Logistics Strategies in the Visegrad Countries: a Comparative Analysis

LOGISTICS STRATEGIES IN THE VISEGRAD COUNTRIES: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

Working paper

edited by

Lajos Veres professor of economics, College of Dunaújváros

Hungarian Logistics Association Budapest 2015

Supported by the International Visegrad Fund, strategic grant 31410010: Synchronization and development of national strategies of logistics in V4 countries

Reviewers: Dr. Alfonz Antoni, Dr. Zoltán Doór, Dr. Csaba Orosz, Edit Vértes

ISBN 978-963-12-4240-9

Table of Contents

Foreword ...... 7 INTRODUCTION ...... 8 Objectives ...... 8 Methodology ...... 8 I. THE CZECH REPUBLIC ...... 10 Transport infrastructure ...... 10 The current state of transport infrastructure ...... 10 Road infrastructure ...... 11 Railway infrastructure ...... 12 Inland waterway transport ...... 13 Combined transport infrastructure ...... 14 The European rail freight corridor ...... 17 Principles of infrastructure development ...... 19 Overview of the current state of logistics parks ...... 20 The biggest investors ...... 23 The largest parks ...... 25 Public logistics centers ...... 26 Vacancy rates and rents of logistics spaces ...... 27 Evaluation and future development of transport and logistic...... 30 Priority 1. Good accessibility ...... 32 Priority 2. Logistics chains ...... 33 Priority 3. Application of co-modality principle ...... 35 Specifics of the railway transport ...... 37 Specifics of the road transport ...... 38 Specifics of the waterborne transport ...... 39 Specifics of the air transport ...... 40 The main objective of the transport policy and the priority structure ...... 41 II. HUNGARY ...... 44 Transport in the Hungarian economy ...... 44

Analysis of the present situation ...... 44 Network infrastructure and assets in the specific sectors of transport ...... 46 Roads ...... 46 The institutional framework of road development and operation ...... 48 Railways ...... 48 Waterways ...... 49 Air transport ...... 49 Combined goods transport & logistics ...... 51 Urban and suburban transport ...... 51 Modal split in transport ...... 53 Environmental impacts of transport ...... 53 Clearance of obstacles and transport safety ...... 54 SWOT analysis of the Hungarian logistics system ...... 56 Logistics strategy of Hungary ...... 62 Strategic pillars ...... 64 The target system of the strategy ...... 65 Tools to execute the logistics strategy ...... 65 Indicative financial table ...... 66 Embeddedness in the development policy ...... 66 Vision and future image ...... 67 Pillar components ...... 68 Logistics infrastructure ...... 69 IT infrastructure ...... 71 Networking and co-operation ...... 73 Logistics R & D & I ...... 74 Logistics strategic tools ...... 74 Sustainable logistics activity ...... 84 III. POLAND ...... 89 The current state of logistic system in Poland ...... 89 The Polish logistic system as a part of its national economy ...... 89 The Polish transport: An overview ...... 93 Road transport ...... 95

Rail transport ...... 101 Air transport ...... 105 Maritime transport ...... 107 Inland water transport ...... 114 Intermodal terminals ...... 117 Storage space ...... 118 Legal regulations related to Polish transport and storage sector ...... 121 Logistics education ...... 121 Directions of transport development in Poland ...... 127 Main assumptions and directions of development of the transport sector in Poland ..... 127 Forecasts for the development of the carriage of goods in Poland till 2020 ...... 130 Directions of intervention in particular branches of the transport industry, taking into consideration the priority infrastructure projects ...... 132 The Polish logistic systems and its development strategy from the perspective of V4 group ...... 144 IV. SLOVAKIA ...... 151 Introduction ...... 151 The infrastructure of Slovak transport ...... 151 The organization of railway transport (passengers, goods) ...... 151 The organization of water transport ...... 151 The organization of road transport ...... 152 Rail freight transport ...... 155 Intermodal transport ...... 155 Air transport ...... 155 Development of the transport infrastructure ...... 157 Roads ...... 157 Development of rail infrastructure ...... 159 Development of intermodal transport ...... 161 Infrastructure of air transport ...... 161 Infrastructure of water transport ...... 162 Impacts on the environment and population ...... 163 Road transport ...... 163 Rail transport ...... 164 5

Air transport ...... 164 Water transport ...... 165 Key findings and key problems and needs of transport sector in Slovakia ...... 166 The logistics centers in Slovakia ...... 167 Distribution of logistic centers ...... 167 Free capacity and occupancy rates at logistics facilities ...... 172 Distribution centers for retail chains ...... 173 Strategic goals of transport to 2020 ...... 177 Road infrastructure of Slovakia ...... 177 Vision and Goals of Railway Transport to 2020 ...... 183 Vision and Goals of Intermodal Transport to 2020 ...... 186 Vision and goals of air transport to 2020 ...... 189 Vision and goals of water transport to 2020 ...... 189 Conclusion ...... 190 V. SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE NATIONAL LOGISTIC STRATEGIES IN THE V4 COUNTRIES ...... 195 A comparative analysis of the logistic performance of the V4 countries ...... 195 Common approaches to logistics and transport in the country strategies ...... 204 Opportunities of co-operation between the V4 countries for transport and logistics development ...... 206 Policy recommendations ...... 207 Suggestions for the next continuing phase of the project ...... 208 Authors ...... 210

Foreword

I am pleased that the four countries of the Visegrad region are pursuing a more efficient and successful cooperation. Our countries’ past and present connect us tightly, therefore the synchronization of the answers to challenges is of utmost importance. Logistics certainly belongs to the challenges which have a great impact on competitiveness. The backwardness of logistics infrastructure in Central and Eastern Europe leads to economic disadvantages. However, not only the infrastructure needs improvement but also the new factors of competitiveness, such as information flow, telecommunication systems, effectiveness of innovation systems, and the opportunity of new knowledge need to be taken into consideration. Thus, the role of logistics will certainly increase in improving the region’s economic competitiveness, and it is expedient to synchronize the strategies directed to this. Supported by a Standard Grant of the International Visegrad Fund, this study presents country analyzes, and focuses on both the common and different elements in the aspect of logistics development. Summarizing the results, it is concluded that there are several opportunities to improve logistics efficiency. Both the technical conditions and the human resources may be developed in the future. The International Visegrad Fund has supported such development programs in the past, and hopefully it will do so in the future, too. On behalf of the Hungarian Logistics Association I would like to thank the precious work of the authors and the help of reviewers. I hope that this book will contribute to the improvement of logistics in the region and the project will be continued to elaborate more precise policy recommendations.

Budapest, 15 October 2015

Dr. Zoltán Doór chairman of the Hungarian Logistics Association

INTRODUCTION

This study was created in the project Synchronization and development of national strategies of logistics in V4 countries, supported by a Strategic Grant of the International Visegrad Fund no. 31410010. The project was led by the Hungarian Logistic Association, while the other participating organizations in the project were the University of Economics in Katowice, the Czech Logistics Association and the Association of Logistics and Freight Transport of the Slovak Republic.

Objectives This project emerged from the co-operation of the logistics associations of the V4 countries and it aimed at analyzing and comparing the logistic strategies of their respective countries, paying special attention to intra-Visegrad cooperation and development potentials in logistics and transportation. Based on the research, the project aimed at delivering policy recommendations to the strategy makers in order to improve the foundation of the future development of logistic networks within the V4 countries, and to promote regional development. In particular, the following aspects were considered:  Who created the strategy of logistics, who is involved (representatives of the industry, experts, NGOs, national government, regional governments, cities etc.)? Is there any governmental and legislative support behind the national strategy?  In which structure, by which statistical background and by which indicators is the output of logistics measured?  Which are the main strategic goals in logistics of the four countries? How does the North-South transportation corridor appear in these concepts?  In which fields are V4 competing with each other? Where are the possible fields of co- operation and common development?  With which other industries may logistics cooperate (transportation, tourism, energy networks, informatics, etc.)?

Methodology After agreeing in mutually acceptable evaluation criteria, each partner has analyzed the available and latest transport and/or logistic strategy of its own country. This overview and analysis is summarized in country studies (chapters 1–4). The comparative analysis and the 8 outline of potential increasing possibilities are based on the LPI index of the World Bank, and the country reports following the accepted evaluation criteria. The summary includes policy recommendations and proposals for the next phase of research.

I. THE CZECH REPUBLIC

Vaclav Cempírek (Czech Logistic Association) and Petr Průša (University of Pardubice)

Transport infrastructure The Czech Republic benefits from a strategically advantageous geographical position. Not only does the Czech Republic lies in the middle of Europe, but it is also a gateway from Western to Eastern Europe. A very important advantage for this state is supported by the fact that the Czech Republic has the most advanced infrastructure in the region.

The current state of transport infrastructure The Czech Republic, as well as other neighboring countries is facing the problem of unbalanced transportation from the perspective of its kind. Road transport is still the most common means of transportation and other ways of carrying cannot compete.

Table 1. Transport performances by type of traffic in thousand tons Transport performance in freight transport according to its forms year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Freight 461144 444574 453537 431855 370115 355911 349278 339314 351517 Rail transport 85613 97491 99777 95073 76715 82900 87096 82968 83957 Shipping 1956 2032 2242 1905 1647 1642 1895 1767 1618 air transport 20 22 22 20 15 14 12 9 9 (thousand tons) 548733 544119 555578 528853 448492 440467 438281 424058 437101 Source: Sydos, 2013.

Table 1 shows the transmission performance of freight transport split by transport forms. From 2005 until today road haulage still prevails. This trend did not change and it seems to remain in the near future. Though the financial crisis from 2009 the volume of transportation decreased, the freight breakdown structure has not changed. The different kinds maintain still the same ratio of total traffic as before the crisis (see Table 2). Road transport occupies a stable position at around 80% of the total freight traffic and its biggest competitor, rail transport, has only a share of almost 20%. The 2009 crisis hit road traffic the most: from 2008 to 2009 the traffic volume decreased by ca. 62 miles tons. A slightly but steadily declining trend characterizes air transport, where from 2005 to 2013 the volume decreased by 55% from 20 to 9 thousand tons. In relation to

10 the total volume of transport, air transport does not take even a tenth percent more – in 2013 it was only 0.002%.

Table 2. Transportation performance in %. Transport performance in freight transport according to its species year 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Freight 84.04% 81.71% 81.63% 81.66% 82.52% 80.80% 79.69% 80.02% 80.42% Rail transport 15.60% 17.92% 17.96% 17.98% 17.11% 18.82% 19.87% 19.57% 19.21% Shipping 0.36% 0,37% 0.40% 0.36% 0,37% 0,37% 0.43% 0.42% 0,37% air transport 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Source: Sydos, 2013.

The Czech Republic has a very dense road and rail networks. Over the years, the length of infrastructure has been more or less unchanged. Instead of adding new section, efforts to maintain the existing infrastructure prevail. In 2013 the Czech Republic had available:  55 761.3 km of roads of which 775.8 km of highways and 458.3 of speed roads,  9 560 km of railways,  315.2 km waterways on the Labe and Vltava rivers.

Road infrastructure Figure 1 shows the motorways in the Czech Republic. While the road network is very dense, the network of motorways is much more modest. The highways and expressways occupy only 2.2% of the total volume of roads. The densest motorway network is around Prague, where logistics parks concentrate. Their infrastructure is located close to highways around Prague, which allows easy access to all points of the compass. While Prague is surrounded by freeways, not all regional centers are connected to the motorway network. The greatest weakness of the road network is the fact that while the volume of road traffic constantly increases, the road infrastructure is considerably beyond this growth. There are lags in maintenance and repair of roads that would keep pace with the increasing burden on the infrastructure. There are still large numbers of missing bypasses in important arterial roads, which would both increase the speed, comfort and driving safety, but also would have improved the quality of life in the affected areas (Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, 2014).

Figure 1. Map of highways in the Czech Republic

Source: Ceskedalnce.cz, 2014.

Still, a comprehensive road backbone infrastructure has not been built yet. At present, a mere 56% of planed motorways and expressways operate. The initial assumption was to dispose the motorway and expressway network length of about 2200 km. Low intensity of new stretches, which is largely due to its very high financial requirements, is not enough to cover the increase in road transport. This results in a higher rate of accidents and the deterioration of the technical condition of the existing infrastructure (Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, 2014).

Railway infrastructure The railway network in the Czech Republic is influenced by the size, the state and the length of the lines. The Czech railway networks belong to the most densest railway networks of the world. Figure 2 shows the railway corridors that connect major cities. At present the Czech Republic has four corridors that connect important railway lines to neighboring countries.

Figure 2. Railway corridors in the Czech Republic

Source: SZDC, 2012

Unfortunately, the current technical conditions of the railway network give advantage to road transport (Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, 2014). In the busiest areas of railway infrastructure, capacity problem occurs when passenger traffic fully covers the capacity of the railway network. Freight transport faces a problem to plan its routes (Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, 2014).

Inland waterway transport Figure 3 shows the navigable sections of rivers. The Czech Republic has a minimal length of waterways. This is caused by its geographic location in the middle of Europe, where rivers mainly originate, but are not yet sufficiently large and wide and do not meet the safety standards that are appropriate to the alloy composition. Therefore, the Czech Republic does not have many options in terms of water transportation. Most rivers are unnavigable, boating is allowed only on the two waterways, which are the Elbe-Vltava waterway and the Canal of Baťa, but the latter is suitable for passenger transport only. Cargo shipping therefore is relevant on the two biggest rivers, Labe (Elbe) and Vltava. The Elbe River is an ideal water

13 way, because it flows into the Nordic Sea and provides the option of connecting river transport to sea.

Figure 3. Map of useable waterways

Source: Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, 2014

However, the Elbe-Vltava waterway is still not fully exploited. It is necessary to emphasize the fact that this situation is largely due to a high dependency on the state of the water basin and the water level, which is not yet sufficiently corrected due to the lack of river infrastructure. All current construction proposals would encounter resistance from environmentalist activists (Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, 2014).

Combined transport infrastructure Combined transport in the Czech Republic is not as widespread as in the neighboring Germany. The aim of the Ministry of Transport in the future is to concentrate a greater volume of traffic on rail and multimodal and intermodal transport (Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, 2014). In order to develop combined and intermodal transport, it is necessary to build a network of transshipment, which, however, is still missing in the Czech Republic. There are only a few railway transshipments which would meet the requirements of technical facilities and capacity. The vision of the Ministry of Transport is to support the construction of such rail

14 transshipment, which would enable further development of rail freight traffic and would thus increase the rail’s share in the total volume of transported cargo (Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, 2014). Table 3 shows the development of combined transport in the Czech Republic.

Table 3. Number of transshipment combined transport year 2005 200 6 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Railway – Road 7 8 9 9 9 9 11 11 12 Railways - Roads - Water 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 total 11 12 13 13 13 13 15 15 16

Terminals which allow combining rail, road and water transport are currently the Staré Loubí Terminál, the Lovosice-Prosmyky terminal, and the T-Port, s. r. o. a ČP Container terminal in Mělník. Terminals combining road to rail transport are: Terminal Brno, a.s., METRANS Česká Třebová, ČD-DUSS Terminál, a. s., TSC Lovosice, Mělník Intermodal terminal, METRANS Plzeň, Terminal Ostrava-Paskov, METRANS Praha, ČSKD-INTRANS, a. s., RailCargoOperator-CSKD, METRANS Ostrava and METRANS Zlín. There were 16 transshipments which were able to check in large containers and 8 transshipment exchangeable bodies in year 2013. The following three charts show the development of combined transport on rail. Figure 4 shows the transport of large containers. It can be seen that the number of containers transported by rail continues to grow; the only exception was in 2009, when due to the crisis the number of containers transported fell by around 200,000 units compared to 2008. The following year witnessed a growing demand and the number of units shipped containers even surpassed that of 2008.

Figure 4. Transport of large containers by rail

900000 823934 759676 800000 723849 679240 700000 660191 600000 559570

500000 451795 433088 397670 400000 300000 200000 100000 0 2008 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Source: Cushman & Wakefield, 2014.

Rising tendency could be witnessed in the transport of road trailers by rail, too. Although by 2009 this mode of transport rather declined, in 2010 a strong growth started, and in 2013 even 50% more road trailers was transported by rail than in the previous year.

Figure 5. Unaccompanied road transport trailers and semi-trailers by rail

30000 27561

25000

20000 18374

15000 11208 10000

4484 5000 2022 1531 1437 65 341 0 2008 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Source: Cushman & Wakefield, 2014.

Transport trailers by rail transport significantly decreased in 2013, in particular when compared to the previous year (about 18,500 less large swap bodies were transported).

Figure 6. Transport of large swap bodies by rail

35000 30882 30000 27575

25000 22563 19176 20000 18876 15668 15979 14075 15000 12430

10000

5000

0 2008 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Source: Cushman & Wakefield, 2014.

The European rail freight corridor In 2010 the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union laid down rules for the establishment and organization of a European Rail network consisting of international freight corridors to ensure competitive advantage in freight. The goal is to achieve the reliability and quality of rail freight, which could compete with other modes of transport. For this purpose, the coordinated development of railway and the establishment of harmonized rules are necessary. The main concept for the creation of regulation 913/2010/EU (further the “Regulation”) was to improve service providers’ infrastructure (further the “IM”) that is provided by international freight operators. Previous activities have made contribution to the creation of the concept of corridors, especially the “First Railway Package”, program TEN-T (Trans-European Transport Network), cooperation between Member States and IM within European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) and the development of TAF TSI (Technical Specifications of Interoperability on Telematic Applications for Freight). Through regulation the European Union would want to operate in the next import areas with the corresponding requirements of harmonization process:  improving coordination between service providers’ infrastructure,  improving the conditions of access to infrastructure,  ensuring the sufficient priority for freight trains,  improving intermodal transport on the corridors.

In order to achieve these objectives, the European Union set 9 international corridors for rail freight (further as “RFC”) up within the EU railway network. Updated description of single RFC (regarding regulation 1316/2013 / EU) is shown in the following table: The organs of each corridor to take the decision-making in order to accomplish the tasks and objectives appear from Regulations. The existing specific rules on Rail Freight Corridors (RFCs) are published in the corridor information document of each corridor (“Corridor information document”, further as “CID”). The specific rules are applied only to interstate freight trains according the rail freight-specific corridor. The Czech national railroad company, (SŽDC) is a member of the following corridors:  RFC 5 Baltic-Adriatic,  RFC 7 East and East Mediterranean,  RFC 8 North Sea-Baltic,  RFC 9 Rhine-Danube.

Corridor RFC 5 Baltic–Adriatic The term of putting the corridor into operation is 10. 11. 2015. A memorandum about understanding has been signed and the basic structure of organization has been created, gradually the basic documents of the corridor were prepared. The Office of the corridor will be settled in Warsaw. Operators of the corridor prepare the establishment of legal entities by forming a European Economic Interest Groupings (EEIG).

Corridor RFC 7 East and East Mediterranean The term of putting the corridor into operation was 10. 11. 2013. The organs of the corridor already approved all necessary documents, in particular the Implementation Plan and Corridor information document. The single point of Contact corridor (OneStopShop corridor) was established within the Rail Capacity Allocation Office at the company VPE. The secretariat of the corridor is settled in the Budapest within the company MÁV.

Corridor RFC 8 North Sea–Baltic The term of putting the corridor into operation is 10. 11. 2015. So far the Czech Railways and SŽDC are providers within this corridor. They have the support of other countries for obtaining full membership in 2015. Czech Railways and SŽDC so far will hold meeting for the organs of corridor. Within study of the transport market, which is the main strategic

18 development document of each corridor and now Czech module is created and on the basis of its results it will be decided the next position of the Czech Republic in this corridor.

Corridor RFC 9 Rhine–Danube On the route Prague–Horní Lideč–Žilina–Košice–Čierna, the term of putting the Czech– Slovak section of the corridor into operation was 10. 11. 2013. Organs of corridor have already approved all necessary documents, especially the Implementation Plan and the corridor information document. The single point of Contact corridor was established at first within SŽDC and it will rotate with the Slovak partner. The Czech–Slovak corridor will become part of the Rhine–Danube corridor at the latest in 2020.

Principles of infrastructure development The main objectives of modernization and optimization for selected railway network in the Czech Republic are the following:  deployment of higher speed limits for sufficient long sections so that the increased speed will be used effectively,  achievement of load track class D4 UIC for the level of track speed is 120 km/h including (22.5 t/right and concurrently 8 t/meter length of the vehicle)  deployment of spatial continuity for loading rate UIC GC according to ČSN 73 6320, basic cross-section Z-GC,  achievement of required railway capacity or achievement of required timeslot trains while determining the optimized size of the rail infrastructure,  equip tracks with such technological capabilities that ensure full security operation in the conditions of 160 km/h maximum speed on a track. Construction of new track and modernization of existing tracks for speed over 160 km/h are considered vital for the modernization of higher degree. New constructions of railway line section that will be prospectively part of a network of high speed tracks, propose taking into account the relevant technical specifications for interoperability of the trans-European high- speed rail system. In conclusion, for the freight corridor RFC 9, the trace has been modified: Praha–Top Lideč/Bohumín/Havířov/Žilina– Košice–Čierna nad Tisou (alternatively Matovic)–Slovak- Ukrainian border. The possibility to use the second road Hranice–Upper Lideč–Czech-Slovak border is highly appreciated.

The Czech Republic is handicapped by the fact that all freight corridors in the East and South end in Prague and are not connected to the North Sea ports. It is expected that the rail corridor will be completed in the Czech Republic in 2018. Currently, work is underway on the national corridors III (Praha–Plzeň–Cheb–Czech-German border) and IV (Prague–Czech Budodějovice–Czech-Austrian border). The researchers suggest that as part of the railway infrastructure combined transport terminals shall be built, because intermodal transport units will become an alternative to the separate vehicle shipments in the near future. In carrying out this plan, modal split may be changed in favor of rail transport, as required by the transport policy of the EU.

Overview of the current state of logistics parks The development of logistics parks in the Czech Republic dates back to the 1990s, when the first logistics companies began to operate. Companies began to develop their first logistics centers, placing them at convenient locations, mainly near to highways. At the end of the 20th century the development of logistics parks in the Czech Republic improved further. The first projects to construct logistics parks started, resulting in large-scale facilities (Kampf et al., 2007). About 70 logistics parks operate currently in the Czech Republic. Logistics parks are allocated by private investors without a united concept, resulting in uneven distribution across the republic. The most concentrated clusters are concentrated around the largest cities such as Prague, Brno, Plzen, Ostrava, Olomouc, Přerov, Prostějov etc. and along highways and expressways. One of the most important places is the vicinity of Prague. Prague has itself a very advantageous strategic position in Central Bohemia. Logistics parks are mostly concentrated on the outer edge of Prague, where four highways and several expressways lead to. They are connected via the Prague circuit, which makes passing through Prague easy and fast. In Moravia, logistics developers prefer areas around Brno and Breclav. This area is a great strategic point because it is located halfway between Prague and Vienna and Prague and Bratislava, respectively, and provides therefore accessible distance towards Moravia, Austria and Slovakia. Regarding infrastructure, logistics parks are connected to the motorways D1 and D2, and a railway siding on the corridor leading from Prague to Vienna can be utilized, too. Other larger logistics parks are around the cities of Pilsen and Ostrava.

Figure 7. Logistics capacity map of Czech regions (in m2)

Source: Rumler, 2014.

Figure 7 shows the area of logistics buildings constructed in various regions. These data are taken from CBRE (Czech division of international CBRE – commercial property and real estate services adviser) and are valid for the third quarter of 2014. It is well reflected that the logistics areas of the Czech Republic are very unevenly distributed. In the fall of 2014, in the Karlovy Vary Region not even a single logistics park was to be found. Other areas which are not frequently sought by investors are the Southern regions of the Republic and the city of Zlin. Figure 8 shows the evolution of cleanly realized demand for logistics areas in the Czech Republic that is adjusted gross realized demand after renegotiation. In 2009, the demand for logistics areas was the lowest since the market was affected by the financial crisis of 2008. But the reduction in demand did not last long with the exception of 2011, when demand dropped below 500 000 m2. In 2011, the decrease in demand reflected investor fears of a growing crisis of the Eurozone.

Figure 8. Cleanly realized demand (m2)

700000

600000

500000

400000

300000

200000

100000

0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Q3 2014

Source: DTZ, 2014.

Figure 9. Total built area of logistic areas (m2)

6000000

5000000

4000000

3000000

2000000

1000000

0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 3Q 2014

Source: CBRE, 2014.

Figure 9 shows the evolution of the exposed paces of logistics buildings in the Czech Republic. With the Czech Republic’s accession to the European Union in 2004 the situation in the construction of logistics centers in the country significantly changed. There was an increase of the logistics companies that decided to take advantage of the strategic position of the Czech Republic in the middle of Central Europe, with the best infrastructure in the region. Demand for construction of logistics parks began to rise steeply, which started to be felt in 2006, when it recorded a gain amounting to over half a million m2 (Figure 11) and the

22 total built area thus exceeded imaginary milestone of 1 million m2 of surface. This trend continued in 2007, which brought a record increase in the amount of 733 thousand m2 (Figure 11), which represents 50% of the existing buildings and due to the fact the total area has climbed to more than 2 million m2. Other years have brought about a boom in construction, and in 2010 the impact of the financial crisis was fully reflected, as only less than 200,000 m2 had been built. Since then, however, the market for logistics surfaces is again rebounding and in the third quarter of 2014, the overall accessibility of built area was almost 4.8 million m2. Assuming that this number will continue to grow as it did in this year (2015). It will be the most new space since 2009 when nearly 450,000 m2 was built (DTZ, 2014 and CBRE, 2014).

Figure 10. Increase by year of planted area

800 000

700 000

600 000

500 000

400 000

300 000

200 000

100 000

0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 3Q 2014

Source: DTZ, 2014 and CBRE, 2014.

The biggest investors Several developers are active on the Czech market which are engaged in lease and construct in industrial areas. Currently the largest and most important ones include: CTP Invest, spol. s.r.o. is a long-term investor and one of the largest investor on the Czech market. In 2014 it became the fourth biggest development company in Europe. The company is seated in Humpolec and entered the market in 1998. Its strategy is based on contracts to sell the property, but use them long term lease. This allows them to better meet the wishes of their clients and respond more quickly to changing needs of tenants. The number of properties in their possession is about 220, of which 85% are industrial and warehouse buildings, the rests

23 are offices. In 2007, the total surface area for rent exceeded 1 million m2. In 2014 the value was more than 2.2 million m2. CTP is known for being involved in all processes of construction of buildings, that is, from land acquisition through legal affairs to design buildings (CTP, 2014). Point Park Properties (often referred to as P3) is a developer, which has operated on the European market since 2001. The company seat is in Prague, where the company manages approx. 120 properties and areas across Europe with a total area PLO of 780,000 m2. Before the end of August 2015 the company undertook extensive buying of properties in the Czech Republic and almost doubled the area of its real estate. Point Park Properties offers its services not only to logistics companies, but also works with the automotive and electronics industry. The company aims at providing first-class services to clients while being mindful of the environment. In 2013 the company obtained the prize “Investor of the Year in industrial real estate” (P3, 2014). Prologis focuses on the area of Central and Eastern Europe, which includes also the Czech Republic. The company was based in 1997 with its regional center in Warsaw. In 2013, Prologis entered the Czech market by constructing the logistics market Park Prague D1 West. Shortly afterwards, it constructed six other logistics parks, four from that are near to Prague. In 2014 it received the award “Industrial developer of the year 2014” for the region of Central and Eastern Europe (Prologis, 2014). VGP group also engages in the logistics real estate market in Central Europe, but has recently increasingly focused on industrial zones in Germany. This company has been operating in the Czech Republic since 1998 and has its headquarter in the Northern part of the country around Jenišovice. The VGP group currently owns 13 logistics sites in the Czech Republic and this year began the construction of other three in Olomouc, Prague and a smaller project in Liberec (VGP, 2014). The following graph shows the ratio between the amounts of demand superiors developers in the Czech Republic in the second quarter of 2014. These developers have absolute dominance in the market, while other companies, like Panattoni, Hoya, Bohman Invest and Contera took only 8% of market demand.

Figure 9. Net take-up according to the developer, 2Q 2014

8% 12% 32% PointPark Properties Prologis 21% CTP Invest VGP 27% OthersOstatní

Source: DTZ, 2014.

The largest parks

P3 Park Horní Počernice In 2006, the construction of the largest logistics park in the Czech Republic began, with a total area of 401,753 m2, of which the area intended for rent occupies over 335,000 m2 and the rest of the area is possible to complete according to clients’ requirements within 6 months. The facility includes 28 buildings. The park is situated in the district of Prague East, only 1.5 km from the shopping center Černý Most. The park is very well connected to the city center; one can get there by regular bus, train and nearby there is also a metro station. As for the connection to the infrastructure, P3 park Horní Počernice lies both in the vicinity of the Prague circuit and also the exit to R10 highway towards Mlada Boleslav–Turnov–Liberec. Among the larger tenants of this logistics park are Alza, Coca Cola, Continental, and Mall. The owner of the park changed in 2014, when the group agreed with the developer VGP Point Park Properties the shop, where P3 bought up several logistics parks belonging VGP. (P3: Logistic parks; 2014).

Prologis Prague – Jirny This logistics park, which is owned by Prologis, is close to Prague at the exit of D11, which runs from Prague to Hradec Králové and has excellent connections from the capital to Eastern Bohemia. Location of this park provides easy access to the Prague circle. The total area of the

25 park exceeds 192 000 m2. At the property, 6 logistic warehouses of 192,000 m2 are located. The tenants of the park include Globus, DHL and Toyota Tsusho (Prologis, 2014).

P3 Prague D1 Another large park in the vicinity of Prague is Prague P3 D1. As the name suggests, the owner of the logistics park is developer Point Park Properties. The total area exceeds 176 000 m2. Construction of the park began in 2005, and was completed in 2014. The Park is located close to the D1 motorway to Brno and also only 15 minutes from the city center. The nearest railway station is at Strašnice about 3 km away. There is also a shuttle bus from the station Opatov. Easy access to the Prague circuit facilitates connection to Plzen and Germany. There are four warehouses and the largest tenants include HOPI, Schenker and Autokelly (P3, 2014).

Public logistics centers Currently in the Czech Republic logistic centers are utilized especially by road transport. There are, however, distribution centers, which are in a condition to use a combination of multiple modes of transport. It is either modality, which combines multiple modes of transport, such as the starting and ending sections a used to transport road transport, but the main transport route for goods is rail or water. This reduces the negative externalities of transport of goods. In contrast, intermodal transport is used by containers and transport units in which the goods are stored throughout transport, and that during the journey they are transferred from railroad freight cars to ships, and vice versa (Václav, C. & Jaromír, Š. 2012). Such logistical centers that use multimodal and intermodal transport are called public logistics centers. A public logistics center is a place where combined transport concentrates with a broad range of logistics services. Public logistics centers operate on the basis of non- discriminatory terms. This means that before the launch of the activity of the logistics center it is obligated to disclose information relating to contracts, price list and services and required services are not allowed to discriminate against anyone (Cempírek, 2010 and Rumler, 2014). There is also interface between the private interest and the public. In reality, this means that both the public and private sector are involved into the construction of public logistic centers. The public sector mainly focuses on effective services in the area and minimizes the negative impact on the environment (Rumler, 2014). Main areas of activity of the public sector in the construction of logistics centers are according to Rumler (2014): 26

 planning and buying grounds, proposals for allocation of a network of public logistics centers,  efforts to encourage continuity of public logistics centers on the trans-European transport network to locate important meeting points of commodity flows in the Czech Republic, the possible connection of logistics centers in this network,  revitalization of selected existing logistics centers, which include, for example deductible expenses such as the introduction of siding to an existing logistics center, connecting road traffic on highways and roads backbone,  the introduction of telematics to existing logistics centers – electronic log-book, the introduction of science into all processes in logistics centers,  education of logistics workforce,  popularization and increasing general overview of logistics among residents. The establishment of a comprehensive network of public logistics centers would not be possible without the support of the government (Cempírek, 2010). The benefits of public logistics centers emerge in several areas. They not only will contribute to the development of their vicinity and increase the variety of services offered to customers, but they will increase the facilities for small entrepreneurs and local industry (Rumler, 2014). A typical problem for logistics space in the Czech Republic is that in most cases they are connected to the road infrastructure only. Railways are used only rarely and even the possibility of connection to the railway is not a condition for the selection of logistics center location. This phenomenon occurs because investment in these projects stem from the private sector and the state does not intervene. Over the construction of logistics parks, there is no supervision of the state or local government, while abroad it is quite a common practice, especially in the form of construction of public logistics centers (Kampf et al., 2007).

Vacancy rates and rents of logistics spaces Although the amount of logistics space is constantly rising, yet fluctuations and moves are on average around 8%.The majority of logistics facilities are starting to build up after fore- renting. This means that developers will begin the construction according to customer needs. This trend provides benefits for both the developer and tenant, as the developer is not taking the risk of the project’s demand on the market and the tenant has the option to have spaces bespoke. After signing the treaty, spaces are usually built and delivered to the tenant within 6–9 months (DTZ, 2014 and CBRE, 2014).

Until 2009 real estate companies registered vacancies in bulk, without dividing the space according to the type of category A, B and C. Therefore, the following chart shows the vacancy rate only since 2010. This year has accounted for the entire period the highest vacancy rate since 2009. In other years the vacancy rate was at around 8%, and this trend is not likely to change in the nearest future (DTZ, 2014 and CBRE, 2014).

Figure 12. The vacancy rate in %

16,00% 14,00% 12,00% 10,00% 8,00% 6,00% 4,00% 2,00% 0,00% 2010 2011 2012 213 3Q 2014

Source: DTZ and CBRE 2014 yearbooks

The map below shows the current status of the vacancy rate by regions for the third quarter of 2014. The map displays some significant differences in the occupancy rate among regions. South Bohemia is the worst Bohemian Region with 42% of vacant space, and second is Hradec Kralove region with 21.2% of vacant space. Fully occupied are the capacities in Liberec and Zlin (DTZ, 2014).

Figure 13. Vacancy rates and prizes (€/m2)

Source: Rumler, 2014

It is interesting that although the occupancy rate is different in each region, rent levels are quite similar in all regions, ranging from €3.5 to €4 per m2 (DTZ, 2014). The following table shows the highest average monthly rents levels since 2006. It is apparent that the rent keeps stable at around € values from 3.5 to 4.5€ per m2. Neither the amount of rent, nor the vacancy rate of logistics space thus reflect the current economic situation (DTZ, 2014).

Table 4. Prime rents (DTZ) €/m2 per month 3Q Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Value 4–4.5 4.2–4.5 4–4.3 3.7–4.3 3.6–4.3 3.6–4.3 3.6–4.3 3.8–4.3 4–4.3 Source: DTZ, 2014.

One can also meet with the so-called effective rents. This is the rent for the premises, which are reduced by the rental holidays. This benefit is derived from efforts to attract lettings. The length of the rent holiday depends on the specific contract between lessor and tenant, and most can be found with an estimated 3 to 6 or 9 months. Specifically, in the third quarter of 2014, after factoring in rent free moving average monthly effective rents range from €3.2 to €3.9/m2.

Evaluation and future development of transport and logistic In general both the overall LPI and its influencing factors show quite hectic changes except for the quality of logistic services. This component is characterized by continuous improvement. The lowest values are connected to the customs services and the infrastructure, while the best values to ease of tracking and timeliness. Timeliness shows the greatest change of influencing factors from 2010 to 2012.

Figure 14. LPI component scores of the Czech Republic, 2007–2014

LPI component scores

4,50 4,00 3,50 2007 3,00 2010 2012 2,50 2014

Source: World Bank 2015.

The position of the Czech logistics sector in the international ranking follows the changes in scores. The best position was attained in 2014 by the ease of shipment component (13th), but in overall LPI ranking the best position was the 26th place in 2010. This was the best year for the Czech logistics sector, because both in timeliness and in ease of shipment it was in the best 20 considering 155 countries. The black year was 2012 when the timeliness factor fell back to the 63rd place, the worst position of all factors from 2007 till 2014. After 2012 in each component there was significant improvement in the performance of the Czech logistics sector.

Table 5. LPI rank values of the Czech Republic Ranks 2007 2010 2012 2014 Overal LPI 38 26 44 32 Customs 36 27 43 33 Infrastructure 36 34 50 36 Ease of Shipment 43 17 45 13 Logistics Services 42 35 31 29 Ease of Tracking 35 27 46 25 Timeliness 42 19 63 39 Source: World Bank 2015.

Figure 15. LPI components of the Czech Republic, 2007–2014

LPI component standardised rank values

70 60 50 40 2007 30 20 2010 10 2012 0 2014

Source: World Bank 2015.

In the Czech Republic there are measurable indicators for the evaluation of transport and logistics as part of Transport Policy Czech Republic, which is approved by the government. This document is based on the Transport Policy of the EU and it is available from section of strategies from web page of Ministry of Transport of Czech Republic. The Transport Policy of the Czech Republic provides proportional development of transport modes, but more emphasis is placed on terrestrial transport. Parts of this proposal text include the critical factors for improving the status of various modes of transport. The transport infrastructure and its equipment are among the factors that influence the competitiveness of both the Czech Republic and its individual regions. This impact must be considered in a wider context, since many other conditions need to be fulfilled in order to achieve competitiveness, like other infrastructure, quality and education of the labor force, application of advanced technologies based on the support of research and development, 31 functioning labor market, healthy financial and market environment, good quality of the environment, health care and attractiveness for tourism. All these areas must be developed in a uniform fashion. As far as the development of the transport infrastructure is concerned, the public sector is responsible for the major part of it. It is a “public good” with high financial demands, both in case of construction and operation and maintenance of the transport infrastructure. It is, therefore, an area suitable for European co-financing. The density of the transport network in the Czech Republic is above average. However, this alone is not enough to secure competitiveness. The attractiveness of the area for investors, as far as transport access is concerned, is governed by relative access, i.e., by comparing the quality of access of different states and regions. In this regard, the quality of the transport infrastructure in the Czech Republic, in particular in comparison with its Western neighbors, lags behind significantly. It is not only about building new roads but also improving the current transport infrastructure, increasing speed, improving safety and increasing capacity. High-quality transport infrastructure, which enables regular deliveries of goods, is important for the reduction of costs in the logistics chain. Logistics technologies based on regular deliveries make it possible to reduce stock, speed up the turnover of goods and so to reduce production costs of companies active in the relevant region. Advanced logistics technologies must also focus on process sustainability, i.e., they have to minimize the impact on the environment and public health. This is why the logistics chains must be able to utilize the benefits of all modes of transport by applying the so-called co-modality principle.

Priority 1. Good accessibility Good access is important in passenger transport as well. It is not only the question of securing the mobility of labor force and public transport services. Also the touristic potential is important. In terms of attractiveness of regions for investors also the kind of access is important which makes it possible to organize business meetings, workshops, congresses and conferences, without much loss of time for the participants of these meetings. This requires easy access of the regions to TEN-T airports, high-speed railway lines and motorway networks. The Czech Republic lies in the middle of Europe and it may seem to have all the conditions required for good-quality transport access. However, it is illusive since the transit potential is limited by natural conditions. Important routes from Western Europe to Russia lead through more favorable terrain in Polish lowlands and the connection between Western Europe and the Balkans is more favorable through the easier terrain along the Danube River. Thus, only the transit routes of lower importance lead through the Czech Republic (Dresden – 32

Vienna/Bratislava and Vienna–Katowice). Unless sufficient attention is given to the development of the transport infrastructure in the Czech Republic (not only in the area of motorways development, but also as regards the development of high-speed railway transport), the Czech Republic can easily become a periphery in the center of Europe with the corresponding negative impact on its competitiveness. The waterborne transport can play a positive role in maintaining the competitiveness of the manufacturing industry in the Czech Republic, as it is able to secure the transport of heavy and bulky articles. Considering high European competition in heavy industry, the connection to inland waterways can become one of the criteria for deciding which facilities will be kept operational in the future. Measures:  Modernize and complete the transport infrastructure in international context (the TEN- T network as a priority), having regard to the competitiveness of the Czech Republic and the needs of industry, development of tourism and other sectors of economy. The Czech Republic must not become a periphery in the center of Europe.  Plan the development of technologies based on satellite systems and ITS, having regard to the needs of transport and the competitiveness of the Czech Republic.

Priority 2. Logistics chains Transport is an important part of the logistics process and if the objectives relating to transport sustainability are to be fulfilled, different parts of the logistics chain must be brought into harmony. The existence of externalities in transport means that within the logistics chain, transport is perceived by producers as a relatively inexpensive part compared to the costs of storing and internal stock. In the final analysis, it results in high requirements on transport including lower utilization of the means of transport (more empty rides as a result of low capacity utilization of vehicles and the requirements of just-in-time transport – JIT). Optimized system of logistics is one of the key factors for the competitiveness of companies and, therefore, it must be included among the measures aiming at increasing the competitiveness of regions and implementing regional cohesion policy. In European countries logistics is gradually moving from a purely commercial sphere to the area of public services, giving rise to logistics centers called Freight Village in English and Güterverkehrszentrum in German. These facilities have a specific task to attend to a territory, which can be defined in different ways: by its size, density of population, consumption and production of large, medium-sized and small enterprises, or even by administrative configuration of states and cross-border cooperation. This trend in the development of logistics in Europe, also in relation 33 to the links to the European transport policy, must be not only taken into account but also developed in a systematic way in the Czech Republic, having regard to the following. First, modal shift from road to those modes of transport which have less impact on the environment, without the entities operating in road transport losing their business, in the form of a service for road operators (railway transport is offering services for road operators in this sense). Second, use of multimodal transport systems to reduce the performance of road transport in favor of those modes of transport which have less impact on the environment, minimizing the costs of the change of the mode of transport and optimizing the time of transport, to avoid accumulation of logistics stock during circulation The servicing of a territory should be understood as an integrated logistics system, which includes the transport of goods and materials, the sorting of consignments and the operation of an internal transport system, the operation of the storage and retail network, the servicing of small and middle-sized enterprises as regards both input raw materials and production output. Public logistics is of key importance for the competitiveness of small and middle-sized businesses because these companies cannot build their own sophisticated systems of logistics. A logistics center can provide for import of materials and components for production in quantities which would often be rejected as a direct consignment by a forwarding agent with a specialized fleet and in a similar way for export of products which exceed the demand in the region or place of production; they assemble complete consignments on behalf of the sender (consisting also of products by different companies) and enable the export of these goods. Measures:  Seek effective and sustainable logistics solutions using the principle of co-modality with the view to supporting multimodal nature of transport, optimize the capacity of the transport infrastructure and use of energy and also make logistics services available to small and middle-sized businesses in industry, trade and agriculture.  Create an access to competitive multimodal transport chains for companies, using the railway and possibly waterborne transport with the objectives of:  improving capacity utilization of the means of transport and reducing empty rides,  reduction of heavy road transport (in the form of a service for road operators),  better cooperation and coordination among companies in the area of transport,  support of small and middle-sized enterprises,  reduction of negative impacts on the environment, public health and transport safety.

Priority 3. Application of co-modality principle The application of the co-modality principle is one of the instruments of the European transport policy for achieving the objectives of sustainable mobility in the area of freight transport. The proportion of the rail transport in the overall transport volume in the Czech Republic is comparable to the EU-15 Member States. However, there is a significant difference: while in the Czech Republic the trend has been declining, in the Western countries railway transport already reached the bottom and has been growing. The reason is that railway freight transport in Western Europe is based on progressive technologies of multimodal transport (in particular on regular combined transport lines, not only to maritime ports but also within the continent). The railway transport in the Czech Republic is much more based on classical technologies of single wagon consignments. The problem consists, among other things, in the fact that there is a lack of terminals for multimodal transport with suitable parameters in the Czech Republic1. Another issue is the non-public nature of existing terminals (from the point of view of non-discriminatory conditions for service providers and end users), which results in insufficiently competitive environment with impact on the quality and scope of the services provided. Even if railway freight transport based on the single wagon consignments will very likely not increase its share in the transport market in the future because of market and technological reasons, a quick collapse of this market segment could have negative impact2, because it would result in a sharp increase of road freight transport. Therefore, a discount on the charge for the use of railway infrastructure should be applied in particular to this segment of the railway market. In order to make the system attractive, it is advisable to connect the multimodal transport terminals to logistics centers. They enable the provision of further services to end clients, including optimization of the distribution process. Currently there is a dense network of logistics centers in the Czech Republic, which are mostly connected only to the road network. While the development of new logistics centers connected directly to public multimodal terminals is desirable, it should not be subject of support from public funds because it would constitute a case of illegal public aid3, which would be contested by the owners of already existing logistics centers and warehouses. Therefore, it should be financed from private sources only. Terminals for

1 In particular the length of tracks in the terminals and a connection to a suitable line with enough capacity for regular freight transport. 2 The only operator of single wagon consignments is currently ČD Cargo, which is considering discontinuing it because of losses. 3 Public aid may be granted, if notified to the European Commission. However, in this case the reasons for such a course of action are not sufficient. The aid must be focused on multimodal terminals, while the connected logistics centers should be financed by the private sector. 35 multimodal and combined transport must be designed so as to cooperate not only with any new logistics centers located in their immediate vicinity but also with existing logistics centers and warehouses on the basis of combined transport based on technologies of inexpensive and efficient transshipment of transport units. On the other hand, the construction of terminals for multimodal transport can be subject of support from public funds and they can even be under public ownership4. The European Commission supports the development of a network of terminals which, according to European law, are defined as part of the transport infrastructure5. This measure aims at higher use of the modes of transport alternative to road transport, as well as making road transport as such more efficient. However, these measures are not directed against road transport operators and they do not aim at infringing on market principles. They consist in particular of the support for the following types of undertaking: enabling the establishment of services for road operators6, and creating conditions for the provision of services directly to the multimodal transport operator. Subsidies for the operation of multimodal transport lines are only possible during the initial stage of operation (provided notification is made to the European Commission). Horizontal transshipment technologies are expensive, paying off only in case of shipment to long distances, hence it makes no sense to establish these systems in the Czech Republic separately for inland use; such systems are to be connected to the pan-European lines. Another important area is the supply solution for larger cities in the form of City Logistics, with connections to public logistics centers. Measures:  In coordination with the adopted Strategy for the support of logistics from public funds and the preparation of the Transport Sector Strategies create a methodological, financial and legal framework for the public support of logistics with clearly defined roles of the national and regional authorities and the private sector incorporated into amendment proposals. Define public terminals as part of the public transport infrastructure and provide for their financing through the State Transport Infrastructure Fund.

4 Complaint by the Metrans Company in Slovakia against the support of public terminals through European funds was not accepted as justified by the European Commission. 5 There is a separate map layer for them in the Trans-European transport network policy. 6 It is convenient for road transport operators to use the services of rail transport on medium and long distances, because in this way they can reduce their costs (lower wear and tear of road semi-trailers, savings on labor costs for drivers, lower energy consumption, increasing the set weight limit for transported goods).

 In relation to the preparation of the Operational Program for the Transport sector for 2014–2020 with the prospect to 2030, compile a proposal for concrete localization of public multimodal terminals, possibly with connections to logistics centers.  Build public multimodal terminals in accordance with AGTC parameters, to be included in the TEN-T network and defined as part of Rail Freight Corridors in accordance with Regulation (EU) 913/2010.  Create conditions for the development of rapid rail freight transport between the main points of transshipment and hubs of economic activity, together with the application of the just-in-time principle.  Initiate work to examine the scope of the current network of railway stations with dispatching authorization, lay down conditions for non-discriminatory access of local road transport operators and entrepreneurs and create conditions for the implementation of suitable logistics solutions (hub + spoke structure).  Create a program for the support of an expansion of the fleet of transport units and means for combined transport and for operating subsidies in the initial stage of operation of regular multimodal transport lines.  Support new concepts of city distribution based on the principles of City Logistics; in case of some cities located on important waterways, use the waterborne transport as an alternative means of supply (e.g., to provide for the supplies of construction materials and disposal of building and communal waste).  Set lower rates on the charges for the use of the transport route for single wagon consignments and in case of combined transport only for intra-continental lines.  Create conditions for the development of air freight transport, which can support the development and creation of jobs, at least by introducing the related ground services, in particular at regional airports, which due to utilization of free capacities can contribute to reducing overload and overcrowding at TEN-T airports and to minimizing the impact on the environment.

Specifics of the railway transport The potential of railway freight transport can only be utilized if transport flows are sufficiently strong. With regard to the fact that the railway network usually does not reach the

37 point of origin or destination of the transport need7, consignments must be transshipped. Collection, distribution and transshipment make the railway and waterborne transport more expensive so that they pay off only at longer distances. Medium distance transport is only possible when certain technologies of horizontal transshipment are used – in this case, handling of replaceable superstructures or containers can be considered. Such systems can be introduced in practice in the Czech Republic on condition that the number of replaceable superstructures used by freight forwarders can be increased. The condition for higher utilization of the railway transport is high-quality railway infrastructure with sufficient capacity for freight transport at any time of the day. Currently freight transport is limited by rapid passenger transport (requiring frequent overtaking, which slows down freight and increases its energy demand) as well as by suburban passenger transport (short intervals between trains). It is difficult for long-distance freight to pass through suburban and urban areas of large conurbations. This is why the Regulation (EU) 913/20108 defines so- called freight corridors, which should ensure sufficient capacity for freight transport when built. For the same reason the main routes in the TEN-T network are defined separately for passenger and freight transport. The railway transport has also the potential for express cargo shipment up to a distance of about 1,000 km, which can help free up air space for the intercontinental air transport. It is contingent on the implementation of a network of high-speed rail lines with direct connections to main international airports. The Eurocarex project, focusing on this market segment, has been in trial operation in Western Europe.

Specifics of the road transport The road transport is indispensable for comprehensive servicing of an area, collection and distribution. However, currently it is also strongly present in those segments of the transport market where other modes of transport are more desirable from the point of view of the whole society9. Discussions are currently under way in Europe on the introduction of so-called modular sets in road transport, referred to as “gigaliners”. Such sets present a suitable solution for increasing transport efficiency under certain conditions, where the traffic intensity is not high and at the same time transport distances are long (i.e., in vast, sparsely populated territories). There are no such conditions in the Czech Republic. The operation of modular

7 With the exception of railway sidings, which are expensive in operation and suitable only for larger companies with sufficiently strong freight transport. 8 Regulation (EU) of the European Parliament and of the Council No 913/2010 of 22 September 2010 concerning a European rail network for competitive freight. 9 For instance, if all costs are taken into account, i.e., including external costs. 38 sets is, therefore, only allowed in the Czech Republic on a very limited scale, on the basis of a permit for a special use of roads. Certain conditions must be fulfilled in order to receive the permit. Under the subsidiarity principle, the process of granting permissions for the operation of gigaliners should at any rate remain under the competence of the national governments, since it is necessary to take into account local conditions, in particular the condition of infrastructure (not only the impact on safety and infrastructure is relevant but also the impact on transport). In certain cases it may be justified to introduce such kind of transport but it must be assessed by national bodies of the relevant Member State. With regard to the fact the gigaliners require relatively large consignments it is more suitable to look for solutions focusing on the use of the railway transport. In the further process it will also be advisable to address the issue of regulation of night freight transport by using differentiated toll rates. Freight transport during the night hours contributes significantly to noise in populated areas, with night time noise having much more severe impact on human health than noise during daytime. What is also to be considered is the fact that in spite of regular rest regime, the driver’s biorhythm during night hours is at a minimum, posing a risk factor for the road safety, particularly in case of trucks with high kinetic energy. Any measures, however, should be compensated with the possibility to use regular lines of combined transport with long- distance transport of semi-trailers.

Specifics of the waterborne transport The share of the waterborne transport in the transport volume in the Czech Republic is not high, mainly due to insufficiently reliable infrastructure. If suitable conditions are created, waterborne transport can become part of regular combined transport lines, exerting competitive pressure on a reduction of prices in the rail and road transport. In 2006 the European Commission announced NAIADES, the Action program in support of inland waterway transport for the period until the end of 2013. Its objective was, inter alia, to help to integrate inland waterway transport into the European transport chain. Its main recommendations focus on efforts to create favorable conditions for the provision of inland waterway transport services and acquisition of new markets, support of ship modernization and innovation, acquisition of new labor and increase of human capital investment, raising awareness on inland waterway transport and improvement of inland waterway transport infrastructure. Currently a follow-up program called NAIADES II is under preparation, which should be issued for the following period 2014–2020.

Specifics of the air transport Air cargo forms an important segment of the freight market, focusing on long-distance express deliveries. Further development is contingent on good-quality interconnection of selected airports with the road and rail infrastructure, as well as with the network of TEN-T airports and logistics centers, which can contribute to raising the efficiency of transport and reducing the environmental burden. Within the framework of the Air Transport Conception, a network of airports in the Czech Republic will be identified with the potential for air cargo development. General measures:  Ensure the operation of the Rail Freight Corridors on the territory of the Czech Republic within the meaning of Regulation (EU) 913/2010 and connect Freight Corridor No 7 with Freight Corridor No 8. Provide for sufficient freight capacity in the freight corridors by ensuring sufficient capacity of the relevant track sections. Where the capacity of the transport infrastructure in the freight corridors is insufficient, introduce temporarily appropriate measures not only in freight but also in passenger transport, until it improves.  Ensure passage through large railway junctions by segregating passenger and freight transport (in particular the Prague Junction).  Create suitable conditions for the utilization of waterborne transport. Permanently create conditions for the possibility to apply support of waterborne transport (modernization of ships for freight and passenger inland waterway transport) within the framework of the NAIAdES (Navigation and Inland Waterway Action and development in Europe) and NAIAdES II Programs as well as follow-up programs of similar nature.  With the view to reducing the impact of transport on public health, differentiate the rates of distance-based charging during night hours, in accordance with directive 1999/62 EU, as amended by directive 2011/76/EU of the European Parliament and the Council of 27 September 2011, and support extension of the network of regular lines of multimodal transport for long-distance freight transport.  Create conditions for the development of air freight transport, which can support the development and creation of jobs, at least by introducing the related ground services, in particular at regional airports, which due to utilization of free capacities can contribute to reducing overload and overcrowding at TEN-T airports and to minimizing the impact on the environment. 40

The main objective of the transport policy and the priority structure The main objective of the Transport Policy is to create conditions for the development of high-quality transport system based on the utilization of technical, economic and technological properties of individual transport modes, on the principles of competition, having regard to its economic and social impact and the impact on the environment and public health. Specific sectoral and cross-section priorities build upon this main objective. The end user is the main focus of the Transport Policy – be it the actual transport client, or the whole society at the national or regional level, for whose citizens the transport needs are being fulfilled. This is the subject matter of the priority called Users. The transport needs of society are met through transport operation. This priority tackles similar issues as the previous one, however seen from the perspective of transport operators and providers of services. In order to reduce huge and needless losses caused by accidents, this framework also includes solutions aiming at higher transport safety. This is why the priority dealing with this area is called Transport Operation and Safety. The operation itself depends on resources, without which transport cannot be operated. They are in particular financial funds, including user-charging issues, which are closely related to the provision of funds. Energy sources are also of vital importance for transport. All of this is the subject matter of the priority called Funds for Transport. The Transport Infrastructure is the necessary condition for transport operation and forms the subject matter of another separate priority. The provision of high-quality transport infrastructure is demanding both in terms of investment needs and time demands on the processes of preparation and implementation of construction. Utilization and deployment of advanced traffic control and regulation systems, information systems, ITS systems and global navigation satellite systems must become an integral part of the transport development. Also research and development in other areas of transport must be taken into account. These tasks are dealt with under the priority Advanced Technologies, Research, Development and Innovation, Space Technologies.

Bibliography CBRE 2013 and 2014 yearbooks Cempírek, V. & Kampf, R. 2005. Logistika. Pardubice: Institut Jana Pernera. Cempírek, V. 2010. Logistická centra. Pardubice: Institut Jana Pernera.

Ceskedalnce.cz. ©2002-2015. Map of highways [online]. Praha: ceskedalnice.cz. Available from: http://www.ceskedalnice.cz/dalnicni-sit CTP: Real estate developer. [online]. Available from: http://www.ctp.eu/ [Accessed 2015-02- 25] Cushman & Wakefield: Real Estate Partner. Map of logistics parks [online]. Available from: http://www.cushmanwakefield.cz/en-gb/ [Accessed 2015-02-25] Czech Statistical Office. [online]. Available from: http://www.czso.cz/eng/redakce.nsf/i/home [Accessed 2015-02-25] DTZ yearbooks Geography of Transport, 2013. Geography of Transport - introduction, development of transport [online]. Praha. Available from: http://geoinovace.data.quonia.cz Kampf, R. et al. 2007. Assessment of the project to build the complex logistics center Dolní Lutyně. Vyd. 1. Pardubice: Institut Jana Pernera. Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, ©2005-2015. Navigable rivers in Czech republic [online]. Praha: MDCR. Available from: http://www.mdcr.cz/mdcr/flash/rocenka_99/ie40/mapa3.htm Ministry of Transport Czech Republic, ©2005–2015. The Transport Policy for the Czech Republic 2014 - 2020 with the prospect of 2050 [online]. Praha: MDCR. Available from: http://www.mdcr.cz/NR/rdonlyres/C6275C00-5172-4D86-BA3C- 930B5E0742A7/0/Dopravnipolitika1420dovlady.pdf P3: Logistic parks. [online]. Available from: http://www.p3parks.com/en/ [Accessed 2015-02- 25] PROLOGIS: Local partner to global trade. [online]. Available from: http://www.prologis.com/en/country/central-and-Eastern-europe/home.html [Accessed 2015- 02-25] RailNetEurope, 2014. Description of single RFC. [online]. Available from: http://www.rne.eu/rail-freight-corridors-rfcs.html Rumler, M. CZECHINVEST, ©1994-2015. The development of logistics centers in Europe and the Czech Republic [online]. Praha: CzechInvest. Available from: http://www.czechinvest.org/data/files/rozvoj-logistickych-center-v-evrope-a-cr-460.pdf Sydos. ©1998–2013. Yearbooks of transport [online]. Praha: Sydos. Available from: https://www.sydos.cz/cs/rocenky.htm Sydos. ©2000–2013. Goods transport flows [online]. Praha: Sydos. Available from: https://www.sydos.cz/cs/proudy.htm 42

SZDC. ©2009–2012. Rail corridors [online]. Praha: szdc.cz. Available from: http://www.szdc.cz/soubory/mapy/koridory-zjednodusene.pdf Šálek, B. 2014. Multimodal transport systems: Systems of swap bodies [online]. Praha: Czech Technical University in Prague. Available from: http://www.fd.cvut.cz/projects/_old/k612xppr/system%20vymennych%20nastaveb.html Václav, C. & Jaromír, Š. 2012. University of Pardubice. 2012. Theory of logistics and transportation technology. Pardubice. VGP: Developer of industrial parks. [online]. Available from: http://www.vgp.cz/en/ [Accessed 2015-02-25] World Bank: Global Rankings 2014 and Country Score Card: Czech Republic [online] Available from http://lpi.worldbank.org/international/global/2014 and http://lpi.worldbank.org/international/scorecard/radar/254/C/CZE/2014#chartarea [Accessed 2015-04-30]

II. HUNGARY

Ákos Radóczi (Hungarian Logistics Association)

Transport in the Hungarian economy Six percent of Hungarian GDP is generated by passenger transport and goods transport. Taking into account the construction of transport networks and vehicle manufacturing, every tenth job is connected to transportation. In household consumption, the share of transport services is 12% (21% including the purchasing and operation of passenger vehicles, cars.) The value of the transport infrastructure is approximately one-fifth of the country’s national capital. Due to geographical and geopolitical position and open economy, the economic competitiveness, the quality of life in Hungary basically depends on the development of the transport system. Due to the geography of Hungary, the country contributes to European labor by ensuring good quality infrastructure conditions to West–East movement of goods. The Hungarian transport system has been substantially developed since 1990. Intermodal logistics centers have been built and the motorway network has been extended from 300 km to nearly 1200km – four times more than in 1990. Air traffic has increased by 500%. However, despite these achievements the Hungarian transport system still faces great challenges due to historical stagnation.

Table 1. Indicators for Hungarian logistics 2006 2013 Logistics Performance Index (LPI) 35 26–30 Logistics added value in GDP 5.40% 7,30–8,80 % Distribution location ranking 7 (2005) 4

Analysis of the present situation

Geographical conditions - international and inland accessibility The geographical location of Hungary is advantageous. Several main Trans-European transport corridors (TEN-T) connect Eastern and Western Europe through the country. These corridors and the facilities offer considerable opportunities to increase economic competitiveness through providing logistics services for international trade.

Figure 1. TEN-T network in the European Union

However, the current quality-related deficiencies (incomplete motorway/expressway network, the obsoleteness of the railway network, the bottlenecks of the road and railway systems, their low load-bearing capacity, the limitations of the navigability of the Danube and the Tisza rivers, certain still existing deficiencies of the Budapest international airport and the underdeveloped state of regional airports, etc.) still reduce the accessibility and traversability of the country. Apart from presenting a great opportunity, the dynamic growth of trade between the neighboring countries and the EU is putting increasing pressure on the Hungarian transport network. The Budapest-centered transport network makes it difficult to approach certain regions, micro-regions and cities. As far as accessibility by road is concerned, the Central Transdanubian and some parts of the Western Transdanubian regions are in the most favorable position; while the South Great Plain, North Hungary and the South Transdanubian regions are disadvantageously situated. Concerning accessibility when selecting locations for the sites of multinational and domestic companies, the most attractive regions include Budapest and its environs, the Central Transdanubian and partly the West Transdanubian regions, whereas the least attractive regions are the ones beyond the River Tisza and certain areas situated along the Northern and the Southern borders. With daily passenger transport the

45 micro-regions in East Hungary bordering Romania and some micro-regions in South and West Hungary are in a disadvantageous situation in terms of road accessibility. The density of the railway network, having a one-third market share compared to the two- thirds share of bus transport in the overall non-local transport, is higher than for example, that of the considerably more densely populated Netherlands. While it is spread out fairly evenly, the obsolete vehicle stock, the low ratio of electrified railway line sections, the poor condition of the tracks, the often inadequate connections and the unreliability of the service make this mode of transport less competitive compared to road transport. The insufficient number of river bridges hinders the strengthening of regional connections. The inadequate transport system has been one of the obstacles of the development of certain underdeveloped regions and settlements. The internal accessibility conditions of larger cities and their surroundings (particularly those of the Budapest agglomeration) are extremely poor. Travelling a distance of 10 km within Budapest and in its immediate surroundings in rush- hour traffic takes longer than covering 50–70 km in other parts of the country.

Network infrastructure and assets in the specific sectors of transport The Hungarian transport network is radially structured with Budapest in the center. Transversal connections either do not exist or are of poor quality in both the road and the railway networks. Even some important radial elements are of obsolete design and condition. While the density of the basic network is adequate, its technical availability and condition do not meet the requirements of the traffic and lag far behind the average of the EU-28. The quality of transport services (frequency of service, comfort level, the provision of information to passengers, changing between vehicles of transport (intermodality) are at low level. Due to these shortages related to network structure and service quality the Hungarian transport sector at present does not support labor mobility to the necessary extent.

Roads Road infrastructure is the most important bottleneck in transport in Hungary. Recently the traffic has increased at a higher rate than capacities were expanded. In 2006, the density of the network (329 km/1,000 km) was at 88 percent of the EU average. The degree of motorway supply (9.6 km/1,000 km2) was only 40 percent of the average of the EU-15. The TEN-T network assumes an expressway network of approximately 2,100 km in Hungary, of which currently about 47 percent has been completed. The shortfall in terms of accessibility by road makes a significant negative effect on the country's economic competitiveness. The lag has 46 been reduced as far as the construction of river bridges is concerned. However, road connections leading to the new bridges are inadequate. Improving these connections can increase the rate of utilization of the bridges and reduce access time. Border crossings were brought up-to-date by the time of the EU accession. Apart from the deficiencies of the network, considerable excess maintenance is required due to the fact that the structure of Hungarian roads was built for a single axle load of 100 kN compared to 115 kN, which is the EU standard. During the accession negotiations Hungary was granted derogation, until the end of 2008 to require a permit for the running of vehicles of an axle load of 115 kN. As it has been laid down in Transport Policy of document AC 153/8/02. REV 8, the Road Reinforcement Program envisaged the reinforcement of 1,900 km of main roads and through roads in Hungary by 2008. In addition to the programs already completed or launched, about 1000–1200km long pavement structures had to be reinforced during the period 2007–2008 in order to comply with that commitment. Transport centered around Budapest essentially determines the structure of the national road system and the transport flow conditions. This is a result of the historically developed socio-economic weight of the capital. However, it is expected to change to a great extent as a result of the thinking in regional context. Hopefully this will have an effect on the development of road connections.

Figure 2. Transit goods transport along the Hungarian state road network in 2004

Figure 3. The traffic load of the state road network

The institutional framework of road development and operation The development and operation of the national road network is coordinated by the Co- ordination Center for Transport Development (CCTD – “KKK”) as the successor of Road Management and Co-ordination Directorate (RMCD – “UKIG”), operating as a background institution of the Ministry of National Development. [NFM] Under an agreement with CCTD, the National Infrastructure Development Private Co. Ltd. (Nemzeti Infrastruktúra-fejlesztő Zrt. – NIF) is responsible for the development of national roads, railways, ports and airports. Similarly, under an agreement with the CCTD maintenance works are performed by the National Motorway Management Co. Ltd. (Állami Autópálya Kezelő Zrt.) and by the Hungarian Public Roads Co. (Magyar Közút Kht.) for the motorway-expressway system and for the rest of the national road network. Expressways built and operated under a concession agreement constitute an exception to this rule; the concession company performs development and subsequent operation for such roads.

Railways Hungary has a 7,685km long railway network. It also represents a radial structure centered on Budapest. The degree of supply indicator of the railway network is 85 km/1000 km2, which is well over the EU-15 average of 47 km/1000 km2. Due to the technical condition of the tracks, a speed limitation is imposed over nearly 30 percent of the total length of railway lines. 17 percent of the railway network has dual tracks. 36 percent of the network is electrified. (The same data in the EU are 41 percent and 48 percent, respectively). While the ratio of electrified line sections is relatively low, per capita length equals that of the average of highly developed 48

EU member states. Approximately 85–90 percent of all rail traffic uses the electrified lines. The average age of the rolling stock of public transport (hauling vehicles, passenger cars) is high, with lots of technically obsolete vehicles and hardly any that are clear of obstacles. The differences in the characteristics of the railway systems of the various countries (different types of electricity supply, signaling and safety equipment) as well as the long lasting customs clearance and other official procedures slow the border crossing with both passenger and goods transport. Modern telematics solutions or interoperable devices required in international railway transport are still not widely used in traffic control in Hungary.

Waterways The most important element of the navigability requirements of the Danube (fairway VI/B) is that the clear and durably reliable transport conditions must be ensured for 2.5-metre-draught vessels of a load capacity of 1,300 to 1,600 tons; - standard in European international navigation, along the entire length of the Rotterdam–Constanţa Trans-European (DMR) waterway. Meeting that requirement is a fundamental condition of profitable and competitive shipping services. The Hungarian-Slovak and the Hungarian sections of the Danube do not meet that requirement. Depending on the fluctuations of water depth, a flotation restriction is in effect during half to two-thirds of the year. The navigation safety information system is in need of development. In Hungary, the density of ports built up to the required standard and capable of continuous operation is about one-third of the EU average. In terms of the services they offer, however, even the existing ports are (as a whole) below the EU average. Due to the above mentioned conditions, waterborne transport is burdened by pre-deliveries, dockside deliveries, several transfers and considerable surplus delivery time on most shipping routes. This is disadvantageous for customers and water carriers alike, and substantially impairs the competitiveness of river transport. As water level is frequently low the formation of shallows and the periodic unserviceability of navigation locks present obstacles to the economic and touristic utilization of the river Tisza.

Air transport Until 2012, about 50 percent of all public passenger air traffic services were performed by one airline, the MALÉV. After long and hopeless struggle MALÉV became bankrupt in February 2012. The base airport for MALÉV was Budapest Ferihegy International Airport. The annual volume of passengers at Budapest Airport was over 8 million persons in 2011. Bankruptcy of MALÉV had caused a decline; but the market shows some recovery. Recent rapid growth has 49 been provided by the operation of discount airlines, such as Wizzair and Ryanair mostly. No regular inland airlines operate in Hungary. Between 1998 and 2005 the volume of goods transport through Budapest Airport increased from 32 thousand to approximately 60 thousand tons of cargo. The expected average rate of the increase of the air cargo transport of the airport is 8.1 percent annually, nearly 3 percentage point higher than the European average. Growth may possibly exceed 10 percent over the next few years. Further two airports of regional importance operate in the country, also handling certain international flights. In 2005, the number of passengers using Debrecen Airport was 33,000 and substantial growth was forecasted for 2006 and later. The crisis caused radical changes. Passenger transport of Debrecen Airport was ca. 145 000 in 2014. Traffic at Sármellék airport [main passenger destinations: Lake Balaton and Hévíz rose to 63,000 in 2006 from 25,000 in 2005. Due to the financial crisis substantial changes happened between 2007 and 2014 (see Table 1). Road connections to these airports and the final destinations are currently inadequate. With a view to improving the accessibility of the country and the regions and the connections with neighboring countries, regional airports may be integrated into public air traffic on a market basis in addition to Debrecen and Sármellék. Table 2. Number of passengers at three Hungarian international airports, 2000–2014 Hévíz-Balaton Int. Airport Debrecen Int. Airport Liszt Ferenc Int. Airport Airport close to Lake Second largest passenger BUD Airport then Franz Balaton West and Hévíz Spa traffic in Hungary LISZT Int. Airport Thousand Thousand Million Year passengers / Change Year passengers / Change Year passengers / Change year year year 2000 - 2000 1,88 N/A 2000 N/A N/A 2001 N/A N/A 2001 4,44 135,50% 2001 N/A N/A 2002 N/A N/A 2002 5,92 33,50% 2002 4,48 N/A 2003 N/A N/A 2003 6,12 3% 2003 5,02 12,0% 2004 21,08 N/A 2004 14,48 136% 2004 6,39 27,3% 2005 25,93 23,0% 2005 33,12 129% 2005 7,93 24,1% 2006 63,63 145,4% 2006 36,94 11,50% 2006 8,27 4,2% 2007 105,70 66,1% 2007 42,90 16% 2007 8,60 4,0% 2008 102,13 -3,4% 2008 42,65 −0,5% 2008 8,44 -1,8% 2009 15,08 -85,2% 2009 25,06 −41% 2009 8,10 -4,1% 2010 14,83 -1,6% 2010 24,42 −2,5% 2010 8,20 -1,3% 2011 18,19 22,7% 2011 19,14 −21,5% 2011 8,92 8,9% 2012 18,83 3,5% 2012 47,75 149,50% 2012 8,50 −4,7% 2013 25,02 32,8% 2013 129,23 170,66% 2013 8,52 0,2% 2014 28,59 14,3% 2014 145,71 12,75% 2014 9,16 7,5%

Combined goods transport & logistics The development of combined transport of goods and the relevant service infrastructure (network of terminals and logistics centers) started over ten years ago with government subsidies in Hungary. The number of trucks forwarded by rail (RoLa) (more than 100,000 in 2003, 89,000 in 2004 and only 64,000 in 2005) has been dropping at an increasing rate since Hungary became a member of the EU. As international trends suggest that unaccompanied combined transportation solutions will probably gain increasing market share on the long run, the developments should be focused in a way to encourage that transport mode. Among intermodal logistics centers (of national importance), Csepel, Győr-Gönyű and Baja centers and the Debrecen LSC are trimodal (road-rail-water and road-rail-air), whereas the rest are bimodal (road-railway). The financially most prosperous national logistics centers operate in Budapest (Budapest Intermodal Logistics Center - BILK, Csepel Free Port) and in Debrecen, Székesfehérvár and Sopron regions. Development has started in the other centers. New facilities have been put into service at Győr-Gönyű and high-volume projects have been started in Szeged and in Szolnok. There appears to be less demand for the moment in Nagykanizsa and Miskolc, just as in Baja, that is equipped suitably to become an agricultural center. In Záhony, the border town to Ukraine, an old infrastructure of considerable capacity awaits modernization. While other logistics projects have been developed mostly out of private initiative, the intermodality of some regional logistics centers enables them to meet higher requirements. Future development will primarily draw on private capital rather than government financing.

Urban and suburban transport Limited attention has been paid on the co-ordination of the systems established independently of each other in time or to the establishment of network connections and transfer opportunities. Urban transport in major Hungarian cities therefore requires further development in a number of ways, both in terms of infrastructure and vehicle stock and the co-ordination and service level of transport management. The general trends include the increasing individual use of motor cars and the decreasing share of public transport. The share of public and individual transport is 60 to 40 percent in the capital, which is better than the average European indicator. Similarly to large European cities, individual transport causes substantial congestion, noise impact and air pollution in Hungary too. The deficiencies of intermodality, i.e. of the infrastructure conditions and co-ordination of transferring between 51 modes of transport make it more difficult to access destinations within the cities from nearby settlements. There are very limited interoperable systems in Budapest. Approximately 22–25 percent of the Hungarian population live in the Budapest metropolitan area. Considerable parts of the population, approximately 600,000 people are daily commuters, which puts great burden on the suburban transport network. The capacity of roads leading to Budapest is far below the suburban transport demand. For the 360,000 persons regularly commuting by car, getting into and out of the city is becoming increasingly difficult due to rush-hour congestion, while at the same time, noise and air pollution continue to deteriorate the condition of the environment. Roads in Budapest deteriorate quicker than they are renewed. In the Budapest agglomeration area the level of daily public transport trips are 3.8 million trips/day. That is close to peak capacity of the currently available technical conditions. Each day 86,000 and 105,000 passengers commute to Budapest by train and regular bus services. There is increasing demand for suburban train services. Accessibility in the agglomeration, however, is poor along various routes. In Budapest the need for a rapid railway connection to Budapest Airport is on agenda. Approaching the city center from the airport may easily take as much or even more than the flight from a nearby capital. The average age of Budapest’s public transport vehicle stock has steadily increased during the past ten years. The province centers (whose number of inhabitants are mostly below 200,000), have bus networks. Just three cities, Miskolc, Debrecen and Szeged have tram and/or trolley bus networks in addition to the buses. The growth and the structure of some other cities (such as Győr, Pécs and possibly Kecskemét) and the emergence of concentrated stand-alone residential areas due to the former housing estate projects may anticipate the need for tram transport services during the next few decades. Almost all tram vehicles are worn out with age and they require replacement. In some cities, the fact that the railway line practically cuts the settlement in two also gives rise to accessibility and transport safety concerns. As a general trend, motor car use is also increasing in provincial cities. Problems emerge in public transport in the organization of lines and services, the co-ordination of the various transport modes and tariff policies. Integrated traffic control and passenger information systems are missing in most provincial cities. The agglomeration transport associations capable of utilizing the reserves in the organization and co-ordination of transport with a view to improve the level of service have not yet been established.

Modal split in transport Similarly to the trends in Western Europe, the share of individual transport (currently approximately 60 percent) is increasing in Hungary in passenger transport. While the degree of motorization is only 50 percent of the average of the EU-15, the number of cars has been growing. Besides the increasing level of motorization, the reasons for public transport lower share include the poor quality of public transport, including slowness, inadequate frequency of service, lack of co-ordination of timetables, substandard passenger comfort and passenger service and crowdedness. Road transport is also becoming prevalent in goods transport. Its throughput increases at a higher rate than that of rail transport, while the volume of railway transport is also on the increase. Modal split in transport is still far more advantageous in Hungary than in the EU-15. During the period 2000–2002, the share of the two sectors (on the basis of tons of goods delivered and passenger kilometer) increased from 24 percent to 27.2 percent for railway transport and from 57 percent to 59.9 percent for road transport within the total transport output. In the EU-15, the respective ratios are 12.9 percent for railway and 75.5 percent for road transport. The performance of Hungary can be assessed in the light of the scenarios published in the White Paper summing up the transport policy of the European Union. The scenarios indicate the impact of the various types of transport policies on the modal split in terms of the expected rate of development of the various transport sectors.

Environmental impacts of transport The environmental situation of Hungarian transport is characterized by the impact of a quantitative increase during the past ten years and the unfavorable change in the modal split between the various modes of transport. The share of road transport has grown dynamically, while that of railway transport has decreased. The increase of the number of vehicles for individual transport has an adverse effect on the load on the environment. The Hungarian road transport vehicle stock is obsolete, antiquated both technically and physically, its operation causes substantial environment damage, primarily air pollution and noise emission, which is indicated by the ratio of currently operating vehicles not complying with even the Euro l specification. While public transport still prevails in urban traffic (e.g. it has a minimum 60 percent share in Budapest), it shows a declining trend.

The quality of fuels the vehicles run on has gradually improved (the elimination of sulphur content has been the most important step in that respect), so their composition is now the same as in the Western European countries. Transport biofuels, encouraged by the EU, have begun to be propagated in Hungary. Rules concerning their use are provided in a specific regulation. Expressway developments have reduced the increase of damage resulting from transit traffic, whereas bypass roads have reduced air pollution and noise impact in cities/settlements. The various types of noise protection walls and other load-reducing technical solutions have been efficient in the noise protection of settlements located along roads and railway lines. Of the air-polluting materials emitted in Hungary, transport generates app. 60 percent of carbon monoxide and nitrogen oxides and approximately 17 percent of carbon dioxide. Any major change in that respect can only be expected by the modernization of the vehicle stock in circulation. Government decree 245/2004 (October 8th) provides for the authorization process of the construction of permanent-track projects by marking out Natura 2000 areas for nature conservation areas of importance at the level of the European Communities. This regulation specifies further infrastructure development activities in nature conservation and environmental protection. In order to achieve sustainable transport in Hungary, a number of other challenges need to be addressed. The modernization of the vehicle stock is ensured by the adaptation, in Hungary, of the development of the requirements of the EU, currently in progress. Apart from tightening the rules concerning the minimum level of waste emissions, the requirements in progress also include criteria concerning the entire lifespan of the vehicle (full on-board diagnostics systems and the verification of enhanced lifespan). It is expected that the market share of vehicles running on non-traditional fuels will gradually increase during the forthcoming years. Ensuring their proper operational conditions presents additional tasks.

Clearance of obstacles and transport safety In addition to people with disabilities, amounting to approximately 10 percent of the population and their families, the efforts to clear obstacles in transport serve the interests of the elderly, parents with small children and people travelling with a heavy load. The ratio of these groups may reach 35–40 percent of the population. 54

The clearance of obstacles in transport began during the period 2000–2004, initiated and financed by the government. Due to the scarcity of funds, however, only a fraction of the transport infrastructure has so far been made suitable for use by persons of special needs (people with disabilities and with impaired sight or hearing). Nearly 10 percent of the 965 railway stations or stops with a station building are fitted with mobile lifting equipment. Of the 3,200 passenger cars, 31 have been fitted with a mobile lifting device and further 51 cars are suitable for the transportation of wheel-chair passengers by the use of the lifting device installed at the railway station (the cars are equipped with suitable toilets and securing devices). Nearly 2 percent of the 7,415 buses in regular service of the companies providing bus services are suitable for the transportation of wheelchairs (low-floor or fitted with lifting equipment). Similarly to most other countries, road transport has the highest death toll of all transport subsectors in Hungary. In 2005, 2 and 91 people were killed in air and railway transport respectively, while 1,278 persons died in road transport. 93 percent of the people having lost their lives in transport were killed in road accidents. While earlier the most of the fatal road accidents happened to the pedestrians, the number of those who lost their lives while driving or travelling in a car has been growing increasingly since 1988. It is particularly worrying that the share of the latter ones, which seemed to stabilize around 40 percent during 1996 and 2001, has risen steeply during the past few years, approaching 50 percent in 2005. In other words, nearly half of the people killed in accidents have suffered the injuries leading to death while travelling in a car. 60 percent of fatal accidents have occurred outside settlements (of the 1,278 victims in 2005, 776 were killed outside settlements). It is an empirical fact that, under the current transport conditions, due to the density of traffic and other incidental circumstances, the risk of fatal injuries is 3–4 times higher outside than within settlements.

SWOT analysis of the Hungarian logistics system

Human resources Strengths Weaknesses Qualified- with significant work experiences, The training system is too much theory foreign languages speaking professional teams oriented, often completely “practice free”. at the logistics services, Long, rigid and occasionally expensive Wide range of educational supply in the courses in vocational training, secondary and higher education and in Often intensive trainings within the enterprise vocational training, should be used to prepare young people for With a working experience of 2-3 years better everyday challenges. than average income opportunities occur in The logistics training course tracking system the capital and in the agglomeration. is incomplete. Logistics education and training are not completely in harmony with the expectations formulated by the employers. The training activity of the fast growing Hungarian private companies and training awareness is at a low level.

Threats Opportunities Excessive resource extraction from the The introduction of the regulation and training forms financed by the state, incentives intensifying the co-operation As a consequence of the lower wages the between education and the companies, supply of the logistics specialists in rural areas Elaboration and starting with logistics training and in the SME sector can be limited. courses with higher quality, that are better Logistics trainings — even if they offer suited to the demand of the market. similar qualifications— can show important Increase of the interoperability among training deviations, not to mention the deviations in areas. the vocational trainings and the trainings of Regular accomplishment of educational „skill- the high schools and universities. gap" investigations and the feedback of the results.

Logistics key players Strengths Weaknesses Active professional organization background Bipolar logistics service segment toward the (LEF). large companies and SMEs having lack of re- Intensive multinational processing, industrial sources. and logistics service providing presence. Competitiveness of the smaller domestic firms Articulated logistics business development has continuously weakened in the increasingly supply. complex becoming logistics sector, Concerning the logistics sector as a whole the weight of integrated services having higher value added can be considered low.

Threats Opportunities The logistics key players cannot clearly show The intensification and increase of the the necessity of logistics development and the efficiency of the institutional forms of the co- expected results do not persuade the operation between the market, civil sector and government. government, Negative impacts of the excessive state Government and key logistics players can (owner) interventions (e.g. market distortion), achieve consensus in priorities of sectoral Foreign investors will doubt if they judge the development. domestic taxation and environment dis- Development of the logistics engagement and advantageous and this can have bad impact on culture of the domestic SMEs. the demand for the logistics services. Logistics sector can use the secondary demand created by the agriculture and by the processing industry to a greater extent. Higher exploitation of the potential to be found in the „soft elements" (logistics business development services), Reduction of taxation and administrative burdens of the logistics service providers, Development of the logistics accounting system, for getting better market information.

Nodal point infrastructure

Strengths Weaknesses Advanced logistics infrastructure in the capital The quality of the present logistics tool-system and vicinity of the capital, is uneven: the domestic logistics centers built for the development of the logistics up level, tool-supply are low compared to the infrastructure within and outside the gate West European level and particularly in the several firms could win supports from the EU. field of the advanced solutions (e.g. e-freight, RFID) the lag is important, top-heavy, centralized (with Budapest as center) logistics network.

Threats Opportunities The economic crisis permanently impedes the The centralized position of Budapest in the planned infrastructure development. logistics network should be reduced. Infrastructure developments supported by the Intensive developments in the field of city state will not be reconfirmed in some cases. logistics, green logistics and inverse logistics. Development of the logistics co-operation close to the borders. Higher exploitation of the nodal infrastructural potential. Development possibilities for the SMEs during the development period of 2014–2020.

Informatics infrastructure Strengths Weaknesses

The majority of logistics companies are aware In spite of the almost complete coverage of the of the importance of informatics development broadband networks the supply with Internet is for better competitiveness. only complete in the sphere of medium sized Broadband network coverage (xDSL, CATV) and large companies. in Hungary is already more advantageous, as IT background of the SMEs supporting the the average value in the EU. logistics activity (company management system, warehouse IT, etc.) is significantly less than in the case of the large companies.

Threats Opportunities The majority of the micro and small Support of broadband infrastructure companies use the Internet only for getting developments at places, where this investment information (searching information related to would not be reasonable on the basis of purely the goods and services) and for business considerations. communication, Development of governmental services Economic crisis significantly obstructs the adapted to logistics demands for the purpose of targeted IT developments. the reduction of administrative burdens and of transaction costs Logistics micro and small companies have recognized the opportunities inherent in the on-line operations. Opportunities for the development of the infrastructure for SMEs during the development period between 2014 and 2020.

Logistics in the international relations Strengths Weaknesses Hungary is a part of the most international Efficiency of logistics diplomacy is low. multilateral transport agreements (UN, etc.), the Economic diplomacy is at present bipolar. country can take part in the work of the Transport and the logistics regulation sector intergovernmental organizations. struggles with shortage of specialists. EU institutional law/ economic co-operation/ Lack of institutional form of the inter- resource background. departmental co-ordination, Far-reaching international relation system of the National customs policy is “ownerless” in domestic civil organizations. Hungary: there is no economic political concept behind the customs diplomacy.

Threats Opportunities The lack of reconciled standpoints in inter- Through the more successful logistics national relations. diplomacy international interest validation Disadvantages coming about from the capability can be improved, misalignment of the horizontal versus sectoral More active participation in the work of the approaches in the foundation of the economic international organizations. political endeavours. A more focused and efficient logistics National economic and sectoral strategies will “country-marketing” activity. not be completed on time. This way the Preparation for the next EU development strategical determination at higher level will not period on time and efficient steps for the be available or the synergies between the sector concerned. logistics and other sectors cannot be exploited. Appointment of a logistics ambassador in Brussels.

Networking and co-operation Strengths Weaknesses In Hungary just in the years following the Lack of co-operation culture with SMEs. political changes the development of the Despite positive individual examples network- industrial parks and incubator houses has been king and co-operation among the partners in started. the field of logistics is not widespread. In 2006-2010 increased attention has been paid Great majority of the logistics companies do on cluster-development. not conclude strategic agreement with other service providing firms. Co-operation among logistics companies will be frequently established only for the unique demands and with transitional characteristics. Supported co-operations are based rather on parallel capacities and not on complementary activities having higher added value.

Threats Opportunities In the case of smaller logistics firms it remains Increasing networking and co-operation can general that they furthermore wish to play a serious role in the stabilization of the correspond alone to the market challenges. market situation of domestic logistics players, Various network co-operation forms will be and in the improvement of their organized not along the business rationality, competitiveness. but adjusted to supporting programs. Integration of suppliers into logistics sector. Strengthening of the clusterization as a consequence of the economies of scale. Strengthening and spreading of the agricultural co-operatives. Strengthening networking and co-operation of logistics SMEs supporting possibilities in the development period 2014-2020.

Logistics RDI Strengths Weaknesses Prepared scientific logistics workshops. Exceedingly weak point of co-operation of the Positive examples for the co-operation bet- SMEs in the field of the R&D activities with ween universities and companies, domestic and foreign large companies and Several promising research areas can be knowledge bases. determined in the field of logistics. Majority of domestic SMEs do not perform R&D activity, moreover does not make service development. Structure of domestic innovation financing (innovation adjunct).

Threats Opportunities Logistics SMEs that do not perform at present Harmonization of research offer of the R&D activities do not plan such activities in research places and of the company innovation the future, too. demands (R&D gaps). Logistics R&D activities are oriented rather to Increasing role engagement of the companies supporting possibilities to be achieved and not in the orientation of R&D activity. to real company demands. Support of the innovative network co- Corporate dissemination of R&D activities operation. made with EU support remains weak. In addition to product and technology innovation service innovation shall be also a supported activity (considered as R&D), Logistics innovation motivation with direct, but tied to conditions support from the side of the state. At a later stage with indirect support through the elements of taxation and subsidy system. Increasing attention should be paid to the deployment of adaptation skills and activities in Hungary.

Logistics strategy of Hungary The pillars of the Strategy demonstrate the most important factors in the logistics sector: expertise, infrastructure, network of connections, Research, Development and Innovation. The study presents the development of the administrative services relevant for logistics purposes and logistics education; logistic accountancy and monitoring, the strengthening of networking and co-operation between logistics operators, the logistics research and knowledge base, the support for logistics infrastructure development and sustainable logistics activities. The paper

62 describes the expectations concerning the development of transport network infrastructure communications network infrastructure. The study outlines the effects of the information society, the relationships between the system of objectives and of instruments that contribute to networking, to co-operation and ensure sustainable logistics activities. The primary aim of the Logistics Strategy was the creation of a long term plan, that has to be accepted by the government, and that should be compatible with related strategies (National Transport Strategy, National Development Plan 2020, New Széchenyi Plan). Another requirement was to analyze international expectations, to show consistency, treating the logistics issue at a right scale. Implementation of the Logistics Strategy may contribute to better employment, to more investments and to the improvement of competitiveness of Hungary. The logistics strategy accepted by the Government is based on a comprehensive professional co-operation can. The elaboration of the strategy was decided by the Government in its Governmental decision No. 1157/2013. The direct source of the strategy in this respect was the demand of the sector strategies by the Ministry for National Economy. During the preparation process the mobilization of professional and advocacy organizations was undertaken by IFKA Industry Development Public Utility Non-profit Ltd. and the Logistics Reconciliation Forum (LEF). Recognizing the importance of the area concerned, several studies relevant to the strategy and governmental documents have affected logistics sector. Among them the following important conditions or analyses were used during the elaboration of the strategy:  Sector industrial strategies (Ministry for National Economy, [NGM] 2012)  Investment in the future — National Research, Development and Innovation Strategy 2020 (Ministry for National Economy, 2012)  National Transport Strategy (on the basis of the source works of the „NKS” working team, drafted by Ferenc Mészáros, Transport Development Co-ordination Center, [KKK] (2012)  Mobility, Vehicle industry, Logistics, Research and Development and Innovation, White Paper of the Sector Strategy (Ministry for National Economy, 2012)  Innovative Technological Strategy for Natural Environment (Ministry for Rural Development, 2011)  RDI Strategy. Vehicle engineering, transport and logistics. Priority Research Area. (BME, Budapest, 2010)  The study of the working team logistics-transport: Position analysis, evaluation and economic policy recommendation, 2009–2013 (Reform Alliance, 2009) 63

 Logistics Action Plan, 2007–2013 (Ministry of National Development, 2009)  Hungarian Logistics Strategy, 2007–2013 (Ministry of National Development, 2009)  Sector Development of the Uniform Transport Development Objective, implementing the Uniform Transport Development Strategic Objective, 2008–2020 (Ministry of Economy and Transport, 2007)  Uniform Transport Development Strategy, 2007–2020, White Paper (Ministry of Economy and Transport, 2007)  The National Development Plan 2020 (NF 2020) designates the main directions of the development policy for the period 2014–2020.

Strategic pillars The strategic pillars demonstrate the most important production factors in the logistics sector: expertise, infrastructure, network of connections and R&D&I. This is supplemented by two areas as horizontal factors (pillars): transport and telecommunication network infrastructure. The availability of both transport and broadband communications networks at an appropriate quality and scope is crucial for the success of the logistic strategy. Both of them are considered external factors determined by other policies. The pillar structure plays a particularly important role in ensuring the strategy’s internal coherence and harmonizing major components.

Table 3. The logical framework of the Hungarian Logistics Strategy A.) Logistic B.) Logistic C.) Logistic D.) Logistic expertise infrastructure relations R&D&I Hub International Human resources Government infrastructure relations Logistic resources Key logistic Network and IT infrastructure Business operators co-operation E.) Transport network infrastructure Road Railway Air Water F.) Communications network infrastructure

The pillar structure has an important role to ensure the internal coherence of the strategy, and from the point of view of creating the consistency among the main elements. The pillar structure determines the inner logic, structure respectively this makes the clear display of the interfaces between the target- and tool-systems (target-tool matrix).

Figure 4. The scheme of pillar structure

The target system of the strategy The target system of the strategy consists of the comprehensive strategic target, and of special goals formulated according to the pillars of the strategy. The overall goal of the logistics strategy is on the basis of the vision and of the position analysis. The contribution of the competition both at entrepreneurial and at national economy levels performs the appropriate enlargement in accordance with its weight expected in the national economy during the period 2014-2020 referring to the promotion of the logistics sources, connection system and innovation.

Tools to execute the logistics strategy The strategy proposes the utilization of the following main tool-groups in the interest of achieving the appointed goals:  Development of logistics-relevant administrative services  The modernization of the logistics training  Building of accounting and monitoring systems  Promotion of the networking and co-operation in the logistics sector  RDI support in the logistics  Promotion of the development of the logistics infrastructure  Assuring the sustainability of the logistics actions.

Implementation and monitoring The most important player in the implementation of the logistics strategy is theMinistry for National Economy. In addition to this the implementation of each measure affects the following ministries: 65

 The strategy appears as a horizontal factor. The success of transportation and broad band network infrastructure development is controlled by the Ministry for National Development.  The development of logistics relevant steps (regulatory steps and administration) are controlled by the Ministry of Justice.  The development of the logistics public education and higher education belongs primarily to the Ministry of Human Resources.  International logistics diplomacy is the activity scope of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and within this the National Office for Foreign Trade. Beside the background institutions of the Ministry for National Economy the following institutions play an important role:  National Tax and Customs Administration (NAV) (simplification of the customs regulation),  IFKA Industry Development Non-profit Ltd. of Public Utility (professional background materials and monitoring, research, professional training),  National Innovation Agency (RDI). From the side of professional organizations the Logistics Consultative Forum (LEF) is an important player in the implementation of the strategy that brings together the associations and representative bodies of the profession (logistics branches).

Indicative financial table The yearly cost of the implementation of the strategy in the period between 2014 and 2020 is about 12 billion HUF/year on the basis of the indicative financial calculations. Based on preliminary estimates about 70–80% of this sum belongs to the developments of the infrastructure of logistics.

Embeddedness in the development policy For the investigation of the embeddedness of the development policy the following two documents mean the basis:  National Development 2020  The new Széchenyi Plan In the National Development 2020 program the logistics plays an important role, since the validation of the nodal (HUB) role of Hungary is considered as the key issue of the strategic vision arising from our geographical location. Three elements of this will be emphasised: 66

 Logistics is indispensable to our country to play a central role in the flow of goods and services within the region.  An important priority is the affirmation of the integrating logistics position of Hungary, the support and the co-operation of the networks to be found in the Carpathian basin.  The nodal point (HUB) role of Hungary should be intensified in the interest of supporting the east-west opening. The National Development 2020 program has designated the following concrete development political tasks about the logistics:  In addition to minimize the social burdens the extension of the carrying of burdens to all community sectors.  The implementation of sustainable public transport.  The elaboration of a comprehensive transport political strategy.  The strategy of Danube regions and the concept related to the development of the Záhony area should be integrated into this strategy.  At the frontier areas the logistics services should be developed jointly with the neighboring states.  Logistics expert training should have emphasized support.  Logistics developments should be realized along the M0-ring expressway, Budapest.  Comprehensive development of the RO-LA systems. In addition to all these aspects the document attracts attention to environmental protection connected to investments.

Vision and future image The main elements of the proposed value-based target situation (vision) are as follows:  At company (micro) level the logistics vision focuses on the fundamental development process, in the course of which the companies organize more and more efficiently their inner logistics processes. An important element of this situation is that the business organizations focusing on the basic abilities and activities – some activities will be outsourced. The streamlined logistics background has high priority from the point of view of the implementation of the industry political goals.  As a whole the spreading of thinking and service culture cost levels can be reduced in Hungary. Quality element of pricing and servicing activities will be developed with

improved logistics. That results the improvement of competitiveness of domestic companies.  At the level of national economy (macro level) – the concept is determined. According to this the broadening of the European Union will give further opportunities to our country. Hungary may develop to the service center of the region.  This chance is confirmed by the geographical position of Hungary and the directions designated as development priorities of the Trans-European transport network as well, Since transport corridors IV., V, VII. and X. pass through Hungary and Budapest, crossing each other in an eye catching way and can form the center of the goods flow processed for the region. As Hungary may develop to a Central and Eastern European logistics service center this may have positive impacts for a range of additional areas:  On the increase of the ability of the country concerning the attraction of capital and the ability to retain the capital.  The supply of the population with goods and services,  Reduction of regional inequalities, social differences and poverty.  Improvement of LPI and other World Bank indices.

Pillar components

Logistics expertise and skill The number of participants in the field of logistics adult training, respectively outside the public school system of the participants in OKJ (National Training List) is between 1000 and 5000 persons yearly with significant fluctuation. The typical participants of these trainings are 20–25 years young students after leaving formal secondary school education. About 1000 persons have successfully finished the academic education between 2000 and 2010, typically earning the following qualifications:  logistics consulting economist,  expert of the logistics management,  international forwarding consulting economist,  expert of the international forwarding activity,  forwarding manager,  transportation engineer specialized in the field of the logistics,  transportation economics specialized engineer. 68

In the area of reproduction of human resources the greatest challenge is that education, which is oriented today toward the knowledge and the special trainings, is not in harmony with the expectations formulated by the employers (neither the expertise acquired, nor the acquired competencies and professional attitudes). A common fault is that the employers formulate first of all their expectations referring to expertise and the theoretical preparedness, and concerning the key competencies there are only latent demands, the direction of which can cause tensions during the employment.

Key players in logistics According to the Central Statistical Office, 16.400 corporate bodies were registered on 31st December2010 in Hungary, which had freight carriage and storage as their main activities. The market is fairly concentrated and the 100 greatest undertakings give more than the half of the whole revenue of the sector concerned (in 2010 about 1400–1500 billion HUFs).

Logistics infrastructure

Hub infrastructure The most important infrastructure items for logistic services are transport networks and components of the hub infrastructure. This strategy treats the network infrastructure as a horizontal factor.

Nodal infrastructure The most important infrastructural background area of the logistic services is represented by the transportation network respectively by the elements of the nodal infrastructure. Since concerning the available documents of the National Transportation Strategy (NTS) the governmental documents are normative, the network infrastructure is featured as a horizontal factor, in the present strategy outlined logistics vision and for the target-system relevant expectations are formulated. The nodal infrastructure essentially serves the satisfaction of the demanded services at the cut-off points of the product flow and belongs to the logistic service centers. The disruption of the material flow processes can be traced back to three basic causes: physical, economic and regulatory causes. The network of the logistic service providing centers is relatively large, but at the same time only few terminals – mainly around the capital – can be considered as full functional and this situation is valid for most of industrial/logistic parks as well. Considering the territorial 69 coverage, this fact can be considered as a disadvantage that the companies affected and undertakings settle their central premises in general on the periphery of the capital, and they restrict their activity scope mainly on the basic logistics services. Out of the elements of the nodal infrastructure the logistic/industrial parks play a prominent role, where the logistic service (also) providing and/or using undertakings. Because of the different definitions of the notion of logistic center the determination of the number of the logistics centers in Hungary exactly can be difficult, but it is clear that only the Intermodal Logistics Center of Budapest (BILK) and the Free Port of Csepel can be considered as accentuated centers. The building up level of the domestic logistics centers and their provision level with equipment lags behind the West European level, and the lag particularly can be observed in the field of the advanced solutions (e.g. e-freight, RFID). According to the classification made by the Logistic Coordination Forum – Alliance of the Logistics Service Providing Centers (MLSZKSZ) providing the qualification of the logistics centers in Hungary the following categories can be differentiated:  intermodal,  regional,  local,  business (company). In accordance with the calculations made by the experts, about 10 such intermodal logistics service providing centers can be operated economically. In a settlement only one regional logistic center can be operated, therefore nationwide 15–20 such establishments can be expected, mainly at the county seats. The logistics centers should form a network for the sake of the balanced care of the country. The supply of the service provisions of the local and company centers are more confined and they are frequently company-specific. They can be considered frequently real estate development rather than logistic projects. Corresponding to the international practice, the most frequently placed out activities at the big companies are storage (66 %), tasks related to the customs clearance (66 %), carriage (62%) and distribution (55%). By comparison according to the logistic outsourcing report of Capgemini for 2013 about 81–86 % of the freight transport, 63% of the storage and 52% of the customs clearance activities are outsourced in Europe. The area of Záhony belongs to the 15 Hungarian intermodal logistics centers, which is in addition to the capital a priority zone of Hungary from the point of view of the transport logistics. Because of encountering of the broad and standard gauge railway lines, the area of Záhony at the Eastern border of the European Union plays an important role in freight traffic 70 between the East and the West. The Russian-Hungarian and the Hungarian-Chinese trade in goods arrive and leave through the transshipment zones of Cierna Slovakia) and Záhony. The greater ports in Hungary (Baja, Győr-Gönyű, Mohács, Csepel Freeport, and Dunaújváros) have the appropriate basic infrastructure and intermodal connection system, but the level of their facilities is far below the level of the West European competitors. The Hungarian ports should more accentuate the marketing of their services concerning the equipment park and the additional services. The exploitation level of the domestic ports is only 40–50 %, which means that no new ports are needed presumably. In longer term only those ports have a chance for the survival that are in the interface point of at least three transport infrastructures (intermodal nodal points).

IT infrastructure The availability of the broadband communication networks – similarly to the transport networks – is an external factor from the point of view of logistics services. Here it should be noted that Hungarian broadband infrastructure is relatively advanced compared to the EU, but at the same time the established level of the new generation networks – first of all in the rural areas – is below the international average. For the use of most services the availability of the optical access is not necessary: broadband services (e.g. xDSL, cable net, 3D Studio MAX, Mobile Internet) can allow the provision of logistics services and the use of them. Despite the almost full coverage of the broadband networks internet penetration is only complete in the sphere of medium sized and large companies. Indicator of this is inversely proportional to the size of the company. Supply is 100% at large companies and is above 95% at firms employing more than 10 persons. In case of micro-companies this proportion is only 74%. As SMEs show low indicators the Hungarian average internet usage is down to 77.5%, and as such is below the EU average.

The differentiation of the Hungarian companies according to size can be observed in the area of the IT infrastructure and service sectors supporting the logistics activities as well. Concerning the introduction of the integrated company management systems, the utilization of warehouse IT informatics software, precise and quick product identification technics (bar- code, radio frequency identification) and the tracking of the goods serving solutions (satellite positioning and navigation systems) the Hungarian undertakings can be considered as moderately advanced. Important discrepancy can be experienced between the features of the practice of the large companies and those of the SMEs. The introduction of the supply chain managing systems is efficient in industrial sectors, where the sphere of the suppliers or the customer sphere is wide. These are mainly chemical companies, pharmaceutical, automotive industries or firms dealing with high technology, as well as the retail trade. At the market the concept of the parent companies is determining. Mainly the Western-European systems are introduced in Hungary. The Hungarian IT service providers can only follow these or can achieve some small innovations. Concerning the future of domestic SCM market economic integration is a key question. As the Hungarian companies are connected to international conglomerates or become the suppliers of the multinational companies settled in our country, they need more and more the IT support of the logistics chains. Another essential question at the domestic markets is the economies of scale. The introduction of the SCM systems can only bring the appropriate result, if the number of premises or the suppliers of the undertaking is high enough, but the number of such firms is very low in Hungary. Only few SCM solutions aiming at the medium sized companies can be achieved on the market, although this may be an opportunity for SMEs. Compared to the financing ability of the SMEs in Hungary these systems are too costly.

Network of logistics connections and international co-operations

International relations The dominant part of logistics traffic crosses the borders, and market operators decide where to use them. Improving and coordinating Hungary’s logistical business diplomacy is particularly important, because the strategic developments required for Hungary to emerge as a logistics service center may be implemented only embedded in the international environment. This requires multiple contacts and co-operations in the international transport/logistics regulating and institutional system.(European Economic Committee, WTO, 72 specialized organs of the UNO, further development of the EU regulatory system, elaboration of international conventions, etc.) In the praxis this means that a complete supporting system for the foreign trade and foreign policy system should be developed. That should cover the whole Central- and Eastern European area. Two main elements of which are the advantageous development of the European transport corridors and the formulation of sound development plans, that are agreed with the neighboring countries. In addition to the economic diplomacy efforts aiming at the neighboring countries an active foreign trade and foreign policy activity should be used in the emphasized relations (e.g. Germany, Italy, Russia, Ukraine, Poland, Romania, Turkey, China, India) in the interest of the development of the economic and commercial relations. These endeavors can be supported among others by the following aspects:  The strengthening of the co-ordination within the state administration in the interest of harmonization of the foreign and economic policy tasks,  The active involvement of the professional organizations in the foundation of the economic diplomatic steps or in the preparation of the international relation building at the project level,  The strengthening of the logistics county-marketing toward the more important partner countries,  The pro-active economic diplomacy concerning the key issues of the transport modes, co-operation and joint lobby activity at the EU level with the neighboring countries aiming at the promotion of the border crossing developments.

Networking and co-operation The development of network co-operation has fundamental importance primarily for SMEs, as most of them are unable to step out into the international market, secure sufficient funds for innovation and development are necessary. The participants in the sector and the advocacy organs have the same opinion that the intensification of networking and co-operation can play a sincere role in the stabilization of the positions and in the improvement of the competitiveness for the domestic logistics market players. Formerly the foreign trade companies and the farmer’s cooperatives made this in Hungary (well or less well). The majority of the co-operations realized in our days have more ad hoc character or horizontal (with capacity building purposes), and only a few examples can be found for the supplementary networking having high added value. Particularly in the case

73 of the smaller firms is common that they preferably fought battles alone. But since the outbreak of the crisis becomes more and more clear that this has a serious price.

Logistics R & D & I In an EU comparison, Hungary’s innovation performance is in the medium range. Industries involved in global value chains – such as the pharmaceutical, the info-communications sectors and vehicle manufacturing – researchers and developers having international connections significantly contribute to the performance of Hungary’s innovation system. On the other hand, most of Hungarian companies remain well below companies of more developed EU member states in the field of R&D and innovation performance. The following main groups of instruments and directions for intervention were outlined to achieve the objectives:  development of the administrative services relevant for logistics purposes,  modernization of logistics education,  establishment of accountancy and monitoring systems,  promotion of networking and co-operation in the logistics sector,  support for logistics R&D&I,  support for logistics infrastructure development,  ensuring sustainability of logistics activities.

Logistics strategic tools Development of the administrative services relevant for logistics purposes The following main instruments were identified:  simplification of customs regulations,  re-launching the Customs Council,  creation of the IT conditions for a cloud-based sharing of commercial data and documents,  comprehensive digitalization of customs clearance procedure (implementation of a fully paperless environment),  development of e-government services to meet logistics needs of businesses,  elaboration of the logistics sub-program of the trade development program in co- operation with the National Office for Foreign Trade,  elaboration of a logistical country marketing program,  establishment of a Logistics Co-ordination Board. 74

Development of logistics education The following main instruments were identified:  improving the conditions for educating logistics professionals in line with international practices,  expansion of the supply of hands-on training opportunities in companies to harmonize theory with practice,  elaboration of a training program for the Hungarian SME sector,  regular skill gap analyses comparing logistics training supplied with corporate demand.

Logistic accountancy and monitoring The following main instruments were identified:  development of a comprehensive logistical statistical accountancy system based on Hungarian and EU expectations,  support for the elaboration of a monitoring system for the movement of goods (capacities available in each logistic sector),  setting up a single logistic data base.

Strengthening networking and co-operation between logistics operators The following main instruments were identified:  support for complementary collaboration between logistics businesses,  promotion of the internationalization and development of regional networks of logistics SMEs,  development of the IT conditions for collaboration between logistics SMEs.

Logistics research and knowledge base Logistics research may take the following main directions:  core logistics research,  support for adapting best innovative international practice,  promotion of collaboration between research, education and business in the field of logistics,  preparation of annual reports and policy recommendations on the Hungarian logistics sector based on regular empirical research. 75

Support for logistics infrastructure development The following main instruments were identified:  encouraging out-of-fence logistics developments,  encouraging within-fence logistics developments.

Sustainable logistics activities The following main instruments were identified:  green logistics development,  inverse logistics development,  development of city logistics area.

Key fields of strategic intervention For the railway network infrastructure:  acceleration of complex reconstruction, at least on lines connecting to Trans-European networks,  systematic improvement of the network’s quality indicators,  reducing the number and density of level crossings with public roads,  managing bottlenecks (e.g. small number of river bridges),  implementation of new technologies and organization procedures,  development of telecommunication systems, acceleration of GSM-R (Global System for Mobile Communications – Railway) implementation,  transparent and simple regulatory system, aligning internal railway regulations to market needs.

For Hungary’s public road network infrastructure:  extension of the missing highway sections to the borders,  improving the quality of bridges in all segments, particularly in the non-highway network,  preparation of accurate and up-to-date technical assessments of the status of the road network and bridges in order to identify renovation needs,  strengthening the circular transport network in addition to the radial structure,  enhancing the quality of the main and side roads connecting traffic to the highway network, 76

 ensuring professional road maintenance and development for local roads (in municipality ownership),  reducing the rate of unpaved roads in residential areas,  introduction of regular traffic counts and status assessments for local roads in order to prevent bottlenecks.

In the field of regulations:  road toll better aligned to actual needs and circumstances,  traffic restrictions on weekends and other days (e.g. holidays, nights, truck prohibition),  local decrees regulating logistics activities and the transport of goods to create the conditions for city logistics.

In the field of air transport infrastructure, the key expectations are the existence of international airports to collect and distribute traffic, proper accessibility of such airports by road and railway and quick access to cities in their vicinities. It is also important to develop new forms of collaboration between regional airports with overlapping service areas and to ensure quick and simple road and railway access to cities close to airports, as well as to implement special storage facilities at an appropriate standard (increasing the capacities of cooled warehouses, controlled storage conditions). In addition, the possibility of dual-purpose use of military airfields should also be considered. As regards the water transport network, the logistics sector expects constant navigability of the Danube. Using the Danube for transport and shipping purposes is important also for the purposes of the Danube–Main–Rhine waterway system, meaning that water management and river regulation should be integrated and coordinated at international level, which is also key for environmental and flood protection purposes as well as for tourism. Promotion of the interlinking of intermodal and regional logistics centers, ports of national public use and regional airfields into a nation-wide network by building and interconnecting the relevant network components is a priority affecting all network infrastructures. The main components of the proposed value-based target situation (vision) are: At corporate (micro) level, the logistics vision focuses on the fundamental development process in which companies organize their internal logistic processes with increasing efficiency. An important aspect of this is that business organizations – focusing on their core capabilities and activities – outsource certain activities. In addition, a state-of-the-art logistics 77 background is particularly important for the purpose of implementing sectoral and industrial policy goals. Overall, the general cost level in economy may decrease and the standard of production and service activities that may be developed by logistics may improve in Hungary, resulting in increased competitiveness both for Hungarian businesses and the entire economy, with the dissemination of a business and service culture reflecting the practice of developed market economies. At national economy (macro) level, the idea – fostered for years by public figures of the trade – according to which Hungary still has an opportunity to emerge as the region’s logistics service provider center with the European Union’s enlargement continues to dominate the strategic vision. This opportunity is granted by Hungary’s geographic location and the directions of the Trans- European Transport Network identified as development priorities, as the corridors IV, V, VII and X traverse Hungary and intersect in Budapest, providing an obvious center for the flow of goods in the region. Based on the analysis of the situation and the vision, the comprehensive goal of the logistics strategy is to increase the contribution to be made by the logistics sector to competitiveness at corporate and national economy level in line with its expected weight in national economy by promoting the development of logistics resources, networks and innovation in Hungary in the 2014–2020 period. Similarly to the strategy prepared by the Ministry of National Development and Economy for the period 2007-2013, three indicators have particular importance for this logistics strategy:  Hungary’s rank based on LPI index,  share of logistics service providers (under double-entry bookkeeping) out of gross added value (Hungarian Tax and Customs Authority),  the country ranking of logistics centers published every two years by Cushman&Wakefield. The elaboration of the set of indicators for each specific objective and the registration of base values are tasks for the strategic monitoring system. The professionals in the Logistics Consultation Forum (LEF) proposed instruments for implementing the strategic objectives formulated based on the analysis of the situation, a review of the relevant international and Hungarian strategic document and the vision in writing, using consolidated sources. The basis for elaborating the instruments was a list of measures compiled earlier by IFKA based on earlier logistics strategies and development 78 policy papers, which grouped potential instruments by nature of intervention (public policy, regulatory, fiscal/subsidy instruments). Having summarized and discussed the proposals received, the following main groups of instruments and directions for intervention were outlined to achieve the objectives:  Development of the administrative services relevant for logistics purposes  Modernization of logistics education  Establishment of accountancy and monitoring systems  Promotion of networking and co-operation in the logistics sector  Support for logistics R&D&I  Support for logistics infrastructure development  Ensuring sustainability of logistics activities

Table 4. Relationships between the system of objectives and of instruments The system of objectives in the Hungarian logistics strategy

Logistic Logistics Logistical infrastructure Logistic relations resources R&D&I key net- inter- cor- govern- human play- hub IT working national porate ment resour ers in infrastructur infrastructur and relation R&D& R&D& -ces logis e e coopera s I I -tics -tion Deve- lopment of adminis- X X X trative services Logistics X X X education Logistic account- X X X X X X X X tancy and monitoring Networkin g and X X cooperatio n Research and X X knowledge base Logistical infra- X X X structure Sustain- ability of X X X X logistics activities

The comprehensive target system and the indicators of the strategy The target system of the strategy consists of the comprehensive strategic target, as well as of the specific targets formulated according to the strategic pillars. On the basis of the situation analysis and of the vision the comprehensive goal of the logistics strategy is to increase the contribution of the logistics sector to the competitiveness at the level of the company and of the national economy during the period between 2014 and 2020 through the promotion of the development of the logistics resources, the relation system and

80 of the innovation in accordance with the expected weight of represented in the national economy.

The specific targets recommended along each strategic pillar are as follows:

Table 5. The target-system of the strategy Pillars Specific factor Specific goals Continuous training activity. High level practice oriented education activity built on each Human other, aligned with the demand of the companies and with the resources maintainer needs in secondary education and in high level education and in vocational training. The development of the logistics role engagement of the Logistics key domestic SMEs and of their culture players The private and civil sectors shall contribute with coordinated A. Logistics efforts to the success of the sector skill Releasing the Budapest orientation of the nodal infrastructure

The formation of the co-operating system of the logistics centers The development of the co-operation along the border Nodal infra- harmonized with the transport corridors of the EU structure The increased exploitation of the possibilities offered by the nodal infrastructure existing and to be developed Increasing the environmental sustainability of the logistics activity The promotion of the IT developments within the company aiming at the reduction of the logistics transaction costs in the SME sector B. Logistics IT infra- The improvement of the efficiency of the inner processes in the infrastructure SME sector structure Streamlined e-governmental and e-self governmental services serving for the reduction of the administrative burdens of the logistics transactions Ensuring more advantageous conditions for the role engagement in the logistics, and Hungary should become more International attractive logistics investment target point relations The support of the maintaining logistics helping the C. Logistics accomplishment of the public tasks relations The merit promotion of the of the networking and of the co- Networks and operation in the logistics sector co-operation Supporting the special processes of the maintainer’s logistics networks accomplishing public tasks The development of the logistics knowledge bases, knowledge flow and knowledge use

The support of the less prevalent, but from the point of view

indispensable information forms (process and organisational State RDI innovation solutions) D. Logistics The harmonisation of the research supply at the research place RDI and of the company’s innovation demands (R and D gap),

The support of the innovation network co-operations

The support of the special processes of the maintainer’ Business RDI logistics networks supporting the accomplishment of public tasks

The tools of the strategy The experts of the Logistics Coordination Forum (LEF) made a proposal for the applied tools of the implementation of strategical goals formulated by the international and domestic strategical documents and the future vision. The elaboration of the tool proposals was based on a measurement list compiled by IFKA according to former logistics strategies and development policy documents, which divided the potential tools according to the kind of intervention (common political, regulation and fiscal/supporting means). Based on the summarization of the proposals the intervention directions will be outlined for the sake achieving the goals formulated:  The development of the administrative services relevant to the logistics  The modernization of the logistics  The configuration of the accounting and the monitoring systems  The promotion of networking and co-operation in logistics sector  The support of the logistics R and D activities  The support of the development of the logistics infrastructure  Ensuring the sustainability of the logistics activity. The detailed measures (tools) will be shown along the tool-groups, and then with the aid of goal/tool matrix the connection of each tool-group with the goal-system and so with the pillar structure of the strategy will be outlined.

Table 6. Strategic tools. Summary Tool groups Tools simplification of the customs regulations development of the e-government services for company demand Administrative services sub-program for commercial development logistics country marketing improving logistics training conditions [as international practice] strengthening practical training Human resources elaboration of the training program for the domestic SMEs regular investigation of supply and companies demand development of a comprehensive logistics statistical system for the domestic and EU on the basis of their expectations Accountancy elaboration of goods flow monitoring system uniform logistics data basis and framework qualification system supporting the cooperation between logistics companies Networking promotion of the logistics SMEs for becoming international, and the supporting the development of their regional networks the support of the adaptation of the international practices to be followed the promotion of the RDI, and the co-operation between the education and the business sphere R&D&I supporting the process- and organization oriented logistics innovation researches and use of them in the practice on the basis of regular empirical researches preparation of yearly reports and professional recommendations about the domestic logistics sector Support to develop stimulation of the logistics development outside the fence logistics infrastructure stimulation of the logistics developments within the fence green logistics developments Ensuring sustainable inverse logistics developments logistics activity city logistics developments

Sustainable logistics activity For the sake of ensuring the sustainability of the logistics activity the following main tools have been identified:  the development of the field of the city logistics,  green logistics developments,  inverse logistics developments. City logistics in closer sense is the disperse commodity supply problem in the towns, in the field of the commerce and of the services generated (e.g. health care). This means from engineering, economic and organizational standpoints the efficient and environment friendly harmonization of the above mentioned areas, with priority in the field of

84 the freight transport, loading and unloading operations and the storage related to those operations using a joint logistics infrastructure. This solution consolidated from several standpoints serves well the protection of the historical urban districts and the reduction of the environmental load, the transport safety, as well as the improvement of the profitability. In this respect the main development directions are the following:  the revitalization of the downtowns,  the management of the last miles,  the investigation of the concentration possibilities of the functions gateway and urban inverse logistics functions (synergy analysis),  the investigation of the use of the possible incentives and supports. For the successful starting with a city logistics pilot project the accomplishment of the following tasks should be accomplished:  the exploration of the research tasks related to each partial elements of the solutions and best practices,  the analysis of the research-results, the development of the possible solution alternatives and the evaluation of them,  the development of a system supplying solution simulation model for the urban supply at strategic and tactical levels,  the comparative analysis of the runs according to several scenario and the evaluation of the results,  concept and feasibility study project plan, invitation to tender, law amendments. In the field of the green logistics the most important tasks are as follows:  in the case of the logistics large systems the optimized building up of the distribution systems using models (the environmental optimization of the modal split), as well as  at the logistics establishments the environment-conscious formation or the promotion of the utilization of the renewable energy resources. For the sake of all these, the establishment of a green logistics competition basis is to be considered, with the involvement of the Hungarian banks, enabling the developments related to the sustainability becoming more easily implementable for the payers in the field of the logistics industry.

Horizontal factors

Transport network infrastructure The National Transport Strategy specifies the co-operation among the various transport modes as featured objective, the co-ordination of the whole of the travel chain and the supply chain, the assurance of its continuity, the improvement of their reliability, which cannot be envisaged without the necessary infrastructural background. The TEN-T network was reviewed in 2010 and in the framework of this survey the core network containing the most important network elements were determined and the comprehensive network elements were fixed. The development of the domestic network infrastructure is in harmony with the designation of the transport corridors fixed in international agreements. In qualitative terms the rail and (to lesser extent) the road infrastructure show a significant shortfall concerning several dimensions compared to the EU average. In order to exploit the logistic passenger and freight traffic transit advantages of Hungary because of its central geographical position in addition to the modernization of the transport infrastructure, the necessary building up of the transport, safety and traffic managing systems the development of the nodal infrastructure is also needed.

Priority axes of the Transport Operation Program The interventions enabling the achievement of the objectives drawn up on the basis of the strategy can be grouped along the following axes of priority:  Improving the international road accessibility of the country and the regional centers  Improving the international railway and waterway accessibility of the country and the regional centers  Improving regional accessibility  Linking up the modes of transport and improving the intermodality and the transport infrastructure of economic centers  Improving urban and suburban public transport  Technical assistance

New Hungary Strategic Plan for Rural Development The New Hungary Strategic Plan for Rural Development emphasizes the population retention role of rural micro-regions. Despite the fact that the economic and social role of agriculture is 86 declining, a very large proportion of the rural population has some kinds of ties with agriculture. In order to achieve an adequate level of profitability, the objective of the NHRDSP is to achieve that the rural population should have alternative sources of income. The objective is to establish an economic, social and societal background that ensures that the rural population does not migrate, thus avoiding excessive urbanization and the depopulation of rural areas. That requires a highly coordinated and very extensive development strategy, a great deal coherent with the other OPs, in order to transform the rural structure. The completion of the TOP developments may trigger economic development in rural areas as well, by bringing markets and jobs closer to the people.

Bibliography Sector industrial strategies (Ministry for National Economy, 2012) Investment in the future – National Research, Development and Innovation Strategy 2020 (Ministry for National Economy, 2012) National Transport Strategy Report (on the basis of the source works of the NKS working team, drafted by Ferenc Mészáros, Transport Development Co-ordination Center, 2012) Mobility, Vehicle industry, Logistics, Research, Development and Innovation, White Paper of the Sector Strategy (Ministry for National Economy, 2012) National Strategy of Innovations in Environmental Technology (Ministry of National Development, 2011) RDI Strategy. Vehicle engineering, transport and logistics. Priority Research Area. (BME, Budapest, 2010) Study of the Logistics-Transport working group: Position analysis, evaluation and economic policy recommendation, 2009–2013 (Reform Alliance, 2009) Logistics Action Plan, 2007–2013 (Ministry of National Development, 2009) Hungarian Logistics Strategy, 2007–2013 (Ministry of National Development, 2009) Sector Development of the Uniform Transport Development Objective, implementing the Uniform Transport Development Strategic Objective, 2008–2020 (Ministry of Economy and Transport, 2007) Uniform Transport Development Strategy, 2007–2020, White Paper (Ministry of Economy and Transport, 2007) The National Development 2020 (NF 2020) Logistics branch political strategy (2014–20) 87

National strategy on transportation Internet - Hungarian logistics policy and strategy 2007-2013, TEN-T network

III. POLAND

Edyta Klosa (University of Economics in Katowice) and Marcin Świtała (University of Economics in Katowice)

The current state of logistic system in Poland

The Polish logistic system as a part of its national economy The Polish economy has grown rapidly for two decades – at more than four percent per year, which means the fastest speed of economic growth in Europe. The last 20 years were also a time of intensive investments in Polish companies and infrastructure. In 2004, Poland joined the European Union as a full member and is now its sixth-largest economy. Living standards more than doubled between 1989 and 2012, reaching 62 percent of the level of the prosperous countries from Western, ‘core’ Europe. Although some other Central and Eastern European countries offer similar opportunities for foreign investors, Poland is still an attractive choice in comparison to its neighbors. Its population is more than 38 million – approximately four times the population of the Czech Republic or Hungary. That fact makes Poland a large market. Whereas the Czech Republic and Hungary have richer and more open economies, Poland has much lower labor costs and its economic growth is more rapid. At the same time, its governance structures are more rule- bound than those of its low-wage competitors, such as Bulgaria, Romania, or others outside the EU (Orenstein, 2014). The current state of Polish economy is still under influence of financial crisis in Euro zone, although Poland went through it relatively well and nowadays an economic revival can be observed. A driving wheel of the Polish economy is inevitably the export. In 2013 it increased to 781,816 mln PLN (152.8 bln EUR). Its share in Polish GDP was systematically growing and is now near 40%. In the same year Polish GDP slightly increased to 1,635,746 mln PLN (370 bln EUR) which means that Poland is on 8th position in EU-28 providing 2.9% of EU’s GDP. Poland’s population tends to shrink during the last years while an unemployment rate compared to 2012 stabilized and equaled in 2013 13.4%. From the perspective of this study it is an important information that during the last years the performance of Polish transport and storage sector was systematically increasing and equaled 98,424 mln PLN in 2013 (see Table 1).

Table 1. Basic macroeconomic data for Poland Specification 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Population in thous. 38167.3 38529.9 38538.4 38533.3 38495.7 Unempl. in % 12.1 12.4 12.5 13.4 13.4 in mln GDP 1,344,505 1,416,585 1,528,127 1,596,378 1,635,746 PLN GDP Y/Y in % 1.6 3.9 4.3 1.9 1.6 in mln Exports 530,278 598,369 688,738 744,748 781,816 PLN in mln Trans&Stor. 68,037 68,807 76,199 88,333 98,424 PLN Source: Central Statistical Office, 2015a.

Long-term forecasts for Poland published by reputable sources also seem to be very optimistic. The PwC report ‘World in 2050. The BRICs and beyond: prospects, challenges and opportunities’ discusses Poland and Malaysia among other states (PwC, 2013b). In the report Poland is described as the leading EU economy in the Central and Eastern European region. According to a senior PwC economic expert, the Polish GDP will grow at an average real rate of around 2.5% per year (2.9% per capita) over the period to 2050. During the analyzed period, Poland will achieve the highest average rate of growth among the big EU economies, and will outdistance Russia in its long-term growth. In particular, the annual growth rate in 2014–2020 should equal about 3.4%, in 2021–2040 – 2.8%, and in 2041–2025 – about 2%. The conditions in the logistics sector were difficult in the last years but they improved slightly. The growth is mostly determined by road and intermodal transport. Moreover, new regional distribution centers were built recently to serve South-Eastern Europe. In 2012, 142,000 companies run their businesses in Polish transport and storage sector (8% of active companies in Poland) which means 2% growth comparing to 2010 (see Figure 1). The value of Polish logistics market in 2013 achieved 182 bln PLN (11.2% of Polish GDP). That value is expected to grow, especially because the outsourcing rate is still relatively low in relation to primary EU countries.

Figure 1. Sales revenue of cargo transport as well as transport and storage services in bln PLN

200,0 174,3 180,0 162,3 160,0 147,4 140,0 127,6 118,4 120,0 100,0 90,2 76,9 83,6 80,0 66,6 70,9 60,0 40,0 20,0 0,0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Cargo transport 66,6 70,9 76,9 83,6 90,2 Trans&Stor services 118,4 127,6 147,4 162,3 174,3

Source: Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 21.

In 2014 Poland’s rank in LPI list is 31 with a score being 3.49 (see Figure 2). In comparison to last years, the Polish LPI stabilized, but still slightly grows, mostly because of enhancing tracking & tracing solutions (The World Bank, 2015c) (see Table 2).

Figure 2. Logistics Performance Index for Poland in 2014

Customs

3,26

4,13 Timeliness Infrastructure 3,08

3,54 3,46 Tracking & tracing International shipments

3,47

Logistics competence

Source: The World Bank, 2015b.

Table 2. Dynamics of Poland’s LPI within 2007–2014 Specification 2007 2010 2012 2014 LPI Rank 40 30 30 31 LPI Score 3.04 3.43 3.44 3.49 Customs 2.9 3.3 3.1 3.3 Infrastructure 2.69 3.1 2.98 3.08 International shipments 2.92 3.47 3.22 3.46 Logistics competence 3.04 3.3 3.26 3.47 Tracking & tracing 3.12 3.32 3.45 3.54 Timeliness 3.59 4.04 4.52 4.13 Source: The World Bank, 2015a.

The data presented in Table 2 induce to draw a conclusion that the most significant progress was made by Polish logistic system between 2007 and 2010. Scores for all assessed factor raised all over the last 7 years, and the timeliness factor achieved the best score, although it slightly decreased by 0.39 points between 2012 and 2014. Authors of ‘Top 100 in European Transport and Logistics Services 2013/2014’ report included Poland (with Switzerland, UK, Germany and Norway) in the growing European logistics markets (see Figure 3). According to this report, the Polish logistics market value is ranked on 7th position (45 bln EUR) (Fraunhofer, 2015).

Figure 3. The value of logistics market in Europe in 2012 in bln EUR

250 228

200

150 126,3 99,2 100 75,2 70,6 47,6 45 50 30,1 29,7 29,7 22,3 22,1 18,8 16,7 14,9 0

Source: Fraunhofer, 2015.

The Polish transport system: An overview Before a more detailed discussion on most significant elements of Polish logistic system, the following part of the study provides a brief insight to Polish transport system. Table 3 presents main data about the infrastructure and equipment (grey-shadowed rows) for six transport modes and their changes between 2009 and 2013. It can be seen that the most important and fast growing mode is road transport. Its infrastructure and equipment is constantly developing. Growth can be also observed for pipeline transport, however, it’s a less important element of Polish transport system. At the same time, the situation of sectors of rail and air transport where the infrastructure and equipment seem to shrink is alarming. The situation in water transport is not very good but the decrease of its growth seems to be restrained in last years. Table 3 presents carriage of goods in thousands of tons (non-shadowed rows) as well as performance in mln ton-kilometers (grey-shadowed rows) per each transport mode during 2009–2013. In 2013 1848.3 mln of tons of cargo was transported (3.3% growth in relation to 2012). Transport performance of 347.9 tkm was achieved (6.8% growth in relation to 2012). Increased transport of goods was observed in road, rail and inland transport while decreased – in air, maritime and pipeline transport. It’s also worth to mention that Poland is a part of two core corridors within Trans-European Transport (TEN-T) Networks. First, the North Sea–Baltic Core Network Corridor is a 3200 km long corridor which will connect the ports of the Eastern shore of the Baltic Sea with the ports of the North Sea. It starts at the modern harbors on the Gulf of Finland of Helsinki (Vuosaari) and Tallinn (Muuga) passing South through the three Baltic States and North Eastern Poland until Warsaw. From there it follows the traditional East-West corridor to Łódź, Poznan and Berlin continuing to the ports on the North Sea coast. The corridor has branches to Ventspils in Latvia and to Klaipeda and Vilnius in Lithuania (European Comission, 2015b). The corridor is still missing some Poland-related important links, which are a Rail Baltic 1435 mm gauge direct line from Tallinn to the Lithuanian-Polish border, from there to the Bialystok upgrade, and further to the Warsaw-Bialystok upgrade.

Table 3. Background information on Polish transport system in 2009–2013 Specification 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Road transport 1 Hard surface public roads in km 268,372 273,760 280,401 280,719 . 2 of which motorways 849 857 1,070 1,365 1,482 3 expressways 522 675 738 1,053 1,244 4 of which improv. surface roads 245,086 249,807 257,564 258,060 . 5 Road motor vehicles in thous. 22,025 23,037 24,189 24,876 25,684 6 of which: lorries 2,797 2,982 3,131 3,178 3,242 Rail transport 7 Operated railway lines in km 20,360 20,228 20,228 20,094 19,328 8 of which standard gauge 20,171 20,089 20,113 19,979 19,259 9 of which electrified 11,956 11,916 11,880 11,920 11,868 Standard gauge rolling stock 10 locomotives: electric 1,887 1,905 1,879 1,849 1,838 11 diesel 2,531 2,358 2,301 2,264 2,194 12 electric railcars 1,202 1,213 1,256 1,226 1,268 13 freight wagons 95,462 89,270 88,928 91,483 87,726 Air transport 14 Air routes network, kilometres 257,860 342,949 196,008 195,918 177,002 15 of which foreign 255,796 340,657 190,815 190,279 171,173 16 Transport aircrafts number 61 56 54 70 68 Inland water transport 17 Navigable inland waterways in km 3,660 3,659 3,659 3,659 3,655 18 tugs and pushers 218 222 210 209 209 19 fleet of barges 612 597 551 548 571 Maritime transport Maritime transport fleet 20 number of vessels 120 121 108 110 110 21 deadweight (DWT), thousand 2,662 2,942 2,931 3,045 3,036 22 average age of vessels in years 20 19 18 16 15 Pipeline transport 23 Main pipelines in km 2,360 2,362 2,444 2,444 2,444 Note: non-shadowed rows: infrastructure, grey-shadowed rows: equipment. Source: Central

Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 77.

Table 4. Transport of goods in tons and transport performance in ton-kilometers in Poland in 2009–2013 Lp. Specification 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 1 Trans. of goods in thous. t. 1,733,166 1,816,713 1,935,143 1,799,482 1,861,281 2 of which: road transport 1,424,883 1,491,253 1,596,209 1,493,386 1,553,050 3 railway transport 242,971 255,708 271,577 241,015 245,529 4 inland waterways transport 5,655 5,141 5,093 4,579 5,044 5 maritime transport 9,378 8,362 7,737 7,476 6,965 6 pipeline transport 50,242 56,208 54,482 52,985 50,656 7 Trans. Perf. in mln tkm. 282,976 308,139 318,569 325,818 347,960 8 of which: road transport 191,484 214,204 218,888 233,310 259,708 9 railway transport 43,554 48,795 53,746 48,903 50,881 10 inland waterways transport 1,020 1,030 909 815 768 11 maritime transport 23,858 19,773 21,341 20,299 16,299 12 pipeline transport 22,908 24,157 23,461 22,325 20,112 Note: non-shadowed rows: transport of goods in tons; grey-shadowed rows: transport performance in ton-kilometers. Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 81.

The second corridor is the Baltic-Adriatic Core Network Corridor, which is a 2400 km long corridor connecting the Baltic ports in Poland with the ports of the Adriatic Sea. It starts at the harbors of Gdańsk and Gdynia, connecting via strong economic centers like Warsaw, Vienna and Venice to Trieste and Ravenna. The corridor has some branches from Szczecin to Katowice, from Graz via Udine to Trieste as well as via Ljubljana to Trieste and Koper. The corridor will provide better access to Baltic and Adriatic seaports for the economic centers in Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Austria (European Commission, 2015a). In Poland the multimodal cross-border connection near Katowice needs upgrading.

Road transport The basic data related to the performance of Polish logistic system prove that road freight transport is the most important one for Poland’s economy. The share of road freight transport in transport performance in tkm is 72%. The Polish road transport performance is significant not only domestically but also in the whole EU. According to Eurostat, Poland recorded a 7% increase in 2012 in the analyzed area, consolidating its position as the second largest road freight transport industry in Europe. Poland, together with Germany, France, UK (on the basis of 2010 data), Spain, and Italy, had reached a group which dominated demand for European road transport in 2012, measured in tons loaded and unloaded. Those countries accounted for nearly 69% of the total. Eurostat also emphasizes strong performance by Polish haulers as

95 third parties in country to country flows. According to this report, Poland emerged as the most successful third country with its haulers appearing as the main other hauler in 11 of the top 20 country to country markets, including Germany/Netherlands, Germany/France, Belgium/Netherlands, Germany/Italy and France/Italy (Eurostat, 2015). Table 5 presents basic data related to goods road transport in Poland in 2013 by direction of transport.

Table 5. Goods road transport in Poland in 2013 by direction of transport thousand million Specification in percent in percent tons t-km Total 1,300,608 100.0 247,594 100.0 National transport 1,117,001 85.9 100,320 40.5 International transport of which 183,607 14.1 147,274 59.5  Export 62,877 4.8 54,296 21.9  Import 53,699 4.0 47,878 19.0  cross-trade 44,973 3.5 37,721 15.2 o of which transit via 2,755 0.2 5,123 2.1 Poland  cabotage 22,058 1.7 7,379 3.0 Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 157.

In 2013 the volume of goods carried by road transport for export and import was 1,179,878 and 1,170,700 thousand tons, respectively. It means that the balance of road freight transport was positive (+9,178 thousand tons). Table 6 reflects the road freight transport performance in each of Polish voivodeship (province). The first five voivodeships with the greatest share both in goods road transport for export and import provides are Silesia, Masovia, Greater Poland, Lower Silesia and Łódź. Their total share constitutes more than 50% of total volume of goods carried by road transport. The total length of roads in Poland in 2012 is about 412 thousand kilometers (see Table 7). National roads, including expressways and motorways are managed by General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways (pol: Generalna Dyrekcja Dróg Krajowych i Autostrad, GDDKiA) on the basis of the Act of 21 March 1985 on public roads (Dz.U. 2013 item 260, as

Table 6. Voivodeship balance of goods road transport in Poland in thousand tons Total balance of goods road transport in thousand Voivodeship tons Polish name English name Export Import Balance Dolnośląskie Lower Silesian 102,729 68,903 + 7,365 Kujawsko- Kuyavian- 61,851 37,718 + 946 Pomorskie Pomeranian Lubelskie Lublin 55,824 40,858 - 1,900 Lubuskie Lubusz 35,078 23,065 - 3,174 Łódzkie Łódź 93,319 58,089 - 2,708 Małopolskie Lesser Poland 76,217 52,002 - 1,080 Mazowieckie Masovian 130,065 83,749 - 6,135 Opolskie Opole 39,111 19,703 + 7,695 Podkarpackie Subcarpathian 50,857 38,564 - 2,994 Podlaskie Podlaskie 46,017 33,529 + 2,329 Pomorskie Pomeranian 70,428 51,212 - 2,202 Śląskie Silesian 161,767 114,742 + 41 Świętokrzyskie Świętokrzyskie 54,193 27,732 + 11,103 Warmińsko- Warmian-Masurian 38,248 25,412 + 1,309 Mazurskie Wielkopolskie Greater Poland 117,825 77,115 - 3,430 Zachodniopomorski West Pomeranian 46,349 29,741 + 2,013 e Together Together 1,179,878 1,170,700 + 9,178 Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 182. amended). The management of the Polish national road system GDDKiA includes planning, construction and maintenance of those roads to enable efficient and safe transport of persons and goods between different regions of Poland as well as between Poland and neighboring countries. Although national roads represent not more than 5 percent (4.65%) of the total length of all roads in Poland, it is estimated that they provide nearly 40 percent of the total road transport performance in Poland. In 2011 over 23 million vehicles travelled along the national roads, because of which it is very difficult to reconcile the interest in services of the transport system (demand) with the capacity of this very system (supply) (GDDKiA, 2015a). The Polish road system still requires intensive investments. OECD states in its document ‘Economic Policy Reforms 2011: Going for Growth’ that the quality of Poland’s transport infrastructure is among the lowest in the OECD and recommended it immediate enhancement (OECD, 2011). Since the moment of publishing the OECD’s document mentioned above, the state of Polish network system drastically changed. According to PwC report, in the years 2007–2013 Poland

97 obtained significant amount of EU funds, in excess of EUR 10 billion, for development of its road infrastructure.

Table 7. Total public roads in Poland by road categories and type of surface Hard surface Total Unsurfaced Road categories total improved unimproved kilometers Total 412,035.1 280,719.1 258,060.0 22,659.1 131,316.0 National 19,182.1 19,180.9 19,179.0 1.9 1.2 Voivodeship 28,422.6 28,361.7 28,318.3 43.2 60.9 District 125,779.2 114,589.4 110,584.2 4,005.2 11,189.8 Commune 238,651.2 118,587.1 99,978.5 18,608.6 120,064.1 Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 124.

Obtaining this aim required systemic changes and developing an effective system both at the state level, and in the market environment. GDDKiA has been formulated three main objectives:  significant enhancement of the condition of the Polish road infrastructure by means of new investment projects,  effective use of the funds obtained from EU, and ensuring cost minimization, appropriate warranty and high quality of the roads;  enhancement of competitiveness on the construction services market. According to the PwC, GDDKiA has achieved the objectives mentioned above. The market has been opened, which has leveraged its competitiveness. 1,500 km of new motorways and express ways have been built at European prices. The network of motorways, which are payable in Poland, is now 2190 km long. Fund reimbursement by the EU confirms their correct spending, and that strict EU standards have been met which means that the roads are of high quality and safe (PwC, 2013a). The current state of Polish national road network is presented on Figure 4. As Figure 4 implies, the main arteries of the Polish road transport system are motorways. They are identified by the letter ‘A’, followed by a number. Under current plans, by 2015 three motorways will span the country, with two routes running along an East-West axis

Figure 4. Current state of national roads network in Poland (state of: 02.01.2015)

Source: GDDKiA, 2015b.

(A2 running centrally and A4 running Southerly) and one motorway traversing a North-South axis (with A1 running centrally). In addition, three shorter motorway stretches (A6, A8, A18) will complete the planned motorway network. The current length of exploited motorways is as follows (Skyscrapercity, 2015): 1. A1: 406,5 km, of which sections:  Gdańsk - w. Stryków: 294,6 km,  Tuszyn - Piotrków Trybunalski: 17,5 km,  Pyrzowice – Gorzyczki: 94,4 km; 2. A2: 474,1 km, of which sections:  Świecko – Warszawa: 453,3 km,  ring road of Mińsk Mazowiecki: 20,8 km; 3. A4: 628,9, of which sections:  Jędrzychowice/Zgorzelec - Rzeszów Wschód: 581,9 km,  Jarosław Zachód – Korczowa: 47,0 km; 4. A6: 23,8 km, of which sections:  Kołbaskowo - Szczecin Kijewo: 21,6 km,

 Tczewska: 2,2 km; 5. A8: (ring road of Wrocław): 22,0 km; 6. A18: (Golnice – Krzyżowa): 4.9 km. In the years 2007–2012, Poland was leading among European countries in terms of the dynamic growth of the motorway network, because it increased the number of motorway kilometers by 106%. Rapid growth of the motorway network by 2014 is presented on Figure 5. In the same period the network of expressways increased by over 230%.

Figure 5. Development of the motorway network in Poland by 2014

Source: Skyscrapercity, 2015.

Furthermore, according to the PwC report, currently nearly 75% of expressways and motorways in Poland are built on time, i.e. by the time limits set out in agreements with contractors. The remaining 25% of projects are completed with an average delay of slightly over 10 weeks. It was emphasized that the average delay of road investment projects in Germany is as long as 7 months, whereas in Greece over a year. A report prepared by the European Court of Auditors (ECA) revealed that the average delay in construction of express roads in the whole EU is 15 months. The new roads have enabled to reduce travel time significantly on numerous key sections between most important Polish cities. Due to the work carried out in the period 2007–2012, the travel time between Gdańsk and Toruń has shortened by 40, between Warsaw and Łódź

100 by 30, and between Kraków and Tarnów by 20 minutes. The whole Polish economy benefits from shorter trips between various cities (PwC, 2013a).

Rail transport During last years the share of rail transport in the carriage of goods in Poland has been systematically decreasing. In 2013, not even 20% of carried goods were transported by rail. However, in 2013, the total rail transport carried 233 million tons of goods, which is 0.7% more than in 2012. At the same time transport performance was 50.9 billion ton-kilometers and increased by 4.0%. Shunting amounted to 13 million tons (by 27.6% more) and 0.07 billion ton-kilometers (by 68.3% more). Regarding the volume of goods carried by rail in ton-kilometers, Poland is on the second place among the EU-27 countries (between Germany and France). In international transport, Polish rail is on the third place (behind Germany and Latvia). In 2013, in comparison to previous year, there was an increase of carriage in international transport (by 5.8%), while in national transport there was a decrease (by 1.3%) (see Table 8). Within international transport, the growth of the carriage of goods was observed in export (by 16.2%) and transit of goods (by 5.8%), while amount of carriage in import of goods decreased (by 1.5%). Within carriage of exported goods the greatest share had transport to Germany, Czech Republic and Austria, whereas carriage of imported goods to Russia, Ukraine, Germany, Belarus and Czech Republic. In 2013, within railway intermodal transport, there were carried by 7.0% containers (loaded and empty) more than in 2012. More than 73% of this carriage was done within international transport. The number of carried swap bodies was 68.2% less than in the previous year (Central Statistical Office, 2014b, pp. 64-65).

Table 8. The structure of carriage of goods by type in Poland of transport in 2012 and 2013 2012 2013 Type of transport share in % of total Total 100.0 100.0 National transport 71.9 70.3 International transport 28.2 29.7 export 10.8 12.4 import 15.3 15.0 transit 2.1 2.3 Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 65.

101

The density of the railway network in Poland is 6.59/km2. Figure 6 shows that that density is higher on the Western side of Poland. Besides domestic connections there are international ones (AGC, AGTC agreements, visible in TEN-T network). The prevailing rail width is 1435 mm; however there are also narrow rails (619.01 km) and broad rails of 1520 mm (542.5 km) (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 46). An operator of broad rails is PKP LHS10. In 2013, the length of the railway network reached 19.3 thousand km (of which 12.3 thousand km are lines of national importance) and was about 766 km shorter than the year before. The network of both the Polish State Railways (PKP) and railway network managed by other entities shrank, the former by about 658 km (while total length is 19.0 thousand km) , while the latter about 108 km, to 0.4 thousand km miles as well. 99.6% of the total length of railway network belongs to standard gauge and large gauge electrified lines. In 2013, 1221 km of tracks (running lines and the main tracks), were modernized, of which 579 km were adapted to a speed of 120–160 km. At the same time almost 30% of Polish railways need immediate modernization (see Figure 7). In the same year, the inventory number of stock of electric and diesel locomotives was 4 thousand units, which is 2.0% less than in 2012. The inventory number of freight rail cars decreased by 4.1% and equaled to 87.7 thousand units (Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 64). The main Polish rail operator is PKP. The PKP Group was founded in 2001 as a result of the restructuring of the state enterprise Polskie Koleje Państwowe (Polish State Railways). The purpose of these changes was to separate railway transport from management of railway lines and to establish independent commercial entities which could render services not only on the railway market. PKP Group comprises the parent company (PKP S.A.) and eleven companies that provide services on railway transport, energy and ICT markets. Freight transport services are provided by PKP Cargo S.A. and PKP LHS Sp. z o.o (PKP Group, 2015b).

10 PKP LHS – Polskie Koleje Państwowe Linia Hutnicza Szerokotorowa Spółka z o.o. (eng. PKP Broad Gauge Railway Line Ltd.). 102

Figure 6. Polish railway network

Source: Bueker, 2013.

The PKP Cargo S.A. is the largest rail operator in Poland and the second largest operator on the market of railway freight transport in Europe. It performs freight services not only in Poland, but also abroad (in Germany, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Austria, Hungary, Belgium and in the Netherlands). PKP CARGO Logistics Group offers domestic and international services of rail, road and rail-ferry transport (on the Świnoujście–Ystad line). It also renders intermodal transport services, operating such freight units as containers, semi-trailers and swap bodies. The operator provides freight forwarding and traction services; offer the handling and storage of goods at our own facilities, and full service of railway side-tracks and repairs of rolling stock. The PKP CARGO Logistics Group owns 2,500 locomotives and 103 about 63.5 thousand carriages, which makes the company the leader of the rail transport sector (PKP Group, 2015a).

Figure 7. The quality of Polish rail infrastructure in 2008–2012

2012 43,0% 30,0% 27,0% 2011 40,0% 32,0% 28,0% 2010 36,3% 34,5% 29,2% 2009 37,0% 36,0% 27,0% 2008 37,0% 38,0% 25,0%

0,0% 20,0% 40,0% 60,0% 80,0% 100,0% 120,0% 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 good 37,0% 37,0% 36,3% 40,0% 43,0% satisfactoty 38,0% 36,0% 34,5% 32,0% 30,0% unsatisfactory 25,0% 27,0% 29,2% 28,0% 27,0%

good satisfactoty unsatisfactory

Source: Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 48.

PKP LHS Sp. z o.o (PKP Broad Gauge Railway Line Ltd.) is managing the railway line no. 65 and performs freight transport on it. The activity of PKP LHS is concentrated in the SouthEast part of Poland and has a regional character. As a company, it offers comprehensive freight forwarding and door-to-door logistics services as well as freight transportation without the need to reload it at the Ukrainian border and with the ability to pull heavy unit trains. With its track gauge of 1,520 mm, railway line no. 65 is the longest broad-gauge line in Poland used for transporting goods. It was designed and built in the 1970s and was put into operation in 1979. It connects the Polish-Ukrainian railway border crossing Hrubieszów/Izow with Silesia, precisely with Sławków in the Dąbrowski Basin, located 25 km from Katowice. Line no. 65 runs through five voivoideships: Lubelskie (Lublin), Podkarpackie (Subcarpathian), Świętokrzyskie (Świętokrzyskie), Małopolskie (Lesser Poland) and Śląskie (Silesian). The railway line includes 10 stations, 13 passing loops and points for cargo handling: terminals, ramps and handling yards, warehouses, bonded warehouses and weighbridges (PKP Group, 2015a). To summarize the discussion about Polish rail transport it is worth to present its main problems and opportunities (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, pp. 56-58): 1. Problems: 104

 Almost 30% of the railways should be immediately renovated.  The average speed of cargo transport is only about 25 km/h.  There are relatively high fees for using the infrastructure, which is a natural constraint for further growth of this transport mode. 2. Opportunities:  The demand for transport of construction materials for road system rebuilding is growing which enhances growth of rail transport as the best mode for that kind of materials.  Rail transport still keeps second position on European market.  There were intensive investments in last years in this transport mode.  In 2013 the fees for using infrastructure started to decrease because of new favourable regulations.

Air transport Air transport is one of the priorities in Polish transport policy. At the same time, the growth of cargo transport is relatively slow because of long border-crossing procedures, growing fleet of small planes and lack of intermodal connections between airports and main Polish and European transport networks. Main cargo operators are PLL LOT and UPS Airlines (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, pp. 91–96). The Polish air transport infrastructure includes 38 airports:  1 central airport in Warszawa (Warsaw),  7 primary regional airports (Kraków, Gdańsk, Poznań, Katowice, Wrocław, Rzeszów, Szczecin),  12 secondary regional airports, which do not handle with cargo,  18 local airports. Figure 8. Main airports in Poland

105

Source: Europe Airports, 2015.

In 2013 36.7 thousand tons of cargo were carried by air transport, which is by 9.9% less than in 2012. The international transport of goods fell by 10.3% and national transport of goods by 8.0%. Cargo carried by scheduled transport accounted for 69.5% of total air transport (67.5% last year). Cargo (including mail) loaded and unloaded at airports was by 8.4% more than in 2012. Volume of cargo reloaded in international traffic was higher by 11.8%, whereas the volume of cargo departed to foreign airports increased (by 18.3%) and the volume of cargo arrived from foreign airports fell (by 6.8%). The volume of total cargo reloaded in national traffic decreased (by 9.3%) (Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 73). Table 9 presents cargo transit in Polish airports in tons. As it can be seen, the Warsaw airport handles with most of cargo in Poland (about 75%). The other vital cargo airports are in Katowice, Kraków and Gdańsk. The Table also implies drastic decrease in volumes of cargo handled between 2011 and 2012 – the only airport with an increase was in Warsaw.

106

Table 9. Cargo transit in Polish airports in tons in 2009–2012 Specification 2009 2010 2011 2012 2012/2011 Warszawa 50,143.3 55,649.2 43,663.0 45,362.7 3.9% Katowice 7,589.7 11,448.4 11,169.7 9,607.0 -14.0% Kraków 4,175.2 4,464.7 2,557.0 582.0 -77.2% Gdańsk 4,016.9 4,487.1 4,944.0 547.0 -88.9% Wrocław 989.4 879.3 1,080.0 1,027.0 -4.9% Poznań 2,150.3 2,369.7 2,165.0 1,763.0 -18.6% Szczecin 874.0 728.9 1,429.0 718.0 -49.8% Rzeszów 557.1 465.8 205.0 200.8 -2.0% Total 70,495.9 80,493.1 67,212.7 59,807.5 -11.0% Source: Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 94.

In 2013, according to the register of the Civil Aviation Office, the total number of aircrafts used in Polish civil aviation equaled 1193 units and was bigger by 2 units than in the previous year. In comparison to 2012, the growth was observed in propeller aircrafts (by 3 units), and jet aircrafts (by 2 units). There was a decrease of turboprop aircrafts (by 3 units) and helicopters (by 17 units) (Central Statistical Office, 2014b, pp. 71–72).

Maritime transport The period since Poland joined European Union has been the time of intensified investments in maritime ports’ infrastructure and equipment as well as the infrastructure supporting land access to those ports. As a consequence, the operating conditions for Polish ports customers improved. The total length of quays together with transshipment ones in Polish seaports in 2012 and 2013 is presented in Table 10 (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 70; Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 71). The crucial ports are located in Gdańsk, Gdynia and Szczecin-Świnoujście port complex. Other ports on the Polish Baltic shore are of lower economic importance (Elbląg, Police, Kołobrzeg, Darłowo and some other local ports), as they serve mostly fishing and tourism. The basic characteristics of main Polish seaports are briefly discussed below. The Port of Gdańsk is a major international transportation hub situated in the central part of the Southern Baltic coast. According to European Union’s strategy, the port plays a significant role as a crucial link in the Trans-European Transport Corridor No. 1 which connects the Nordic countries with Southern and Eastern Europe. The Port of Gdańsk is comprised of two principal sections with naturally diversified operational parameters: the

107 inner port stretches along the Dead Vistula and the port canal, while the outer port enables direct access to the Gulf of Gdansk.

Table 10. Length of quays at Polish seaports Total Of which used Seaports meters 2012 2013 2012 2013 Total 72,615 76,328 63,620 67,259 Darłowo 245 245 190 190 Elbląg 3,666 3,666 3,666 3,666 Gdańsk 22,828 22,828 19,492 19,492 Gdynia 13,344 13,382 13,021 12,982 Kołobrzeg 2,390 2,397 2,390 2,397 Nowe Warpno - 193 - 193 Police 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Stepnica. 376 376 225 225 Świnoujście 6,437 6,688 6,326 6,577 Szczecin 18,125 19,219 13,742 14,359 Trzebież - 695 - 695 Ustka 2,037 1,935 1,401 1,779 Władysławowo 2,167 2,167 2,167 2,167 Dziwnów - 1,537 - 1,537 Of which transshipment quays Total 43,295 43,724 42,392 42,853 Darłowo 145 145 145 145 Elbląg 2,240 2,240 2,240 2,240 Gdańsk 9,743 9,743 9,494 9,494 Gdynia 10,444 10,444 10,444 10,444 Kołobrzeg 743 743 743 743 Police 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Stepnica 294 294 145 145 Świnoujście 6,014 6,164 5,964 6,114 Szczecin 11,573 11,423 11,150 11,000 Ustka 750 947 718 947 Władysławowo 349 349 349 349 Dziwnów - 232 - 232 Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 232.

The inner port provides a comprehensive range of terminals and facilities designed to handle with containerized cargo, passenger ferries and Ro-Ro vessels, passenger cars and citrus fruits, sulphur, phosphorite and other bulk. The other quays fitted with versatile equipment and infrastructure are universal in use and enable handling with conventional general as well

108 as bulk cargo such as rolled steel products, oversize and heavy lifts, grain, artificial fertilizers, ore and coal. The outer port enables operations on piers, quays and cargo handling jetties situated immediately on the waters of the Gulf of Gdańsk. This section of the port provides facilities suited to handling with energy raw materials such as liquid fuels, coal and liquefied gas. The outer port also accommodates modern Deepwater Container Terminal (Port of Gdańsk, 2015b). Main shipment statistics for Port of Gdańsk in the period 2009–2014 are presented in Figure 9.

Figure 9. Cargo handling in Port of Gdańsk in tons

35 000 000 30 000 000 25 000 000 20 000 000 15 000 000 10 000 000 5 000 000 0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Liquid fuel 9 493 881 14 401 243 10 387 872 10 741 002 11 026 283 12 483 157 Coal 2 716 380 3 180 939 1 789 259 1 923 785 4 589 254 3 322 356 Other bulk 2 233 903 2 686 735 5 011 746 4 327 721 2 650 378 3 613 109 General cargo + timber 3 458 139 6 132 028 7 300 488 8 888 019 10 513 937 11 229 724 Grain 960 588 781 152 816 123 1 017 609 1 479 443 1 629 212 Total 18 862 891 27 182 097 25 305 488 26 898 136 30 259 295 32 277 558

Grain General cargo + timber Other bulk Coal Liquid fuel Total

Source: Port of Gdańsk, 2015a.

The Port of Gdynia is a universal port specialized in handling with general cargo, mainly unitized cargo transported in containers and in Ro-Ro system. The port offers a well- developed network of multimodal connections including hinterland, regular Short Sea Shipping Lines as well as ferry connections (ferry terminal). The Port of Gdynia is a vital link in the Trans-European Transport Network Corridor No. 6. Handling with the containerized cargo at the Port of Gdynia is the domain of two modern container terminals located in the Western Port: the Baltic Container Terminal Ltd. the and Gdynia Container Terminal S.A. There are also bulk terminals equipped with modern cargo

109 handling equipment (Baltic Grain Terminal Ltd., Maritime Bulk Terminal Gdynia Ltd., Baltic Bulk Terminal Ltd., Westway Terminal Poland Ltd. and Petrolinvest). Baltic General Cargo Terminal Gdynia Ltd. is specialized in handling with general cargo. It consists of two terminals. One of them is dedicated to handle with Ro-Ro cargo (within Basin V of the port), while the other one handles with conventional general cargo (Port of Gdynia Authority S.A., 2015a). Main shipment statistics for Port of Gdynia in the period 2010–2014 are presented in Figure 10.

Figure 10. Cargo handling in Port of Gdynia in tons

25 000 000

20 000 000

15 000 000

10 000 000

5 000 000

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Oil products 916 000 591 000 213 000 62 000 229 000 Coal and coke 1 684 000 1 400 000 2 050 000 2 640 000 2 060 000 Other bulk 2 268 000 2 726 000 1 794 000 1 631 000 1 476 000 General cargo + timber 8 204 000 9 607 000 9 970 000 11 148 000 12 739 000 Grain 1 664 000 1 587 000 1 782 000 2 178 000 2 902 000 Total 14 736 000 15 911 000 15 809 000 17 659 000 19 406 000

Grain General cargo + timber Other bulk Coal and coke Oil products Total

Source: Port of Gdynia Authority S.A., 2015b.

Together with the Port of Świnoujście, the Port of Szczecin constitutes a complex managed by a united authority. The complex is the closest maritime transport base for West and North- West Poland. The Port of Szczecin is located about 68 km from the sea. The trip by the waterway from Szczecin to Świnoujście takes approximately 4 hours. The port can handle with vessels of draught up to 9.15 m and a length of up to 215 m. The Port of Szczecin is universal and enables to handle both with general cargo and bulk cargo goods. Its domain is handling and storage of containers, steel products, oversized cargo, paper and cellulose. The Port of Szczecin is the largest transshipment center of granite blocks in Poland. It also enables to handle with dry bulk cargo such as coal, coke, aggregates, grain, fertilizers and liquid cargo, including those requiring special storage conditions and handling, such as tar. The Port of Świnoujście supports handling with vessels of draught up to 13.2 m and a length of up to 110

270 m. This is the largest terminal in Poland for handling with dry bulk cargo, mainly coal (exports and imports) as well as imported iron ore for Polish, Czech and Slovak steel companies. Another important facility in the Port of Świnoujście is a ferry terminal, equipped with five stations to serve passenger-car ferries and car-railway ferries on the route to and from Sweden. In Świnoujście there is also a new terminal that specializes in handling with agro-food products. That terminal is equipped with a flat storage warehouse with a total capacity of 50,000 tons (Port Szczecin-Świnoujście, 2015a). The main shipment statistics for the Ports of Szczecin and Świnoujście in the period 2010– 2014 are presented in Figure 11.

Figure 11. Cargo handling in Ports of Szczecin and Świnoujście in tons

25 000 000

20 000 000

15 000 000

10 000 000

5 000 000

0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Oil products 948 000 0 1 401 500 1 403 000 1 620 800 1 670 300 Coal and coke 4 219 700 7 196 400 5 422 100 4 257 400 4 529 400 4 601 800 Other bulk 2 605 500 1 800 000 4 134 900 4 761 200 5 542 300 5 130 400 General cargo + timber 7 108 200 7 899 100 9 313 800 9 450 700 9 409 000 10 354 600 Grain 1 615 500 849 400 1 081 800 1 394 400 1 648 500 1 644 300 Total 16 496 900 17 744 900 21 354 100 21 266 700 22 750 000 23 401 400

Grain General cargo + timber Other bulk Coal and coke Oil products Total

Source: Port Szczecin-Świnoujście, 2015b.

In 2014 75,085 thousands of tons were carried through Polish sea terminals (a 6.25% increase compared to 2013). Figure 12 provides brief insight into cargo transit volumes in previous 6 years in the three main Polish ports. The total amount of tons carried in those ports equaled 32.3 mln t. in Gdańsk (6.7% more than in 2013), 19.4 mln t. in Gdynia (2.9% more than in 2013) and 23.4 mln t. in Szczecin-Świnoujście (9.9% more than in 2013).

Figure 12. Cargo transit in main Polish maritime ports in thousands of tons

111

80,0 70,7 75,1 64,0 70,0 62,8 62,6 60,0 48,6 50,0 40,0 30,0 20,0 10,0 0,0 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Gdynia 13,3 14,7 15,9 15,8 17,7 19,4 Szczecin-Świnoujście 16,5 20,8 21,4 21,3 22,8 23,4 Gdańsk 18,9 27,2 25,3 26,9 30,3 32,3 Total 48,6 62,8 62,6 64,0 70,7 75,1

Gdańsk Szczecin-Świnoujście Gdynia Total

Source: Port of Gdańsk, 2015a; Port of Gdynia Authority S.A., 2015b; Port Szczecin- Świnoujście, 2015b.

During the last years Polish maritime ports denote also record growth in the amount of carried containers (see Figure 13).

Figure 13. Container carriage in main Polish maritime ports in TEU

2 500 000 2 139 616 1 969 537 2 000 000 1 657 433 1 357 182 1 500 000 1 053 634 1 000 000

500 000

0 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Szczecin-Świnoujście 56 503 55 098 52 179 62 307 78 439 Gdynia 485 255 616 441 676 349 729 607 849 123 Gdańsk 511 876 685 643 928 905 1 177 623 1 212 054 Total 1 053 634 1 357 182 1 657 433 1 969 537 2 139 616

Gdańsk Gdynia Szczecin-Świnoujście Total

Source: Port of Gdańsk, 2015a; Port of Gdynia Authority S.A., 2015b; Port Szczecin- Świnoujście, 2015b.

In 2014 it exceeded 2 mln of TEU, however, only the Port of Gdańsk was able to carry more than 1 mln of TEU (for the first time in 2013). In 2014 the three main Polish maritime ports

112 carried 1.21 mln of TEU (Port of Gdańsk, 2.9% more than in 2013), 0.85 mln of TEU (Port of Gdynia, 16.4% more than in 2013), and 0.08 mln of TEU (Port of Szczecin-Świnoujście, 25.9% more than in 2013), respectively. It is worth to emphasize that the last of them, although carried the least amount of containers, denoted the most visible growth of all. In 2013 Polish ship-owners and companies managed a fleet that had 110 vessels of 3,036,065 of deadweight (DWT) and 2,084,373 of gross tonnage. Most of those vessels operate under foreign flag (see Table 11).

Table 11. Maritime transport fleet in Poland by type of ships Vessels Deadweight (DWT) Gross Tonnage (GT) Types of vessel 2012 2013 2012 2013 2012 2013 Total 110 110 3,044,819 3,036,065 2,126,771 2,084,373 Merchant ships 100 94 3,007,193 2,994,388 1,964,126 1,918,764 Of which: Dry bulk 72 64 2,650,768 2,631,379 1,653,125 1,602,429 Container ship 1 2 41,850 48,200 35,881 41,677 Ro-Ro ships 3 3 24,132 24,132 46,986 46,986 Other general cargo ships 17 19 248,749 254,841 197,008 200,928 Tankers 7 6 41,694 35,836 31,126 26,744 Ferries 7 7 37,390 37,390 162,009 162,009 Passenger ships 3 5 236 246 636 1,582 Maritime barges - 4 x 4,041 x 2,018 Of total by flag: Polish 15 22 28,281 37,861 21,382 29,138 Foreign 95 88 3,016,538 2,998,204 2,105,389 2,055,235 Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 228.

In 2012 the following ship-owners were registered: Polska Żegluga Morska (Polsteam, 69 vessels), Chipolbrok (17 universal vessels), Pol Euro Linie Żeglugowe S.A. (3 ships), Pol Levant Linie Żeglugowe Sp. z o.o. (2 Ro-Ro vessels) and Unibaltic (7 vessels). The Baltramp company from Szczecin operates 5 universal general cargo ships, and Polska Żegluga Bałtycka S.A. (Polferries) owns 3 ferries. Unity Line Sp z o.o. manages 7 ferries and Euroafrica Shipping Lines manages the fleet of 11 vessels (3 of which are ferries) (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 78). The leading Polish ship-owner is Polsteam. Polsteam is one of the biggest dry bulk ship-owners and ship operator in Europe. Its total share in this particular shipping sector is about 0.5 percent which places the company among the first ten biggest ship-owners in the world. Furthermore, having a fleet of modern dedicated tankers,

113

Polsteam is extensively involved in carriage of liquid sulphur. With those ships Polsteam is an important player in the world market of liquid sulphur (Polsteam, 2015).

Inland water transport The current inland waterways network has been shaped by the natural configuration of river and canal connections built mainly in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Inland water transport is of low importance in Poland. In 2013 there were 3655 km of inland waterways (3384 km of which are exploited ones, and only 119 km has international significance) (see Table 12).

Table 12. Navigable inland waterways in Poland in 2013 Waterways according to classes of Exploited Total regionalsignificance international waterways Ia Ib II III IV Va Vb Specification kilo- in % meter per- kilometers of s cent total Total 3,655 100. 1,08 89 1,07 39 38 55 12 3,38 92.6 Navigable regulated 2,417 66.10 7581 753 6911 116 − − 971 2,173 89.8 Canalizrivers ed parts of rivers 644 17.6 101 136 106 205 38 55 − 6201 96.3 Casals 336 9.2 168 −7 106 477 − − 15 334 99.4 Navigable lakes 258 7.1 54 − 168 27 − − 9 258 100. Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 213. 0

In the period of 2010–2013 the length of inland waterways declared as navigable decreased by 5 km. This was the result of renovation of a canal lock on Gliwicki Canal. Nevertheless, it is worth to emphasize that in comparison with other EU countries, the length of navigable Polish waterways is significant. Longer networks of waterways are only in Germany, Finland, France and the Netherlands (Central Statistical Office, 2014a, p. 35). The main inland waterways are on the rivers Odra, Wisła, Noteć and Warta. The basic river and canal network in Poland is depicted on Figure 14.

114

Figure 14. Polish inland waterway system

Source: Ecorys, 2015.

The network consists of (Woś, 2010, p. 3): 1. The Vistula (Wisła) river’s basin (Central Statistical Office, 2014a, pp. 35-36):  rivers: Biebrza, Brda, Dead Vistula, Nogat Szkarpowa, Pisa and Vistula;  canals: Augustowski, Bartnicki, Bydgoski, Elbląski, Jagielloński, Łączański and Żerański;  lakes: Ruda Woda, Bartężek, Drużno, Jeziorak, Szeląg Wielki, Ewingi, Roś, lakes on the line of Augustowski and the Elbląski canal and Mazury lake system, including lakes connected by rivers and canals, from the Lake Roś in the town of Pisz to the lake Mamry in Węgorzewo and side routs from the lake Mikołajewski to the lake Nidzkie. 2. The Oder (Odra) river’s basin:  rivers Nysa Łużycka, Noteć, Warta, Parnica, Western Oder, Eastern Oder and Regalica;

115

 canals: Gliwicki, Kędzierzyński, Ślesiński, Górnonotecki;  cuttings: Klucz-Ustowo and Parnicki;  lakes: Dąbie and Gopło. The dominant type of vessels used for inland transport is the pushing vessel. This type of fleet constitutes 87.4% of total barge fleet which in 2013 carried 72.4% of all loads. The role of dumb barges was insignificant (Central Statistical Office, 2014a, p. 44). The nominal value of Polish inland barges is mostly depreciated but operators are still more interested in their modernization then in buying new ones (see Table 13).

Table 13. Inland waterways towing fleet and passenger vessels in Poland in 2013 Tugs Pushers Passenger ships Specification power in power in power in passenger units units units kW kW kW seats Total 17 2,302 192 51,743 102 11,052 8,783 construction year: up to 1949 3 376 - x 10 1,623 1,031 1950–1969 8 1,057 37 8,500 45 5,113 4,434 1970–1979 2 160 106 29,889 11 843 705 1980–1989 4 709 44 11,542 2 158 93 1990–1999 - x 5 1,812 10 911 748 2000 and later - x - x 24 2,404 1,772 Source: Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 21.

In comparison to 2010, in 2013 the volume of transported cargo decreased by 98,000 tons (1.9%) and 262 million tkm (25.4%). In that period the biggest volume of cargo was carried in 2010 (5,142,000 tons), while in 2013 5,044,200 tons of goods were transported. In the period of 2010–2013 systematic increase in goods transported by Polish inland operators was reported. In 2013 the volume of goods carried by this transport mode equaled 2,229,200 tons, which is 44.0% more in comparison to 2010. More than a half of those goods (55.8%) were carried in international transport, which is 8.3% less than in 2012. Because of the decrease of international transport volume, an average distance of transport per 1 ton of cargo was shortened from 200 km in 2012 to 152 km in 2013. International transport export in Polish inland waterways achieved 24.9% of share (approximately 3.0% more compared to 2012). The main direction of exporting goods was Germany (95.2% of total exports of goods by inland waterways) (Central Statistical Office, 2014a, p. 49). In the structure of goods transported by Polish waterways in 2013 (similarly to previous years) the biggest share belonged to metal ores and other mining and quarrying products (48.8%) and coal (13.7%) (Central Statistical Office, 2014a, p. 50). 116

Intermodal terminals In the last decade a 75% growth could be observed in the number of intermodal terminals in Poland (see Figure 15). Those terminals belong to different companies, sometimes financially related to each other (e.g. PKP Cargo S.A., CargoSped Sp. z o.o., Euroterminal Sławków Sp. z o.o.). Beside those facilities there are also terminals owned by local operators like CLIP Logistics Sp. z o.o. in Swarzędz or Schavemaker Poland Sp. z o.o. in Kąty Wrocławskie. The development of new terminals relates mostly to three voivodeships: Wielkopolskie (Greater Poland), Śląskie (Silesian) and Pomorskie (Pomeranian) (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, pp. 98– 99).

Figure 15. Number of container terminals in Poland

40 35 35

30 28 28

25 23 20 20

0 2005-2006 2007-2008 2009-2010 2011-2012 2013

Source: Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 98.

During the last years Polish container terminals have reached the highest growth rates in Europe in terms of transshipment volume. The total volume handled in Polish ports in 2012 amounted to ca. 1.7 mln TEU (20-feet containers) showing 30% increase compared to 2011 and 243% compared to the 2009 volume (Ministry of Treasury, 2013). In Poland the container terminal network is developed by 17 companies. The biggest network (9 terminals) belongs to PKP Cargo S.A. (together with Cargosped Sp. z o.o.). The other important players on the market are: Spedcont Spedycja Polska Sp. z o.o. (5 terminals), Polzug Intermodal Polska Sp. z o.o. (4 terminals), PCC Intermodal S.A. (3 terminals), Procont (2 terminals) and Loconi Intermodal S.A. (2 terminals) (Fechner and Szyszka eds., 2014, p. 100). 117

Storage space Despite the financial crisis the storage market has grown continuously during the last years. Both in the amount of storage space and the number of storage service providers have increased, as well as in variety and quality of their offer. It is mostly caused by the necessity of reducing the consequences of long-term negligence in that area of Polish economy. The market of storage space kept several percent additional resources in 2012–2013 and is now well adapted to Polish companies’ needs and requirements. In 2012 500 thousands m2 and in 2013 300 thousands m2 of new storage space were provided (see Figure 16). The increase mentioned above was mainly caused by the investors from private sector settling new storage objects for their own needs and industrial developers building mostly built-to-suit objects and universal facilities having lease agreements signed previously by their customers (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 117). Significant growth is also related to so-called modern storage space, which can be described by the following parameters (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, pp. 119–120):  9 m of height,  at least 1 gate per each 1000 m2,  dustproof floor which endurance is 5t/m2 ,  sufficient fire-fighting system including sprinklers and fire flaps,  5-8% of office space. In 2013 there were 9.7 mln m2 of that kind of storage space in Poland (see Figure 17). Modern storage facilities are mostly built by industrial developers for hire. The share of the storage space provided by them in the total amount of storage space was 85% in 2013. The amount of storage space decreased in the recent years. This fact is probably caused by the liquidation of out-of-date storage space operated by transport service providers and its exchange for modern storage facilities which are more fitted to today logistic standards (Fechner and Szyszka eds., 2014, p. 118).

118

Figure 16. Total closed storage space and total modern storage space in Poland in thousands m2

80 70 60 50 40 69,4 70,2 71,2 73,1 30 63,6 65,9 20 6,7 7,7 8,1 8,8 9,4 10 4,5 0 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Total closed storage space in thousands of square meters Modern storage space in thousands of square meters

Source: adopted from: Fechner and Szyszka eds., 2014, pp. 117–120.

Figure 17. Total closed storage space in chosen sectors in Poland in 2007–2012 in mln m2

2012 5,6 35,5 22,1 9,9

2011 6 35,8 19,7 9,7

2010 6,7 33,1 20,1 10,3

2009 6,6 31,5 19,7 11,6

2008 6,6 28,4 18,9 12

2007 6,8 27,8 17,3 11,7

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Agriculture Industry Trade Logistics

Source: Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 119.

In 2014 the demand for storage space in Poland continued to increase. 1.87 mln m2 were hired (33% growth in a relation to 2012), 1.26 mln of which were hired as a result of new or prolonged contracts with existing tenants. The most promising was the last quarter of 2013, when the net demand for storage was 784,000 m2 and the gross demand 602,000 m2. Increase of demand observed at the end of year was mostly caused by the company Amazon, which

119 hired 324,000 m2 for its new logistic center. However, despite the vital growth of demand, a slight decrease of uninhabited space rate could be observed (at the end of 2013 it was 11.4%). The main reason of that decrease was the significant rotation of tenants. Some of them chose to leave hired facilities and moved to their owned ones. There were also some bankruptcies. Finally, new tenants on the market have most often decided to cooperate with developers when building their own storage facilities. During the last years significant growth of storage space under construction can be observed. In 2013 there were 714,000 m2 under construction, compared to the 2012 figure (220,000 m2). The reason is the high demand that influences the amount of space being under construction (On Point, 2014, p. 3). The pattern of storage facilities allocation in Poland has remained the same since decades. At the end of 2014 the total supply of industrial and storage space was 7.45 mln m2, 6.88 mln m2 (92%) of which was provided by five main regional markets: Warsaw, Górny Sląsk, Poznań, Polska Centralna and Wrocław (see Figure 18). The rest of locations in Poland can be treated only as supportive and having local meaning.

Figure 18. Density of provided storage space in Poland according to its regions

Source: On Point, 2014, p. 11.

There are growing differences in the nature of supply between the regions mentioned above. Upper Silesia, despite the logistic service providers, attracts mostly manufacturers from

120 automotive and several other industries. Poznań and Wrocław become more and more vital logistic bases for Western Europe and the place of production assigned for exports. The market of Warsaw is mostly oriented to support logistic services for the capital city agglomeration and provides headquarters for the majority of trading companies. Finally, Central Poland, which is increasingly integrating with Warsaw, constitutes a main distribution center for the companies running their businesses all over Poland (On Point, 2014, p. 11).

Legal regulations related to Polish transport and storage sector Legal regulations play an important role in the transport and storage sector. Poland, like every country, has its own set of legal regulations which have direct and substantial effect on companies’ logistics performance. However, nowadays there is no synthetic legal act related to logistic activity. In practice, depending on range of logistics services, transport mode and type of goods, companies are obliged to comply with many laws and regulations, i.e. civil code, commercial law, tax law, labor law, custom and transport polices, postal law, act of competition and consumer protection or the law of carriage of dangerous goods. It is worth to note that all of them have a huge impact on logistics efficiency and further investments decisions. This leads to the conclusion that, in the near future the government should pay a closer attention to create favorable operating conditions for logistics industry. For this reason, a comprehensive major law covering the entire logistics sector seems to be a very useful solution.

Logistics education The Polish education sector provides many ways of learning logistics. Obtaining the relevant knowledge can start in the high school or technical school, then be continued at the economical or technical university or college (bachelor or master courses as well as postgraduate studies). There are also plenty of training agencies offering different, more or less detailed logistics trainings. As the most important sector of education seems to be the higher education, Figure 19 presents the number of public and non-public universities offering logistic courses. As it can be observed, despite the number of universities and colleges offering logistics education only slightly increased in last years, the total number of such entities is relatively high which can suggest that the offer related to logistics education in Poland is relatively rich. It can be also observed that twice as much non-public universities and colleges offer logistics courses than public schools (Fechner and Szyszka eds., 2014, pp. 145-146). 121

Interesting tendencies can be also observed in the number of logistics courses offered on postgraduate studies. While in 2011/2012 the number of such courses slightly decreased because of the overall pessimism related to poor condition of Polish economy and worsened financial condition of the potential students, in 2012/2013 the number of logistic courses has explicitly grown (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, pp. 148–149) – see Figure 20. It can be assumed that in the following years that number will continue to grow as the companies in Poland develop their businesses and still look for the qualified labor force.

Figure 19. Public and non-public universities and colleges offering logistics courses in Poland in 2011–2013

Source: Fechner and Szyszka eds., 2014, p. 146.

122

Figure 20. The number of post-graduate logistics courses in Poland in 2010–2013

Source: Fechner and Szyszka, 2014, p. 149.

Inventory flow in Polish economy If it comes to inventory flow, Central Statistical Office of Poland presents on the yearly basis reports covering financial results of Polish companies, in which one can find some interesting data about the value of current assets. Those data are published with a year delay and are highly aggregated, but they can still provide some insight in the structure of inventory in Polish economy. Table 14 presents the levels of current assets and stock in Polish enterprises in 2013 and 2012 as well as their percent changes. The specification was prepared according to NACE sections of economic activity. As it can be seen, in 2013 the overall value of stock deteriorated by 2.9% in comparison to 2012 when the value of total current assets increased slightly by 0.5%. The most significant increases of stock can be observed in other service activities, financial and insurance activities, and mining and quarrying (more than 30% od decrease). At the same time the value of stock increased between 2013 and 2012 only in 7 cases – the most significant growth of their value was noticed in accommodation and catering (by 107%). It is worth to emphasize

123 that one of those seven sections noting the increase of stock value was transportation and storage section.

Table 14. Current assets and stock (in bln of PLN) and their changes (in %) in Polish companies in 2013 and 2012. 2013 2012 2013/2012 Total Total Total

current Stock current Stock current Stock Specification assets assets assets Total 978.3 251.8 973.3 259.4 0.5% -2.9% Agriculture, forestry and fishing 15.1 3.7 17.3 4.1 -12.7% -9.0% Industry 445.1 128.2 429.7 132.2 3.6% -3.0% - Mining and quarrying 31.9 4 19.7 6.0 61.9% -33.8% - Manufacturing 347.3 115 339.7 115.3 2.2% -0.3% - Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 55.6 8.4 59.9 10.0 -7.1% -16.1% - Water supply; sewerage, waste mgmt and remediation 10.3 0.9 10.4 0.8 -0.6% 10.2% Construction 87.7 21 80.9 20.1 8.4% 4.5% Trade; repair of motor vehicles 229.7 84.8 233.6 89.9 -1.7% -5.6% Transportation and storage 34.3 2 36.4 1.9 -5.8% 3.5% Accommodation and catering 3.2 0.5 3.0 0.2 7.2% 107.0% Information and communication 36.3 3.3 35.7 3.2 1.6% 4.2% Financial and insurance activities 52.3 0.3 58.0 0.5 -9.8% -38.6% Real estate activities 22.1 3.8 22.8 3.2 -2.9% 17.1% Professional, scientific and technical activities 30 2.7 29.9 2.8 0.3% -3.2% Administrative and support service activities 16.1 1 18.7 0.9 -14.0% 17.0% Other service activities 0.9 0.1 1.1 0.2 -19.4% -52.0% Source: Central Statistical Office, 2013, p. 36; Central Statistical Office, 2014, p. 4.

Unfortunately, the most recent financial data for Polish companies are accessible for 2014 and encompass only industry. In spite of that, they can be also interesting from the perspective of this report. Thus table 15 presents the value of total current assets, total stock as well as stock of finished products and goods for Polish manufacturing companies in 2014. In comparison to the end of December 2013, at the end of December 2014, the value of stock of finished products in current prices in manufacturing enterprises (keeping accounting ledgers and more than 49 employees) was by 0.9% lower. In the same period of time their share in total stock decreased from 28.4% to 27.3%. The relation of the total value of stock of

124

Table 15. Stock value in comparison to total current assets in manufacturing enterprises by sections and divisions in Poland in 2014 (in mln of PLN) Total Total Finished Sections and divisions current Goods stock products assets Total 425151.1 126287.3 34442.2 10483.0 Mining and quarrying 15139.9 4961.8 2187.9 177.5 Of which: mining of coal and lignite 6857.5 1887.7 1547.8 44.1 Manufacturing 340459.9 110730.7 31240.8 8238.9 Manufacture of food products 47974.5 15564.7 6376.0 1406.7 Manufacture of beverages 7691.0 1561.8 393.2 367.3 Manufacture of tobacco products 1955.5 1087.8 192.7 18.6 Manufacture of textiles 3119.1 1407.9 461.2 113.9 Manufacture of wearing apparel 1881.5 873.0 376.6 114.2 Manufacture of leather and related products 1533.1 674.2 201.8 39.3 Manufacture of products of wood, cork, straw and wicker 7077.4 2795.7 972.7 107.2 Manufacture of paper and paper products 10640.5 2939.3 982.9 225.6 Printing and reproduction of recorded media 3392.4 661.0 134.7 44.8 Manufacture of coke and refined petroleum products 24813.1 10858.1 4090.2 633.5 Manufacture of chemicals and chemical products 18863.4 5727.3 1984.5 528.0 Manufacture of pharmaceutical products 6938.0 2590.5 562.8 317.3 Manufacture of rubber and plastic products 25068.6 7359.6 2258.9 709.5 Manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products 17925.2 5858.9 2615.0 493.7 Manufacture of basic metals 16680.9 7169.2 2011.6 92.4 Manufacture of metal products 24657.9 8128.5 1685.8 643.3 Manufacture of computer, electronic and optical products 13015.7 3383.2 411.5 151.4 Manufacture of electrical equipment 19050.7 5790.1 1309.7 753.2 Manufacture of machinery and equipment n.e.c. 17335.4 6092.3 1086.6 301.3 Manufacture of motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers 40004.7 8928.1 1522.8 593.6 Manufacture of other transport equipment 11002.7 5275.7 234.3 129.8 Manufacture of furniture 8738.3 3237.6 1024.5 186.1 Other manufacturing 3097.1 1270.2 303.8 186.5 Repair and installation of machinery and equipment 8003.2 1496.0 47.0 81.7 Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply 59797.6 9895.1 934.8 1938.3 Water supply; sewerage, waste mgmt & remediation 9753.8 699.6 78.7 128.3 of which: Water collection, treatment and supply 2675.0 82.8 0.4 9.7 Waste collection, treatment & disposal; mater. recovery 3898.3 496.2 72.1 107.3 Source: Central Statistical Office 2015, pp. 79-80. 125

finished products to net revenues from the sale of products was 3.4% when in 2013 it was 3.5%, however if the production of food and beverages was excluded, it would stand at 3.3% (in 2013 it would be respectively 3.4%). The relation worsened, among others, in: mining of coal and lignite (from 6.0% to 7.3%), production of wearing apparel (from 10.1% to 11.2%), leather and related products (from 6.3% to 7.1%), other non-metallic mineral products (from 6.9% to 7.4%), and basic metals (from 4.4% to 4.9%). The relation turned for the better, among others, in: production of coke and refined petroleum products (from 6.2% to 4.6%), beverages (from 2.6% to 1.5%), pharmaceuticals (from 5.0% to 4.8%), computer, electronic and optical goods (from 1.5% to 1.3%), printing and reproduction of recorded media (from 1.9% to 1.7%), rubber and plastic products (from 4.1% to 4.0%), and metal products (from 3.3% to 3.2%) (Central Statistical Office 2015, pp. 79-80).

Financial flow in Polish economy The recent financial outlays of Polish companies can be found only for manufacturers. Moreover, they are significantly aggregated and don’t provide detailed insight into the costs structure, which would be interesting from the perspective of logistics. However, authors of this report have decided to present shortly the most important financial data in the scope accessible for them. In 2014, financial results of manufacturing companies (keeping accounting ledgers and more than 49 employees) decreased in comparison to the previous year. The financial result from sale of products, goods and materials, the result on financial operations, gross financial result and net financial result were lower than in 2013. As a result of intensified increase of costs of obtaining revenues from total activity than that of revenues from total activity, the cost level indicator deteriorated. Financial result on economic activity equaled 69261.1 mln of PLN, and was by 6.6% worse than in 2013. It was significantly influenced by the result on financial operations which deteriorated from 2505.7 mln of PLN to minus 1519.5 mln of PLN. The financial result from the sale of products, goods and materials decreased by 1.4%, i.e. from 69917.1 mln of PLN to 68912.0 mln of PLN. In 2014 costs of obtaining revenues from total activity were by 2.0% higher than in 2013, while the revenues from total activity grown by 1.5%, which was reflected in a decrease of cost level indicator from 94.2% to 94.6%. The decrease of this indicator was noticed in 17 divisions of industry, among others in: mining of coal and lignite, production of coke and 126 refined petroleum products, other transport equipment, textiles, electrical equipment, chemicals and chemical products, pharmaceutical goods, furniture, motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers. The increase of that indicator was observed in: electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply, manufacturing of leather and related products, printing and reproduction of recorded media, waste collection, treatment and disposal activities; materials recovery, manufacture of other non-metallic mineral products, basic metals, and metal products. From the logistics perspective data about relation between short–term liabilities and short– term dues from deliveries and services can be also interesting. That relation was also worse in 2014 than in the previous year and amounted in 86.0% versus 90.3%. Similarly to 2013, liabilities from deliveries and services exceeded the level of dues in: mining of coal and lignite, manufacturing of basic metals, coke and refined petroleum products and motor vehicles, trailers and semi-trailers (Central Statistical Office 2015, pp. 79-80).

Directions of transport development in Poland This part of work is a review of government documentation on the transport activity in Poland, focusing on the Transport Development Strategy which determines the objectives and areas of priorities for actions until 2020 and on the Implementation Document which details the Strategy and defines operational objectives and priority investments in infrastructure (Ministry of Transport, Construction and Marine Economy, 2013; Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014a).

Main assumptions and directions of development of the transport sector in Poland Transport is one of the most important sectors of the Polish economy. Active support given to its development stimulates the growth of other sectors on both national and EU levels (Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014a). The significance of transport is proven by the fact that its modernization is regarded as an important area of intervention in the national development policy. More precisely, transport is currently one of the nine interconnected sector strategies, which together form a medium and long-term strategy of the development of Poland. In this area of activity, the main actions in the coming years will focus on the improvement of transport accessibility, ensuring safety for the passengers and transported cargo and improvement of operational effectiveness. The analyzed strategy includes two major areas of intervention, on which one should concentrate in order to achieve the set objectives. These areas are: infrastructure and market.

127

Furthermore, transport development should be supported by actions aimed at transferring the burdens connected with road transport into other sectors. The fundamental objective of the Transport Development Strategy is to create a modern transportation system, i.e. a system which could be distinguished by a high degree of inter- branch integration, which would be adjusted to the needs and preferences of its users, and which would also be environmentally friendly. One has also set specific objectives, the implementation of which will determine the achievement of the strategic objectives. A list of specific objectives for each of the five transport branches is presented in Figure 21. It should be noted that all these objectives are of complementary nature, which means that none of them can be considered on an independent basis, in isolation from the other ones.

Figure 21. Strategic and specific objectives of each of the five transport branches

Source: Ministry of Transport, Construction and Marine Economy, 2013, p. 40.

An extremely important role in the new transport policy will be played by actions aimed at improving transport accessibility, which in practice should contribute to an increased social mobility and investment attractiveness of Poland in comparison to other countries. At the same time one rightly notices that the improvement of transport accessibility at the regional, national and international levels is only possible through increased infrastructural investments in all transport branches, i.e. rail, road, sea, air and inland waterway transport. Regarding the

128

European dimension one needs to further develop the Trans European Transport Network (TEN-T), whereas on the national level it is necessary to improve connections between the regional centers and the major cities in Europe, and to consolidate internal territorial cohesion, through the improvement of transportation both between the main centers of the country and smaller subregions. Bearing in mind the need for modernization and spatial distribution of the elements of the transport infrastructure, the following ten priority directions are included in the Transport Development Strategy:  intensification of multi-modal connections between Warsaw and the provincial capitals, as well as with the European network,  creation of effective transport connections between the provincial capitals and major centers in Poland and abroad,  development and integration of urban transport systems,  development of transport connections at the regional and local levels, with the inclusion of the rural areas,  intensification of connections with regions of a special socio-economic value (e.g. tourism, industry, culture, environment);  intensification of connections between the Eastern border of the country and the regions characterized by a higher dynamics of growth;  improvement of transportation between the border areas and the growth centers, and in the areas along the EU external borders, development of a cross-border network of connections,  elimination of the existing barriers in the public transport, among others through the construction of interchanges at the local and regional levels,  improvement of road safety,  reservation of areas for potential investments in infrastructure after 2020. Although the development priorities of the Transport Development Strategy provide for activities in all branches of the transport industry, in the coming years one will see a dominant role of expenditure on the implementation of projects in road transport, along with a gradual increase in the financing of the railway transport. The majority of funds allocated for the implementation of investments covered by the Implementation Document will come from three EU Funds: European Regional Development Fund, Cohesion Fund and “Connecting Europe Facility”. Allocation of funds to particular projects will be performed within the framework of two operational programs: 129

 Operational Programme Infrastructure and Environment for the years 2014–2020 with an amount of EUR 27.41 billion,  Operational Programme Eastern Poland for the years 2014–2020 with a budget amounting to EUR 2 billion.

Forecasts for the development of the carriage of goods in Poland till 2020 Forecasts for the development of transport in Poland until 2020 show a continuation of the upward trend in the carriage of goods. At the same time it should be emphasized that in particular years, in different branches of transport, the dynamics of the average annual growth of demand for freight transport may be rather unstable. One assumes that in the years 2010– 2017 the growth of demand for transport activity will be higher, compared to the years 2018– 2022 (Burnewicz, 2010). Table 14 includes detailed forecasts concerning carriage of goods for all branches of transport. The data show that over the next few years there will be a significant increase in the amount of the carried goods. In the maximum variant in 2020 as many as 2.32 billion tons of cargo will be transported with all means of transportation. According to the second variant (the pessimistic one), in 2020 the weight of the transported cargo will amount to nearly 2.27 billion tons. In this case the growth rate will be less than 20%. In terms of particular branches, the largest demand for the carriage of goods will be still covered by the road transport. Depending on the adopted variant, one will carry from 1.90 to 1.94 billion tons of cargo in 2020 with the use of the road transport. This constitutes 84% of the total cargo weight. The growth rate will be around 20%, i.e. almost the same as in the case of the entire freight transport. In this context, a relatively slight increase is expected in the second main transport branch, i.e. the rail transport. In this case, one anticipates that in 2020 the total weight of the transported cargo will amount to approximately 240 million tons, which is roughly 11% more than 10 years ago. A slightly higher growth rate is expected after 2020. One also expects an increased demand for trainload services, mainly with respect to the transport of coal, petroleum products and other chemicals and aggregates. The highest dynamics of growth will be achieved by air transport. According to the forecast, a demand for air transport services measured in tons will increase roughly by 34–49%. One also assumes that the most intensive growth will be visible after 2020, although the air transport will continue to have the smallest share in the overall cargo carriage. The inland water transport is expected to be the second most rapidly developing branch. In 2020 around 6.7–6.9 130 million tons of cargo will be transported by inland waterway transport, which in comparison to 2010 means an increase by 31–35%. One also expects a dynamic increase in the demand for sea transport services. In this case, the volume of sea transport measured by the weight of the carried goods will increase by nearly 30–34% in 2010–2020, mainly due to the development of sailing services between the European ports and an increased demand for intermodal transport services by land and sea (Burnewicz, 2010).

Table 14. Forecasts for the development of the carriage of goods in Poland till 2020 maximum variant minimum variant Increase Description [millions of tons] [millions of tons] 2020:2010 Years 2010 2020 2010 2020 Max Min Rail 217.00 244.00 217.00 238.00 12.60% 10.00% Road 1588.00 1942.00 1588.00 1901.00 22.30% 19.60% Inland water 5.10 6.90 5.10 6.70 34.90% 30.70% Pipeline 56.00 59.00 56.00 57.00 5.80% 1.70% Sea 50.00 67.00 50.00 65.00 34.40% 29.90% Air 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 48.80% 34.50% Other 0.40 0.50 0.40 0.50 21.60% 13.90% Total 1917.00 2320.00 1917.00 2268.00 21.00% 18.30% Please note: The maximum and minimum variants result from the adoption of two versions of the national economic development in the forecast – the optimistic and the pessimistic one (depending on changes in GDP). Source: Ministry of Transport, Construction and Marine Economy, 2013, p. 35.

The transport development forecast takes into account the fact that the energy efficiency of the country will improve in the analyzed period, which will be reflected in a slower pace of development of the industrial pipeline transport, mainly because of a smaller increase in the demand for fuel. In this case the growth rate will fluctuate between 2 and 6%. Forecasts for the years 2010–2020 assume a dynamic growth in the intermodal freight services. An analysis of data presented in Table 15 shows that the cargo weight in the intermodal transport will increase in the analyzed period, from 19.1 million tons in 2010 to 25–26 million tons in 2020. In the group of the eight analyzed transport technologies, the most significant ones will be: transport services by land and sea provided by foreign shipowners, as well as port containers

131 transport services by road, with the total share in the intermodal transport amounting to around 68%. The highest growth rate will be noticed in case of port containers transport by rail and road. In this sector one estimates a twofold increase in the demand for such services. On the other hand, no significant changes are expected in the demand for transport of vehicles by rail, transport of domestic containers by road and rail, and transit of containers by rail. Their percentage share in the intermodal transport will constitute only about 2%.

Table 15. Forecasts for the development of the intermodal freight in Poland till 2020

minimum maximum variant Description variant [million of [millon of tons] tons] Years 2010 2020 2010 2020 Sea-land transport of Polish shipowners 2.9 4.1 2.9 3.9 Sea-land transport provided by foreign shipowners 7.4 10.8 7.3 10.3 Port containers transport services by rail and road 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.7 Port containers transport services by road 5.0 7.2 4.9 6.9 Land containers transport services by rail and road 2.7 2.8 2.7 2.7 (Polish foreign trade) Transport of domestic containers by road and rail 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Transport of vehicles by rail 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 Transit of containers by rail 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Total amount of cargo tonnage (in some cases counted 19.1 26.4 19.0 25.2 twice)

Source: Burnewicz, 2010, p. 62.

Directions of intervention in particular branches of the transport industry, taking into consideration the priority infrastructure projects11

Road Transport Transport by road will be a key element of the Polish integrated transport system. The Transport Development Strategy emphasizes the fact that the existing road network requires significant investments because of its high level of congestion. One estimates that around 88% of the TEN-T core network will have been modernized by 2023.

11 The investment plans covered by the Implementation Document relate only to the infrastructure projects implemented in the road, rail, see, and inland waterway transport. This document does not include investments in the means of transport, safety increasing investments, purchase of means of transport, special equipment, etc. They will be included in a separate operational programme. 132

An increase in expenditures on the road transport will contribute to an improved effectiveness and safety of motor transport services. One also expects a significant reduction of congestion, particularly in the urban areas, which will be achieved thanks to the construction of bypasses and investments aimed at increasing the demand for public transport services. One expects that in 2020 the number of passenger transport services per 1 urban resident will increase from 174.5 to 226.8. In the context of the development of urban transportation, one should also take into account the need to promote low-emission and energy efficient vehicles. In the passenger transport services one will prefer means of transport that comply at least with the EURO 6 standard, as well as alternatively powered vehicles (in the first place one will implement activities for the development of the urban rail transport). One also expects a significant increase in the quality of the services provided for public transport users thanks to the implementation of modern information and telematics technologies. The concept of development of the main road network provides for the expansion of expressways. According to this concept, by the end of 2020 the length of the motorways should be around 2000 km, while the length of the expressways ca. 5300 km. A priority task will also be a modernization of sections which connect Poland with other states, within the framework of the project of the development of the Trans-European Transport Network. Figure 22 shows the target scheme of road projects to be implemented in the years 2014– 2020. The national road construction program for the years 2014–2020 emphasizes the fact that investments and modernization should contribute to an increased density of: expressways from 4.1 km/1000 km2 to 10 km/1000 km2 and motorways and expressways from 9 km/1000 km2 to 15 km/1000 km2 (Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014b). The development of the road transport also requires reconstruction of the existing roads. In this respect one intends to develop the local roads and connect them to the national and provincial road networks. For areas affected the most by freight transport bypasses are planned to direct the transit traffic away from the cities. Nine such investments, including those to be implemented in Inowrocław, Olsztyn, Jarocin and Nysa, are planned for the years 2014–2018. Within the framework of the Transport Development Strategy one also intends to purchase innovative technological solutions to increase the safety of the persons and goods during the transport and to reduce the congestion.

133

Figure 22. Road investments to be implemented in Poland in the years 2014-2020

Source: Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014a, p. 123.

As a result of the implementation of the road investments planned for 2014–2020, the average time of traveling by car between the provincial centers will be reduced on average by 33%, i.e. from 4h 20 min to 3h 40 min. Moreover, the improvement of road infrastructure should increase the safety of the road users. In this respect, one has set two main targets: in 2020, compared to 2010, the number of road deaths should be reduced by at least 50%, whereas the number of persons seriously injured should be reduced by 40%. A list of infrastructure investments in road transport includes 42 projects of the total value of PLN 193,103.97 mln. The tasks undertaken in this area will mainly (in 95%) focus on the construction and redevelopment of the TEN-T network routes. Fourteen investment projects will be implemented within the framework of the core network, whereas the other twenty six projects within the framework of the comprehensive network. The General Directorate for National Roads and Motorways will be the beneficiary of these projects. Table 16 includes the major road projects.

134

Table 16. List of the largest investments in road infrastructure

Total cost Rank Description Funds [PLN in millions] 1 The S7 Road – a string Gdańsk – Warszawa 14 350.90 EU

2 The S2/A2 Road – a string Warszawa – Siedlce 10 206.80 EU/others

3 The S7 Road – a string Warszawa – Kraków 9 860.40 EU

4 The S19 Road – a string Białystok – Lublin 9 604.90 EU

5 The S19 Road – a string Rzeszów – gr. Państwa 8 880.40 EU

6 The S6 Road – a string Słupsk – Gdańsk 8 733.90 EU

7 The A1 Road – a string Tuszyn – Pyrzowice 7 653.77 EU/others

8 The S19 Road - a string of Lublin – Rzeszów 6 848.70 EU

9 The S74 Road – a string Kielce – Nisko 6 147.10 EU

10 The S17 Road – a string Lublin – Hrebenne 5 720.50 EU Source: Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014a, p. 89–91.

Railway Transport The increased competitiveness of the rail transport will be achieved by the implementation of a variety of investment projects. One assumes that around 86% of the passenger network and 90% of freight network will have been modernized within the TEN-T by the end of 2023. Factors generating the largest demand for rail passenger services are: travel time, comfort of travelling and safety standards. By the end of 2030 the average time of traveling between the provincial capitals will have been reduced by 33%, which gives the passengers an average time saving of about 1 h 50 min. This goal requires implementation of a number of investments (linear and point ones) in the infrastructure and in the means of transport. In the latter case, the existing passenger trains are planned to be modernized and new ones are planned to be purchased. In the next few years decision will be made about the development of a high-speed rail network (over 200 km/h). Figure 23 presents a network of high-speed connections between the largest cities of Poland together with the expected time of the journey. It will be based on the so-called “Y” line connecting Wrocław and Poznań with Warsaw, running through Łódź and Kalisz.

135

Figure 23. Diagram of the high-speed networks in 2020 and travel time (vision)

Source: Minister of Infrastructure, 2008, p. 18.

One also plans to increase the share of rail transport services in the public transport services and inter-agglomeration connections. In practice, this ensues from the need to connect the largest cities with modern railway lines. It is predicted that in 2020 all provincial centers will be connected by railway lines, where the average speed of passenger trains will be at least 100 km/h. The most important project is to connect the major urban centers with the lines Szczecin–Poznań–Wrocław, Poznań–Wrocław and Warsaw–Kielce. As far as freight transport is concerned, the main changes will involve development and modernization of the means of transport and railway infrastructure. At first, one will implement a freight transport monitoring system. There are also plans to improve the freight car service (including application of technologies enabling one to load and unload them in a shorter time). Initiatives supporting the intermodal transport, including investments in the means of transport connected with the provision of this kind of services, are considered to be particularly important in terms of development of this branch of transport. On the one hand, the undertaken activities will focus on increasing the attractiveness of the intermodal offer, mainly by the development of door-to-door services provided in compliance with the just in time rule. On the other hand, such activities will contribute to an increased competitiveness of 136 the sea ports. In this regard, the need to cofinance the marine transshipment terminals is also underlines, because their prices offered to the customers are rather unattractive due the high costs of the service activities, increased additionally by the profit margin. A particular attention in the context of improving the competitiveness of rail transport should be given to the modernization of existing and to-be-constructed railway lines, as well as to the revitalization activities. The situation is quite similar as far as the infrastructure of railway stations and platforms is concerned. Investments in the area of automatics and telecommunications will play a crucial role in the development of this branch. This applies in particular to the European Rail Traffic Management System. A gradual implementation of the system into the main railway lines will contribute to the interoperability of rail transport in Europe, improvement of the safety of the train traffic and increased train speed. Figure 24 presents a general map of rail projects to be implemented in the years 2014–2020, the purpose of which is to “unblock the bottleneck of the rail”.

Figure 24. Rail investments to be implemented in the years 2014–2020

Source: Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014a, p. 122. In this regard, activities needs to be undertaken aiming on the one hand at achieving a steady speed of trains over long distances, and on the other hand at allowing the passage of long trains of the axle load of 221 Kn.

137

Table 17. The largest investments in rail infrastructure Total cost Rank Description [PLN in Funds millions] Construction of a new railway line Podłęże – Szczyrzyc – 1 Tymbark/Mszana Dolna and modernization of the existing 6 000.00 EU railway line No 104 Chabówka – Nowy Sącz. Works on the main passenger train routes (E 30 and E 65) in the 2 area of Silesia, stage I: line E 65 section Będzin – Katowice – 4 100.00 EU Tychy – Czechowice Dziedzice – Zebrzydowice. Works on the railway line No 7 Warszawa Wschodnia 3 Osobowa-Dorohusk section: Warsaw – Otwock – Dęblin – 3 500.00 EU Lublin. Works on the railway line E 75 section: Sadowne – Białystok 4 with additional works on the section Warsaw Rembertów – 3 000.00 EU Sadowne. Works on the railway line E 20 section: Warsaw - Poznań - 5 2 600.00 EU additional works on the section: Sochaczew – Swarzędz Works on the railway line E 75 section: Białystok – Suwałki – 6 2 500.00 EU Trakiszki (state border) Unblocking the Łódź Railway Junction (TEN-T), stage II, 7 2 300.00 EU section Łódź Fabryczna – Łódź Kaliska/Łódź Żabieniec 8 Construction of new railway line Modlin – Płock 1 800.00 EU Works on the railway line E 30 section Kraków Główny 9 Towarowy – Rudzice, along with extension of agglomeration 1 700.00 EU line railway tracks Construction of a railway connection between MPL „Katowice” 10 in Pyrzowicach with the Upper Silesian agglomeration, section 1 600.00 EU Katowice – Pyrzowice Source: Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014a, p. 81–88.

A list of rail investments to be implemented in the years 2014–2020 includes 62 projects of national importance of a total value of PLN 54 595.58 mln and 12 projects of macro-regional importance of a total value of PLN 2 174.66 mln. A majority of the planned investments concerns modernization and restoration of railway lines belonging to the TEN-T network. It is worth mentioning that only in five of these cases a construction of completely new railways are planned. A good example is the plan to build a railway line between Pyrzowice airport and Katowice city in 2020. PKP Polskie Linie Kolejowe S.A will be the beneficiary of all these projects. Table 17 shows a list of 10 main railway projects of national importance.

138

Air Transport Air transport will constitute an important element of the integrated transport system in Poland. Nevertheless, it needs to be noted that because of the already implemented investments, mainly during the organization of the 2012 UEFA European Championship, the financial support for the air transport projects in the coming years will be limited. The main efforts will focus on the improvement of the air traffic safety and further development of the airport infrastructure and to increase the airport capacity by 2030 up to 80–85 million passengers a year. This ensues mainly from the forecasts of a huge increase in the passenger traffic, also in the domestic travel sector. The implementation of initiatives connected with the Single European Sky is also planned, which would include airports in the intermodal connection network. In this scope, the purchase of modern equipment is planned for handling services, in order to create a domestic fleet of medium-sized cargo aircrafts. In the context of the above challenges, it should be noted that in order to increase the share of the air transport in the intermodal transport, airports need to be integrated into the network of motorways and expressways. Furthermore, all international airports are planned to be connected with railway stations. The point is to enable all international passengers to continue their journey in a comfortable and quick manner. The issue of adjusting the infrastructure of regional ports to the requirements of logistics services is becoming an important challenge, too. Representatives of the transport, freight and logistics industry underline an urgent need for the introduction of new solutions which would allow them to further optimize the airfreight transport time. The role of modern cargo warehouses, with a direct access to the aircraft unloading zone, seems to be of particular importance here (Dominik and Świtała, 2014).

Maritime Transport Sea transport is an important element of the national transport system, which should allow one to increase the share of the Polish transport in foreign trade services. Currently, in the global trading system almost 80% of cargo is transported by sea, while in Poland it is only 15% (Fechner and Szyszka, 2014; Central Statistical Office, 2014b). Among the measures that need to be taken to increase the share of the sea transport in the international transport is the development of port infrastructure and increased commercial activity of sea ports. The development of the port infrastructure requires the following measures:  extension of the approach fairways (including their deepening),

139

 construction and modernization of the transport infrastructure which connects ports with service buildings to increase their transport accessibility,  construction and development of terminals for strategic raw material handling (coal, petroleum, LNG) in the largest facilities of this kind. Strengthening of the economic function of the ports requires diversification of their commercial offer, followed by the customization of their services. It is also important to increase the share of sea ports in intermodal freight services. This ensues from the fact that ports with their access to three transport branches should serve as multimodal logistics hubs in the existing transport network.

Table 18. The largest investments in maritime infrastructure

Total cost Rank Description [PLN in Funds millions] Modernization of the fairway Świnoujście- EU, national 1 1 384.98 Szczecin to a target depth of 12.5m funds Implementation of the Tricity Agglomeration EU, national 2 1 100.00 Northern Bypass (multimodal project) funds Improvement of the infrastructure of rail access to 3 800.00 EU the Port of Gdańsk (multimodal project) Modernization of breakwater constructions in the EU, national 4 660.00 Northern Port in Gdynia funds Improvement of rail access to the sea port in 5 650.00 EU Gdynia (multimodal project) Redevelopment of the Southern port access in EU, national 6 600.00 Gdynia funds Construction of a port of refuge for ships in distress and ships that may cause ecological EU, national 7 480.00 disaster, along with breakwater infrastructure and funds overflow dam (Northern Port of Gdańsk) Improvement of rail access to the sea port in 8 463.00 EU Szczecin and Świnoujście (multimodal project) Works on an alternative transport route Bydgoszcz 9 367.00 EU – Tricity (multimodal project) Construction of a deepwater berth in the external EU, national 10 300.00 port in Świnoujście (multimodal project) funds

Source: Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014a, p. 91–94.

A list of sea transport projects includes 50 infrastructure investments of the total amount of PLN 11 450.28 mln. It should be emphasized that in the years 2014–2022 the focus will be on multimodal projects. As many as 31 investments of this type have been planned in the 140

Implementation Document. Table 18 shows the largest projects, of which six are multimodal projects. The beneficiaries of the projects will be the Port Authorities of the Ports of Gdańsk, Gdynia, Szczecin and Świnoujście, Municipal Port Authorities, Maritime Authorities, Maritime Search and Rescue Service SAR, seaside communes and railway infrastructure managers. In the context of the expected changes, the expansion of the existing fleet is planned by purchasing specialized ships. In particular, the purchase of liquefied gas carriers is intended and the completion of the construction of the LNG terminal in Świnoujście is planned. As in the case of the remaining sectors of transport, the traffic management and control systems will be also modernized and developed.

Inland waterway transport Despite being the cheapest and the most environmentally friendly solution, inland waterway transport will not play a significant role in the transport system in Poland. A fundamental barrier to the development of this branch of transport is the poor condition of the river system, which prevents waterway transport over longer distances. The Transport Development Strategy shows that the Oder River remains the only river route significant in terms of transport, as it constitutes an integral part of the Central European Transport Corridor connecting the Scandinavian countries with Central Europe, the Italian Peninsula and the Balkans. Therefore, development of the inland water transport will mainly involve modernization of the Oder River and its possible connection with international routes. The purpose of the investments undertaken in this area is to create a continuous river route stretching from Gliwice to the mouth of the Oder River, of the parameters of at least the 3rd class waterway. Among other directions of interventions, one should mention the following:  improvement of the navigation conditions of the rivers,  modernization of the infrastructure of waterways of tourist attractiveness,  increasing the access to sea ports through inland waterways,  adjustment of the inland waterway transport to the EU requirements,  promotion of environmentally friendly modes of freight transport for distances over 300 km,  implementation of the River Information System, which will improve the effectiveness of information on waterways in sections of international significance.

141

A list of infrastructure projects includes 25 investments of the total amount of almost PLN 4 billion. Table 19 includes information on the implementation of ten main projects. The beneficiaries of the investments in the inland waterway transport will be: the Regional Water Management Boards in Wrocław, Szczecin, Gliwice, Gdańsk, Kraków and Poznań and the Inland Navigation Office in Szczecin.

Table 19. The largest investments in inland waterway infrastructure

Total cost Rank Description [PLN in Funds millions] Modernization of the Gliwice Channel – the sailing route and 1 600.00 EU the shore protection Repair and modernization of the control construction on the 2 free-flowing Oder River waters –reconstruction and 509.00 EU modernization of the control construction Construction of the Niepołomice barrage on the upper section 3 500.00 EU of the Vistula River Modernization of hydro-engineering structures on the 4 238.00 EU channeled waterway of the lower section of the Noteć River Modernization of the Gliwice Channel – equipment and 5 200.00 EU facilities functionally associated with the sailing channel Modernization of the weirs on the Oder River in selected 6 200.00 EU sections Repair and modernization of the control construction on the 7 190.00 EU border section of the Oder River Modernization works on the border section of the Oder River 8 176.80 EU for ice –breaking purposes in winter Revitalization of the sailing route, the Bydgoszcz Channel and 9 the channeled lower section of the Noteć River to the 174.00 EU parameters of the 2nd class waterway Construction of a barrage on the Vistula River to the South of 10 170.00 EU Włocławek Source: Ministry of Infrastructure and Development (2014a, p. 94–96).

Intermodal Transport As already emphasized on many occasions, particular attention in the national transport policy is given to the role played by the intermodal transport in the further development of sea and railway transport. The intensification of activities in this area will also be crucial for the implementation of the goals of sustainable transport. The growth rate will vary in this case, too, depending on the adopted directions of interventions. In the first place, one should highlight the need to create conditions that would

142 support the development of the intermodal transport in the domestic transport service market. At the same time, any changes in this scope should be of a systemic nature and should not only refer to the technical and organizational aspects of the service provision, but should also take into consideration the legal and financial issues. For example: one of the ideas is to amend the provisions of law, which should enable the reduction of charges for the use of the railway infrastructure. Generally speaking, the new formal and legal frameworks should contribute to an improved standard of intermodal services, including the safety of the carried goods, with a simultaneous reduction of the servicing costs. The main elements of the transport system contributing to an increased demand for intermodal services are:  terminals and logistics centers which build a network of transshipment hubs,  network of railway lines with elevated gauge adjusted to low-height train sets,  telematic and satellite systems allowing for a better control of the transport processes. The results of research on the directions and intensity of freight flows in Poland indicate an urgent need for the implementation of projects contributing to the extension of the existing network of transshipment points. An analysis of the situation shows that in the next few years the share of the weight of the intermodal transport cargo in the railway transport will double. To cover the entire country with intermodal transport at least 30 new railway terminals and 6–8 new regional logistics centers should be opened near large urban agglomerations. The activities aiming at inter-branch integration will mainly focus on the development of multimodal platforms within the framework of the TEN-T network, designed for handling cargo transported with the use of at least two means of transport. In accordance with the above forecasts, one will prefer investments in sea port terminals and railroad terminals implemented within the framework of the TEN-T network. In the current budget period, one plans to develop and launch at least 21 multimodal platforms (Figure 25), including 10 platforms near large urban centers in the TEN-T core network and 11 platforms in the TEN-T comprehensive network.

143

Figure 25. General map of locations of intermodal platforms

Source: Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014a, p. 123.

The Polish logistic systems and its development strategy from the perspective of V4 group Poland is one of the most intensively growing and largest economies within the European Union. As a country with strong historical and economic relations to other states from Central Europe, it is also a member of V4 group since 1991. Poland avoided economic recession during the last financial crisis because of a weaker influence of exports on total GDP, bigger domestic demand and consumption. A very important role in Polish economy is played by small and medium enterprises, which create an important share of GDP and make Polish economy more flexible when responding to larger global economic changes. The interconnection of economies within the V4 group is traditionally strong. Poland and Slovakia are the third and the second most important importers of Czech goods. Similarly, the Czech Republic is the second most important trade partner for both Poland and Slovakia. It is worth to notice, that trade with Poland is determined by a high percentage of machine goods and a growing number of agricultural products (Špok et al., 2012). As the members of V4 attempt to develop a coherent strategy of logistics system for the whole group, Poland joined these efforts. As the first part of this report indicates, Poland, because of its convenient localization, highly modernizing infrastructure and continuously growing economy, is an attractive logistic partner for other members of V4 group.

144

Transport is the most important element of logistic system in Poland as well as one of the most important sectors of its economy. As our report indicates, its development was very intensive during last years and it stimulates the growth of other sectors on both national and international levels. Thus it can be also treated as a crucial growth driver of the V4 region economy. The total carriage between Poland and other V4 countries equaled almost 20% all transported mass (19.2% for imports and 19.7% for exports). The main part of that carriage takes place between Poland and the Czech Republic (Central Statistical Office, 2014b, p. 54). The main role in Polish transport system is played by road carriage (second largest road freight transport industry in Europe). Its infrastructure and equipment is constantly developing. Poland is also an important part of Trans-European Transport (TEN-T) Networks system being a member of its two corridors: North Sea-Baltic Core Network and Baltic- Adriatic Core Network. It is expected that the second one will provide better access to Baltic and Adriatic seaports for the economic centers in Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia being another important linkage between those V4 countries. The second most important Polish transport mode from V4 group perspective is rail, although during last years the share of that transport in the carriage of goods in Poland was systematically decreasing. Because the volume of goods carried by rail in ton-kilometers places Poland on the second place among the EU-27 countries and on the first place in the V4 group, it should be treated as an important part of V4 logistic system and be carefully concerned when developing its logistic strategy. Besides of road and rail linkages in the Polish logistic network described above, there are also nodes vital for V4 logistics, namely warehouses and terminals. In the last decade a 75% growth could be observed in the number of intermodal terminals in Poland, which are crucial elements in the international logistics. It is worth to remind, that Polish container terminals have reached the highest growth rates in Europe in terms of trans-shipment volume. Also the regular storage space in Poland increased 3.6 times in a period between the first quarter of 2005 and the first quarter of 2010. In the analyzed period, the warehouse market in Poland grew faster than in other countries of Central and Eastern Europe, which is connected, among others, with an advantageous geopolitical location of Poland. The increased number of terminals and regular storage facilities as well as enhanced variety and quality of storage services offered by Polish companies should be concerned as another significant driving wheel of Poland’s cooperation with other V4 countries in the area of logistics. Because of the significance of transport as a part of Polish logistic system its modernization is regarded as an important area of intervention in the national development policy. Transport is 145 currently one of the nine interconnected sector strategies, which together form a medium and long-term strategy of the development of Poland. It is worth to point out that the main actions in the following years related to transport will focus on the increase of its accessibility, ensuring safety for the passengers and transported cargo, and improvement of operational effectiveness. Those main directions of Polish transport system development will inevitably affect the V4 logistic operations. In our report we have mentioned ten major directions of intervention in the Polish transport system till 2020. Some of them seem to have vital possible impact on V4 logistic system, namely:  intensification of multi-modal connections between Warsaw and the provincial capitals, as well as with the European network,  creation of effective transport connections between the provincial capitals and major centers in Poland and abroad,  improvement of transportation between the border areas and the growth centers, and in the areas along the EU external borders, development of a cross-border network of connections,  improvement of road safety. It can be observed, that the further development of Transeuropean network, which constitutes the main axis being a foundation of V4 transport system is one of the main priorities of the Polish transport strategy for the following years. Such a network will also significantly increase the internal coherence of V4 group. An increase in expenditures on the Polish road transport will contribute to an improved effectiveness and safety of motor transport services and significant reduction of congestion. One estimates that around 88% of the TEN-T core network will have been modernized by 2023. The further development of Polish high-speed network will result in the compression of time and the improved quality of logistic service addressed to the cargo flow between Poland and other V4 countries. The main directions of Polish rail transport system are also very important from the V4 perspective. Improving the competitiveness of that transport by the modernization of the existing and construction of new railway lines, railway stations and platforms as well as automatic and telecommunication solutions should enhance the quality of rail service of V4 partners. This applies in particular to the European Rail Traffic Management System. A gradual implementation of the system into the main railway lines will contribute to the interoperability of rail transport, improvement of its safety and increased train speed between Poland and V4 countries. 146

The activities related to the intermodal connections enhancement will be focused on the development of multi-modal terminals within the framework of TEN-T network. It can result in the improvement of the intermodal connections between V4 countries. Improved transport accessibility should contribute to an increased social mobility and investment attractiveness of Poland from the perspective of its V4 partners. Although in the Polish transport development strategy till 2020 there can be observed multiple important aspects and activities positively affecting V4 cooperation in the area of logistics, there are no explicit linkages between that strategy and similar plans of other V4 countries. Moreover, there is no coherent logistics strategy for Poland. If there are serious plans connected to the development of the coherent V4 logistics system in the future, those severe gaps should be fulfilled. This effort can be highly beneficial, because fulfilling those gaps and enhancing the coherence of V4 logistic system will improve competitiveness of the V4 group as a whole from the perspective of global economy.

Bibliography Bueker T., 2013, Map of Polish Railway Network, 7 June 2013 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Burnewicz J., 2010, Forecasts for the development of transport in Poland until 2030, Ministry of Infrastructure, Warsaw. Central Statistical Office, 2013, Financial Results of Economic Entities in 2012, Warsaw. Central Statistical Office, 2014, Financial Results of Economic Entities in 2013, Warsaw. Central Statistical Office, 2014, Transport – activity results in 2013, Warsaw. Central Statistical Office, 2015, Poland – Macroeconomic Indicators, 02 October 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Central Statistical Office, 2015, Outlays and Results in Industry in 2014. Warsaw. Dominik M., Świtała M., 2014, The Activity of Katowice Airport in Users Opinion, “Logistyka”, no. 4. Economic Policy Reforms 2011: Going For Growth. OECD Publishing 2011. Ecorys: Ecorys Assists Poland in Upgrading Inland Waterways, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015].

147

Europe Airports: Airports in Poland, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. European Commission: Infrastructure - TEN-T - Connecting Europe. Baltic-Adriatic Core Network Corridor, 10 March 2015 at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Eurostat: Road Freight Transport Statistics, March 10, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Fechner I. and, Szyszka G. (eds.), 2014, Logistics in Poland 2013, Institute of Logistics and Warehousing, Poznań. Fraunhofer: Top 100 in European Transport and Logistics Services 2013/2014, 2015 [online]. Available at: < http://www.scs.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/scs/de/dokumente/studien/TOP100_Executive_Su mmary_20132014.pdf> [Accessed 12 October 2015]. GDDKiA: The National Traffic Management System, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. GDDKiA: The Network of State Roads in Poland], 2 January 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Central Statistical Office, 2014, Inland waterways transport in Poland in 2010-2013, Warsaw. Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014, Implementation Document to the Transport Development Strategy until 2020 (with a prospect until 2030)], Warsaw. Ministry of Infrastructure and Development, 2014, Programme of construction of the national roads for the years 2014-2020 (project), Warsaw. Ministry of Infrastructure, 2008, Programme of construction and introduction of a high-speed rail network in Poland], Warsaw. Ministry of Transport, Construction and Marine Economy, 2013, Transport Development Strategy until 2020 (with a prospect until 2030), Warsaw. Ministry of Treasury: Container Terminals in Poland – A New European Trade Hub?, 28 August 2013 [online]. Available at: [Accessed: 12 October 2015].

148

Orenstein M. A.: Six Markets to Watch: Poland. From Tragedy to Triumph, 24 January 2014 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. PKP Group: Companies of PKP Group, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Polsteam: Company, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Port of Gdańsk: Cargo statistics, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Port of Gdańsk: General Info – Location, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Port of Gdynia Authority S.A.: Basic Data, 24 June 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 Ocober 2015]. Port of Gdynia Authority S.A.: Statistics, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Port Szczecin-Świnoujście: History of Ports, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015].calendar. Port Szczecin-Świnoujście: Statistics, 2015 [online]. Available at: < http://www.port.szczecin.pl/pl/porty/statystyki/przeladunki-w-roku-2015 http://www.port.szczecin.pl/en/ports/statistics/containers> [Accessed 12 October 2015]. PwC: Milowy krok w zaledwie kilka lat. PwC ocenia polskie drogi, 22 October 2013 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Storage space market in Poland in 2014. On Point report, 2014. Skyscrapercity: Statistics of construction of motorways and expressways, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. Špok R., Kříž E., Antalóczy A., Sass M., Toporowski P., Frank K., 2012, V4 Trade and FDI Observer, ICEG European Center, Budapest. The World Bank: Country Score Card: Poland 2007, 2015 [online]. Available at [Accessed 12 October 2015].

149

The World Bank: Country Score Card: Poland 2014, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. The World Bank: Global Rankings 2014, 2015 [online]. Available at: [Accessed 12 October 2015]. World in 2050. The BRICs and beyond: prospects, challenges and opportunities. PwC Economics, January 2013. Woś K., 2010, Development Trends for Inland Waterways in Poland. Szczecin.

150

IV. SLOVAKIA

Iveta Kubasáková (University of Žilina), Ivana Šimková (University of Žilina) and Jozef Gnap (University of Žilina)

Introduction The annual increase in Slovakia’s GDP showed a strong upward trend from 1.4% in 2000 to 10.5% in 2007. As a result of the economic crisis there was a decrease of 4.9% in 2009. In the last years, the GDP has grown again, by 4.4% in 2010 and 3.2% in 2011. The Slovak economy shows above-average growth in terms of GDP in the current conditions of economic situation in the EU. Looking at the analysis of share in the total GDP by regions, the largest share of GDP has Bratislava region and the lowest one Prešov Region.

The infrastructure of Slovak transport

The organization of railway transport (passengers, goods) In 2012, the national railway company of Slovakia carried out about 97% performances in public interest. The remaining 3% were carried out by the private carrier RegioJet SK. Both carriers have concluded the transport contracts in the public interest with the state until the end of 2019. The total volume of train performance financed under these contracts is 30.3 million of train kilometers per year; the state spends 205 million EUR on it. The freight rail transport is fully liberalized and is not subsidized in Slovakia. The national railway cargo carrier (ZSSK CARGO, 100% owner of the country) and 31 other freight carriers operate on the market. The vast majority of ZSSK CARGO performance is oriented on metallurgical segments (iron ore, coal and metals).

The organization of water transport During the years 2001 to 2012, 63 business licenses were issued in public freight and passenger water transport, also in domestic as well as international waterways. They mostly operate with 1-2 freight vessels. Legal persons operate rarely in freight transport; only 11 carriers operate in public passenger transport exclusively on national waterways. The largest carrier is Slovak Shipping and Ports. It deals not only with inland water transport, but has in its portfolio a full range of port services in ports Bratislava and Komárno, forwarding services and repairs, and reconstruction and shipbuilding. It provides logistics 151 services related to transport of goods of all kinds on the Danube and on the entire network of European waterways between the North Sea and the Black Sea.

The organization of road transport The development of performance has increasing trend in road freight transport by 2008, except of two slight decreases in 2001 and 2006. That is probably the result of the division of transport work between all modes of freight transport. Two major growth performances were recorded: in 2005, caused by Slovakia’s joining the European Union and in 2007 when two major car manufacturers (PSA and KIA) started their production in Slovakia. In 2009 and 2010, the development of performance was regressive mainly due to the global economic crisis and in 2010 it reflected the consequences of the introduction of tolls. In 2011 an increasing trend in the performance of road freight transport could be observed again. The development of the overall performance of road freight transport is dependent on the development of performance of international road freight transport, because the performance of national road freight transport is approximately on the same level. Considering the impact of other variables, shipping manifests itself mainly on performance of international road haulage. From the components of the international road freight transport, import has the most effect on the other. Similar progress has the export, with this indicator is shown increases in periods when started an operation of foreign investors (in 2005 Samsung, in 2007 PSA). Other performance developments related to export are influenced by the evolution of economic indicators in Slovakia and in the European Union. The volume of traffic recorded the largest increase after accession of Slovakia to the EU was directed to third countries. Effects of the global economic crisis are reflected in the delay of approximately one year.

152

Table 1. Performance of road freight transport per tkm 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Transport performan 14 34 13 79 14 92 16 85 18 51 22 55 22 11 27 05 29 09 27 48 27 41 29 04 ce (mil. 0 9 9 9 7 0 4 0 4 4 1 5 tkm) Internatio 11 13 16 16 21 22 21 22 24 nal 9 284 8 481 9 909 613 082 923 896 425 768 936 190 116 transport From these Import 3 109 2 700 3 047 3 703 3 783 4 452 4 362 5 661 5 848 4 650 5 377 6 013 Export 3 920 3734 4 371 5148 5 163 6 498 5 725 7 243 6 929 6 593 6 863 7 446 Transport in third countries 10 10 and 2 255 2 047 2 491 2 762 4 136 5 973 6 809 8 521 9 991 9 949 693 657 cabotage in foreign countries National 5 056 5 318 5 020 5 246 5 434 5 627 5 218 5 625 6 326 5 548 5 221 4 929 transport According to purpose Other 11 11 12 14 16 20 20 25 26 25 26 28 purposes 564 165 474 383 106 236 017 019 881 740 042 001 Own 044 2 776 2 634 2 455 2 476 2 410 2 314 2 097 2 031 2 213 1 744 1 369 purposes Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1.

Table 2. Traffic performance IAD (mn passengerkm) 1995 2000 2005 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Individual car traffic 17 977 23 929 25 824 25 994 26 395 26 420 26 879 87 Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1.

153

Table 3. Performance of rail freight transport 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Transport of goods 54 17 53 58 49 86 50 52 50 44 49 31 52 44 51 81 47 91 37 60 44 32 43 71 in total 7 8 3 1 5 0 9 3 0 3 7 1 (thousand t) from transport of goods the transport operators with 20 or more employees Transport of goods 54 17 53 58 49 86 50 52 49 75 47 74 50 05 49 89 45 64 35 64 40 10 40 20 in total 7 8 3 1 6 5 5 0 3 7 0 3 (thousand t) Internatio nal 42 30 42 27 39 42 42 16 42 51 40 84 43 67 43 05 39 42 31 09 3517 35 24 transport 0 1 5 2 4 1 1 5 5 6 5 4 in total From these 18 52 18 79 17 58 18 56 18 90 17 82 18 45 19 28 17 05 14 61 16 34 15 68 Import 5 5 3 1 3 5 4 7 1 1 6 3 14 74 14 34 12 51 13 02 12 71 11 68 12 20 11 65 10 37 10 21 Export 8 856 9 634 9 6 5 3 9 6 4 2 8 5 10 57 10 89 11 33 13 01 12 11 11 99 Transit 9 026 9 130 9 327 7 629 9 195 9 346 8 2 0 3 6 6 National 11 87 11 31 10 43 8 359 7 242 6 904 6 384 6 835 6 218 4 551 4 925 959 transport 7 7 8 Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1.

Table 4. Transport volume of intermodal transport in 2000–2011 (thousan 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 201 201 d ton) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 Real 1 1 1 2 1 2 transport 565 633 757 855 952 631 256 336 811 280 986 780 volume Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1.

Table 5. Quantity of goods transported by air freight transport in tons 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Transport of goods 3 5 2 7 12 17 20 22 in total (t) 937.75 595.39 412.00 470.49 328.67 960.14 750.00 725.71 International 3 5 2 7 12 17 20 22 transport 909.54 570.09 399.72 465.13 321.12 959.22 749.88 725.48 National transport 28.216 25.306 12.280 5.356 7.553 0.917 0.125 Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1.

154

Rail freight transport The performance development of rail freight had the same course and ranged between 48 million and 54 million tons of goods transported per year in the period 2000–2008. The stable economic situation in the country and plenty of transported materials and products influence this development, especially with regard to companies with railway sidings (car, power plants, iron-foundries etc.). In 2009, the production in the mentioned sectors declined due to the global economic crisis, which led to a decline of nearly 30% of the performance in rail freight transport (compared to the level of 2000). In 2010, after overcoming the global economic crisis, the performance again raised by 18% thanks to the influence of industry and production and then it remained at almost the same level in 2011. International freight transport clearly prevails over national rail freight transport. The performance development of these transport modes show that the international freight transport is the main part of the total rail freight transport and the development of its performance is the same as the development of the total performance of rail freight transport. The fact that import outweighed export is also reflected in the allocation of performance in international rail freight transport where the import is main component. The development of performance related to the import is virtually the same as the development of the total performance of rail freight transport. The development of performance related to export has more or less downward trend. The performance development of transit transport grew up to 2006 and in the period 2006–2008, the performance of transit transport was higher than for exports. From 2009 to 2011, the transit performance fell below the standard of performance related to export because of the economic crisis once; the total performance also decreased in the same period.

Intermodal transport In last years, there has been a marked increase of combined transport in Slovakia as well as in other European countries. The trend development of combined transport is described in the in following pages (development of intermodal transport). During a decade after the year 2000 it has multiplied by about 6 times.

Air transport The average annual volume of transported goods was around 11.7 thousand tons in the last eight years at six international public airports of the Slovakia. Behind this average value there is a significant, almost six times increase between 2005 and 2012. 155

The M.R. Stefanik Bratislava Airport has an average proportion of more than 93% of the transported cargo since 2005, and has a leading position in terms of redistribution of freight transport, too. During the last eight years about 4% of the goods were transported in the Košice airport and 2% from Poprad-Tatry Airport. The rest was transported from Žilina, Piešťany and Sliač airports. The average annual number of transported passengers was around 2.145 millions in the last eight years at the six international public airports of Slovakia.

Figure 1. The network of road infrastructure in the Slovak Republic of the TEN-T

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Figure 2. The network of rail infrastructure in the Slovak Republic of the TEN-T

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1.

156

Development of the transport infrastructure The priority for the Slovak Republic is the creation of reliable and well connected transport network that would put together the main economic centers of Bratislava and Košice with other regions. The emphasis is placed on the functionality of the transport system and its integration into European transport structures and reduces the negative effects of transport on the environment. Projections of the development road traffic in Slovakia for the year 2020 are to ensure:  Quality, available and integrated transport infrastructure,  Competitiveness of transport services,  Transport acceptability for users,  Environmentally friendly, energy-efficient and safe transport, which will protect the environment, will be energy efficient with minimal emissions; will ensure safety and reduce traffic accidents with fatal consequences.

Roads The total length of the road network was 17 737 397 km in 2000, including highways, motorway feeder roads, expressways and first to third class roads. Since 2001 the road network development showed a slight upward trend until now; in 2012, the total length of the road network was 18 044 022 km that is an increase of 1.73% compared to 2000. Behind this increase there is a structural change in the network.

157

Table 6. Quantity of goods transported by air freight transport in tons Length of Highways Expressways 1st 2nd 3rd highways, + + Local Year class class class expressways, 1st highways expressways roads roads roads roads and 3rd class roads feeders feeders 10 2000 17 764 296 27 3 222 3 826 25 220 394 10 2001 17 766 296 + 2 27 3 221 3 828 25 220 391 10 2002 17 807 302 + 5 52 3 224 3 829 25 220 396 10 2003 17 843 313 + 5 66 3 335 3 729 25 220 396 10 2004 17 787 316 + 6 78 3 263 3 729 25 220 394 10 2005 17 935 328 + 6 126 3 341 3 734 25 942 401 10 2006 17 834 328 + 6 153 3 206 3 742 25 942 399 10 2007 17 883 365 + 8 159 3 207 3 742 25 942 402 10 2008 17 916 384 + 9 159 3 275 3 686 25 942 402 10 2009 17 947 391 + 9 180 3 317 3 644 25 351 406 10 2010 17 985 416 + 11 190 3 318 3 643 25 351 408 10 2011 18 040 419 + 11 229 + 13 3 317 3 639 25 351 411 10 2012 18 044 419 + 13 234 + 14 3 312 3 637 -- 415 Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Highways and expressways The length of highways (highways plus highways feeders) was 296 km in 2000. By 2005, the total length was 334 km that is an increase of 12.84% compared to 2000. In 2005 and 2006, the length was at the same level. After 2006 the situation has improved, the total length reached 427 km in 2010. Over the next two years it had only a slight increase and, the total length of highways (highways plus highways feeders) reached 432 km in 2012. The length of expressways was 27 km, the same level both in 2000 and 2001. In 2002 expressways increased by 92.59% that represents a length of 52 km. In the subsequent period up to 2005, development continued at a slower pace and the total length was 126 km in 2005.

158

The further development took place in 2006, it was a positive move by 21.43% compared to 2005, the total length was 248 km by 2012.

The first class roads In 2000, the total length of first class roads was 3,222 km. The overall first class roads development has a slightly upward trend since 2002 till 2012. In 2012, the total length of first class roads was 3 312 km.

The second and third class roads Roads of 2nd and 3rd classes are important for traffic between the regions and districts. In 2004 these roads passed into the ownership of self-governing regions, whose role has been to ensure the roads’ development, maintenance and systematic recovery. The total length of 2nd class roads was 3637 km and the length of 3rd class roads was 10,415 km.

Development of rail infrastructure The performance and efficiency of railways depend on the condition of the rail infrastructure. Rail infrastructure in Slovakia, despite having a high density network, functions with outdated technology and low usability of its capacity. The solution is to modernize of the infrastructure that is included in the pan-European corridors no. IV., V. and VI., which are part of the TEN- T. This modernization is based on the needs to offer quality railway infrastructure for international and domestic passenger and freight transport from the North to South and from East to West. After 2001 the development of length slightly decreased. In 2004 the development of length was almost returned to its original value and after 2004 the development proceeded without major changes until 2007.

159

Table 1. Development of rail infrastructure length in Slovakia during 2000–2011 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 The total 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3622. 3622. length of rail 662. 662. 657. 657. 660. 658. 658. 658. 622. 624. 7 4 roads (km) 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 6 1 From these 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 Standard 3 3443. 512. 512. 507. 507. 510. 476. 476. 480. 443. 444. gauge 443.2 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 1 2 Narrow- 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 49.8 49.8 50.1 50.1 gauge Wide gauge 100 100 100 100 100 99 99 99 99.4 99.4 98.7 98.7 From these 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 Monorail 642. 642. 637. 637. 640. 606. 607. 610. 576. 576. 577.2 576.9 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 6 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 From those: 2 2 642. 642. 637. 637. 640. 606. 607. 610. 576. 427. Monorail NR 428.0 428.1 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 6 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1015. 1 Double-track 020. 020. 020. 020. 020. 019. 018. 018. 016. 017. 2 015.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 0 From these 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Electrified 1 1 536. 536. 556. 558. 556. 556. 577. 577. 577. 578. roads 576.7 577.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 2 Non- 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2014. Electrified 126. 126. 101. 099. 104. 069. 048. 051. 015. 014. 015.6 6 roads 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 6 2 8 % Electrificatio 41.9 41.9 42.5 42.6 42.5 42.9 43.5 43.5 43.9 43.9 43.92 43.9 n The length single-track 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2458. with standard 492. 492. 487. 487. 490. 490. 491. 490. 457. 459. 458.3 4 gauge 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 2 4 railways Length of non-operated single-track 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.4 33.2 29.3 30.3 30.3 30.33 31.1 with standard gauge railways Source:http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

160

Development of intermodal transport In the years 2000–2011 the number of intermodal terminals slightly decreased. In 2000, from total number of 11 combined transport terminals 8 were in operation and in 3 the operation was temporary suspended. In 2010 seven combined transport terminals operated continuously: two in Bratislava (UNS, Port), and one in Sládkovičovo, Žilina, Dunajská Streda, Kosice and Dobra pri Čiernej nad Tisou, respectively (the terminal of intermodal transport in Čiernej nad Tisou was previously closed). The terminals in Ružomberok and Trstena were not finished to the operating state, but they are registered as terminals in temporary suspension of operations in the statistical data.

Table 2. Infrastructure of intermodal transport in Slovakia 2000–2011 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of 11 11 11 10 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 terminals From these In 8 8 8 6 6 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 continuous operation In 3 3 3 4 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 temporary operation Source:http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Infrastructure of air transport Slovakia has a relatively dense network of airports of different character and classification in relation to the size of the country. In 2013 an initiative was launched to optimize the number of airports operated by the airport company with respect to territorial, economic and transport indicators and the needs of the state and the regions. The development of air transport infrastructure in the SR is specified in the following table. The development is quite stable, with minor changes only.

Table 3. Infrastructure of air transport in Slovakia in 2000–2011 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Number of airports 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 26 25 25 27 26 Non-public airports 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 13 13 Public airports 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 14 14 13 13 From these Public international 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 airport Source:http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

161

Infrastructure of water transport The infrastructure of water transport plays an important role in the intermodal transport systems in domestic and especially in international transport on the unified network of European inland waterways and the world’s oceans.

Table 4. Development of water transport infrastructure length in Slovakia 2000–2011

Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

The length of navigable rivers (km) 250.85 250.85 250.85 250.85 250.85 250.85 Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 The length of navigable rivers (km) 250.85 250.85 250.85 250.85 250.85 250.85 From this Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Danube 172 172 172 172 172 172 Váh 78.85 78.85 78.85 78.85 78.85 78.85 Canals 38.45 38.45 38.45 38.45 38.45 38.45

Year 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Danube 172 172 172 172 172 172.00 Váh 78.85 78.85 78.85 78.85 78.85 78.85 Canals 38.45 38.45 38.45 38.45 38.45 Source:http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

The water transport infrastructure comprises natural navigable rivers with total length of 250.9 km and artificial canals with total length of 38.5 km. At present, the Danube is entirely navigable and Vah is partly navigable on the lower flow after Sered. The planned navigability of Vah is divided into three stages and it aims at completing the connection to Odra and then directly to the Baltic Sea and the Adriatic Sea (Stage I: Komarno-Sered, completed in 1998, stage II: Sered–Puchov, Stage III: Púchov–Žilina, Stage IV: Žilina-Odra). The Danube is significant river in terms of foreign trade and is an integrated part of the waterway. In 1992, the construction of river road Rhine-Main-Danube was completed and since then has been used for transport from the Black Sea (Izmail) to the North Sea (ARA ports). This route connects Slovakia with nine European countries. The Gabcíkovo dam improved navigation conditions of waterways. The Váh waterway was officially launched between Komárno and Sered in 1999. The water transport is only possible with the use of vessels in range from 200 to 392 m3 of in Selice dam and Kráľová dam and with the water level of the Danube at least 250 cm in Komárno.

162

Slovakia is considering the navigability of the river Morava as part of the Danube-Oder-Elbe (international designation E20/E30) system. Currently, it is not possible to sail with vessels with a combustion engine on the river Morava. Protected landscape areas are to be found along the most part of the river.

Impacts on the environment and population Quality of the environment contributes significantly to improving the quality of life, therefore it is necessary to protect it. For this reason it is necessary to plan, modernize and complement measures to improve the protection of the environment during the planning and construction of transport infrastructure.

Table 5. Total emissions from transport in 2011 Source of Emission in 2011 (kilotons) emission PM PM CO CO NOx VOC SO TSPM 2 2 10 2.5 Passenger cars 33.662 2188.088 5.303 4.064 0.067 0.216 0.409 0.322 Motorcycles 0.963 10.446 0.020 0.274 0.000 0.006 0.007 0.007 Buses 0.684 397.183 3.159 0.158 0.012 0.053 0.082 0.067 Vehicles (to 3.5 t) 3.372 755.689 2.284 0.303 0.024 0.205 0.278 0.244 Vehicles (over 3.5 7.601 3707.776 32.006 1.954 0.118 0.810 1.178 1.002 t) Road transport in 46.282 7059.182 42.772 6.754 0.222 1.290 1.954 1.642 total Passenger 0.122 35.913 0.599 0.055 0.000114 0.017 0.017 0.016 transport Freight transport 0.162 47.550 0.794 0.073 0.000151 0.023 0.022 0.021 Rail transport in 0.284 83.463 1.393 0.128 0.000265 0.040 0.038 0.036 total Water transport in 0.509 149.338 2.492 0.230 0.005 0.072 0.068 0.065 total Air transport in 0.450 36.889 0.101 0.065 0.009 0.008 0.008 0.008 total 47. Transport in total 7328.872 46.758 7.177 0.236 1.410 2.068 1.751 525 Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Road transport Road transport is responsible for the largest share of emissions of pollutants from transport. In road transport emissions production is determined primarily by individual passenger transport

(cars and motorcycles), which shared in production of road transport in 2011: CO2 - 31.14%,

163

CO - 74.81%, NOx - 12.45 % VOC - 64.22%, SO2 - 30.18%, TSPM - 17.21%, PM10 - 21.29%, PM2.5 - 20.04%. In 2011 greenhouse gas emissions in road transport, which is the largest producer from all modes of transport, there were the levels of emission: CO2 - 7059 182.13 tons (an increase of

4.9% compared to 2010), CH4 emissions - 613.6 tons (a decrease of 10.65% compared to 2010). In 2011 CO emissions were at 46 281.71 tons, that is decrease 3.28%. NOx emissions increased to 42 772.16 in 2011. It is important to note that the formation of NOx emissions is principally engaged in vehicles with diesel engines. In 2011, SO2 emissions have raised by 4.13%, even though sulphur content of diesel fuel has significantly changed to the 50 mg / kg. In 2011, emissions of TSPM rose to 1 290.2 tons, which is a slight increase of 3.02% compared to 2010. In 2009, emissions of TSPM were at level of 1205 tonnes. For the main source of emission increase diesel vehicles can be regarded. This increase can therefore be attributed to the increase in diesel consumption in 2011 by about 10% compared to 2010.

Rail transport In 2011, there was consumed 26,581 tons (31,643,612 L) of diesel fuel in the rail transport; it is less by 3,643 tons (a decrease of 12%) compared to 2010. In case of electricity consumption - traction was a further growth. The power consumption of traction (AC and DC) increased by the level of 525,641,334 kWh; this is an increase of 75,024,158 kWh (an increase of 16.7%). In 2011, greenhouse gas follows the trend: CO2 - the quantity of emissions is 83 463.1 tons, it is less by 13.2%, NO2 - the quantity of emissions is 0.63 tons, it is less by 98.5 % CH4 - the quantity of emissions is 4.84 tons, it is less by 15.1%. In the case of major pollutants - CO, NOx, NMVOC, SO2 and TSPM; the quantity was at the following level, and also indicates the percentage increase or decrease over the previous year 2010: CO - produced a level at 284.4 tons, it is less by 21.5%, NOx - produced a level at 1 392.8 tons, it is less by 19.2%, NMVOC - produced a level at 123.6 tons, it is less by 20, 2%, SO2 - produced a level at 0.265 tons, it is less by 91.2%, TSPM - produced a level at 40.4 tons, it is less by 69.1%. In the year 2011 there was expansion of monitoring in the case of major pollutants except PM10 even PM2.5 was monitored (PM10 – 38.3 t, PM2.5 –36.4 t).

Air transport

In 2011, emissions of greenhouse gases CO2 and CH4 compared to 2010 was at the following level: CO2 - the quantity of emissions is 36,889.1 tons, it is less by 24.5%, CH4 - quantity actual emissions is 6.47 tons, it is less by 18.3%. In the case of major pollutants - CO, NOx, 164

NMVOC, SO2, TSPM; the quantity was at the following level compared to 2010: CO - the quantity of emissions is 449.55 tons, it is less by 12.68%, NOx - quantity of emissions is 101.05 tons, it is less by 12.43%, NMVOC - the quantity of emissions is 64.71 tons, it is less by 18.24%, SO2 - the quantity of emissions is 9.20 tons, which a decrease of 11.88%, TSPM - the quantity of emissions is 7.52 tons, it is less by 10.9%. In the year 2011 there was expansion of monitoring in the case of major pollutants except PM10 even PM2.5 was monitored (PM10 – 7.52 t, PM2.5 –7.52 t).

Water transport Consumption of diesel fuel is a key metric for calculating emissions from water transport in the Slovak section of the Danube. In 2011, the consumption of diesel oil was at 47 559 t, that is an increase of 14.4% compared to 2010. In 2011, emissions of greenhouse gases in water transport were at a lower level compared to 2010 CO2 - the quantity of emissions was

149,338.11 tons, an increase of 12.7%, NO2 - the quantity of emissions is 1.14 t CH4 - the quantity of emissions is 8.66 tons, an increase of 9.62%. In the case of major pollutants - CO,

NOx, NMVOC, SO2 and TSPM; the quantity was at the following level, and also indicates the percentage increase or decrease over the previous year 2010: CO - the quantity of emissions was 508.89 tons, an increase of 2%, NOx - the quantity of emissions is 2492.14 tons, an increase of 5.2%, NMVOC - the quantity of emissions is 221.15 tons, an increase of 3.9%

SO2 - the quantity of emissions is 4.76 tons, TSPM - the quantity of emissions is 72.29 tons. In the year 2011 there was expansion of monitoring in the case of major pollutants except PM10 even PM2.5 was monitored (PM10 – 68,49 t, PM2,5 –65,16 t).

165

Key findings and key problems and needs of transport sector in Slovakia

Table 6. LPI for Slovakia since 2007 till 2014 2007 2010 2012 2014 LPI Rank 50 38 51 43 LPI Score 2,92 3,24 3,03 3,25 Customs 2,61 2,79 2,88 2,89 Infrastructure 2,68 3 2,99 3,22 International shipments 3,09 3,05 2,84 3,30 Logistics competence 3,00 3,15 3,07 3,16 Tracking & tracing 2,87 3,54 2,84 3,02 Timeliness 3,26 3,92 3,57 3,94 Source: http://lpi.worldbank.org/international/scorecard

Cross-cutting issues and needs of systemic nature:  lack of preparation for a pre-project,  inadequate deployment principles and methods of project management,  unavailability of input data into the analysis and planning,  insufficient financial resources and allocation in the transport sector, financial sustainability,  unit prices of construction activities,  other issues of a systemic nature. Road transport:  negative impacts of inadequate funding for the maintenance of first class roads,  condition of road infrastructure,  lack of deployment and status of intelligent transport systems,  traffic load of the road network,  use of road freight transport network,  the use of the road network transit,  the use of the road network public transport,  availability of the motorway and expressway network from each district,  transport availability in freight transport,  safety aspects of road transport.

166

Rail transport:  freight transport demand,  prognosis and opportunities of rail passenger transport,  prognosis and opportunities of rail freight transport,  security and traffic accidents,  the capacity of the network,  technical condition of the network,  the needs and requirements of carriers. Air transport  obsolescence and constraints of capacity in airport infrastructure,  the level of technical and operational security,  the impact of air transport on the environment. Water transport  bottlenecks of the Danube waterway,  bottlenecks of the Váh waterway,  technical condition of public ports,  low interest in doing business in the field of water transport and age of ship fleet,  the downward trend in water freight transport,  safety aspects of water operations,  emission limits to vessels,  collection and disposal of waste from vessels.

The logistics centers in Slovakia

Distribution of logistic centers The distribution of logistics centers and parks in Slovakia is significantly imbalanced. Current and planned logistics centers and parks are mainly located in the Southwestern part of Slovakia, which is due to the good transportation connections in this area and access to manufacturing centers (primarily automotive but also other industries in these areas), as well as the ease of access to neighboring countries. Important factors include the motorway and speedway infrastructure in this area (D1, R1 and D2) as well as the international crossroads leading to Austria, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Poland. Rail infrastructure has a smaller and relatively minor impact.

167

From this overview below it is clear that a large majority of warehousing premises in logistics centers are located around Bratislava in two regions, Bratislava and Trnava. These areas represent 81.39% of the total logistics floor space in Slovakia. A majority of such prepared projects are also in these regions (here the Trnava region is in the lead) with potential expansion into Trenčín and Žilina. These areas feature the completed D1 motorway and include concentrations of industry along with crossroads with a number of important routes. In spite of progress, both Eastern and central Slovakia lags behind significantly in terms of both existing and planned logistics centers and parks.

Figure 3. Logistics parks larger than 20 hectare

Source: http://www.asb.sk/biznis/realitny-trh/velke-drahe-a-prazdne-kancelarie

168

Table 11. List of logistics parks larger than 20 hectare Logistics center/park Region Storage area (m2) Westpoint D2 Distribution park Lozorno Bratislava 85,000 Bratislava – Rača logistics center Bratislava 69,160 DNV logistics park Bratislava 82,000 Bratislava logistics park Senec Bratislava 68,000 ProLogis park Bratislava – Senec Bratislava 180,000 Goodman Senec logistics center Bratislava 45,000 Bratislava – Svätý Jur logistics center Bratislava 31,530 Gebruder Weiss logistics center Bratislava 8,400 VGP – Eurovalley logistics center Bratislava 12,600 Cargo partner Bratislava logistics center Bratislava 8,175 Trnava logistics park Trnava 180,000 ProLogis park Galanta Trnava 160,000 Vadual logistics Trnava 25,000 EUROFINN Leopoldov Trnava 3,000 Malé Dvorníky logistics center Trnava 10,000 Šárovce logistics center Nitra 5,000 Toptrans EU logistics center Nitra 20,000 ProLogis park Nové Mesto nad Váhom Trenčin 36,000 LogCenter Nové Mesto nad Váhom Trenčin 45,000 Stred Krupina logistics center Banska Bystrica 5,500 Europa logistics, Zvolen Banska Bystrica 21,700 Prešov – Malý Šariš logistics center Prešov 16 260 SDH Prešov – Petrovany logistics center Prešov 20,800 CALMAR distribution-logistics center Košice 17,000 Maťovce logistics center Košice 10,000 Košice logistics platform Košice 22,000 Source: The authors

169

Figure 4. Storage capacities in logistics premises by regions

37 060 49 000 27 200 0 Bratislavský 81 000 27 000 Trnavský Nitriansky

589 865 Trenčiansky Žilinský Banskobystrický 378 000 Prešovský Košický

Source: The authors

Table 14. Quantity of goods transported by air freight transport in tonnes Logistics center/park Region Storage area (m2) Eurovalley Bratislava min. 88,000 Dachser logistics Lozorno Bratislava 23,534 Zamajerské – Bratislava DNV Bratislava N/A Log. park Bratislava – Čierny les Bratislava 43,000 Panattoni park Senec Bratislava 80,000 HB Reavis Trnava Trnava N/A Codognotto Trnava – Zeleneč Trnava 64,600 Pata logistics center Trnava N/A Sereď logistics center Trnava N/A Cargo Partner Dunajská Streda logistics center Trnava 30,000 CTP Park Trenčín Trenčin 130,000 Trenčín – Opatovce logistics center Trenčin 35,430 CTP Park Žilina Žilina N/A PointPark Žilina – Strečno Žilina 27,000 Veľká Ida logistics center Košice 103,000* Immopark Košice Košice N/A * Net usable space. Source: The authors

The largest logistics center operator in Slovakia is ProLogis, which operates logistics centers in Senec, Galanta and Nove Mesto nad Váhom, with a total storage space of 387,000 m2, representing a third of all space in logistics centers and parks in Slovakia.

170

The following table shows an overview of storage and manufacturing (simple manufacturing activities) options for general and specific goods offered in individual logistics centers and parks. The final column includes the presence of rail spurs in the given logistics center or park.

Table 15. Options featured at individual logistics sites Logistics center/park Manufacturing Cooling Freezers ADR Rail Westpoint D2 Distribution park Lozorno - - - - - Bratislava – Rača logistics center + - - - + DNV logistics park + - - - + Bratislava logistics park Senec + + - - - ProLogis park Bratislava – Senec - + + + - Goodman Senec logistics center - - - - - Bratislava – Svätý Jur logistics center - - - - + Gebruder Weiss logistics center - - - - - VGP – Eurovalley logistics center + - - - - Cargo partner Bratislava logistics center - + - - - Trnava logistics park + - - - - ProLogis park Galanta - + + + - Vadual logistics - + + - - EUROFINN Leopoldov - - - + + Malé Dvorníky logistics center - - - - - Šárovce logistics center - - - - - Toptrans EU logistics center - + - - - ProLogis park Nové Mesto nad Váhom + + + - - LogCenter Nové Mesto nad Váhom - + + + - Stred Krupina logistics center - + + - - Europa logistics, Zvolen - - - - - Prešov – Malý Šariš logistics center + - - - - SDH Prešov – Petrovany logistics center - + - - - CALMAR distribution-logistics center - + + - - Maťovce logistics center - - - - + Košice logistics platform - - - - - Notes to the table: Manufacturing: logistics center/park includes facilities for light manufacturing activities; Cooling: temperature controlled refrigerated facilities available; Freezers: temperature controlled freezer facilities available; ADR: hazardous materials storage available; Rail: rail spur runs to logistics center or park, access to rail transport; Plus sign: Given item is located in the logistics center or park; Minus sign: Given item is not located in the logistics center or park. Source: The authors

From this overview it is clear that specific warehousing premises, including those for refrigerated goods, frozen goods and ADR goods are mainly located in smaller specialized 171

centers (a majority of these premises are in small warehouses that are not shown here and in distribution centers for the needs of a specific company as well as those distribution centers for retail chains). The storage of such goods is provided by ProLogis at its facilities in Senec, Galanta and Nove Mesto nad Váhom, and at the LogCenter Nové Mesto nad Váhom facility. Other centers and parks are more focused on general merchandise that does not require any specific conditions, in particular for the auto industry. Specifically focused logistic parks, in particular for the auto industry, include manufacturing space for sub-suppliers are in Devínská Nova Ves in Bratislava (Volkswagen plant) and near Trnava (Trnava logistics parks). The KIA facility in Žilina currently uses its own premises for such activities (Juricová-Melušová, Kubasáková-Poliaková, 2010, Kubasáková, 2010, Kubasáková-Hollá, 2008).

Free capacity and occupancy rates at logistics facilities This chapter is deals about the ratio of free capacity to overall capacity (storage and operation space) at logistics centers and parks. The available space at logistics facilities significantly increased due to the recent crisis. Regarding the fact that all data on storage capacity could not be determined (in particular this was an issue for smaller facilities), those facilities for which available capacity could not be determined were removed from the comparison, meaning the floor space was removed from the overall total floor space for this indicator. Regarding the fact that the available space is most frequently divided into the area around Bratislava and the rest of Slovakia in print media, in this case a similar method was used where Bratislava includes both the Bratislava and Trnava regions. The share of overall available space in Slovakia is currently 10.65%, within this in Bratislava and Trnava regions: 9.00%, while in other regions: 19.59%. The other regions feature a much smaller total floor space with significantly higher available space.

172

Table 16. Free capacity and occupancy rates at logistics facilities Logistics center/park Region Storage space Available Available (m2) capacity (m2) capacity (%) Westpoint D2 Distribution park BA 85,000 10, 800 12.70 Lozorno Bratislava – Rača logistics BA 69,160 4,250 6.15 center DNV logistics park BA 82,000 Bratislava logistics park Senec BA 68,000 10,000 14.70 ProLogis park Bratislava – BA 180,000 7,000 3.88 Senec Goodman Senec logistics center BA 45,000 10,000 22.22 Bratislava – Svätý Jur logistics BA 31,530 2,575 8.17 center VGP – Eurovalley logistics BA 12,600 6,500 51.60 center Trnava logistics park TT 180,000 ProLogis park Galanta TT 160,000 8,400 5.25 Vadual logistics TT 25,000 1,000 4.00 EUROFINN Leopoldov TT 3,000 600 20.00 Šárovce logistics center NR 7,000 2,000 28.57 Toptrans EU logistics center NR 20,000 9,000 pallets ProLogis park Nové Mesto nad TN 36,000 0 0.0 Váhom LogCenter Nové Mesto nad TN 45,000 15,600 34.66 Váhom Prešov – Malý Šariš logistics PO 16,260 0 0.00 center SDH Prešov – Petrovany PO 20,800 6,900 33.17 logistics center Košice logistics platform KE 22,000 Total 804,350 85,625 10.65 Source: The authors

Distribution centers for retail chains These facilities are privately owned and are used exclusively for retail chains. These facilities were not included in the previous statistics. Such facilities are used for intermediate stock activities from wholesalers and also for the distribution of goods to individual stores. They are equipped with refrigeration and freezer facilities as these chains also sell this type of merchandise. These facilities include: Tesco distribution center: Located near Beckov (Nové Mesto nad Váhom district) near the D1 motorway. This warehouse features 45,000 m2 and an addition 10,000 m2 for frozen products. Tesco also uses a distribution warehouse for clothing for Central Europe near Senec with 35,000 m2 and has rented capacity in a number of the logistics centers named above. 173

Kaufland distribution center: Located in Ilava near the ramps to the D1 motorway. Lidl distribution center: The Lidl chain uses two distribution centers, one near to Nemšova (Trenčín district, near D1 motorway ramps) and another near to Prešov. Billa distribution center: Located near to Senec at the D1 motorway ramps with 10,000 m2 of storage. COOP Jednota distribution center: COOP Jednota uses a number of distribution centers located across Slovakia. Its facilities include:  COOP VOZ, a.s., Trnava,  Veľkoobchodný družstevný podnik, akciová spoločnosť, Levice,  Zemplínska Veľkoobchodná Spoločnosť, a.s., Trebišov,  COOP-TATRY, s.r.o., Prešov,  COOP LC SEVER, a.s., Liptovský Mikuláš,  LOGISTICKÉ CENTRUM STRED, a.s., Krupina,  COOP JLC, a.s., Kostolné Kračany. A new distribution center is planned in Žilina-Bánova with 15,000 m2 of storage space. From this it is clear that the private distribution centers of retail chains are mainly concentrated in the Western part of Slovakia located near to motorways. One exception is COOP Jednota, which uses distribution centers located across the country in an even manner and the Lidl distribution center in Prešov. Logistics centers in general are not equally distributed across Slovakia. From the analysis shown above, it is clear that 81.39% of all logistics space is located in two regions, the Bratislava region and the Trnava region. Companies, mainly electro-technical and for the auto industry, and large foreign companies rent logistics centers in the Slovak Republic in areas close to the constructed motorway network. They need to be close to their sub-suppliers and customers. The construction of distribution and logistics centers in these locations secures the continuous flow of products between large commercial and industrial companies and their suppliers and customers. The main factor limiting the development of industrial and logistics centers outside of Western Slovakia remains insufficient transport infrastructure. One additional problem may be the EU border with Ukraine. Trade with countries to the East of Slovakia is of far less significance than those in the EU and such trade is characterised by the use of rail transport for the import of raw materials and fill materials in the overall volume of goods. Developers are also faced with the time-consuming task of overly sub-divided areas. It is extremely difficult to purchase an intact plot of land as most large areas have a large

174

number of smaller owners. While construction may only take 5 or 6 months, the preceding preparations may require twice as much time. The wide scale construction of logistics centers and parks in Slovakia started in 2003 and 2004, in the period when Slovakia was in the process of joining the EU. Before, no such development of logistics capacities had taken place in Slovakia. The range of offers was minimal and regularly featured obsolete buildings that did not feature sufficient capacity. Former manufacturing sites were the primary facilities used for storage and loading operations. Even after construction work, these buildings did not meet any of the demands for modern logistics premises. If a new storage facility appeared, these were mainly facilities for specific companies or retail chains and had no real impact on the open real estate market. Clients used the services of various specialized Slovak developments but these really only fulfilled the role of a kind of supplier of custom projects. The construction of speculative development projects that would have offered additional storage capacities to the market were not yet taken seriously. CBRE research (a real estate company which brokers rental transactions in the logistics segment among others) shows that the industrial and logistics spaces in Slovakia in 2006 were 425,000 m2, whereby rentable space was 93,000 m2. Rental development reached a peak in 2008. This period witnessed the greatest construction activity, and the 2nd half of 2008 saw 200,000 m2 of new storage space come online. Requirements of the market will down under pressure and demand for rent in 2009 dropped. The level of unoccupied space increased from 2.1% to 12.3%. In this year, construction of storage facilities decreased by half. This decline in construction was mainly caused by efforts from developers to rent existing premises. New construction continued to focus on custom construction for tenants with requirements that could not be met by existing and available space, stated Martin Baláž from the Slovak department of industrial property rentals from Cushman & Wakefield. Recovery began in 2010. During the 2nd quarter of 2010, 30 times more space was rented than in the previous quarter, totaling 54,000 m2. Currently the total space in warehousing facilities is around 1.2 million m2. Class A industrial and logistics parks, e.g. the most modern, meet current quality requirements and are currently concentrated in the Bratislava and Trnava regions. The rest of Slovakia mainly features older warehouses and Class B, C and D facilities other than new halls custom built for specific customers (e.g. Visteon, Tesco, Kaufland, Lidl, Billa, Hella, Unomedical, Dura, Vaillant etc.). The wide scale construction of such premises began around 2004. This period was characterized by the dynamic growth of the Slovak economy. The following years 175

saw an increase in the level of speculative development by foreign investors. Such capacities came online relatively easily and were filled quickly in this period of economic development. Speculative development of warehousing capacities came to a halt in 2009. The construction of custom logistics centers for customer will dominate now and in the future as opposed to such speculative construction. Developers will first seek clients and then build. It is anticipated that any new offers this year will be build-to-suit meaning the developer will build for a specific company. The minimum for industrial and warehousing halls is 50% in terms of contracted tenants. In 2009 and 2010 rents for warehousing premises, in comparison to previous years, slightly declined leaving the average for the 4th quarter of 2010 at a level of €3.17/m2/month. Average profitability in the same period was 8.75%. The rents themselves depended on location, rental term and competing projects. The level of stimuli offered by developers increased and tenants signed contracts for shorter periods. Amid stiff competition, developers are fighting for every client using rent holidays or custom changes to warehousing space. Rents in Bratislava and the nearby surroundings were at a level of €3 to €4.50 per square meter (prices were mainly around the lower price in this range). The rest of Slovakia had a range of anywhere from €3.80 to €4.50/m2. The main cause is the greater levels of competition in Bratislava when compared to the other areas of Slovakia. In general logistics centers and parks in Slovakia are distributed in an imbalanced manner as 81.39% of the total surface area is located around Bratislava in the Bratislava and Trnava regions. These were mainly constructed by private foreign investors for supra-regional needs. Their location in the Southwest Slovakia is best for easy access to surrounding countries. Three countries are direct neighbors (Hungary, Austria and the Czech Republic) and the transport infrastructure in this area is relatively well developed (compared to other parts of Slovakia) and allows easy access to other European countries. A majority of these logistics centers and parks are focused on road transport while rail transport plays secondary role. Only a few such centers and parks have rail spur access. Existing logistics centers and parks are not connected to combined transport terminals that should be slowly built using state funds primarily (that will offer their own logistics centers after construction). A majority of logistics centers and parks’ floor space is focused on warehousing of general merchandise that does not require special conditions. Almost all such centers and parks are covered warehousing space with heights of 10 to 10.5 m. Warehouses are tempered with stable temperatures of 15–20 °C, and have round-the-clock security protection. They offer variable storage capacities ranging from 1,000, 1,500, 2,000 or 2,500 m2. These warehouses meet all modern standards. Specific 176

types of warehousing are a far minority of such facilities. This type includes the open warehouse in Maťovce near the Ukrainian border. Another group of facilities are the refrigerated and freezer warehouses that have other specific characteristics. As opposed to general warehouses, these are distributed much more evenly across Slovakia. These are mainly smaller warehouses for companies focused on refrigerated and frozen products including their transport (Vadual logistik, Calmar, SDH, LC Stred), or specific sections or some larger logistics centers (ProLogis park Senec, Galanta, Nové Mesto nad Váhom). Understandably, these warehouses are also located in distribution centers for large retail chains that sell groceries and foodstuffs but such facilities only serve to meet private needs. Such refrigerated and freezer warehouses are concentrated in the Western portion of the country but this imbalance in their distribution is less than that for warehousing capacities in general.

Strategic goals of transport to 2020 The base document is the transport development strategy in Slovakia (Government Resolution of the Slovak Republic number 158 from 3rd March 2010). There are defined basic long term objectives, priorities of transport development in Slovakia, tools and resources that are necessary to achieve goals. The document is the base for other conceptual materials of Ministry of Transport, Construction and Regional Development of the Slovak Republic and it formulates positions of Slovakia with respect to future European transport policy in the coming period. The document also respects conceptual materials that were adopted in European Union level; for example: Lisbon strategy, Gothenburg strategy and transport policy of the EU. The transport strategy development also respects conceptual materials that were adopted with government of Slovakia; for example: Concept of territorial development of Slovakia 2001, Transport policy of the Slovak Republic up to 2015, the Operational Program Transport for the years 2007–2013, etc. The specific visions and goals of transport sector in the Slovak Republic have been set up in accordance with the applicable legislative and development documents which include global visions and goals, needs of every transport sub-sectors identified in the analysis.

Road infrastructure of Slovakia The road network is dense and well maintained in Slovakia. It consists of highways, roads for motor vehicles, state roads (I and II class) and secondary roads. The first class roads represent 17% from public roads (18 000 km). The most difficult roads for motorists are the roads 177

which are leading across Slovakia from North to South; they must overcome the mountain ridges. The busiest roads are mountain crossings at Donovaly (Ružomberok-Banská Bystrica), Veľký Šturec (Martin-Banská Bystrica) and Čertovica (Liptovský Mikuláš- Brezno). The motorway network has a length of more than 350 km and it is constantly expanding. A continuous highway from Bratislava over Žilina to Košice will be built. Bratislava has direct highway connections with Prague, Vienna and soon also with Budapest. Figure 5 shows the current and future highway infrastructure of Slovakia.

Figure 5. Map of current and future highways

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

The vision of effective and stable development of road transport sector Vision VP1: The modern, quality, safety and effective working highways, expressways and roads 1st class

The strategic goal 1: The effective development of highways, expressways and roads the 1st class network The strategic goal 1 is oriented to effective development of highways, expressways and first- class ways. The fulfill of goal should lead to raising the availability, accessibility of regions,

178

districts, major points of interest and effective quality network of motorways, expressways and first-class ways. The strategic goal 2: The modernization and repair roads network The strategic goal 2 is oriented to modernization and restoration of individual levels of road network in Slovakia. The fulfilment of the goal should be for improving building of highways, expressways and the first-class ways. The strategic goal 3: The development intelligent transport systems (ITS) The strategic goal 3 is oriented to development of intelligent transport systems. The fulfilment of this goal should be the expansion of intelligent transport systems on highways, expressways and first-class ways. Constructed should be different sensory layer (ASD, weather reports, and similar), and the central systems-efficient sensory data basis. The strategic goal 4: The improvement of road safety Strategic goal 4 is oriented to improving road safety. It is necessary to eliminate the critical areas on roads. The strategic goal 5: Reducing the socio-economic and environmental impacts of road transport The strategic goal 5 is oriented to reducing socio-economic and environmental impacts of transport. It is necessary to reduce impacts of road transport on environment and population.

Figure 6. Highways network in Slovak Republic

179

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Table 17. Transport strategy for highways and expressways by Green projects eggy for highways and expressways by Green projects Expected completion P.n Roa Lengt Name of project date . d h Beginning End Lietavská Lúčka - Višňové - Dubná Skala (1. 1 D1 phase) 13,5 2014 2019 Lietavská Lúčka - Višňové - Dubná Skala (2. 2 D1 phase) 3 D1 Hubová - Ivachnová (1. phase) 15,3 2013 2017 4 D1 Hubová - Ivachnová (2. phase) 5 D3 Žilina Strážov - Žilina Brodno (1. phase) 4,3 2014 2017 6 D3 Žilina Strážov - Žilina Brodno (2. phase) 7 D3 Svrčinovec - Skalité, polovičný profil (1. phase) 15,46 2013 2016 8 D3 Svrčinovec - Skalité, polovičný profil (2. phase) Hričovské Podhradie - Lietavská Lúčka (1. 9 D1 phase) 11,3 2014 2017 Hričovské Podhradie - Lietavská Lúčka (2. 10 D1 phase) 11 D1 Budimír – Bidovce 14,4 2015 2018 12 D1 Privádzač Lietavská Lúčka – Žilina 5,1 2016 2018 13 D3 Čadca, Bukov – Svrčinovec 5,7 2015 2018 14 D1 Turany – Hubová 13,6 2016 2019 15 D1 Prešov západ – Prešov South 7,9 2015 2019 16 D3 Žilina Brodno - Kysucké Nové Mesto 11,2 2016 2020 17 D3 Kysucké Nové Mesto – Oščadnica 10,8 2016 2019 18 R2 Mníchova Lehota – Ruskovce 15,5 2016 2019 19 R2 Rožňava - Jablonov nad Turňou (Soroška) 14 2016 2021 20 R2 Košice, Šaca - Košické Oľšany 21,5 2017 2020 21 R4 Prešov, northern bypass 14,7 2016 2019 22 R5 Svrčinovec - border SK/CZ 2 2015 2018 Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Table 18. Highways and expressways - modernization and safety by Green project Expected completion date P.n. Road Name of project Length Beginnin End g Trnava - Nitra (exchange and completion of 27 R1 43 2014 2015 safety restraint devices) Šašovské Podhradie - Zvolen (exchange and 28 R1 21 2015 2015 completion of safety restraint devices) 180

Expected completion date P.n. Road Name of project Length Beginnin End g Trnava - križovatka Lúka (exchange and 29 D1 46 2014 2015 completion of safety restraint devices) Ivachnová - Važec (exchange and completion 30 D1 45 2015 2016 of safety restraint devices) Prešov - Budimír (exchange and completion of 31 D1 19 2016 2016 safety restraint devices) 32 D2 Parking Sekule - reconstruction and expansion 0 2014 2016 Parking Veľké Zálužie (left and right side) - 33 R1 0 2015 2016 reconstruction and expansion IVSC 34 KE Sabinov preložka cesty 10 2015 2018 I/68 IVSC I/64 Bypass Prievidze, I. phase, 2. constraction 35 2,69 2015 2016 ZA I - MZ v trase bud. I/64 IVSC 36 I/75 Lučenec – preložka 3,96 2015 2017 BB IVSC 37 I/61 Trnava, northern bypass 2,7 2016 2018 BA IVSC I/51 Senica – Jablonica - Trstín, 1. 38 7,8 2017 2019 BA construction, bypass Senice IVSC 39 I/66 Brezno - bypass, II. phase 4,9 2015 2017 BB IVSC 40 I/64 Prievidza - bypass, II. phase 3,9 2016 2018 ZA IVSC 41 I/51 Holíč - bypass, II. phase (1. part) 2,66 2015 2016 BA IVSC 42 I/75 Šaľa – bypass 15,5 2015 2018 BA IVSC 43 I/18 Nižný Hrabovec - Petrovce n/L, preložka 19 2016 2018 KE IVSC 44 I/74 Brekov - Humenné preložka 5,7 2019 2021 KE 45 SSC Landslides on first-class roads 0 2015 2020 The modernization selected sections of 1st 46 SSC 0 2015 2019 class roads in TT a NR region The modernization selected sections of 1st 47 SSC 0 2015 2019 class roads in BB region The modernization selected sections of 1st 48 SSC 0 2015 2019 class roads in TN a ZA region The modernization selected sections of 1st 49 SSC 0 2015 2019 class roads in PO a KE region Reconstruction of intersection on first-class 50 SSC 0 2014 2018 roads IVSC I/72 Tisovec mesto - Tisovec, Čertova dolina, 51 10 2017 2019 BB reconstruction

181

Expected completion date P.n. Road Name of project Length Beginnin End g IVSC 52 I/65 Kremnica - Kremnické Bane 1,5 2015 2017 BB IVSC 53 I/75 Sládkovičovo – Galanta 5,95 2015 2017 BA IVSC 54 I/65 Kremnické Bane – border of region 3,5 2016 2018 BB Protection of solid objects on the first class 55 SSC 0 2015 2018 roads Construction and improvement safety 56 SSC parameters of bridges and 1st class road, 1st 0 2015 2017 stage Construction and improvement safety 57 SSC parameters of bridges and 1st class road, 2nd 0 2018 2020 stage Measures to reduce the noise burden on first- 58 SSC 0 2017 2019 class roads Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Table 19. Preparation of project documentation for highways and expressways Expected completion date P.n. Road Name of project Length Beginnin End g I/72 Tisovec mesto - Tisovec, Čertova dolina, 75 SSC 0 2014 2017 reconstruction 76 SSC I/65 Kremnické Bane – border of region 0 2014 2016 77 SSC I/75 Sládkovičovo – Galanta 0 2014 2015 78 SSC I/64 Kľače – Šuja 0 2014 2016 79 SSC I/64 Rajecké Teplice – Kľače 0 2014 2016 Construction and improvement safety parameters 80 SSC 0 2014 2015 of bridges and 1st class road, 2nd stage Construction and improvement safety parameters 81 SSC 0 2016 2018 of bridges and 1st class road, 2nd stage The modernization selected sections of 1st class 82 SSC 0 2014 2015 roads in all regions 83 SSC Protection of solid objects in first class road 0 2014 2015 84 NDC 0 2014 2016 Weather stations, traffic counters, CCTV 85 cameras, variable message signs for RC and D, 0 2014 2019 system integration NDS 86 Bratislava (modernization and completion IRSD) 0 2015 2017 25 2015 2015 Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

182

Figure 7. Highway network in Slovakia

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Vision and Goals of Railway Transport to 2020 Vision 1: The balance between supply and demand Vision 2: The balance between infrastructure supply and traffic demand Vision 3: Creating the conditions for the proper functioning of the railways

Strategic Goals (SG) in Railway Transport The strategic goal 1: The passenger railway transport – high quality and competitive The specific goal 1 is aimed at sufficiently high quality and attractive railway passenger transport. It is not only about own equipment trains, railway stations and stops, but also to ensure mutual transport links. The strategic goal 2: The freight railway transport – high quality and competitive The specific goal 2 supports the freight development. It is necessary to provide necessary parameters of transport ways, but the modern and sufficient capacity for loading, reloading and unloading of goods. The strategic goal 3: The railway infrastructure – modern and secure The specific goal 3 suggests maintenance and modernization furthermore important routes with high traffic potential. It is necessary to ensure the timely and adequate maintenance. The strategic goal 4: The efficient organization and planning of development railway

183

The specific goal 4 stresses the need for effective planning, organization development of railway sector. It is necessary to create appropriate conditions. The strategic goal 5: The economically sustainable railway The specific goal 5 is oriented to effective development of projects, and effective function of railway transport.

Table 20. The modernization of railways by Green projects Expected Lengt completion date P.n. Name of project h Beginni End ng ŽSR, Modernization of the line Púchov – Žilina, for speed 1 160 km/hod., II. stage – (part Považská Teplá /out/ – Žilina 12 2015 2016 /out/) ŽSR, Station completion Žilina - Teplička and adjoining rail 2 infrastructure in the node of Žilina, project documentation 14 2015 2016 DSP, DRS a DVZ Station completion Žilina Teplička and adjoining rail 3 14 2018 2020 infrastructure in the node of Žilina, realization Modernization of railway Žilina – Košice, part Liptovský 4 Mikuláš – Poprad-Tatry (out), realization of the part Poprad- 31 2015 2018 Tatry - Lučivná a Paludza - L. Hrádok Modernization of railway Žilina – Košice, part ofPoprad- 5 Tatry (out) - Krompachy, realization of the part Spišská Nová 26 2018 2022 Ves - Poprad-Tatry 6 Feasibility study "Transport Node of Bratislava" 0 2014 2015 electrification of the line Devínska Nová Ves – state border 9 4 2018 2019 SK/AT., realization ŽSR, electrification of the line Bánovce nad Ondavou - 10 33 2014 2015 Humenné, PD for degree DSP a DRS ŽSR, electrification of the line in Bánovce nad Ondavou - 11 33 2016 2018 Humenné, realization Žilina - Košice, Modernization of railway, partŽilina - 18 28 2015 2018 Kraľovany, PD Žilina - Košice, Modernization of railway, part Kraľovany - 19 41 2015 2017 Liptovský Mikuláš, PD Košice - Čierna nad Tisou, Modernization of railway, part 21 47 2017 2020 Košice - Michaľany, PD Košice - Čierna nad Tisou, Modernization of railway, part 22 51 2017 2020 Michaľany - Čierna nad Tisou, PD 23 Čierna nad Tisou, Modernization of node, PD + realization 9 2016 2019 24 Bratislava - Galanta, Modernization of railway, PD 43 2017 2019 25 Galanta - Nové Zámky, Modernization of railway, PD 43 2017 2019 Nové Zámky - Štúrovo – state border SR/MR, Modernization 26 58 2017 2019 of railway, PD

184

Expected Lengt completion date P.n. Name of project h Beginni End ng State border SK/CZ – Kúty – Bratislava – Nové Zámky – 27 Štúrovo/Komárno - št. hr. SR/MR, Modernization of railway, 251 2014 2016 ŠR + PD introduction of ERTMS in corridor n. IV Kúty state border 28 71 2014 2016 SK/CZ - Node BA (ETCS L2 + GSM R), PD introduction of ERTMS in corridor n. IV Kúty state border 29 71 2015 2019 SK/CZ - node BA (ETCS L2 + GSM R), realization Modernization of railway Žilina – Košice, part Krompachy 46 0 2016 2020 (out) – Kysak, further financing from PD to DRS introduction of ERTMS in corridor n. IV BA - Nové Zámky - 47 182 2017 2020 Štúrovo / Komárno (ETCS L2 + GSM R), PD introduction of ERTMS in corridor n. IV BA - Nové Zámky - 48 182 2019 2022 Štúrovo / Komárno (ETCS L2 + GSM R), realization ŽSR, Modernization of railway Púchov - Žilina, for speed 12 16 2018 2018 160 km/hod. – I. stage (Púchov - Považská Teplá) electrification of the line Haniska pri Košiciach - Moldava 16 20 2016 2017 nad Bodvou, realization Zvolen - Fiľakovo, electrification of the line, continuation in 17 66 2014 2015 PD (DSP, DRS, DVZ) ŽSR, The modernization corridor, state border CZ/SK – 13 17 2019 2022 Čadca - Krásno nad Kysucou (out), railway,realization Modernization of railway Žilina – Košice, part Kysak - 14 16 2018 2021 Košice, realization Košice - Kostoľany nad Hornádom (construction for IKD), 20 2 2018 2020 realization ŽSR, electrification and optimalization of the line Leopoldov 38 59 2016 2018 - Nitra - Šurany, further financing PD ŽSR, electrification and optimalization of the line Leopoldov 39 59 2018 2022 - Nitra - Šurany, realization 41 Zvolen - Fiľakovo, electrification of the line, realization 66 2015 2020 Bratislava Nové Mesto - Dunajská Streda - Komárno, 42 42 2019 2020 electrification of the line PD ŽSR, electrification and optimalization of the line Fiľakovo - 43 Moldava nad Bodvou, PD icluded ŠR for part Zvolen - 131 2015 2018 Haniska p.K. ŽSR, electrification and optimalization of the line Fiľakovo - 44 131 2018 2022 Moldava nad Bodvou, realization ŽSR, electrification and optimalization of the line 45 75 2017 2020 Zbehy/Lužianky - Prievidza, PD ŽSR, Terminal of intermodal transport Košice, 1. Stage of 49 0 2018 2020 construction ŽSR, Terminal of intermodal transport, 1. Stage of 50 0 2018 2020 construction Bratislava Nové Mesto - Dunajská Streda - Komárno, 53 0 0 0 electrification

185

Expected Lengt completion date P.n. Name of project h Beginni End ng ŽSR, Terminal of intermodal transport Bratislava, 1. Stage 54 0 2018 2020 of construction Small projects (crossovers, densification graph of the 52 0 2014 20222 network ZSR) Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Figure 8. Incorporation of Slovak Railways into the European Rail Corridors

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Vision and Goals of Intermodal Transport to 2020 Vision 1: Providing conditions for the development of intermodal transport Strategic Goals (SG) in intermodal Transport: The strategic goal 1: The high quality, accessible and integrated transport infrastructure The terminals of intermodal transport need the infrastructure (terminal Bratislava, Leopoldov, Košice, Žilina, Budča a Dobrá) and its interconnection (technology and information) as well as with logistics centers. The strategic goal 2: The competitive services and balanced development of all transport modes

186

It is a priority of the EU to improve the accessibility of sea ports in South Europe (e.g. ports of Koper, Rijeka, Trieste), particularly the railway from Koper to Divač, which is bottleneck of the transportation of goods. Figure 9 shows the current status of combined transport infrastructure in Slovakia, all facilities outside the network AGTC.

Figure 9. Terminals of intermodal transport

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

187

Table 21. Terminals of intermodal transport

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

Table 22. Quantity of goods transported by air freight transport in tons

Source: http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

The proposal to build public intermodal transport terminals:  intermodal terminal Žilina – Teplička (cancelled),  intermodal terminal Košice – Bočiar (first stage – reconstruction), 188

 intermodal terminal Bratislava – Pálenisko (first stage – reconstruction),  intermodal terminal Leopoldov – Šulekovo Pálenisko (first stage – reconstruction),  intelligent control system for intermodal infrastructure.

Vision and goals of air transport to 2020 Vision1: Modern, safe and integrated air transport infrastructure Strategic Goals (SG) in Air Transport: The strategic goal 1: The efficient development of air transport infrastructure networks The strategic goals oriented to continuously create conditions enabling the development of air transport sector, led by the liberal tendencies of creating conditions and modernisation of infrastructure. The conditions are active instruments to support the impacts of major air carriers on the market with goals to develop mobility and to support economic development of the state and the regions. The strategic goal 2: The maintenance and repair of air transport infrastructure The strategic objective SL2 is ensuring operability condition optimized network of air transport infrastructure in the SR comprehensive maintenance activities. The conditions are active instruments for support of major commodity operators and obtain new goods flows to the market for development of mobility and support economic development of the state and regions. The strategic goal 3: The safe operation and security protection The strategic discusses about needs using offer of the river information services to increase effective safety and development communication and information infrastructure in water transport. The strategic goal 4: The reducing socio-economic impacts of air transport The strategic goal 4 is oriented to reducing of the negative impacts of water transport and environment and population.

Vision and goals of water transport to 2020 Vision: Modern, safe and integrated water transport infrastructure Strategic Goals (SG) in Water Transport: The strategic goal 1: Development, modernization and reconstruction of the infrastructure of waterways

189

The aim of the specific goal 1 is to provide guaranteed conditions for navigation on the waterways in the Slovak Republic with establishment of their components to safe river operation. It is necessary to eliminate bottlenecks in water transport in Slovak Republic. The strategic goal 2: Maintenance, renewal and development of network in public ports The strategic goal 2 is oriented to enable continuous growth performance of water transport based on liberal tendencies of creating business conditions and modernization of port infrastructure on the Danube. The conditions are active instruments to support the entry of major commodity operators and acquisition of goods flows on the market for the development of mobility and support economic development of the state and regions. The strategic goal 3: Implementation of new technologies The strategic goal 3 discusses about the need to use the offer of River Information Services (RIS) to increase the efficiency, security and development through communication and information infrastructure in water transport. The strategic goal 4: Reducing environmental impacts of water transport The strategic goal 4 is oriented to reducing the negative impacts of water transport to the environment and population. The strategic goal 5: Creating conditions for education of employees in water transport The strategic goal 5 is for the preparation and support of education and harmonizing the conditions of learning process for professions in the water transport.

Conclusion The vision of the strategy is to provide quality, accessible and integrated transport infrastructure, competitive transport services, environmentally friendly and energy-efficient and safe transport by 2020. The implementation of concrete actions of strategy will be completed and modernized comprehensive network of superior transport infrastructure with connection to the TEN-T and the balanced development of services will be ensured. Conditions will be created for reducing the impact of transport on the environment with respect to with EU rules and responsibilities of transport users. A comprehensive transport infrastructure will allow the mobility of people and goods, functioning of the internal market, territorial cohesion regions and connection to network transport infrastructure of EU. Individual regions will be interconnected with transport infrastructure; in 2020, 85% of Slovakia and 95% of the population will be connected to a motorway or expressway in less than 45 minutes. For increasing the capacity of the infrastructure will be implemented intelligent transport systems. Rail freight and public 190

passenger transport will be a real alternative to road freight transport and individual car transport. Airport infrastructure will ensure especially international interconnection with the rest of Slovakia and in major cities will allow the integration of air transport with (high-speed) rail systems and urban public transport, suburban and individual transport. The GDP growth will be slower globally in the coming years in relation to the global financial crisis in Europe, which will be reflected in the demand of transport services. Transport has a tendency to significantly decrease at the beginning of the crisis. On the other hand, the transport sector is recovering faster than other sectors, particularly as a result of faster growth of international trade. The development of transport will try overcoming the impact of the global economic crisis that affects mainly automotive and electronics industries in Slovakia. The V4 countries should focus on building corridor TEN-T the most and put all the effort to finish it as soon as possible. The multimodal TEN-T Core Network with the Core Network Corridors will strongly contribute to European cohesion and strengthen the internal market. A more competitive economy will produce higher employment. Enhanced multimodality on a better rail, inland waterways and maritime infrastructure within the multimodal TEN-T, as well as innovative technologies in the field of transport, will induce modal shift, reduce congestion on road, cut emissions of greenhouse and polluting gases and boost transport safety and security. The new European infrastructure policy will put in place a powerful European transport network across 28 Member States, connected to neighboring countries and the rest of the world, to promote growth and competitiveness. It will connect East with West and replace today’s transport patchwork with a network which is genuinely European.

Bibliography JURICOVÁ – MELUŠOVÁ, V.: Support for Regional Development in the Nitra Self- governing Region within the EU Cohesion Policy, www.fesrr.uniag.sk , [email protected] , www.unsk.sk KUBASÁKOVÁ, I.- POLIAKOVÁ, B.: Výhody a nevýhody uplatnenie princípov City logistiky / In: Globalizácia a jej sociálno-ekonomické dôsledky '10 [elektronický zdroj]: zborník príspevkov z medzinárodnej vedeckej konferencie : Rajecké Teplice 4.-6. október 2010. - ISSN 1336-5878. - [Žilina: Žilinská univerzita, 2010]. - S. 286-290. - Požiadavky na systém: CD ROM mechanika

191

KUBASÁKOVÁ, I.: Logistics parks in the Slovak Republic [Logistické parky v Slovenskej republike] / In: Logi : scientific journal on transport and logistics. - ISSN 1804-3216. - Vol. 1. No. 1 (2010), s. 86-93. KUBASÁKOVÁ, I.-ŠULGAN, M.: Služby logistických centier na Slovensku / In: LOGI 2009: [mezinárodní vědecká konference], 19.11.2009, Pardubice: sborník příspěvků. - Brno : Tribun EU, 2009. - ISBN 978-80-7399-893-6. - S. 72-75. KUBASÁKOVÁ, I.: Logistické centrá na juhu Slovenska/ In: Železničná doprava a logistika [elektronický zdroj]: elektronický odborný časopis o železničnej doprave a preprave, logistike a manažmente. - ISSN 1336-7943. - Roč. 5, č. 3 (2009) s. 64-68. - Popis urobený 27.10.2009. KUBASÁKOVÁ, I.- HOLLÁ K.:Logistics centers in Slowakia [Logistické centrá na Slovensku] In: Logistic centers. - Pardubice: Institut Jana Pernera, 2008. - ISBN 978-80- 86530-52-9. - P. 116-121. http://www.skladuj.sk/ http://www.financnik.sk/financie.php?did=349&article=435 (Ing. Roman Krajčír, MBA – Rozvoj logistiky na Slovensku a jej financovanie) http://www.asb.sk/biznis/brzdou-rozvoja-logistickych-centier-mimo-bratislavy-je-cestna- doprava-4032.html (Brzdou rozvoja logistických centier mimo Bratislavy je cestná doprava) http://fpedas.uniza.sk/zdal/images/stories/clanky_pdf/cislo_02_10/04_kralikova.pdf (Alžbeta Králiková - Logistické centrá najväčších prístavov v Európe) http://www.euroekonom.sk/poradna/ekonomicky-slovnik/?q=logisticke-centrum http://studium.fd.cvut.cz/html/logisticka_centra.html (Pastor Otto, Wansley Michaela – Logistická centra) http://dal.hnonline.sk/2-24927390-k60000_d-22 (Rozvoj logistických parkov na Slovensku rýchlo napreduje) http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/o-haly-a-sklady-je-zaujem-iba-v- bratislave.html (Martin Labanc - O haly a skladové priestory je záujem iba v Bratislave) http://reality.etrend.sk/realitny-biznis/sklady-sa-budu-sit-na-mieru.html (Jana Hambálková - Sklady budú opäť na mieru) http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/vystavba-skladov-sa-prepadla-o-polovicu.html (Martin Rojko - Výstavba skladov sa prepadla o polovicu) http://reality.etrend.sk/realitny-biznis/mbelix-stahuje-sklady-do-lozorna.html (M belix sťahuje sklady do Lozorna)

192

http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/slovensko-pomaly-naplna-potencial- logistickej-velmoci.html (Miro Sedlák, Martin Jesný – Slovensko pomaly napĺňa potenciál logistickej veľmoci) http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/logistika-stabilizovana-spekulanti-prec.html (Ľuboš Mistrík - Logistika stabilizovaná, špekulanti preč) http://reality.etrend.sk/realitny-biznis/spekulativna-logistika-uz-nema-sancu.html (Martin Labanc - Špekulatívna logistika už nemá šancu) http://zahorie.sme.sk/c/5745223/pointpark-bratislava-v-lozorne-je-obsadeny-na-85- percent.html http://www.asb.sk/architektura/projekty/logisticky-park-Westpoint-pri-lozorne-303.html http://www.hbreavis.com/sk/projekt/logisticke-centrum-raca-0 http://www.karimpol.com/en/project-senec.htm http://www.prologiseurope.com/pdf/Bratislava_web.pdf http://seneclogisticscenter.com/sl/about-goodman.html http://www.prologiseurope.com/pdf/ProLogis_Park_Galanta-Gan.pdf http://www.transport.sk/spravy/zasielatelstvo-a-logistika/2890-10-800-metrov-stvorcovych-v- prologis-parku-bratislava-zaplnia-hracky.html http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/dopravcovia-idu-do-prologis-parku- bratislava.html http://www.prologiseurope.com/pdf/ProLogis_Park_Nove_Mesto.pdf http://trencin.sme.sk/c/5042488/prologis-park-nove-mesto-je-uz-plne-prenajaty.html http://www.skladynaprenajom.sk/ http://www.hbreavis.com/sk/projekt/logisticke-centrum-svaty-jur-0 http://www.gw-world.sk/sk/848.aspx http://www.eurovalley.sk/ http://www.financnik.sk/ http://www.logistickyparktrnava.sk/ http://www.vadual.sk/ http://www.eurofinn.sk/ http://www.tamtrans.sk/ http://www.toptrans.sk/ http://www.logcenter.sk/ http://www.slovak-industrial.sk/ http://www.coop.sk/ 193

http://www.europalc.sk/sk/index.htm http://www.hbreavis.com/sk/projekt/logisticke-centrum-presov http://sdh.prvy.sk/?m=809&c=s&i=s http://www.calmar.sk/ http://www.premako.sk/ http://www.lindbergh-dachser.sk/ http://www.logisticsatoz.sk/dachser-stavia-logisticke-centrum-v-lozorne http://www.bratislava.sk/vismo/dokumenty2.asp?id_org=700000&id=11023940 http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/pri-slovnafte-bude-logisticky-park-cierny- les.html http://reality.etrend.sk/realitny-biznis/ipec-a-panattoni-spolu-v-senci.html http://www.stavebne-forum.sk/sk/article/15785/vstup-panattoni-europe-do-domacej- logisticko-priemyselnej-areny/ http://www.hbreavis.com/sk/projekt/logisticke-centrum-trnavazavar http://trnava.sme.sk/c/5765720/v-zelenci-postavia-skladovy-areal-za-30-milionov-eur.html http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/logisticke-centrum-v-dunajskej-strede.html http://mesto.sk/prispevky_velke/dunajska_streda/cargopartnersrpos1211275080.phtml http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/ctp-invest-pripravuje-parky-v-presove-a-pri- kii.html http://www.pointparkproperties.com/sk/novinky/spr%C3%A1vy-o-projektoch/pointparkproperties-expanduje-do-%C5%BEiliny.html http://www.pointparkproperties.com/sk/projekty/zoznam-projektov/slovakia/pointpark- %C5%BEilina.html http://reality.etrend.sk/komercne-nehnutelnosti/v-kosiciach-vyrasta-immopark.html http://korzar.sme.sk/c/5663569/logisticky-park-pri-velkej-ide-da-pracu-takmer-500- ludom.html http://www.instore.sk/news/komplexna-logistika http://www.asb.sk/biznis/realitny-trh/velke-drahe-a-prazdne-kancelarie www.statistics.sk, Statistial office of the Slovak republic http://www.telecom.gov.sk/index/index.php?ids=1

194

V. SUMMARY OF THE ANALYSIS OF THE NATIONAL LOGISTIC STRATEGIES IN THE V4 COUNTRIES

Attila Korompai (Corvinus University of Budapest)

A comparative analysis of the logistic performance of the V4 countries The logistic performance of the V4 countries will be compared by using the LPI values. The values of LPI and its components for the V4 countries are presented in the star diagrams below based on available data of the World Bank for the years 2007, 2010, 2012 and 2014.

Figure 1. Overall LPI scores of V4 countries

2007 3,60 3,40 3,20 Czech Republic CZE 3,00 Hungary HUN 2,80 Poland POL 2014 2,60 2010 Slovak Republic SVK Average V4

2012

Source: World Bank

The average logistics performance path of the V4 countries shows an increase from 2007 till 2010, but by 2012 there was a slight decrease. After 2012 the average LPI index has increased again. The dominant values in this path were connected to the Czech and Polish logistics. The path was similar for the Slovak Republic but at a lower level. The Hungarian path was different, because after 2007 there was a strong decrease till 2010 but after that the path showed a continuous growth, and by 2014 the values of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland were quite close to each other. The lowest values were presented by Slovakia. With these overall LPI values the rank of individual countries considering the whole range of countries involved into the World Bank analysis has changed from 2007 to 2014 according to

195

the table 1. Altogether the V4 countries showed an improving position in international comparison.

Table 1. The overall LPI rank of V4 countries Country 2007 2010 2012 2014 Czech Republic 38 26 44 32 Hungary 35 52 40 33 Poland 40 30 30 31 Slovak Republic 50 38 51 43 Source: World Bank

Figure 2. Customs LPI scores of V4 countries

2007 3,40 3,30 3,20 3,10 3,00 2,90 Czech Republic CZE 2,80 Hungary HUN 2,70 2014 2,60 2010 Poland POL Slovak Republic SVK Average V4

2012

Source: World Bank

Considering the customs component of the LPI, the Czech Republic and Hungary show the same tendency as their overall LPI value. The Hungarian value has fallen from the highest one in 2007 to almost the lowest one by 2010, but its increase was slower. Its value did not reach the 2007 level by 2014. The most dynamic growth was presented by Poland with a slight decrease in 2014. Slovakia has also showed dynamic development. Its values were always around the Hungarian ones since 2010. The position of the V4 countries in the global customs LPI ranking has improved from 2007 by 2014, while there were worse ranking values during the period. The only exception is

196

Hungary whose position is still well below its 2007 position, and a continuous worsening is reflected.

Table 2. The customs LPI rank of V4 countries Country 2007 2010 2012 2014 Czech Republic 36 27 43 33 Hungary 34 45 47 48 Poland 38 34 28 32 Slovak Republic 55 47 45 52 Source: World Bank

Figure 3. Infrastructure LPI scores of V4 countries

2007 3,30 3,20 3,10 3,00 2,90 Czech Republic CZE 2,80 Hungary HUN 2,70 2014 2,60 2010 Poland POL Slovak Republic SVK Average V4

2012

Source: World Bank

Based on the infrastructure scores, the Czech Republic had the best values in 2010 and 2014, the second one in 2007, but interestingly was ranked last in 2012. This was the year when Poland jumped to the second best place while in other years it was positioned near the last place with Slovakia. Hungary was on the top in 2007 and 2012, in other years it was around the V4 average value.

Table 3. The infrastructure LPI rank of V4 countries Country 2007 2010 2012 2014 Czech Republic 36 34 50 36 Hungary 33 38 40 40

197

Poland 51 43 42 46 Slovak Republic 52 42 48 37 Source: World Bank

Regarding the infrastructure, the international position of the Czech Republic has not changed (36) and that of Poland and Slovakia has not improved significantly. It was only Hungary among the V4 countries, whose position was stagnating (40th) in the last two evaluated years after falling back from the 33rd place. In 2014 the international ranking position of individual V4 countries was between the 36th and 46th place while the range was much wider in 2007, when the position of Hungary was 33 and Slovakia was 52. There is a significant improvement in the position of Slovakia, which jumped from the last place in 2007 (52) to the second one (37) by 2014.

Figure 4. Ease of shipment LPI scores of V4 countries

2007 3,60 3,40 3,20 3,00 Czech Republic CZE 2,80 Hungary HUN 2014 2,60 2010 Poland POL Slovak Republic SVK Average V4

2012

Source: World Bank

Considering the ease of shipment, the Czech Republic followed the overall LPI development tendency, mostly at the top of the V4 countries. Poland emerged from the lowest level in 2007 to far the best by 2012. At the same time, Hungary suffered a radical decrease between 2007 and 2010, followed by continuous growth until 2014, when its value was the best in the discussed period. Slovakia witnessed also a decreasing tendency until 2012, but by 2014 its value became the best in the period, though it is still the lowest among the V4 countries.

198

Table 4. The ease of shipment LPI rank of V4 countries Country 2007 2010 2012 2014 Czech Republic 43 17 45 13 Hungary 42 86 52 32 Poland 52 35 22 24 Slovak Republic 38 57 71 38 Source: World Bank

In international comparison the best values of ease of shipment were recorded for Slovakia in 2007, the Czech Republic in 2010 and 2014, and Poland in 2012. Hungary has fallen 44 places from 2007 till 2010. Since that its position is gradually improving, and by 2014 it reached its best position (32). Poland showed great improvement getting to the 22nd and 24th places by 2012 and 2014, respectively, from the 52nd place in 2007. Following a continuously declining position till the 71st place in 2012, Slovakia regained its original (38th) position by 2014.

Figure 5. Logistic services LPI scores of V4 countries

2007 3,60 3,40 3,20 3,00 Czech Republic CZE 2,80 Hungary HUN 2014 2,60 2010 Poland POL Slovak Republic SVK Average V4

2012

Source: World Bank

In 2007 the quality of logistic services was more or less the same for all V4 countries. Since that time Poland and the Czech Republic have preserved their leading position. The position of Slovakia has stagnated, while Hungary showed the same tendency to its other LPI components (strong decrease and gradual increase till the V4 average in this case).

199

Table 5. The logistic services LPI rank of V4 countries Country 2007 2010 2012 2014 Czech Republic 42 35 31 29 Hungary 37 53 36 37 Poland 38 36 32 33 Slovak Republic 40 41 43 46 Source: World Bank

Considering the quality of logistics services, the V4 countries are usually placed around the 35th position in international comparison except for the lowest value of 53 for Hungary in 2010, and for Slovakia, which showed a declining position from the 40th to 46th. The Czech Republic continuously improves its position, while Poland is stagnating at the 32–33rd place.

Figure 6. Ease of tracking LPI scores of V4 countries

2007 4,00 3,80 3,60 3,40 3,20 Czech Republic CZE 3,00 Hungary HUN 2,80 2014 2,60 2010 Poland POL Slovak Republic SVK Average V4

2012

Source: World Bank

The tendencies of ease of tracking and tracing LPI component evaluation are similar to the overall LPI tendencies for the Czech Republic and Poland. The Hungarian tendencies are also similar to other components but the range is larger comparing to the other V4 countries. After the smallest value in 2010, Hungary achieved the highest score both in 2012 and 2014. The Slovak values are the smallest between the V4 countries except for 2010, when Slovakia received an extremely high evaluation.

200

Table 6. The ease of tracking LPI rank of V4 countries Country 2007 2010 2012 2014 Czech Republic 35 27 46 25 Hungary 44 71 30 15 Poland 40 33 37 27 Slovak Republic 55 31 68 63 Source: World Bank

The changes in the international position of the V4 countries on the basis of the tracking and tracing indicator show extremely wide range (from 71st place in 2010 to the 15th in 2014) due to the Hungarian values. The most lagged position is for Slovakia except in 2010 when it received the second best place among the V4 countries. The positions of Poland and the Czech Republic show improvement with a falling back in 2012. The swing was larger for the Czech Republic.

Figure 7. Timeliness LPI scores of V4 countries

2007 4,60

4,10

3,60 Czech Republic CZE 3,10 Hungary HUN 2014 2,60 2010 Poland POL Slovak Republic SVK Average V4

2012

Source: World Bank

Timeliness is a crucial component of the reliability and quality of logistics services. Despite some decrease, the highest values among the V4 countries are still connected to Poland. Similarly to some other LPI scores, Hungary’s score in timeliness decreased from the best value to the worst one, followed by a gradual increase approaching the top value by 2014. Slovakia continuously improves its value from the lowest to around the average of the V4

201

countries. The evaluation of the Czech timeliness shows individual tendencies in relation to its other LPI components. While in 2010 the country received the second best value, after a continuous decrease its value in 2014 was the lowest of the V4 countries.

Table 7. The timeliness LPI rank of V4 countries Country 2007 2010 2012 2014 Czech Republic 42 19 63 39 Hungary 34 62 61 20 Poland 40 2 19 15 Slovak Republic 60 34 46 30 Source: World Bank

In each year the best position in timeliness among the V4 countries was achieved by Poland, with the exception of 2007 when Hungary preceded by 6 places. In international comparison, Poland was ranked 2nd in 2010, and 15th in 2014. Hungary has fallen back to the last place (62 and 61) among the V4 countries in 2010 and 2012, respectively. However, by 2014 Hungary received the second place among the V4 countries, achieving the 20thrank. While Slovakia has strengthened its position from the 60th to the 30th in the international ranking, the Czech Republic lost its position with ranking values of 63 in 2012 and 39 in 2014. Particularly interesting is the evaluation of the international position of the V4 countries based on the LPI index in relation to the V4 neighboring countries. Two countries neighboring the V4 have higher LPI scores than that of Poland, the best among the Visegrad group (score 3.49, rank 31). These are along the western border of the V4 group. One of them is Germany which is on the top of the total international comparison with a score of 4.12, and the other one is Austria, having a score of 3.65, putting the Alpine country at the 22nd place. From the other seven neighboring countries, only Slovenia (score 3.38, rank 38) and Romania (score 3.26, rank 40) were able to overtake a V4 state (Slovakia, having a score of 3.25 and a rank of 43). The remaining five countries have all lower score values than any of the V4 countries. The closest values are for Lithuania, and the most lagged neighboring country is Belarus positioned on the 99th place in the international comparison. The average differences are demonstrated on the figures 8–9.

202

Table 7. Overall LPI scores and rank values of the V4 and neighboring countries in 2014 Country Code score rank Poland POL 3.49 31 Czech Republic CZE 3.49 32 Hungary HUN 3.46 33 Slovak Republic SVK 3.25 43 Average V4 3.43 34.75 Coefficient of V4 variance V4Coeff 3.4% 16.0%

V4 neighbors

Germany DEU 4.12 1 Austria AUT 3.65 22 Slovenia SVN 3.38 38 Romania ROM 3.26 40 Lithuania LTU 3.18 46 Croatia HRV 3.05 55 Ukraine UKR 2.98 61 Serbia SRB 2.96 63 Belarus BLR 2.64 99 Average V4NB 3.25 47.22 Coefficient of V4NB variance V4NBCoeff 13.4% 58.4% Source: World Bank

These differences are important from the aspect, that one of the key role of the V4 countries is to offer and ensure Trans-European transport and logistic services both in East–West, North– South and Northwest–Southeast relations.

203

Figure 8. LPI average and coefficient of variance differences between V4 and V4Neighbours in 2014

overall LPI score score Timeliness rank10,00 overall LPI score lower… Timeliness score 0,00 overall LPI score upper… -10,00 Tracking and tracing rank overall LPI rank rank -20,00 -30,00 Tracking and tracing score overall LPI rank lower… -40,00 -50,00 Logistics quality and… overall LPI rank upper…

Logistics quality and… overall LPI rank % of…

International shipments… Customs score

International shipments… Customs rank Infrastructure rank Infrastructure score

Average_diff V4-V4NB COEFF_diff

Figure 9. LPI Coefficients of variance for V4 and V4 neighboring countries

overall LPI score… Timeliness rank80,0% overall LPI score… Timeliness score overall LPI score… 60,0% Tracking and… overall LPI rank… 40,0%

Tracking and… 20,0% overall LPI rank…

0,0% Logistics quality… overall LPI rank…

Logistics quality… overall LPI rank… Coefficient of V4 International… Customs score variance V4Coeff

International… Customs rank Coefficient of Infrastructure… Infrastructure… V4NB variance V4NBCoeff

Common approaches to logistics and transport in the country strategies Comparing now the national logistics strategies, several commonalities can be observed. Each strategy emphasizes the long-term strategic importance of logistics and transport for the 204

national economies and social wellbeing. The contribution to the national economic growth and to the increase of social wellbeing is organic part of the general objectives of each transport and logistics strategy. Common requirement is the close connection to the national (macro level) and European development programs and strategies. Each strategy was elaborated on governmental initiation and contribution with the participation of various business and NGO organizations. It turns out from the national studies mostly indirectly that the responsibility for the realization of the strategies is connected to national governmental level. On the other side the strategies operate as guiding principles both for governmental and business organizations interested in transport and logistics development. The NGOs’ role is concentrating to the planning and control phases. The development along the Trans-European transport corridors to meet the high quality requirements is emphasized in each strategy. In most cases those lines are preferred which are operating as the main lines of movements (both passenger and goods) from the west to the east direction. The importance of transit roles is present in each strategy. On the other side the strategies strongly concentrate on internal transport and logistics. In the national level it is considered necessary to improve connections between the regional centres and the major cities in Europe, and to consolidate internal territorial cohesion, through the improvement of transportation both between the main centres of the country and smaller subregions. The international relations receive attention in most cases in connection with the development of border stations particularly at the Eastern borders. The system of objectives includes in each strategy (directly or indirectly on various levels):  the integrated development of a modern and coherent transport and logistics system,  the creation of favorable conditions for the smooth functioning of the transport market, and increasing the sector’s competitiveness.  increasing the efficiency and the quality of services and operation,  improving the safety and reliability,  decreasing the environmental risk and impact,  developing opportunities for multi-modal connections, and multimodal logistic centers,  development and integration of urban transport systems on regional and local levels, with the inclusion of rural areas,  developing the infrastructure for high speed interurban connections,  rational financing solutions.

205

Though all these objectives are relevant from the aspect of international co-operation between the V4 countries, the only common element in the national transport and logistics strategies is the reference to the North–South Trans-European transport corridor from this point of view.

Opportunities of co-operation between the V4 countries for transport and logistics development The common components of the transport and logistics strategies of the V4 countries evidently may point to potential fields of co-operation between the individual countries, despite the fact that most of them are identified as national objectives. The integrated development of the transport systems of individual V4 countries should be realized in harmony not only within the V4 community but it is a requirement on the level of the EU in the frame of the European transport and logistic systems. There are many aspects of this co- ordination from which several important points are listed below:  co-ordination of development along the Trans-European transit corridors on the roads, railways, water- and air transport, different energy networks both in the development of the linear and the nodal components, as well as the technological aspects,  the development of high-speed transport opportunities between national and regional centers in international perspective,  the co-ordination of the development and configuration of safety systems both for various transport braches and logistics,  in harmony with the EU processes the elaboration of common standardization principles for transport and logistics to improve efficiency and quality of services, as well as to promote innovation processes,  while there is a competition between the V4 countries in the field of transit in East– West relations, the co-operation and co-ordination either in the development of transit network, or in the distribution of transport could increase the efficiency and reliability,  the co-operation in the development of multimodal logistic centers to improve modal split utilization opportunities,  within the EU regulation a V4 level regional co-ordination of regulation systems for transport and logistics,  special field of opportunity to co-operate in education for transport and logistics sector that is included in several development strategies,

206

 co-ordination of industrial policies from the aspect of the transport and logistics sector (particularly production of transport means, energy policy, information technologies and software development etc.),  co-operation and co-ordination for decreasing environmental risk and impact of the transport and logistics sector,  particular attention has to be given to the impact of climate change in the transport and logistics sector – in this aspect radical change may take place in the role of the ports in Poland for the V4 countries, because they may increase owing to the opening Nordic/polar passage on the sea,  comparative studies to investigate the social impact of transport and logistics,  establishing and operating efficient financial funds and systems for transport and logistics sector development in co-operation with various European funds,  establishing and operating a V4 level body or institution for continuous monitoring and to promote co-operation in transport and logistics development.

Policy recommendations The opportunities and tasks involved into the national development strategies for the transport and logistics sector embrace very wide range. For the sake of efficient concentration of resources the ranking of tasks and the appropriate selection for realisation of projects are necessary. Two evaluation criteria have to be balanced in the frame of this process: priority should be given to eliminate the narrow sections or to those investments which have the largest multiplicative impact. This balance is different either for individual countries or for various branches, or for various LPI components. Therefore the body of national experts have to come to an agreement by keeping the efficiency and interest of the V4 community in view. One of the first steps should be the clarification and co-ordination of the mutually accepted terminological system. This may be connected to the development of the co-ordinated vocational education in this field. Particular attention has to be devoted to strengthening the V4 aspects of network components in the development strategies. Priorities have to be given to the co-ordinated development of north-south transport lines and border crossing points, co-ordination of developing the safety systems, standardisation and shipment organisation as well as the application of information technologies. Based on the LPI tendencies and latest values priorities should be given to customs services, ease of shipment and logistics services development in Hungary and Slovakia, to 207

infrastructural elements in Poland, to ease of tracking in the Czech Republic, Poland and Slovakia, and for timeliness in the Czech Republic and Slovakia. To preserve or improve competitiveness of the V4 countries the values gained in other LPI components of individual countries have to be maintained or rather by their further development or modernization stepping forward in ranking. Both for development of the transport and logistics and for the development of international co-operation in economic and environmental issues particular attention has to be devoted to the utilization of industrial multiplicative impacts of the transport and logistics, especially in the field of research and development (i.e. the innovation policy), and to the research and consequences of social and environmental impacts of the operation and development of transport and logistics. The activities based on this attitude will ensure the necessity that the transport and logistics development process in accordance with the strategies of individual countries should be organically embedded into the national economic and social development strategies while at the same time they contribute to the further development of the V4 community.

Suggestions for the next continuing phase of the project Though the results of this project could be utilized in the common coordinated development of transport and logistics sector the efficiency could be increased if the research team based on the evolved co-operation and experiences as well as on the achievements of the project further continues the work. Based on the results of this project there are several possible directions to continue:  The most urgent and most relevant work for a next project could be the clarification and co-ordination of a common terminology. In the frame of the present project the first steps were necessary to take, but just this problem has raised the idea to make a systematic work on this topic.  Based on the results of this analysis of the national strategies the evaluation and selection of those possible development project proposals which may contribute most effectively to the increased competitiveness of the operation of transport and logistics on the territories of the V4 countries. This meets with the EU development policies.  The elaboration of a mutually acceptable training program for various level of education.  Studying the environmental and social impact of transport and logistics development on the V4 co-operation and its perspectives. 208

 Analyzing the industrial multiplicative impact of the transport and logistics sector.  The institutional framework development for promoting the V4 co-operation in transport and logistics development.

209

Authors

Vaclav Cempírek He studied at the University of Žilina and at the Technical University of Dresden. Since 1996 he has taught at the University of Pardubice; he was appointed full professor in 2008. Between 2010 and 2013 he was member of the Parliament of the Czech Republic. Since 2015 he has been the chairman of the Czech Logistics Association. He has authored numerous books and journal articles. E-mail: [email protected]

Jozef Gnap Since 1985 he has worked for the University of Žilina, Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications, Department of Road and Urban Transport. He earned his doctoral degree in 1992 from the Department Branch and Sector Economy. In 1996 he became associate professor and in 2002 he was appointed full professor. In 2000 he also became the chair of the department. He is member of the directorate of the Association of Logistics and Freight Forwarding. E-mail: [email protected]

Edyta Klosa She studied management at the University of Economics in Katowice and after finishing her study in 2001 she started to work there as a lecturer and researcher for the Department of Business Logistics at Faculty of Management. As she earned her doctoral degree in 2009, she was appointed assistant professor at her department. As a young scholar she won a scholarship co-founded by the British Council and the Polish Ministry of Science (Cranfield University, UK). She is a researcher in the field of supply chain logistics individually as well as a member of her departmental research team and international research teams (e.g. Thenexom group, Polish-Slovenian research team, multi-university team working on LOGOS project). Edyta Klosa is also an author and co-author of multiple articles and papers as well as a monography covering logistics issues. In addition she translated two logistics handbooks to Polish (Coyle J.J., Bardi E., Langley Jr. J.: Management of Business Logistics and Lysons K.: Purchasing and Suply Chain Management). Since 2001 she has also worked as a managerial trainer and advisor for Polish firms or international companies running their businesses in Poland. 210

E-mail: [email protected]

Attila Korompai He studies geography and biology and earned a doctorate in economics. He worked as associate professor and head of the Geography Department at the Corvinus University of Budapest. He taught courses on regional analysis, forecasting and planning, regional policy, economics and geography of natural resources, economic geography in Hungarian and English language, and also elaboration of teaching programs, materials, textbooks for the above courses. He has experiences in the theories, methodologies and elaboration of regional studies and strategies, territorial impact assessment and evaluation, analyzing territorial synergies on international (EU), national, regional and settlement levels. He is member of the Regional Science Committee of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Hungarian ambassador of the Regional Studies Association, member of Hungarian Scientific Associations of Geography, Regional Science, and Settlement Development. E-mail: [email protected]

Iveta Kubasáková She obtained her PhD in Transport and telecommunication technology from the Faculty of Operation and Economics of Transport and Communications of the University of Žilina in 2006. Since 2009 she has been working as assistant professor at Department of Road and Urban Transport of the same university. She is the author of university textbooks and several papers published in academic journals. E-mail: [email protected]

Ákos Radóczy He studied engineering and economic at the Transport and Telecommunication College in Győr and the University of Economics in Budapest and earned a doctoral degree in economics from the latter in 1991. As a transport advisor he worked for several companies and the Institute for Transport Sciences. He was involved in several international projects of the Hungarian Logistics Association. E-mail: [email protected]

Petr Průša

211

He studied transport management at the University of Pardubice, where he also obtained his PhD in 2000. He is as an associate professor and director of the transport laboratory at the same university. Between 2008 and 2010 he acted as department chair, and 2010 and 2013 he was the vice-dean for international relations of the Jan Perner Transport Faculty. He is the author of several journal articles and book chapters. E-mail: [email protected]

Ivana Šimková She obtained her PhD in 2015 from the University of Žilina. During her postgraduate studies she spent a semester at the University of Patras (Greece), where she worked on the GIFT 2.0, a strategic project in the Adriatic corridor. She also obtained a MSc degree Civil Engineering in 2012 from University of El Paso (USA). Currently she works for the Transport Research Institute in Žilina as a researcher in public urban transport. She has authored several journal articles. E-mail: [email protected]

Marcin Świtała He earned his MA and PhD degrees from the University of Economics in Katowice. Since 2009 he has worked as an assistant professor at the Department of Business Logistics at the same university. His research focuses on logistics service market and logistics outsourcing relationships, and its results have been published in several academic journals. He is also the author of two marketing books. E-mail: [email protected]

Lajos Veres He studied engineering and economics at the Kiev University of Civil Aviation and the Budapest University of Technology and Economics. He obtained a PhD in regional development from the University of Pécs. He worked at the airport of Tököl and as advisor helped local authorities in regional development. He is professor of economics at the College of Dunaújváros, where he teaches regional development, regional economics, tourism economics, regional policy of European Union, settlement and regional planning, as well as regional logistics and logistics management. He is also the Danube Strategy Director of the same college. In the past few years he managed the elaboration of Danube Strategy in several European Union project. He is also chairman of the Domestic Regional Development Co. and 212

the Scientific Association for Spatial Development. He authored 11 independent books and 20 book chapters. E-mail: [email protected]

213