Search results

Economic growth is defined as growth in the capacity to meet individual and collective consumption demands. Decline in economic growth for a longer period (i.e. recession) occurs as a part of the “The Limits of Growth” concept. During such an economic crisis, three policy concepts can be implemented: “austerity”; “business as usual”; and “fiscal stimulus”. The purpose of this paper is to examine the economic response to the 2008 recession, in the area of sustainable transport system development, in Europe.

The study assesses and identifies the need for investments in transport infrastructure, in particular rail, to remove barriers to developing a sustainable multimodal transport system. Towards this, by analysing secondary data collected from relevant online sources, the paper explores the prospects for sustainable rail freight transport development in Europe, during the recession period. For this, eight EU countries were selected, based on the length of railway lines in use: France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden and the UK.

Investment in five transport infrastructures were examined – road, rail, IWT, maritime ports and airports – and the research finds that overall, the “austerity” policy was implemented for investment in rail infrastructure, whereas a modest “stimulus” policy can be observed for investment in road infrastructure. The average investment in IWT infrastructure had a “stimulus” policy, whereas the average investment in Maritime port and Airport infrastructure suggests a “business as usual” policy. Of the various approaches taken in the recent recession period, European rail transport appears to have fared least well.

To some extent, the research is limited by lack of some data (e.g. data unavailability on the UK airport infrastructure investment from year 2006).

The findings of the research will encourage policy makers in national government to invest in sustainable transport infrastructure.

The study suggests that there is a lack of uniform policy response to the recession, in terms of investment in transport infrastructure, and that there is a significant difference between the policy goals set by the EU – modal shift from road to rail and/ IWT to develop a sustainable transport system – and their practice. The author argues for an integrative, common and action-oriented approach to sustainable rail freight system development, by European countries, to develop effective, Europe-wide rail freight corridors, under schemes such as Horizon 2020 and Shift2Rail.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the necessity of longer and/heavier and/or faster freight train operations and their viability in the European context.

Using a case study, the current research applies qualitative methods, including desktop research and informal discussion with the rail freight industry and shippers. The case study is the recently conducted trial of 1.5 km long Marathon freight train in Europe.

The research finds that at this stage there is no commercial necessity of running a 1.5 km long train. There are technical and operational limitations which are less problematic, but the commercial necessity is a must and that will need sufficient traffic volume on a longer route (to justify extra time and cost incurred in marshalling yard and reasonable pre- and post-consolidated rail transport haul). The time required to form up/disperse such large formation could arguably be a major constraint for the train itself as well as for other services run on the same network. The authors agree in principle with the “do more with less” notion and the necessity of faster train concept. Also, the authors are agreeing with the heavier train aspect.

Considering the current and future (more semi-finished and finished, containerised) cargo trend, it is more important that freight train is operated consistently, reliably, and commercially attractive relatively faster and frequent serving moderate distances (around 300+ km). Towards this, the operation of merging two (or more) short trains to form up to 750 m long trains should be explored, in particular on the nine Rail Freight Corridors, to identify the potential and realistic opportunities for commercial deployment of “longer and/or faster and/or and heavier” freight train.

At the moment there is no need of a 1.5 km long freight train to improve the performance of EU railways.

The case study provides an important platform for debate on the contemporary notion of “longer”, “faster” and “heavier” freight trains in the European context.

The purpose of this paper is to assess the performance of an online benchmarking tool developed for logistics service users and providers to provide alternative service option in Europe.

First, conduct desktop research including but not limited to academic literature reviews on benchmarking, performance measurement and previous and current examples of online benchmarking tools in order to determine issues in the field; second, report the development process and functionalities of a benchmarking tool; third, examine the benchmarking tool through structured interviews with the users of the tool; and finally, draw conclusion as to whether the tool is effective or needs changes to make it more effective.

Six Key Performance Indicators were identified: Transport cost, Transport time, Flexibility, Reliability, Quality, Sustainability. The functionality of an online transport chain benchmarking e‐tool is detailed. The evaluation of the tool found that it is a strategic decision‐making tool; cost is most often selected as the most important indicator; the majority would not use the tool for daily planning purposes. Future needs of development were identified, including using the tool for procurement decisions, and its utility in supporting corporate social responsibility and sustainability.

The benchmarking e‐tool is developed for the 27 EU countries plus Norway and Switzerland. Thus, the research findings are primarily applicable for these countries and may not be applicable for other countries.

The online tool has been used by multiple commercial companies actively involved, as a service provider or user, in the freight transport chain to plan their transport chains.

The tool makes the strategic planning of intermodal and co‐modal transport solutions easier and supports exploring sustainable freight transport choices in Europe.

The paper meets a research need to evaluate a newly‐developed online benchmarking tool, as well as detailing the e‐tool, and setting it within the practice and policy in this field.