Abstract

This paper is an annual publication issued by the Microeconomic Analysis service of the National Bank of Belgium. The Flemish maritime ports (Antwerp, Ghent, Ostend, Zeebrugge), the Autonomous Port of Liège and the port of Brussels play a major role in their respective regional economies and in the Belgian economy, not only in terms of industrial activity but also as intermodal centers facilitating the commodity flow. This update paper provides an extensive overview of the economic importance and development of the Flemish maritime ports, the Liège port complex and the port of Brussels for the period 2007 - 2012, with an emphasis on 2012. Focusing on the three major variables of value added, employment and investment, the report also provides some information based on the social balance sheet and an overview of the financial situation in these ports as a whole. These observations are linked to a more general context, along with a few cargo statistics. Annual accounts data from the Central Balance Sheet Office were used for the calculation of direct effects, the study of financial ratios and the analysis of the social balance sheet. The indirect effects of the activities concerned were estimated in terms of value added and employment, on the basis of data from the National Accounts Institute. As a result of the underlying calculation method the changes of indirect employment and indirect value added can differ from one another. (...) Following the 2009 decline and the improvement in 2011, maritime traffic in the Flemish ports began falling again in 2012. That applies to all the Flemish ports. Value added was rising in the maritime cluster of the Flemish ports and falling in the non-maritime cluster where trade and industry were in decline. Direct value added has risen in the ports of Antwerp and Ostend whereas it has fallen in the ports of Zeebrugge and Ghent. Conversely, direct employment was expanding in both clusters in the Flemish ports viewed as a whole and in each port taken individually. The decline in investment in the Flemish ports continued in 2012. That trend is evident in all the Flemish ports except the port of Ostend where investment was maintained in 2012. The volume of cargo handled in the port of Liège decreased in 2012. Direct value added and employment contracted in both clusters. The steel giant ArcelorMittal had idled two blast furnaces at the site in Liege. Investment increased in both clusters in the Liège port complex. The volume of cargo handled at the port of Brussels declined in 2012. Value added and employment in the maritime cluster fell but rose in the non-maritime cluster. The drop in investment recorded since 2009 continued throughout 2012, albeit at a slowing pace. This report provides a comprehensive account of these issues, giving details for each economic sector, although the comments are confined to the main changes that occurred in 2012. Document type: Book

Abstract

This paper is an annual publication issued by the Microeconomic Analysis service of the National Bank of Belgium. The Flemish maritime ports (Antwerp, Ghent, Ostend, Zeebrugge), the Autonomous Port of Liège and the port of Brussels play a major role in their respective regional economies and in the Belgian economy, not only in terms of industrial activity but also as intermodal centers facilitating the commodity flow. This update paper provides an extensive overview of the economic importance and development of the Flemish maritime ports, the Liège port complex and the port of Brussels for the period 2006 - 2011, with an emphasis on 2011. Focusing on the three major variables of value added, employment and investment, the report also provides some information based on the social balance sheet and an overview of the financial situation in these ports as a whole. These observations are linked to a more general context, along with a few cargo statistics. Annual accounts data from the Central Balance Sheet Office were used for the calculation of direct effects, the study of financial ratios and the analysis of the social balance sheet. The indirect effects of the activities concerned were estimated in terms of value added and employment, on the basis of data from the National Accounts Institute. As a result of the underlying calculation method the changes of indirect employment and indirect value added can differ from one another. (…) After the upturn in 2010, maritime cargo traffic in the Flemish ports continued to rise, albeit at a slower pace in 2011. Direct value added declined in the four ports in Flanders as a whole. Both maritime and non-maritime clusters as a whole were down. The only increase in value added occurred in the port of Zeebrugge. The value added of the non-maritime clusters in each port declined, while in the maritime cluster, the port of Antwerp was the only one to register a steep drop. Direct employment in the Flemish ports as a whole declined during the year 2011. This is true of both the maritime and non-maritime cluster. Only the port of Ghent registered a rise in employment in both clusters. Investment contracted in the Flemish ports as a whole for the third year in a row. The decline in investment was between 7 and 13 percent in the ports of Antwerp, Ghent and Ostend, whereas Zeebrugge recorded a negative rate of one-fifth in its investment levels in 2011. The volume of cargo handled in the port of Liège increased slightly in 2011. Direct value added rose in both clusters, while employment registered a decline in the maritime cluster and a rise in the nonmaritime cluster. After falling in 2010, investment picked up again in 2011 in both clusters. The volume of cargo handled at the port of Brussels rose in 2011. Value added in the maritime cluster was up but contracted in the non-maritime cluster. Employment increased in both clusters. The drop in investment recorded since 2009 continued throughout 2011. This report provides a comprehensive account of these issues, giving details for each economic sector, although the comments are confined to the main changes that occurred in 2011. Document type: Book

Abstract

This paper is an annual publication issued by the Microeconomic Analysis service of the National Bank of Belgium. The Flemish maritime ports (Antwerp, Ghent, Ostend, Zeebrugge), the Autonomous Port of Liège and the port of Brussels play a major role in their respective regional economies and in the Belgian economy, not only in terms of industrial activity but also as intermodal centres facilitating the commodity flow. This update paper1 provides an extensive overview of the economic importance and development of the Flemish maritime ports, the Liège port complex and the port of Brussels for the period 2008 - 2013, with an emphasis on 2013. Focusing on the three major variables of value added, employment and investment, the report also provides some information based on the social balance sheet and an overview of the financial situation in these ports as a whole. These observations are linked to a more general context, along with a few cargo statistics. Annual accounts data from the Central Balance Sheet Office were used for the calculation of direct effects, the study of financial ratios and the analysis of the social balance sheet. The indirect effects of the activities concerned were estimated in terms of value added and employment, on the basis of data from the National Accounts Institute. As a result of the underlying calculation method the changes of indirect employment and indirect value added can differ from one another. The developments concerning economic activity in the six ports in 2012 - 2013 are summarised in the table on the next page. The overall decline in maritime traffic seen in the Flemish maritime ports in general in 2012, and in each individual port, was reversed in 2013, but only thanks to growth in Antwerp; the other three ports (Ghent, Ostend and Zeebrugge) experienced a further decrease. In terms of value added, the opposite occurred: a general increase, except in Antwerp, resulting in a slight rise for these ports as a whole. The employment picture was variable, but there was expansion overall, matching the growth of value added, namely 0.3 %. Finally, investment in the Flemish ports declined overall, totalling 3.2 % less in 2013 than in the previous year. In the ports of Liège and Brussels, cargo traffic and employment both declined in 2013. After the sharp fall in 2012, value added at the port of Liège edged upwards again, but in Brussels it recorded a significant decline2. Conversely, investment in Liège was down again, following the surge in 2012, whereas the port of Brussels saw a substantial increase. This report provides a comprehensive account of these issues, giving details for each economic sector, although the comments are confined to the main changes that occurred in 2013. Document type: Book

Abstract

The European Union is highly dependent on seaports for trade with the rest of the world and within its Internal"br" Market. Approximately, 75% of goods imported and exported and 37% of exchanges within the Union transited"br" through seaports in 2013. To manage this amount of cargo in ports, smooth operations are required. The"br" performance of ports is currently evaluated by using different types of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). How"br" the indicators are described is dependent on the stakeholders and their organizational interest."br" Ports, and the transport sector as a whole, are undergoing drastic changes. To cite a few, demand increases, ship"br" capacity enlargements, shipping line mergers and alliances lead to more concentrated flows and increase of traffic"br" in certain hub ports detrimental to medium size ones, other aspects such new requirements regarding environment"br" protection and security are also relevant. At the same time, ports are usually located in the middle of existing"br" neighborhoods, which limits possibilities to enlarge their area whilst stress is placed to improve the port-city"br" interrelation. Therefore, there is a need to invest in port infrastructure, but expansion or renovation of a port is"br" extremely difficult. The required investments are big and the planning horizon is long. Hence, if the designed"br" structures turn out to be unsuitable due to changes in needs, it is rather expensive to make changes."br" Planning tools have developed remarkably during the past 10 years. Different types of planning tools are used in"br" seaport and terminal design to model the completeness. Modelling generates digital representations of physical"br" and functional characteristics of a terminal area, buildings and other infrastructures. With the help of model-based"br" approaches and with suitable KPIs, it is easier to understand and evaluate the effects of certain design solutions"br" for terminal operations in a larger context. By using modelling tools, it is also possible to compare different design"br" options to outline how certain choices in terminal design influences on the completeness."br" There is a need to define the objectives of good terminal prior to plan the terminal and its operations. A good"br" terminal would satisfy the stakeholders’ expectations in best possible ways in the given preconditions. The"br" achievement of objectives can be evaluated by using suitable indicators. However, the indicators used to plan and"br" model terminal operations may differ from indicators used to evaluate the performance of current ports and"br" terminals. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the indicators required for terminal planning and compare them"br" with existing KPIs used for measuring the performance of ports and terminals.

Abstract

International audience; We are looking into the evolution of cooperation and competition between airlines and railroads, in the context of rail deregulation, with the tools provided by network economics. After looking at the progress of rail deregulation in Europe, we describe the situation of air and rail in terms of cooperation (intermodality). We then examine the current strategies of airlines and railroads considered as networks industries. In this light, we then analyse their possible strategies in a context of rail deregulation, with a complete opening of rail markets. We conclude by assessing the possibility of emergence of multi-modal network operators.

Abstract

ddis Ababa, with an area of 540 km2 and with population of 3.1 million people is experiencing a rapid pace of socio-economic and physical transformation. The city is not only the political, commercial, economic and financial hub of the country but also an international city serving as the seat of the African Union and various international organizations. Alike many African Cities, Addis Ababa has been undergoing a high rate of urbanization. This process of rapid urbanization has resulted in the increase in the size of the population and the physical expansion of the city. As a consequence, travel demand and length of the trip are increasing. Transportation plays a key role in determining the socioeconomic development and shaping the spatial development framework of the city. Equally important, transportation as derived demand is also a fundamental means for residents to fulfill their various activities. In Addis Ababa motorization, although on the increase, is low and public transportation is the most important mode of motorized mobility for the large majority of the city’s population. There are various formal and informal operators of the public transport mainly operating on individual basis. It is estimated that there are over 18,000 public transport vehicles that are daily running in Addis Ababa, most of them low capacity vehicles. Despite its importance, the public transport sector not only suffers from shortage, insufficient capital investment, and until recently lack of clear governmental policy and leadership but also from the absence of integrated approach to its operation, planning and management.Many cities in the North have embarked on integrating the provision of public transportation for nearly half a century now. In these cities, integration in public transportation has been recommended as a viable instrument for providing high quality and seamless urban transport and enhancing sustainable urban development. African cities which are characterized by their high urbanization rate, low level of private car ownership, deficient public transportation system and significant financial constraints lack public transportation integration experiences. The question is then ‘how do African cities replicate and implement public transport integration practices?’ that have been originally developed for the Cities of the North. The thesis attempts to answer this question and analyses the different forms of public transport integration. It then proposes a framework for implementing integrated public transport as a sustainable means of urban mobility in Addis Ababa.; Addis-Abeba, qui s’étend sur 540 km2 et compte 3,1 millions d’habitants, connait aujourd’hui des transformations socio-économiques et spatiales rapides. Elle n’est pas seulement le coeur politique, commercial, économique et financier du pays mais aussi une ville internationale accueillant le siège de l’Union africaine et d’autres institutions internationales. Comme d’autres villes africaines, elle connait un rythme élevé d’urbanisation. Ce processus a impliqué la croissance du nombre d’habitants mais aussi une extension spatiale accrue. En conséquence, la demande de déplacements et la longueur des parcours ont augmenté. Le transport joue ainsi un rôle clé, pesant sur le développement socio-économique et la configuration de l’espace urbain. Tout aussi important, en tant que demande dérivée, il joue sur la capacité des citadins à accomplir leurs diverses activités. La motorisation des ménages restant faible en dépit d’une lente progression, le transport public constitue le principal moyen d’accès à une mobilité motorisée pour la majorité de la population. L’offre est constituée d’une multitude d’opérateurs formels et informels, travaillant selon un schéma artisanal. On estime à plus de 18 000 les véhicules de transport public, la plupart de faible capacité, qui parcourent chaque jour les rues d’Addis-Abeba. En dépit de son importance, le transport public souffre de capacités d’investissement insuffisantes ainsi que, jusqu’à récemment, du manque d’une politique publique claire et affirmée. Il pâtit également de l’absence d’une approche intégrée, pour sa planification, sa gestion et sa mise en oeuvre. De nombreuses villes du Nord, parfois depuis près d’un demi-siècle, ont choisi de construire un service intégré de transport public. L’intégration y est vue comme un outil viable pour offrir un transport urbain de haute qualité et « sans couture », permettant un développement urbain durable. Par contre, les villes africaines, caractérisées par une urbanisation rapide, des taux d’équipement automobile faibles, un système de transport public déficient et des contraintes financières majeures manquent de telles expériences d’intégration du transport public. Notre question est donc : « Comment les villes africaines peuvent-elles reproduire et mettre en oeuvre des politiques d’intégration du transport public ? », originellement développées dans les villes du Nord. La thèse essaie d’apporter des éléments de réponse à cette question. Elle s’appuie sur une analyse des différentes formes d’intégration du transport public. Puis elle propose un schéma de conception et de mise en oeuvre d’un système de transport public intégré, appréhendé comme un outil de mobilité urbaine durable pour Addis-Abeba.

Abstract

Smart-Rail has targeted the alignment of rail freight services performance with the requirements of the “new” rail freight market that should be attracted in order to achieve a modal-shift. In general terms this implies that in order to be able to compete with the road options, a reduction of logistical costs should be achieved and not only a reduction of the price paid for the rail services. A significant share of the rail related logistical costs for the user can be reduced by improvement of reliability, lead time, flexibility and visibility. Smart-Rail has focussend on:"br" • Contribution to a mental shift of the rail sector toward a client oriented and supply chain focus."br" • Developing supply chain oriented business models for cooperation of different stakeholders."br" • Development of a methodology and architecture for exchange of data/information between stakeholder."br" • Establishment of three operational Continuous Improvement Tracks (CIT’s) with the purpose to identify the practical barriers and improve and test the innovative measures in a real life situation."br" The H2020 project Smart-Rail is a lighthouse projects of Shift2Rail running between May 2015 and April 2018.

Abstract

“Mobility", "interoperability", and "inter-modality" are concepts expressing both objectives of services and characteristics of systems. How interoperable and intermodal systems influence personal mobility is intuitive and often discussed. In public transport, interoperability between fare systems, for instance, is an important step towards “seamless travel” by allowing users to access public transport in different areas with one single medium (“ticket”), while interoperability between trip planning systems allows for user-friendly passenger information and thus provides a necessary condition to ease the mobility of people. Truly interoperable systems follow a holistic approach in respect of transport, and provide the combination of different modes/means of transport within the same journey. CEN Technical Committee 278 WG3 developed a particularly useful standard for data structures (Transmodel) which acts as a reference for other standards, and hence facilitates the definition of the necessary requirements to make EU-wide multimodal travel information services accurate and available to all.

Abstract

This paper aims to develop a user typology which enables user-specific analyses in respect of mobility behavior. It addresses the challenge of integrating unimodal and intermodal travel behavior into a user typology to obtain an overview of intermodal users within the context of their overall mobility behavior. The user typology is based on two cluster analyses (agglomerative hierarchical clustering) which use quantitative survey data on unimodal and intermodal mobility behavior obtained for Berlin, Germany. One cluster analysis was performed for unimodal use and one for intermodal mode use to take into account the users’ relatively low use of intermodal modes as well. The analyses resulted in 6 intermodal and 5 unimodal clusters based on users’ mobility behavior. Since in each case every individual is assigned to one intermodal and one unimodal cluster, the resulting intermodal and unimodal clusters were then combined in order to represent the overall mobility behavior of each individual as mobility types. The mobility types are further characterized by information on socio-demographics and mobility resources obtained from the dataset. These enhanced mobility types (EMT) provide a clearer impression of the users’ characteristics and needs. This user typology takes account of the wide range of mobility options available in cities today and the resulting diversity in people’s mobility behavior. To enable us to address the needs of users who combine several modes of transport within one trip, the proposed procedure approaches the challenge of integrating intermodal behavior into user types. The results provide a user typology which combines intermodal and unimodal travel behavior with personal characteristics and enable researchers and practitioners to work on user-specific research questions and planning tasks. Document type: Article