution are, as far as practical, met by those who
cause them (in which the revenue from new pricing systems would be kept under local control and used
for transport improvements); an emphasis on better maintenance and management of the road systemrather than increasing its capacity; consideration of the effects on transport of other policies in land-use,
health, education etc.; development of institutional structures or contractual arrangements able to bringthese changes about; and conditions in which people’s everyday behaviour and attitudes may be inharmony with policy, finance and environmental constraints.

2. SOME RESEARCH INFLUENCES ON POLICY BEFORE 1989

The year 1989 produced a watershed in transport policy thinking. But the precursors to that wereextended over a long period. For at least sixty years, there have been two parallel streams of argument on
what to do about the relationship between the car and the infrastructure it uses. One view has been tocontrol, moderate or tailor car use so that it is in some way kept within bounds defined by broader
objectives of traffic or social efficiency. The other has been to accept its growth as inevitable, and provide
the road capacity necessary to accommodate it.
This is not a new argument. Tripp (1942), for example, outlined techniques of “traffic calming” long
before the phrase was coined. Buchanan (1961) argued persuasively for this approach in his own books,
and the logic also underpinned parts of Traffic in Towns (HMSO, 1963), though with some ambiguity.
But at each period the dominant argument has been that it is proper to provide capacity to match the trafficlevels, even though those traffic levels have arisen in the context of costs of transport which have been
distorted.
An early example of the dominant orthodoxy, imported to Britain from the USA, was a study in
London (Freeman Fox, 1966). In summary, this said that population, employment and incomes in London
would rise. As a result, car ownership would almost double in twenty years. The total number of trips
would increase by nearly 50 per cent, the share of car would increase from a third to over a half, the shareof bus would decrease from a third to a sixth and the share of rail would decrease from a sixth to a tenth.
A “high class” road network would be needed, and could be provided, of sufficient capacity to serve suchdemands. Public transport must be provided for the people unable to use cars, although they would
become relatively few in number.

158

The detailed policies developed in London, other cities and the country as a whole, were constructedaround two key assumptions, each led by demand trends. Private car use would increase, therefore it wasnecessary to increase road capacity; and public transport use would decline, therefore it would be logicalto reduce service levels.
Both of these actually happened. Extensive road construction schemes were planned and sometimes
implemented, though never at a pace which approached the growth in traffic, and with increasing political
opposition when road schemes meant destruction of homes and green space.
In the early 1970s, many transport planners found themselves increasingly uncomfortable about thesocial and equity effects of this policy. Hillman et al. (1973) and Plowden (1972) and, in the US,
Schaeffer and Sclar (1975), for example, contested the technical and economic efficiency of the approach,and described it as “self-fulfilling”. They argued that even when household car ownership was high, it
was not universal. People in car-owning households did not have access to a car for all their journeys.
The people who lost most from such a strategy were precisely those who already had the greatest travel
problems, namely children, the elderly, the poor and women, and together these formed a majority, not aminority. The implications of all this were profound. Schaeffer and Sclar note, for example, that childdevelopment psychologists before the 1950s were able to use “independent travel” (by bus) as a key
measure of 8-14 year olds' ability to orient and master space. As bus services disappeared from American
suburbs, even the affluent young could leave their immediate neighbourhood only if someone would
chauffeur them, and independent travel was delayed until they were old enough to get a driving licenceand access to a car. A central feature of the development from childhood to adulthood was modified.

3. METHODOLOGICAL AND RESEARCH INFLUENCES
IN THE WATERSHED: 1989 AND AFTERIn the UK, the year 1989 represented the high point of the “predict and provide” approach, and its
final hour. The Department of Transport (1989a) issued revised national road traffic forecasts, suggestingthat car traffic would increase by between 82 per cent and 134 per cent between the years 1988 and 2025.
There are many criticisms of the forecasting models used to obtain the forecasts, but at the time thetechnical question of their validity was essentially a side-show compared with their policy impact. Thismay be divided into two phases, immediate and considered. The immediate impact was the launching of a
substantially expanded road construction programme, called “Roads to Prosperity”, (DoT, 1989b),
described as the “greatest road programme since the Romans”. The considered reaction, which evolved
over the subsequent two years or so, in effect had the opposite implication. A radically new situation
developed, in which, for the first time, there was a universal recognition that there was no realistic
possibility of increasing road supply at a level which approached the forecast increases in traffic. This
recognition started in the cities, but the underlying logic swiftly spilled over into rural and inter-city
movement. This was influenced significantly by research into the implications of the forecasts (e.g.
Goodwin et al., 1991). It was argued that, from the forecasts, it logically followed that whatever road
construction policy is pursued, the amount of traffic per unit of road would increase, not reduce.
On the face of it1, this implied that all available road construction policies only differed in the speed
at which congestion would get worse. Therefore, demand management would force itself to centre stage
as the essential feature of future transport strategy, independently of ideology or political stance.

159

At this point, however, the nature of the argument was radically transformed by concern about
environmental questions of a much broader significance than transport, i.e. the effects of human activity
on global warming, acid rain, entire ecological systems, threats to individual health and life, and possibly
to the survival of human societies.
The key turning point in bringing these global questions effectively into transport discussions was aconference of the Ministers of Transport of 19 European countries, in November 1989. The conference
received a series of expert research reports on the extent to which transport was an important contributor
to environmental pollution. The picture that emerged is now reasonably well known. In summary, thetransport sector is one of the major polluters. This varies, of course, according to the specific emission
considered; broadly, transport is responsible in advanced industrial countries for about 5 per cent of total
emissions of oxides of sulphur, 10 per cent of the particles, nearly half of the hydrocarbons, over half ofthe oxides of nitrogen, and around 80 per cent of the carbon monoxide. In a separate category, transport isthe source of about a quarter of the man-made emissions of carbon dioxide, inherently involved in theburning of fossil fuels and the main cause of the greenhouse effect.
Transport is also one of the most rapidly growing sources of these pollutants, mainly (though not
exclusively) due to increases in private car ownership and use. In other words, the same social
developments which were most closely bound up with the problem of congestion, were now perceived toalso be a major cause of environmental impacts.
It is not surprising, therefore, that policy remedies which had already emerged in the discussions
about congestion should re-emerge as priorities in discussions about pollution. The European Conferenceof Ministers of Transport (1990) adopted (unanimously) a resolution which went considerably further thanany previous multi-national statement of its form, and which indicated a number of emphases that had notpreviously been very apparent in British Government thinking (or indeed the practice of many of the othersigning countries).

4. THE RESEARCH BASE OF POLICY

For the rest of the 1990s, a string of scientific and research-based reports had the effect ofunderpinning and increasing confidence in the tentative policy reorientation described above.
One recurrent theme was the identification of specific elements of best practice in other countries
which had progressed further than in the UK (e.g. pedestrianisation of city centres in Germany; public
transport investment in cities in many countries; tentative experiments with road pricing in Scandinavia;
traffic calming in the Netherlands, etc.).
Some other research outputs related to this evolving policy context, were:

Trends in Transport and the Countryside, published by the Countryside Commission (Stokes etal., 1992), which showed even faster rates of growth in rural areas;

The Royal Commission of Environmental Pollution 18th Report (1994), which demonstrated theenvironmental unsustainability of current trends in transport [and the follow-up 20th Report(1997), expressing disappointment in progress made];

160



The SACTRA report, Trunk Roads and the Generation of Traffic (1994), which demonstrated
that increases in road capacity, in conditions of congestion, typically led to some increase in the
total volume of traffic, which reduced the duration of any relief from congestion;



The RAC (1995) report, Car Dependence, which persuaded the RAC (and some other agencies)
to support policies intended to reduce car dependence and encourage less car use for about
20 per cent of the current car journeys;
The SACTRA (1997) interim report, Transport Investment, Transport Intensity and Economic
Growth, which argued that in conditions of imperfect competition, some of the economic
impacts of transport investment would not be captured in current appraisal methods, and thatthese impacts might be either positive or negative;

DETR and London Transport research on Traffic Impacts of Highway Capacity Reductions(Cairns et al., 1998), which demonstrated that road capacity could be reallocated topedestrianisation, public transport priority, etc., without necessarily causing intolerable extra
congestion on alternative routes).

It is not argued here that the above research caused the shift in policy, which would not be credible.
But the policy shift provided a favourable context in which research of this sort, instead of being shelved
as embarrassing or ignored as irrelevant, could be quickly appreciated and in turn inform the policy
debate.

5. SPECIALIST RESEARCH REQUIREMENTS FROM THE WHITE PAPER

Some specific aspects of the White Paper call for rather specialist data and analytical requirements.
Walking and cycling. We shall need to abandon all surveys which collect data on“walking/cycling”, treated as though they were a single method of transport. These data areuseless. We need data on walking, and we need data on cycling, and adding them together into aspurious “non-motorised mode” will not give us any useful policy discrimination;Effects outside transport. We shall need to be more alert to the transport consequences of
non-transport decisions, e.g. where to locate a school or hospital. This means that othergovernment departments (also in local government) will need transport expertise in collecting
and analysing data;Road capacity. Those specific new road schemes which do go ahead will need to be justified
with reference to their relationship with the whole strategy, and notably its economic andenvironmental impacts, not only the temporary relief of congestion. In other situations there will
be reductions of road capacity, or its reallocation to pedestrian areas, for example, which also
raises questions of environmental and economic impact -- typically in connection with a rather
complex package of policies, not all components being implemented at the same time;Monitoring methods. We shall need new emphases on monitoring the actual evolution of local
conditions, over time, related to changes in transport conditions. The advisory committee,
SACTRA (1997), published an interim report which had some very sharp words of criticism for161the state of the art of empirical quantitative work on this question, much of the publishedmaterial really being little more than statements of hope or aspiration. Concerning
environmental impacts, there really is no alternative to an expansion of real-time, continuous
monitoring. The technology is developing quite quickly, but they are not yet widely enoughused.
For these sort of initiatives there has been an informal convention that some sort of before andafter survey is done, but usually spanning quite a short period -- normally one year, sometimes
even less -- and then interest tails away. That is not going to be sufficient as the scale ofschemes gets bigger and their cumulative effect becomes more complex.


Public transport. There is commitment to the importance of public transport and especially tothe prospect of reversing its long-term decline in a big way.

This raises a problem. We now have a largely commercial, privately-owned, public transport sector,
with great difficulty about collecting, or releasing, data which is likely to be commercially significant-- which is most of the data about evolution of markets and costs. We shall have to break through on this.
There is a separate policy problem about devising incentive structures to ensure that commercial andsocial objectives are in harmony, and those incentive structures will be legally complex, and will have to
be monitored for success in their intended effects, and even more to detect the ever-present problem ofunintended effects.
So, to sum up at this stage, we have already seen a shift from single, cross-section surveys, usedbasically to diagnose problems and build models, to one-off, before-and-after surveys focused on aparticular initiative. We shall see a further shift in the same direction, to continuous monitoring (not justone “after”, but repeated many times), with a broader scope so that they do not just focus on the short-term
impacts of one specific policy initiative, but the cumulative effects of many interacting initiatives,
covering a longer time and a larger space. I simply do not see an alternative to this.

6. THE NEED FOR A NEW CONCEPTUAL AND ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORKMy argument is that at the same time as a very obvious sea-change in transport policy, there is a lessobvious, slower, still uncompleted sea change in the methodologies and assumptions of analysis,
forecasting and appraisal; and this itself will change the nature of the data we need and the statisticalanalyses applied to them.
At the same time that concern has been mounting about the effects of growth of traffic, there was atechnical recognition that the volume of traffic is, in part, the result of policy and is therefore subject tosome degree of choice.
This was a crucial shift in understanding. For a generation, transport professionals had encouraged
politicians to think that the total volume of traffic was an inexorable quantity, driven almost entirely byincome and largely unaffected by policy. The result was a systematic policy bias: it led to a tendency tooverestimate the relief from congestion offered by a new road and to underestimate the potential andbenefit for road space reallocation.

162

Consider three questions we may now be called upon to provide technical advice.
1)

Are choices, once made, reversible? For example, is the choice to reduce car ownership or use
influenced by the same factors, at the same strength, as the choice to increase car ownership oruse? All common sense says no. Our models assume, in general, yes.

2)

For policy packages, does it make a difference to the outcome in which order we implement thecomponent parts? That is, does it matter whether we introduce road pricing first and public
transport improvements later, or the other way round? All politicians know that the answer is
yes -- it will make a difference to the outcome. Our models, assume, in general, not. The end
result will be the same.

3)

For any policy involving money and prices, does the market respond immediately, or is it acumulative process over time? In other words, when do we actually receive the income fromnew pricing strategies, year by year? All bankers know that the answer to this question makes
the difference between fortunes and bankruptcy. Our models, in general, imply (though rarely
have the courage to state explicitly) that all market responses are virtually instantaneous.

If the technical assessment of reversibility, delays and market build-up are crucial to the new policy
agenda, then the essence of the answers must lie in certain fundamental dynamic concepts, namely,transition costs (which lead to hysteresis and non-symmetrical reversibility); lags and leads (which resultin a displacement in time of cause from effect); negotiation of outcomes (where different processes canlead to different end-states) and natural variability of choices, from day to day and from year to year
(which lead to what, in opinion research, is called “churn”).
All this focuses attention on the critical behavioural question, what do people actually do whentravelling conditions change? Research already carried out establishes that they can change their drivingstyles, they can alter their route, the time of day they travel, the frequency of trips, the destinations theychoose, the location of their home and workplace, the method of transport, the arrangements they come towith family or neighbours, the sequence of activities on a round trip, the substitution of trips by otherforms of communication or activity and many other more subtle changes.
This contrasts strongly with a view of travel as stable and repetitive -- the commuter who makes thesame journey every day, the shopper doing the same journey every week. Without question, such
repetitive patterns exist. They are so important that they dominate our perceptions of our own lives, andour interpretation of other people’s, and they are reinforced when we see roughly the same traffic
conditions at roughly the same time, day after day.
But the apparent stability is composed, we now know, of volatile, unstable, changing undercurrents,
or “churn”. The actual individuals in a traffic queue, even at the same time on two successive mornings,
are not, in most part, the same individuals. Every year, anything up to a third of people change their jobs,
perhaps one in seven move house. They get a pay increase. Or they get sacked. People leave home, getmarried, have babies. Their children change school, leave school, leave home. Some get divorced. They
retire. A member of their family dies. If car ownership grows by a steady 2 per cent in a year, what thatreally means is that 12 per cent of households increase their cars, and 10 per cent reduce them. At each ofthese life events there may be a reason to reconsider travel choices.
So the response to policies which change the condition of travel is composed of at least two quite
different processes:

163

First, there are responses by specific individuals. They are limited by habit, by the desire toexperiment (or not to), by ignorance, preferences and by domestic and economic constraints which arevery powerful at any point in time, but which change and evolve. For these people, minor adjustments
may be quite swift, but bigger changes proceed at the pace of change in their own lives and the pace ofevolution of their attitudes and tastes.
Secondly, all the time, some individuals drop away and are replaced by different people making a
new set of trips. These can react to whatever prevailing conditions they find, sometimes bringing a more
open mind to the new situation.
As a result, the process of adaptation to a new policy starts on Day One. But it takes between
five and ten years before the adjustment is near enough to completion to get lost in other even longer-term
processes.
Understanding this process of response is crucial to policy analysis, because that is what gives us
space and time to design a strategy of implementation; and the bigger the change, the more important it is
to manage it over time. This leads us to confront the concept of equilibrium. Our ability to treat the newpolicies analytically, to understand their effects, to assess their costs and benefits, is seriously hindered by
our inheritance of an analytical tool-kit that is bright, impressive, of unchangeable intellectual
achievement, and wrong.
The concept of “equilibrium” has exerted a commanding authority over the development of economic
theory in general, and travel behaviour modelling in particular. But the most widely-used analytical tools
based on equilibrium have nothing to say about sequence and time scale and build up, because theelegance and power of this concept of equilibrium focuses all the attention on notional end-state
conditions after everything has settled down.
Not only that, but even their description of the end-state may be biased. The reason for this is thefollowing. Just because equilibrium can exist as a potential state of an individual or a system, clearly does
not necessarily mean that an equilibrium actually does exist at the moment of an observation. But theassumption that it does is ubiquitous. All models estimated using cross-section data assume thatequilibrium is not only reachable, but reached. If this does apply at the point of an observation, we would
be entitled to assume that relationships estimated (from a well-specified model) accurately represent theend-state strength of the various influences, and the estimated relationships can then be used to describe
some other equilibrium end-state which would apply in the future as a result of different values of theinfluencing variables than have been observed.
But that leads to an inherent source of mis-specification bias, because the logic described only works
on quite strong conditions. Models based on cross-section analyses, or on unlagged time series analyses,
are only able to deliver correctly estimated equilibrium relationships if the variables of interest have notchanged systematically, in the period before the observation, for a time long enough to have allowed theeffects to settle down.
Since the adaptation period is in the order of years, and since many of the important variables have atendency to change more in one direction than in the opposite (e.g. income, prices, network conditions),
this condition is rarely, if ever, likely to apply in conditions observable in modern economies in the realworld. Therefore, the parameters estimated from such data and models will not, in general, be successful
in describing even the equilibrium end-states that are their focus. Their so-called equilibrium relationships
are based on observation of uncompleted processes.

164

So I argue that the sort of improved understanding that is necessary for policy assessment will dependon treating travel behaviour as an uncompleted process of change and adaptation: processes by which
travel habits are formed, or broken, the process by which cultural values and patterns of travel behaviour
are transmitted from person to person, between producer and consumer, or from generation to generation,and how the constraints acting as barriers to change themselves get stronger, or relax, in the course ofindividual, household and social growth.
From this it follows that the strength of the individual constraints inhibiting demand responses will be
determined, in part, not by the present situation of the individual, but by his or her previous history -- aquestion we rarely ask, and almost never analyse.
This suggests that there are two paradigm shifts going on, not just one. One is rethinking therelationship between travel demand growth and the capacity and policies provided to cope with, counter ormoderate it. The second is a deep shift from analytical tools based on the concept of equilibrium to those
based on the concept of process. The second is proceeding more slowly than the first. I do not really
understand why this is, but it seems to me quite certain that the role of one-off, cross-section surveys,
analysed with the presumption that equilibrium relationships have already been obtained, will give way tothe collection of longitudinal data, capable of revealing the process of behavioural change over time,
analysed without the presumption of already achieved equilibrium.
What this means is panel surveys instead of cross section surveys; it means time series data not onlyat aggregate level (which is well-established) but at disaggregate level as well. It means ingenious
methods of analysis such as pseudo-panel or cohort studies. It means linking continuous counting
methods (for example, used for traffic levels and measurement of pollutants) to discontinuous counting
methods such as repeated surveys. It means the econometrics of time-series analysis rather than theconvergent iterations of equilibrium.

CONCLUSION

To summarise: we have a simple problem, and a complex one. The simple one (though not so simple
in practice) is that the new policies draw attention to certain key areas of policy -- walking, cycling, public
transport, car use and so on and, therefore, we need to make sure that the data we collect is relevant totesting success, detecting problems and improving the policies. The complex one is that collecting data is
not an autonomous activity insulated from the way we think about and model problems. The overall
strategy in the White Paper cannot be understood, let alone improved, by focus on equilibrium end-states-- it is about understanding and redirecting processes. That requires a more fundamental shift both in thedata we collect and, even more important, the procedures we use to analyse them.

165

NOTE
1.

This implication is not strictly correct -- if traffic would substantially change its distribution in timeand space, all predicted traffic could be accommodated without any additional road construction atall. But the policy instruments necessary to achieve such a redistribution were not embedded in theforecasting methods available at the time, and this policy track did not become important until after“predict-and-provide” had been abandoned.

166

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Buchanan, C.D. (1961), Standards and values in motor-age towns, J. Town Planning Inst., 47, 320-329.
Cairns, S., K. Hass Klau and P. Goodwin (1998), Traffic impact of highway capacity reductions:assessment of the evidence, Landor, London.
Carley, M. with Donaldsons (1997), Sustainable Transport & Retail Vitality: State of the Art for Towns &Cities, Historic Burghs Association of Scotland with Transport 2000.
Department of the Environment (1990), This common inheritance, HMSO, London.
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (1998), A new deal for transport: better for
everyone, TSO, London.
Department of Transport (1989a), National road traffic forecasts (Great Britain) 1989, HMSO, London.
Department of Transport (1989b), Roads to prosperity, HMSO, London.
European Conference of Ministers of Transport (1990), Transport policy and the environment,
ECMT/OECD, Paris.
Freeman Fox & Partners (1966), London traffic survey, Volume 2, Greater London Council, London.
Goodwin, P.B. (1989), “The rule of three: a possible solution to the political problem of competing
objectives for road pricing”, Traffic Engineering and Control, 30 (10).
Goodwin, P.B., S. Hallett, F. Kenny & G. Stokes (1991), Transport: the new realism, Report 624,
Transport Studies Unit, University of Oxford.
Goodwin, P.B. (1998), “The end of equilibrium”, in: T. Garling et al. (eds.), Theoretical foundations oftravel choice modelling, Pergamon, Oxford.
Hass-Klau, C. (1993), “Impact of pedestrianisation and traffic calming on retailing: a review of theevidence from Germany and the UK”, Transport Policy, 1 (1).
Hillman, M., I. Henderson and A. Whalley (1973), Personal mobility and transport policy, Political andEconomic Planning Broadsheet 542, London.
HMSO (1963), Traffic in Towns (the Buchanan Report), London.
HMSO (1964), Road pricing: the economic and technical possibilities (the Smeed Report), London.

167

Plowden, S. (1972), Towns against traffic, Andre Deutsch, London.
RAC (1995), Car dependence, P.B. Goodwin, (ed.), RAC Foundation for Motoring and the Environment,
London.
Schaeffer, K.M. and E. Scalar (1975), Access for all:
Harmondsworth.

transportation and urban growth, Penguin,Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment (SACTRA) (1994), Trunk roads and thegeneration of traffic, HMSO, London.
Standing Advisory Committee on Trunk Road Assessment (SACTRA) (1997), Transport Investment,
Transport Intensity and Economic Growth: Interim Report, Department of the Environment,
Transport and the Regions, London.
Stokes, G., P.B. Goodwin and F. Kenny (1992), Trends in transport and the countryside, The Countryside
Commission, Cheltenham.
Tripp, H.A. (1942), Town planning and road traffic, Edward Arnold, London.

168

ALSO AVAILABLE

The Separation of Operations from Infrastructure in the Provision of Railway Services. Series ECMT
- Round Table 103 (1997)(75 97 02 1P) ISBN 92-821-1221-7
France FF295
£38
$US58
DM86
New Trends in Logistics in Europe - Round Table 104 (1997)(75 97 05 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1224-1
France FF215
£28

$US42

DM63

Infrastructure-Induced Mobility. Series ECMT - Round Table 105 (1998)(75 98 07 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1232-2
France FF400
£40
$US67

DM119

Intercity Transport markets in Countries in Transition. Series ECMT - Round Table 106 (1998)(75 98 10 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1235-7
France FF400
£41
$US66
DM119
User charges for railway infrastructure. Series ECMT - Round Table 107 (1998)(75 98 14 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1240-3
France FF290
£30
$US50

DM86

14th International Symposium on Theory and Practice in Transport Economics. Which Changes forTransport in the Next Century? (1999)(75 1999 01 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1241-1 France FF590£63$US105
DM176
What Markets Are There For Transport by Inland Waterways? Series ECMT – Round Table 108(1999)(75 1999 06 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1246-2 France FF300
£32
$US53
DM89
Freight Transport and the City. Series ECMT – Round Table 109 (1999)(75 1999 08 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1247-0 France FF280
£29
$US47

DM84

Prices charged at the OECD Bookshop.
The OECD CATALOGUE OF PUBLICATIONS and supplements will be sent free of charge
on request addressed either to OECD Publications Service,or to the OECD Distributor in your country.

169OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2, rue André-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16
PRINTED IN FRANCE(75 1999 10 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1249-7 – No. 50915 1999