Critical Factors in Financing and Management of Light Rail Transit Systems: Delphi Methodology Approach
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Nov. 2013, Volume 7, No. 11 (Serial No. 72), pp. 1385-1397 Journal of Civil Engineering and Architecture, ISSN 1934-7359, USA D DAVID PUBLISHING Critical Factors in Financing and Management of Light Rail Transit Systems: Delphi Methodology Approach Julián Sastre González1 and Clara Zamorano Martín2 1. Royal School of Engineering, University of Seville, Sevilla 41007, Spain 2. Civil Engineering Department, Foundation Caminos de Hierro, Madrid 28002, Spain Abstracts: In recent years, a large number of LRT (light rail transit) networks and tramways have been built in Spain using the tender system. The rhythm of construction has been such that very few analyses have been carried out and those that have were only partially done because the main participants involved had ulterior motives which impeded their having a critical and independent opinion of the projects carried out. Within this framework, the Delphi methodology presents itself as a very useful instrument, as the intrinsic advantages that it has added to the characteristic that the experts who participate in the project can remain anonymous without detracting value from the conclusions obtained as these are grouped together according to their worth. Key words: Public-private partnership financing, Delphi, public transport, LRT, management, concessions. 1. Introduction major development of these systems using the BOT (built, operate and transfer) method. For these systems Congestion in cities and new ways of tackling to run in more efficiently, it would appear obvious to mobility issues, principally on the part of the citizens take into account critical factors regarding their themselves, are making different public bodies aware financing. The pace of development with which this that it is worth favoring the development of urban rail system has expanded, as regards light rail networks, network systems and metros, specifically LRT (light and the lack of, in some cases voluntary, spreading of rail transit)1 and reserved platform systems. Since the information about these, means that the same mistakes construction of the first modern tramway, put into are being repeated systematically from one project to service in Spain in 1994, ten more tramway systems or another. A recent study carried out in Spain [2], light rail networks have been built, and at the current allowed for the compilation of extensive information time, there are more than 20 under study or in on 22 Spanish case-studies [3, 4], as well as others construction. These figures can be extrapolated to from different parts of Europe, analyzing variables of Europe as a whole, where there are currently the region supply, demand and cost to which was added a detailed of 200 tramway networks of which the majority are study on nine projects following a laborious located in the 15 member states which made up the interviewing process. As can be seen in Table 1, 90% European Union on the May 1, 2004. The development of these had problems during the construction and expectations of this system and secular financing on the operational phases, amongst which unforeseen events part of the Public Administrations make us think of during construction stands out, There are also other Corresponding author: Julian Sastre González, Dr., M.Sc., factors to be taken into account, such as an increase in Ph.D., research fields: public-private partnership, railways, investment cost, as can be observed in Fig. 1, which transport planning and sustainable mobility. E-mail: [email protected]. affected a large number of the projects. Over-costing in 1 In this paper, LRT or LR and tramways (we refer to modern the operational phase is the problem which has the least tramways networks) are used in the same sense as in Spain that has been decided for each case for political/marketing reasons effect on infrastructures as a whole, perhaps in part [1]. 1386 Critical Factors in Financing and Management of Light Rail Transit Systems: Delphi Methodology Approach Table 1 Comparative analysis of the solutions of underground or overland metro. Comparative analysis of solutions for underground or overland metro systems Underground metro system Advantages Other remarks Does not interfere with the road network nor reduce its capacity Does not affect traffic Greater commercial speed Total times for each mode of transport can be Less impact on surface building work except when problems involving greater or lesser depending on each case and subsidence or archaeological difficulties occur require, just as demand assessment does, specific Increased capacity studies Increased road safety Improved initial image which helps social support Overland metro Advantages Other remarks Increased accessibility Possibility of more stops Notably cheaper to build and operate On visual or aesthetic impact is also debatable. Greater acceptance on the part of users in terms of comfort sensation as they Overland systems, at the moment, use catenaries can enjoy the local environment whilst travelling without producing the feeling (although it must be mentioned that the recent of claustrophobia Bordeaux overland did not use overhead cabling) Facilitates the implantation of restrictive measures for private traffic to relieve though often are carried out providing a complete congestion in the city centre urbanisation of the environment, from “façade to Shorter building work duration in theory (although obtaining residence permits façade” and “giving back the city” or improving in public spaces may cause troublesome delays) some areas of this Easier to spread Greater security against terrorist attacks and emergencies (security) Source: In-house based on diverse interviews. because they had only recently been put into legislation (this is the case in Spain with the service. concessions on Infrastructures Law of 2003 and the A highly advisable way of using past experiences to Regulations of Public Service Contracting of the benefit of the construction of new projects is via the 2007), and the support on the part of some agents use of perspective, specifically by the application of the toward certain technologies or systems can cause Delphi method [5]. major development in these areas when, without The Delphi method is included in those techniques which, it would have occurred at a much slower known as “expert methods” which, unlike the pace; extrapolative or correlation methods, require specific (3) The ethical, moral, social and political conditions data on past experiences, based on consulting people dominate over the economical and technological ones who have vast knowledge on the subject in hand. This in an evolutionary process. In this case, one type of method is usually used when one of the following technology can see its development hindered if the conditions occurs: technology itself is rejected by society, or stimulated (1) There is no historical data with which to work. A by political acceptance as in seen in the case of the light typical case in this situation is the provision of new rail networks. They are, also, urban projects of major technologies. One must take into account that the political impact. projects in place on the Iberian Peninsula have all been The aim that has been achieved by the application recently completed; of the Delphi method is to establish the key (2) The impact of external factors has a greater factors for financing a new tramway or light-rail influence in the evolution than the internal ones. In this network based on the opinion of qualified way, the appearance of favourable regulatory specialists [6]. Critical Factors in Financing and Management of Light Rail 1387 Transit Systems: Delphi Methodology Approach 100.0% 80.0% 60.0% 40.0% 20.0% 0.0% p delays rate quality o&MM o&MM operator - Construction Construction Increased constructor constructor O&M phase O&M relationshi Unaccpetable Demand level Demand Income level Extra charges of Problems in the below forecast investment cost investment below forecast rate Over-costing in the Fig. 1 Main problems encountered. 2. Methodology agents involved in this type of project. A basic requirement was that they had had a high level of The methodology has been carried out in two stages. authentic responsibility in several projects of the type The first, qualitative, in which experts were requested under study. Fifteen specialists from Spain and to provide their reasoning with respect to the opinions Portugal have taken part, and these can be grouped into presented and later quantitative analysis was carried four categories: out in which the experts were asked to answer survey • 7 heads of public departments; about the main parameters. • 3 from the financial sector; The first stage was performed by the use of personal • 3 concessionary partners; interview which lasted for around 2 h and were held • 2 sector researchers. over 22 months depending on when the experts were After carrying out the interview analysis, the a priori available. conclusions were established and the questionnaire was The second stage was done by sending a survey designed which would be the basis for the second phase containing the parameters by e-mail, and through this of the study. The results of both phases allow to extract system the results were returned in a period of about two weeks. the research’s findings. For preparation of the first stage, a basic The practical way of applying the method has been questionnaire was designed based around the sector’s set out in Fig. 2. main issues and added to the results obtained from