regulatory frameworks and legislation in public transport transparencies 2003 eu-funded urban...
TRANSCRIPT
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORTREGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Transparencies 2003
EU-funded Urban Transport Research Project Results
www.eu-portal.net
TRANSPORT TEACHING MATERIAL
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
MODULE 1 DEFINITIONINTRODUCTION TO LEARNING MATERIALS
KT Regulatory framework of public transport contains:
• legal and
• organisational aspects
Transparency, efficiency and quality are the keys for a friendly and efficient PT.
• The co-existence of authorities and operators, the necessary allocation of responsibilities sharing of risks as well as co-ordinated ”pull” and ”push” measures are other crucial issues
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
The following EU-objects served as key sources for this KT:
SOURCES
• ISOTOPE (improved structure and organisation for transport operations of passengers in Europe)
• MARETOPE (managing and assessing regulatory evolution in local public transport operations in Europe)
• QUATTRO (quality approach in tendering urban public transport operations)
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Short description of the national differences in the following parts of Europe.
The following categories of financing can be distinguished:
Capital cities regions are often approached in a different manner than rest of the country.
NATIONAL DIFFERENCES
• UK
• Western Europe
• Central Europe
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
MODULE 2
Structure of presentation
• Definition
• Sources
• Right of initiative
• Levels of planning and control in PT
• Contractual relationships between actors
• Quality assurance in PT
• Financing and subsiding
• Differences and Examples
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
RIGHT OF INITIATIVE• competition on the road (UK) market initiative
• competition off the road (very common throughout the EU) authority initiative
Source: MARETOPE
Organisational forms
Public system
Conces-sion
Authorisa-tion
Open entry
Authority initiative
Delegated management
Public management
Dominated by public companies)
Dominated by private companies)
Note!Tendering of the realization is possible in all models!
Market initiative
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
RIGHT OF INITIATIVE
The market initiative regimes have as common characteristic that commercially viable services are meant to appear out of autonomous market processes.
Authority initiative regimes have as common characteristic that services can only result from a conscious action by the authority. As such no services can appear as result of simple market forces as no legal provision makes such autonomous entry possible.
Organisational forms
Public system
Conces-sion
Authorisa-tion
Open entry
Authority initiative
Delegated management
Publicmanagement
Dominated by public companies)
Dominated by privatecompanies)
Note!Tendering of the realization is possible in allmodels!
Market initiative
Organisational forms
Public system
Conces-sion
Authorisa-tion
Open entry
Authority initiative
Delegated management
Publicmanagement
Dominated by public companies)
Dominated by privatecompanies)
Note!Tendering of the realization is possible in allmodels!
Market initiative
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
.
It is important to state that few real-world examples will fully correspond to any of these theoretical organisational forms. Normally it is a blurry blend of several forms
Source: MARETOPE
Organisational forms
Authority initiative
Pu
blic m
anag
em
ent
...
Cen
tral plan
nin
g &
ou
t-so
urcin
g
...
Dele
gate
d m
anag
emen
t
...
Co
ncessio
n
Perp
etual exc
lusive au
tho
risation
... Tem
po
rary exclus
ive au
tho
risation
...
Tem
po
rary no
n-e
xlusive au
tho
risatio
n
...
Op
en en
try
Market initiative
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
MODULE 3
Source: MARETOPE
Organisational forms
Authority initiative
Co
ncessio
n
...
Deleg
ated m
anag
emen
t
...
Cen
tral plan
nin
g &
ou
t-so
urcin
g
...
Pu
blic m
anag
emen
t
Co
ncessio
n
...
Deleg
ated m
anag
emen
t
...
Cen
tral plan
nin
g &
ou
t-so
urcin
g
...
Pu
blic m
anag
emen
t
Op
en en
try
...
Tem
po
rary no
n-exlu
sive au
tho
risation
...
Tem
po
rary exclusive
auth
orisatio
n
...
Perp
etual exclu
sive au
tho
risation
Op
en en
try
...
Tem
po
rary no
n-exlu
sive au
tho
risation
...
Tem
po
rary exclusive
auth
orisatio
n
...
Perp
etual exclu
sive au
tho
risation
Market initiative
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
LEVELS OF PLANNING AND CONTROL IN PT
Source: MARETOPE
Level
General description
Decision
General goals: transport policymarket shareprofitability
General description of the services: area
target groupsintermodality
Detailed service characteristicsfaresimage
additional services
vehiclesroutes
timetable
Salesselling activities
information to the public…
Productioninfrastructure managementvehicle rostering and maint.
personnel rostering and mngt.
Strategic What do we want to achieve?
Long term (5 year)
Tactical Which services can help to achieve these aims?
Medium term (1-2 year)
Operational
Short term (1-6 months)
How to produce these services?
„Software
„Hardware“
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
EXAMPLE: TENDERING OF THE DESIGN AND REALISATION (CONCESSIONING)
The freedom of operators is limited by the minimum standards defined by the concessioning agency which organises the tendering of all services, area-wise, according to the instructions of the transport authority.
Source: MARETOPE
In many cases decisions pertaining to one topic, such as fares or routes, will not be attributed totally to soley one actor.
Transport Authority
Politicalcouncil
TransportDepartment
Tenderingorganisation
Independant Organisation
“The People” Transporters
Private companies
Strategic
Tactical
Operational
Actor
Transp. Pol.
((discussion)Social pol.
Relation
Mobil. Std.Accessib. Std.
(Min.std.)
((discussion)
Translation
TimetableVehicle type
Routes
(Min.std.)((Min.std.)
(Min. std .)(Mid. std .)
(Min.std.) Fares
Sale
Person. Mngt.Vehicle Mngt.
Information
Com
petitive tendering
Democratical control
Contract with tenderung organisation
InstructionsHierarchical control
Transport Authority
Politicalcouncil
TransportDepartment
Tenderingorganisation
Independant Organisation
“The People” Transporters
Private companies
Strategic
Tactical
Operational
Actor
Transp. Pol.
((discussion)Social pol.
Relation
Mobil. Std.Accessib. Std.
(Min.std.)
((discussion)
Translation
TimetableVehicle type
Routes
(Min.std.)((Min.std.)
(Min. std .)(Mid. std .)
(Min.std.) Fares
Sale
Person. Mngt.Vehicle Mngt.
Information
Com
petitive tendering
Democratical control
Contract with tenderung organisation
InstructionsHierarchical control
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Source: MARETOPE
Transport Authority
Politicalcouncil
TransportDepartment
Tendering organisation
Independant Organisation
“The People” Transporters
Private companies
Strategic
Tactical
Operational
Actor
Transp. Pol.
((discussion)Social pol.
Relation
Mobil. Std.Accessib. Std.
(Min.std.)
((discussion)
Translation
TimetableVehicle type
Routes
(Min.std.)((Min.std.)
(Min. std .)(Mid. std .)
(Min.std.) Fares
Sale
Person. Mngt.Vehicle Mngt.
Information
Com
petitive tendering
Democratical control
Contract with tenderung organisation
InstructionsHierarchical control
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Contracts in the public transport world usually divide between production cost risks and revenue risks. Risks can be shared in various ways implying many intermediate forms of contracts are thinkable as can be seen in the shaded boxes.
MODULE 4: CONTRACTUAL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ACTORS
Source: MARETOPE
Production risk borne by
Authority Operator
Operator
AuthorityR
even
ue ri
sk b
orne
by
ManagementContract
(M)
Gross CostContract
(GC)
Net CostContract
(NC)
M withProductivityincentives
M withproductivity and
revenue incentives
M withRevenueincentives
GC with Shared
production risk
GC withRevenueincentives
NC withshared revenue and
production risk
NC withShared
revenue risk
NC withShared
production risk
GC withrev. incentives andshared prod. risk
Production risk borne by
Authority Operator
Production risk borne by
Authority Operator
Operator
AuthorityR
even
ue ri
sk b
orne
by
Operator
AuthorityR
even
ue ri
sk b
orne
by
ManagementContract
(M)
Gross CostContract
(GC)
Net CostContract
(NC)
M withProductivityincentives
M withproductivity and
revenue incentives
M withRevenueincentives
GC with Shared
production risk
GC withRevenueincentives
NC withshared revenue and
production risk
NC withShared
revenue risk
NC withShared
production risk
GC withrev. incentives andshared prod. risk
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Source: MARETOPE
Production risk borne by
Authority Operator
Operator
Authority
Rev
enue
risk
bor
ne b
y
Management Contract
(M)
Gross Cost Contract
(GC)
Net Cost Contract
(NC)
M with Productivity incentives
M with productivity and
revenue incentives
M with Revenue incentives
GC with Shared
production risk
GC with Revenue incentives
NC withshared revenue and
production risk
NC with Shared
revenue risk
NC withShared
production risk
GC with rev. incentives and shared prod. risk
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
CONFLICT TYPES
There are internal (industrial relations) and external (between an authority and an operator) and will vary in their magnitude of importance.
Contracts should include provision for remedy covering all the risks that may be foreseen at the outset. Flexibility is one important part to guarantee a sustainable service which can cope with future challenges.
Source: ISOTOPE
FinanceResponsabilities
CONFLICTTYPES
Objectives to Reach
Fare Policy Perfomance Other
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
The figure presents possible combinations of public or private ownership with public or private management indicating different types of contracts between government and state-owned enterprises, private managers of state assets and private monopoly, respectively.
Ownership
Public Private
Private
Public
Managem
ent
Public management(wb: Performance contract)
Private concession(wb: Regulatory contract)
Delegated management(wb: Management contract)
OWNERSHIP VERSUS USAGE
Source: MARETOPE
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Private
Public
Man
agem
ent
Public management(wb: Performance contract)
Private concession(wb: Regulatory contract)
Delegated management(wb: Management contract)
Ownership
Public Private
Source: MARETOPE
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
In the context of tendering, decision making at the tactical level can be organised.
FIXED VERSUS FLEXIBLE PLANNING
• prior to the contracting out and operators have no tactical powers (London, Copenhagen)
• (prior to the contracting out and operators have some tactical powers (Helsingborg, Sundsvall)
• during the contracting out (Netherlands, France) simultaneously with the contracting out of the operational level
• during the contracting out not simultaneously with the contractingout of the operational level
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
These various forms are ordered in into four main options for the place of the tactical (T) decisions.
FIXED VERSUS FLEXIBLE PLANNING
Source: MARETOPE
T Determined prior to
contracting/tendering
T Determined During
contracting/tendering
T Fixed Duringcontract
T Changes During contract
Contracting/tendering of:
The Development and the realisation with redevelopment incentives.
Contracting/tendering of:
the realisation with redevelopment incentives.
Contracting/tendering of:
The Development and the realisation
Contracting/tendering of:
the realisation
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Quality loop
The quality loop is based on four distinctive benchmarks:
Analysing differences between these four benchmarks (see figure 11) help decision-makers to improve their service.
MODULE 5 QUALITY ASSURANCE
Source: MARETOPE (on the basis of QUATTRO),
Provider Customer
Word-of-mouth
Personal needs
Past experience
Competitive alternatives
PerceivedExpectationof quality
Gap 1Gap 2
Gap 3
Gap 5Gap 4Statedquality
Realisedquality
Expectedquality
Perceivedquality
Plannedquality
Gap 6
Provider Customer
Word-of-mouth
Personal needs
Past experience
Competitive alternatives
PerceivedExpectationof quality
Gap 1Gap 2
Gap 3
Gap 5Gap 5Gap 4Statedquality
Realisedquality
Expectedquality
Perceivedquality
Plannedquality
Gap 6
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
Source: MARETOPE (on the basis of QUATTRO)
Provider Customer
Word-of-mouth
Personal needs
Past experience
Competitive alternatives
Gap 1Gap 2
Gap 3
Gap 5Gap 4
Realised quality
Expectedquality
Perceived quality
Planned quality
Gap 6
MODULE 5
Quality loopPerceived
Expectationof quality
Stated quality
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
The contract should specify:
CONTRACT DESIGN
• objectives of continuous improvement
• tools and responsibilities, including measurement and/or monitoring programs
• consequences of the measures, including financial incentivesand/or penalties
• control of these results
• recourse procedure in the case of non application of the contract
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
CONTRACT DESIGN
• Transport (including access/exit by users)
• Connections (inside UPT/with other modes)
• Information to customers (static/real time)
• Fares and sales system
• Environmental impact (in a broad sense)
This specification of services should stimulate operators and authorities to cover all operational/tactical fields of interest by the continuous improvement system:
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
MODUL 6 INTEGRATIONThe contract should specify:
• Logical integration
• Physical integration
• Traffic integration
Continuous improvement
By ”continuous improvement” of urban public transport, we consider the need for continuous adjustment of the service design and of the organisation in charge of providing the service, in order to maintain or increase its value. Innovation in service and management is generated by continuous improvement systems.
REGULATORY FRAMEWORKS AND LEGISLATION IN PUBLIC TRANSPORT
FINANCING AND SUBSIDING
Pricing and financing in Urban Transport are closely related concepts since the level of prices determines the self-financing capacity, and consequently the need for subsidies.
The following categories of financing can be distinguished:
• Transport users contributions
• Contributions from public sources and public companies
• Contributions from other beneficiaries
• Private sources