1 / 34

State of the Railway World

State of the Railway World. Louis S. Thompson Railways Adviser The World Bank Bucharest Workshop April 22, 2002. Reform is vital everywhere. Railway Deficits Regional Pressures Globalization Failure and collapse are possible

drew-turner
Télécharger la présentation

State of the Railway World

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. State of the Railway World Louis S. Thompson Railways Adviser The World Bank Bucharest Workshop April 22, 2002

  2. Reform is vital everywhere • Railway Deficits • Regional Pressures • Globalization • Failure and collapse are possible • The particular dilemma of the former socialist countries – especially accession candidates • > Paradigm Change: what do we need railways for?

  3. GDP: 2000 vs. 1988 (%)

  4. Industry as Percent of GNP: Change 1990 to 1998 versus percentage in 1990 Reduction in % Industry, 1990 to 1998 Industry as Percent of GNP in 1990 Conclusion: socialist countries had the highest percent of GNP as industry in 1990, and they showed the highest reduction in industry percentage between 1990 and 1998

  5. Ton-Km trends by CEE railways and Turkey

  6. Ton-Km trends by CIS railways

  7. Ton-Km trends by Western railways Note: Germany after 1993 includes DR traffic

  8. Passenger-Km trends by CEE railways and Turkey

  9. Passenger-Km trends by CIS railways

  10. Passenger-Km trends by Western railways

  11. Rail Share of Rail + Truck Traffic (%) versus Average Rail Length of Haul1998 Regression: Developing and Developed

  12. Ratio of: 99 output/employee to 88 output/employee % Output (000 TU)/Employee EUROPE CEE CIS Labor productivity in 1999 and compared with 1988

  13. However measured, there is labor redundancy Output (000 TU)/employee Percent TU which is T-Km: T-km/(T-km + P-Km) in %

  14. Services, structure and competition • Intercity, Suburban/Regional and Freight are different markets, need focused management • Get rid of non-core • Organization options emerging: • Monolithic (the old, existing) • Dominant operator controls infrastructure, incremental user pays for access • Infrastructure separation: all users pay for access • Ownership – can be public, private, or partnerships

  15. Competition on Parallel Tracks: U.S. Class I Railroads

  16. Competition on the Same Tracks: Multiple Use U.S. Freight Tracks (Excluding Amtrak)

  17. Structure and ownership interactions Ownership Structure No single solution, mixtures possible, not static

  18. Competition objectives • IN the Market • Parallel tracks (U.S. for example) • Trackage rights (U.S. and Canada) • Competitive access (E.U., Canada, possibly China and Russia) • FOR the Market • Exclusive concessions, positive or negative, for PSO-type services such as commuters. Can include operating subsidies and investments

  19. Very wide experience with change • Latin America – mostly freight and passenger concessioning, but some privatization • Africa -- concessioning • E.U. -- privatization and franchising • CEE countries – restructuring and accession • Japan -- privatization • India, China, Russia – restructuring to meet market competition • Experience has been strongly (with exceptions) positive

  20. Percent change in Ton-Km since concessioning

  21. Revenue (US$/Ton-Km) before and after concessioning Before Concessioning After Concessioning

  22. Labor productivity before and after concessioning(000,000 TU/Employee) Before Concessioning After Concessioning

  23. Payments for concessions ($ millions)

  24. Tariff savings from concessions

  25. Form of the suburban and metro concessions in Latin America • Stated system to be operated • Stated tariff policy (maximum) • Stated service quality required (quantity, frequency, on-time, cleanliness, etc) • Defined capital program in total – bidder chose the timing • Competition for minimum cost to Government of subsidy and capital program (12% NPV) • Awarded in the 1994/1996 timeframe • Demand growth (200 to 400%), productivity up 300 to 400%

  26. Buenos Aires suburban railways Sarmiento Line S S (TBA) M Mitre Line ZARATE M (TBA) CAMPANA Urquiza Line ESCOBAR U (Metrovias 1/94) M M EXALTACION Roca Line TIGRE DE LA CRUZ BN R SAN FERNANDO (Trainmet 4/95) GRAL. SARMIENTO PILAR SM San Martín Line VTE. SAN ISIDRO SM LOPEZ (Trainmet 4/94) SAN Retiro MARTIN Belgrano Norte Line TRES DE BN U LUJAN (Ferrovias 4/94) FEBRERO Constitución CAPITAL Belgrano Sur Line MORENO FEDERAL BS MORON (Trainmet 5/94) AVELLANEDA GENERAL RODRIGUEZ S S 95 Km MERLO MERCEDES LANUS LOMAS QUILMES DE ZAMORA BERAZATEGUI BS MARCOS PAZ ESTEBAN ECHEVERRIA ALTE. ENSENADA BROWN FLORENCIO LA VARELA BERISSO MATANZA GENERAL LAS HERAS R R LA PLATA SAN VICENTE CAÑUELAS R BRANDSEN LOBOS S S R 130 Km

  27. Buenos Aires subway 20 Km Mtro. Carranza Retiro L.N. Alem F. Lacroze Pza. de Mayo Pra. Junta 17 Km Constitución Plaza de City of Buenos Aires los Virreyes Centro Cívico Gral. Savio

  28. Concessioned Rio suburban system (Supervia)

  29. Concessioned Rio Metro (Oportrans)

  30. Arg. Brazil Ridership response to concessioning(1993=100) Note: Belgrano Sur removed in order to enhance detail of others.

  31. Labor force changes

  32. Lessons • Many approaches “work”– so don’t do nothing • Get objectives and expectations right • Mixed approaches can be best – avoid dogma • Get agreements right, but allow for change • Resolving social issues – especially labor – is critical to success

More Related