La Red de Alta Velocidad Europea: Más un mosaico poco efectivo que una realidad

More documents

Recommendations

Info

9 and its competitors (air transport, conventional rail and road transport). We concluded that total travel time and price level are both important factors for success. Combined with effectively regular services, these factors could allow high-speed rail to increase its market share. Intermodal competition is fierce, and it affects the sustainability of high-speed lines: high-speed rail does not compete on an equal basis with other transport modes. IX. We assess sustainability of the EU co-funding to be at risk. Judging by a benchmark, a high-speed line should ideally have nine million passengers per year to be successful. However, on three of the seven completed high-speed lines we audited, the number of passengers carried was far lower. The infrastructure cost of these lines was 10.6 billion euro, to which the EU provided around 2.7 billion euro. This means that there is a high risk of ineffective spending of EU co-funding on these lines. Our assessment of the number of people living in the catchment areas of the audited lines indicates that nine of the 14 audited lines and cross-border connections did not have enough potential passengers to be successful. These include the three lines indicated above carrying a lower number of passengers compared to the benchmark of nine million. X. In 2010, we issued a report calling for urgent action to lift all technical, administrative and other barriers to rail interoperability. However, we found that these barriers still persist in 2018. The rail passenger market is not open in France and Spain. There is on-track competition in Italy and, to a limited extent, in Austria; in these Member States, services were more frequent and of higher quality, whereas ticket prices were lower. Integrated ticketing systems, and greater attention paid to monitoring and standardising customer satisfaction and punctuality data, could further improve the passenger experience. XI. For a successful continuation of EU co-funding for high-speed rail infrastructure in the next programming period, we recommend that the Commission should take a number of steps. These include: (i) carrying out realistic long-term planning; and agreeing with the Member States the key strategic stretches to be implemented first, with close monitoring and enforceable powers to ensure that commitments to complete the core EU highspeed rail network are respected;
10 (ii) making EU co-funding support linked to earmarked strategic priority projects, effective on-track competition and achievement of results; (iii) simplifying cross-border constructions with regard to tendering procedures, the use of “one-stop-shops” for the formalities, and the lifting of all remaining barriers; (iv) actions to improve seamless high-speed rail operations for passengers, such as, for example, e-ticketing, simplification of track access charges and improving the reporting to citizens on punctuality and customer satisfaction data.
Page 1 and 2: EN 2018 NO 19 Special Report A Euro
Page 3 and 4: 2 CONTENTS Paragraph Abbreviations
Page 5 and 6: 4 Annex I - European High-Speed Net
Page 7 and 8: 6 ERTMS (European Rail traffic mana
Page 9: 8 V. The quality of the assessment
Page 13 and 14: 12 all planned high-speed rail infr
Page 15 and 16: 14 Member States, to remove bottlen
Page 17 and 18: 16 13. Although these sums are sign
Page 19 and 20: 18 Figure 4 - Overview of audited l
Page 21 and 22: 20 22. Although the relationship is
Page 23 and 24: 22 two or more Member States, as th
Page 25 and 26: 24 30. This limits the EU added val
Page 27 and 28: 26 Picture 1 - Missing link at the
Page 29 and 30: 28 Decision-making lacks reliable c
Page 31 and 32: 30 Figure 5 - Differences in constr
Page 33 and 34: 32 Table 4 - Cost of the audited hi
Page 35 and 36: 34 unrealistic. This was not questi
Page 37 and 38: 36 Picture 2 - Construction works o
Page 39 and 40: 38 speed rail. However, when assess
Page 41 and 42: 40 (iv) From Paris to Strasbourg, t
Page 43 and 44: 42 16 km/h 37 . The number of stati
Page 45 and 46: 44 74. To be successful and competi
Page 47 and 48: 46 be successful 43 . In 2016, only
Page 49 and 50: 48 Box 2 - The operations of the Sh
Page 51 and 52: 50 Seamless and competitive cross-b
Page 53 and 54: 52 Picture 5 - Passengers waiting a
Page 55 and 56: 54 90. Directive (EU) No 2012/34/EU
Page 57 and 58: 56 A strong and independent regulat
Page 59 and 60: 58 The principles of sound financia
Page 61 and 62:
60 106. Each Member State must have
Page 63 and 64:
62 6. In the upcoming CEF Regulatio
Page 65 and 66:
64 ANNEX I European High-Speed Netw
Page 68:
66 Country HSL Project Code Project
Page 72:
68 ANNEX IV Key HSR Data per Member
Page 76 and 77:
70 ANNEX VI A citizen’s view: Ass
Page 78 and 79:
72 given to the fastest and slightl
Page 81:
74 Averages by visited country Euro
Page 85 and 86:
76 ANNEX VIII Map of the catchment
Page 87 and 88:
High-Speed Line Eje Atlantico 78
Page 89 and 90:
80 High-Speed Line Est Européenne
Page 91 and 92:
82 High-Speed Line Torino - Salerno
Page 93 and 94:
High-Speed Line Berlin - Munich 84
Page 95 and 96:
86 High-Speed Line Madrid - Lisbon
Page 97 and 98:
88 High-Speed Line Figueres - Perpi
Page 99:
90 Analysis of stations ANNEX IX Co
Page 102 and 103:
XI. The Commission refers to its re
Page 104 and 105:
calculation of the socio-economic v
Page 106 and 107:
depend on the size of the country a
Page 108 and 109:
As regards CEF, the Commission does
Page 110 and 111:
operators, the Commission has recen
Page 112 and 113:
Since 2000, the EU has been investi
Page 114 and 115:
ES los auditores, una velocidad med
show all

La Red de Alta Velocidad Europea: Más un mosaico poco efectivo que una realidad

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

Delete template?

Save as template?