Post on 01-Jan-2016
description
transcript
Barry CableDirector
Transport and Tourism Division
1st Expert Group Meeting on Developing Euro-Asian Transport
Linkages
9-11 March 2004, Alamaty Kazakhstan
Strategy for Further Development of Euro-Asian
Transport Linkages
2
Background to “Developing Euro-Asian Transport Linkages”Background to “Developing Euro-Asian Transport Linkages”
Developing countries constrained by inadequate transport infrastructure, legislation that differs from one country to another and time-consuming border procedures
Opportunities for interregional transport not fully explored
Five regional Commissions“Capacity-building in developing interregional
land and land-cum-sea transport linkages” (2002-2006).
3
Expected accomplishments
To identify important existing and potential interregional transport linkages To strengthen the capacities of national officials To put in operation efficient interregional transport linkages.
4
Strategic Vision for Euro-Asian Transport Links
2000, UNECE and UNESCAP put forward their “Common ECE/ESCAP Strategic Vision for Euro-Asian Transport Links” at the Second International Euro-Asian Conference on Transport 2001, with modification adopted by the UNECE Inland Transport Committee2003, Third International Euro-Asian Conference on Transport endorses the vision as eventually “integrated and harmoniously functioning Euro-Asian transport system”Euro-Asian Corridors identified
5
Major Euro-Asian Corridors identifiedTranssiberian: Europe (PETCs 2, 3 and 9) – Russian
Federation Japan, with branches to:Kazakhstan – China and Korean peninsula;Mongolia – China.
TRACECA: Eastern Europe (PETCs 4, 7, 8, 9) – across Black Sea – Caucasus – across Caspian Sea – Central Asia.
Southern: South-eastern Europe (PETC 4) – Turkey – Islamic Republic of Iran, with branches from Iran to:
Central Asia – China;South Asia – South-East Asia/Southern China.
North-South: North Europe (PETC 9) – Russian Federation, with branches to:
Caucasus – Persian Gulf;Central Asia – Persian Gulf;Across the Caspian Sea – Islamic Republic of Iran – Persian Gulf.
6
Strategy for the Euro-Asian transport system development Formulation of integrated intermodal international Euro-Asian transport routes/corridors and networks.Formalization through international agreements or amendments to existing ones, as a basis for their coordinated development.Facilitation of transport at border-crossing based on relevant international conventions Establishing national transport/trade facilitation committeesAnalysis of routes/corridors to identify physical and non-physical barriersOperationalization through efficient arrangements and mechanisms for each international route
7
Strategy for the Euro-Asian transport system development
Introduction/development of modern information technology.Development of transport logistics.Development of Public-Private PartnershipsFurther development of efficient cooperation between international and other organizations involved.Particular attention to be given to needs of landlocked countries and economies in transition.
8
Major outputs of the project
InfrastructureRoutes (rail, road, intermodal) within each of the Euro-Asian Transport corridors identifiedSet of alternative transport routes (where appropriate) for each participating country identified;Agreements on the routes reached between the countries concerned.
9
Major outputs of the project
Facilitation/Border crossingNational Trade and Transport Facilitation Committees established/ strengthened in the countries (TOR, Work Plans, Protocols…);Actions initiated/persued to introduce and implement major relevant international conventions (UNECE, UNESCAP resolution 48/11...);Border-crossing points and route specific problems identified
10
Major outputs of the projectDevelopment needs identified
Major physical and non-physical barriers identified through the UNESCAP methodology for international transport route analysis, including costs and time issues;Possibility of transport of ISO and non-ISO (high cube) containers along each of Euro-Asian transport routes established (including container terminals, ICO, transshipment points/nodes);Priority development needs (needs of common domestic and international importance) identified;Possible Public-Private Partnerships (PPP) approaches suggested;Operation cooperative arrangements suggested;
11
Formulation of interregional transport linkages UNECE-UNESCAP-National Focal Points
Extension of Pan-European Transport Corridors (PETCs) towards AsiaExtension of Asian transport routes to EuropeEuro-Asian Transport corridors, a starting point along withUNECE European Agreement on Main International Traffic Arteries (AGR) and UNESCAP Asian HighwayUNECE European Agreement on Main International Railway Lines (AGC) and UNESCAP Trans-Asian Railway as the basis for the route alignments. TRACECA-ECO-OSJD Euro-Asian links also considered
12
Limitations to identification of linkages
Not all links in these networks included in but only those most relevant within the four corridors.Countries are invited to propose routes considered Euro-Asian importance.Intermodal perspective, inland water routes and major seaports should also be considered together with inland container depots and border crossing facilitiesFocus on container traffic.At least three major origin/destination points in Europe (Central, Northern and Southern Europe) should be identified and agreed upon as basis for analysis.Air transport be excluded at the present time.
13
Considerations in identifying linkages
Corridor “Transsiberian”Only railway routes to be considered ?
Corridor “TRACECA”Railway-cum-sea (across the Caspian and Black Seas) route only ?;
Corridor “Southern”Rail, road and intermodal (rail-cum-road) routes;Routes through South Asia and South-East Asia to China to be considered in follow-up phase of project.
Corridor “North-South”Railway and rail-cum-sea (Caspian Sea) route;Clarification should be sought with regard to roads.
14
Project schedule - 2004
Identification of routes (March – July 2004)technical specifications of the infrastructure;operational information, including estimated traffic volume; andCurrent/ongoing investment projects on routes • UNECE and UNESCAP have prepared a draft
questionnaire for consideration • As far as possible, the secretariat will provide the
NFPs with data available to assist
Consolidation/analysis of data (July – Sept 2004)Presentation of preliminary results (October 2004)
15
Prioritization of investment projects
Countries develop inventory of national projectsUNECE/UNESCAP consolidate at interregional levelPrioritization
Consensus on linkages/route alignmentsConstitute elements of the corridorsIncluded in UNECE/UNESCAP networksDo not meet minimum standards for international trafficIdentified as a time/cost bottleneck
16
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
Distance
Time/cost
17
Distance
Time/ cost
Transport to border
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
18
Distance
Border crossing
Time/ cost
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
19
Distance
Transport to sea portTime/ cost
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
20
Distance
Wait at sea port
Time/ cost
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
21
Distance
Sea transport
Time/ cost
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
22
Distance
Time/ cost
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
UNESCAP time-cost methodology to isolate, identify bottlenecks
23
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Lao-Thai Lao-
Vietnam
Mongolia-
China
Mongolia-
Russia
Nepal-India
Kazakhstan-Russia
Uzbekistan-
Turkmenistan
Bor
der
Average Maximum
Comparison of border crossing time (hours)
24
Cost/TEU
$131 $100
$293
$155$124
$200
$650
$0
$100
$200
$300
$400
$500
$600
$700
Lao-Thai Lao-Vietnam
Mongolia-
China
Mongolia-Russia
Nepal-India
*Kazakhstan-
Russia
*Uzbekistan-
Turkmenistan
Comparison of border crossing costs (US$ per TEU)
25
Project schedule - 2005
Facilitation of transport along the Euro-Asian transport linkages (2005)Analysis of transit times and costs along routes
cost/time/distance analysis be conducted to assess the physical and non-physical bottlenecks
Capacity building and strengthening of implementation of the major international transport agreements and conventions by countries
series of national (and/or subregional) workshops Strengthening of national trade/transport facilitation committees
26
Project schedule - 2006• Establishment of a database with contact
details of responsible experts and institutions involved in the Euro-Asian development aspects in consultation with member states, other development agencies and offices of the UN system.
• Creation of a website for the project (already initiated).
• Organization of workshop for sharing lessons learned across the Regional Commissions.
27
Thank you for your attention