UNECE WP6 Geneva 14-16 May 2012

1. UNECE WP6 Geneva14-16 May 2012 Intermodal transport statistics (IMTS) Giuliano Amerini (Eurostat)

2. Content - TF IMTS 2011 - CGST 2011 - Work under way (2012) - Next future  today: main topics 2

3. Task Force on Intermodal Transport Statistics • Set up by decision of the CGST at the end of 2009 with a two-year mandate • Key assignments: 1) to better identify user needs 2) to investigate possibilities for compiling intermodal freight transport statistics at EU level, by looking at studies, projects and initiatives at national, international and EU level3) to explore the area of “logistics performance indicators” • The Task Force met twice: January 2011 and September 2011 • Participants: 6 Member States (DK, DE, FR, NL, AT, SE); users (DG MOVE, JRC, ETISplus); private sector experts (ESPO, ECSA, EIA); international organisations (UNECE)

4. Some basic definitions • Intermodal transport: movement of goods in one and the same loading unit/vehicle by successive modes of transport without handling the goods themselves when changing modes. • ITU = Intermodal Transport Unit (containers, swap bodies; vehicles) • Logistics: transport, handling, storage of goods 4

5. The context: the demand from users • Intermodal transport and co-modality: interest of policy makers has been growing over the years; White Paper re-emphasises data needs • Three types of statistical output:- statistics, publications- indicators (intermodal transport and logistics)- data to feed transport models (TRANSTOOLS) • Why?- policy monitoring- policy making (Impact assessment) • From specific demand (uni-modal transport statistics) to complex user requirements (integrated transport statistics) 5

6. IMTS: national and other experiences • National experiences: the Task Force has examined various experiences from Member States (see Annex 2 of the Report) • International experiences were reviewed: UNECE survey, PPRISM • Two options appear to compile IMTS: • Launch a full-scale new data collection (example: commodity flow survey – SE, US) • Use existing statistics from different transport modes and combine them in an appropriate way (example: DE) • For pragmatic reasons, the Task Force has chosen the 2nd option for further investigation

7. The « German approach » • The Statistisches Bundesamt has been compiling intermodal transport statistics since 2002, by combining existing modal statistics and applying a number of hypotheses (see Annex 3 of the Report) • The Task Force has compared the data used by DE with those stemming from the various transport-related EU legal acts (rail, road, sea, IWW) • This analysis has resulted in indications on ‘shortcomings’ in relevant EU legislation, should the German approach be applied at EU level (see Annex 4 of the Report)

8. Shortcomings in EU freight transport statistics • In order to implement the “German approach”, data availability stemming from legal acts covering IWW transport statistics match fairly well. • The same applies for maritime transport statistics, except modal split (in and out; including feedering) in main ports. • Data for road freight transport are of lesser importance for the ‘German approach’. Detailed data are less reliable (sampling techniques). Problems of coverage in national samples (only national trucks). Model hypotheses mirror this situation. • Major shortcomings were detected for rail data

9. Rail Transport Statistics: a first brainstorming • The TF took advantage of the Rail Transport Statistics WG meeting (9-10 November 2011) to further investigate how the shortcomings in rail transport statistics stemming from the relevant EU legal act could be addressed:- rail experts- all Member States • This point of the Rail Transport Statistics WG meeting was not “for decision” but just “for preliminary technical discussion” since: • The Intermodal Task Force has no mandate to prepare proposals (for decision) • The current mandate of the Task Force ends at the end of 2011 • Initial comments were supplied (see Annex 5 of the Report) 9

10. Reference list of intermodal terminals • Freight transhipment points play an important role • Various countries are establishing national lists • The Intermodal TF has been looking at various initiatives; no single reference list at EU level • A preliminary list of 533 European Intermodal terminals has been established; modal combinations for each terminal are listed (see Annex 6 of the Report) • From this list, an official reference list could be established; such a list should be maintained/updated regularly • For intermodal transport statistics, the list could be useful to detect terminal density and identify the main intermodal transport corridors

11. Logistics Performance Indicators • Another aspect within the mandate of the Task Force • Tangible dimension of « logistics » not easy to obtain • A document outlining possible definitions of « logistics » was prepared (see Annex 7 of the Report) • A theoretical framework for 30 possible indicators was developed. Certain indicators are hard to obtain as underlying data are not available or of insufficient quality • Currently, a limited set of indicators using reliable data (stemming from the ESS) are being investigated. These could be published in the framework of a Statistics in Focus publicationor a Statistics Explained web page

12. Other methodological aspects • The horizontal characteristics of the work performed by the Task Force has pointed to various additional issues: • Better integration of existing modal transport statistics • Harmonisation of concepts and definitions (weight, geo) • Need for a clear definition of « transport corridors » • Longer term: - Exploring EU approach to statistics (territoriality/ nationality)- integration of transport statistics with trade (origin, destination: « from where to where goods are moved and how ? »), SBS and STS statistics (logistics).

13. Suggestions of the TF IMTS to the CGST • The participants of the Task Force concluded that the work performed was most useful and should be continued • Testing the implementation of the cost-effective “German approach” should further be investigated •  for more efficiency: allow consultations ‘for decision’ in modal WGs on proposals to extend existing data collections [extension of TF mandate] • Work in other areas (logistics performance indicators, reference terminal list) should be pursued (…) 13

14. Suggestions of the TF IMTS to the CGST (…) • Working towards the harmonisation of existing definitions across transport modes (weight, geo) and the development of new cross-mode concepts such as “transport corridors”[extension of TF mandate] • To start reflecting about possible longer term developments: integration of transport statistics (a system of transport statistics) and EU levelapproach to statistics (EU level transport operations, territoriality principle, EU survey, EU sampling etc.) [extension of TF mandate: long term] (…) 14

15. Suggestions of the TF IMTS to the CGST (…) • To start reflecting about possible longer term developments on the integration of transport statistics with other statistics (trade, SBS, STS, etc.)[extension of TF mandate: long term] •  time extension of the mandate: 2 more years 15

16. The Task Force: shall we continue ? CGST: December 2009  December 2011: • Task Force: report to the CGST on the activities • Decision has to be taken by the CGST on the way forward:- extension of the TF mandate- or to stop - or other recommendations ? 16

17. CGST 2011 - CGST approved all the proposals from the TF 17

18. 2012: activity so far • Eurostat and CGST are working on the terminal list • Eurostat is preparing a new call for tenders  2013 18

19. 2012: what’s next ? UNECE WP6: 14-16 May 2012 (Geneva)- UNLocode- Vehicle stock and infrastructure- extra-EU road transport statistics ? WG MTS: 13-14 June 2012- modal split in main container ports (including feedering) TF IMTS: ??? Oct-Nov 2012 (or in 2013 ?)- results of last 12 months (rail, maritime, UNECE, list of terminals) - national contributions (FR, NL)- IMSF contribution CGST: 3-4 Dec 2012 19

20. Thank you for your attention Any comments ? Any questions ? 20