SWOT-Analysis - FLAVIA

Freight and Logistics Advancement in Central/South-East Europe - Validation of trade and 

transport processes, 

Implementation of improvement actions, 

Application of co-coordinated structures 

WP 6 

Extending of cooperation structures to the Black Sea bordering and TRACECA 

countries 

Action 6.1.2 

SWOT-analysis to identify problems and opportunities of intermodal transport in the 

Black Sea bordering countries 

Date: 10.12.2012 

Version: [approved] Public Document

Involved FLAVIA partners: 

Freight and Logistics Advancement in Central/South- 

East Europe - Validation of trade and transport processes, 

Implementation of improvement actions, Application 

of coordinated structures 

Technical University of Applied Sciences Wildau, DE 

Upper Austrian University of Applied Sciences Research & Development 

Ltd. - LOGISTIKUM, AT 

The information in this document is provided as is, and no guarantee or warranty is given 

that the information is fit for any particular purpose. The user thereof uses the information 

at its own risk and is solely liable for its usage. 

- 2 -

Content 





1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 4 

2 Relevance for the CENTRAL EUROPE Goals .................................................................. 5 

3 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 6 

4 Country profiles of TRACECA countries .......................................................................... 7 

4.1 Armenia ....................................................................................................................... 7 

4.2 Azerbaijan ................................................................................................................... 8 

4.3 Bulgaria ....................................................................................................................... 9 

4.4 Georgia ...................................................................................................................... 10 

4.5 Kazakhstan ................................................................................................................ 11 

4.6 Kyrgyzstan ................................................................................................................ 12 

4.7 Moldova ..................................................................................................................... 13 

4.8 Romania .................................................................................................................... 14 

4.9 Tajikistan ................................................................................................................... 15 

4.10 Turkey ........................................................................................................................ 16 

4.11 Ukraine ...................................................................................................................... 17 

4.12 Uzbekistan ................................................................................................................. 18 

5 SWOT analysis of the intermodal transport and trade along the TRACECA corridor 19 

5.1 SWOT analysis .......................................................................................................... 19 

5.2 Description of the entries ........................................................................................ 20 

5.2.1 Strengths ............................................................................................................................... 20 

5.2.2 Weaknesses ......................................................................................................................... 21 

5.2.3 Opportunities ......................................................................................................................... 23 

5.2.4 Threats .................................................................................................................................. 25 

6 Conclusions ...................................................................................................................... 27 

6.1.1 Summary – strengths ............................................................................................................ 27 

6.1.2 Summary – weaknesses ....................................................................................................... 27 

6.1.3 Summary – opportunities ...................................................................................................... 28 

6.1.4 Summary – threats ............................................................................................................... 30 

Tables ........................................................................................................................................ 31 

Figures ...................................................................................................................................... 31 

- 3 -

1 Executive Summary 





The TRACECA corridor becomes more and more a strategic factor for the EU. In the last decade 

over 60 technical assistance and 14 investments projects were financed. The investment 

volume amounts to 170 mln €. Focussed issues are secure and safe transport, harmonizing 

legal regulations, facilitating trade and institutional support. The main aim for both – the EU and 

TRACECA – is to establish stable and continuous trade and transport relations. Also the transport 

operators and logistics providers invest more and more within the TRACECA region. The 

ports of Constanta, Odessa and Poti are already in the property of foreign transport companies. 

The present report delivers an assessment of the current trade and transport situation within the 

TRACECA region and its relations and links to the EU. Benefiting and hindering factors are assembled 

with the help of a SWOT-analysis. With the help of an own survey, results from other 

FLAVIA reports as well as experiences from other projects for all four fields concrete statements 

were prepared. 

The analysis shows that on paper the TRACECA region has a powerful position. The corridor is 

rich of natural deposits like oil, gas and strategic minerals (e.g. gold, seldom minerals and uranium). 

Furthermore, situated at the linkage point between Europe and Asia it possesses a growing 

relevance for international transport routes following the former Great Silk Road. The reactivation 

and expansion of the land bridge route could mean a serious alternative for the maritime 

route. 

Several pipeline projects are realised at the moment. They should supply Europe with gas for its 

energy production and should decrease the dependencies from Russian supplies. This might 

lead to conflicts in future. 

Despite of the existing resources and the large development potential the TRACECA region 

struggles with various problems which hamper the trade and transport relations. An unstable 

political environment accompanied with abuse of authority, corruption and organised crime disadvantage 

a large part of the region. All these factors scare potential investors. 

The infrastructure does not reach a Western standard. Especially the Eastern part of the 

TRACECA corridor needs new investments into the transport network. In addition the organisation 

of the transports has to be optimised. Long-lasting border procedure, unsafe transport conditions 

and missing services have to be overcome. 

A promising approach is a close cooperation between the EU and the TRACECA. A linkage of 

both regions with the help of common working groups or platforms could be one opportunity. 

The coordination of joint infrastructure projects for instance would avoid solo runs. The experiences 

from the TEN-T (Trans-European Transport Network) shaping process might be used for 

the creation of a “TCAN-T” (Trans-Central Asia Transport Network). Such a network could be 

the basis for further agreed expansions of the transport routes. 

- 4 -





2 Relevance for the CENTRAL EUROPE Goals 

The FLAVIA corridor goes in Southeast direction through the CENTRAL EUROPE Programme 

area (from Central Europe to Romania at the Black Sea). Logically, the transport flows does not 

end abruptly at the Black Sea. Beyond, the emerging markets in the Near, Middle and Far East 

can be reached. One common transport route to the Far East (via the Suez channel) is by maritime 

transport. Another possibility is to use the European-Asian land bridge via the Black Sea, 

the Caucasus and the Caspian Sea. The countries located along this land bridge developed 

dynamically during the last two decades. The TRACECA countries offer primarily huge and 

valuable, natural resource deposits. The demand of the EU member states continuously increases 

for such goods. In contrast the TRACECA countries demand goods of the processing 

industry. 

To ensure efficient trade and transport relations in future the transport chains between the two 

regions have to be extended and developed. This concerns the establishment of reliable transport 

services to enhance the accessibility as well as the construction of an integrated transport 

network that enables multimodal logistics approaches. 

The report presents the current state of play regarding infrastructure, intermodality and planned 

investments on the one hand as well as actual obstacles within the region on the other hand. 

The indication of trade and transport barriers shall help to develop action plans to remove them. 

The improvement of the connectivity between Europe and the TRACECA countries would entail 

two consequences: 

1.) Efficient trade and transport conditions to the emerging markets in the TRACECA corridor 

2.) An alternative transport route via the Eurasian continent to Asia 

3.) Closer cooperation between both regions 

4.) Realisation of joint infrastructure projects 

- 5 -

3 Methodology 





After gathering and compiling information about the intermodal transport within the TRACECA 

corridor in report 6.1.1 the subsequent task is to transform them into a SWOT analysis considering 

effects of the intermodal plans with focus on the FLAVIA corridor. Hence, the findings from 

report 6.1.1 are the main input. Additionally, a further desk research for detailed information 

shall be carried out. To provide a basis for the SWOT-analysis all above mentioned countries 

shall be introduced with a country profile. The information for that shall be derived from reports 

of WP 3 and other highly reliable and comparable sources. 

Relevant countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, 

Romania, Tajikistan, Turkey, Ukraine, Uzbekistan 

Step 1 – Country profiles 

The profile should include: 

• Text block introducing the country highlighting the geographical location, the political 

constitution, major economy fields, income/GDP development and general transport 

strategy. 

Step 2 – SWOT, Information collection 

The SWOT analysis is divided into 4 fields: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats. 

The analysis shall work out in which position the intermodal transport is situated within the region 

(Evaluation A). A second evaluation will be made concerning the effects of the analysed 

situation on the situation in the FLAVIA corridor (Evaluation B). In the following, all topics were 

evaluated regarding their inherent “multiplier effects” and/or their demand by the intermodal sector 

(see i.e.: expert interviews carried out within the FLAVIA project). The methodology foresees 

three steps of classifications (+ low, ++ middle, +++ high). After the collection of the topics a first 

feedback and consultation round among the responsible partners will be made. 

Step 3 – SWOT, Description of the identified entries 

Each entry shall be explained shortly. Here, a clear relevance and reference to the intermodal 

transport has to be recognizable. Also differences among country groups or solely countries 

shall be addressed. 

Step 4 – SWOT, Summary of each field 

Finally, for each field a summary shall be prepared. Here, the most hindering obstacles or the 

most important strengths shall be emphasized. What statements can be derived for the future to 

improve the actual situation resp. keep the positive factors on track? Here also the division in 

“A” (inside TRACECA) and “B” (Exchange with FLAVIA) has to been followed. 

- 6 -

4 Country profiles of TRACECA countries 





4.1 Armenia 

Armenia is a land-locked country in the Caucasus region. Its neighboring countries are Turkey, 

Georgia, Azerbaijan and Iran. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, there is still a conflict 

with Azerbaijan over the region of Nagorno-Karabakh. This conflict harms the economic 

situation of Armenia. The main reason is a trade blockade imposed by Turkey and Azerbaijan. 

Nevertheless, Armenia experienced a continuous economic growth until 2008. From that year 

on the country economy finds itself in a downturn. The most important trade partner is Russia. 

Gas is imported from Russia via a pipeline through Georgia. Due to the conflict the transport 

routes to Azerbaijan and Turkey are in a very bad condition. Currently, the Armenian government 

invests in the domestic transport network and intends to close the gaps to its neighbours. 

Indicator Measurement Value Source 

Population 2011 mill. 3,3 http://www.armstat.am/ 

Population 2017 (prognosis) mill. 3,5 http://www.imf.org 

S3 ++ 

GDP 2011 Bln Euro 7,3 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

GDP 2017 (prognosis) Bln Euro 9,6 http://www.imf.org/ 

Import – sum 2010 Bln Euro 2,8 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

Imported goods Food, gas, oil 

Export – sum 2010 Bln Euro 0,8 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

Exported goods Gems, metal products 

Rail freight transport 1000 tonnes n/a 

Road freight transport 1000 tonnes n/a 

Table 1: Key figures – Armenia 

Figure 1: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions – Armenia 

- 7 -





4.2 Azerbaijan 

Located at the Caspian Sea and within the Caucasus, Azerbaijan is an oil and gas-rich country. 

The deposits lie mostly below the Caspian Sea. The export of the resources to Western Europe 

and Russia means the main source of income for the country. The revenues from the oil trade 

enable a relatively high living standard compared to the neighbouring countries. Nevertheless, 

other industrial sectors are under-developed and do not reach a competitive level. Most efforts 

and human capital are concentrated within the oil and gas industry. This implies a disadvantage 

of the agriculture and the processing industry. As result Azerbaijan has to import a significant 

amount of goods. The country is affected by corruption tendencies and underdeveloped democratic 

structures. The transport network experienced investments in the port (Baku and Alyat) 

and railway infrastructure (regular container block train between Poti and Baku). 


Population 2011 mill. 9,1 http://www.imf.org 


S3 ++ 

GDP 2011 bln Euro 49,2 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

GDP 2017 (prognosis) bln Euro 99,2 http://www.imf.org/ 

Import – sum 2010 bln Euro 5 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

Imported goods n/a 

Export – sum 2010 bln Euro 16 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

Exported goods Gas, oil 

Rail freight transport (2008) 1000 tonnes 27.432 UNECE Transport Database 

Road freight transport (2010) 1000 tonnes 99.891 UNECE Transport Database 

Table 2: Key figures – Azerbaijan 

Figure 2: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Azerbaijan 

- 8 -





4.3 Bulgaria 

Bulgaria is a member of the EU and situated on the Eastern Balkans but until now not a member 

of the Schengen-area. Via the ports of Varna and Burgas it has access to the Black Sea. In 

the 1990’s Bulgaria struggled with the transition to democracy and market economy. With the 

millennium a slight improvement of the economic situation could be reached. Tough Bulgaria 

still belongs to the countries in Europe with the lowest income. Disadvantaging factors are the 

relatively high degree of corruption and the organized crime. The EU requests Bulgaria several 

times to fight against the drawbacks. The country is junction of the Russian oil pipeline “South 

Stream” and the European “Nabucco pipeline”. 

Bulgaria is dependent from gas and oil imports. The exports concentrate on food products, 

chemicals and metal products. 




S3 ++ 

GDP 2011 bln Euro 38,5 http://epp.eurostat.ec 


Import – sum 2010 bln Euro 25,3 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

Imported goods Gas, oil, machinery 

Export – sum 2010 bln Euro 25,6 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

Exported goods Chemicals, food 



Table 3: Key figures - Bulgaria 

Figure 3: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Bulgaria 

- 9 -





4.4 Georgia 

Georgia lies strategically important at the East coast of the Black Sea. The country is located at 

the intersection of two continents – Europe and Asia. The ports of Poti and Batumi are the most 

important transshipment points for exporting and importing goods. Especially, as transit country 

for pipeline projects Georgia takes on greater significance. Three pipeline projects affect it directly. 

The Baku-Tiflis-Ceyhan-Pipeline crosses the country from east to west, the South Caucasus 

Pipeline passes the country from east to southwest and the “Nabucco Pipeline” which 

links together with the South Caucasus Pipeline at the Georgian/Turkish border. As former part 

of the Soviet Union, Georgia was heavily dependent from the energy supply. Rising prices deteriorate 

the economic situation. As a result Georgia strives more and more to obtain gas from 

Azerbaijan. In addition economic reforms were carried out and improved the situation noticeable. 

Main export goods are agriculture products, metals and ores. 




S3 ++ 




Imported goods Gas, machinery 


Exported goods Wine, ores 


Road freight transport 1000 tonnes n/a 

Table 4: Key figures - Georgia 

Figure 4: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Georgia 

- 10 -





4.5 Kazakhstan 

As huge area state, Kazakhstan possesses various land forms. Most of the population is concentrated 

in the east and the fertile south. The center and west with its deserts and steppes is 

only sparsely settled but here most of the vast deposits of raw materials are located. Deposits of 

crude oil and gas are situated around the Caspian Sea. Kazakhstan is the world’s biggest producer 

of uranium. The economy is interlinked closely to Russia and hence sensible for negative 

developments. Kazakhstan has pipeline connections to Russia, China and to Western Europe 

via the Baku-Tiflis-Ceyhan-Pipeline. The mentioned richness of strategic resources has led to 

continuous and high growth rates since the millennium. The living standard is relatively high 

within the region. The trade balance is positive. The country struggles with a severe environmental 

harmful heritage of the Soviet Union. This comprises the shrinkage of the Aral Sea, nuclear 

testing areas and toxic dumping areas. 




S3 ++ 




Imported goods Machinery, 

products 

metal 

Export – sum 2010 bln Euro 36 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

Exported goods Oil, metal products 


Road freight transport (2007) 1000 tonnes 1.667.373 UNECE Transport Database 

Table 5: Key figures - Kazakhstan 

Figure 5: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions – Kazakhstan 

- 11 -





4.6 Kyrgyzstan 

The country is characterized by a high mountain landscape. Only a small part of Kyrgyzstan has 

a share on lowlands. The country is divided ethically in a Kyrgyz urban North part and an Uzbeks 

rural South part. The separation has led to tensions between both parts since the independence 

from the Soviet Union. The country does not possess noticeable energy resources. 

There are some oil and gas deposits. But most of the energy supply has to be imported. On the 

other hand the country owns one of the world’s largest gold deposits. The agriculture plays a 

major role for the economy. The industrial production is not competitive enough and contributes 

only slightly to the GDP. The ongoing ethnical conflict and the low diversified economy result in 

the fact that Kyrgyzstan is one of the countries in Central Asia with a low income. Regarding the 

transport infrastructure the country is by far the most underdeveloped within the region. The 

road and primarily the railway network do not meet a satisfactory standard. Moreover, North- 

South transport routes are hard to establish due to the unfavorable landscape. 




S3 ++ 




Imported goods Oil, machinery, 

chemicals 


Exported goods Gold, food 



Table 6: Key figures - Kyrgyzstan 

Figure 6: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Kyrgyzstan 

- 12 -





4.7 Moldova 

Moldova lies between Ukraine and Romania. It has no direct access to the Black Sea. But the 

country has a small river section at the Danube. The port of Giurgiulești at this section provides 

an important transshipment point for the import and export of goods. Moldova has a nonelectrified 

railway system with Russian broad gauge. This hampers the organization of border 

crossing transport towards Western Europe (via Romania). The country is negatively affected by 

the Trans-Dniester conflict. The region east of the Dniester is majorly populated by Russians 

and Ukrainians. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union the region fights for its independence. 

Moldova’s economy is oriented mainly on the agriculture sector. The trade of wine was once a 

profitable business but it declines over the last years. In terms of energy supply the country depends 

on supplies from Russia. This circumstance has let to serious problems due to rising 

prices. The exports concentrate on products from the agricultural sector. Logically, the import of 

energy resources takes an important role. 




S3 ++ 




Imported goods Energy resources, 

machinery 


Exported goods Textiles, food 

Railway transport (2010) 1000 tonnes 3.852 UNECE Transport Database 

Road transport (2010) 1000 tonnes 23.801 UNECE Transport Database 

Table 7: Key figures - Moldova 

Figure 7: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Moldova 

- 13 -





4.8 Romania 

Romania is a member of the EU but not of the Schengen-treaty. It is located at the Black Sea 

and possesses with the port of Constanta a large transshipment point. The port connects Europe 

with the Caucasus Region (via Black Sea) and with the Far East (via the Bosporus and the 

Suez Channel). The country developed less dynamically than other post communistic countries 

in East Europe. But it experienced stable growth rates until the economic crisis in 2008/2009. 

As reaction of the crisis Romania has released austerity measures to encounter the downturn. 

The country possesses various deposits of natural resources. This comprises majorly oil, gas 

and coal. The processing of oil is one the main industries. Furthermore, the semiconductor industry 

contributes significantly to the GDP. Unfortunately, Romania struggles with corruption 

and organized crime. Preventing measures requested by the EU are implemented slowly. 




S3 ++ 

GDP 2011 bln Euro 136,5 http://epp.eurostat.ec 



Imported goods Machinery, chemicals 


Exported goods Semiconductor products, 

textiles, metal products 



Table 8: Key figures – Romania 

Figure 8: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Romania 

- 14 -





4.9 Tajikistan 

Like Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan is characterized by a high mountain landscape. It is the poorest 

country in Central Asia. The transport network is strongly under-developed. The railway network 

is only linked to Uzbekistan. A connection via Kyrgyzstan to China is planned. The country is 

agrarian-oriented, almost half of the population are employed at the agricultural sector. The 

most important export good is cotton. The industry sector is developed indistinctly. After independence 

in 1991 the country was afflicted by a civil war. The five-year conflict affects the 

economy till present day. Tajikistan is dependent on the import of gas and oil. Nevertheless, 

Tajikistan owns various natural deposits like oil, gas and gold. With the help of Chinese investments 

the exploration of oil, gas and gold is advanced. But also credits shall help to finance new 

infrastructure projects. 




S3 ++ 



Import – sum 2010 bln Euro 2 http://trade.ec.europa.eu 

Imported goods Machinery, food, chemicals 


Exported goods Cotton, raw materials 

Rail freight transport 1000 tonnes n/a UNECE Transport Database 

Road freight transport 1000 tonnes n/a UNECE Transport Database 

Table 9: Key figures - Tajikistan 

Figure 9: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Tajikistan 

- 15 -





4.10 Turkey 

Turkey spans between Europe and Asia. At the intersection of both continents lies the Bosporus 

as linkage of the Black Sea and the Mediterranean Sea. It possesses a strategic position for 

transport flows in west-east and north-south direction. With the Black Sea ports and the ports of 

Istanbul and Izmir, Turkey has high frequented transshipment points. Over the last years Turkey 

experienced a dynamic economic growth. The country has overcome the economic crisis mildly. 

The reason is a strict reform program which has been imposed at the beginning of the millennium. 

The country imports oil for the energy and industry production. That is the main reason why it 

has a relatively high current account deficit. The most important export goods are textile products, 

electronic products (television receiver and white goods) and car parts. 




S3 ++ 




Imported goods Oil, gas 


Exported goods vehicle parts, 

chemicals, textiles 

Railway transport 1000 tonnes 23.229 UNECE Transport Database 

Road transport in tonnes 1000 tonnes 176.455 UNECE Transport Database 

Table 10: Key figures - Turkey 

Figure 10: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions – Turkey 

- 16 -





4.11 Ukraine 

The Ukraine is the second largest country in Europe. With the Sea ports in Odessa and Illichiwsk 

it possess highly used transshipment points. The sea hinterland connections are developed 

well. Overall, the country has a relatively well-developed transport network. The main railway 

routes are electrified. After the collapse of the Soviet Union the country was affected severely 

by the transformation to the private economy. Additionally, the strong economic relations 

to the USSR dropped. After years of decline the economic growth increased dynamically since 

the millennium. The Ukraine has a strong industrial sector. The manufacturing of steel products 

is the major industry branch. However, this means a vulnerable dependency to the international 

trade. In the course of the economic crisis the demand has shrunken. This affect was reinforced 

by increased energy prices which brought the energy-intensive industry in serious trouble. 




S3 ++ 




Import Gas and oil 


Export Steel and Metal products 

Railway transport (2008) 1000 tonnes 498.537 UNECE Transport Database 

Road transport 1000 tonnes 1.267.000 UNECE Transport Database 

Table 11: Key figures - Ukraine 

Figure 11: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Ukraine 

- 17 -





4.12 Uzbekistan 

Uzbekistan is a landlocked country. It is located along the former Great Silk Road. Via Kazakhstan 

and Turkmenistan it has transport connections to the Caspian Sea. In eastern direction 

a direct railway link via Osh (Kyrgyzstan) to Kashgar (China) is planned. The country is divided 

in a western part majorly covered with deserts and steppes and a dense settled eastern 

part (Ferghana valley). Uzbekistan is one of the world’s biggest cotton producers. Furthermore, 

it possesses huge gas and gold deposits as well as other natural resources. The country has a 

rather centralized economy. Direct foreign investments reach a lower level compared to the 

neighbouring countries. Restrictions and import customs complicate the trade. Despite these 

circumstances the country becomes more and more interesting for the EU due to the immense 

natural resources. 




S3 ++ 




Imported goods Machinery, chemicals, 

metal products 


Exported goods Cotton, gas, gold 

Railway transport tonnes n/a UNECE Transport Database 

Road transport in tonnes tonnes UNECE Transport Database 

Table 12: Key figures - Uzbekistan 

Figure 12: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Uzbekistan 

- 18 -





5 SWOT analysis of the intermodal transport and trade 

along the TRACECA corridor 

5.1 SWOT analysis 

Strengths impact Weaknesses impact 

S1 huge deposits of natural resources +++ W1 Insufficient industrial and +++ 

S2 trimodal access + 

economical structures 

W2 low educational level +++ 

S3 freedom of design for infrastruc- ++ W3 cross border problems ++ 

ture development and transport net- 

W4 antiqued infrastructure +++ 

work planning 

W5 problems with realizing safe, 

secure and sustainable transport 

chains (transport quality) 

++ 

W6 Licenses +++ 

Opportunities impact Threats impact 

O1 huge economic growth potential + T1 Unstable political environment +++ 

O2 unexploited and diversified raw +++ T2 missing infrastructure and in- ++ 

materials resources 

termodal facilities 

O3 Connection to the Central Asian +++ T3 language barriers ++ 

and Far East markets 

T4 corruption, crime and mismanagement 

+++ 

Table 13: Evaluation A – Situation inside TRACECA region 

Strengths impact Weaknesses impact 

S1 economical independencies +++ W1 Unstable framework conditions 

+++ 

S2 short distance to the FLAVIA cor- + W2 lack of integration and cohe- ++ 

ridorsion 

of transport infrastructure 

networks 

W3 low logistics know-how +++ 

Opportunities impact Threats impact 

O1 efficient connection of the ++ T1 infrastructure bottlenecks, cus- +++ 

TRACECA network with the TEN-T 

toms clearance and trade barriers 

O2 Potential for sustainable policy +++ T2 inefficient and non-appropriate +++ 

development 

institutional structures 

O3 Processing of higher quality raw + 

materials for the EU market 

T3 Exchange rate risks + 

O4 establishment of a common ++ T4 Tremendous and rapidly grow- ++ 

transport planning group/platform 

ing freight transport volumes especially 

on the road including the 

negative external effects 

Table 14: Evaluation B – Effects for trade/transport with the FLAVIA countries 

- 19 -

5.2 Description of the SWOT-elements 





5.2.1 Strengths 

S1 huge deposits of natural resources 

Evaluation A: 

The region possesses vast natural deposits. The countries bordering on the Caspian Sea have 

access to huge oil and gas fields. This comprises majorly Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan. 

The export of those strongly demanded raw materials puts the countries in a powerful and 

strategic important position. Other demanded resources, like gold, uranium and rare earths are 

exploited in the high mountain countries Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. The construction 

of pipelines (Nabucco Pipeline, South Caucasian Pipeline, Baku-Tiflis-Ceyhan-Pipeline) is 

advanced continuously. Furthermore, increasing foreign investments are aimed at extrapolating 

and exploiting the existing resources. 

S2 trimodal access 

Evaluation A: 

The TRACEA region has an access to the Black Sea and the Caspian Sea. Both seas are connected 

via the Don, Don-Volga Channel and the Volga. The TRACECA ports have seaport hinterland 

connections via rail and road. Nevertheless, Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan 

are land-locked and depending on transit routes to the ports as most important transshipment 

points. 

S3 freedom of design for infrastructure 

Evaluation A: 

Especially, the Eastern part of the TRACECA region has to make up lost development regarding 

the transport infrastructure. Missing links and an inadequate quality hamper the trade and 

transport relations. Due to this circumstance new constructions and expansions can be planned 

in an optimal way. Hindering infrastructures do not exist. Thus, the infrastructure planners and 

investments can be deployed in an efficient way. 

S1 economic independencies and cooperation with the EU 

Evaluation B: 

Since 2004 the EU supported TRACECA with 170 mln €. This technical aid was used for 80 

projects in the field of transport security, harmonizing legal regulations, facilitating trade relations 

and institutional support. The cooperation helps to strengthen and advance the political, 

economic and social independencies. Over the last years the trade relations with the EU and 

the TRACECA region increased. The TRACECA offers various resources and a gate to the Far 

East markets. The establishment of sustainable and stable trade relations should be the main 

goal. 

- 20 -





S2 short distance to the FLAVIA corridor 

Evaluation B: 

The nearness of both corridors is a strategic advantage. The ports of the Black Sea as linking 

points are very suitable. They are already equipped with a modern infrastructure. Constanta, 

Odessa, Istanbul and Poti/Batumi build the main framework for maritime transport connections. 

Rail ferry links already exist for instance between Poti and Odessa, Constanta and Batumi as 

well as Constanta and Istanbul. Railway connections by land are possible via the Bosporus. 

5.2.2 Weaknesses 

W1: Insufficient industrial and economical structures 

Evaluation A: 

The liberalization of a foreign trade policy and regional cooperation into sphere of transport and 

transit are closely interconnected. Liberalization of a commercial policy between one of the 

partners with which it does not have general borders, will not lead to substantial growth of bilateral 

trade if the movement of vehicles and goods will be complicated because of lacks of the 

transport infrastructure. E.g. Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan are all relatively small 

economies and need to promote trade and integrate into the international trading system to 

achieve sustainable economic development. High unemployment and inflation will hinder government 

efforts to stimulate demand. In addition, a successful implementation of an anti crisis 

policy will require measures of structural reforms including transport and trade. 

W2 low educational level 

Evaluation A: 

The level of education needs to be improved in order to get an international level through supporting 

cooperation’s among educational institutions. Especially in the field of logistics not all 

actors have the same level of knowledge. Therefore the harmonization process is difficult along 

the intermodal supply chain. 

W3 cross border problems 

Evaluation A: 

Based on the findings of Action 6.1.1 it is essential to mention that the facilitation of processes 

and documents needed when crossing the border (e.g. electronically standard developments 

and introduction of modern logistics tools) is a main problem in this area. The strong concentration 

on technical development and standards has to be mentioned here as well. It is essential, 

that technological harmonization is established in all of the relevant borders in the TRACECA 

region within a technological strategy plan as it serves as the main prerequisite supporting rail 

and inland waterway transportation. For intermodal transports, where the main run is carried out 

by rail, the transport quality is one of the most important issues/problems for the competitiveness 

of intermodal solutions. Interoperability, quality or reliability assurance and the lack of integrated 

information and communication systems are examples which hinders intermodal solutions. 

Consequently waiting times and costs for crossing the borders between these countries 

are still huge problems. 

- 21 -





W4 antiqued infrastructure 

Evaluation A: 

Antiqued infrastructure is assessed as high obstacle because in many TRACECA countries the 

infrastructure does not reflect the needs of transportation network. In addition there are missing 

intermodal facilities like container equipment at ports and inland terminals. This causes infrastructural 

bottlenecks for the region. For example, the strategy for the development of the transport 

infrastructure of the Republic of Bulgaria mentions that the conditions of the technical situation 

and level of maintenance of the current transport infrastructure, as well as the outdated 

transport technology and equipment is not satisfying. 

W5 problems with realizing safe, secure and sustainable transport chains (transport 

quality) 

Evaluation A: 

The obligatory safety and security standards along an intermodal supply chains are not given. 

Here the areas of risks are storage places, transport processes on risky routes and transhipment 

processes. Loading units and wagons are facing high potential of external manipulation 

due to low security standards. The analyses of cross boarder processes indicate that time consuming 

procedures have increased due to additionally security checks. Hence – an adequate 

mix of controls and quality level is not found yet. 

W6 Licenses 

Evaluation A: 

This barrier includes aspects like access to infrastructure, open access to the network, complexity 

of homologating rolling stock (only rail), time for licensing, complexity of licensing and for 

getting a driver licence, power of the independent inspection authorities and the captain's certificate 

of competency. Here competitive disadvantages for intermodal transports are given. Especially 

for rail transports, as they are affected through long waiting times, additional costs, complex 

procedures, unclear responsibilities and a lack of planning reliability. 

W1 Unstable framework conditions 

Evaluation B: 

From the FLAVIA point of view, a big weakness is the legal framework concerning regulatory 

policies. Different transport policies are not harmonized and therefore a common strategy to 

push existing cooperation’s is difficult to reach. 

W2 lack of integration and cohesion of transport infrastructure networks 

Evaluation B: 

Here the lack of the railway infrastructure where sufficient speeds for freight trains are not possible 

can be mentioned. Further, in many countries suffer from an insufficient number of specialized 

terminals and from the lack of modern logistics and information systems. Another point of 

interest is the maintenance of the existing infrastructure network. Due to lack of maintenance 

funds and postponed repair works the infrastructure is in bad condition. Poor technical parameters 

cannot guarantee a high level of safety and security according to European standards. 

- 22 -





W3 low logistics know-how 

Evaluation B: 

Know-How support and transfer is not carried out in an appropriate way. An establishment of 

new structures and strategies for logistic concepts is difficult. 

5.2.3 Opportunities 

O1 huge economic growth potential 

Evaluation A: 

Most of the TRACECA countries were former parts of the Soviet Union. After the collapse of the 

USSR the centrally planned economies transformed to private market economies to be competitive 

on the global markets. This transition was a difficult process which has led firstly to shrinking 

economic performances. Since the millennium almost all countries experienced a dynamic 

growth. The initial situation is promising, now the opportunities have to be taken. 

O2 unexploited and diversified raw materials resources 

Evaluation A: 

Besides the known deposits unexploited resources are expected in TRACECA. Unfortunately, it 

is often the case that know-how and the needed technics are missing to explore the entire 

scope of the resources. This means most of the countries depend on foreign consortiums which 

take over the exploitation. 

O3 Connection of Central Europe to the Central Asian and Far East markets 

Evaluation A: 

The TRACECA region is the connecting link between Europe and Asia. A continuous route 

along the former Silk Road would be an alternative to the maritime route. The raising markets in 

Central Asia and the Far East are important sales markets for European companies but also 

industry production locations. The emerging TRACECA countries could profit by resource exports 

to Europe and Asia as well as provider of modern transit routes and transshipment points. 

O1 efficient connection of the TRACECA network with the TEN-T 

Evaluation B: 

One of the most promising measures to ensure fast and modern transport routes is the logical 

linkage of the TRACECA network with the TEN-T. Recently, the TEN-T was revised by the European 

Commission. Docking points for a comprehensive transport network between both networks 

are: 

- Sea: 

o Constanta (RO) and Varna (BG) to 

Odessa (UA), Istanbul (TR), Poti (GE), Batumi (GE) 

- 23 -

- Rail: 

o Cierna nad Tisou (SK) to Chop (UA) 

o Iasi (RO) to Ungeny (MD) 

o Medyka (PL) to Mostiska (UA) 

o Svilengrad (BG) to Edirne (TR) 





A close cooperation in the developing process of the transport infrastructure would lead to a 

logical and efficient network. Uncoordinated planning approaches mean a fragmentation of the 

whole network. 

O2 Potential for a sustainable and cooperative policy development 

Evaluation B: 

Investing in infrastructure and new businesses is not enough for sustainable relations. A stable 

political and legal framework has to be established between the EU and the countries of TRA- 

CECA. This in turn is one requirement for long lasting trade relations. On the following fields of 

intervention is a need for action: 

- Facilitating trade regulations (e.g. customs clearance, cross border procedures, payment 

terms) 

- Harmonizing of legal regulations 

- Institutional support 

- Technical assistance for authorities involved in trade and transport transaction 

O4 common transport planning group/platform 

Evaluation B: 

The linkage of the FLAVIA corridor (as part of the TEN-T) and the TRACECA corridor has to be 

coordinated and monitored by a common working group. The platform could support and monitor 

the merge of both networks. The benefit of such a platform is the opportunity to plan new 

infrastructure projects in a cooperative way. This shall avoid solo runs by the construction of 

new projects. For instance, a new railway line should not end at a border point of the EU. The 

route should continue beyond with an approximate equal quality. 

New planned projects affecting both corridors have to be identified by the EU and TRACECA. 

As result an agreed list should be prepared including all relevant projects. Information which 

might be provided: 

- Rough description of the project 

- investment volume, 

- time horizon, 

- route profile, 

- responsibilities. 

- 24 -





O3 Processing of higher quality raw materials for the EU market 

Evaluation B: 

The export of highly demanded raw materials is a profitable business. Especially the Western 

part of TRACECA is focused on this trade due to its valuable and huge deposits. But in the long 

run a more innovative and a more engineered economy is needed. The processing of the raw 

materials within the own country would mean an increased net product. The setup of a supply 

industry for high developed products manufactured in the EU is imaginable. Also a good argument 

is that those highly engineered products consists more and more of rare raw materials like 

seldom earths and gold. But the transformation from a pure raw material exporting country to an 

engineered industry requires investments and know-how. This could be delivered by European 

companies. In the end it is a matter of fact that the resource deposits are limited. A sustainable 

and long-termed concept is needed. 

5.2.4 Threats 

T1 Unstable political environment 

Evaluation A: Basic legal elements of political orders and regular policies are not harmonized. 

This is necessary to emphasize as they act as a mutual trust between the regions. Further, 

there are prerequisite for the future integration process required. Due to unsteady situations in 

some TRACECA countries, there is a little functioning transport infrastructure. Consequently, 

the establishment of basic elements of a political order like transport policies can bring improvements. 

T2 missing infrastructure and intermodal facilities 

Evaluation A: Especially the construction of cargo handling stations and intermodal terminals 

can be seen as bottleneck for the region. In general, shippers require specific frequencies of 

operation to different destinations. In fact, these operations need to be provided on a cost- and 

time-efficient way to facilitate rail transport. Therefore, certain infrastructural requirements have 

to be met. Especially several problems with the secondary rail network in the mentioned region 

can cause problems to guarantee the flexibility of rail operations. Also the used equipment of 

the single cargo terminals brings bad transport conditions. This is why specific transport solutions 

cannot be provided. 

T3 language barriers 

Evaluation A: Official Languages spoken in the area of interest are Armenian, Azerbaijani, Bulgarian, 

Georgian, Persian, Kazakh, Russian, Moldovan, Romanian, Turkish, Ukrainian and 

Uzbek. Through the high diversity, communication problems may arise on a permanent basis. 

T4 corruption, crime and mismanagement 

Evaluation A: The corruption perceptions index scores countries on how corrupt their public 

sectors are seen to be. In 2011 the following figure can be seen. 

- 25 -

Turkey 

Figure 13: Corruption index 2011 

Source: Corruption perception index 2011 





Kazakhstan 

Uzbekistan 

T1 infrastructure bottlenecks, customs clearance and trade barriers 

Evaluation B: The customs formalities within the region can be seen as threat, due to a lot of 

administrative work which cause extra costs for intermodal transports. As mentioned missing 

terminals is one of the main obstacles for intermodal transports. The missing of special equipment 

causes problems for a high performance for such transports. Trade barriers cause bad 

access to new potential trade partners for Central Europe and the whole FLAVIA corridor. 

T2 inefficient and non-appropriate institutional structures 

Evaluation B: Due to structural problems insufficient procedures are given. This is again due to 

the missing transfer of Know-How. The modernization of the institutional structures is not 

pushed in the appropriate way. 

T3 Exchange rate risks 

Evaluation B: The impact of foreign exchange rate uncertainty (fluctuations) and the corresponding 

costs (converting the home currency into numerous other currencies) hinder intermodal 

cross-border solutions to be competitive, projectable and transparent. 

T4 Tremendous and rapidly growing freight transport volumes especially on the road 

including the negative external effects (CO2 etc.) 

Evaluation B: The current development of the freight transport between the countries and the 

whole continents is characterized by impetuous growth. In these conditions, the efficiency of 

transports within the international directions becomes one of the main problems and renders 

strong influence on the further development of transport routes to and from the regions. 

- 26 -

6 Conclusions 





6.1.1 Summary – strengths 

Doubtless the huge natural deposits of strategic important resources is one the main strengths 

of the TRACECA region. Oil, gas and rare minerals like gold and seldom earths are and will be 

highly demanded by the global economy. 

The expansion of the transport connections between Europe and Central Asia bases on good 

pre-conditions. Both regions are accessible by trimodal links. Main linking point is the Black Sea 

with its operating (rail) ferry lines. The existing ports along the coast are already equipped with 

modern transshipment facilities. Foreign logistics providers already take a share at the operation 

of the ports. The port in Odessa is operated by a German daughter company of HHLA (Hamburger 

Hafen and Logistik). A share of the port of Constanta is operated by DP World (Dubai 

Ports World). The Dutch company APM Terminals operates the port of Poti. This proves the 

raising relevance of the corridor for European and non-European logistics provider. 

The Black Sea as linking point between the FLAVIA corridor and TRACECA possesses a strategic 

role. This comprises mainly the ports, the ferry links between each other and the seaport 

hinterland accessibility. 

The interdependencies between TRACECA and the EU have reached a relatively high level yet. 

The European countries purchase goods from TRACECA. Furthermore various technical aid 

programs and projects were initiated and carried out by EuropeAid a section of the EC initiative. 

6.1.2 Summary – weaknesses 

The liberalisation process for a common policy between the TRACECA countries and its trading 

partner is necessary to guarantee substantial growth of bilateral trade. Actually big obstacles 

exist as there are complicated economic and organisational structures. This causes a lack of 

transport infrastructure and creates physical barriers. 

The current level of education, especially in the fields of logistics is one of the most hindering 

obstacles for these countries. Crossing border processes harm the current trade within the region. 

The facilitation of processes and documents is a problem. Further, interoperability, quality 

or reliability assurance and the lack of integrated information and communication systems are 

topics which hinder intermodal solutions. Waiting times and costs for crossing the borders between 

these countries are the consequences. 

Antiqued infrastructure is assessed as main obstacle. There are missing intermodal facilities like 

container equipment at ports and inland terminals. A high number of insufficient terminals with 

missing specialized equipment and the lack of modern logistics and information systems is given. 

This causes infrastructural bottlenecks for the region. 

- 27 -





Also the current safety and security standards along an intermodal supply chains are behind the 

European standards. Storage places, transport processes on risky routes and transhipment 

processes are transport stages where many incidents occur. 

The licensing process is facing problems, especially for rail transports. Because of long waiting 

times, additional costs, complex procedures, unclear responsibilities and a lack of planning reliability 

these point can be seen as main obstacle. 

From the FLAVIA point of view, a big obstacle is the legal framework concerning regulatory policies. 

Different transport policies are not harmonized and therefore a common strategy to push 

existing cooperation’s is difficult. 

6.1.3 Summary – opportunities 

As a region with unused industrial capacities TRACECA possesses various opportunities for the 

future development. The growth potentials mainly result from the resource deposits. The aim for 

a sustainable and profitable trade should be to take over a stronger position in the value chain. 

The production intensity has to be increased. The only export of raw materials could harm the 

economy due to the limitation of the deposits and the neglect of other industry branches. The 

further processing and beneficiation of the raw materials would strengthen the economic position. 

For the transformation process a technical assistance by the EC or companies would be 

promising. 

Furthermore, the usage of renewable resources for the production of energy and an efficient 

deployment of environmental technologies would be another opportunity. Countries like Kazakhstan 

and Uzbekistan with its desert and steppe landscape would be suitable for the production 

of solar and wind energy. The high mountain states could use the various rivers originating 

there for the production of water energy. 

Both development possibilities need investments, technical assistance and know-how. The establishment 

of cooperative structures between the EU, interested companies and TRACECA 

should be focused. 

The most important issue from the point of view of the transport relations is the logical linkage of 

both networks. An adequate infrastructure and a well-functioning transport organization are the 

basis for continuous and fast trade flows. The TEN-T as backbone of the European transport 

infrastructure is a significant part of the politics. A revision of the network by the EC was conducted 

in October 2011. By reference to the map (figure 13) the linking points of the TEN-T with 

the TRACECA network are depicted. Those links are initial points for the development of closer 

transport relations. 

- 28 -





To coordinate and manage the linkage of both corridors a common transport planning 

group/platform should be established. The platform could be used to plan and implement transcorridor 

projects. The experiences from the TEN-T core network shaping process could be used 

for the TRACECA corridor as well. The platform should be backed-up by market actor interest 

groups. 

Figure 14: TEN-T core network (blue) and its linkage points (orange) to the TRACECA region 

- 29 -





6.1.4 Summary – threats 

Due to the unstable situations in the TRACECA, countries caused by missing harmonized political 

orders and regular polices, there exist threats concerning the infrastructure situation. Consequently, 

the establishment of basic elements of a political order like transport policies can 

bring improvements to the whole transport sector. Cargos handling stations and intermodal terminals 

have to be developed to set a basis for intermodal transports. 

The current situation indicates threats as the existing capacity and efficiency of the mentioned 

points is not given. One way to achieve efficiency is the electrification of the railway connections 

on main routes in the region. 

The current level of language skills has to be improved as communication is the basis of all 

transport processes. Especially for intermodal transports exist many interfaces where actors 

have to communicate to set up required standards to enable intermodal transports. 

The customs formalities within the region can be seen as threat, as there a lot of administrative 

work exist which causes extra costs for intermodal transports. Trade barriers cause bad access 

to new potential trade partners for Central Europe and the whole FLAVIA corridor. 

The impact of foreign exchange rate uncertainty (fluctuations) and the corresponding costs hinder 

intermodal cross-border solutions to be competitive, projectable and transparent. This is one 

of the biggest threats for the cooperation for the partners within the FLAVIA corridor and the 

TRACECA countries. Further, it is required to maintenance the whole infrastructure on important 

routes which connects both regions. 

- 30 -

Tables 





Table 1: Key figures – Armenia .................................................................................................... 7 

Table 2: Key figures – Azerbaijan ................................................................................................ 8 

Table 3: Key figures - Bulgaria ..................................................................................................... 9 

Table 4: Key figures - Georgia ................................................................................................... 10 

Table 5: Key figures - Kazakhstan ............................................................................................. 11 

Table 6: Key figures - Kyrgyzstan .............................................................................................. 12 

Table 7: Key figures - Moldova ................................................................................................... 13 

Table 8: Key figures – Romania ................................................................................................. 14 

Table 9: Key figures - Tajikistan ................................................................................................. 15 

Table 10: Key figures - Turkey ................................................................................................... 16 

Table 11: Key figures - Ukraine .................................................................................................. 17 

Table 13: Key figures - Uzbekistan ............................................................................................ 18 

Table 14: Evaluation A – Situation inside TRACECA region ...................................................... 19 

Table 15: Evaluation B – Effects for trade/transport with the FLAVIA countries ........................ 19 

Figures 

Figure 1: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions – Armenia ............... 7 

Figure 2: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Azerbaijan ............ 8 

Figure 3: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Bulgaria ................ 9 

Figure 4: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Georgia ............... 10 

Figure 5: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions – Kazakhstan ........ 11 

Figure 6: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Kyrgyzstan .......... 12 

Figure 7: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Moldova .............. 13 

Figure 8: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Romania ............. 14 

Figure 9: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Tajikistan ............ 15 

Figure 10: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions – Turkey .............. 16 

Figure 11: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Ukraine ............. 17 

Figure 12: Map of major intermodal nodes and known extensions/additions - Uzbekistan ........ 18 

Figure 13: Corruption index 2011 (source: Corruption perception index 2011) ......................... 26 

Figure 14: TEN-T core network (blue) and its linkage points (orange) to the TRACECA region 29 

- 31 -

SWOT-Analysis - FLAVIA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?