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