1 / 26

Regionalization of Railway Passenger Traffic in Switzerland: A Model for France?

This paper examines the successful regionalization reform of passenger rail transport in Switzerland and explores its potential as a model for France. It analyzes the design, impacts, dynamics, and lessons learned from the Swiss reform, providing valuable insights for policymakers in France.

littleton
Download Presentation

Regionalization of Railway Passenger Traffic in Switzerland: A Model for France?

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

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Regionalization railway passenger traffic in Switzerland: more performance without competition. An example for France? Christian Desmaris – University of Lyon – Laboratory of Transport Economics July 2013

  2. Why this paper ? • The regional passenger traffic in France has been strongly reshaped over the ten past (2002), butthis reform appears today as unfulfilled, both in a financial and institutional bind: • Institutional. French law does not actually open the possibility of biddingin contrast with the European laws which open the competition in the next future (OSP, 2007-2019) and Fourth railway package (2013). • Financial. SNCF production costs are high and rise much and and regularly. (Crozet and Desmaris, 2011). • Our suggestion: the Swiss reform of regional passenger rail transport can it serve as a model in France? Manyreasons: • Institutional. The Swiss railway regionalization ended the monopoly of historical operator and provides good results for taxpayers and travelers. • A Similarregionalrailwayreformagenda: 1995/1996 vs 1995/1997-2002. But in France, unfinishedreform. • The Size. In France, the regions are PAT. Switzerland is similar with one of great French regions in terms of population and surface. WCTR Rio - July 2013

  3. Our four questions: • 1. What is this switzerland rail reform design? • 2. What are their impacts on public finances and on travellers’ welfare? • 3. How to understand the dynamics in the regional and local traveller railway transport reform in Switzerland? • 4. What learning lessons from Switzerland passenger railway reform for policy makers in France? WCTR Rio - July 2013

  4. 1. The Swiss railway reform (1) • 1. First step in 1995/96: a regional traffic reform • Threeaxes: • Regionalisation : cantons as full responsible for the order of regional transport services ; but FOT co-signs the agreements. • Net-costcontract: Unplanned deficits will no longer be covered by the State.Veryincentive. Twoyearscontracts. • Liberalisationregionaltraffic. – No more SBB monopoly; Possibility of tendering for rail regional transport services. • Regionalisationparadox: more potentailcompetition and more need of traffic coordination (FOT) WCTR Rio - July 2013

  5. 1. The Swiss railway reform (2) • 2. Second step in 1998/1999: a new regulatory framework very near European pattern (first and second package) • A significantly renewed SBB organization and its business model (01/01/1999) • Independence from the political and administrative powers, but special status of a public limited company - quadri-annual contract • Confederation has accepted to erase SBB debts • Activities have been divided into four distinct branches: Passenger Traffic, Cargo, Infrastructure and Real Estate • Sovereignty tasks have been transferred to the FOT WCTR Rio - July 2013

  6. 1. The Swiss railway reform (3) • 3. Thirdstep 2009/…: a highlycontroversial and unfulfilledreform in 2013 • Threeparticularly controversial points: • The tendering procedures in regional passenger transport (train / bus) : optional or compulsary? • The respective share of the Confederation and the Cantons for the financing of infrastructure • The choice of the optimal architecture for the infrastructure management - Swiss rail system is vertically integrated (as Japan) • Swiss railway pattern reform: so specific • Pragmatic reform: step by step … • Various and conflictualobjectifs: qualityvsproductivity and rentability ; more rail sharevsmore efficiency in using publics funds • Competition in the law. but specificpublic governancein fact ,WCTR Rio - July 2013

  7. 2. Significant performance gains Grants allowed by the Confederation to the regional traffic operated by SBB • 1. An inverse of the public compensation trend (1) WCTR Rio - July 2013

  8. 2. Significant performance gains Grants allowed by the Regional authorities for the regional traffic operated by SNCF • 1. An inverse of the public compensation trend (2) WCTR Rio - July 2013

  9. 2. Significant performance gains OFS (2012). Mobility in Switzerland - Results of the micro-census Mobility and Transports 2010. • 2. More faster train and more distance in train – Rail 2000 WCTR Rio - July 2013

  10. 2. Significant performance gains Statistics from UIC • 3. A large development of the total SBB supply – train-km WCTR Rio - July 2013

  11. 3.The3 keys ofthe Swissrail reformsuccess • Key 1. A veryresponsiblepublic governance (1) • A) A collective choice in favor of a long-term rail infrastructure investment planning WCTR Rio - July 2013

  12. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess • Key 1. A very responsible public governance (2) • B) A cap on public operating contributions in favor of infrastructure funding WCTR Rio - July 2013

  13. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess • Key 1. A veryresponsiblepublic governance (3) • C) A larger involvement of the regional authorities in decision-making and funding • 1. La stratégie des pouvoirs publics • Un transfert de la responsabilité financière et de la commande de l’Etat aux cantons (régionalisation) WCTR Rio - July 2013

  14. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess (a) After reduction due to savings programs. • Key 1. A veryresponsiblepublic governance (4) • D) A really incentive and empowering SBB corporate governance • An absolute financial constraint imposed to the Swiss Railways by the Confederation WCTR Rio - July 2013

  15. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess • Key 2. An historical operator capable of greatincreasingproductivity and managerial innovations (1) • A) To obtain significant labor productivity gains (1) Our calculations from Historical statistics of railways (UIC). WCTR Rio - July 2013

  16. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess Train-Km / emlpoyee (* 1000) Our calculations from Historical statistics of railways (UIC). • Key 2. An historical operator capable of great increasing productivity and managerial innovations (2) • A) To obtain significant labor productivity gains (2) WCTR Rio - July 2013

  17. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess • Key 2. An historical operator capable of great increasing productivity and managerial innovations (3) • B) To increase the railway company earnings WCTR Rio - July 2013

  18. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess (a) In parentheses average annual variation • Key 3. More numerous and more satisfied passengers (1) • A) A constant strong growth in the Swiss passenger traffic WCTR Rio - July 2013

  19. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess • Key 3. More numerous and more satisfied passengers (3) • B) The country where the demand for rail remains the highest in the world WCTR Rio - July 2013

  20. 3. The keys of the Swiss rail reformsuccess SBB Management Report 2011 (2012), p. 21. • Key 3. More numerous and more satisfied passengers (4) • C) Indicators of overall traveler satisfaction for the SBB clients WCTR Rio - July 2013

  21. 4. Threelessons and propositions for the French Railway Policy (1) LET – CNRS - Université de Lyon • First lesson: the rail transport high quality has a major cost for the Community • A financial cost: • Rail quality production requires huge and continuous investments (ECMT, 1999) • Veryhigh rail public subsidies per capita : €800 in Swissvs €170 in France (Prud’homme, 2009) • A political cost: • State as to be the "major assembler" of the all public transport system. • FOTkey rule of a potential "network manager" (Genoud, 2000). • A managerial cost: • The Swiss governments fully assume their role as owners : a strategic management of the the incumbent operator. • An exceptional stability of the leaders in charge (SBB, Ministries).

  22. 4. Threelessons and propositions for the French Railway Policy (3) LET – CNRS - Université de Lyon • Third lesson: the regional rail transport high success results of a global triangular governance • More implication of regional public authorities • A radically overhauled of the organization and management of the incumbent railway operator SBB. • Large public transport users and citizen support. • Some doubts about sustainability of these dynamic of progress: • Critical strategy of systematic savings: disinvestment and social access more difficult(Nahrath and al.. 2008) . • Increase in trafficversus more infrastructure maintenance (Leuenberger. 2010) • Limits of the quest for the more efficient use of public funds: slight increase in public contributions for regional transport.

  23. 4. Threelessons and propositions for the French Railway Policy (2) LET – CNRS - Université de Lyon • Second lesson: performance gains without market competition - The secret of a successfulrailwaygovernance • The core of the reform: to impose a "performance constraints" to public transport companies • via generalizing contractual agreements: net cost contract. • Regional rail passenger traffic is an exemplary illustration. • Tenderingislegally possible, but no real case in the railway domestic sector • "Competition for the market" is possible... • Yardstick competition: a significant role in the performance? FOT and benchmark regulation: 26 cantons and plurality of domestic private networks.

  24. 4. Three lessons and propositions for the French Railway Policy (4) • Three challenges for the French railway actors for more progress: • First proposal SNCF-RFF/ government: accept the establishment of a strong regulation based on contractualized goals, productivity and service gains vs increased investments in network and put SNCF at the head of all public railway system. • 2nd proposal SNCF/Regions as TA: more productivity and transparency vs limited and graduated competition. • Third proposal involves SNCF/Customers: better quality of service (punctuality, information) vs extra financial contribution from the rail users themselves. • Does all actors want these new equilibrium? Does SNCF and government able to do that? WCTR Rio - July 2013

  25. As conclusion: Transferability to other countries to study. Probably very difficult… A strikecanhideanotherstrike… WCTR Rio - July 2013

  26. Bibliography LET – CNRS - Université de Lyon • Bovy P.H. (1992), "Le modèle ferroviaire suisse : un modèle à suivre ?", CST, 25, 47-66. • Carron N. (2004), "La politique ferroviaire dans le cadre de la politique générale des transports en Suisse", Rail International, 17-29. • Crozet Y., Desmaris C. (2011). Le transport ferroviaire régional de voyageurs : un processus collectif d’apprentissage. Recherche Transports Sécurité, 27, 3. • Finger M., Rosa A. et al., 2012. Governance of competition in the Swiss and European railway sector, Final report for SBB, Florence School of Regulation. • Genoud C. (2000), La régionalisation des transports publics : implications de la nouvelle loi sur les chemins de fer à l'exemple des cantons de Berne, Zurich, Neuchâtel et Jura, Lausanne, Cahier 188, IDHEAP. • Maier-Gyomlay J., 2013. Learning lessons from Switzerland – A BLS perspective. Railway Gazette International, January, 36-40. • Meyer A., Meier B. (2011). Switzerland, pp. 127-135 in CER (2011), New Reforming Railways – Learning from Experience, Brussels. • Nahrath S., Rieder M. et alii. (2008), "Les impacts de la régionalisation et de la libéralisation sur la durabilité du secteur ferroviaire en Suisse", Flux, 72/73, 49-64. • OECD (2006), Regulatory reform in Switzerland - Regulatory authorities for air transport, railways, telecommunications and postal services, Paris, 143 p. • Prud’homme R. (2009), "Du modèle ferroviaire suisse", Transports, 457, 304-306.

More Related