A funding scheme supporting sustainable and efficient freight transport services Fields marked with are mandatory. A Respondent s profile Please provide information to help us build your profile as a respondent. In accordance with Regulation 45/2001, all personal data collected through this survey will be kept securely and will ultimately be destroyed. A.2 Please te that the questionnaire will be available for your full contribution only if your name, organisation (if you answer on behalf of an organisation or institution) and contact details are provided. If you choose t to provide your name, organisation and contact details, you still have the option of submitting a general comment (up to 2000 characters). However, if you choose to provide us with your name, organisation and contact details, you can still opt for your answers to remain anymous when results are published. Yes, I will provide my name and contact details No, I prefer to provide a general comment only A.3 First name Laura A.4 Last name Rozzo A.5 Organisation European Express Association A.6 Address Square de Meeus 35
A.7 City Brussels A.8 Country Austria Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Slovenia Spain Sweden Slovakia United Kingdom Other (please specify) A.10 Email address tec@euroexpress.org
A.12 Received contributions may be published on the Commission's website, with the identity of the contributor. Do you agree with your contribution being published under your name? My contribution may be published under the name indicated. My contribution may be published but should be kept anymous. I do t agree that my contribution be published at all. A.13 Are you answering as an individual or on behalf of an organisation or an institution? I am answering as an individual I am answering on behalf of an organisation or institutions (business organisation, NGO, public authority, etc.) A.14 If you are answering on behalf of an organisation: what type of organisation do you work for? Self-employed Private company (excluding SME) Public authority/administration Small or Medium Enterprise (SME) Industrial organisation Industry association or a chamber of commerce (national/regional/local) Research organisation/university Non-Governmental organisation EU institution Other (Please specify) A.16 If you are answering on behalf of an organisation: Which field of activity does best characterise your organisation? (Multiple answers possible) Road Rail Inland waterway Short sea shipping Intermodal transport Haulage Infrastructure management Developer of invative logistical solutions/systems Consulting/Research Policy maker/adviser Other (Please specify)
A.18 If answering as an individual, please provide your place of residence. If answering on behalf of a company/organisation/institution, please provide the country of your workplace. Austria Belgium Bulgaria Croatia Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Greece Hungary Ireland Italy Latvia Lithuania Luxembourg Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Slovenia Spain Sweden Slovakia United Kingdom Other (please specify) A.20 If answering on behalf of an organisation, please te that as part of the European Transparency Initiative, organisations are invited to use the register of interest representatives (http://europa.eu/transp arency-register/index_en.htm) to provide the European Commission and the public at large with information about their objectives, funding and structures. Please indicate if your organisation is registered in the Transparency Register of the European Commission. Yes No
A.21 Please enter your registration number in the Transparency Register (numbers only, without "-") 189470485183 B Obstacles to sustainable and efficient freight transport services in the EU transport market The transport market does t operate at optimal efficiency and is dominated by road transport, because of market failures which hamper the achievement of an efficient and sustainable transport system. We have pre-identified several problems, which may contribute to this issue: Low level of integration between modes Inefficient operations within modes (in terms of environment and cost - efficiency) Slow uptake of invations that can improve the efficiency of transport and logistical operations In the questions below you are asked to provide your on these problems and specific causes behind each of them. B.2 Do you have any comments to these problems? Do you see any other problems hindering sustainable and efficient freight transport? If so, what in your are the causes of these problems? By nature, members of the EEA take a transport mode neutral approach, i.e. they just use the appropriate (combination of) modes of transport to best serve their customers in function of, among others, the characteristics of the goods to be transported and the delivery time requirements. Modal shift solutions are limited. Due to the short transportation distance or poor service quality and/or inadequate rail infrastructures (e.g. r terminal with a regular service), it doesn t often make ecomically sense to switch to rail transport. A more efficient and sustainable supply chain will be achieved if each mode of transport improves the reliability and flexibility of its services and its sustainability. Transport policies should be designed in such a way that they enable each mode of transport to further develop on the basis of its own advantages; invation in one mode should t be curtailed because of perceived negative effects on ather mode, since one will need all modes to become more green and efficient to deliver the (increased) transport volumes of the future.
B.3 To what extent do you agree that the problems described above hinder sustainable and energy efficient freight transport? Low level of integration between modes Inefficient operations within modes Slow uptake of invations that can improve the efficiency of transport and logistical operations. Other problems described in the previous question There are pre-identified possible causes for each of the problems indicated above. Please indicate to what extent you consider them relevant.
B.5 To what extent do you consider relevant the causes identified for the problem of "Low level of integration between modes on the EU market"? Missing small scale multimodal infrastructure (e.g. cranes, loading platforms, cross docking stations, links to the transport network) Missing on-board interface equipment facilitating efficient transhipment of cargo between modes Low performance of n-road modes in terms of time and/or speed Low performance of n-road modes in terms of accessibility Low performance of n-road modes in terms of cost-efficiency Low performance of n-road modes in terms of reliability Low performance of n-road modes in terms of service availability Limited financial means to implement multimodal solutions Lack of kwledge on potential multimodal transport operations Higher management/administrative effort due to complexity of multimodal transport Limited level of trust when outsourcing transport services to logistic providers Limited level of trust when developing collaborative approaches in freight transport logistics Limited use of advanced logistics solutions (e.g. IT platforms, internal organisation methods and management systems optimising cargo flow between modes)
B.6 Do you have any comments to these causes or do you see any other relevant cause leading to the low level of integration between modes? Non-road modes can t be treated equally; therefore it is difficult to answer these questions. Short-sea shipping, maritime and aviation offer better service quality and accessibility in comparison to rail. Rail transport continues to be the mode which provides less service reliability and the more difficulties to integrate into a supply chain solution due to the infrastructure and the higher administrative effort. Moreover, multimodal solutions are, although the concept is considered as very interesting, time-consuming to develop. Transit times are mostly increasing, because we have to connect to additional switch points (t always close to our own infrastructure) which involve additional handling and driving times. B.7 To what extent do you consider relevant the causes identified for the problem of "Inefficient operations within individual modes in the EU market"? Low awareness of existing fleet management systems, operational practices (e.g. eco-driving), specialised equipment and techlogies improving efficiency of the operations Limited financial means to implement advanced solutions (specialised equipment, techlogies, operational practices, management systems etc.) Low acceptance of invation - confidence in invative solutions (e.g. limited kwledge on costs, reliability and operation) Specialised delivery mechanisms (e.g. just in time: JIT) and specialised productions patterns can reduce the load factor External costs (GHG emission, pollution, congestion, accidents, ise, infrastructure) are t or only partially internalised B.8 Do you have any comments to these causes or do you see any other relevant cause leading to inefficient operations within individual modes? Please see answer in B.6 - it is difficult to answer to questions applicable for all modes. But a clear system of earmarking provisions into the respective mode of transport needs to be secured before implementation.
B.9 To what extent do you consider relevant the causes identified for the problem of "Slow uptake of invation on the EU market"? Lack of awareness and information on (the potential) benefits of invation (both techlogical and organisational) Limited financial means to implement invation High capital intensiveness of invation, leading to lower cost-effectiveness of services Low acceptance of invation - confidence in invative solutions (due to e.g. limited kwledge on costs, reliability and operation) Business risk for the first mover Lock-in to existing techlogies (lack of available infrastructure, high investments already made on the existing techlogies etc.) B.10 Do you have any comments to these causes or do you see any other relevant cause leading to the slow uptake of invation on the EU market? C Experience gained from implementation of the Marco Polo programme In the period 2003-2013 the European Commission implemented the Marco Polo programme as an instrument to improve the environmental performance of freight transport services in the EU. The main objective of this programme was to reduce the amount of freight transported by road. The questions in this section concern this expired Marco Polo programme. C.2 Are you familiar with the Marco Polo programme? Yes No (skip the rest of this section)
C.3 Are you a beneficiary of the Marco Polo Programme? Yes No C.4 Which features of the Marco Polo programme you consider particularly important and useful? C.5 What in your are the most important shortcomings of the Marco Polo programme? The chief shortcoming of the current Marco Polo program is in its objective to favor one transport mode over ather. D Market needs and objectives of a funding scheme for freight transport services The Commission is considering implementing a new funding scheme for freight transport services in the context of the revised TEN-T guidelines ( Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013) and using the instruments provided by the Connecting Europe Facility ( Regulation (EU) No 1316/2013). Article 32 of the TEN-T guidelines sets out the main aspects of the scope for this approach. The funding scheme is envisaged to contribute to improvement of the efficiency and sustainability of freight transport in Europe. D.2 Do you think an intervention at EU level is needed to support actions which address the problems described above? Strongly needed Somewhat needed Not needed at all No D.3 Please explain your choice in the question above. If a new funding scheme for freight transport services is to be introduced, then the EEA strongly favors a scheme which i) does t aim for modal shift and ii) better takes into account the component of (CO2) efficiency in the supply chain. The framework should be flexible and be open to all modes of transport, including to exclusive road transport operation. It should offer a variety of options how to finance different actions in order to reduce the carbon footprint of the supply chain.
D.4 What do you consider to be in general the most effective financing method for supporting projects which address the problems described above in section "Obstacles to sustainable and efficient freight transport services in the EU transport market"? Please rate from 1 (very effective) to 5 (t effective at all) or. Grant/cash transfer (subsidy that does t have to be paid back) A loan with a low interest rate that has to be paid back Guarantees: if the project turns out to be t profitable, losses are (partially) compensated by the funding scheme Fiscal incentives Other/ combination of the above (please specify) D.5 Please specify "Other/combination of the above" if applicable The possibility to have a combination of different financing methods is better to tailor-make if needed, e.g. investment in assets requires other financing methods than telematics techlogy development. D.6 Please explain your choices in the question(s) above. Collaboration stimulated by incentives (either direct or via tax systems) will result in more positive business cases and individual (company) level. D.7 Which of the problems that hinder sustainable and efficient freight transport (described above) should be in the focus of the new funding scheme? Low level of integration between modes Inefficient operations within modes Slow uptake of invations that can improve the efficiency of transport and logistical operations Other problems (please specify)
D.9 To improve the sustainability and efficiency of transport, the funding scheme should provide co-financing to the following type of projects:
Invative and energy efficient equipment improving efficiency of the operations Transhipment techlogies Information services, operational practices and products improving efficiency of logistical processes (e.g. logistical planning systems, transport management systems, carbon footprint measurement systems, interface for telematics applications) Collaborative approaches to logistics (e.g. cargo bundling or other cooperation between transporters and/or shippers) Small scale infrastructure improving sustainability and efficiency of transport operations as well as facilitating integration between modes (e.g. crane, loading platform, cross docking station, missing links to the transport network) Large infrastructure elements are to be funded by other means (e.g. a relevant part of the new TEN-T programme targeting transport infrastructure) Modal shift to less polluting modes by shippers/transport operators/logistic service providers Transport avoidance (invative solutions to e.g. increase loading factor, reduce product or packaging volumes, reduce transport distances, reduce amount of empty runs, reduce (waste) flows) Multimodal integrated projects Dedicated training activities (e.g. in field of efficient supply chain management, logistics operations, other transport solutions) Transport efficiency measures within single mode (e.g. eco-driving, eco-steaming, vehicle traction, single wagonload type of projects) Invative last mile solutions in urban areas increasing efficiency of transport operations (increasing load factor, reducing number of trips etc.) Other (please specify below)
D.11 Please explain your choices in the question(s) above. The EEA is of the that the objective of modal shift is t the right incentive for switching transport to more efficient and sustainable solutions. The subsidy should t be calculated on the basis of the achieved modal shift but on the environmental performance in general. The revised funding scheme needs to focus on different possibilities how to make freight transport more efficient and sustainable, t only within a single mode but also in combination with other modes. (Co-) Financing invative transport efficiency actions and solutions are necessary to improve the environmental performance of freight transport in general. Key element of the funded projects needs to meet business reality and market conditions. Supporting invative last mile solutions in urban areas can be very effective. However, funding should t go to so-called city logistics projects whereby one party is granted a (quasi)mopoly to do the last mile delivery in cities as this works as market-disturbing. D.12 As regards financing the invation, which part of the lifecycle of invative products and services should the new funding scheme target? Those being currently in the demo/pilot phase Those that have become commercially available on the market recently and therefore have t been widely deployed yet Those being commercially available for a longer time but have t been widely deployed since they are t yet profitable (i.e. have higher financial costs than benefits) Those being commercially available for a longer time but have t been widely deployed for other reasons than costs (e.g. perceived practical issues) E Design of the Funding Scheme The design of the funding scheme for freight transport services needs to take into account market needs and the results delivered by the Marco Polo programme. The purpose of this section is to identify relevant elements to be considered in the scheme development process.
E.2 Considering the above please indicate which elements should be in particular addressed by a scheme supporting freight transport services under TEN-T programme? Tailored to market needs Simple application process and entry conditions User-friendliness and transparent procedures Payments based on results Ex-ante assessment of project benefits Ex-post evidence of project benefits Long-term sustainability (viability) of projects Competition aspects Added value of funding (i.e. support to projects that would be implemented without funding anyway) Environmental issues Leverage effects of funding Feasibility of an action Other (please specify) E.4 Please explain your choices in the question(s) above. As indicated above the projects which are going to be funded need to be based on a business case and fit business reality.
E.5 What in your are the most relevant performance indicators, which may be considered for the funding scheme? Cost-effectiveness of the operation Duration (sustainability) of the service Freight shifted to less polluting modes measured in tonnes/tonne kilometres (tkm) Measurement unit corresponding to the transport of one tonne over a distance of one kilometre The total amount of transport avoided in tonnes, kilometres, tkm or vehicle kilometres (vkm) Measurement unit corresponding to the movement of one vehicle over a distance of one kilometre Total emissions (e.g. CO 2, air pollutants, ise) reduced with the project in kg or tonnes Invativeness of the project (e.g. number of invations implemented, budget spent on invation etc.) Costs per reduced kg of emission (e.g. CO 2, air pollutant, ise) External costs (e.g. climate change, air pollution, ise) reduced in euro Fuel saved in litres, m, tonnes etc. Energy saved in MWh Transportation time reduced in the number of days The amount of diesel/gasoline replaced by gas or alternative fuels, e.g. by LNG, LPG, electricity, etc. Number of persons trained (as regards training activities) Other (please specify) 3
E.6 Please specify "Other" if applicable Scalability should be taken into account as additional performance indicator. It would allow funding projects which have opportunity for large-scale implementation, but facing difficulties to get deployed due to higher costs. E.7 Please explain your choices in the question(s) above. Energy efficiency should be the main criterion to allocate funding and foster sustainable and efficient freight transport services. The new funding scheme should bridge the gap between invative solutions e.g. new techlogies to reduce emissions and achieve broad market uptake in order to boost more sustainable transport especially with regard to all modes and for all transport users and t shift freight artificially from road to alleged greener modes of transport. E.8 Are you aware of any funding instrument supporting freight transport services, which might be considered in designing the new funding scheme. Please explain your suggestion.