Key problems and priorities in urban

transport sector in SEERegional Meeting on Sustainable

Transport Policies in South Eastern Europe

Budapest, 21-22 June

Wioletta SzymanskaProject Manager

21 June 2007

www.rec.org

Introduction

Overall objective of meeting: to assist SEE in better understanding of sust. transport policies and practices in EU context, in sust. urban transport planning and operation using available best practices

www.rec.org

Introduction

• Findings from interviews in 3 PILOT countries: Albania (Tirana), FYR Macedonia (Skopje), Serbia (Belgrade)

• Interviews - to investigate current problems of urban PT sector in SEE, in particular in cities in pilot countries to give background for further discussion at this meeting

www.rec.org

Interviews

Serbia, Belgrade

Macedonia, Skopje

Albania, Tirana

6 meetings with 8 people from:

1. City transport/env. secretariats

2. Public transport company

3. Urban planners/Land Development Agency

4. NGO

7 meetings with 10 people from:1. City council2. Public transport company3. Ministry of Transport4. Traffic Institute5. NGO6. Local bus factory

6 meetings with 8 people from:1. City transport department2. Association of the Private Bus Operators3. Ministry of Transport4. Institute for Transport Studies5. NGOs

www.rec.org

www.rec.org

PT systems in PILOT countries: Belgrade• Inhabitants: 1.6 million• Price of single ticket: 27 dinars for 1st zone,

(approx. 0.3 EUR)• Main operator: "Beograd" City Transport

Company (GSP Beograd)- urban transport by buses, trolleys, and trams under contract with city (36% of company budget from city)

• Directorate for Public Transport in the City of Belgrade responsible for transport

• In 1999 the private bus operators entered, since 2006 under integrated timetable

• Share of PT 40-50%

www.rec.org

Public transport issues: Belgrade• Biggest air pollutant in Belgrade is transport, old-

fashioned air quality legislation

• Traffic congestion in the city, lack of parking places

• Old rolling stock (buses are in better condition), especially trams - investment in rolling stock and infrastructure

• Slow inclusion of cycling and walking

• Problems with coordination and inclusion of all relevant stakeholders at the right time, especially in planning process

• Lack of education and awareness both for citizens and in the institutions

www.rec.org

www.rec.org

PT systems in PILOT countries: Skopje

• Inhabitants: 506,926

• Price of single ticket: 30 denars (approx. 0.5 EUR)

• Public Transport Operator JSP “Skopje” - only bus lines, 2 private operators

• Skopje City Traffic Department - responsible for transport

• Very old bus fleet - average age is 16 years (with some buses of 30 years)

• No subsidies from city, nor from the government

www.rec.org

Public transport issues: Skopje• No urban transport policy, no parking policy • Old and unreliable and not safe bus fleet• No subsidy from the city• Social groups with discounted tickets not covered• Number of passengers decreasing significantly,

number of cars growing• No investment possible – no funds from the city, no

possibilities to take loans• Deregulated public transportation and not defined

relations between transporters (private operators)• No priorities given to PT in decision making process

– big road infrastructure projects have priority

www.rec.org

PT systems in PILOT countries: Tirana• Inhabitants: 520,000 (750,000)• Price of single ticket: 20 leks (approx. 0.16 EUR)• Since 2002, 20% of service provided by 1 public

transport operator (buses), 80% provided by 5 private operators (buses and minibuses),

• no bus terminal• City Public Transport Directorate responsible

for PT• The tariff policy is within the responsibility of

the government • Low number of cars per ca (1 car/10 persons) • public transport share (Co-Plan data) -

38.7%

www.rec.org

Public transport issues: Tirana• No urban transport strategy, no parking policy• Decentralisation process is not complete – some

responsibilities are still with central government• Poor infrastructure, no traffic control center nor

bus terminal• Old bus fleet and crowded buses, unreliable

transport service, number of cars growing• Pollution and congestion in the city• Gaps in legislation-not clear who has mandate to

determine fare of service and its reimbursement• Problems with “informal” bus service• No priorities given to PT in decision making process• Fragmentation of institutions

www.rec.org

Common problems (1)PT systems in investigated cities are different, some more advanced, some need more improvements, but common problems can be identified:

No transport strategy – city level, develop Policy, strategy, programms, strategy linked t national strategy

proper regulatory framework for further improvements of PT

How to start the action at the city level?-implementation How to make cities to make it more attractive in PT How to involve stakeholders No traffic control and management and no prioritisation to

PT. No good parking policy (few exeptions) Poor infrastructure, old rolling stock, poor transport service

offered• Problems with covering discounted fares of social groups

www.rec.org

Common problems (2)• Relatively high share of PT, but number of cars

growing rapidly

• No political will, strategic vision and leadership to make few structural changes

• Financial problems very often caused by giving priorities to road construction and big infrastructure projects

• Slow inclusion of alternative and env. friendly modes of transport such as walking and cycling

• Low general environmental awareness of population

www.rec.org

Actions needed• Need for systematic preference (priority) and improvement of PT quality

• Formulate and implement transport strategy, including env. friendly transport

• More attention to the public opinion

• Good service contracts

• Need for complete renewal of rolling stock in PT or upgrade: second hand rolling stock, retrofitting etc.

• Capacity building for LA to be able to plan

• Better understanding of problems of operators

• institutions

• Improvement of coordination between institutions and inclusion of all stakeholders

• Awareness rising among citizens and politicians, education, for operators (directors)

• role of mass-media – should be used for promotion of PT

• Promote transport – LA can also learn from transport projects

www.rec.org

Situation in other SEE cities?

• Most likely in other SEE cities the situation is similar to pilot cities

• Similar recommendations could be given

• Regional cooperation and exchange of experience should be enabled

Do you agree?

www.rec.org

Thank you!