FACILITATION OF INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY TRANSPORT IN ASIA. Vasile N. Olievschi Railway Specialist

Transcription

1 FACILITATION OF INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY TRANSPORT IN ASIA Vasile N. Olievschi Railway Specialist Astana December 20-21,

2 MAIN IDEAS Asian railways great potential to become major international carrier Railways from isolated national networks to interoperable connected network The comprehensive approach to railways interoperability Border crossing and levels of interoperability Common Parameters for Interoperability Considerations on the Way Forward 2

3 ASIAN RAILWAYS GREAT POTENTIAL TO BECOME MAJOR INTERNATIONAL CARRIER 3

4 Length of Railway Lines [km] Russian Federation, 85,266, 8% Middle East, 5,253, 1% Asia, 232,675, 23% Africa, 50,959, 5% America, 371,114, 37% Europe, 253,161, 25% Australia, 8,615, 1% MORE THAN 1 MILLION KM OF TRACK IN THE WHOLE WORLD 4

5 Volume of Freight [Billions ton-km] Russian Federation, 2,299, 24% Africa, 159, 2% Europe, 558, 6% Asia, 3,359, 35% America, 3,253, 33% 5

6 Volume of Passengers [Billion pass-km] Russian Federation, 129, 4% Africa, 63, 2% Europe, 471, 15% Asia, 2,379, 78% America, 22, 1% 6

7 Freight Railway Traffic Evolution 171% 154% 150% 132% 100% 122% Europe & Russia Africa America Asia WORLD Average

8 Passenger Rail Traffic Evolution 192% 187% 162% 100% 105% 95% Europe & Russia Africa America Asia WORLD Average 8

9 Traffic Density by Regions [traffic units/km] Asia 24,659,976 World Average 12,671,401 America Australia Africa Europe Middle East 8,822,739 6,923,854 4,360,270 4,066,325 1,900,057 9

10 Railways Labor Productivity by Country [Traffic Units / Staff] 14,203,199 USA South-Africa 6,220,375 Kazakhstan Russian Federation Japan China (Pop. Rep. Of) India France Germany 3,232,831 2,946,334 1,750,121 1,540,384 1,367, , ,639 10

11 CONCLUSIONS ON STATISTICS Some of the most important railways in the world are in Asia Railways are a reliable component of the domestic transportation system in some Asian countries The long distances of transport specific for international markets and higher volumes to be moved with lower impact to the environment are the strong points in favor of railways In spite of these positive premises, the Asian railways are less successful on grabbing significant share of the international transport market 11

12 WHAT TO DO? Becoming a competitive player in the international market is not easy for railways, and will certainly not be automatic To become an attractive option for shifting part of the existing volumes of traffic or for taking the new volumes of traffic generated by their countries, railways must provide quality transport services (price, speed, availability, punctuality, etc.) superior to those offered by the competition The study does not address all aspects of railway competitiveness; it tries to define the ways to make the Asian railways work better together for achieving higher interoperability 12

13 RAILWAYS FROM ISOLATED NATIONAL NETWORKS TO INTEROPERABLE CONNECTED NETWORK 13

14 HISTORICAL RAILWAYS DEVELOPED INDEPENDENTLY OF EACH OTHER Railway companies have been created in a relatively short period of time in many countries, starting with the 19 th century Integrated and self-regulated entities in charge of the construction and maintenance of their infrastructure and with the provision of the transport services It generated in each country specific technical standards, operating rules, commercial contracts or institutional frameworks As the business of the railway companies was limited for many years to their domestic markets, they developed their assets and their company culture independently of each other Dominant position on the market 14

15 CHANGES IN MARKET CONDITIONS Extraordinary increase of the efficiency of other modes New economic development pattern required more and more trade between different countries or regions of the world Road, sea and air transport allow one operator to transport from origin to destination More sophisticated customers with requirements of transport beyond the national borders New market conditions put many of the world s railways under a strong pressure to change

16 THE NEED TO CHANGE FROM self-regulated companies with rigid rules, developed as isolated national transport networks TO flexible companies, able to operate on open to competition market Railways had to find ways to interconnect their business to deliver flawless services from origin to destination, regardless of how many companies are involved

17 WORKING TOGETHER TO BETTER SERVE THE CUSTOMERS Interoperability means the ability of a rail system to allow the safe and uninterrupted movement of trains which accomplish the required levels of performance for these lines. This ability depends on all the regulatory, technical and operational conditions which must be met in order to satisfy the essential requirements The EU Directive 2008/57/EC

18 COOPERATION IS THE KEY FOR THE INTERNATIONAL COMPETITIVENESS OF RAILWAYS 18

19 INTEROPERABILITY FOR COMPETITIVENESS The competitiveness of the international railway transport is a matter of active participation of all railways along a route to address the following three major factors: TIME: duration of transport from origin to destination, SERVICE: the quality of services, single contact with customers, information on the position of the expedition and the guarantee of the time of arrival at the destination TARIFF: the cost of transportation services from origin to destination The quality of operation of international traffic along a certain route is defined by the weakest link of the chain 19

20 It is not only about technical aspects!!! THE COMPREHENSIVE APPROACH TO RAILWAYS INTEROPERABILITY 20

21 COMPONENTS OF RAILWAY INTEROPERBILITY (1) Operational Interoperability Technical Interoperability Legal Interoperability LEGAL: unified contractual obligations vis-á-vis customers from origin to destination TECHNICAL: common technical parameters of railways infrastructure and rolling stock OPERATIONAL: harmonized operation practice over an entire international route 21

22 COMPONENTS OF RAILWAY INTEROPERBILITY (2) Operational Interoperability Technical Interoperability Legal Interoperability The three components are tightly interconnected: First, the unified legal framework in the relationship with the customers is essential, regardless of the level of technical and operational interoperability Second, achieving a certain technical interoperability through large investments is not justified if this is not capitalized in achieving appropriate operational interoperability Third, operational interoperability is meaningless if does not target competitiveness of railways on the market 22

23 GOVERNMENTS MUST TAKE THE LEAD OF THE PROCESS Implementing harmonized legal framework for domestic rail transport and uniform legal framework for international rail transport Supporting the investments in railway infrastructure to enhance technical interoperability Streamlining border crossing procedures to facilitate international traffic 23

24 BORDER CROSSING AND LEVELS OF INTEROPERABILITY 24

25 THE BORDERS ARE THE FRACTURE POINTS OF TRANSPORT The ideal situation is when the train continue the trip from origin to destination over the borders on the corridor In real life this is in most cases not achievable and different levels of interoperability could be implemented along an international route depending on the local conditions Countries must work together to implement the highest possible level of interoperability, balancing targeted competitiveness with realistic costs 25

26 DEPENDING ON TECHNICAL INTEROPERABILITY LEVEL A - Wagons of the train cannot cross the border. The train will be recomposed with new wagons after the transshipment of the freight. The new train will continue the trip on the entry railway in a new composition LEVEL B - Wagons of the train can cross the border and continue the route. This requires compatibility between the two neighboring countries for a number of elements of the railway infrastructure and for the wagons LEVEL C - Wagons and locomotive of the train can cross the border and continue the route. This is the highest level of technical interoperability and requires additional compatibilities between the two railways 26

27 DEPENDING ON OPERATIONAL INTEROPERABILITY MODE 1 : the two neighboring border stations of the exit railway and the entry railway develop procedures separately, first in the exit border and then in the entry border MODE 2 : the two neighboring countries agree to designate one single common border station, where the procedures of the authorities of both countries take place in parallel MODE 3 : the two neighboring countries use a common procedures for border crossing without the train stopping; the border crossing activities are organized in major stations agreed upon by the two neighboring states, in parallel with the operational procedures for traffic management. 27

28 LEVELS OF INTEROPERABILITY (1) Legal Technical Operational No legal framework in place Irrelevant Irrelevant Railway 1 Railway 2 STOP BORDER Country 1 STOP BORDER Country 2 Harmonized legal environment between the two railways does not exist and international trains cannot be operated. Technical and operational harmonization are irrelevant in this case. 28

29 LEVELS OF INTEROPERABILITY (2) Legal Technical Operational Legal framework in place LEVEL A (wagons cannot cross) Mode 1 (dual border) or MODE 2 (single border) Transshipment Railway 1 STOP BORDER Railway 2 Countries 1 & 2 The train stops at the common border station agreed upon by the two neighboring countries. The wagons of the exit railway cannot operate on the network of entry railway. The freight is reloaded in the wagons of the entry railway and a new train with a locomotive from entry railway is composed. Border crossing procedures are developed by the authorities of the two states in parallel or consecutively. 29

30 LEVELS OF INTEROPERABILITY (3) Legal Technical Operational Legal framework in place LEVEL B (wagons can cross with new boogies) Mode 1 (dual border) or MODE 2 (single border) Bogie Change Railway 1 Railway 2 STOP BORDER Countries 1 & 2 Harmonized legal environment between the two railways is in place. The train stops at the common border station agreed upon by the two neighboring countries. The track gauge of the two railways is different and bogie change is necessary at the border station. The locomotive of the entry railway will replace the locomotive of the exit railway. Border crossing procedures are developed by the authorities of the two states in parallel or consecutively. 30

31 LEVELS OF INTEROPERABILITY (4) Legal Technical Operational Legal framework in place LEVEL B (wagons can cross) MODE 1 (dual border) Railway 1 Railway 2 STOP BORDER Country 1 STOP BORDER Country 2 Harmonized legal environment between the two railways is in place. The train stops consecutively at the border stations of each country for border crossing procedures. The technical parameters of the two railways allow only wagons to continue the route. Locomotive of the entry railway will replace the locomotive of the exit railway. 31

32 LEVELS OF INTEROPERABILITY (5) Legal Technical Operational Legal framework in place LEVEL B (wagons can cross) MODE 2 (single border) Railway 1 Railway 2 COMMON STOP BORDER Countries 1 & 2 Harmonized legal environment between the two railways is in place. The train stops at the common border station agreed upon by the two neighboring countries. The technical parameters of the two railways allow the wagons to continue the route. The locomotive of the entry railway will replace the locomotive of the exit railway. Border crossing procedures are developed in parallel by the authorities of the two states in one single point. 32

33 LEVELS OF INTEROPERABILITY (6) Legal Technical Operational Legal framework in place LEVEL C (wagons & locomotive can cross) MODE 1 (no stop at border) Railway 1 Railway 2 NO STOP BORDER Countries 1 & 2 Harmonized legal environment between the two railways is in place. The technical parameters and operational rules are fully compatible. The train can continue smoothly the route without stopping at the border. 33

34 COMMON TECHNICAL PARAMETERS FOR INTEROPERABILITY 34

35 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Usually the most expensive component of the interoperability to be achieved; fundamental for the gradual reduction of the fragmentation of railway traffic There is always a solution to solve any existent technical incompatibilities (it is only a question of costs and time) The technical interoperability is not a goal by itself; it makes sense only if it facilitates a higher level of operational interoperability 35

36 CHALLENGES OF TECHNICAL INTEROPERABILITY (1) There are in place precise standards elaborated by international bodies like OSJD, UIC or AREMA which developed comprehensive technical leaflets for technical parameters of railways The issue is not the lack of standards, but to make the right choice of standards for a targeted performance of a route Bringing the existent Asian railways (232, 675 km of track representing 23% of the total railway length of the planet) on a common technical platform is a very complex issue 36

37 CHALLENGES OF TECHNICAL INTEROPERABILITY (2) Different track gauges are a reality in Asia and three successful railways have different gauges: Russia - 85,266 km of broad gauge track China - 66,989 km of standard gauge track India - 65,808 km of extra-broad gauge track Recommended principles concerning the common technical parameters for Asian railways: take into account the existence of several track gauges as an unchangeable element agree upon a set of technical parameters, essential across the region agree upon the values for harmonization of the technical parameters decide on synchronized gradual implementation along the corridors 37

38 RECOMMENDED TECHNICAL PARAMETERS 38

39 LEVEL B (WAGON CAN CROSS BORDER) - INFRASTRUCTURE - PARAMETER TRACK GAUGE AXLE LOAD STRUCTURE GAUGE PASSING SIDING LENGTH PLATFORM LENGTH PLATFORM HEIGHT DEFINITION The distance between the inner faces of the two load-bearing rails forming the railway track and is usually measured in millimetres. Axle load indicates the maximum weight accepted on an axle of the railway vehicle circulating on infrastructure Defines the relevant dimensions of various components of infrastructure to ensure safe running of the trains (ex: minimum height and width of tunnels and bridges, minimum distance to railway platforms, buildings, etc.) The passing siding (passing loop or crossing loop) is a place on a single railway line where trains circulating in opposite directions can pass each other, or higher priority trains pass over slower trains circulating in the same direction The structure built along rail tracks in a railway station where passengers can get on or can get off the train The elevation of a railway platform above top of rail track 39

40 LEVEL B (WAGON CAN CROSS BORDER) - ROLLING STOCK - PARAMETER LOADING GAUGE MAXIMUM TRAIN LENGTH COUPLING SYSTEM BRAKE GEAR FLOOR HEIGHT OF COACHES RAIL / WHEEL INTERFACE ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS WATER & WASTE DEFINITION Defines the dimensions of height and width which must not be exceeded by a rail vehicle or its load to not collide with bridges, tunnels and other lineside structures The longest possible trains allowed by the passing loop length The mechanism designed for connecting vehicles in a train The equipment used on the wagons coupled in a train to enable deceleration, control acceleration (downhill) or to keep wagons standing when parked Must be compatible with the platform height to allow the safe access of passengers for boarding and disembarking The wheel profiles must be compatible with the rail arrangements (rail profile, its inclination to the vertical, switches and crossings etc.) The passenger coaches need compatibility on lightning system, air conditioning, shore supply connection, etc. Passenger fleet must have access to compatible equipment and systems for water and waste connections throughout various countries along the route 40

41 LEVEL C (WAG & LOCO CROSS BORDER) - INFRASTRUCTURE - PARAMETER SIGNALING TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT TELECOMMUNICATIONS TRACTION SYSTEM DEFINITION Various systems system used to direct railway traffic and keep trains clear of each other at all times Various methods to control the railway traffic, as well as to ensure overall supervision of the railway operations Defines the means of communications railway traffic management (mainly between traffic managers, station agents and locomotive drivers) Defines the type of engine that provides the motive power for a train (mainly Diesel or Electric) 41

42 LEVEL C (WAG & LOCO CROSS BORDER) - ROLLING STOCK - PARAMETER TYPE OF LOCOMOTIVE LOCOMOTIVE TRACTION POWER MAXIMUM SPEED DEFINITION Diesel or Electric traction (type of electric traction, DC or AC) The power of the engine used for propulsion of the locomotive (horsepower or kilowatts) Speed of vehicles (wagons, coaches or locomotives) measured in km/h 42

43 COMMON OPERATIONAL PARAMETERS 43

44 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS Operational interoperability is less costly than technical interoperability, but it is highly dependent on the existing level of technical interoperability The harmonization of activities of other authorities which interfere in the operation of the international trains is necessary (customs, immigration, phytosanitary, etc.) Requires strong political willingness and synchronized efforts of all involved countries to work together Any missing link will make useless all investments for the technical interoperability 44

45 Common Operational Parameters The common operational parameters can be grouped in two categories: Operational interoperability of the railways based on compatible operating rules (train tonnage, train composition, speed of train, management of traffic, maintenance rules for assets, etc.), Operational interoperability of other entities involved in the border crossing activities based on commonly agreed upon procedures. 45

46 CUMULATIVE APPROACH FOR RAILWAY OPERATING RULES LEVEL OF INTEROPERABILITY SET OF RULES LEVEL A: WAGONS CANNOT CROSS THE BORDER SET OF RULES FOR LEVEL A LEVEL B: WAGONS CAN CROSS THE BORDER SET OF RULES FOR LEVEL A SET OF RULES FOR LEVEL B LEVEL C: WAGONS & LOCOMOTIVE CAN CROSS THE BORDER SET OF RULES FOR LEVEL A SET OF RULES FOR LEVEL B SET OF RULES FOR LEVEL C 46

47 LEVEL A - WAGONS CANNOT CROSS THE BORDER RAILWAY OPERATING RULES The train is recomposed at the border; minimum rules for operational interoperability Harmonized international train timetables Exchange of information between the railways along the corridor for customer information Development of a system of presenting the customers a single tariff for a specific international expedition from origin to destination Harmonization of information system for passengers on stations opened for international traffic (pictograms, luggage rooms and lockers, information booths, ticketing desks, washrooms, facilities for passengers with disabilities, etc.) 47

48 LEVEL B - WAGONS CAN CROSS THE BORDER RAILWAY OPERATING RULES (additional to Level A) Minimum set of harmonized operating rules between two neighboring railways : Train composition Maintenance of wagons Breakdowns of wagons Handling and inspection of hazardous and perishable goods 48

49 LEVEL C - WAGONS & LOCOS CAN CROSS THE BORDER RAILWAY OPERATING RULES (additional to Levels A and B) The continuation of the trip from the exit railway to the entry railway via an unchanged train (same wagons and same locomotive) requires harmonization of the following: Management of traffic, including rules for communication between drivers and traffic control centers, language of communication Locomotive drivers allowed to operate on track of different railways Locomotive fueling and maintenance Criteria and procedures for certification for safety critical staff Unified system for training of drivers and other safety critical staff This level of interoperability is difficult to be achieved and requires advanced integration of operating rules among the railways along a corridor 49

50 HARMONIZED OPERATING RULES FOR OTHER ENTITIES OF THE STATES Probably, the most critical operational interoperability issues, as it is beyond the responsibility of railways Due to the political sensitiveness of activities related to border crossing, each country may adopt specific procedures not always harmonized with those in neighboring countries This goal can be achieved through regional and bilateral international agreements between various authorities of the states under the coordination of their governments 50

51 PARAMOUNT ROLE OF GOVERNMENTS Governments have major responsibilities in addressing the critical aspects of border crossing procedures: unified customs procedures moving customs clearance to take place at the departure and arrival points or at the main stations close to borders to decrease congestion and delay at the border, extending and harmonizing opening hours for the customs offices, use of scanners to inspect moving wagons, use of mutually recognized electronic seals 51

52 COMMON LEGAL ENVIRONMENT 52

53 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS The major challenge railways face concerning the legal aspects is the lack of a global unified regime to cover rail transport, as opposed to air or maritime transport The legal issues are to be addressed in parallel, on two levels: at the national level in each country, and on a regional level 53

54 RECOMMENDED COMMON NATIONAL LEGAL PRINCIPLES Legally compatible railway systems does not mean adopting a unique form of organization or structure of railway company(ies) Adopt a commercial approach to railways, including flexibility in setting up tariffs at least for freight and international expeditions Create a non-biased regulatory framework between road and rail transport systems (licensing, technical inspection, safety authorization, etc.) Promote gradually equivalent modes of financing the land transport infrastructures: road and rail Establish compatible safety standards for cross recognition of technical inspections of wagons at the border 54

55 COMMON LEGAL INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENT A uniform legal framework to define the relationships between railways and vis-à-vis customers, to provide international transport services (contractual obligations and liabilities) Two well-known international organizations have put in place two legal regimes: COTIF using the CIM consignment note in Europe, not accepted in Asia OSJD using the SMGS consignment note in Asia, not accepted in Europe Joining the existing international railway conventions is the only way to comprehensively address the legal issues of international rail transport 55

56 COTIF or OSJD? Any of these organizations defined uniform rules concerning: the obligation to the carrier to carry the goods for reward to the place of destination and to deliver them there to the consignee, unique consignment note to destination, payment and costs, loading and unloading responsibilities, delivery of goods at destination, liabilities for loss or damage of goods, settlement of accounts between carriers, liabilities in case of loss or damage of wagons 56

57 OSJD or COTIF? COTIF and OSJD cooperate tightly and common CIM/SMGS consignment note is currently agreed upon and in use; to put in place a single legal regime from the Atlantic to the Pacific More work is still needed to make OTIF and OSJD railway zones more coherent, convergent and interoperable, but the environment to develop the unique legal environment exists and the road ahead is clear Most of the Asian countries are already members of OSJD or COTIF and some of them are members of both organizations; There are still railways in 12 ESCAP countries which are not part of OSJD or OTIF All of these countries are strongly advised to join one entity, depending on their own interest in developing international ties 57

58 LAYERS OF INTEROPERABLE INTERNATIONAL LEGAL FRAMEWORK Bilateral / multilateral agreements / contracts among railways along the corridor Subsequent agreements between the neighboring railways Subsequent agreements between border police, customs, sanitary, phytosanitary Bilateral border crossing agreement between governments Membership to one of International Rail Conventions 58

59 ASSESSMENT OF THE CURRENT STATUS The study proposes tables for data collection along the international corridors as support for decisions and for keeping track of progress of improving interoperability: Table 1 Technical Parameters critical for interoperability Table 2 Railway Operational Parameters Table 3 Other State Entities Operational Parameters at border crossing The Tables are built as examples for selected international corridors, as follows: China Russia Belarus China Mongolia Russia - Belarus China Kazakhstan Russia - Belarus China Kazakhstan Azerbaijan Georgia Turkey China Kazakhstan Uzbekistan Turkmenistan-Azerbaijan Georgia Turkey India - Pakistan Iran Turkey Bulgaria 59

60 THE WAY FORWARD 60

61 THOUGHTS FOR FUTURE Set Up the Goals Develop Action Plans Measure the Results How to define and agree the common goals for all Asian railways to improve the interoperability? How to develop and gradually implement the programs for achieving the targeted interoperability? How to measure the progress achieved at a certain moment in time in order to make the necessary corrections? 61

62 AN EXAMPLE: EUROPEAN APPROACH (Strong Political Involvement) EU, as a political and economic organization including 28 member states, provide the common political will for defining common policies on railway corridors Inter-governmental Memoranda expressing the common willingness of countries to achieve a common set of goals for railway development, including interoperability Agreements between railway companies along the international corridors for putting in place the provisions of the signed Memoranda between governments Working Groups for each corridor created by the involved governments and railways to implement the provisions of the signed documents, using the expertise of COTIF, UIC, OSJD. 62

63 ASIA Political Support is Vital SCOPE Harmonization of transport policies between Asian countries Painful reforms in the transport sector Border crossing facilitation Management of large-scale transport investment programs GOALS Developing the Euro-Asian transit by rail Addressing the challenge of the land-lock countries Improving the environment for regional trade between the Asian countries. 63

64 Recent Positive Factors Creation of the Customs Union between the Russian Federation, Belarus and Kazakhstan, Accession of the Russian Federation, Tajikistan and Kazakhstan to WTO The start of One Belt One Road Initiative IMPROVE THE GENERAL POLITICAL-ECONOMIC CLIMATE ACROSS THE REGION 64

65 HOW TO HARMONIZE AGENDAS? SELECTED ASIAN CORRIDORS RUSSIA GERMANY POLAND BELARUS GEORGIA AZERBAIJAN KAZAKHSTAN MONGOLIA TURKEY IRAN UZBEKISTAN CHINA Trans-Siberian (with Variants) Central Asian (with Variants) Southern Asian Route South-East Asian Connections PAKISTAN INDIA Eastern Route Vietnam Cambodia Central Route Laos Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore Western Route Myanmar AGREEMENT ON COMMON GOALS FOR ALL ASIAN RAILWAYS AND VARIABLE SPEED IMPLEMENTATION ALONG SPECIFIC CORRIDORS ACCORDING WITH THE WILLINGNESS OF RAILWAYS ALONG EACH ROUTE 65

66 PROPOSED APPROACH FOR ASIAN RAILWAYS (1) UNESCAP - THE COMMON PLATFORM FOR INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY TRANSPORT AND INTEROPERABILITY POLICIES UNESCAP Resolution 71/7 on Adoption of Regional Cooperation Framework for the Facilitation of International Railway Transport is the tool to bring together the railways from all Asian countries to work for this purpose under the UNESCAP flag All railways no matter if they are members or not of UIC, OSJD, COTIF could participate to this program UNESCAP COULD PLAY ITS ROLE ACTING ON TWO LEVELS: Offering to the governments the platform for negotiation and signature of Memoranda for implementing common policies on specific aspects for enhancing international railway transport Acting as neutral secretariat for hosting reunions for the definition of specific action plans and for their implementation through the voluntary participation of the involved parties 66

67 PROPOSED APPROACH FOR ASIAN RAILWAYS (2) The governments and railways must be pro-active to promote their interests along corridors : Agree the long term goals for the development of international railway transport Agree and sign Memoranda stipulating the objectifs to be accomplished along international corridors Put in place Working Groups on corridors based on the common will of the countries along each route Agree specific Action Plans for each corridor Set up indicators to measure the progress of the works BEING COMPETITIVE ON INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORT IS A VERY CHALLENGING TASK WHICH REQUIRES COOPERATION OF COUNTRIES, ADAPTABILITY OF RAILWAYS TO THE MARKET AND CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT OF THE QUALITY OF TRANSPORT SERVICES 67

68 It is not the strongest that survives, nor the most intelligent... It is the one that is the most adaptable to change. Charles Darwin

69 Thank you for the kind attention! 69