Analyses of existing intermodal plans

Transcription

Freight and Logistics Advancement in Central/South-East Europe - Validation of trade and
transport processes,
Implementation of improvement actions,
Application of co-coordinated structures
WP 6
Extending of cooperation structures to the Black Sea bordering and TRACECA
countries
Action 6.1.1
Analyses of existing intermodal plans
Date:
Version:
10.12.2012
[approved]
Public Document
Freight and Logistics Advancement in Central/SouthEast Europe - Validation of trade and transport processes, Implementation of improvement actions, Application
of coordinated structures
Involved FLAVIA partners:
Technical University of Applied Sciences Wildau, Conrad Schmidt, DE
University of Pardubice, David Sourek, Ph. D., CZ
Upper Austrian University of Applied Sciences Research & Development Ltd. LOGISTIKIM, Gerald Aschauer, AT
University "POLITEHNIKA" of Bucharest - Transportation Research and Consulting Centre, Prof. Dr.-Ing. Mihaela Popa, RO
The information in this document is provided as is, and no guarantee or warranty is given
that the information is fit for any particular purpose. The user thereof uses the information
at its own risk and is solely liable for its usage.
-2-
Content:
1
Executive Summary.......................................................................................................... 4
2
Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 7
3
Intermodal plans within the Black Sea and TRACECA countries ................................. 8
3.1
Transport projects initiated by national authorities ............................................... 9
3.1.1
3.1.2
3.1.3
3.1.4
3.1.5
3.1.6
3.1.7
3.1.8
3.1.9
3.1.10
3.1.11
3.1.12
3.1.13
3.1.14
4
Armenia................................................................................................................................... 9
Azerbaijan ............................................................................................................................. 10
Bulgaria ................................................................................................................................. 11
Georgia ................................................................................................................................. 12
Kazakhstan ........................................................................................................................... 13
Kyrgyzstan ............................................................................................................................ 14
Moldova ................................................................................................................................ 15
Romania................................................................................................................................ 16
Russia (south) ....................................................................................................................... 17
Tajikistan .......................................................................................................................... 19
Turkey............................................................................................................................... 20
Turkmenistan .................................................................................................................... 21
Ukraine ............................................................................................................................. 22
Uzbekistan ........................................................................................................................ 23
3.2
Logistics operators within the TRACECA/ Black Sea Countries ......................... 25
3.3
Scientific studies .................................................................................................... 33
3.4
Existing barriers for intermodal transports .......................................................... 38
Conclusions .................................................................................................................... 43
List of tables ........................................................................................................................... 46
List of figures ......................................................................................................................... 46
-3-
1 Executive Summary
A significant part of the transport between Central and Southeast Europe is generated by Black
Sea and TRACECA 1 countries. The most important sources and destinations are Batumi, Poti
(Georgia), Constanta (Romania), Odessa (Ukraine) as well as the Turkish Black Sea harbors
and the Caspian ports Baku (Azerbaijan), Aktau (Kazakhstan) and Turkmenbashi (Turkmenistan). An extension of the Central-Southeast-European transport corridor (FLAVIA) towards this
region is highly economically relevant. Like the Great Silk Road the corridor links Asia and Europe. Recent developments show that some transport operators use this land bridge as an alternative to the maritime transport.
The Intergovernmental Commission (IGC) TRACECA was founded to develop the transport
corridor Europe – Caucasia – Asia as a sustainable, efficient and integrated transport system.
Important approaches are the development and harmonization of the transport infrastructure
and the safe and sustainable multimodal transport.
Since the mid-1990s the economic power of the Black Sea and TRACECA countries has been
growing, caused by the ever increasing international trade. Currently, there is a rapid growth of
the gross domestic product. And also in the future a growth rate of 100% to 800% between
2007 and 2030 is expected. This economic development characterized by growing production
and import-export activities, causes increasing transport flows.
It is assumed, that between 2006 and 2020 the transport volume in the TRACECA-corridor will
double. Most important export goods are raw materials like crude oil, natural gas, metals and
food.
Also the containerisation in transport will continue to increase and requires new and improved
infrastructure for the transshipment in the harbors and inland terminals. However, so far the
transport infrastructure in this region is mostly underdeveloped. The FLAVIA project identified
as the most significant barriers for the intermodal transport bureaucracy and corruption, a lack
of cooperation and confidence between the countries, instable legal frameworks, complex processes by crossing the borders and a lack of technological harmonization.
Intermodal transport in the TRACECA-countries has a high potential to develop new trade and
transport routes and it offers opportunities for the development of the FLAVIA corridor, too. But
before establishing new transport routes various requirements have to be met.
This concerns especially infrastructure investments, efficient organization of the transport chain,
legal aspects, governmental support and attractive transport offers. The current development
show, that the countries along the TRACECA corridors have started to modernize and extend
1
Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Romania, Tajikistan, Turkey,
Ukraine, Uzbekistan
-4-
their transport infrastructure. Modernization of ports, new logistics centers and new railway lines
are the most often planned projects. This is the first step for attracting new transport flows
through the corridor.
The second step has been already done by Georgia, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. Between Poti,
Baku and Aktau a regular block train is running. This means after strengthening the infrastructure, reliable and regular transport services have to be offered to attract shippers. Thereby,
proper measures like ensuring a sufficient security level, efficient non-corrupt authorities as well
as continuous and safe operation have to be implemented.
-5-
2 Relevance for the CENTRAL EUROPE Goals
The FLAVIA corridor goes in Southeast direction through the CENTRAL EUROPE Programme
area (from Central Europe to Romania at the Black Sea). Logically, the transport flows does not
end abruptly at the Black Sea. Beyond, the emerging markets in the Near, Middle and Far East
can be reached. One common transport route to the Far East (via the Suez channel) is by maritime transport. Another possibility is to use the European-Asian land bridge via the Black Sea,
the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea. The countries located along this land bridge developed
dynamically during the last two decades. The TRACECA countries offer primarily huge and valuable, natural resource deposits. The demand of the EU member states continuously increases
for such goods. In contrast the TRACECA countries demand goods of the processing industry.
To ensure efficient trade and transport relations in future the transport chains between the two
regions have to be extended and developed. This concerns the establishment of reliable
transport services to enhance the accessibility as well as the construction of an integrated
transport network that enables multimodal logistics approaches.
The report presents the current state of play regarding infrastructure, intermodality and planned
investments on the one hand as well as actual obstacles within the region on the other hand.
The indication of trade and transport barriers shall help to develop action plans to remove them.
The improvement of the connectivity between Europe and the TRACECA countries would entail
two consequences:
1.) Efficient trade and transport conditions to the emerging markets in the TRACECA corridor
2.) An alternative transport route via the Eurasian continent to Asia
-6-
3 Methodology
To provide an overview of the current intermodal plans within the TRACECA/Black Sea countries, a desk research elaborated intermodal plans/projects/studies within the Black Sea bordering and TRACECA countries.
Relevant countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova,
Romania, Russia (South), Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine, Uzbekistan,
The desk research is divided into 4 fields of investigation. The responsible partner has to carry
out the desk research for its field.
Field 1 – National authorities (LP)
Current transport investment projects with relevance to the intermodal transport are identified.
Furthermore, strategic aims and measures of the national transport development plans shall be
examined.
Field 2 – Overview of transport operators carrying out intermodal transports (PP10)
Logistics operators shall be identified which already offer logistics services along the TRACECA
corridor. This comprises transport and terminal operators and their services.
Field 3 – Scientific studies (PP5)
Already published studies and analyses shall be used to characterize the TRACECA corridor
more detailed. Transport relevant contents shall be collected and summarised. As a result, conclusions for the corridor shall be compiled.
Field 4 – Analysing existing problems of intermodal transports (PP8)
Existing technical, administrative and organisational barriers and obstacles shall be identified.
For this, the results from 3.2.4 can be used. A further investigation shall round up which conditions hinder the intermodal transport.
-7-
4 Intermodal plans within the Black Sea and TRACECA
countries
The TRACECA corridor consists of 13 countries. Additionally, Russia (south) and Turkmenistan
are part of the defined country group. The resulting corridor reaches from East Europe to Middle
Asia. It connects Central Europe with Asia via a land bridge. Most of the countries are parts of
the former Soviet Union. The most significant geographical landscapes are the Black Sea, the
Caucasus and the Caspian Sea. They determine the direction of the transport flows to a large
extent.
Figure 1: FLAVIA corridor (green) and TRACECA and Black Sea Countries (purple)
Source: own depiction
The following chapter analyses the TRACECA corridor regarding to existing and upcoming intermodal investment plans. For that reason 4 fields of intervention have been identified:
- National authorities
- Transport operators
- Scientific studies
- Current problems/barriers of the intermodal transport
-8-
4.1 Transport projects initiated by national authorities
It can be stated, that the countries along the TRACECA/Black Sea corridor have already initiated various transport projects. The compiled desk research bases on information from the national ministries of transport, from the TRACECA program itself and from running research projects. Mainly three types of investment projects have been identified.
1.) strengthening and construction of new railway segments
2.) establishment of new transport services for example ferry links or block trains
3.) the extension/construction of existing/new transshipment facilities (especially ports and
logistics centers)
4.1.1
Armenia
Armenia does not possess an access to a national seaport. This means the country depends on
transport routes which pass their neighbours. The current transport investments in Armenia aim
obviously on the completion of the railway network. For that reason new railway segments are
under construction. The strengthening of the rail links to Iran and Azerbaijan prove the intension
to connect the infrastructure on transnational level. The planned multimodal transport hub in
Jerevan shall bundle transport volumes in the capital region. Table 1 gives an overview of current projects.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Logistics
Center
Transport
network
Transport
network
Transport
network
Transport
network
Yerevan Logistics Centre
Development of a multimodal
transport hub
increase of maximum speed and
capacity
Track equipment and signaling
system renewal
Increase of transit time
2011-2015
Improving connection to Iran
n.a.
2
3
4
5
Rehabilitation of the existing
rail link Yerevan- Tbilisi
Complete reopening of Hrazdan-Ijevan section
Construction of new rail link
Vanadzor-Fioletovo
New railway Gagarin Meghri/Iranian border
n.a.
n.a.
n.a.
Table 1: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Armenia
Source: www.traceca-org.org
According to the numeration of the table above all planned transport investment projects are
depicted in the figure below. Yellow asterisks stand for investments within the transport network,
blue asterisks stand for investments into the port and logistics nodes network.
-9-
4
3
2
1
5
Figure 2: Map of Armenia including current transport investment projects
Source: own depiction referring to www.traceca-org.org
4.1.2
Azerbaijan
The country possesses an important role within the Caucasus region. On the one hand it has a
strong transhipment point at the Caspian Sea with the port of Baku. On the other hand, it has a
gateway function to the ports of the Black Sea. By means of the transport projects, it is recognizable that the public authorities plan to strengthen this position. This shall be ensured by the
new construction of the port of Alyat. The port will be situated at a railway junction. This makes
it possible to link transports from Russia (north), Iran (south), Armenia (south west) and Georgia
(west). The most relevant transport connection is the link to Georgia. Here, the important Black
Sea ports Poti and Batumi are located. The rehabilitation of the railway segment to the Georgian border is hence the main project fort the next years (see table 3 and figure 3).
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Logistics
Center
Alyat Sea Trade Port Logistics Centre
2014/2015
2
Transport
network
Baku - Alyat - Beyuk Kesik
(Georgian border)
Railway rehabilitation
Base for an improved distribution of
imported cargo to consumers in the
Baku region as well as throughout
Azerbaijan
Improving the Seaport hinterland
connection towards Georgia
n.a.
Table 2: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Azerbaijan
- 10 -
2
1
Figure 3: Map of Azerbaijan including current transport investment projects
4.1.3
Bulgaria
Bulgaria and Romania are the natural starting/destination points of transports to/from the
TRACECA region. Consequently, Bulgaria is interested in the extension and linking of its ports
to the (Central-European) hinterland. The planned measures show, that the port of Varna shall
take over the role of an important Black Sea transhipment point. This would mean the port of
Varna is in direct competition to the port of Constanta in Romania. The connection to the intermodal terminal Ruse, situated on the Danube River, proves a multimodal transport approach. A
shorter hinterland connection might attract transport flows from Central Europe via the Danube
or via Romania. The projects are depicted in table 3 and figure 4.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Transport
network
Varna-Ruse Rail Rehabilitation
2012-2017
2
Logistics
center
Varna Ferryboat and Logistic Centre
3
Terminal
Ruse Region
Intermodal Terminal
Increased capacity for freight
transport, decreased transit time,
development of intermodal “searailway-river” transportations
Modernization of the port for multimodal transports across the Black
Sea
Improvement of intermodality in the
south-eastern region of the EU
n.a.
n.a.
Table 3: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Bulgaria
- 11 -
3
1
2
Figure 4: Map of Bulgaria including current transport investment projects
4.1.4
Georgia
Similar to Azerbaijan, Georgia has a strategic position within the corridor. Both countries form
the shortest land bridge between the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. The investment projects
focus mainly on the establishment of continuous and scheduled transport services. The container block trains to Baku and via Baku to Almaty in Kazakhstan shall improve the accessibility
of the whole region. Predictable transport offers are in interest of the transport operators and
shippers. Maybe, further fixed offers will follow. The transshipment points in Poti and Tbilisi are
the main nodes of the transport network (see table 4 and figure 5).
# Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Intermodal
service
Poti – Baku container block
train, 3 round trips per day
2
Intermodal
service
Logistics
Center
Poti-Baku-Aktau-Almaty container train
Logistics City Tbilisi - construction of a container terminal + transport, handling
and storage facilities
3
Shorter transit time, improving the
seaport hinterland connection
between Poti and Baku
Continuous transport service connecting TRACECA and EU
options for cross-border intermodal transport, more efficient
and competitive cargo export and
regional cargo import distribution
n.a.
Start in 2006
n.a.
Table 4: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Georgia
- 12 -
1/3
3
Figure 5: Map of Georgia including current transport investment projects
4.1.5
Kazakhstan
The huge territorial country, which makes the overcoming of long distances necessary, is very
suitable for railway transports. But so far the transport network cannot fulfill the requirements for
modern transport offers yet. There is only a sparsely network of railway tracks and roads. The
main aim should be to develop a logical and coherent transport network. The planned investment projects aim to strengthen the railway infrastructure and the link of the most important port
Aktau to the hinterland. But also an improved connection to China via Aktogay and Dostyk is
part of the plans. Kazakhstan could take on an important position as transit country within the
TRACECA corridor. It has access to the Caspian Sea and a connection to China.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Transport
network
Transport
network
Aktogay-Dostyk Railway
Electrification
Construction of a new railway
section Beineu – Shalkar
n.a.
Port
Extension of the port
Aktau
Improving transit time, connecting
China and TRACECA countries
Improving the seaport hinterland
connection of the port Aktau, increased transit time
Increasing the transshipment
volume
2
3
n.a.
n.a.
Table 5: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Kazakhstan
- 13 -
1
2
3
Figure 6: Map of Kazakhstan including current transport investment projects
4.1.6
Kyrgyzstan
Presently, Kyrgyzstan possesses only a short and underdeveloped railway system. The capital
Bischkek is connected via Kazakhstan to the TRACECA corridor. At this point, a new logistics
center for multi-modal transport handling is planned. Like Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan has a border
to China. For the future a railway line from Kashi (China) through Kyrgyzstan to Osh is planned.
This connection might stimulate new transshipment nodes along the connection. A linkage to
the capital would be imaginable, too.
Overall, the development potential in the country is relatively high compared to the neighboring
countries. Basically, new inland railway connections are needed and a proper linkage to the
bordering countries. The main barrier for new transport infrastructure investments is the unfavorable landscape. Especially, the high mountain characteristic of Kyrgyzstan complicates the
construction of new projects due to enormous costs and planning efforts. This applies especially
for routes in North/South direction.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Logistics
center
Planned: construction of a multimodal logistics node in Bishkek
Handling multimodal transports,
transport hub for the capital
region
Until 2012
Table 6: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Kyrgyzstan
- 14 -
1
Figure 7: Map of Kyrgyzstan including current transport investment projects
4.1.7
Moldova
The transport investments confine themselves on the extension of the logistics center at the
airport of Marculesti. The facility shall handle and transship containers for multimodal transports.
The terminal could be the basis for new transnational intermodal transport services. However,
the transport network has to be modernized as well. Currently, the entire railway network is nonelectrified. All tracks have the Russian broad gauge. In Moldavia, the initial situation is rather
poor. Nevertheless, the country should use its advantages. The access to the Danube (port of
Giurgiulești) could attract transports from Central Europe (via inland waterway) to Ukraine and
Russia.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Logistics
Center
Marculesti Airport
Logistics Centre
Strengthening north Moldova with a
container transhipment facility, basis for
the development of cross-border
intermodal transport services
n.a.
Table 7: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Moldova
- 15 -
1
Figure 8: Map of Moldova including current transport investment projects
4.1.8
Romania
Compared to the other TRACECA countries, Romania has a dense transport network. But from
a western European view, there is much need for modernization. This applies mainly for the
existing railway routes. Their capacities have to be extended and the transport equipment has
to be modernized (rolling stock, transshipment facilities). During the last years single parts of
the transport infrastructure have been modernized. This concerns mainly the freight terminals in
Arad, Constanta and Bucharest.
The most important Black Sea port of Romania is Constanta. It can be seen as linkage between
Central Europe and the TRACECA corridor. The port has regular container lines for instance to
Poti in Georgia, Novorossiysk in Russia and Ilyicevsk in the Ukraine. Further important services
are regular operated ro-ro and ferry lines. Current investment projects concentrate on the development/upgrade of the terminals. The terminal infrastructure will be modernised within the
next 5 years. This comprises for instance the inland terminals in Arad, Braşov, Bucharest,
Craiova and Timisoara, the Danube ports in Giurgiu and Oltenita as well as the extension of the
South Harbor in Constanta. Advantaging aspects are the integration within the TEN-T network,
the provision of EU funds and the strategic location of the country as gateway to the Caucasus
region and Asia.
- 16 -
#
1
2
Type
Combined
Transport
Service
Intermodal
Terminal
Intermodal
Terminal
3
Intermodal
Terminal
4
Intermodal
Terminal
Intermodal
Terminal
Description
Establishing of RO-LA services
Building Timisoara Intermodal
Terminal
Technical assistence for
terminal extension in
Constanta South Harbour
Technical assistance for the
Bucharest Terminal (the Western part)
Development of Oltenita and
Giurgiu Terminals
Upgrading and/or building
intermodal terminals: Calafat,
Craiova, Pitesti, Turda, ClujNapoca, Dej, Târgu Mureş,
Braşov, Făgăraş, Sfântu
Gheorghe
Aim
Strenthening of rail
transport by crossing of
Carpathian Mountains
Improving the intermodal network
Time horizon
2011-2013
2011-2013
2011-2013
2011-2013
2011-2013
2014-2020
Table 8: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Romania
1
3
4
4
2
Figure 9: Map of Romania including current transport investment projects
- 17 -
4.1.9
Russia (south)
The considerations for Russia are limited to the South. It comprises the part bordering at the
Black Sea. The port of Novorossiysk has to be mentioned as significant transhipment point and
possesses a container terminal. The capacities shall be extended until 2014. Simultaneously,
the sea port hinterland connection to the port is improved by constructing a second track.
It has to be mentioned that Russia stands in a rather competitive position to the TRACECA corridor. Long-range railway transports to Asia are already performed. BMW in cooperation with
DB Schenker Rail operate a container train from Leipzig Wahren to Shenyang (North-east China).
#
1
2
Type
Transport
network
Port
Description
Construction of a second railway
track to the port of Novorossiysk
Extension of the container terminal with annual capacity of 1.2
million TEU, Novorossiysk
Aim
Increase of the track capacity
To increase transshipment
volume and market share
on the container cargo
market
Time horizon
n.a.
Completion
2014
Table 9: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Russia
- 18 -
1
2
Figure 10: Map of Russia including current transport investment projects
4.1.10 Tajikistan
Due to its high mountain landscape (similar to Kyrgyzstan) the transport routes within the country are very sparsely developed. Only the south-east region around the capital Dushanbe has a
noteworthy transport infrastructure. At present just a railway link to Uzbekistan exists. In the
future a new railway construction from Vahdat (near Dushanbe) via Kyrgyzstan to China is
planned.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Terminal
Transport
network
reduction of time of customs clearance
strengthening economical connections between Tajikistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, China and
Afghanistan
n.a.
2
International Border Terminal “Nizhniy Pyanj”
Vahdat – Karamyk (Kyrgyz
border) railway
n.a.
Table 10: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Tajikistan
- 19 -
2
1
Figure 11: Map of Tajikistan including current transport investment projects
4.1.11 Turkey
From importance for the TRACECA corridor are especially the north and east parts of the country. Many prosperous ports are located along the northern Black Sea coast. The most important
ones are the ports of Trabzon, Samsun and the new investment project in Filyos. The port of
Istanbul located at the Bosporus is the biggest one in entire Turkey. Turkey has railway links to
the TRACECA countries Georgia and Armenia in the East and to Bulgaria and Romania in the
west. Due to the poor transport network in Armenia, a bypass is under construction. This alternative route runs from Kars via Georgia and Azerbaijan to the ports of Baku and Alyat (under
construction). In the next 10 years the Turkish authorities want to double the length of the railway network (extension by ca. 10.000 km). Simultaneously, the electrification is focused. From
the competitive point of view, the separation of infrastructure and operation is planed for 2013.
The Turkish state rail will be privatized. It is most likely that new railway undertakings will enter
the market which would be a very positive signal for the competition on the transport market.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Port
Filyos New Port
n.a.
2
Transport
network
Bypass via Georgia and Azerbaijan to the Caspian Sea.
Planned to handle break & dry
bulk & containers, opens a
gateway to Black Sea and
East European countries
Increased lead time to the
ports at the Caspian Sea
2013
Table 11: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Turkey
- 20 -
1
2
Figure 12: Map of Turkey including current transport investment projects
4.1.12 Turkmenistan
The country is characterised through its desert landscape. The existing transport routes run like
the former Silk Road in east-west direction. Railway links exist only to Uzbekistan. A new railway connection is planned to Kazakhstan in the north. The track runs until the port of Aktau.
Beyond, connections to Russia would be possible. The most important transhipment facility is
the port of Turkmenbashi. It offers regular ferry lines to Baku. Turkmenistan is not a member of
the TRACECA organisation. Nevertheless, the country is listed due to its position near the corridor.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Transport
network
new railway line from Kazanjik to the port of Aktau (KZ) is
under construction
Sea port hinterland access
n.a.
Table 12: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Turkmenistan
- 21 -
1
Figure 13: Map of Turkmenistan including current transport investment projects
4.1.13 Ukraine
The Black Sea ports of Odessa, Ilyichevsk and Yuzhny play a major role for the Ukraine trade
within the TRACECA corridor. All harbours have regular lines to Poti, Istanbul and Varna. To
keep up with the increasing transport flows the ports are in a modernization process. The
Ukraine is equipped with a well-developed transport network. It has connections to Central Europe via Slovakia (Ciena nad Tisou) and Poland (Medyka).
Another effort aims at offering block trains between Ilyichevsk and the Baltic Sea (Klaipeda).
This land bridge might stimulate new transport flows from the north towards the TRACECA corridor. Furthermore, the direct border to Poland offers a short link to Central/ Western Europe
and its seaports.
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Port
Terminal
handling of increased
vessel size for the Ukrainian cargo
Capacity increasing for container
transhipment, block-train “Viking”
between the ports of Klaipeda and
Ilyichevsk
n.a.
2
Yuzhny Port Approach
Channel and Harbour Deepening
Ilyichevsk new Container
Terminal
2012-2021
Table 13: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Ukraine
- 22 -
1
2
Figure 14: Map of Ukraine including current transport investment projects
4.1.14 Uzbekistan
Uzbekistan does not possess an access to a sea port. Hence, transit routes to the neighboring
countries, especially Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, are important and already exist. Via Kyrgyzstan a link to China is available. Due to dissection of the country in the east part, railway
segments have to pass foreign territories. This could be seen as a disadvantage. New construction projects depend on the willingness for cooperation. A current intermodal investment project
concentrates on the logistics center at the Navoi International Airport. The logistics center is
located at a junction of transport flows (east-west-south).
#
Type
Description
Aim
Time horizon
1
Logistics
Center
Creation of a Logistic Center on
the basis of Navoi International
Airport
Transcontinental transport
node, connect Far East,
Southeast Asia, Southern
Asia and Europe
n.a.
Table 14: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Uzbekistan
- 23 -
1
Figure 15: Map of Uzbekistan including current transport investment projects
- 24 -
4.2 Logistics operators within the TRACECA/ Black Sea Countries
Transport is organised in networks which means that there is a close relationship between the
infrastructure and the service provided. A network offers connectivity and choice, but the
infrastructure is also expensive and has to be homogeneous to provide a continuity of service.
The day to day efficiency of the system is provided by the operators who find the least costly
ways through the networks. This efficiency is increased with the help of ITS (Intelligent
Transport Systems).
Some of the challenges to a growing demand for mobility come from the existence of a network
that is not integrated, overloaded and/or sometimes obsolete.
Even within the same mode, transport systems are fragmented along national lines by
legal and technical barriers. Moreover there is also competition between vehicles for the use
of the same infrastructure, in particular between passenger and freight transport. These
rigidities restrict choice possibilities and lower the efficiency of the system by producing energy
and time losses.
One of the most critical friction points in a network is at interchange points. This is the point
where the user enters the network and where various loading and storage operations take
place. It is also the place where delays, missed transfers and postponements happen. The
technology and organisation of nodes has to be radically improved to make boarding and
transhipment much easier.
Policies that appear capable to ease the transport constraints, are those that facilitate the
creation of a fully integrated, modern and reliable transport network, capable of exploiting the
strengths of each mode, on its own and in combination, and of accommodating the
technological progress. Operators and infrastructure managers must strive to make alternative
modes and co-modal transport more attractive to end-users.
After the short country profiles and the planned investment projects on overview about transport
operators offering services along the corridor follows (table 15).
- 25 -
Name
(based in)
Type
Evergreen
Line
(Taiwan)
Transport
operator
(http://www.evergre
enline.com/static/jsp/s
ervice.jsp)
Transport
operator
(http://www.simplext
rans.com/)
SIMPLEXTRANS LTD
(Moldavia,
Turkey)
Offered services (if available:
start and destination, capacities,
transported cargo)
Black Sea Feeder services: OdessaConstanta-Varna-Piraeus, v.v.
Container transportation by sea
from China, Turkey, Europe, Africa,
America in CIS countries and viceversa;
Multimodal transportation (sea + wagon
/ container / truck).
GÜNEY
TRANS
(Turkey)
Eurreco Logistics
(Netherland)
Green
Integrated
Logistics
(n.a.)
TELS group
(Great Britian,
Ukraine)
Transport
operator
(http://www.guneytr
ans.com/aboutus.ht
m)
Transport
operator
(www.eurreco.eu/)
Transport
operator
(http://www.greenlogistics.com/greenweb/
servicvices/service_route.as
p)
Transport
operator
(http://www.telsgrou
p.com/about_us/)
Transporting in containers by sea with
transshipment of the cargo in CIS wagons or rail containers
INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY-based
FORWARDING
Logistics services
Logistics services
TELS group offers complete range of
railway transportation services
throughout the territories of Republic of
Belarus, Russian Federation, The
Republic of Kazakhstan, The Baltics and
The Middle Asia (export, import, transit).
Relevance for the intermodal transport
long-term schedule of services
(http://www.shipmentlink.com/tv
s2/jsp/TVS2_ServiceProfile.jsp
?line=BSF&segment=9)
Simplextrans has a number of
logistic solutions which permit
choosing the optimum means of
transport when making shipments on routes between the
TRACECA countries and between Turkey and CIS countries
Logistics organization from/to
CIS destinations from/to
Turkiye by CIS & Europen sized
wagons at related rail stations.
Railway transport is part of
multimodal services and
extends to the Ukraine, Russia, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan,
Turkmenistan, Tajikistan
Integrated logistics services on
networks:
- Almati-NovorossiyskTashkent-Hayraton-AshgabadBandar Abbas- Baku;
-Tashkent-Mersin-Istanbul.
TELS offers internal and
international railway carriages
of any tonnage containers (3, 5,
20, 24, 20' и 40'), as well as
wagons of any type.
- 26 -
Name
(based in)
Type
transported cargo)
Tibbett
Logistics
(Romania)
Transport
operator
(http://www.tibbettlo
gistics.com/) and
Terminal operator
It is the only private operator of a rail
container terminal in Bucharest, and is
building an innovative trans-national
multi-modal (port-rail-road) container
distribution network – to extend into
neighbouring Bulgaria, Serbia, Hungary
and further afield.
Container distribution in
Romania and Bulgaria and
extension innitiative to Serbia,
Hungary etc.
Black Sea
Cargo LLC
(Georgia)
Transport
Operator
(http://www.blackse
acargo.com/)
Terminal
operator
Private operator which offers air, sea,
rail and road freight services along the
Black Sea and TRACECA corridor.
Local freight forwarder which
distributes cargo from/to the
ports of Poti and Batumi.
Petkim Petrokimya, a subsidiary of the
State Oil Company of Azerbaijan Republic (SOCAR)
Terminal
operator
APM TERMINALS POTI
Terminal
operator
APM Terminals Romania Srl
operating in Petkim Port, located in Aliaga, on the Aegean
Coast of Turkey
(http://www.eft.com/generalsupply-chain/apm-terminalsannounces-port-developmentturkey)
The port currently services,
acting as the European gateway for international trade in
Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan, and is ideally located to
become a future hub for Central
Asia trade.
(http://www.apmterminals.com/
europe/poti/)
The port currently services in
Constanta Port
DP World
(Dubai, U.A.E)
Terminal Operator
DP World Constanta": premier container
terminal, serving both the Romanian
domestic market and a wider hinterland
spreading into parts of Central Europe,
together with first class feeder connections to the Ukraine, Russia, Georgia &
Moldova.
HHLA
(Germany)
Terminal Operator
HHLA also operates a container terminal
in Odessa (Ukraine), beside Hamburg
terminal.
The port's geographic location
has also proved ideal as a
reliable transhipment hub for
the greater Black Sea region.
(https://webapps.dpworld.com/p
ortal/page/portal/DP_WORLD_
WEBSITE/MarineTerminals/Locations/)
container operator
(http://hhla.de/en/segments.htm
l)
Socep
Constanta
(Romania)
Terminal Operator
SOCEP -container port operator in the
Constantza Port (300 000 TEU containers annual handling capacity).
container operator
(http://www.socep.ro/en/service
s.html
APM Terminals
(Netherlands)
- 27 -
Name
(based in)
Type
transported cargo)
Illitschiwsk
(Ukraine)
Terminal Operator
The port is operated as government
enterprise. The Port of Ilyichevsk's Multimodal Complex specializes in operations with railway ferry boats and rollon/roll-off vessels. The Multi-modal
Complex contains storage for about
7000 vehicles, including a storage yard
for 450 containers and 30 trucks with
trailers.
Batumi
(Georgia)
Terminal Operator
Alyat
(Azerbaijan)
Terminal Operator
Baku
(Azerbaijan)
Terminal Operator
Aktau
(Kazakhstan)
Terminal Operator
The port of Batum is characterized by
the following figures as:
Container terminal, the total throughput
is 100 000 TEU p.a.
Oil terminal – up to 15 million tons p.a.
Dry cargo terminal
The 2014 estimation of Alyat port
throughput is 40 000 TEU or 10 million
tons of good and will help improve container transport on the TRACECA corridor
The Port of Baku Container Terminal is
located on the territory of the Main Cargo Terminal area and is designed for
handling of all kinds of containers, including 40 FEUs and capable of handling of 15000 containers annually. The
area of warehouses at the Terminal
extends up to 1600 sq. meters
At present, the Aktau Port is the modern
multipurpose terminal, having the technological resources, which provide future development of the port: over
2
50000 m of open areas and covered
2
transit storehouse - 6000 m
Two railway-ferry lines operate
from the Port of Ilyichevsk on
the
Black
Sea:
Ilyichevski-Varna
ia) -Poti/Batumi (Georgia) and
Port of Ilyichevsk-Derindge
(Turkey). Travel time for the
ferries is 18 hours for Varna, 44
hours for Poti, 46 hours for
Batumi, and 27 hours for Derindge.
Container operator
(http://www.batumiport.com/eng
/index.php)
Turkmen-bashi
(Turkmenistan
)
Terminal Operator
Terminal operator Point Logistics offers
full logistic support for any operations
regarding: warehouse storage; handling
services; packing operations; Customs
transit registration.
The Port of Alyat will contribute
to the development of the new
transport mode and logistics for
increasing the attractiveness of
the TRACECA route
Terminal operator
(http://www.bakuseaport.az/cu.
html)
The Aktau Port is a main part of
shipping sea ways EuropeAsia, going through the Caspian and the Black Sea, Volga,
Volga-Don and Belomor-Baltick
channels as well as in the direction of Iran. Also, has been
involved a route of the project
TRASEKA passing through the
ports Aktau – Baku (Azerbaidjan) – Poti (Georgia)
The Turkmenbashi port is a
main transshipment point that
links Turmenistan to Caucasus
and European part of Russia
and the republics of Central
Assia
- 28 -
Name
(based in)
Type
transported cargo)
DB Schenker
(Germany)
Transport operator
Connecting from Chongqing (China) to
Duisburg via Alashankou (ChinaMongolia cross-border) and crossing,
Kazakhstan, Russia, Belarus, and Poland took place in March–April 2011,
covering 10,300 km (6,400 mi) in 16
days.
Connecting Asia and Europe
Table 15: Overview about existing operators in the TRACECA/ Black Sea countries
Historically Great Silk Way routes (around 1,400 km) ran through Kazakhstan from China to
Europe. Nowadays, this country is seeking to improve the competitiveness for transit traffic.
According to NEA1, Kazakhstan ranks first among all TRACECA countries, considering
container transport by rail. In total 473 thousand TEU were transported in 2007 (see figure 16).
Four international railway corridors, which pass through the Republic of Kazakhstan, help to
improve its interregional integration with many countries in the New Independent States (NIS)
area and other foreign countries as well (see figure 17). 2
At second place ranks Ukraine with 327 thousand TEU transported on railways in total in 2007.
Ukraine has the most developed railway network in the TRACECA region, with an operating
length of over 22 thousand kilometres. The electrification of the total length of the railway
network is 43%. Ukrainian railways interact with the railways of seven neighbouring countries
via 57 border crossing points and with 19 major ports on the Black sea, Azov Sea and River
Danube.
2
NEA et all. TRACECA Transport and Trade Atlas, Nov. 2009, project funded by European Union.
- 29 -
Figure 16: Container transport by rail (x1000 TEU) in TRACECA countries, in 2007
Source: TRACECA Transport and Trade Atlas, NEA et all. (2009)
Black Sea ports play a major role in intermodal chains, especially maritime containers which are
being transported between the hinterland and countries around the Black Sea. There is a strong
concentration of maritime container transport in the Odessa-Constantza-Izmir range (NEA,
2009).
The port of Izmir is the largest port in the Western TRACECA region in container volume
between 2004 and 2006, with 816,000 TEUs moved on average. Situated on the mid-west
coast of Turkey, Izmir is a gateway to many markets.
The port of Constantza ranks second with a through put of around 733,000 TEU on average
between 2004 and 2006. Four container terminals operate in the Port of Constantza with a
throughput that has grown over the last years.
At third place ranks the port of Mersin with 626,000 TEU on average between 2004 and 2006.
With its modern in frastructure and equipment, efficient cargo handling, vast storage areas and
its proximity to the free trade zone, Mersin is one of the most important ports in the Eastern
Mediterranean.
- 30 -
As for the corridors relevant for freight operations in TRACECA countries, we may have an
integrated picture considering the railway network connecting Asia and East Europe (figure 17).
Figure 17: Asian Railway network and its track gauges
Source: United Nations/UNESCAP
The most frequently used transport routes that links east Europe whith Asia are as follows:
1. International Transport Corridor “Trans-Siberian” (or “East-West”, having as backbone
the Trans-Siberian Railway): Europe (Pan European Transport Corridors 2, 3 and 9) –
Russia – Japan, with three branches from the Russian Federation to:
• Kazakhstan - China,
• Korean Peninsula, and
• Mongolia – China;
2. International Transport Corridor TRACECA: Eastern Europe (Pan European Transport
Corridors 1, 4, 7, 8, 9) – across Black Sea – Caucasus – across Caspian Sea – Central
Asia;
3. International Transport Corridor “North-South”: Northern Europe (PETC 9) – Russia, with
three branches:
• Caucasus - Persian Gulf;
- 31 -
•
•
Central Asia - Persian Gulf;
Across the Caspian Sea – Republic of Iran – Persian Gulf (on this route the
deep-water Volga-Don river system is used.
(http://www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/doc/2008/sc2/ECE-TRANS-SC2-62-inf03e.pdf
http://www.silkroadstudies.org/new/docs/publications/GCA/GCAPUB-10.pdf
http://kouvola.lut.fi/files/download/Research_Report_179_Nora.pdf)
- 32 -
4.3 Scientific studies
1. Strategic choice for Istanbul: A domestic or international orientation for logistics?, published by: Dilek Özdemir in Cities 27 (2010) p. 154 – 163, Elsevier ISSN 0264-2751,
year: 2010
This study concerns with relevance of logistic centre in Istanbul – Turkey and its orientation/focus on international or national trade. From TRACECA point of view the logistics centre in
Istanbul is very important, because it can serve as intermodal node for transport between Europe and Central Asia. The weak points of Istanbul as logistics centre of international importance are mentioned. The limited combined transport or cumbersome bureaucracy belongs
for example to weak points.
2. Sustainable consumption and production in South East Europe and Eastern Europe,
Caucasus and Central Asia, published by: European Environment Agency, EEA Report No 3/2007, ISSN 1725-9177, year: 2007
This study analyse the situation in South East Europe and Eastern Europe, Caucasus and Central Asia. The consumption and production is analysed with focus on its sustainability. The report comprises chapter about transport. Based on this report, it is possible to estimate the further progress and development on field of transport regard to social and economic aspects.
3. TRACECA Transport and Trade Atlas, published by NEA (www.nea.nl), year 2009
This atlas provides an overview of the different trade and transport issues in the TRACECA area. It provides useful information on trade and transport flows, transport chains and intermodal
transport and logistics in the TRACECA countries. It can be used as basis on transport modelling in the different TRACECA countries.
4. Trade Facilitation and Institutional Support Project, Completion Report, published by
Dornier Consulting GmbH / KLC, year 2006
This report summarizes the activities that have been done in the TFIS project. Useful for
TRACECA countries are especially period reports concerning Pilot scheme for simplified rules
for freight movement and Action Plan for the TRACECA Visa and freight documents.
5. Study on regional co-operation within the Eastern Europe, Caucuses, Central Asia in
the field of transport, published by Scott Wilson, year 2004, (http://www.tracecaorg.org/fileadmin/fm-dam/Tacis/eecca_f_rep.pdf)
The main aim of this study is to give guidance on how the EU transport strategy for the EECCA
region may be broadened and re-oriented.
6. The problematic role of EU democracy promotion in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Nagorno-Karabakh, published by Licínia Simão in Communist and Post-Communist Studies
45(2012) p. 193 – 200, Elsevier, ISSN 0967-067X, year 2012
- 33 -
This paper can be used as basic study for improvement of transport security in TRACECA
countries. It describes democratic principles in Post-Communist countries and their development.
7. The use of outsourcing logistics activities: The case of Turkey, published by Emel Aktas, Berrin Agaran, Fusun Ulengin, Sule Onsel in Transportation Research Part C 19
(2011) p. 833–852, Elsevier, ISSN 0968-090X, year 2011
This research aims at analysing logistics services from the viewpoint of companies, who are
already outsourcing their logistics services and others who currently fulfil their logistics needs inhouse. The methodology can be used for analyse of other TRACECA countries and for development of measures to improve logistics services across TRACECA corridor.
8. Davydenko I., Landa Maxta I., Martens R., Nesterova N., Wark T.: Potential for Eurasia land bridge corridors & logistics developments along the corridors. Project: REorganization of Transport networks by advanced RAil freight Concepts, 2007 – 2012.
Available at: <http://retrack.demis.nl/Documents/Deliverables/D13.2-Report on potential for Eurasia land bridge rail corridors FINAL 25042012.pdf> [cit. 2012-11-01].
RETRACK project is focused on the connection between North and Black seas by rail transport
with possible prolongation to China via three main corridors. TRACECA corridor is one of them
(the others are Trans-Siberian and the Central). These routes are compared in the project. Prolongation to China is solved in WP 13 of the RETRACK project.
Project report contains following parts: overview of recent studies, technical description of selected routes, transport organization, transport infrastructure, bottlenecks, condition of rolling
stock etc. Main terminals along TRACECA corridor are also mentioned. Project gives a basic
overview of situation on TRACECA corridor and it is able to be used as base for FLAVIA research. Two main technical problems – different track gauges (1,435 and 1,520 mm) and different electric-supply systems (DC 3 kV, AC 25 kV 50 Hz or not-electrified segments) are pointed out.
Forecast of traffic flows (transport demand) in future based on transport model is utilizable for
consideration of TRACECA corridor also in the frame of FLAVIA project.
Conclusion of RETRACK project is that infrastructure and rolling stock along TRACECA corridor
is in poor condition and it must be improved for utilizing in the frame of Europe-China connection. More preferred route along the TRACECA corridor is via the port of Turkmenbashi.
9. Luică, Pamela: Illichivsk Port to become transport hub between Asia and Europe.
RailwayPro [online]. Available at: <http://www.railwaypro.com/> [cit. 2012-11-02]. Published 2012-10-12.
There is pointed out that port of Illichivsk (one of largest ports in Ukraine) plays an important
role. There is mentioned that this port is connected to 100 countries by commercial activities.
Port is equipped for RO-RO operation. There is also declared a tendency for modernizing of
port as well as railway infrastructure for improving of capacity (about 32 million tonnes per year
to 55 million tonnes) and quality of services. This is able to be used as an example for other
owners of such infrastructure along the TRACECA corridor.
- 34 -
10. Maffii Silvia, Schoen Andreas: The future of the TRACECA railways. RailwayPRO
[online], published 2012-08-30 [cit. 2012-11-02]. Available at:
<http://www.railwaypro.com/>.
Beside basic aims of TRACECA corridor there is mentioned the project “Silk Wind” container
block train from Kazakhstan to Turkey/Black Sea. This project will be one of the first steps how
to set TRACECA corridor into real operation.
In March 2012 preparations started for a project connecting Kazakhstan (from the Chinese border) with Turkey and the Black Sea region via the Caspian Sea and the Caucasus. The background for this project is to implement a new block train and to modernize the port infrastructure
in Turkey, Georgia, Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan. The desired result is to reduce the transportation time significantly, also with improved quality of services:
- Construction of new railway line between Georgia and Turkey – to be operational in 2013, rehabilitation of the whole railway infrastructure from Baku to Kars;
- Construction of 988 km new railway line between Zhezkazgan and Beineu in Kazakhstan;
shortening the distance from China to the Caspian Sea by appr. 1000 km – construction started,
to be operational in 2016;
- Construction of the new Baku International Sea port in Alyat – first Phase to be operational in
2015;
- Modernization and extension of the port of Aktau, Kazakhstan.
There is also mentioned an information that responsible authorities started multilateral discussions about simplification of transport in this region. It was focused on creation of one transport
document (issued electronically and sent in advance) for simplification of crossing of borders.
11. Bekmagambetov, Murat: Problems of Realization of Transit-Transport Potential of Kazakhstan. Vienna: 18th OSCE Economic and Environmental Forum. English translated
presentation. Published. 2010-02-01. Available at: <http://www.osce.org/eea/41324>
[cit. 2012-11-03].
It is expected an increase of transport volumes by factor 2 between years 2008 and 2015 in
Kazakhstan. Main regard in presentation is put to problem of long procedures on railway border
crossings. It will takes about 2 hours in average (in Europe about 40 min). There is mentioned
Resolution of ECMT 99/2 on “Removal of Obstacles on Boundary Crossings for the International Transportations of Cargoes” with recommendation to reduce these procedures (they should
not last longer than 1 hour) in next five years. Supervision system (able to simplify border crossing) used in Kazakhstan are introduced. It is able to be used as one possibility how the transport
over borders is able to be simplified.
12. Bekmagambetov, Murat: The prospects of cooperation and coordination of the efforts
of international organizations and national governments in the implementation of
transport projects in the CA region. Almaty, 2010. Published by: 18th OSCE Economic
and Environmental Forum “Promoting good governance at border crossing, improving
the security of land transportation and facilitating international transport by road and
rail in the OSCE region”, Part 2, Prague: 2010-05. Document available at:
<http://www.osce.org/eea/68121>. [cit. 2012-11-03].
- 35 -
This document deals with the situation of the transport sector in the region of Central Asia. It is
mentioned a basic overview of transport challenges. One part deals with the accession status of
the Central Asian republics to international treaties and UNECE conventions. Basic information
about transport infrastructure as well as about traffic is mentioned. Second and the main part of
this document deals with state-of-the-art initiatives connected to the transport sector in this region. A list of projects realized to support the freight transport is published there. There are
mentioned following programs: CAREC, TRACECA, EurAsEC, UNECE and UNESCAP projects, SPECA, BOMCA, USAID as well as IRU initiatives. This material is able to provide a good
information base about activities being realized in the region of Central Asia.
13. Kennedy, Tom: Establishment of Modern Logistics Centres in Central Asia. Published:
2009-10-12. Presentation available at: <http://www.osce.org/eea/39691>.[cit. 2012-1103].
This presentation points out the problem of difficult and long border crossing-times. Furthermore, high costs for transport are mentioned next to complicated administration and possible
corruption. It is also mentioned one important fact that logistic centres in Central Asia can combine more functions (from administrative over custom services and storage to combination of
functions like consolidation and distribution functions by major cities). Following evaluation process is introduced:
1. Candidate projects identified with beneficiaries
2. Apply selection criteria for prioritization
3. Perform feasibility studies for selected candidate projects
4. Evaluate potential for private sector participation
5. Rank by study results
Next weights of criterions are recommended to be used for projects of logistic centres situated
in the region of Central Asia:
Location 20 %; High Traffic Potential 20 %; Attractiveness to Stakeholders 20 %; Stakeholder
Commitment 15 %; Project Status 10 %; Positive Social Impact 5 %; No Adverse Environmental
5 %; No Serious Legal factors 5 %.
These principles are seen as very useful to be used also in the frame of the FLAVIA project.
There are also introduced proposals of location of logistic centres in Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan,
Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan.
14. TRACECA Regional Transport project. International Logistics Centres/Nodes Network
in Central Asia in the Republic of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyz Republic, Republic of Tajikistan,
Republic of Uzbekistan and the Republic of Turkmenistan EUROPEAID/125727/C/SER/Multi - Task C: Feasibility Study – Kyrgyzstan Available at:
<http://www.logisticsec.kz/images/file/final_FS_OSH_eng.pdf> >.[cit. 2012-11-03].
- 36 -
Project “TRACECA Regional Transport project” (duration 2009 – 2010) elaborated supporting
measures to support international trade and to facilitate the movement of goods along the
TRACECA corridor through improving logistics capabilities, interoperability and multimodal
transport. Project outputs are: analysis of TRACECA logistic network and the related operation
of transport and logistics within the network; identification, ranking and promotion of logistics
centres’ projects as well as feasibility studies of the selected projects.
The following activities were carried out during the project:
a) Evaluation of traffic flows and assessment of the effectiveness of the transport and logistics network in the beneficiary countries;
b) Identification of needed improvements to the logistics network through the improvement/new construction of logistics centres, with emphasis on generating strong support
from the private sector,
c) Using multi-criteria analysis, develop a list of potentially viable candidate projects, undertaking economic, technical and financial feasibility studies.
Conclusion for scientific studies
A various number of projects, case studies and other informational sources could be obtained
which deal with the strengthening of the transport conditions along the TRACECA corridor.
Some sources are oriented on multilateral problems; this comprises a need of improvement
regarding the transport infrastructure, some problems in legislation and its unification (simplifying of transport conditions) etc. Here especially, time-consuming border crossings and the need
for modernizing and development of the infrastructure have to be pointed out as major fields of
activities.
Another field of research pursues more spatial planning oriented approaches. This comprises
the development of criteria for the planning of new infrastructure projects (e.g. how and where
new logistic centres should be located). This approach gets along well with the circumstance
that the transport network is only developed insufficiently. The planners have a relatively high
scope of planning and can construct a quasi-optimal transport network.
The analysed studies concentrate mainly on the improvement of the national transport infrastructure. Partly, the bilateral relations were analysed, in the first place the organisational and
administrative conditions at the borders. It can be expected that further projects are focussing
on a more multilateral level. An improved cooperation between the countries and standardised
processes will lead to a transport system which can fulfil transnational demands in the future
(main focus: transnational supply chains). A transport potential along the TRACECA corridor is
recognizable. But two factors might antagonize this potential: the competition of other routes
connecting Europe and China (Trans-Siberian and a corridor known as Central) and the weak
utilization of the corridor presently.
- 37 -
4.4 Existing barriers for intermodal transports
In the tables below the existing technical, administrative, organisational and interdisciplinary
barriers and obstacles were identified. For this analysis selected results from the FLAVIA report
3.2.4 “Barriers to overcome TRACECA and Black Sea countries” are the basis whereupon only
the 11 barriers categorized with high importance respectively critical were used. Beside the description of the barriers the tables also provide information which corresponding aspects hinder
the intermodal transport.
•
Administrative barriers
Barrier
Description
Corruption and
mismanagement
Misappropriation of transport-relevant finance
and government resources, corruption, wastage,
the lack of economic and political transparency
and the mismanagement of financial institutions
related to transport
Licenses
(rail,
IWW)
This barrier includes aspects like access to infrastructure, implementation of EU directives
(open access to the network), complexity of
homologating rolling stock (only rail), time for
licensing, complexity of licensing and for getting
a driver licence, power of the independent inspection authorities, captain's certificate of competency
Customs clearance can be a maze of unfamiliar
processes and documentation. Almost every
country outside of the EU has different policies,
and these policies can vary substantially, for
example from port to port, depending on the
volume of packages requiring clearance on any
particular day depending on the package shipment method, depending on the package origin,
depending on the package, weight, shape, packing, size, profile, depending on the paperwork
accompanying the shipment, etc.
Exchange rate risk occurs due to the uncertainty
in the future value of a currency and is best described as the risk that a business' operations or
an investment's value will be affected by changes in exchange rates.
Customs
clearance
Exchange
rate risks
Consequences for the intermodal
transport
Corruption is inimical to long term and
sustainable development of the
transport sector and especially for intermodal transport in regard to funding
of infrastructure (rail tracks, terminals,
etc.), new processes and the creation of
a fair legal transport framework (advantages for intermodal services)
Competitive disadvantages for intermodal transports - especially for rail because of long waiting times, additional
costs, complex procedures, unclear
responsibilities, a lack of planning reliability etc.
Customs formalities like certificates,
import/export permits, inspection of
goods, payment of duties and taxes etc.
can be problematic for intermodal
transport. First of all an efficient customs
administration is necessary to ensure
efficient feeder operations. Additionally
security measures are added to the
economic issues. In short, over the last
years complicated and time consuming
procedures have increased.
The impact of foreign exchange rate
uncertainty (fluctuations) and the corresponding costs (converting the home
currency into numerous other currencies) hinder intermodal cross-border
solutions to be competitive, projectable
and transparent.
Table 16: Most significant administrative barriers within the TRACECA corridor
Source: www.flavia-online.eu, Report 3.2.3, 3.2.4
- 38 -
•
Technical barriers
Barrier
Description
Consequences for the intermodal transport
Transport
quality rail
Transport quality is the level of
provided service. To be competitive
rail transport needs an EU-wide
cross-border network of different
high quality rail freight services.
The actual aversion of the logistics
service providers and shippers to
rail transport is mainly due to reliability and quality problems.
Lack of
innovation
(rail)
Changes through innovation have
been most obvious in rail transport
when looking at rolling stock, in the
field of signalling and train control
(e.g. ETCS, solid state interlocking,
audio frequency track circuits etc.)
and in telecommunications (e.g.
GSM-R). However regarding optimizing and/or speed up rail operations and transhipment technology
is much more difficult to observe
similar levels of progress.
Actually the transport quality rail is one of the most
important issues/problems for the competitiveness of
intermodal solutions:
• Lack of minimum quality clauses and commitments in contracts between railway undertakings
and their customers
• Lack of integrated information and communication systems hinders intermodal solutions
• The lack of quality and reliability assurance for
freight services, particularly for international services has a negative impact on the attractiveness of rail transport and as a consequence is
still one of the major reasons why the market
share of intermodal solutions is stagnating or
steadily declining.
• The actual process of opening up the European
rail freight market is too slow to make intermodal
transport more attractive in the short run.
• Interoperability issues
• Important issues to be considered in operational
management
programmes are Co-, Inter- and Multimodal
freight transportation
services and the explicit role of rail within such
services to be rightly construed and understood
• Low numbers and no dense network of terminals
in the TRECECA / Black Sea region
• Capacity of rail infrastructure is assessed as a
high obstacle because in many countries the infrastructure does not reflect the needs of transportation network. Hence – usage of multimodal
transports could have only supportive role in organization of overall transportation solution.
The lack of successful innovations is hindering intermodal solutions in various ways.
• Concerning the user requirements, the costs of
the innovations are perceived as high. This
probably is one of the major barriers to the successful adoption of the innovations in the rail
transhipment market. In this market, costs are
very important and cannot always be recovered
through charging higher prices.
• Involved stakeholders: The user of the innovation is the terminal operator and the innovation
must meet his criteria whereby the actual user is
the rail transport company (and ultimately the
shipper of the freight).
• European-wide insertion of the automatic pull
clutch (Z-AK)
- 39 -
Barrier
Description
Waiting
time at
borders
Crossing borders is the biggest
source of delays, because European railways involve different voltage
systems, different signaling systems, and different rules on permissible loads, different safety and
working practices. Railways could
be safer, less polluting and more
suitable than trucks for transporting
large quantities of goods over long
distances, but Europe's actual problem is that its freight services were
still designed to serve domestic
markets.
Realization of
ERMTS
(rail)
In rail transport Europe's problem is
that its freight services were designed to serve domestic markets.
In other words: the European dimension is still missing.
The two main components of European Railway Traffic Management
System (ERTMS) are the European
Train Control System (ETCS), a
standard for in-cab train control,
and GSM-R, the GSM mobile
communications standard for railway operations. Also, there is an
agreement on a common certification system for train drivers and
harmonizing safety rules dedicated
to freight transportation services
• For intermodal freight transport the field of innovation includes factors such as extended service
life, low maintenance, availability and capacity
for increased speeds and axle loads
At international level, where intermodal services
require border-crossing, in terms of technically harmonized networks (i.e., infrastructure) the knack of
the game is seen in delicate border-crossing negotiations and strict operations using “one locomotive /
one train brigade”, to the extent possible.
• That means that Europe will need common/synchronized scheduling systems for both
rolling stock and train crews, which would guide
and monitor the operation over enlarged span,
but over the territory of one country only.
• Rail tracks in former soviet countries are wider
than those in the rest of Europe and locomotives
have to be changed for different networks.
• The European Train Control System (ETCS),
which is a one of components in the European
Railway Traffic Management System (ERTMS) –
is intended to guarantee a common standard
that enables trains to cross national borders and
enhances safety, but is implemented differently
per nation and very slowly. (See also barrier realization of ERMTS)
European Commission wants technical harmonization (to ensure no technical obstacles) and open
market (to ensure competitive environment for efficient operation and development). The implementation of ERMTS is very important for intermodal
transport, actual:
• We are still in the first phase of implementing
ERMTS, most of the ERMTS-adopted infrastructure is still tested and the sections are very short.
• Nearly every country is implementing ERMTS
with different technical equipment and systems
• The European rail management system is far
away from completion and the therefore the still
exiting national systems in the short and medium
run a barrier for intermodal transport
Table 17: Most significant technical barriers within the TRACECA corridor
•
Organisational barriers
Barrier
Description
Organiza-
No defined interfaces between the EU-
Because of the organizational status quo in-
- 40 -
tional effort
/ aspects
systems and framework and the
TRACECA / Black Sea countries.
Many railway networks are nationally
owned so it is inevitable that national
borders are often also railway borders;
inward-looking policies by both governments and railways have often
hindered the development of international rail corridors. The main problems
are customs and other border procedures, information flow, driver change,
incompatible train inspections, lack of
transit management by the governments.
termodal transport suffers by:
• Extremely high organizational efforts and
aspects needed to organize a multimodal
transport
• No costs benefits in comparison to road
transportation
• Lower flexibility in organization of processes (which is very important with high demanding FMCG Customers; i.e. global retailers chains)
• Difficulties to assure quality aspects; e.g.
on-time performance
Table 18: Most significant organisational barriers within the TRACECA corridor
•
Transport-accompanied barriers
Barrier
Description
General
transport
safety
Safety of transport services vary considerably and minimum standards of
quality are not yet available.
Theft of
goods
The Government in the TRACECA /
Black Sea area have to develop a
better regulatory environment by introducing new laws and regulations and
by strengthening the existing enforcement mechanisms. Implementation
programs should be devised to facilitate the introduction of these new laws
and regulations.
Theft of goods during the transport and
transhipment process.
From an intermodal point of view the availability, credibility and reliability of transport operators is very important. To secure the safety of
goods:
• Transport facilities for materials and persons should comply with national or international safety regulations and good engineering practice as regards design, construction and operation.
• Transport equipment should be inspected
and tested by a qualified specialist and
certified by the competent authorities.
In IWW and rail transport import and export
from and to TRAECA and Black Sea countries
often cargo is stolen. As a consequence shippers and/or logistic service providers a priori
decide against intermodal transport or shift
back to road transport.
Table 19: Most significant horizontal barriers within the TRACECA corridor
The findings of WP 3.2.4 were also compared with the outcomes of the project “International
Logistics Centres/Nodes Network Central Asia 3. This project also analysed within their research
work existing barriers, respectively cross border operations in the TRACECA corridor.
The main findings of this project can be summarized as the following 4:
3
http://www.logisticsec.kz/en/reports/project-reports/index.htm
- 41 -
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Waiting time and costs for crossing the borders between this countries are still a huge
problem
Mutual trust between these countries is still not developed
Damages, deterioration, shortage of the goods during reloading works;
The lack of harmonization of boundary and customs procedures
long registration times required for customs, veterinary, sanitary and other documents
Opening of customs seals, without drawing up of certificates of opening
Insufficient quantity of railway platforms for moving of containers
Low level of use of modern information-logistics and computing means
A considerable quantity of required documents
Necessity of filling at the border of customs documents (including documents of the
control of delivery) by using information directly from shipping documents
Bureaucracy, corruption
Many different regulatory authorities; consolidation of all procedures in fewer agencies
would speed the border crossing process.
To sum up, the results of both projects FLAVIA and the International Logistics Centres/Nodes
Network Central Asia, highlight in many cases the same existing barriers for the region.
4
http://www.logisticsec.kz/images/file/Task_A_Report_Revised_final_version.pdf
- 42 -
5 Conclusions
The consideration of the TRACECA corridor regarding intermodal plans results in a heterogeneous picture. Besides planned investment projects along the corridor, transport operators performing within the corridor have been analysed. Furthermore studies and scientific papers about
the region have been described. Finally, present barriers along the corridor have been presented. The gathered data and information show that the TRACECA corridor has large development
potentials. But it is still a long way to be an efficient trade and transport corridor. Extending and
modernizing the infrastructure is not enough to attract market actors. Stable trade and transport
relations are accompanied by various flanking processes which also have to be considered and
fulfilled. Figure 18 tries to assemble indicators which influence the performance of trade and
transport. The figure makes no claims of being complete due to the complexity of the issue.
Figure 18: technical, economic and social factors influencing trade and transport
Concluding for the TRACECA corridor, there are advantages and disadvantages regarding the
economic, social and ecological framework. Obviously it is not satisfying for shippers to find just
a modernized transport infrastructure. Many other factors play a role which influences the behavior of the market actors. Referring to the figure above advantages and disadvantages are
summarized in the following.
- 43 -
Advantages:
•
High and diversified raw materials resources
•
Emerging markets in future (huge economic growth potential)
•
Increasing transport infrastructure modernization through growing investments
•
Seamless connection of the corridor with the TEN-T network
•
Trimodal access
•
Growing economic interdependencies with the EU member states
•
Intergovernmental Commission (IGC) TRACECA as platform for cooperation with the EU
•
Huge distances in the eastern part of the corridor are suitable for rail freight transports
•
Relatively high scope for spatial planning approaches
Disadvantages:
•
Unstable political environment
•
Still in-efficient and non-appropriate institutional structures
•
Sparsely spread intermodal facilities for container transshipment, concerns especially
the eastern part of the corridor and the inland
•
Long-lasting customs clearance
•
Language and cultural barriers
•
Corruption and mismanagement
•
Currently increasing road freight transports to the disadvantage of the rail
•
Unfavorable landscape due to deserts and the high mountain character
•
Missing links between the countries, concerns especially the eastern countries
•
Safety and security levels are far away from the European standards
Especially within organisational and administrative issues, a lot of interferences could be identified. Bureaucracy, corruption involvement, establishment of mutual trust, etc. could be identified
as the main existing problems in this corridor, hindering efficient transportation flows. Therefore
it is essential, especially for governmental and public authorities to overcome these barriers as
they have the strongest influence on the mentioned administrative and organisational obstacles.
Furthermore, the facilitation of processes and documents needed when crossing the border
through e.g. electronically standard developments and introduction of modern logistics tools is
main potential area for emphasis in future. Moreover the strong concentration on technical development and standards is essential too. It is central, that technological harmonization is established in all of the relevant borders between FLAVIA Corridor and TRACECA/Black Sea region
on a common technological strategy plan, as it serves as the main prerequisite supporting rail
and inland waterway transportation.
- 44 -
The focus of the done and on-going research projects aims on the analysis of current obstacles
which hinder the transport of goods along the TRACECA corridor. The major action fields are:
•
•
•
•
•
Analyzing cross-border procedures
Standardizing transport processes and documents
Identifying new locations for logistics centers/terminals to extend the transport network
with the help of spatial planning tools
Identifying missing railway segments
Planning of new intermodal block trains
Concluding, the present studies and projects concentrate majorly on technical (transport infrastructure), organizational (cross border procedure, block trains) and administrative (harmonisation of transport documents) aspects of the supply chain.
Up-coming projects should also focus primarily on multi-lateral issues. The TRACECA corridor
consists of 13 countries (including Turkmenistan). To be competitive in the future and to fulfill
transnational transport demands a harmonisation and standardisation within the corridor and
efficient relations to adjacent regions have to be established. The following research fields
should be addressed:
•
•
•
•
Studies regarding the logical interlinking of the TRACECA network with the TEN-T network
Development of seaport hinterland connections
Establishment of common security standards
Concepts to standardize cross-border procedures
Generally, a west-east decrease regarding the transport quality can be ascertained. While the
western part of the corridor has relatively well-developed structures the countries in the eastern
part are still poorly developed. Romania, Ukraine, Turkey, Georgia and Azerbaijan possess a
good infrastructural basis. Capable ports and terminals for intermodal services exist. Nevertheless, they still do not reach the West-European standard. Selective exceptions are the port of
Constanta, the port of Poti and the ports around Odessa.
Current investment plans show that the modernisation and extension of the infrastructure is encouraged. In a next step new regular transport services have to be established and offered.
Such developments have already started with the block train between Poti and Baku. Similar
services have to follow to be attractive and competitive for shippers. In the end only Moldavia
with its underdeveloped transport network drops out from this country group.
The other country group, representing the eastern part of the corridor, has not reached the
same quality level yet. This comprises Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Armenia. Those countries have a poorly developed infrastructure. The main aim
should be to close missing railway links between the countries and towards the west. But this
undertaking is hampered by the landscape profile and the small financial potential. On the other
side most of the countries have a direct border to China. Main effort should be to link with China
to establish a continuous land bridge from Asia to Europe.
- 45 -
List of tables
Table 1: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Armenia .................................................... 9
Table 2: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Azerbaijan ............................................... 10
Table 3: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Bulgaria................................................... 11
Table 4: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Georgia ................................................... 12
Table 5: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Kazakhstan ............................................. 13
Table 6: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Kyrgyzstan .............................................. 14
Table 7: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Moldova .................................................. 15
Table 8: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Romania ................................................. 17
Table 9: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Russia ..................................................... 18
Table 10: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Tajikistan............................................... 19
Table 11: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Turkey ................................................... 20
Table 12: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Turkmenistan ........................................ 21
Table 13: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Ukraine ................................................. 22
Table 14: Overview of planned intermodal projects in Uzbekistan ............................................ 23
Table 15: Overview about existing operators in the TRACECA/ Black Sea countries ............... 29
Table 16: Most significant administrative barriers within the TRACECA corridor....................... 38
Table 17: Most significant technical barriers within the TRACECA corridor .............................. 40
Table 18: Most significant organisational barriers within the TRACECA corridor ...................... 41
Table 19: Most significant horizontal barriers within the TRACECA corridor ............................. 41
List of figures
Figure 1: FLAVIA corridor (green) and TRACECA and Black Sea Countries (purple) ................ 8
Figure 2: Map of Armenia including current transport investment projects ................................ 10
Figure 3: Map of Azerbaijan including current transport investment projects ............................ 11
Figure 4: Map of Bulgaria including current transport investment projects ................................ 12
Figure 5: Map of Georgia including current transport investment projects................................. 13
Figure 6: Map of Kazakhstan including current transport investment projects........................... 14
Figure 7: Map of Kyrgyzstan including current transport investment projects............................ 15
Figure 8: Map of Moldova including current transport investment projects ................................ 16
Figure 9: Map of Romania including current transport investment projects ............................... 17
Figure 10: Map of Russia including current transport investment projects ................................ 19
Figure 11: Map of Tajikistan including current transport investment projects ............................ 20
Figure 12: Map of Turkey including current transport investment projects ................................ 21
Figure 13: Map of Turkmenistan including current transport investment projects ...................... 22
Figure 14: Map of Ukraine including current transport investment projects ............................... 23
Figure 15: Map of Uzbekistan including current transport investment projects .......................... 24
Figure 16: Container transport by rail (x1000 TEU) in TRACECA countries, in 2007 ................ 30
Figure 17: Asian Railway network and its track gauges ............................................................ 31
Figure 18: technical, economic and social factors influencing trade and transport .................... 43
- 46 -

Analyses of existing intermodal plans

Transcription

Similar documents

Salahuddin Kasem Khan, President, Bangladesh Employers

Welcome to Weiss-Röhlig - Austrian Business Council

Read here more about our excellent logistics services. - Weiss

WERC Warehouse Employee Survey

Schneider Intermodal

fashion logistics - Logwin Logistics

Phoenix Logistics Center

yobel scm

The Suez Canal Area Development Project