1 | Page
Iron Curtain Trail
Sustainable mobilty along the newest EuroVelo route.
Trans-national Action Plan
Prepared by:
European Cyclists` Federation (ECF)
Brussels, Belgium
Commissioned by:
West Pannon Regional and Economic Development Nonprofit Ltd.
Szombathely, Hungary
5th December 2014
2 | Page
Table of Contents
Executive Summary p. 3
Overview of the sections p. 6
1. Routes – infrastructure development actions p. 8
2. Services p. 13
3. Marketing – promotion p. 16
4. Organisation, financing p. 20
Costs of the core activities by country p. 23
Costs of the core activities by timescale p. 23
Costs of core activities by type p. 24
3 | Page
Executive Summary – Action Plan – Iron Curtain Trail - EuroVelo13 – Southern section
Mission, goals EuroVelo is a network of 14 long distance cycle routes connecting and uniting the whole
European continent. The routes can be used by cycle tourists as well as by local people making
daily journeys and it is envisaged that the network will be substantially completed by 2020.
One of the network’s newest routes is the “Iron Curtain Trail, EuroVelo 13”, which leads from
the Barents Sea to the Black Sea and is more than 10,400 km long. The “Iron Curtain Trail” is
the longest route of the European cycle route network and it is expected to generate annually
3.3 million daytrips, 849.000 holiday trips and have an economic impact of 355 million Euro
when it is fully developed. In order to reach the full potential of the EuroVelo 13 route, project
partners have evaluated potential itineraries, services, promotion/marketing conditions, the
organisational and financial background of the “Iron Curtain Trail” and defined necessary
actions until 2020.
With the support of the South East Europe Programme which funded the project “Sustainable
mobility along the newest EuroVelo route, the Iron Curtain Trail”- (ICT), the Southern section
of the “Iron Curtain Trail” will be able to catch up the more developed sections and become the
engine of all cycle related development in the region.
Main objectives of the project:
• To improve the accessibility of the South East Europe (SEE) regions by bicycle;
• To connect the SEE region with a European long distance cycling route;
• To realise opportunities for cycling and public transport connections;
• To promote cycling and combined sustainable transportation as a means of
sustainable mobility and tourism;
• To improve knowledge, exchange experiences and raise awareness on cycling and
public transport related developments.
4 | Page
The objectives of this action plan consist of defining the necessary actions and the responsible
organisations in order to reach the fullest potential of the Iron Curtain Trail and provide a real
developing framework of the route.
Partners implementing the project
The project “Sustainable mobility along the newest EuroVelo route, the Iron Curtain Trail”,
funded by South East Europe Programme, is managed and coordinated by the West Pannon
Regional and Economic Development Nonprofit Ltd from Hungary (Szombathely).
Participating partners are regional development bodies and non-governmental organisations
(NGOs) who are either funded partners or observers are the following :
• BGLD - Regional Government of Land Burgenland Eisenstadt, Austria;
• EKOPOLIS - Ekopolis Foundation Banská Bystrica, Slovakia;
• HCA – Hungarian Cycling Alliance – Budapest, Hungary;
• RRA MURA – Regional Development Agency Mura Ltd – Murska Sobota, Slovenia;
• BCA – Bulgarian Cycling Association – Burgas, Bulgaria
• ANTIGONE – Information and Documentation Centre on Racism, Ecology, Peace and
Non-Violence – Thessaloniki, Greece;
• STRDA – South Transdanubian Regional Development Agency – Nonprofit Public
Ltd. Pécs, Hungary;
• ASWM – Association of South-western Municipalities – Blagoevgrad, Bulgaria;
• BAAT – Bulgarian Association of Alternative Tourism – Sofia, Bulgaria;
• INCDT – National Institute for Research and Development in Tourism – Bucharest,
Romania;
• RMB – Regional management Burgenland Ltd – Eisenstadt, Austria
• NAERDI – National Agricultural Advisory, Educational and Rural Development
Institute – Budapest, Hungary;
5 | Page
• Moj Bicikl - NGO My Bike
• YCC - Yugo Cycling Campaign – Belgrade, Serbia
• CDSERP - Centre for development of the South-East planning region
• TAK - Tourist Authority of Koprivnica, Croatia;
• DCC – Danube Competence Centre – Belgrade, Serbia;
• PI - Association Center for Development And Promotion Promo Idea Strumica,
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia
• THRACE - Region of East Macedonia
This transnational action plan is based on the National and Regional action plans which were
drawn up during the course of the Iron Curtain Trail project.
Current situation and proposed activities
Experts currently estimate that less than 0.5% of all holidays in Bulgaria are cycle holidays. The share is between 1% and 3% in Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, Slovakia and Croatia and more than 3% in Austria and Hungary. Because of this we have to focus on the target groups both inside and outside the countries of the ICT, with specific targeting of the local tourist market in the Slovakia-Austria-Hungary section. According to the needs of local and international cyclists we have to improve the route, service conditions, provide information and organise effective promotion. 85 % of the 3381 km long final itinerary leads on low traffic or traffic free roads and paths which can be used immediately. We propose to construct 304 km of new segregated cycle paths and 692 km of cycle lanes along main carriageways, whilst 207 km of surface improvements are needed for roads, mainly for cyclists. In order to reduce costs and improve road safety we proposed soft route development measures (shared lane marking and traffic calming / reduction) on 231 km of the route. The improvement of the quality of the low traffic public roads is necessary on 107 km. We defined 70 separate sections for the southern part of the Iron Curtain Trail. The length varies (between 12,5 and 92 km) and we want to be sure there are basic accommodations at least at the end of the daily sections. Unfortunately 17 sections in various rural stage of the route do not fulfil this basic criterion (of which 7 are placed in Serbia and 4 in Bulgaria), so we propose to develop basic accommodations on 10 sections, amongst other measures. To provide better services, especially for cyclists, we proposed to transform the service points to cycle friendly in every country and introduce label and quality insurance in those countries which do not yet have a national system. To reach and convince our target groups we have to integrate the Iron Curtain Trail to trans-national (EuroVelo), national, regional and local
6 | Page
promotion activities and offers and we need new marketing – promotion actions (websites, printed promotion tools, events, study tours). The organisational solutions are the key to the sustainability in case of every long distance cycle route project. Beside awareness raising and training, we propose steering and working groups. Costs and benefits The Southern section of the Iron Curtain Trail is expected to generate annually 1.5 million
daytrips, more than 170,000 holiday trips and have a total economic impact of 97.7 million Euro
per year if it is fully developed1. The core activities (including development and operational
costs) are total 58,5 million Euro (for 2014 – 2020)! It is therefore clearly worthwhile to invest
European, national, regional, local public and private resources into the southern section of the
Iron Curtain Trail!
As there was not a Turkish partner involved in the Iron Curtain Trail project, the route survey
in Turkey was carried out by the Bulgarian project partners. As such we do not make a detailed
projection of short-, mid- and long-term activities and their costs for the 4 Turkish sections.
Overview of the sections
The route was defined with 70 daily sections.
Country Section start – (via) - stop Summary length (km)
Slovakia Hohenau - Devinska Nova Ves 59
Slovakia Devinska Nova Ves - Kittsee 33.4
Austria Kittsee/Bratislava South - Andau Bridge 70
Austria (Hungary) Andau Bridge - Fertoujlak 12.5
Hungary Fertoujlak - Fertorakos 44.4
Austria Fertorakos (Moerbisch) - Scattendorf 23
Hungary Scattendorf (Agfalva-Somfalva) - Harka 16.6
Austria Harka (Neckenmarkt) - Nikitsch 25
Hungary (Austria) Nikitsch (Marienhof-Zsira) - Bildein North 53.85
Austria (Hungary) Bildein North - St. Emmerich 33
Hungary St. Emmerich (Szentimrei tanya) - Felsoszolnok 27.2
1 According to the study “The European cycle route network EuroVelo” ordered by the European
Parliament.
7 | Page
Slovenia Felsoszolnok (Martinje) - Pince 66.5
Hungary Pince (Tornyiszentmiklos) - Letenye 22.8
Croatia Letenye - Donja Dubrava 30.7
Croatia Donja Dubrava - Krizevci 90.5
Croatia Krizevci - Osijek 92.2
Croatia Osjijek - Barcs 67.7
Hungary Barcs - Dravasztara 46.3
Hungary Dravasztara - Siklos 54.7
Hungary Siklos - Mohacs 58.5
Hungary Mohacs - Bacsalmas 62
Hungary Bacsalmas - Tompa 26
Serbia Tompa - Subotica - Asotthalom 50
Hungary Asotthalom - Tiszasziget 57
Serbia Tiszasziget (Djala)- Kikinda 70
Serbia Kikinda – Jimbolia 33
Romania Jimbolia - Deta 90
Romania Deta - Moravita 16
Serbia Moravita - Bela Crkva 56
Romania 2 Bela Crkva (Naidas) - Moldova Noua 55
Romania 2 Moldova Noua - Dubova 80
Romania 2 Dubova - Portile de Fier (Kladovo) 39
Serbia 3 Bela Crkva – Golubac 55
Serbia 3 Golubac – Donji Milanovac 57
Serbia 3 Donji Milanovac - Kladovo 63
Serbia Kladovo - Negotin 78
Serbia Negotin – Mokranje - Rajac - Mali Jasenovac 43
Serbia Mali Jasenovac – Zaječar 27
Serbia Zaječar – Bučje - Knjaževac 56
Serbia Knjaževac – Kalna 28
Serbia Kalna - Temska – Pirot 40
Serbia Pirot – Visočka Ržana - Slavinja 31
2 Alternative routes – Right bank of the Danube 3 Alternative routes – Left bank of the Danube
8 | Page
Serbia Slavinja - Dimitrovgrad 40
Bulgaria Dimitrovgrad- Dragoman 25
Bulgaria Dragoman – Gorochevtsi 58
Bulgaria Gorochevtsi - Ushi 46
Bulgaria Ushi - Kyustendil 40
Bulgaria Kyustendil - Pastuh 34
Bulgaria Pastuh - Blagoevgrad 40
Bulgaria Blagoevgrad – Delcevo Border Crossing 30
FYR Macedonia Delcevo Border Crossing - Berovo 53.5
FYR Macedonia Berovo - Strumica 56.2
FYR Macedonia Strumica – Novo Selo 36.1
Bulgaria Novo Selo - Petrich 39
Greece Petrich (Promoachonas) - Exochi 92.2
Bulgaria Exochi (Ilinden) - Satovca 67
Bulgaria Satovca – Trigrad 59
Bulgaria Trigrad – Shiroka Laka 40
Bulgaria Shiroka Laka - Rudozem 57
Bulgaria Rudozem - Zlatograd 40
Bulgaria Zlatograd - Momcilgrad 60
Bulgaria Momcilgrad - Cernicevo 58
Bulgaria Cernicevo – Kyprinos 58
Greece Kyprinos - Edirne 30
Turkey Edirne - Lalapaşa 74
Turkey Lalapaşa - Devletliağaç 32
Turkey Devletliağaç - Dereköy 63
Turkey Dereköy – Malko Tyrnovo 21
Bulgaria Malko Tyrnovo - Kosti 42
Bulgaria Kosti - Rezovo 50
Total 3381 km
9 | Page
1. Routes – infrastructure development actions
Current situation – proposed solutions ● 87% of the 3381 km long final itinerary leads on low traffic or traffic free roads and cycle
paths. This 87% can be used immediately after signposting. Some of these public roads (3%) need surface improvement or it is recommended to asphalt them, not only to cater for cyclists but to improve (the general motorized and non-motorized) mobility conditions for the local population.
● EuroVelo13 – Iron Curtain Trail signposts are currently present in three countries along the route; the entire route is signposted in Austria and Slovakia, with some short sections introduced in Hungary during the course of the project. In total, 256km of the route carries EuroVelo 13 signposts. In addition, 279 km of the Serbian section follows the route of EuroVelo 6, which is fully signposted. Including this Serbian section, 1144 km of existing cycle route signposting need to be upgraded with the addition of the EuroVelo 13 logo. 2261 km of the route requires brand new signposting for cyclists.
● 423 km of the route is located on public roads with high levels of motorized traffic where separation or traffic calming / reduction is needed urgently. The majority of the public roads with high traffic are found in Bulgaria (280km) and Serbia (46 km). (It is proposed that segregated cycle paths, pedestrian – cycle paths and cycle lanes are constructed if they can be used by the local population as well (to help daily transportation / mobility).
● 121 km from the final itinerary is proposed on non-asphalted public roads, where the surface is mostly smooth and solid enough, but on some sections (7km) the quality must be improved. A further 139 km is proposed on non-asphalted, traffic-free, 29 km of which need urgent surface repairs.
● In certain sections the distances between service points / settlements are quite challenging (for less athletic cyclists) because of the low density of the population. In several cases we propose to improve bike transport on public transport, so that there is an alternative solution if the weather is challenging.
● There are national standards for cycling infrastructure in place in Austria, Hungary and Slovakia, while all other countries crossed have engaged to develop these in collaboration with national and regional governments. There are also monitoring and maintenance systems in place for cycling facilities in Austria, and parts of the route in Slovakia and Serbia.
Proposed infrastructure development activities
● 1.1. Construction of separated cycle path. Beside high traffic public roads (mostly justified by the needs of the local population), the partners proposed 304 km new cycling facilities. The majority of these developments (209 km) are proposed by the Bulgarian partners but they are also required in Macedonia (63 km), where the proposed route is on a mountain road which does not currently have sufficient space
10 | Page
for a cycle lane. In general we do not propose this measure in areas with a low population density, where investment can hardly be justified.
● 1.2. Renew facilities and improve the surface of public roads mainly for cyclists. It includes the improvement of the quality of dirt and gravel roads (mostly justified by the needs of the cyclists). Summary approx 207 km. The majority of these developments were proposed by the Croatian (86.7km) and Slovakian (49km) partners, with minor sections also proposed in Hungary, Bulgaria, Slovenia and Macedonia.
● 1.3.1. Cycle lane marking is a cost effective solution to improve the conditions for cyclists on existing public roads, without construction works. We propose to mark 692km of cycle lanes on the existing public roads, the vast majority of this being in Bulgaria (634 km).
● 1.3.2. Shared marking. An alternative solution to a painted cycle lane on narrower roads, this road marking increases awareness of cyclists for car drivers. It is proposed as a solution on 80km of the route, again mainly in Bulgaria (50 km). A critical 16km section is proposed in Romania in the Iron Gates national park, where potential for road expansion is limited.
● 1.3.3. Traffic calming / reduction. This is the cheapest and fastest way to accommodate existing roads to the needs of the cyclists, but the resistance of the authorities can be significant. This has been proposed 151km of route, including 111km in Hungary, 14.2 km in Croatia. Again 16km is proposed in Romania in the same critical section.
● 1.3.4.1. EuroVelo signposting in addition to the existing national / regional signs. This action is relevant notably in sections of Hungary (352.6 km), Croatia (232.8 km) and Serbia (297 km) totalling 1144 km for the whole route.
● 1.3.4.2. Complete, new signposting including EuroVelo signs. There are sections in every country except Austria and Slovakia, where complete signposting is needed, totalling 2261 km in length. The longest section is in Bulgaria (1033km), whilst the shortest is in Croatia (47km).
● 1.4.2. Improve bike transportation capacity on public transport (PT). There were 38 sections of the route where actions were proposed to develop public transport links, which are very important to service the route in remote areas. Many of these proposals were put forward as package offers in Work Package 4 of the project.
● 1.5.1. National / regional standard for cycling infrastructure. It is necessary to develop national standards in every country (based on the EuroVelo standards) and approve it. It has to define the adequate infrastructure types in the most important circumstances (like the level of the motorised traffic, pedestrians, cyclists, the speed of the motorised traffic etc.), the physical parameters of the infrastructure etc. ‘National standards’ are regulations that are accepted by the relevant national authorities. It was proposed for most of the participating countries – Slovenia, Croatia, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Greece. These standards already exist in Austria, Hungary and Slovakia.
● 1.5.2. Handbook for maintenance works and monitoring. It has to define the level of expected services as well as the tasks required to maintain the route (including signposting and monitoring). In order to provide consistent road conditions and quality,
11 | Page
a trans-national manual has to be prepared and accepted. It was proposed or is in development in Hungary, Slovakia, Croatia, Bulgaria and Macedonia.
● 1.6.1. Automatic counters. It is important to define those key sections where the traffic on the route can be / needs to be measured. We propose to install them on 22 sections, in Serbia (11 sections), Bulgaria (4 sections), Macedonia (3 sections).
● 1.6.2. Data manipulation, data transfer and verification. This action includes every activity to process and manipulate the result of the counting until 2020. It is essential in every country which installs automatic counters.
● 1.7.1. Maintenance of the cycling facilities. The maintenance costs of infrastructure created as a result of the core activities (facilities mainly for cycling). The maintenance and operational costs of the connected facilities (mainly not for cyclists) are not part of the current action plan.
● 1.7.2. Maintenance of the signposting. In some countries the signs have to be replaced before the end of their “natural” lifetimes (e.g. because they are stolen!). We recommend implementing this activity on the national or regional level.
12 | Page
Connected infrastructure development activities
● Repair the asphalt on public roads / streets. Repair the non-asphalted public roads
/ streets. It is proposed to add a new asphalt layer or consolidate the surface of the
non-asphalted roads in order to have less dust and smoother riding. This action is
necessary on 106.7 km of the route. It is proposed in Croatia (86.7 km) and Bulgaria
(20km). The public roads connect permanent settlements and the action is justified
mostly by the benefits to the motorised mobility of the local population (not the
cycling tourists).
13 | Page
2. Services
Current situation:
● We defined 70 sections for the Southern section of the Iron Curtain Trail. The length varies (between 12.5 and 92 km) but it was important that there is at least basic accommodation available at the end of each section. Ideally the accommodation is available more frequently, but currently we do not have this situation throughout the entire route yet. The most problematic (“inappropriate”) service conditions are reported on 17 sections, including in rural areas of Serbia (7 sections) and Bulgaria (4 sections). In these countries, remote, rural areas are the most problematic. There are 22 sections with serious deficiencies (”just appropriate service conditions”) along the route (mostly in Croatia, Serbia, Romania) but there are basic retail shops, pubs and restaurants available nearly everywhere at least with moderate or low density.
● The only quality control or cycling friendly service systems in the countries of the Southern section part of the Iron Curtain trail are in Austria, Slovakia and Croatia. Slovakia and Croatia plan to improve these systems as part of the mid-to-long term development of the Iron Curtain Trail, while Hungary, Bulgaria and Macedonia plan to introduce national systems.
● Bike repair services are sporadically available (only in bigger towns), which can result difficulties in case of technical problems with the bikes of less experienced cyclists.
Proposed service development activities ● 2.1.1. Development of basic accommodation. There are 10 sections throughout the
route where the development of basic accommodation was proposed to provide at least appropriate conditions according the EuroVelo standards. This was particularly important in 3 sections in Serbia, and in Slovenia where the entire route requires this measure.
● 2.1.2. Development of basic retail capacities – this measure was proposed in sections lacking retail stores for travelling cyclists’ basic supplies. It will be necessary in 5 daily sections of the route, mainly in Hungary (3 sections).
● 2.1.3.1. Transforming accommodations to ‘cycling friendly’. This means the identification of accommodation and the way they can be transformed to cater for cycle tourists (e.g. establish safe bike storage facilities and place bike repair kits). It is necessary on 29 sections of the route and will go hand in hand with the development of national networks for cycling friendly services.
● 2.1.3.2. Transforming retail shops, pubs and restaurants to cycling friendly. It means the identification of retail services and the ways they can be transformed to cater for cycle tourists (e.g. establish safe bike storage facilities and place bike repair kits). It is proposed for 17 sections, including 6 in Hungary and 4 in Romania.
● 2.1.3.3. Transforming attractions (museums, visitor centres, spas etc) to cycling friendly. It means the identification of the attractions and the way they can be transformed (to cater for cycle tourists (e.g. establish safe bike storage facilities and
14 | Page
place bike repair kits). It is proposed for 24 sections, largely in Serbia (7 sections) and Hungary (6 sections).
● 2.1.3.4. Training and awareness-raising for the staff of services and attractions. To deal with cyclists, the staff of cycling friendly services can get a short training (basic needs, basic repair, basic expressions in different languages), partly for awareness-raising. It will involve 1-2 persons per service point. It was proposed in Hungary, Bulgaria, Serbia, Croatia and Macedonia (where the low level of awareness among the service providers was considered as a main challenge).
● 2.1.4.1. Label and quality criteria system for cycling friendly services. It can include marketing plans, design and consultancy work. It is necessary on the national / regional level. Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and Macedonia plan to introduce national systems. Austria and Greece have already established systems.
● 2.1.4.2. Organise and control the network of cycling friendly services. It can include exploring the potential services providers, visiting them, controlling their services and keeping the contact with them. It will eventually be necessary in every country (because all has/wants a cycling friendly system), but only Slovakia and Croatia plan to improve their current systems as part of their mid-term actions on the Iron Curtain trail.
● 2.1.5. Establish rest stations. The services of the rest stations can be provided by local pubs or gasoline stations as well, but if they do not exist and they are not expected to be opened in the near future (far from settlements etc.), we have to provide additional rest stations with protection against sun / rain, toilet facilities and, if possible, running water (or close to a spring). We try to ensure that these rest stations reach at least the minimum level and use renewable resources (solar cells, bio toilet etc.) in order to protect the natural environment. The rest stations can include / integrate landscape art solutions as well. They are proposed on 24 sections including 7 in Serbia, 5 in Romania, 4 in Bulgaria, and 3 in Hungary.
● 2.2.1. Establish bike repair stations. Bike repair stations can be provided by private companies or individuals as commercial services, if the cyclists cannot repair their bike by themselves. We propose to establish bike repair stations on 26 sections, in Serbia (13 sections), Hungary (3 sections), Macedonia (3 sections) and Romania (4 sections).
● 2.2.2. Establish bike rental stations. This can be justified in areas where the holiday makers are well represented among the target groups and we would like to attract them to cycle during their holiday, or if it is hard to arrange for them to bring their own bikes by Public Transport. All countries except Greece, Austria and Slovakia proposed this in certain sections, with 11 sections of the route targeted in total.
● 2.2.3. Establish pedelec stations. To attract new target groups (less “fit” cyclists), pedelecs can be a good solution, especially on longer sections, but the charging of their batteries (with electricity) should be possible. We propose to establish new pedelec stations in 5 of the Hungarian sections, in addition to those already available in Austria. No other countries proposed this solution in the current action plan.
15 | Page
● 2.2.4. The establishment of new bicycle centres with complex services was proposed in Hungary, Croatia, Bulgaria and Macedonia.
● 2.2.5. Help line. In order to help cyclists in emergency situations, telephone help lines and technical rescue services can be developed. It was proposed in Hungary, Croatia, Bulgaria and Macedonia due to areas with low population density in these countries.
Connecting service development activities (construction of hotels etc.) would be necessary on several sections. Because of the lack of capacities the consortia decided not to explore and define the quality improvement actions in order to reach the “good” level but propose instead to focus on the core actions to achieve at least the “just appropriate” level everywhere.
16 | Page
3. Marketing – promotion
Current situation ● Some of the regions along the southern section of the ICT are already well known
among cycling (and other) holiday makers, some even as cycling holiday destinations. For example the Neusiedlersee/Fertö lake on the Austrian-Hungarian border, and the Iron Gates region of Serbia/Romania/Bulgaria. Even those are not necessarily among the touristic hot-spots of Europe, but they are well known regionally and they can serve as a basis for cycling tourism promotion along the ICT. It is necessary to use these assets.
● The ICT – EuroVelo 13 route is usually not mentioned in any official promotion or marketing activity of the above mentioned tourism destinations, although the EuroVelo 6 route which shares the road through the Iron gates in Serbia and Romania is already well promoted.
● The Bikeline Guide and Michael Cramer’s book about the Iron Curtain Trail are the main sources of detailed information specially for cycling tourist.
● Printed information (brochures, free maps) did not properly cover the route, and as such each country produced brochures promoting the Iron Curtain trail during the course of the project. In the action plan 47 sections are highlighted as having insufficient printed information.
● Deficiencies were also found in the availability of sufficient web information beyond the transnational level, with 35 sections not covered (the entirety of the route in Bulgaria, Romania, Macedonia, Serbia and Slovenia).
● There are some events along the route, including cross-border cycling events between Hungary, Slovakia and Austria which can be connected to the route and used to promote it.
Proposed target groups and target markets Experts currently estimate that less than 0.5% of all holidays in Bulgaria are cycle holidays. The share is between 1% and 3% in Romania, Serbia, Slovenia, Slovakia and Croatia and more than 3% in Austria and Hungary. Because of this we have to focus on the target groups inside and outside the countries of the ICT. For example, other countries with high cycling shares (over 3%) of the tourism market include Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, and the Nordic countries. The Southern section of the Iron Curtain Trail is expected to generate annually 1.5 million daytrips, more than 170,000 holiday trips and have a total economic impact of 97.7 million Euro per year if it is fully developed4. In order to use this potential we have to focus on the following target groups:
● Cycling tourists (cycling holiday makers) will generate overnight trips. We can expect them already in short-term, as soon the signing is finished and the promotion started,
4 According to the study “The European cycle route network EuroVelo” ordered by the European
Parliament.
17 | Page
because the current conditions already meets their basic needs except in those sections where the route and service conditions are inappropriate. They will come mostly from Germany and from the countries along the route.
● Tourists in existing tourism destinations (see above) are one of the main target groups. Short cycling tours can prolong their stay and increase spending. They are already important in the short term.
● Local population can use the route for daily transportation and daily leisure trips and can indicate bigger investment. In the target region, Hungary (22%) and Slovenia (9%) have the highest shares of cycling in their modal split, but the route does not lead through their capitals or main urban nodes. Most of the other countries crossed have modal splits around the EU28 average of 8%, except for Greece (2%) and Bulgaria (4%).5
● Cycling adventurers can be one of the main target groups for the Serbian – Bulgarian – Macedonian – Greek section, because on several sections it is ‘wild’ enough and will remain exciting enough to satisfy the “adventure” cyclist. On the other hand the Slovakian – Austrian – Hungarian border section is well enough developed to be promoted to family groups and more demanding route users in terms of services.
Proposed promotion activities ● 3.1.1. Marketing plan for the route. As part of the Iron Curtain Trail project, a marketing
plan and common methodology was produced on the Trans-national level by the European Cyclists’ Federation. Consistent with the principles of the EuroVelo marketing and communication principles for all routes, the plan includes a market analysis for the route broken in to four sections, highlights the tools at the partners’ disposition, gives a general strategic plan for target market, and evaluates the current status of bookable offers, services and attractions in each country. The transnational marketing plan and common corporate design was accepted by all the project partners and integrated in their national and regional strategies.
● 3.1.2. Regular surveys of the users and market. These surveys have to be regular (at least biannual) and based on the same methodology in every country. It is necessary to investigate users’ opinion on the European level with the same frequency. Macedonia, Greece, Bulgaria, Hungary and Slovakia proposed national surveys, in order to collect country specific information.
● 3.2.1. Integrate the route into the existing tourism offers. Tour operators are providing different touristic offers in the main tourism destinations. The ICT has to be added as an additional program to the existing offers. The cost is to contact and convince these tour operators to integrate ICT. The activity was deemed relevant in all countries except Croatia.
● 3.2.2. Internet sub-site development. It is proposed to have a special separate sub-site / part on the existing national / regional tourism portal providing updates and detailed information about ICT. It will link to the relevant national and regional tourism portals in every country. This was relevant in every country along the route.
5 Special Eurobarometer 422a, December 2014
18 | Page
In the frame of the project the following national and regional website developments were prepared: New national websites: Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Slovakia New regional websites: Strumica region, Macedonia; Mura region, Slovenia; West Pannon region, Hungary Redevelopment of existing national and regional websites according to EuroVelo standards: Bulgaria; Hungary; Romania; Serbia; South Transdanubia, Hungary; Burgenland, Austria; Koprivnica, Croatia
● 3.2.3. Integrate the route into guidebooks and maps. Existing or planned guide books and detailed maps have to contain the latest information, precise itinerary and connecting information for the ICT. These publications are commercial products, so the cost of integration means consultancy, meetings etc. There is currently only one guide book (from Esterbauer Bikeline), but it will (hopefully) increase. This is an ongoing activity and it has to be repeated every second year. It is proposed in Hungary, Slovakia, Bulgaria and Macedonia on the national level, and is already completed in Austria.
● 3.2.4. Integrate the route into printed promotion tools. Existing or planned promotion leaflets and free overview maps – even where they are not only for cyclists – have to contain the latest information, overview itinerary and general information relating to the ICT. These publications are not products for sale, but the cost of integration means consultancy, meetings etc. This ongoing activity was developed during the project and needs to be repeated every second year. This activity was proposed in 7 countries (Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Greece) and is completed in Austria.
● 3.2.5. Integrate the existing ICT-related events to the promotion of the current route. Existing events can help to promote the route, but they need some adoption, in this case we have to add a cycling specific programme to it. It has to be repeated every year in Hungary, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria and Macedonia)
● 3.2.6. Integrate the route into advertisement activities. Every national tourism board organises advertisements and promotional campaigns about their attractions. We have to ensure that ICT is represented in these actions. Again this was a preferred action for Hungary, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria and Macedonia.
● 3.2.7. Integrate the promotion of the route into presentations at fairs. Every national tourism board promotes their area at international / national tourism fairs. We have to ensure that ICT is represented in these fairs. Hungary, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria and Macedonia would again integrate this as part of their marketing efforts.
● 3.2.8. Integrate the route into social media. The use of the existing, well–known social media sites can bring additional boost for the promotion in Hungary, Bulgaria and Macedonia.
● 3.3.1. Develop cycling tourism offers. Together with existing tour operators, it is necessary to develop common cycling tourism offers. Again countries with extended rural areas such as Hungary, Croatia and Bulgaria would like to work explicitly in this field, because in the rural areas organised tours can be more successful at the
19 | Page
beginning than individual trips. All countries were involved in developing cycling tourism offers as part of Work Package 4 of this project.
● 3.3.2. Internet portal development. In addition to information on tourism portal subsites, as detailed in point 3.2.2, Hungary, Slovakia, Slovenia, Bulgaria, Greece and Macedonia engaged to develop separate EuroVelo web portals to cover the Iron Curtain Trail in their countries and regions.
● 3.3.3. Publish printed promotion tools only about this specific route. Publishing leaflets including a free overview map about the route is a useful promotion tool. This action was proposed in Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Serbia.
● 3.3.4. Organise cycling promotion events every year from 2015 onwards connected to this specific route. This is especially interesting for Hungary, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece, Serbia and Romania.
● 3.3.5. Organising study trips for national and regional journalists along the route is a good tool, which is proposed in every country except Austria and Croatia.
● 3.3.6. Applications for smart phones and audio guides can improve the user’s experience, increase safety and help with orientation. These are proposed in Hungary, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Serbia.
● 3.3.7. Info points and info stands. These info points are large outdoor information boards at rest stations, and especially at the many border crossing points of the ICT. It is proposed for 21 sections of the southern ICT, mostly in Serbia (12 sections), and Romania (3 sections).
● 3.3.8. Press and advertisements. It covers press releases, PR articles, direct advertisements in printed and electronic media and media watch. It is relevant in Hungary, Macedonia, Bulgaria and Croatia.
20 | Page
4. Organisation, financing
Current situation ● The responsibilities regarding the development of the Iron Curtain Trail are mostly clear
on the Southern section of the ICT. o Route infrastructure. The national and regional road authorities together with
their local counterparts / branches have to be responsible for the majority of the route infrastructure development actions (Chapter 1). The only exception can be the improvement of the public transport connections (where Public Transport providers have to be involved) and the monitoring (where National EuroVelo Coordination Centres can be responsible) in the future. Signposting is ideally under the responsibility of the road authorities, but tourism boards and National EuroVelo Coordination Centres can take this task over (if the financing is secured). Hungary can be a good example regarding the coordination and implementation of the national signing system.
o Services. The national and regional tourism boards together with their local counterparts / branches and the National EuroVelo Coordination Centres have to be responsible for the coordination of the service development actions (Chapter 2). They are responsible explicitly for quality control (2.1.4). The implementation of the service development tasks (Chapter 2) is mostly to be done by private enterprises but in some critical sections NGOs and / or local municipalities can take over responsibility temporarily.
o Promotion and marketing. The national and regional tourism boards together with their local counterparts / branches and National EuroVelo Coordination Centres have to be responsible for the coordination of the promotion and marketing actions (Chapter 3).
o Organisation. To organise the management of the EuroVelo routes in every country is a common responsibility, but has to be steered by the National EuroVelo Coordinators / Coordination Centres.
● The development of the Iron Curtain Trail needs horizontal cooperation (between transport, tourism, public administration, enterprises, NGOs etc.); vertical cooperation (between different levels form the local up to the transnational); and geographical cooperation (between countries, neighbouring regions / municipalities). All of this cooperation should be improved in the southern section of the ICT. There are several National EuroVelo Coordinators (Austria, Bulgaria, Greece) and potential applicants (Slovakia, Croatia, Hungary) but only one real Coordination Centre (led by the DCC in Serbia) has been formed at the time of writing.
● The Iron Curtain Trail (and cycling generally) is not integrated to the tourism, transport, regional development, rural development strategies and programmes of the national and regional authorities. This is a risk for the synchronized implementation of the TAP.
● There is a serious lack of dedicated financial resources, but there is big potential in the new EU financing period (2014 – 2020).
● In every region, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) can co-finance all the local activities.
21 | Page
● Every region along the southern section of the ICT in the EU currently fall under the Convergence Objective, with the exception of the Burgenland region, Austria. These (ERDF) funds can provide enough resources together with the national co-financing, if the relevant operational programmes and biannual action plans (transport, tourism, regional, rural and SME development) explicitly mention cycling, allocate resources and the managing authorities publish calls for proposals with adequate conditions.
● For the less expensive or directly cross-border route development actions (Chapter 1) and the majority of the services, promotion – marketing and organisational development actions (from Chapters 2, 3 and 4) can be financed from the cross-border programs under the European Territorial Cooperation Objective.
Proposed organisational development actions
● 4.1. Awareness-raising. In every country the situation is different. In most of the participating countries (save Austria, Slovakia, Croatia) we still should invest to convince decision makers and stakeholders. We propose the organisation further conferences and workshops to show good practices and discuss the organisational structure of the route development. The Bulgarian partners in particular propose to use this project as a basis for a national lobbying strategy on the value of cycling tourism.
● 4.2. Training and study tours. To improve the special knowledge of the involved stakeholders special trainings and / or study tours have to be organised for Hungarian, Bulgarian, Slovakia, Macedonian and Greek stakeholders.
● 4.3. A precise survey of the whole itinerary by GPS. For the route coordination and for the customers, we need a precise survey of the route. It can be made available online for the cyclists and for the professionals. The survey has to include the route, attractions, services, public transport connections and it needs to be updated at yearly intervals (with any changes). This activity has been completed along the entire length of the southern section of the ICT.
● 4.4. Ranger system. To monitor the route conditions, special services can be organised from volunteers to adopt a route section and investigate the conditions regularly. The organisation of the system (in 2015) and basic operational costs (travel, equipment and management) are calculated for Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria and Macedonia.
● 4.5. A working group for infrastructure development is necessary in Austria, Hungary, Serbia, Romania, Macedonia and Bulgaria in order to coordinate infrastructure developments and maintenance, and bring together technical officers from the local, micro-regional and the national / regional authorities.
● 4.6. A working group for the services and marketing - promotion development is necessary in Austria, Hungary, Serbia, Romania, Bulgaria and Macedonia to coordinate services, product developments and promotion.
● 4.7. Steering groups for route development are necessary in every country and on the trans-national level too. It should coordinate the whole route development and maintenance (of every component). It should bring together decision makers from the local, micro-regional and the national / regional authorities. These steering groups are relevant on regional, national and trans-national level as well. The steering groups have to involve the National EuroVelo Coordination Centres / Coordinators and the relevant
22 | Page
cycling NGOs. The steering groups have to organise regular public consultations. The update of the action plan and the evaluation of the results is the responsibility of the steering group.
● 4.8. Four countries (Hungary, Bulgaria, Macedonia and Croatia) proposed to involve the local populations in public consultation about the development of the ICT.
● 4.9. We would eventually recommend that the entire Iron Curtain Trail undergoes a certification process according to EuroVelo standards. This should be a final step after all aspects of the route development are achieved. Three countries included the eventual costs of the certification in their action plan (Hungary, Bulgaria and Macedonia).
23 | Page
Costs of the core activities by country
Costs of the Core activities by timescale
Country Costs
All € 58,522,944
Slovakia € 2,007,500
Austria (Burgenland only) € 95,000
Hungary € 19,931,744
Slovenia € 1,528,000
Croatia € 9,576,918
Serbia € 5,127,400
Romania € 314,428
Bulgaria € 9,434,537
FYR Macedonia € 10,152,017
Greece € 355,400
Activities Timing Costs
All Summary € 58,522,944
short term € 3,593,304
mid term € 18,612,246
long term € 36,317,394
24 | Page
Costs of core activities by type
Activities Timing Costs
All core activities Summary € 58,522,944
Infrastructure summary € 50,483,411
short term € 2,691,989
mid term € 16,016,471
long term € 31,774,951
Service summary € 1,548,248
short term € 326,170
mid term € 949,853
long term € 272,225
Promotion. Marketing summary € 1,018,801
short term € 314,313
mid term € 634,520
long term € 69,968
Organisation summary € 5,472,485
short term € 260,833
mid term € 1,011,402
long term € 4,200,250
