Trends in the Transport Sector, 1970-2001

TRENDS IN THE

TRANSPORT SECTOR

(75 2003 02 1 P) ISBN 92-821-1301-9

-:HSTCSC=VVXUVV:

E U R O P E A N

C O N F E R E N C E

O F

Published earlier than comparable studies, this report provides the reader with first-hand figures on key transport trends. It analyses the transport situation in the western and eastern European countries, as well as in the Baltic States and the CIS.

T R A N S P O R T

How have the passenger and freight transport sectors evolved since 1970? How is road safety faring? This publication presents the most up-to-date statistics on transport markets in Europe, together with char ts highlighting the major trends.

O F

IN THE

TRANSPORT SECTOR

M I N I S T E R S

TRENDS

1970-2001

100x205_e.fm Page 1 Friday, February 14, 2003 3:16 PM

EUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS OF TRANSPORT

Trends in the Transport Sector 1970-2001

CEMT ECMT

1953 2003

EUROPEAN CONFERENCE OF MINISTERS OF TRANSPORT (ECMT) The European Conference of Ministers of Transport (ECMT) is an inter-governmental organisation established by a Protocol signed in Brussels on 17 October 1953. It is a forum in which Ministers responsible for transport, and more specifically the inland transport sector, can co-operate on policy. Within this forum, Ministers can openly discuss current problems and agree upon joint approaches aimed at improving the utilisation and at ensuring the rational development of European transport systems of international importance. At present, the ECMT’s role primarily consists of: −

helping to create an integrated transport system throughout the enlarged Europe that is economically and technically efficient, meets the highest possible safety and environmental standards and takes full account of the social dimension;

−

helping also to build a bridge between the European Union and the rest of the continent at a political level.

The Council of the Conference comprises the Ministers of Transport of 42 full Member countries: Albania, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, FYR Macedonia, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Moldova, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, the Russian Federation, Serbia and Montenegro, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, Ukraine and the United Kingdom. There are six Associate member countries (Australia, Canada, Japan, Korea, New Zealand and the United States) and two Observer countries (Armenia and Morocco). A Committee of Deputies, composed of senior civil servants representing Ministers, prepares proposals for consideration by the Council of Ministers. The Committee is assisted by working groups, each of which has a specific mandate. The issues currently being studied -- on which policy decisions by Ministers will be required -- include the  ECMT, 2003

3

development and implementation of a pan-European transport policy; the integration of Central and Eastern European Countries into the European transport market; specific issues relating to transport by rail, road and waterway; combined transport; transport and the environment; sustainable urban travel; the social costs of transport; trends in international transport and infrastructure needs; transport for people with mobility handicaps; road safety; traffic management; road traffic information and new communications technologies. Statistical analyses of trends in traffic and investment are published regularly by the ECMT and provide a clear indication of the situation, on a trimestrial or annual basis, in the transport sector in different European countries. As part of its research activities, the ECMT holds regular Symposia, Seminars and Round Tables on transport economics issues. Their conclusions serve as a basis for formulating proposals for policy decisions to be submitted to Ministers. The ECMT’s Documentation Service has extensive information available concerning the transport sector. This information is accessible on the ECMT Internet site. For administrative purposes the ECMT’s Secretariat is attached to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

Publié en français sous le titre: EVOLUTION DES TRANSPORTS 1970-2001

Further information about the ECMT is available on Internet at the following address: http://www.oecd.org/cem/ ECMT Publications are distributed by: OECD Publications Service, 2, rue André Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16, France.

4

 ECMT, 2003

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION........................................................7 1.

THE ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT IN 2001 .................................................................9

1.1 General outlook .....................................................9 1.2 Factors in the slowdown of the Western economies............................................................10 1.3 A more favourable trend in the transition countries, especially in the CIS countries............12 1.4 The transition countries are finding it difficult to put their foreign trade on a viable growth path..14 1.5 A reassuring record on combating inflation in the new Member countries ..............................15 1.6 A disquieting employment situation in the transition countries ..............................................16 2.

FREIGHT TRANSPORT .................................18

2.1 Freight transport in the countries of Western Europe ...................................................18 Road freight transport .........................................19 Rail freight transport...........................................20 Inland waterways ................................................22 Oil pipeline transport ..........................................23 2.2 Freight transport in the Central and Eastern European Countries .............................................24 Road freight transport .........................................25 Rail freight transport...........................................26 Inland waterway transport ..................................28 Oil pipeline transport ..........................................28 2.3 Freight transport in the countries of the CIS .......29 3.

PASSENGER TRANSPORT............................32

3.1 Passenger transport in the countries of Western Europe ...................................................32 Passenger transport by rail .................................32 Passenger transport by bus and coach................33  ECMT, 2003

5

Transport by car..................................................34 3.2 Passenger transport in the CEECs .......................35 Passenger transport by rail .................................35 Passenger transport by bus and coach................36 Transport by car..................................................36 3.3 Passenger transport in the CIS countries .............37 Passenger transport by rail .................................38 Passenger transport by bus and coach................38 4.

ROAD SAFETY ................................................39

4.1 Road safety figures for the countries of Western Europe ...................................................39 4.2 Road safety figures for CEECs............................41 4.3 Road safety figures for the countries of the CIS..43 TABLES......................................................................49 A.

Freight Transport..................................................51

B.

Passenger Transport .............................................57

C.

Road Accidents ....................................................63

6

 ECMT, 2003

INTRODUCTION

The main aim of this publication is to describe developments in the transport sector in Europe in 2001 and to show, primarily by means of charts, how the situation has changed since 1970. The analysis of recent trends in the European transport sector is based on data supplied by 41 ECMT Member countries1 in the form of statistics expressed in passenger and tonne-kilometres. To ensure that the overall trends are representative of as many countries as possible, the indices used in several of the charts include estimates for countries which do not yet have figures available for 2001. The report has been divided in four parts. The first one is a brief analysis of the economic environment in 2001. The second part deals with freight transport in ECMT Member countries. The third part concentrates on passenger transport and the fourth one reviews road safety. The 15 Member States of the EU together with Norway, Switzerland, Turkey as well as Iceland and Liechtenstein are referred to hereinafter as “Western European countries” (ECMT/WEST). The recent trends in the transition countries are also reviewed. Given that the transport systems of these countries are highly distinctive and are currently undergoing radical change, 1.

Albania (ALB), Austria (AUT), Azerbaijan (AZE), Belarus (BLR), Belgium (BEL), Bosnia-Herzegovina (BIH), Bulgaria (BGR), Croatia (HRV), the Czech Republic (CZE), Denmark (DNK), Estonia (EST), the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (YUG), Finland (FIN), France (FRA), FYR Macedonia (MKD), Georgia (GEO), Germany (DEU), Greece (GRC), Hungary (HUN), Iceland (ISL), Ireland (IRL), Italy (ITA), Latvia (LVA), Liechtenstein (LIE), Lithuania (LTU), Luxembourg (LUX), Moldova (MDA), Netherlands (NLD), Norway (NOR), Poland (POL), Portugal (PRT), Romania (ROM), the Russian Federation (RUS), the Slovak Republic (SVK), Slovenia (SVN), Spain (ESP), Sweden (SWE), Switzerland (CHE), Turkey (TUR), Ukraine (UKR) and the United Kingdom (GBR).

 ECMT, 2003

7

it was decided to compile specific aggregate indicators: one set for the 12 Central and Eastern European Countries and three Baltic States (ECMT/CEECs) and a second set for the 6 members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (ECMT/CIS). Data for the former Czechoslovakia (CSK) have been taken into account up to 1992 to ensure a degree of continuity in the series over a lengthy period of time; from 1993 onwards, the data provided by the Czech and Slovak Republics have been used. Furthermore, German reunification produced a break in the series due to the incorporation, from 1991 onwards, of data relating to new Länder, resulting in a similar increase in the results of the ECMT as a whole.

8

 ECMT, 2003

1. THE ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENT IN 2001

1.1 General outlook The year 2001 was marked by a sharp slowdown in the world economy and a rapidly worsening economic outlook. World GNP is estimated to have grown by only 2.5% that year compared with 4.7% in 2000. Correlatively, world trade was flat in 2001 whereas it had grown by over 11% in 2000. The most salient economic development of 2001 was that the world’s three largest economies, the United States, Japan and Germany, all went into recession at the same time, something that had not been encountered since 1973-74. As regards the industrialised countries, wealth produced grew by only 1% in 2001 after having grown by 3.7% in 2000. Between 2000-2001, the economies of the industrialised countries thus slowed considerably. Indeed, they experienced one of the sharpest rates of deceleration since the 1973-74 recession. The economic prospects for the United States were overcast by the terrorist attacks in New York and Washington DC on 11 September 2001. These tragic events occurred at a time when the economies of the industrialised countries were touching bottom. In the short term, the effect of these attacks was to make the economic outlook even more difficult to predict, compounded by a loss of confidence on the part of households and enterprises and the impact of the events felt practically worldwide. The economic slowdown that marked 2001 was not felt with the same force in the transition countries. Indeed, they even weathered it unexpectedly well. In the Central and Eastern European Countries (CEECs) and the Baltic States, GDP grew by over 3% in 2001. In Russia, the economic boom slowed sharply but the 2001 figures still show growth of 5%. Moreover, the strength

 ECMT, 2003

9

of the Russian economy buoyed the CIS economies in 2001. 1.2 Factors in the slowdown of the Western economies One of the main factors in the slowdown of the Western economies was the collapse of the information and communications technology investment boom, following the emergence of large amounts of spare capacity in manufacturing industry in the United States and corporate financial results which were not in line with market expectations. Companies had over-invested during the long period of uninterrupted economic expansion experienced by the United States (1990-2000). As this period came to an end, manufacturing companies slashed purchases of goods and services in the “new economy”, causing the stock market prices of new technology companies to collapse. It became very clear that these companies were completely over-valued. The stock markets of all Western countries were affected, prompting a drastic decline in the “wealth effect” that the speculative rise in these stocks had generated. The decline was particularly marked in the United States, where it triggered a fall in household consumption and a loss of confidence in the future that was detrimental to high levels of consumption. But even before this became perceptible, the declining profitability of industrial enterprises, together with over-capacity, had prompted firms to cut back their investment plans sharply. The cutback in purchases of new-technology products spread throughout the industrialised world on account of the internationalisation of production processes, and saddled information and communications technology firms with colossal debts; whereas in 2000 people had believed that a new era had opened up in the information and communications sector. The worsening economic outlook pushed down stock prices in its turn.

The recessionary effect on the demand for investment and consumer goods triggered by the stock market downturn was aggravated by another shock -- the rise in oil prices. This rise, which was very high in 1999-2000, was reversed only in the second half of 10

 ECMT, 2003

2001. Household disposable income in the Western economies was thus hit sharply in the first six months of 2001, while energy-consuming firms also saw their profit margins narrow as a result of higher oil prices. On account of the deflationary pressures bearing down on the world economy, firms were unable to pass on the rise in energy prices to their sale prices. This also prompted firms to cut back their investment. Also, it should not be forgotten that central bank lending terms were tightened in 1999 and 2000 and that, while the Federal Reserve Bank was quick to respond by loosening monetary policy considerably, to the reversal of trend and then to the terrorist outrages of 11 September 2001, the European Central Bank was more reluctant to cut its rates -- it only did so from May 2001 -- to deal with persisting inflation in the European Union close to the top end of its targets. All these factors combined to weaken world economic growth in 2001: the GDP of the industrialised countries fell after the first quarter of 2001, and the fall was amplified during the remaining three quarters. Against this background, the terrorist attacks of 11 September had a considerable psychological impact, making it impossible to predict how the economy would develop during the last months of 2001. Throughout the European Union, economic activity slowed sharply in 2001. The growth cycle that Spain, Finland, France, Ireland, the Netherlands and Portugal had been experiencing was reversed. The weak growth rates of these countries masked a very marked industrial recession, such that industrial output in the European Union in December 2001 was more than 5% lower than December 2000. As a major exporter, Germany was very badly hit by the stagnation of international trade while its economy experienced the same deflationary pressures as other countries. Mention should also be made of the construction crisis in that country, stemming from over-investment in the wake of reunification, the effects of which were amplified in 2001 by the decline in the population’s propensity to consume and invest because of the economic doldrums.

 ECMT, 2003

11

Outside the Euro area, the UK economy grew by 2.3% in 2001. However, this figure, which was better than that of the Euro-area economies, masked a very sharp deceleration in 2001. The Danish and Swedish economies also slowed sharply in 2001, especially the Swedish economy as a result of the collapse of exports of new information and communications technology goods. Outside the European Union, Turkey experienced a major financial crisis after the devaluation of February 2001. All components of final demand fell sharply, with the exception of exports, the level of which was insufficient, however, to prevent GDP from falling by more than 7%. Switzerland did not escape the cyclical slowdown in 2001 either. Output grew by over 1.5% during the first half of the year and was subsequently flat. This turndown, which reflected a loss of export dynamism and declining corporate investment, was accompanied by a worsening of the labour market. 1.3 A more favourable trend in the transition countries, especially in the CIS countries Despite the sharp slowdown in the world economy, 2001 was a relatively positive year for the new ECMT Member countries, which, with the exception of FYR Macedonia, recorded GDP growth in some cases higher than the good performance in 2000. The aggregate GDP of the transition economies grew by 5% in 2001, making the CEECs and the CIS the regions with the highest growth rates. Behind these figures lay the economic performance of the CIS, which experienced strong growth for the third year running. As in 2000, Russia was the main engine of this expansion, recording GDP growth of 5% in 2001. After the 1998 devaluation, the Russian Government introduced a set of reforms which strengthened the economic and legal basis of civil society. Tax reforms and consolidation in the banking sector, coupled with a lessening of political interference in the economy, laid the basis for economic recovery. The devaluation of August 1998 made Russian products more competitive in the domestic market. Furthermore, from mid-1999 to 12

 ECMT, 2003

mid-2001, the Russian economy benefited to the maximum from the steep rise in oil prices, as a result of which GDP grew by 21% over that period. In many respects, the reforms undertaken by the Russian Government seem to have put the country on the path of irreversible transformation into a market economy, even if much still remains to be done. Another important aspect is that eight of the eleven CIS economies experienced high rates of growth in 2001, even higher than that of Russia. Moldova and Ukraine were among these countries. Overall, efforts to bring down inflation combined with increased income from the growth of exports raised purchasing power in these countries, which in turn triggered a virtuous circle of economic growth. In 2001, the CEECs and the Baltic States also experienced strong growth. In Croatia, the Czech Republic, Romania, the Slovak Republic, Latvia and Lithuania, the growth rate in 2001 was up on 2000, outstripping official estimates. Activity was closely in line with expectations in Albania, Bosnia Herzegovina, Bulgaria and Estonia. In contrast, activity in Slovenia and Hungary slowed in 2001 due to lower export growth. Nevertheless, growth in both countries was positive in 2001 and above the Euro area average. Only two economies, FYR Macedonia and Poland, experienced serious economic difficulties in 2001. The reasons for Poland’s difficulties are manifold, complex and well-entrenched, and a lesson can be drawn from them: the governments of new Member countries should take advantage of the years of economic expansion to overhaul completely their economic systems, notably with regard to the issue of loss-making public enterprises and public deficits generally. Putting off indispensable reforms until tomorrow runs the risk that the problems will get worse and accumulate; problems which were masked during periods of expansion will then have devastating effects during the periods of recession they help to usher in and aggravate. The social repercussions of the necessary adjustments are admittedly painful and it is important to put in place an adequate safety net to cushion them, but the governments of the new Member countries should not  ECMT, 2003

13

ease up on their efforts. As for FYR Macedonia, which was the only country in the region to experience a recession, internal tensions due to the armed conflict there explain its poor performance. Looking at the factors behind the enviable performances of the transition countries, it may be said that the reforms launched in the immense majority of countries have restored the confidence of households and enterprises, attracting foreign capital and direct investment on a very large scale, despite the Argentina syndrome. Overall demand in the CEECs thus evolved positively in 2001, internal growth factors taking over from weakening external demand. In addition, thanks to productivity gains, the transition countries managed to remain competitive vis-à-vis their foreign competitors. Their share of EU imports was thus up in 2001 on 2000, reflecting the greater competitiveness of their products. In this connection, it may be noted that the growth of productive investment in the transition countries weakened somewhat in 2001, falling to 1.8%, i.e. half the rate in 2000 (3.6%), due primarily to a sharp decline in investment in Poland. Productive investment rose steeply in Estonia, Latvia, Bulgaria and the Slovak Republic. The CIS countries were unable to maintain the high level of investment recorded in 2000, but it still grew 10% in 2001. Only in Belarus and Moldova did investment fall. All told, the economic performance of the transition countries in 2001 exceeded what most economic analysts expected, on account of the very marked slowdown of the Western economies at the start of 2001. The main factor of concern for the transition countries remained their recurrent foreign trade deficit. 1.4 The transition countries are finding it difficult to put their foreign trade on a viable growth path The overall foreign trade account of the transition countries is heavily influenced by oil prices. In 2000, when the price of crude oil surged, the transition countries posted an overall foreign trade surplus of over US$27 billion. In 2001, the surplus halved due to the 14

 ECMT, 2003

fall in oil price mid-year. This reflected the reduced surplus of the oil-exporting CIS countries but also a worsening of the foreign trade balance of the majority of transition countries. Most of them were able to finance their deficits by inflows of foreign direct investment but some CIS countries and other south-east European countries had difficulty financing them. In Eastern Europe and the Baltic States, the foreign trade deficit, which amounted to US$20 billion in 2001, hardly changed compared with 2000. The contraction of industrial exports to the EU countries was offset by increased income from services and higher exports of goods and services to Russia. The deficit worsened slightly, except in Poland which was in virtual recession, due to the increase in exports of goods and services, fuelled by the economic growth experienced by the East European and Baltic States. In south-east Europe, with the exception of Croatia, which experienced a significant expansion in its exports to the EU, a very sharp deceleration of Romania’s and Bulgaria’s exports may be noted. Their trade with CIS countries remained flat while the weakening of their exports was due to the turndown in the world prices of some of the raw materials they export. Bulgaria was also affected by the economic crisis in Turkey and Yugoslavia’s difficulties. The dollar value of CIS exports rose by 4% during the first nine months of 2001. Exports grew in practically all countries -- notably by 25% in Moldova -- while they fell in Georgia. All told, the aggregate trade balance of the CIS countries shrank by only US$4 billion in 2001, to $49 billion. The surplus of Russia, one of the main oil and metals exporters in the region, fell somewhat.

1.5 A reassuring record on combating inflation in the new Member countries The trend towards an easing of inflationary pressures was confirmed in 2001 in the transition countries. The disinflation process was largely due to the fall in the price of imports, especially energy imports. At the same time, good harvests brought down  ECMT, 2003

15

the prices of basic foodstuffs. Given the importance of food products in the housewife’s basket in the transition countries, especially in the CIS countries and south-east Europe, the beneficial effect of the reduction in food prices was very discernible from mid-2001. Nevertheless, in countries like Croatia, Hungary and Slovenia, food products remained a factor of inflation. Overall, however, the main inflation factor in the transition countries was the rise in the prices of services, especially in Lithuania, the Czech Republic, Russia and Yugoslavia.

By the end of 2001, the annual inflation rate was higher than in 2000 only in Latvia and Lithuania, and then it was still relatively low (2-3%). In contrast, although the inflation rate fell in Romania in 2001, it was still well above 30%, though below that in Yugoslavia (40.5%) and Belarus (46.3%). In Poland, the high unemployment rate was accompanied by wage moderation, while deflationary pressures at work in the economy, combined with good harvests, brought inflation down to an annual rate of 3.5% at the end of 2001, one of the lowest rates in the region. In Hungary, despite the effects of a wage increase and a stable level of employment, inflation at the end of 2001 was under 7%, three points less than at the end of 2000. In the Czech Republic, inflation stabilized at around 4%, but was unchanged on 2000 on account of the expansionary monetary and tax policies adopted. In Russia and the CIS countries, the growth of total demand stemming from rising incomes put upward pressure on prices, however. 1.6 A disquieting employment situation in the transition countries Generally speaking, labour markets in the transition countries showed no improvement despite the overall satisfactory economic performance of those countries in 2001. Employment continued to decline in CEECs and rose only very slightly in the CIS countries, so that the overall labour supply remained weak. Unemployment rates stayed very high and worsened in several countries. The problem of underemployment was 16

 ECMT, 2003

exacerbated by the fact that some jobseekers were no longer eligible, or ineligible, for compensation, the number of job-seekers in this situation having risen in some countries, while employment remained concentrated in certain areas, though there were differences between countries in this respect.

In Eastern Europe, total employment fell in 2001 in the same proportions as in 2000. Employment in Eastern Europe was hit particularly by developments in Poland. During the first three quarters of 2001, employment rose in Hungary, the Slovak Republic and Slovenia. The trend in Albania was comparable as a result of the major public investment and job creation programmes implemented. In contrast, employment was flat in the Czech Republic, Romania and Yugoslavia and fell in the other countries. In FYR Macedonia, employment fell considerably, due to the internal conflict and the deep recession that it triggered. All told, the unemployment rate in Eastern Europe worsened in 2001, rising to 15.6% on average, its highest level since the start of the political and economic transformation. The scant statistics available suggest that, in contrast, the labour market improved slightly in the CIS countries in 2001. While Russia showed signs of tangible improvement, the situation seems to have worsened in Ukraine and Moldova. Although the statistics should be treated with caution insofar as jobseekers do not necessarily register as seeking work, especially when they are no longer receiving unemployment benefit, the total number of jobseekers stood at 11 million in the CIS countries at end-2001, 1.5 million less than in the same period the previous year. Russia was the main contributor to this improvement, its unemployment rate falling from 10 to 9% over the period from December 2000 to December 2001.

 ECMT, 2003

17

2. FREIGHT TRANSPORT

2.1 Freight transport in the countries of Western Europe In the countries of Western Europe, road freight transport dominated the market in 2000; it accounted for more than 79% of the total tonne-kilometres carried by rail, road and inland waterway transport.

Trends in market share (in %) of the various modes Freight transport in t-km 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2001 23.6 21.7 17.7 15.1 14.7 14.0 Rail 66.0 69.2 74.1 77.6 78.5 79.4 Road 9.1 8.2 7.3 6.8 6.6 Inland waterway 10.4 100 100 100 100 100 100

A closer look at the trends over time shows that road freight transport has been steadily taking market shares from rail and inland waterway transport. However, while inland waterway transport is bearing up under the trend, the modal share of rail transport in 2001 stood at no more than 50% of its share in 1970 (31.1%).

18

 ECMT, 2003

Trends in freight transport (tonne-kilometres) – Western Europe – 1970=100 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50

7

0 20 0

1

8

4

19 9

19 9

19 9

5

2

9

Railways Inland waterways

19 8

19 8

19 8

6

19 7

3

19 7

19 7

19 7

0

0

Roads Pipelines

Railways, 18 countries : AUT, BEL, CHE, DEU, DNK, ESP, FIN, FRA, GBR, GRC, IRL, ITA, LUX, NLD, NOR, PRT, SWE, TUR Roads, 16 countries : AUT, BEL, CHE, DEU, DNK, ESP, FIN, FRA, GBR, GRC, ITA, LUX, NLD, NOR, SWE, TUR Inland waterways, 10 countries : AUT, BEL, CHE, DEU, FIN, FRA, GBR, ITA, LUX, NLD Pipelines, 12 countries : AUT, BEL, CHE, DEU, DNK, ESP, FRA, GBR, ITA, NLD, NOR, TUR Source: ECMT.

Road freight transport In 2001, road freight transport in the countries of Western Europe was not directly affected by the contraction in the industrial activity in those countries. Tonne-kilometres carried by Western road hauliers were up by over 2.1% on 2000. For this reason, road freight transport reached a record level in 2001. Looking at the situation in 2001 country by country, the enviable performance of road freight  ECMT, 2003

19

transport in Spain and Luxembourg stands out, with respectively +8.4% and +5.8%. It may also be noted that Germany, France and Norway recorded growth close on 3%. The other countries for which data are available, in contrast, show contractions in road freight transport in 2001, the most significant declines being recorded in Turkey (-6.3%) and Sweden (-4.8%), followed by Finland (-3.95%). Liechtenstein also recorded a fall in activity, attested by the 2.6% fall in the number of tonne-kilometres carried by road hauliers. In the Netherlands, road freight transport was down by 1.7%, while in Denmark and the United Kingdom it fell by close on 1%. However, the contractions in activity did not involve very large volumes, so that the overall performance of road freight transport was not affected. A longer-term look at the trends shows that total tonne-kilometres in the road freight sector increased by a factor of more than 3.25 over the period 1970-2001, despite the gloomy economic situation in 2001. This was the strongest performance of all the inland transport modes in Western Europe and shows that road freight transport is relatively unaffected by economic downturns. The progress made on European construction and the expansion of international trade resulting therefrom benefited road haulage undertakings directly. Rail freight transport Compared with the performance of road freight transport in 2001, the performance of rail freight transport in the countries of Western Europe was disappointing. Tonne-kilometres carried by 17 rail networks were down by over 3.5% on 2000. The weak performance of the Turkish (-23.6%), Greek (-11%), French (-9%), Belgian (-7.7%), Luxembourg (-7.1%) and Danish (-6.2%) networks may be noted. Several other networks recorded a decrease in tonne-kilometres close to the average: the Swedish (-2.7%), Italian (-2.6%), Swiss and German (both down by 2.3%) networks. The Portuguese and Norwegian networks reported a decline in activity of almost 2%.

20

 ECMT, 2003

In contrast with this overall trend, which belied the declarations of intention of the heads of the rail networks and the wishes of policymakers, only a few countries reported a growth in activity -- the United Kingdom (+8.8%), Ireland (+5.3%) and Austria (+1.8%). The smaller progress made by the Spanish network (+1.2%) may also be noted. Clearly, the negative trade of rail freight transport in the countries of Western Europe in 2001 shows that this transport mode does not mirror changes in the cycle since tonne-kilometres carried in 2001 were at the same level as in 1999, whereas over the same period the economy grew. Furthermore, between 1970 and 2001, rail freight transport was virtually flat, registering the weakest performance of all the inland freight transport modes. The reason for the weaker performance of rail freight transport in 2001 -- which affected combined transport since the ICF posted a fall of over 13% in its TEU business, while the UIRR (International Union of Combined Rail-Road Transport Companies) reported a decline of 12% in domestic traffic and an increase of only 1% in international traffic -- is to be found in the inadequate quality of the services provided. Whether it was on account of difficulties co-ordinating freight trains with passenger trains, a shortage of drivers or locomotives or strikes, it seemed very difficult for rail networks to cope with a level of freight activity barely above that of 1970. Admittedly, use of the possibility of “free access” on international corridors -- perceived as a solution to the lack of dynamism of purely national rail networks -- increased, but only very small volumes were involved. For example, a prerequisite for improving the international performance of the railways is to authorise the drivers of one network to drive trains on another network, which in turn requires that the training received by drivers in one country be recognised in another. While it is clear that the future growth of European transport lies in international transport, the numerous impediments that rail networks have to deal with when operating international services attest to the magnitude of the task to be accomplished.  ECMT, 2003

21

Inland waterways Tonne-kilometres carried by inland waterways fell by 1.15% in 2001 compared with 2000. This overall figure is valid for seven countries of Western Europe. More specifically, inland waterway traffic increased substantially in Finland (+8.7%), Italy (+7.1%) and Austria (+4.6%). It may also be noted that inland waterway traffic grew by over 1.5% in the Netherlands. In contrast with these few positive trends, in 2001 inland waterway transport fell in France by over 6.5% and in Germany by almost 2.5%. In Luxembourg, activity was also down, though to a lesser extent: -1.6% on 2000. Looking at the traffic on a few significant waterways, it may be noted that 9 890 vessels were recorded in 2001 at the Coblenz Lock on the Moselle, carrying an overall tonnage of 15.4 million tonnes compared with 16 million tonnes in 2000. This tonnage was broken down as follows: 9.9 million tonnes upstream (10.2 million in 2000) and 5.5 million tonnes downstream (5.8 million in 2000). The decline in upstream traffic was mainly due to lower tonnages of iron ore and scrap, while in the case of downstream traffic it was iron, steel and non-ferrous metal that declined the most. Besides bulk cargo, 1 530 containers, or 25% less than in 2000, were carried on the international stretch of the Moselle.

In the case of Rhine traffic, the picture in 2001 was lacklustre, since the volume of traditional Rhine traffic was down by 2.5% on 2000 and business was flat even though water levels could be described as good. Cuts in steel production in Germany -- which also reduced the demand for coal -- during the second half of 2001 explain, to a large extent, this performance. On the Main-Danube canal, due to the downturn in the economy, the closure of a thermal power station beside the canal and technical repairs at the locks, the volume of traffic was down by over 11% (in tonnes) on 2000, a record year. The traffic at Kelheim, a reach shared between the Main and the Danube, decreased by 4.2%. This figure includes a 5.7% fall in tonnage towards the Danube but only a 2% fall in flows towards the Rhine. 22

 ECMT, 2003

At the Kelheim Lock, the main traffic flows consisted of foodstuffs and fodder together with ore and scrap. On the other hand, container traffic trade between the ports of the Main-Danube canal and the Danube ports was down by over 23% on 2000. As regards overall traffic on German waterways, 2000 had been an exceptional year from the point of view of both tonnage carried and logistical services. The slight decline in 2001 was thus only relative. It should be said, however, that non-Rhine flags handled only 37% of the tonnage carried by waterway. Container transport deserves special mention, however, since it rose by over 5%. A look at the longer-term trends shows that the volume in tonne-kilometres carried by inland waterway transport was up by nearly 22% in 2001 on 1970, which was an enviable achievement compared with the performance of rail transport which was flat over the same period, but still fell far short of the results for road freight transport. Admittedly, the latter mode covers Western Europe via a very dense network of roads, an advantage which it is impossible for the other modes, in particular inland waterways, to offset. Oil pipeline transport Data for 12 countries show that oil pipeline transport seems to have fallen by nearly 6% in 2001 compared with 2000. Pipeline transport of petroleum products and chemicals thus did not confirm its steady growth, mainly due to the sharp fall in oil pipeline transport through Turkey (-18.1%). In contrast, it grew significantly in Austria (+6.7%), Switzerland (+6.5%) and Norway (+5.6%). In Spain too, it grew appreciably, by almost 4% in 2001. It also increased by 2.9% in Italy in 2001. The only other significant decrease, which confirms somewhat the mixed picture in 2001, was in France (-2.3%) and, to a lesser extent, the Netherlands (-0.7%). Leaving aside the impact of major investment, which makes any long-term comparison subject to caution, it may be noted that the growth of oil pipeline transport over the period 1970-2001 was uneven but  ECMT, 2003

23

nonetheless positive, making it one of the primary means of transporting chemicals and petroleum products.

2.2 Freight transport in the Central and Eastern European Countries In the CEECs and the Baltic States, rail has lost the dominant position it held in 1990, and the even more dominant one in 1970, to road transport which, in 2001, carried over 56% of total tonne-kilometres carried by the three main inland transport modes. Inland waterway transport also saw its market decline, but to a lesser extent than rail, which was the big loser in the process of economic transformation. Trends in market share (in %) of the various modes Freight transport in t-km 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2001 71.5 72.4 66.2 51.0 43.7 41.4 Rail 25.1 24.4 30.4 46.4 53.9 56.3 Road 3.2 3.4 2.6 2.4 2.3 Inland waterway 3.4 100 100 100 100 100 100

24

 ECMT, 2003

Trends in freight transport (tonne-kilometres) – Eastern Europe and the Baltic States 1970=100 350 300 250 200 150 100 50

Railways Inland waterways

20 00

19 97

19 94

19 91

19 88

19 85

19 82

19 79

19 76

19 73

19 70

0

Roads Pipelines

Railways, 15 countries : ALB, BGR, BIH, CZE, EST, HRV, HUN, LTU, LVA, MKD, POL, ROM, SVK, SVN, YUG Roads, 14 countries : ALB, BGR, CZE, EST, HRV, HUN, LTU, LVA, MKD, POL, ROM, SVK, SVN, YUG Inland waterways, 11 countries : BGR, CZE, EST, HRV, HUN, LTU, LVA, POL, ROM, SVK, YUG Pipelines, 10 countries : ALB, BGR, CZE, HRV, HUN, LTU, LVA, POL, ROM, YUG Source: ECMT.

Road freight transport Road freight transport in the CEECs and the Baltic States saw a large increase in the tonne-kilometres carried by its hauliers in 2001, averaging almost 4.5%. This is comparable to, although slightly below, the figure for road freight transport in 2000 (+5.2%). Tonne-kilometres reached record levels in 2001, confirming road haulage as the leading mode for freight transport in the CEECs and the Baltic States, a position that road haulage has held in these countries since 1998.  ECMT, 2003

25

Slovenia and Estonia recorded the biggest growth in road freight transport, respectively +29.2% and +18.9%. Road freight transport’s performance was also enviable in Yugoslavia (+12.5%) and Latvia (+12.1%) as well as, though to a lesser extent, in Bulgaria (+8%) and Romania (+7.7%). Lithuania was in virtually the same situation, with tonne-kilometres carried by road hauliers up by over 6.5%. Only Albania and Poland recorded weak rates of growth, respectively +3.1% and +2.1%. Conversely, the counter-trend performances of Czech and Slovak hauliers may be noted, down by 4.5% and 5.3% respectively, but these were exceptions in an overall positive picture. The strong showing of the CEECs and the Baltic States, despite the worsening economic climate, was directly discernible in the figures for their road freight transport. Buoyant exports to both the EU and CIS strengthened the lead they are taking in transport growth. In all, it would seem that road has bettered its performance by a factor of 3.4 over the period 1970-2001 in the CEECs and the Baltic States, with a particularly rapid spurt in growth from 1995 onwards -- coinciding with the first visible signs of economic recovery in the region -- that completely and swiftly wiped out the drops in traffic recorded in the period 1990-93. One point to be noted is that overall performance over the period 1970-2001 is comparable in all respects with that seen in road freight transport in Western Europe at the same time, the only difference being the very rapid acceleration in the increase in tonne-kilometres carried by road in the CEECs and the Baltic States from 1995 onwards. Rail freight transport In 2001, rail freight transport in the CEECs saw a very large overall decline of almost 5.2%, thereby wiping out completely the gains made in 2000; as a result, the level of activity was less than what it had been in 1999. This decline confirmed the long-term 26

 ECMT, 2003

downward trend in rail freight transport, which had been broken only in 1995 and 2000. It may be said that the still positive economic climate did not give the railways any respite in what seems to be an inevitable process of decline. Looking at the figures for each network, it can be seen that only the Croatian, Latvian and Estonian networks reported increases of respectively +16.6%, +6.5% and 5.6%. The maintenance of flows of traffic to Russia, fuelled by strong economic activity, explains the performances of the Estonian and Latvian networks. The other networks saw their activity decrease. The fall was particularly marked in Albania (-32.1%), Lithuania (-13.2%), FYR Macedonia (-12.3%), Poland (-11.8%) and Bulgaria (-11.4%). The Hungarian, Czech and Slovak networks also experienced a fall in business, though less than the aforementioned countries. Their performances were respectively -4.5%, -3.5% and -2.7%, i.e. very close to the overall average. It may also be noted that the Slovene and Romanian networks’ activity was virtually flat, which, bearing in mind the results of the other networks, may be considered a positive performance. An overview of the longer-term trends shows very clearly that 2001 confirmed the declining performances of the rail networks of the CEECs in the area of freight transport. The decline was directly discernible in the fall in business, by more than 50%, of the Polish combined transport operator, Polkombi, which followed on the 20% fall in activity of Boehmiakombi, the Czech combined transport operator. Rail freight transport has shrunk by well over a half since 1990 in the CEECs and the Baltic States. This reflects a structural economic change that works to the advantage of road transport, which has proved better able to adapt to a new economic situation characterised by an opening up to new external markets.

 ECMT, 2003

27

Inland waterway transport Inland waterway transport in the CEECs saw a fall of 2% in tonnage carried in 2001 compared with 2000, when it was already down by about approximately 6% on the previous year. This fall confirmed the downward trend in inland waterway transport which began with the transition process and was broken only by the period 1995-97. It should be pointed out, however, that this downward trend was compounded by traffic difficulties on the Yugoslavian part of the Danube, which severely penalised inland waterway transport. Among the poor performances were those of the Romanian and Czech networks, down by 26.6% and 21.6% respectively. Bulgaria’s performance was also negative, down by 8% in 2001. Only the Croatian and Hungarian networks reported significant growth, with increases of 23.8% and 18.4% respectively, although in the case of the Croatian network the growth involved very small volumes. In the case of Hungary, notwithstanding this growth, activity was only half that in 1990. Only the Polish and Romanian networks posted a level of activity in 2001 higher than that recorded in 1990, with growth rates of 7.8% and 4.2%, respectively. All told, an overview of the long-term trend shows that inland waterway transport seems to have lost nearly half of its freight transport business since the start of the transition process, a remarkably poor performance, even though less so than that of rail transport. However, one has to bear in mind that the protracted armed conflicts that shook the region had major repercussions on inland waterway transport. Oil pipeline transport Trends in oil pipeline transport in 2001 in the CEECs and the Baltic States were positive. With very high growth in Croatia, Lithuania, Romania and Hungary (respectively +73%, +38.3, +27.1% and 21.9%), overall oil pipeline transport was up by 13% in the region. In comparison, there was only slight growth in Poland (+3.6%) and the Czech Republic (+3%).

28

 ECMT, 2003

On the other hand, oil pipeline transport fell in 2001 in Albania and Bulgaria (respectively, -14.3% and -10.5%) in contrast with the overall positive trend in the region. Overall, oil pipeline transport does not seem to have declined since 1990, indeed it even grew by about 20%, an enviable performance compared with that of rail, and inland waterway transport to a lesser degree. It should also be noted that the number of tonnekilometres carried by oil pipeline in the region was five times that of tonne-kilometres carried by inland waterway. 2.3 Freight transport in the countries of the CIS In the member states of the CIS, rail confirmed its position as the dominant mode for freight transport, accounting for over 86% of the market in tonnekilometres in 2001, with road transport carrying not even as much as 10% of this amount and inland waterways just over 4%.

Trends in market share (in%) of the various modes Freight transport in t-km Rail Road Inland waterway

 ECMT, 2003

1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2001 87.6 87.6 84.5 84.7 86.3 86.6 6.7 6.8 9.4 10.0 9.1 9.0 5.7 5.6 6.1 5.3 4.6 4.4 100 100 100 100 100 100

29

Trends in freight transport (tonne-kilometres) – CIS countries – 1990=100 120

100

80

60

40

20

Railways Inland waterways

20 01

20 00

19 99

19 98

19 97

19 96

19 95

19 94

19 93

19 92

19 91

19 90

0

Roads Pipelines

Railways and roads, 6 countries: ZE, BLR, GEO, MDA, RUS, UKR Inland waterways, 2 countries: BLR, RUS Pipelines, 2 countries: AZE, RUS Source: ECMT.

Given the foregoing, the performance of rail can be taken as an indicator of the economic situation and, in this respect, it may be noted that rail transport in the CIS increased by more than 2.5% in 2001 which, while a positive performance, was below the 13.4% growth in 2000 on 1999. Actually, if it had not been for the sharp decrease in activity in Ukraine (-14.4%) and Belarus (-5.4%), rail activity in the CIS would have shown substantial growth in 2001, buoyed by the 4.9% growth in freight transport in Russia, 8.2% growth in Azerbaijan and over 33% growth in Moldova. Despite these signs of recovery, which were already discernible during the period 1999-2001, rail 30

 ECMT, 2003

transport in the CIS carried only just over 50% of the total tonne-kilometres carried in 1990, reflecting the economic situation, which, it was true, was improving as a result of the positive reforms implemented, but which was still marked by the decline of heavy industries and the gradual rationalisation of production processes. Following an 8% increase in tonne-kilometres carried by road in the CIS in 1999, compared with 1998, the year 2000 again brought good results, with nearly 7% growth in road freight traffic. This is a reversal of the trend that had become apparent since 1990, with road transport registering a steady decline in activity, falling to its lowest point in 1998, with a business activity index of 38.2 (100=1990). This reversal of trend was broadly confirmed in 2001, although to a lesser extent than in 1999 and 2000, since road freight transport in the CIS grew by more than 1%. Actually, the performances in 2001 were the outcome of diverging trends: sharply down in Moldova (by over 37%), road freight transport rose steeply in Azerbaijan (+39%) and was virtually flat in Russia (+0.85%). It may also be considered that it fell by practically 3% in Belarus. All told, it was the weak growth in Russia that explains the overall CIS figure. In the inland waterway sector, the only data available are for the Russian Federation, which had reported an increase in activity of over 7.5% in this sector for 2000. Benefiting from the good economic climate, inland waterway transport grew by over 16.5% in Russia. Overall, despite the positive trend in 2000 and 2001, inland waterway transport in Russia in 2001 was down by about 60% on its 1990 level.

Transport by oil pipeline, principally of oil-based products, grew slightly in Russia in 2001 (+2.3%), although it was practically 20% up in Azerbaijan.

 ECMT, 2003

31

3. PASSENGER TRANSPORT 3.1 Passenger transport in the countries of Western Europe Trends in passenger transport (passenger-kilometres) – Western Europe 1970=100 300 250 200 150 100 50

7

4

0 20 0

19 9

1

19 9

8

Railways

19 9

2

5

19 8

19 8

9

19 8

19 7

6

3

19 7

19 7

19 7

0

0

Private cars

Buses and coaches

Railways, 18 countries: AUT, BEL, CHE, DEU, DNK, ESP, FIN, FRA, GBR, GRC, IRL, ITA, LUX, NLD, NOR, PRT, SWE, TUR Private cars, buses and coaches, 15 countries: BEL, CHE, DEU, DNK, ESP, FIN, FRA, GBR, GRC, ISL, ITA, NLD, NOR, PRT, SWE Source: ECMT.

Passenger transport by rail Passenger transport by rail continued to increase in 2001 in the countries of Western Europe, which posted a rise of 2.3% in passenger-kilometres compared with 2000 figures. This overall increase was of the same order as in 2000 although not as high as in 1998 and

32

 ECMT, 2003

1999, when passenger-kilometres increased by 4.3% and 3.1%, respectively. The overall performance for the year 2001 was made possible by the growth of the Greek (+10.4%), Irish (+9.1%), Italian (+6.7%), Luxembourg (+4.2%) and Swiss (+4.1%) networks. The Spanish network registered a growth of +3.5%, slightly above the overall average. The French, Danish and UK networks saw an increase in passenger traffic close to the overall average of the countries of Western Europe (respectively +2.4%, +2.38% and +2.35%), while the Portuguese network reported a slight growth of activity. The figures for Germany show that passenger traffic was flat in 2001 on its network. In contrast, some countries, though much less numerous, reported a decline in passenger transport. They were the Finnish (-3.6%), Norwegian (-2.4%) and Dutch (-1.9%) networks. In all, the number of passenger-kilometres travelled on the rail networks of Western Europe in 2001 show an increase of over 50% since 1970. Since 1990, there has only been one year of decline, in 1993, and 2001 seems to have been a record year. Passenger transport by bus and coach After an overall positive performance in 2000, when it had grown by over 3%, passenger transport by bus and coach -- measured in passenger-kilometres -was almost flat in 2001. Measured for eight countries, it grew by only 0.75%. The figure was due to the zero growth of passenger transport by bus and coach in the United Kingdom, Norway and Finland. The only countries that reported an increase in passenger transport were Spain (2.8%) and Italy (+2%). In contrast, France and Denmark suffered a decline of 1.1% in bus and coach transport, while Germany reported a very slight decrease.

 ECMT, 2003

33

In all, passenger transport by bus and coach increased by practically 55% from 1970 to 2001, but was only just able to make up in 2001 and 2000 the decline in activity seen in 1999. As a result, 2001 was not the record year for bus and coach transport that it was for rail passenger transport. Transport by car Travel by private car in passenger-kilometres appears to have risen dramatically since 1970: increasing in overall volume by a factor of almost 2.5 despite the slight fall in overall volume recorded for 2000. In contrast, growth was significant in 2001, practically 2%. This good performance can be explained by the increase in traffic in 2001 in France (+4%), Finland (+2.4%) and Norway (+2.3%). To a lesser extent, travel by car in passenger-kilometres was also up in Spain (+1.8%), increased very slightly in 2001 in the Netherlands (+0.35%) and Italy (+0.2%) and shrank by 0.85% in Denmark.

34

 ECMT, 2003

3.2 Passenger transport in the CEECs Trends in passenger transport (passenger-kilometres) – Eastern Europe and the Baltic States - 1970=100 250

200

150

100

50

0

4

1

8

7

20 0

19 9

19 9

19 9

5

Railways

19 8

9

2

19 8

19 8

6

19 7

3

19 7

19 7

19 7

0

0

Buses and coaches

Railways, buses and coaches, 15 countries: ALB, BGR, BIH, CZE, EST, HRV, HUN, LTU, LVA, MKD, POL, ROM, SVK, SVN, YUG Source: ECMT.

Passenger transport by rail Passenger transport by rail continued to decline throughout 2001 in the CEECs. Passenger-kilometres travelled on the region’s rail networks overall appear to be down by 4.6% in 2001 compared with 2000, an even bigger decrease than that reported in 2000 compared with 1999. The biggest decreases in activity were suffered by the Estonian (-30.4%), FRY Macedonian (-24.4%), Bulgarian (-13.9%), Lithuanian (-12.8%) and Yugoslavian (-12.1%) networks. Other countries also experienced significant  ECMT, 2003

35

declines in their passenger business: Poland (-7.6%) and Romania (-5.7%).

Only Albania, Hungary and Slovenia recorded growth in their passenger business -- large growth in Albania (+10.4%) but much smaller growth in Hungary (+3.2%) and Slovenia (+1.4%). All told, after a decade of decline, the number of passenger-kilometres recorded by the rail networks of Central and Eastern Europe in 2001 came to just barely 50% of the total travelled in 1970, showing that the railways were the biggest losers during the transition to a market economy. Passenger transport by bus and coach A slight increase in passenger-kilometres by bus and coach was seen in the CEECs in 2001. Less than 1%, this small increase marked a reversal in the steady downward trend since 1990, which had attained 1.5% in 2000. However, it is difficult to draw an overall picture of passenger transport by bus and coach in the countries of the region. While there was large growth in some countries like Yugoslavia (+20%), the Czech Republic (+13.4%), Albania (+10.4%) and FYR Macedonia (+7.4%), in the other countries the data show declines in activity: Romania (-8.1%), Slovenia (-7.3%) and Estonia (-6.4%). The picture for 2001 is thus mixed. Overall, with the years of persistent decline experienced since 1990, broken only in 2001, passenger transport by bus and coach in the CEECs in 2001 seems to have been barely above its 1970 levels, after seeing higher levels in 1989, when it had been twice as high as in 1970. Transport by car Clearly, the corollary of the major decline in rail passenger transport has been an increase in passenger transport by road. The number of passenger-kilometres travelled by private car has been increasing steadily

36

 ECMT, 2003

since 1987 in the CEECs and again showed an increase of 3.5% in 2001. Of the six countries that provided data for 2001 (ALB, CZE, HUN, POL, SVK, YUG), only Hungary and the Slovak Republic reported weak growth (respectively +0.2% and +0.5%). In contrast, Poland (+5.3%) and Yugoslavia (+3.7%) recorded high growth rates for passenger-kilometres travelled by private car. The Czech Republic and Albania also recorded positive growth but which was below the average (respectively, +2.6% and +1.1%). 3.3 Passenger transport in the CIS countries Trends in passenger transport (passenger-kilometres) – CIS countries 1990=100 120 100 80 60 40 20

19 90 19 91 19 92 19 93 19 94 19 95 19 96 19 97 19 98 19 99 20 00 20 01

0

Railways

Buses and coaches

Railways, 6 countries: AZE,BLR,GEO,MDA,RUS,UKR Buses and coaches, 5 countries: AZE,BLR,MDA,RUS,UKR Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

37

Passenger transport by rail After a steady decline in passenger-kilometres since 1994, broken only in 2000, 2001 saw a further fall of 5.7% in passenger transport by rail in the CIS countries. The railways’ level of activity in 2001 thus appears to be more than 50% down on that in 1990. The only positive notes in the overall picture were sounded by Azerbaijan (+8.3%) and Moldova (+3.2%). Passenger transport by rail was down in Belarus, Russia and Ukraine, sharply down in Belarus (-13.9%) and to a lesser extent in the other two countries in the region (respectively -5.4% in Russia and -4% in Ukraine). All told, taking the example of Russia, passenger transport by rail has fallen by practically 40% since 1970 and by over 60% since 1990. Passenger transport by bus and coach After falling by 3.75% on average in the CIS countries in 2000, passenger transport by bus and coach again fell in 2001, by almost 10%. The negative performance in 2001 was chiefly the result of the sharp fall in passenger transport by bus and coach in the Russian Federation. Total passengerkilometres by bus and coach services in Russia fell by 10.8%. Passenger transport by bus and coach was also down in Azerbaijan by practically 2.7%. In contrast, Moldova (+4.6%) and Belarus (+2.8%) recorded increases in the number of passenger-kilometres transported by their carriers in 2001. Looking at the long-term trend, and taking the example of Russia, passenger transport by bus and coach in 2001 was up by more than 45% on its 1970 level, but was well down on 1990, when it was 2.6 times the 1970 level.

38

 ECMT, 2003

4. ROAD SAFETY

In 2001, road accidents in the ECMT Member countries killed over 90 000 people and injured more than 2.1 million. Even if these figures show a fall of 1.6% in the number of deaths and 1.4% in the number of victims compared with those of the previous year, they nevertheless represent a frightening human sacrifice. Every year the number killed is equivalent to the population of a town such as Namur (B), Nancy (F) or Reykjavik (ISL) and the number hospitalised to that of a town such as Rome (I), Lisbon (P), Nagoya (JPN) or Denver (USA). In any event, these figures reflect significantly different situations from one country or region to another.

4.1 Road safety figures for the countries of Western Europe In the countries of Western Europe, all indicators pertaining to road safety show an improvement in 2001, after the improvement already made in 2000: í

The number of accidents fell by nearly 3.1% in 2001, thus confirming the end recorded in 2000 of a period of six consecutive years (between 1993 and 1999) during which it rose (+22%).

í

The number of victims (injured + killed) on Western European roads fell by 2.7% in 2001, a percentage figure slightly higher than in 2000, but nevertheless confirming the end of a period of three consecutive years (1997-99) in which the situation had worsened.

−

Lastly, the number of people killed on the roads fell by 4.4% in 2001, which confirms the uninterrupted downward trend for this indicator since 1992. In all, the annual number of deaths on the roads in the Western European countries was more than 45% lower in 2001 than in 1970.

 ECMT, 2003

39

Trends in road accidents (number) – Western Europe 1970=100 120 100 80 60 40 20

Accidents

20 00

19 97

19 94

19 91

19 88

19 85

19 82

19 79

19 76

19 73

19 70

0

Killed and injured

Fatalities Accidents, killed and injured, 20 countries : AUT, BEL, CHE, DEU, DNK, ESP, FIN, FRA, GBR, GRC, IRL, ISL, ITA, LIE, LUX, NLD, NOR, PRT, SWE, TUR Source: ECMT.

Despite this general improvement, the situation in 2001 varied considerably from one country to another in terms both of the most recent trends and of the relative degree of risk on the roads: −

While the number killed in 2001 fell significantly in Norway (-19.3%), Denmark (-13.4%), Portugal (-10%) and Switzerland (-8.1%), it rose sharply in Finland (+9.3%), which was thus an exception among the West European countries.

−

The total number of fatalities per million inhabitants ranged from as many as 179 in Greece, 143 in Portugal, 139 in Spain, 137 in Belgium, 62 in the Netherlands and 60 in Sweden and the United Kingdom. For

40

 ECMT, 2003

information, the figures for the same indicator were 147 in the United States, 130 in New Zealand, 101 in Australia, 98 in Canada and 81 in Japan. −

In relation to the number of cars on the roads, the total number of fatalities per million motor vehicles varied from as many as 524 in Turkey, 444 in Greece, 269 in Belgium, 265 in Ireland, 128 in the United Kingdom to 123 in the Netherlands and Sweden. By way of comparison, the number of fatalities per million motor vehicles is 185 in New Zealand, 189 in the United States, 180 in Canada, 167 in Australia and 138 in Japan.

4.2 Road safety figures for CEECs In the CEECs, the main statistical indicators for road safety exhibited a less favourable trend in 2001, though the situation varied across countries, than in the countries of Western Europe: −

The number of road accidents was up by 0.15%, thus worsening again after three consecutive years of improvement. The figure is nevertheless up by over 38% on that of 1985.

−

The number of casualties (killed + injured) rose by 1.3%. Here again, we find the downward trend observed in 1998, 1999 and 2000. With this negative result, the number of victims in 2001 was up by more than 37% on the figure for 1985.

−

In 2001, there was a fall of 6.4% in the number of fatalities on the roads of Central and Eastern European countries. This fall, the most marked in percentage terms since 1996, confirms the good results for 1998 (-1.7%), 1999 (-4.8%) and 2000 (-4.9%). The fact remains that the overall number of fatalities over the past 15 years has increased by nearly 20% in the CEE countries but has fallen by

 ECMT, 2003

41

nearly 17% in Western Europe over the same period.

Trends in road accidents (number) – Eastern Europe and the Baltic States 1970=100 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20

Accidents Fatalities

97

94

00 20

19

91

19

19

88 19

82

79

85 19

19

19

19

73 19

70 19

76

0

Killed and injured

Accidents, killed and injured, 13 countries: ALB, BGR, CZE, EST, HRV, HUN, LTU, LVA, MKD, POL, ROM, SVK, SVN Source: ECMT.

In terms both of the trend observed in 2001 and of the relative degree of risk on the roads in that year, however, we find very different situations from one country to another: −

In 2001, the number of fatalities fell very substantially in FYR Macedonia (-34%), in Slovenia (-11.2%) and the Czech Republic (-10.2%). The situation of other CEECs worsened in this respect. The record in Yugoslavia (+21.5%) and Lithuania (+10.1%) was particularly bad.

42

 ECMT, 2003

−

As regards the number of fatalities per million inhabitants, the situation also varied considerably from one country to another, the ratio being as high as 220 in Latvia, 202 in Lithuania and 143 in Poland, but no higher than 77 in Albania, 52 in FYR Macedonia and Bosnia-Herzegovina.

−

The previous figures provide certain information on the relative degree of risk on roads in the different countries but they are significantly influenced by the levels of car ownership in each one. In order to gain a better grasp of the situation, it is essential to take account of another indicator, the number of fatalities per million motorised vehicles. This varies considerably from one country to another, ranging from as many as 2 009 in Bosnia-Herzegovina, 1 631 in Albania and 777 in Latvia, to 360 in Estonia, 309 in Bulgaria and 291 in Slovenia. Although this indicator should be used cautiously, given the current uncertainty surrounding the assessment of the total number of cars on the roads, it nevertheless reveals rather different levels of road safety on the roads of Western Europe compared with those of Eastern Europe.

4.3 Road safety figures for the countries of the CIS For 2001, the data on the CIS show increases of 4.1% in the number of accidents, 4.7% in the number of victims and 4% in the number of fatalities on the roads. This particularly negative result does not confirm the steady fall in all indicators, which has been seen every year since 1991 with the sole exception of 1998. Nevertheless, since 1991, the number of fatalities on the road networks in the CIS countries appears to have dropped by more than 15% and the number of victims has fallen by almost 16%.

 ECMT, 2003

43

Trends in road accidents (number) – CIS countries 1990=100 120 100 80 60 40 20

01

99

00

20

20

97

98

19

19

96

Accidents Fatalities

19

94

93

95

19

19

19

19

91

19

90

19

19

92

0

Killed and injured

Accidents, killed and injured, 5 countries: AZE, BLR, GEO, MDA, RUS Source: ECMT.

Within this region there are, however, significant differences from one country to another: −

As to the most recent trend, it will be noted that, while 2001 saw no increase in the number of fatalities in Belarus and this indicator was down in Azerbaijan (-6.2%), there was a significant increase in Ukraine (+13.5%) and in Moldova (+3.2%). The Russian Federation recorded an increase of over 4.4% in the number of fatalities on the roads, the latter exceeding 30 000, or nearly 30% of the total number of fatalities across the territory of all the ECMT Member countries.

−

The number of fatalities per million inhabitants, which rose to 213 in Russia and 44

 ECMT, 2003

159 in Belarus, fell to 98 in Moldova and 69 in Azerbaijan, whereas the number of fatalities per million motorised vehicles was higher than 1 000 in all the countries of the CIS (1 779 in Azerbaijan, 1 656 in Georgia, 1 369 in the Russian Federation and 1 080 in Belarus. While the relative level of risk varies from one country to another, it is generally very high compared with the level in Western European countries.

 ECMT, 2003

45

Total number of deaths per million population in 2001 (estimated data) Albania Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bosnia-Herzegovina Bulgaria Croatia Czech Denmark Estonia Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Moldova Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom Yugoslavia Australia Canada Japan New Zealand United States

0 Source : ECMT

50

100

46

150

200

250

300

 ECMT, 2003

Total number of deaths per million road motor vehicles in 2001 (estimated data) Albania Austria Azerbaijan Belarus Belgium Bulgaria Bosnia-Herzegovina Croatia Czech Denmark Estonia Finland France FYR Macedonia Georgia Germany Greece Hungary Iceland Ireland Italy Latvia Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Moldova Netherlands Norway Poland Portugal Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia Spain Sweden Switzerland Turkey Ukraine United Kingdom Yugoslavia Australia Canada Japan New Zealand United States

0 Source : ECMT

 ECMT, 2003

500

1000

47

1500

2000

TABLES

A.

FREIGHT TRANSPORT

B.

PASSENGER TRANSPORT

C.

ROAD ACCIDENTS

 ECMT, 2003

49

FREIGHT TRANSPORT Thousand million tonne-kilometres Table A1 : Rail 1970 ALB 0.2 AUT 9.9 AZE 24.6 BEL 7.8 BGR 13.9 BIH 3.4 BLR 50.1 CHE 6.6 CSK 55.9 CZE DEU 70.5 DNK 1.9 ESP 10.3 EST 5.0 FIN 6.0 FRA 67.6 GBR 24.6 GEO 9.8 GRC 0.7 HRV 5.7 HUN 19.8 IRL 0.5 ISL ITA 18.1 LIE LTU 13.6 LUX 0.8 LVA 15.5 MDA 10.4 MKD 0.6 MLT NLD 3.7 NOR 1.4 POL 99.3 PRT 0.8 ROM 48.0 RUS 2494.7 SVK SVN 3.3 SWE 17.3 TUR 6.1 UKR YUG 6.2 ECMT/WEST 253.8 ECMT/CEECs 290.4 ECMT/CIS 2589.7

1980 0.5 11.0 33.2 8.0 17.7 4.4 66.3 7.4 66.2

1990 0.6 12.7 37.1 8.4 14.1 4.0 75.4 8.3 59.5

2000 0.0 16.6 5.7 7.7 5.5 0.1 31.4 10.8

2001 0.0 16.9 6.1 7.1 4.9 0.2 29.7 10.5

01/00* -32.1 1.8 8.2 -7.7 -11.4 15.7 -5.4 -2.3

63.8 1.6 11.3 5.9 8.2 64.8 17.6 13.7 0.8 7.6 24.4 0.6

61.4 1.8 11.6 7.0 7.9 49.7 16.0 10.8 0.6 6.5 16.8 0.6

17.5 76.0 2.0 12.2 8.1 10.1 55.4 18.1 3.9 0.4 1.9 8.1 0.5

16.9 74.3 1.9 12.3 8.6 9.9 50.3 19.7

-3.5 -2.3 -6.2 1.2 5.6 -2.5 -9.0 8.8

0.4 2.2 7.7 0.5

-11.0 16.6 -4.5 5.3

18.4

21.2

25.0

24.4

-2.6

18.2 0.7 17.6 15.2 0.7

19.3 0.7 18.5 14.8 0.8

8.9 0.7 13.3 1.5 0.5

7.7 0.6 14.2 2.0 0.5

-13.2 -7.2 6.5 33.2 -12.3

3.4 1.7 134.7 1.0 75.5 3439.9 3.9 16.6 5.2 8.5 241.4 385.8 3568.3

3.1 4.5 1.6 1.9 83.5 54.0 1.6 2.2 57.3 18.0 2523.0 c 1373.2 11.2 4.2 2.9 19.1 19.7 8.0 9.9 488.2 172.8 7.7 2.0 233.5 272.9 299.8 152.1 3149.4 1588.6

4.3 -5.1 1.8 -1.8 47.7 -11.8 2.1 -2.1 18.0 -0.1 1440.9 4.9 10.9 -2.7 2.8 -0.7 19.1 -2.7 7.6 -23.6 147.9 -14.4 2.0 3.6 263.1 -3.6 144.3 -5.1 1630.8 e 2.7

ECMT/WEST = 18 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,IRL,ITA,LUX,NLD, NOR,PRT,SWE,TUR ECMT/CEECs = 15 countries : ALB,BGR,BIH,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM, SVK,SVN,YUG ECMT/CIS = 6 countries : AZE,BLR,GEO,MDA,RUS,UKR

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

51

c = change in the series.

FREIGHT TRANSPORT Thousand million tonne-kilometres Table A2 : Roads 1970 0.8 2.9 3.7 13.1 7.0 0.8 8.1 4.8 10.1

1

ALB AUT 1 AZE BEL BGR BIH BLR CHE CSK CZE DEU DNK ESP EST FIN FRA GBR GEO GRC HRV HUN IRL ISL ITA LIE LTU LUX LVA MDA MKD MLT NLD NOR POL PRT ROM 1 RUS SVK SVN SWE TUR 1 UKR 1 YUG ECMT/WEST ECMT/CEECs ECMT/CIS

1

78.0 7.8 51.7 2.3 12.4 66.3 85.0 7.0 1.3 5.8

1980 1.3 7.9 7.5 18.3 13.1 4.4 16.8 7.3 21.3

1

124.4 7.9 89.5 4.2 18.4 98.1 91.1 2.4 1

58.7 0.0 3.4 0.1 2.9 3.2 0.8 0.0 12.4 3.2 15.8

2.6 11.4 5.0

5.2 0.0

119.6 0.0 6.9 0.3 5.1 5.6 2.5 0.0 17.7 5.3 44.5 11.8 11.8 241.4

2.1 17.8 17.4

3.9 21.4 37.6

2.8 438.6 60.3 15.0

5.4 673.8 134.2 273.6

1

1990 1.2 9.0 3.3 32.0 13.8 3.1 22.4 11.5 23.3 169.9 9.4 151.0 4.5 25.4 114.8 132.9 2.6 12.5 2.9 15.2 5.1

2000 2.2 17.2 3.5

2001 2.2 4.8

39.0

3.3

8.0

9.0 21.9

8.7

-3.0

39.0 280.7 11.0 297.6 3.9 27.8 184.2 153.7 0.5

37.3 289.0 10.9 322.6 4.7 26.7 189.0 152.1

-4.5 2.9 -1.0 8.4 18.9 -4.0 2.6 -1.0

3.1 c

1

177.9 0.0 7.3 0.4 e 5.9 6.3 2.2 0.0 22.9 8.2 40.3 10.9 5.2 299.4

01/00* 3.1

2.8 12.1 0.0 0.0 158.6 0.7 7.8 0.4 4.8 1.0 0.8 0.0 31.6 13.5 72.8 7.5 9.9 153.8 21.4 4.4 31.5 161.6

6.8 c 11.8 0.0 0.0 1

0.7 8.3 0.5 5.4 0.6 2.3 0.0 31.0 13.8 74.4

1

10.6 155.1 20.2 5.7 30.0 151.4

4.9 26.5 65.7 14.8 9.3 2.7 3.1 970.1 e 1451.3 e 1481.9 e 135.9 187.7 196.1 348.7 168.3 e 170.3 e

-2.5

-2.6 6.5 5.8 12.1 -37.4 197.8 -1.7 2.7 2.1 7.8 0.8 -5.3 29.2 -4.8 -6.3 12.5 2.1 4.5 1.2

ECMT/WEST = 16 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,ITA,LUX,NLD, NOR,SWE,TUR ECMT/CEECs = 14 countries : ALB,BGR,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM,SVK,SVN,YUG ECMT/CIS = 6 countries : AZE,BLR,GEO,MDA,RUS,UKR 1. Excluding road transport for own account.

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

c = change in the series.

Source: ECMT.

52

 ECMT, 2003

FREIGHT TRANSPORT Thousand million tonne-kilometres Table A3 : Inland waterways ALB AUT AZE BEL BGR BIH BLR CHE CSK CZE DEU DNK ESP EST FIN FRA GBR GEO GRC HRV HUN IRL ISL ITA LIE LTU LUX LVA MDA MKD MLT NLD NOR POL PRT ROM RUS SVK SVN SWE TUR UKR YUG ECMT/WEST ECMT/CEECs ECMT/CIS

1970

1980

1990

2000

2001

01/00*

1.3

1.6

1.7

2.4

2.6

4.6

6.7 1.8

5.9 2.6

5.4 1.6

0.4

0.4

-8.1

1.2 0.1 2.4

1.9 0.1 3.6

1.8 0.2 4.4

48.8

51.4

54.8

0.8 66.5

0.6 64.8

-21.6 -2.5

0.0 2.0 12.7

0.0 1.8 10.9 0.4

0.0 1.1 7.2 0.2

0.0 0.4 7.5 0.2

0.4 7.1

8.7 -6.6

0.3 1.8

0.6 2.1

0.5 2.0

0.1 0.9

0.1 1.1

23.8 18.4

0.4

0.2

0.1

0.2

0.2

7.1

0.1 0.3 0.1 0.1

0.2 0.3 0.1 0.3

0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3

0.0 0.4

0.0 0.4

0.0 -1.6

30.7

33.5

35.7

41.3

41.9

1.5

2.3

2.3

1.0

1.2

1.3

7.8

1.3 163.9

2.4 228.2

2.1 213.9

2.6 71.0 1.4

2.7 82.8 1.0

4.3 16.7 -26.6

3.5 103.4 13.6 165.1

4.2 106.0 18.1 230.1

11.9 3.2 106.7 15.4 215.8

13.3 1.0 125.6 8.3 71.1 e

1.0 124.2 e 8.1 83.0 e

0.2 -1.1 -2.2 16.7

0.0

ECMT/WEST = 10 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,FIN,FRA,GBR,ITA,LUX,NLD ECMT/CEECs = 11 countries : BGR,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,POL,ROM,SVK,YUG ECMT/CIS = 2 countries : BLR,RUS

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

53

c = change in the series.

FREIGHT TRANSPORT Thousand million tonne-kilometres Table A4 : Pipeline ALB AUT AZE BEL BGR BIH BLR CHE CSK CZE DEU DNK ESP EST FIN FRA GBR GEO GRC HRV HUN IRL ISL ITA LIE LTU LUX LVA MDA MKD MLT NLD NOR POL PRT ROM RUS SVK SVN SWE TUR UKR YUG ECMT/WEST ECMT/CEECs ECMT/CIS

1970

1980

1990

2000 0.0 7.6 1.4

2001 0.0 8.1 1.6

3.6 1.0 0.3

7.1 1.6 1.8 0.8

6.4 3.4 1.0 0.6

1.2 6.4

1.1 9.8

1.2 7.5

15.1

13.1

1.0

3.0

11.7 2.9 4.2

28.2 2.7

34.7 10.1

1.0

9.1

0.4

0.3

-10.6

0.2

0.2

6.5

1.6 15.0 7.2 7.5

1.7 15.8

3.0 4.8

7.8

4.0

19.6 10.2

21.7 11.4 5.0

21.2 11.5

-2.3 1.2

4.4

3.6 5.3

0.7 4.0

1.2 4.9

73.1 21.9

11.9

11.5

10.3

10.6

2.9

3.5

4.8

38.3

6.5

7.5

16.3

5.9 3.5 20.4

5.8 3.7 21.1

-0.7 5.6 3.6

4.9 2.1 13.9

01/00* -14.3 6.7 19.8

4.1

5.0

7.0

17.1

1.8 243.0

5.2 1087.0

5.1 1.4 2575.0 c 1916.5

1.8 1961.5

27.2 2.4

1.4

13.7

43.5

-18.1

66.7 16.2 244.0

0.1 101.5 37.3 1088.6

62.4 53.1 208.0 0.1 0.1 138.0 144.9 36.0 38.5 2578.4 c 1917.9

0.3 231.4 136.4 e -5.9 43.6 13.3 1963.2 2.4

ECMT/WEST = 12 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FRA,GBR,ITA,NLD,NOR,TUR ECMT/CEECs = 10 countries : ALB,BGR,CZE,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,POL,ROM,YUG ECMT/CIS = 2 countries : AZE,RUS

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

c = change in the series.

Source: ECMT.

54

 ECMT, 2003

FREIGHT TRANSPORT Thousand million tonne-kilometres Table A5 : Total freight (A1+A2+A3+A4) 1970 1 ALB 0.9 AUT 17.6 1 AZE 29.3 BEL 27.9 BGR 22.7 BIH 4.2 BLR 59.4 CHE 12.8 CSK 74.8 CZE 0.0 DEU 212.4 DNK 9.7 ESP 63.1 EST 7.4 FIN 20.4 FRA 174.8 GBR GEO 9.8 GRC 7.6 HRV 7.3 HUN 28.4 IRL 0.5 ISL 0.0 ITA 86.2 LIE 0.0 LTU 17.1 LUX 1.2 LVA 18.5 MDA 13.7 MKD 1.4 MLT 0.0 NLD 50.9 NOR 4.6 POL 124.3 PRT 0.8 ROM 56.4 1 RUS 2901.6 SVK 0.0 SVN 5.4 SWE 35.1 TUR 25.0 1 UKR 0.0 1 YUG 12.4 ECMT/WEST 861.9 ECMT/CEECs 377.1 ECMT/CIS 3013.8

1980 1.8 27.5 42.3 34.0 34.1 8.8 85.0 15.9 100.9 0.0 252.7 9.5 103.8 10.1 28.4 208.4 119.2 16.1

1

1

10.8 42.3 5.6 0.0 150.1 0.0 25.3 1.3 22.8 21.1 3.2 0.0 59.6 6.9 198.7 12.8 94.8 4996.5 0.0 7.8 38.0 56.4 0.0 18.2 1121.7 571.1 5160.9

1

1

1990 1.8 29.7 43.7 46.9 30.1 7.1 99.6 21.2 94.7 0.0 297.8 14.0 166.8 11.5 34.4 191.2 159.3 13.4 13.1 13.5 39.3 5.7 0.0 210.8 0.0 26.8

2000 2.2 43.8 10.5 9.4 c

0.0 58.9 438.2 20.2 317.2 12.0 38.3 268.8 183.4 9.3

2001 2.3

01/00* 2.6

12.6

19.9

8.9

-4.9

0.0 56.4 443.8

-4.3 1.3

342.7 13.2 37.0 267.6

8.0 10.0 -3.4 -0.4

1

5.5 10.3 c 25.2 25.5 1.5 0.5 0.5 5.3 0.0 0.0 194.0 1 1 0.7 -2.6 0.7 20.1 20.8 3.2 1.5 1.5 -1.9 24.7 24.6 27.1 10.2 21.4 2.5 2.7 5.5 3.0 1.3 2.8 112.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.5 83.2 83.1 -0.2 11.9 18.8 19.3 2.8 138.7 148.4 144.4 -2.7 12.5 9.7 69.6 31.9 33.1 3.9 5611.3 c 3514.4 3640.3 3.6 0.0 34.0 32.2 -5.3 9.1 7.3 8.5 17.5 45.6 51.1 49.1 -4.0 136.2 224.6 202.5 -9.8 722.9 20.4 5.8 6.4 11.3 1446.9 1992.6 e 2003.5 e 0.5 483.1 386.5 392.0 1.4 6512.4 3764.2 e 3847.3 e 2.2

ECMT/WEST = 16 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,ITA,LUX,NLD, NOR,SWE,TUR ECMT/CEECs = 14 countries : ALB,BGR,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM,SVK,SVN,YUG ECMT/CIS = 6 countries : AZE,BLR,GEO,MDA,RUS,UKR 1. Excluding road transport for own account.

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

55

c = change in the series.

PASSENGER TRANSPORT Thousand million passenger-kilometres Table B1 : Rail ALB AUT AZE BEL BGR BIH BLR CHE CSK CZE DEU DNK ESP EST FIN FRA GBR GEO GRC HRV HUN IRL ISL ITA LIE LTU LUX LVA MDA MKD MLT NLD NOR POL PRT ROM RUS SVK SVN SWE TUR UKR YUG ECMT/WEST ECMT/CEECs ECMT/CIS

1970 0.3 6.3 1.7 8.3 6.2 1.7 7.3 8.2 20.5

1980 0.4 7.4 2.2 7.0 7.1 1.4 11.0 9.2 18.0

1990 0.8 8.5 1.8 6.5 7.8 1.4 16.9 11.1 19.3

38.5 3.4 15.0 1.2 2.2 41.0 30.4 2.1 1.5 3.7 15.2 0.8

40.5 4.3 14.8 1.6 3.2 54.7 30.3 2.8 1.5 3.6 13.7 1.0

43.6 4.9 16.7 1.5 3.3 63.7 33.2 2.0 2.0 3.4 11.4 1.2

32.5

39.6

44.7

2.1 0.2 3.8 0.8 0.3

3.3 0.2 4.8 1.4 0.4

3.6 0.2 5.4 1.6 0.4

8.0 1.9 36.9 3.5 17.8 265.4

8.9 2.8 46.3 6.1 23.2 342.2

11.1 2.4 50.4 5.7 30.6 417.2

1.5 4.6 5.6

1.4 7.0 6.0

3.7 211.6 115.1 277.2

3.6 244.4 128.7 359.7

1.4 6.3 6.4 82.0 4.8 271.5 142.2 521.4

2000 0.1 8.2 0.5 7.8 3.5 0.0 17.7 12.8

2001 0.1

01/00* 10.4

0.5 8.0 3.0 0.0 15.3 13.4

8.3 3.6 -13.9 0.0 -13.9 4.1

7.3 75.1 5.6 20.1 0.3 3.4 69.9 c 38.2 0.5 1.6 1.3 9.7 1.4

7.3 75.4 5.7 20.8 0.2 3.3 71.6 39.1

0.0 0.4 2.4 3.5 -30.4 -3.6 2.4 2.4

1.8 1.2 10.0 1.5

10.4 -0.9 3.2 9.1

43.8

46.7 c

0.6 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.2 c 14.7 3.3 19.7 3.8 11.6 167.5 2.9 0.7 7.9 5.8 51.8 1.4 323.8 60.0 238.3

0.5 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.1

-12.8 4.2 -1.3 3.2 -24.4

14.4 3.2 18.2 3.9 11.0 158.4 2.8 0.7

-1.9 -2.4 -7.6 1.7 -5.7 -5.4 -2.3 1.4

5.6 -4.5 49.7 -4.1 1.3 -12.1 331.1 e 2.3 57.2 -4.6 224.6 e -5.7

ECMT/WEST = 18 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,IRL,ITA,LUX,NLD, NOR,PRT,SWE,TUR ECMT/CEECs = 15 countries : ALB,BGR,BIH,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM, SVK,SVN,YUG ECMT/CIS = 6 countries : AZE,BLR,GEO,MDA,RUS,UKR

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

57

c = change in the series.

PASSENGER TRANSPORT Thousand million passenger-kilometres Table B2 : Private cars 1970 ALB AUT AZE BEL 49.3 BGR BIH BLR 0.0 CHE 41.8 CSK CZE DEU 350.6 DNK 33.3 ESP 64.3 EST 0.0 FIN 23.7 FRA 305.0 GBR 283.0 GEO GRC HRV HUN 7.3 IRL ISL ITA 211.9 LIE 0.0 LTU 0.0 LUX LVA 0.0 MDA 0.0 MKD MLT 0.0 NLD 66.3 NOR 17.8 POL 0.0 PRT 13.8 ROM RUS 0.0 SVK SVN SWE 56.1 TUR UKR YUG 4.1 ECMT/WEST 1521.0 ECMT/CEECs 11.3 ECMT/CIS

1980

1990

43.5

54.1

65.4 3.7

80.7 4.5

0.0 61.3

0.0 73.3

466.5 38.1 130.9 0.0 34.8 453.0 367.0

593.2 50.3 174.4 0.0 51.2 586.0 588.0

2000 5.1

2001 5.2

01/00* 1.1

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

0.0

63.8 723.4 59.8 302.6 0.0 55.7 699.6 613.0 0.0

65.5

2.6

59.3 308.0 0.0 57.0 727.6

-0.8 1.8 2.3 4.0

19.1 36.0

47.0

0.0 43.5

0.0 43.6

0.2

324.0 0.0 0.0

2.7 522.6 0.0 0.0

665.2 0.0 0.0

666.4

0.2

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 141.1 46.7 149.7

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 141.6 47.8 157.7

0.0 0.0 23.9 0.0 94.1 0.0

0.0 0.0 24.1 0.0

0.0 108.1 30.4 0.0 29.0

0.0 137.3 42.7 68.1 c 40.5

0.0

0.0

67.7

86.9

12.6 2185.3 48.6

17.3 3048.9 132.4

0.0

10.8 11.2 3694.9 e 3764.0 e 296.9 307.3

0.4 2.3 5.3

0.5

3.7 1.9 3.5

ECMT/WEST = 15 countries : BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,ISL,ITA,NLD,NOR,PRT,SWE ECMT/CEECs = 6 countries : ALB,CZE,HUN,POL,SVK,YUG

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

c = change in the series.

Source: ECMT.

58

 ECMT, 2003

PASSENGER TRANSPORT Thousand million passenger-kilometres Table B3 : Buses and coaches 1970 0.8

ALB AUT AZE BEL BGR BIH BLR CHE CSK CZE DEU DNK ESP EST FIN FRA GBR GEO GRC HRV HUN IRL ISL ITA LIE LTU LUX LVA MDA MKD MLT NLD NOR POL PRT ROM RUS SVK SVN SWE TUR UKR YUG ECMT/WEST ECMT/CEECs ECMT/CIS

3.1 9.3 12.2 1.2 8.4 3.0 21.4

1980 1.4 12.5 5.7 9.1 21.6 4.1 14.4 4.4 33.8

1990 2.2 13.6 6.7 5.0 c 25.9 2.7 19.8 5.6 43.4

2000 0.2

2001 0.2

48.6 4.6 20.9 2.6 7.5 25.2 60.0

65.6 6.1 28.1 3.7 8.5 38.0 52.0

56.6 7.6 33.4 4.5 8.5 41.3 46.0

4.8 3.3 13.5

5.8 7.1 26.4

32.0 0.0 4.9

9.3

9.0

-2.7

14.6

15.0

2.6

9.2

9.5

2.8

9.4 69.0 9.1 50.3 2.6 7.7 45.3 48.0 0.0

10.6 68.7 9.0 51.7 2.5 7.7 44.8 48.0

13.4 -0.4 -1.1 2.9 -6.4 0.0 -1.1 0.0

5.1 7.0 24.1

3.3 18.4

3.5 18.7

4.4 1.1

57.8 0.0 6.7

0.3 84.0 0.0 6.7

94.0 0.0 1.7

95.8

2.0

1.6

-2.9

3.3 1.9 1.0 0.0 11.1 4.2 29.1 4.4 7.9 100.1

4.5 3.9 2.2 0.0 13.2 4.9 49.2 7.6 24.0 209.7

5.9 4.9 1.5 0.0 13.1 4.6 46.3 10.3 24.0 262.2

2.3 1.0 0.8 0.0

2.3 1.1 0.8 0.0

-1.8 4.6 7.4

6.3 31.0

0.0 -2.3

2.6 5.5

4.9 7.3

6.6 9.0

6.3 31.7 11.8 7.7 164.4 8.4 1.6 10.1 0.0

7.1 146.6 8.1 1.5

-8.1 -10.8 -4.6 -7.3

6.4 241.1 110.4 113.5

12.4 308.4 202.0 233.6

90.3 7.9 330.4 c 208.5 383.9

4.5 385.4 e 108.4 190.5 e

5.4 388.2 e 109.3 172.1 e

01/00* 7.1

20.1 0.7 0.8 -9.6

ECMT/WEST = 15 countries : BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,ISL,ITA,NLD,NOR,PRT,SWE ECMT/CEECs = 15 countries : ALB,BGR,BIH,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM, ROM,SVK,SVN,YUG ECMT/CIS = 5 countries : AZE,BLR,MDA,RUS,UKR

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

59

c = change in the series.

PASSENGER TRANSPORT Thousand million passenger-kilometres Table B4 : Total road transport (B2+B3) 1970 ALB 0.8 AUT 2 AZE 3.1 BEL 58.6 BGR 12.2 BIH 2 1.2 2 BLR 8.4 CHE 44.9 2 CSK 21.4 CZE DEU 399.2 DNK 37.9 ESP 85.3 EST 2 2.6 FIN 31.2 FRA 330.2 GBR 343.0 GEO GRC HRV 2 3.3 HUN 20.8 IRL ISL ITA 243.9 LIE 0.0 LTU 2 4.9 LUX LVA 2 3.3 MDA 2 1.9 2 MKD 1.0 MLT 0.0 NLD 77.4 NOR 21.9 POL 29.1 PRT 18.2 ROM 2 7.9 2 RUS 100.1 SVK SVN 2 2.6 SWE 61.6 TUR 41.3 UKR 2 YUG 10.5 ECMT/WEST 1803.3 ECMT/CEECs 121.7 ECMT/CIS 2 113.5

2

1980 1.4 56.0 5.7 74.5 21.6 4.1 14.4 65.6 33.8

2

532.1 44.2 159.0 3.7 43.3 491.0 419.0 6.1

381.9 0.0 6.7

2

2

649.8 57.9 207.8 4.5 59.7 627.3 634.0 8.3 24.2 7.0 71.1

7.1 62.4 0.0

4.5 3.9 2.2 0.0 121.3 35.3 49.2 36.6 24.0 209.7

1990 2.2 67.7 6.7 85.8 25.9 2.7 19.8 78.9 43.4

2

4.9 75.0 73.4

3.0 606.5 0.0 6.7 0.0 5.9 4.9 1.5 0.0 150.4 47.3 114.4 c 50.8 24.0 262.2 6.6 95.9 135.0 90.3 25.2 3514.3 340.9 383.9

25.0 2567.1 250.5 233.6

2000 5.3 0.0 9.3

2001 5.4 0.0 9.0

01/00* 1.3

14.6

15.0

2.6

9.2

9.5

2.8

73.2 792.4 69.0 352.9 2.6 63.4 744.9 661.0 4.5

76.1

4.0

68.4 359.7 2.5 64.7 772.4

-0.9 1.9 -6.4 2.1 3.7

3.3 61.9 0.0

3.5 62.3 0.0

4.4 0.5

759.2 0.0 1.7 0.0 2.3 1.0 0.8 0.0

762.2 0.0 1.6 0.0 2.3 1.1 0.8 0.0

0.4

53.1 181.4

54.1 188.7

2.0 4.0

7.7 164.4 32.4 1.6 104.2 185.7

7.1 146.6 32.1 1.5

-8.1 -10.8 -0.8 -7.3

168.2

-9.4

15.3 16.6 4266.0 e 4320.5 e 405.4 416.6 190.5 e 172.1 e

-2.7

-2.9 -1.8 4.6 7.4

8.5 1.3 2.8 -9.6

ECMT/WEST = 16 countries : BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,ISL,ITA,NLD, NOR,PRT,SWE,TUR ECMT/CEECs = 15 countries : ALB,BGR,BIH,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM, SVK,SVN,YUG ECMT/CIS = 5 countries : AZE,BLR,MDA,RUS,UKR 2. Excluding private cars.

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

c = change in the series.

Source: ECMT.

60

 ECMT, 2003

PASSENGER TRANSPORT Thousand million passenger-kilometres Table B5 : Total passengers (B1+B4) 1970 ALB 1.0 AUT 2 AZE 4.8 BEL 66.8 BGR 18.5 BIH 2 3.0 2 BLR 15.7 CHE 53.0 CSK 2 41.9 CZE 0.0 DEU 437.7 DNK 41.3 ESP 100.2 EST 2 3.8 FIN 33.4 FRA 371.2 GBR 373.4 GEO 2.1 GRC 2 HRV 7.0 HUN 36.0 IRL 0.8 ISL 0.0 ITA 276.4 LIE 0.0 LTU 2 7.0 LUX 0.2 LVA 2 7.1 MDA 2 2.6 2 MKD 1.4 MLT 0.0 NLD 85.4 NOR 23.9 POL 66.0 PRT 21.7 2 ROM 25.7 2 RUS 365.5 SVK 0.0 2 SVN 4.1 SWE 66.2 TUR 46.9 UKR 2 0.0 YUG 14.2 ECMT/WEST 2007.7 ECMT/CEECs 236.8 ECMT/CIS 2 388.6

2

2

1980 1.8 63.4 7.9 81.4 28.7 5.5 25.4 74.8 51.8 0.0 572.6 48.5 173.8 5.2 46.5 545.7 449.3 9.0 10.7 76.1 1.0 0.0 421.5 0.0 9.9 0.2 9.3 5.3 2.5 0.0 130.2 38.1 95.5 42.7 47.2 551.9 0.0 6.4 82.0 79.4 0.0 28.5 2802.8 379.2 590.4

2

2

1990 2000 2001 01/00* 2 3.0 5.4 5.5 1.5 76.2 8.2 8.5 9.8 9.6 -2.1 92.3 33.7 18.1 18.0 -0.6 4.1 36.6 27.0 24.8 -8.2 89.9 62.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.5 83.4 3.6 693.4 867.5 62.7 74.6 74.1 -0.6 224.5 373.0 380.5 2.0 6.0 2.9 2.6 -8.6 63.0 66.8 68.0 1.8 691.0 814.8 c 844.0 667.2 699.2 10.3 5.0 26.2 10.4 4.6 4.7 3.0 82.5 71.6 72.3 0.9 1.2 1.4 1.5 9.1 3.0 651.3 802.9 808.9 c 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.3 2.3 2.2 -5.6 0.2 0.3 0.3 4.2 11.2 3.1 3.0 -1.7 6.5 1.3 1.4 4.3 1.8 1.0 c 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 161.5 49.8 56.4 57.3 1.7 164.8 c 201.1 206.9 2.9 56.5 54.6 19.3 18.0 -6.7 679.4 331.9 305.0 -8.1 0.0 35.2 34.9 -0.9 8.0 2.3 2.2 -4.6 102.2 112.1 141.4 191.5 173.8 -9.3 172.3 30.0 16.7 17.9 6.7 3772.9 4575.7 e 4637.2 e 1.3 483.1 465.3 473.8 1.8 903.4 428.3 e 396.3 e -7.5

ECMT/WEST = 15 countries : BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,ITA,NLD,NOR PRT,SWE,TUR ECMT/CEECs = 15 countries : ALB,BGR,BIH,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM, SVK,SVN,YUG

SVK,SVN,YUG

ECMT/CIS = 5 countries : AZE,BLR,MDA,RUS,UKR 2. Excluding private cars.

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

61

c = change in the series.

ROAD ACCIDENTS Thousands Table C1 : Number of accidents 1970 1980 ALB AUT 51.6 46.2 AZE BEL 77.0 60.8 BGR 5.7 BIH BLR CHE 28.7 25.6 CSK 33.5 24.1 CZE DEU 377.6 379.2 DNK 19.8 12.3 ESP 58.0 67.8 EST 2.2 1.7 FIN 11.4 6.8 FRA 235.1 248.5 GBR 272.8 257.3 GEO 3.0 3.1 GRC 18.3 18.2 HRV 15.1 HUN 23.2 19.0 IRL 6.4 5.7 ISL 0.7 0.5 ITA 307.7 163.8 LIE 0.3 0.3 LTU 4.7 6.2 LUX 3.1 4.0 LVA 4.7 4.7 MDA 3.1 4.4 MKD 3.1 1.9 MLT NLD 59.0 49.4 NOR 9.3 7.8 POL 41.8 40.4 PRT 22.7 33.9 ROM 4.9 4.8 RUS SVK SVN 8.3 6.9 SWE 16.6 15.2 TUR 19.2 36.9 UKR YUG 0.0 0.0 ECMT/WEST 1576.2 1403.5 ECMT/CEECs 143.3 e 130.5 ECMT/CIS 6.1 7.5

1990 46.3 62.4 6.5

23.8 30.1 340.0 9.2 101.5 2.1 10.2 162.6 265.6 3.0 19.6 14.5 27.8 6.1 0.6 161.8 0.3 5.1 1.2 4.3 6.0 2.3 13.2 8.8 50.5 45.1 9.7 197.4 5.2 17.0 115.3 50.9 33.6 1295.4 158.2 218.9

2000 0.4 42.1 2.0 49.1 6.9

2001 0.4 43.1 2.0

01/00* -6.5 2.2 -0.1

6.7

-2.6

6.4 23.7

6.3 23.9

-1.3 0.7

25.4 382.9 7.3 101.7 1.5 6.6 121.2 242.1 1.7 23.0 14.4 17.5 7.8 0.8 211.9 0.4 5.8 0.9 4.5 2.6 1.7 1.0 10.9 8.4 57.3 44.2 7.6 157.6 7.9 8.5 15.8 466.4 33.3 48.8 1301.0 159.4 170.3

26.0 375.3 6.9 100.4 1.9 6.5 116.7 236.5

2.3 -2.0 -6.6 -1.3 25.7 -2.7 -3.7 -2.3

19.7 15.7 18.5

-14.3 8.5 5.8

0.6 6.0 0.8 4.8 2.8 1.3 1.0 10.5 8.2 53.8 42.5 7.2 164.4 8.2 9.2

35.1 2.8 -14.5 6.3 6.6 -23.2 5.3 -3.8 -2.3 -6.2 -3.7 -4.1 4.3 3.8 8.6

409.4 34.5 61.5 1261.3 159.6 177.2

-12.2 3.6 26.0 -3.1 0.2 4.1

ECMT/WEST = 19 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,IRL,ISL,ITA,LIE,LUX, NLD,NOR,PRT,SWE ECMT/CEECs = 13 countries : ALB,BGR,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM,SVK,SVN ECMT/CIS = 5 countries : AZE,BLR,GEO,MDA,RUS

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

63

c = change in the series.

ROAD ACCIDENTS Thousands Table C2 : Casualties [killed+injured] 1970 ALB AUT 72.7 AZE BEL 107.8 BGR BIH BLR CHE 37.7 CSK 44.2 CZE DEU 551.0 DNK 26.7 ESP 87.0 EST 2.3 FIN 17.1 FRA 344.7 GBR 371.5 GEO 4.3 GRC 25.7 HRV HUN 31.9 IRL 9.8 ISL 0.9 ITA 238.4 LIE 0.1 LTU 4.9 LUX 2.5 LVA 5.0 MDA 3.6 MKD 2.7 MLT NLD 71.4 NOR 12.3 POL 37.8 PRT 30.3 ROM 6.3 RUS SVK SVN 11.2 SWE 23.5 TUR 20.8 UKR YUG 1.8 ECMT/WEST 2031.1 ECMT/CEECs 168.0 ECMT/CIS 7.9

1980

1990

64.4

62.0

84.7 7.3

88.2 8.4

33.6 31.9

30.2 40.4

513.5 15.8 112.7 2.1 9.0 352.2 335.9 4.7 26.7 22.2 25.5 9.1 0.7 231.4 0.1 5.5 2.4 4.5 5.1 2.9

456.1 11.3 162.4 2.8 13.4 236.1 352.9 4.6 29.1 21.2 39.4 9.9 0.9 227.6 0.1 6.4 1.8 5.6 7.8 3.3

58.6 10.6 52.2 43.4 5.6 165.6

15.0 12.2 66.9 65.7 11.9 250.2

9.9 20.1 28.8

7.1 23.3 94.0 63.1 27.4 1798.3 213.3 279.0

25.1 1924.7 169.7 175.4

2000 0.6 55.9 2.2 69.4 9.0

2001 0.5 57.2 2.8

01/00* -11.8 2.4 26.7

9.0

-0.5

8.1 30.7

8.0 30.7

-1.1 0.2

32.4 511.6 9.6 155.6 2.0 8.9 169.8 335.0 2.6 32.8 21.2 23.9 12.5 1.3 308.0 0.2 7.6 1.3 6.0 3.6 2.5 1.2 11.5 12.0 71.6 61.6 8.8 209.0 10.7 11.9 22.6 118.0 41.8 17.7 1810.1 208.4 225.4

33.7 501.8 8.9 155.1 2.6 8.8 161.7 326.5

3.8 -1.9 -7.2 -0.3 29.1 -0.7 -4.8 -2.6

27.8 22.7 25.4

-15.3 7.5 6.2

0.2 7.8 1.2 6.4 3.8 1.9 1.2 11.0 11.8 68.2 58.5 8.4 218.7 11.5 13.0 22.9 97.5 44.2 21.1 1760.8 211.1 235.9

10.5 2.7 -6.4 5.5 6.8 -22.6 4.0 -4.2 -1.7 -4.8 -4.9 -4.4 4.6 6.9 9.0 1.1 -17.4 5.7 19.8 -2.7 1.3 4.7

ECMT/WEST = 19 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,IRL,ISL,ITA,LIE,LUX, NLD,NOR,PRT,SWE ECMT/CEECs = 13 countries : ALB,BGR,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM,SVK,SVN ECMT/CIS = 5 countries : AZE,BLR,GEO,MDA,RUS

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

c = change in the series.

Source: ECMT.

64

 ECMT, 2003

ROAD ACCIDENTS Thousands Table C3 : Killed ALB AUT AZE BEL BGR BIH BLR CHE CSK CZE DEU DNK ESP EST FIN FRA GBR GEO GRC HRV HUN IRL ISL ITA LIE LTU LUX LVA MDA MKD MLT NLD NOR POL PRT ROM RUS SVK SVN SWE TUR UKR YUG ECMT/WEST ECMT/CEECs ECMT/CIS

1970

1980

1990

2.2

1.7

1.4

3.0

2.4 1.2

2.0 1.6

1.7 2.2

1.2 1.9

1.0 2.0

19.2 1.2 4.2 0.3 1.1 15.1 7.8 0.8 0.9

13.0 0.7 5.0 0.3 0.6 12.5 6.2 0.9 1.2 1.6 1.6 0.6 0.0 8.5 0.0 0.8 0.1 0.7 0.9 0.2

7.9 0.6 6.9 0.4 0.6 10.3 5.4 1.1 1.7 1.4 2.4 0.5 0.0 6.6 0.0 0.9 0.1 0.9 1.1 0.2

3.2 0.6 3.4 1.4 1.9

2.0 0.4 6.0 2.3 1.9 27.5

1.4 0.3 7.3 2.3 3.8 35.4

0.6 1.3 4.0

0.6 0.8 4.2

1.4 73.7 13.6 1.4

2.0 59.4 16.7 29.3

0.5 0.8 6.3 9.6 2.1 49.9 21.5 41.0

1.7 0.5 0.0 10.2 0.0 0.7 0.1 0.6 0.6 0.1

2000 0.3 1.0 0.6 1.5 1.0

2001 0.3 1.0 0.6

01/00* 6.1 -1.8 -6.2

1.0

-0.1

1.6 0.6

1.6 0.5

0.0 -8.1

1.5 7.5 0.5 5.8 0.2 0.4 7.6 3.6 0.5 2.0 0.7 1.2 0.4 0.0 6.4 0.0 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 1.1 0.3 6.3 1.6 2.5 29.6 0.6 0.3 0.6 3.9 5.2 1.0 41.1 16.0 32.7

1.3 7.0 0.4 5.5 0.2 0.4 7.7 3.6

-10.2 -7.0 -13.5 -4.5 -2.5 9.3 1.0 0.5

1.9 0.6 1.2 0.4 0.0

-7.0 -1.2 3.3 -1.0 -25.0

0.0 0.7 0.1 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.0 1.0 0.3 5.5 1.5 2.5 30.9 0.6 0.3 0.5 3.0 5.9 1.3 39.2 15.0 34.0

-33.3 10.1 -7.9 -12.1 3.2 -34.0 6.7 -8.2 -19.4 -12.1 -10.0 -1.5 4.4 -3.5 -11.2 -8.5 -25.0 13.5 21.5 -4.4 -6.4 4.0

ECMT/WEST = 19 countries : AUT,BEL,CHE,DEU,DNK,ESP,FIN,FRA,GBR,GRC,IRL,ISL,ITA,LIE,LUX, NLD,NOR,PRT,SWE ECMT/CEECs = 13 countries : ALB,BGR,CZE,EST,HRV,HUN,LTU,LVA,MKD,POL,ROM,SVK,SVN ECMT/CIS = 5 countries : AZE,BLR,GEO,MDA,RUS

*

-0.5% < 0 < 0.5%.

e = estimate.

Source: ECMT.

 ECMT, 2003

65

c = change in the series.

100x205_e.fm Page 2 Friday, February 14, 2003 3:16 PM

OECD PUBLICATIONS, 2, rue André-Pascal, 75775 PARIS CEDEX 16 PRINTED IN FRANCE (75 2003 02 1 P1) ISBN 92-821-1301-9 – No. 52917 2003