Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on  The mobility of persons in the enlarged Europe and its impact on means of transport
Date: 2005-10-26
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: carriage of passengers, common transport policy, enlargement of the Union, free movement of persons

3.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28/47

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on ‘The mobility of persons in the
enlarged Europe and its impact on means of transport’

(2006/C 28/09)

On 10 February 2005, the European Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 29(2) of its Rules
of Procedure, decided to draw up an opinion on: The mobility of persons in the enlarged Europe and its impact
on means of transport.

The Section for Transport, Energy, Infrastructure and the Information Society, which was responsible for
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 4 October 2005. The rapporteur
was Mr Levaux.

At its 421st. plenary session, held on 26 and 27 October 2005 (meeting of 26 October), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 74 votes, with four abstentions.

1. Purpose of the own-initiative opinion

— a more respectful attitude towards the environment on the

part of the European public;

By 2020/2030 the European Union, which today
1.1
comprises 25 Member States, will certainly have expanded
through the accession of new Member States, starting with
Romania, Turkey Bulgaria, Croatia, etc. Without making any
assumptions about other possible accessions, it is likely that in
terms of cooperation and exchange, at least, the EU's immediate
sphere of influence will extend to outlying countries such as
the Ukraine, Georgia, and Russia.

— the need for interaction in the areas of culture, heritage
(artistic, architectural, etc.), education, scientific knowledge;

— a more cosmopolitan European public, in a territory which

will have more than doubled in size;

1.2 Within this vast territory the size of a continent, which
forms a rectangle 6 000 km east to west by 4 000 km north
to south, new demands will be made of passenger transport so
as to guarantee free movement upholding the principle of
liberty, develop a European democracy based on cultural
exchange and encourage economic development.

1.3
The development of the means of transport to meet the
likely demand for mobility over the coming two to three
decades must be carried out with a view to achieving the objec-
tives set out at the Lisbon Summit in 2000:

‘Europe must become the most competitive and dynamic
knowledge-based economy in the world, capable of sustain-
able economic growth with more and better jobs and
greater social cohesion’.

1.4
All proposals aimed at developing collective and indivi-
dual means of passenger transport will therefore have to take
the following into account:

— the most recent studies looking into quantitative and quali-

tative needs in passenger transport by 2020/2030;

— the introduction and expansion of new technologies, which
to be developed
will allow new means of
(provided that
research funding, and
sources of investment required for their development and
introduction are provided as soon as possible); and

the regulations,

transport

— an increase in trade and tourism from outside Europe, in

particular from south-east Asia, China and India.

1.5
Any assessments and measures relating to the develop-
ment of passenger transport must, in order to be inclusive and
guarantee equal opportunities, take account of the rights of
passengers with reduced mobility (PRMs), such as people with
disabilities, older people, and very young children. In order to
guarantee that PRMs can enjoy independent mobility free of
hindrance, regulatory measures need to be introduced to ensure
that future means of transport and the related infrastructure,
are accessible to them. In the case of air transport, for instance,
the Commission has proposed a regulation which sets out the
rights of PRMs (1).

1.6
The Committee notes that over the past few decades the
European Union has taken an active interest in goods transport,
producing a large number of measures aimed at increasing the
capacity of freight transport so as to encourage European trade
and — hence — economic development. There has thus been a
plethora of
infrastructure projects, a majority of
which have been aimed at developing road infrastructure, with
a much smaller proportion targeted at rail infrastructure, and
very few at inland waterways.

transport

— more

responsive behaviour by the European public,
resulting from the competitiveness objectives set by the
European Union at the beginning of this century;

(1) EESC opinion currently being drafted on the Proposal for a Regu-
lation of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning
the rights of persons with reduced mobility when travelling by air.

C 28/48

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.2.2006

1.7
At the end of 2005 the Commission will present a
communication regarding the mid-term results of the proposals
it made in the White Paper on European Transport Policy for
2010: Time to Decide. This will allow assessments to be drawn
up on whether users have successfully been put at the heart of
transport policy, and whether consideration given to sustain-
able development has resulted in a real transfer of increases in
freight transport away from roads to alternative means of trans-
port (rail, inland waterways and sea …). The Committee will, at
the appropriate moment, present an opinion in the usual form
on the basis of this review. That opinion should not be pre-
empted here.

solutions

in passenger

Pending this, the Committee notes that even though
1.8
projections by the International Union of Railways (UIC) give
the passenger/km ratio for Western Europe for 2010/2020 (2),
no overall evaluation of passenger transport has yet been
carried out. For several decades now the general view seems to
be that satisfying demands and needs in freight transport will
produce adequate
transport. This
approach explains the development of road infrastructures.
These have been used indiscriminately for freight, as well as
individual and collective passenger transport (cars, coaches).
Roads have always had this double function. Today increases in
road traffic make the co-existence of freight transport alongside
passenger transport difficult, or even dangerous, on a number
of routes. This prioritisation of freight transport has led to road
infrastructure projects being favoured over other means of
transport because roads can be used by both freight and
persons.

1.10
In view of the above, the Committee, which is not in a
position to carry out studies, calls on the Commission to
undertake a general appraisal as soon as possible to:

— estimate the volume of passenger travel within the EU and

its immediate sphere of influence up to 2020/2030;

— estimate the amount of travel by Europeans from Europe to
international destinations, as well as travel by non-EU citi-
zens entering and circulating in Europe for business,
tourism or other reasons up to 2020/2030;

— make sure, in view of the above estimations, that existing
capacity, or capacity currently planned under various
programmes, will meet the demand for passenger transport
foreseen by 2020/2030;

— put forward, in a new White Paper 2010 dedicated to trans-
port policy, an action plan which corresponds to the ambi-
tions and interests of the EU and its people. This should put
greater emphasis on ‘The movement of people in an
enlarged Europe and its impact on means of transport by
2020/2030’.

2. Outline and scope of a general appraisal on transport

and the mobility of persons

1.9

The Committee believes that this state of affairs:

2.1 New dimensions of Europe. Distance and time:

— is substantially removed from the priorities set out in the
White Paper which places the user at the heart of transport
policy;

— is difficult to reconcile with the commitment, often re-
asserted, to take sustainable development principles into
account;

— does not adequately encourage necessary European cohe-
sion, which is achieved through interaction of all kind, in
other words through the mobility of persons;

— gives no consideration to the benefits the European Union
can obtain from developments in international
tourism
originating in China and India. By 2030, these countries
should have attained a sufficiently high standard of living to
allow several hundred million of their citizens to travel
abroad each year.

(2) See Appendix 1.

2.1.1
The Committee calls on the Commission to take
action to make Europe's citizens and policymakers more aware
of the geographical dimensions that Europe has attained today
and will have attained in the near future. By 2020/2030 the
EU, which today counts 25 Member States, will no doubt
include new members. Its immediate sphere of influence will
have expanded as a result of its proximity to other states (or its
cooperation with neighbouring states), and will stretch across
the
relating to
passenger and freight transport will manifest themselves on a
much larger scale.

entire European continent. Here,

issues

Currently, too few Europeans are aware of the size of
2.1.2
the EU and the scope of its influence. This covers a territory
that reaches from the Atlantic Ocean to the heart of Russia,
from east to west, and from the Baltic to the Mediterranean —
and hence also Africa — from north to south.

2.1.3
The new distances involved in this space, and the time
required to travel across them cannot be considered as an
extension or a simple continuation of the situation that existed
up to that point, given the limitations on technology and speed
of travel in the medium term.

3.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28/49

2.1.4
Furthermore, globalisation and the increases in the
standard of living sought by countries with high population
levels will lead to increased demand for passenger transport,
with several hundred million people living outside the EU
wishing or needing to travel within Europe each year on
successive trips of a relatively short nature. The Committee
therefore believes that, when considering the future size of
Europe attention must be paid to both the distances involved
(within the European area, the EU's immediate sphere of influ-
ence and international connections), and the time required to
cover them (duration of travel, speed of means of transport,
optimisation of
taking into
the time required for
account the wishes of users and the constraints they face).

travel,

2.2 Potential scope of a general appraisal of the mobility of persons

2.2.1
requirement are:

The main reasons that make passenger transport a

The free movement of people and goods is a fundamental prin-
ciple at the heart of the building of Europe. The Committee
believes that constant attention needs to be paid to ensuring
that this principle is fully applied in practice within the Euro-
pean area, especially today following the double effects of
enlargement and globalisation. Safeguarding this principle
represents a major challenge for democracy and European
cohesion.

judicial, protection against

The free movement of people requires the setting of rules
transport of
(legal,
persons with reduced mobility etc. …). However, this is not the
subject of this opinion, the purpose of which is to deal with
the means of transport and equipment required to maintain the
principle of the free movement of persons, and to ensure mobi-
lity.

terrorism,

Identifying the reasons for which persons wish to or need to
is an important prerequisite, since the way in which
travel
mobility is provided will vary depending on the relative impor-
tance in quantitative and qualitative terms of those reasons.

The Committee

following
2.2.2
reasons for travel are looked into, although this is not an
exhaustive list:

recommends

that

the

— business (commercial, professional …);

— training and the exchange of knowledge (study, seminars,

cooperation on research);

— job-related (secondment, performance of a trade …);

— discovery and exchanges (tourism, culture, heritage …);

— other reasons.

2.2.3
The Committee recommends that the general appraisal
it is calling for should focus on travel that generates repetitive
or continuous movements of a substantial nature.

2.2.4 T w o c a te g or i e s of tr a ve l

It is important to consider the way in which individuals travel
since this partly determines the means of transport they will
use:

— Travel by individuals or very small groups (several persons,

couples, families…)

Please note: the number of passengers authorised to travel
in a vehicle driven by a private individual under the
highway codes could be used as a definition of a ‘small
group’.

— Travel in a large group for different reasons (professional,

tourism, retired persons, holiday makers, etc. …).

2.2.5 Di sta nc e s i nv olve d

complementary or

The Committee wishes to set a limit on the scope of the
general appraisal, but points out that doing so in itself requires
careful consideration. Obviously, the means that may be used
will be many, different,
coordinated,
depending on the distance to be covered. Also, the time that
users allow for travel
is a function of the distances to be
covered, the means of transport used, and the reasons for
In considering ways of providing
which they are travelling.
transport, it is also important to take into account the bodies
that will be responsible for implementing policies (state, local
and regional authorities, municipalities …).

2.2.6
distances as follows:

The Committee

therefore

suggests

categorising

— 0 to 100 km: should not be included in the general
appraisal since this represents urban or peri-urban travel, in
other words, a special subject, which is to be treated sepa-
rately and is the concern of cities or groups of cities. The
difficulties encountered all over Europe in developing
appropriate and consistent services
in urban transport
(safety, comfort, respect
for the environment, pollution,
quality and continuity of service …) makes it necessary to
pool expertise in order to draw out the greatest possible
benefit for users;

— 100 to 250 km: more frequent use is made of day returns,
including for cross-border travel, e.g. journeys from home
to the place of work using fast and affordable means of
transport which allow those who live a long way from
large urban centres to travel to work on a daily basis;

C 28/50

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.2.2006

— 250 to 750 km: it would be useful to examine the condi-
tions in which transport by road (private vehicles or
coaches) and rail (normal or high-speed rail services) can
compete;

— 750 to 1 500 km:

to examine the
conditions in which transport by rail (high speed) and air
can compete;

it would be useful

— above 1 500 km: distances which cover large stretches of
the European continent, where the time factor is a greater
constraint than it is for smaller distances, and the use of air
transport is unavoidable.

Finally, the chapter dealing with distances also needs
2.2.7
to consider international and trans continental travel, in order
to factor in the movements of people entering and leaving the
European area.

2.2.8
The Committee would obviously like the general
appraisal that it is advocating to take account of the different
forms of passenger transport and the infrastructures that will
be required. The aim, therefore, must be to identify, assess and
optimise tried and tested means of
transport, and also to
explore — without preconceived notions — new possibilities
which will allow technologies that appear over the coming
decades to be integrated into the transport system quickly. This
assumes that the Commission will make proposals to encou-
rage, organise and coordinate research programmes for the
development of new forms of transport, and that it anticipates
future needs, whilst at the same time taking into account the
time required to implement new solutions.

2.2.9
purpose of this appraisal, be categorised as follows:

The existing means of passenger transport can, for the

— Road transport:

travel by private vehicles or coaches.
There are no indications today that would suggest a decline
in the use of this form of transport (quite the contrary).
This means that technological improvements to motors and
fuel need to be found in order to make them less polluting.
Two approaches are possible:

— hands off: a policy of ‘wait and see’ in the hope of being

able to correct the worst effects;

— establish the main thrust of a proactive policy,

for
example, by preparing maintenance and fuel supply
networks for future vehicles using new types of fuel,
building and maintaining dedicated infrastructure for
certain types of vehicles and road users, and carrying
out
roadside
support services and necessary measures to be taken on
travel over long distances.

research into ‘intelligent motorways’,

— Rail transport: It appears that preference is now given to
high-speed links. Unfortunately, this sometimes covers up
shortcomings in the traditional network.

— Air transport: Given the direction in which the EU is evol-
ving, this form of transport is indispensable for travel over
large distances and beyond EU borders. These develop-
ments, along with the rapid marketing programme of the
Airbus A 380, mean that European airport infrastructures
(including links to urban centres) need to be adjusted very
soon so that they are able to cater to large aircraft and
absorb the expected increases in traffic.

— Transport by sea: This means regular passenger transport
services on a local and regional basis (North Sea, the Baltic,
the Mediterranean) which cover a variety of distances. Such
transport could be developed further, for example through
‘maritime motorways’, and could be complemented by
other means of transport.

— Transport on inland waterways: This form of transport is
currently considered a marginal one, except in some capi-
tals built by a river, where passengers use the river to travel
to work or for tourism (river cruises or ‘river buses’)
However, the development of passenger transport on inland
waterways should be considered a possibility and not be
categorically dismissed (transport
to and from Venice
airport etc.).

2.3 Evaluation of passenger transport needs by 2020/2030

2.3.1
The Committee's research into the available data,
which forecasts passenger transport over the coming decades,
has revealed serious shortcomings in that area. The number of
assessments relating to transport as it was in the past is quite
large. However, such assessments are not conducive to reliable
predictions on the future. For instance, they do not take recent
developments into account, such as enlargement of the EU to
25 Member States, the possibility of further accessions in the
medium term, or developments in countries that lie within the
EU's immediate sphere of influence.

2.3.2
The EESC is not aware of any available studies on the
potential impact and consequences on the EU resulting from
increases in the standard of living in developing countries.
According to several concurring predictions from different
sources,
these increases will allow several hundred million
people to travel outside their country's borders by 2020 in the
case of China and, in the case of India, most probably by 2030.
The often quoted figure of 100 million Chinese being able to
travel outside their country as tourists by 2020 seems unrea-
listic today. However, this represents only 8 % of the Chinese
population. This is smaller than the percentage of Japanese
tourists who travel abroad each year
(around 12 million
people). A recent study suggests that 4 % of the Chinese popu-
lation have now reached a standard of living equal to that of
the European average. 4 % is not a large figure, but, given the
size of China, it represents more than 50 million people!

3.2.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 28/51

2.3.3
Even supposing that only 50 million Chinese choose
to come to Europe as tourists, visiting several EU countries by
plane on relatively short stays (ten days on average),
the
Committee recommends that the EU look into the necessary
development of capacities, after having checked theoretical
predictions. It calls on Member States to introduce appropriate
means of enabling the EU to reap the economic benefit of such
increases in tourism. Failure to provide Chinese and Indian visi-
tors with the mobility they expect when the time comes will
mean that they will travel instead to countries which are in a
position to welcome them.

the

into

enquiry

The Committee noted with interest

2.3.4
the document
published by the Commission in September 2004 and entitled:
European energy and transport: Scenario on key drivers. This docu-
ment, which should serve as a reference, shows the results of
an
by
outlook
2010/2020/2030. The main objective of the document is to
study energy needs and the possibility of using less polluting
and/or renewable energies. Chapter VI deals with transport and
gives us some insight into the future. It would be useful to
review these figures in order to identify and extract the data
relating to passenger transport together with freight transport,
which still holds a dominant position in these statistics.

various

areas

for

that they are examined in depth so that an overview of the
situation in the medium and long term can be gained.

2.3.8
The Committee calls on the Commission to initiate a
comprehensive and targeted study to assess, as fully as possible,
the quantitative and qualitative needs in passenger transport
that have to be met by 2020 and 2030.

2.3.9
This study should examine not just the 30 countries
already selected by the Commission in the above document,
but also other countries which lie in the EU's immediate sphere
of influence (Croatia, Albania, Ukraine, Russia, North Africa
…), and which in the 25 years to come will, whatever the
form, enjoy closer relations with the EU.

international

The impact of

2.3.10
travel, especially the
effect of tourism originating in developing countries (China,
India), needs to be assessed in order to gauge the movement of
people both into and out of the European area, as well as
movements within it.

2.3.5
tion of expected developments.

The appendix to this report (3) provides some indica-

3. Proposals and conclusions

The data covers 30 countries (the 25 Member States, to which
the Commission has added Romania, Bulgaria, Switzerland,
Norway and Turkey). Generally speaking, passenger transport
in these countries will grow over a forty-year period. (Gpkm =
Giga-passenger per kilometre)

— 4,196 Gpkm in 1990 to 5021 in 2000 (+20 % in 10

years);

— 5,817 Gpkm in 2010 (+16 % in 10 years);

— 6,700 Gpkm in 2020 (+15 % in 10 years);

— 7,540 Gpkm in 2030 (only 12,5 % in 10 years).

The EESC:

believes that the mobility of persons in an enlarged
3.1
Europe must be guaranteed in order to strengthen democracy
and contribute to cohesion in the EU;

3.2
notes that, there are very few studies into the mobility
of persons by 2030 that allow the assessment of transport
needs and the infrastructures that will be required to meet
them;

3.3
points out that any expansion of infrastructures on a
continental scale would require very long implementation
periods (around two decades) before they would come into use;

The Committee notes that,

2.3.6
interestingly, the predic-
tions for the coming decades foresee lower growth than for the
1990/2000 period. This would seem to indicate that the mobi-
lity of persons is no longer a measure of economic vitality.

3.4
believes the Commission should, given that the informa-
tion available indicates a strong increase in demand for
passenger transport, initiate studies on the subject followed by
a general and targeted appraisal, in parallel with studies and
discussions on the development of goods transport;

2.3.7
The indication is that passenger transport in private
cars will increase by 45 % in the 2000/2030 period, but rail
transport by only 30 %. Meanwhile, air transport will increase
300 % over the same period. The Committee is not in a posi-
tion to assess the consistency of these predictions, but suggests

3.5
suggests that these discussions could be the subject of a
new Transport Policy White Paper in 2010 attaching greater
importance to this than 2001. This should allow the require-
ments that will confront passenger transport by 2020/30 to be
met. The following criteria could be covered:

(3) See Appendix 2.

— the main reasons why people travel;

C 28/52

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

3.2.2006

— ways of travelling (in a group or individually);

— classification according to distances covered;

— means of passenger transport used and levels of accessi-

bility, safety and security, etc.;

recommends that the Commission, together with the
3.6
Member States concerned,
introduce the necessary means to
ensure the best possible mobility for people, in line with the
principle of sustainable development, by taking into account:

— the difficulties or constraints faced by people with disabil-
ities, older persons and young children, though cooperation
with organisations which represent persons with reduced
mobility;

— the funding needed for the research and development of
new methods and technologies adapted to passenger trans-
port; and

— the legislative, regulatory and financial provisions Member
States will require to implement investment projects that
will meet needs;

3.7
stresses in conclusion that a united Europe must ensure
that Member States offer a balanced transport service, both for
freight and passengers.
It wishes to be notified when the
appraisal is launched and to be involved therein, and also to be
consulted on the conclusions.

Brussels, 26 October 2005.

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Anne-Marie SIGMUND

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the

— Proposal for a Council Regulation on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar

sector

— Proposal

for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 1782/2003 establishing
common rules for direct support schemes under the common agricultural policy and estab-
lishing certain support schemes for farmers

— Proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a temporary scheme for the restructuring of the
sugar industry in the European Community and amending Regulation (EC) No 258/1999 on the
financing of the common agricultural policy

(COM(2005) 263 final — 2005/0118-0119-0120 CNS)

(2006/C 28/10)

On 25 July 2005 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under
Articles 36 and 37 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the abovementioned proposals.

The Section for Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment, which was responsible for preparing
the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 7 October 2005. The rapporteur was
Mr Bastian.

At its 421st plenary session held on 26 and 27 October 2005 (meeting of 26 October), the European
Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 103 votes with 22 votes against and 18
abstentions.

1. Introduction

whereas European demand for sugar is estimated at 16 million
tonnes a year.

Twenty-one EU countries produce sugar beet. The
1.1
French overseas departments and Spain are minor sugar cane
producers (280 000 tonnes). In general, annual European sugar
production fluctuates between 17 and 20 million tonnes,

Beet cultivation on crop rotation extends over 2.2
1.2
million hectares of land and involves 320 000 farmers (i.e.
slightly less than 7 hectares per beet farmer). Beet is processed
at 236 sugar factories employing some 75 000 permanent and