Rail Liberalisation Index 2007 - Deutsche Bahn AG

IBM Global Business Services 

Rail Liberalisation Index 2007 

Market Opening: Rail Markets of the Member States of the 

European Union, Switzerland and Norway in comparison 

A study by IBM Global Business Services 

in conjunction with Prof. Dr. Dr. Christian Kirchner, 

Humboldt University, Berlin 

Presentation in Brussels, 17 October 2007

Note 


This presentation contains slides created by IBM Global Business Services 

in conjunction with Prof. Dr. Dr. Kirchner, Humboldt University, Berlin. 

The complete results of the "Rail Liberalisation Index 2007" 

are available on the Internet at www.db.de/liberalisierungsindex (German) 

and www.db.de/liberalisation-index (English/French) 

as from 17 October 2007. 

English translation – in case of doubts German version shall apply. 


2 Rail Liberalisation Index 2007 | Brussels, 17 October 2007 

© Copyright IBM Corporation 2007


1 Objective and Concept 

of the Rail Liberalisation Index 2007 

2 Results of the Study: 

Current Status of Market Opening 

3 Conclusion 








3 Conclusion 





The new version of the Rail Liberalisation Index is intended to provide 

current information on the progress of railway liberalisation. 

1. Comparing the current relative degree of market opening of the rail transport markets 

in the enlarged EU, CH and N as on 1 May 2007 (reporting date) 

2. Evaluating the market access possibilities from the point of view of railway undertakings 

willing and able to enter 

3. Adapting the LIB Index to the status of scientific discussion 

4. Increasing the level of detail for better quantifiability and differentiation of the 

market entry barriers 

5. Disclosing methods, weighting, sources and evaluations 

6. Providing a snapshot of the current competitive situation 

7. Ensuring comparability with previous studies 

8. Aligning the market opening discussion to the facts 

9. Driving liberalisation forward 

What progress has been made by the 

individual countries in opening their markets? 





The LIB Index 2007 takes account of impulses given by the EU Commission as well 

as the new framework conditions and ensures comparability. 

1. Special focus on the liberalisation process in rail freight transport 

2. For the first time, publication of separate indices for passenger and freight transport 

3. Better differentiation between purely commercial transport and transport under a public 

service contract 

4. Extension of the regulatory aspects on the basis of the IBM study 

"Rail Regulation in Europe, 2006" 

5. Consideration of the enlargement of the EU by Romania and Bulgaria; 

Index thus comprises 27 countries: EU (excluding Malta and Cyprus), Switzerland and 

Norway 

6. Consideration of impulses given by the EU Commission regarding legal provisions 

concerning access to operational facilities 

7. Shift of weights in favour of the practical market access conditions 

Comparability with the LIB Index 2004 is ensured thanks to the 

modular structure of the Index and the low number of changes. 





The market access barriers are measured from the point of view of 

railway undertakings (RUs) willing and able to enter. 

Law in the books 

Law in action 

What are the legal requirements 

for market entry and to what 

extent do regulatory authorities 

support external RUs? 

What are the practical market 

access possibilities and barriers 

from the point of view of external 

RUs? 

Which market is actually 

accessible and what allocation 

procedures are used? 

LEX 

Index 

ACCESS 

Index 

What practical and legal market entry barriers must be overcome by 

an external RU before it can offer its services? 





The Rail Liberalisation Index 2007 makes a consistent distinction 

between market entry barriers and the development of competition. 

Market test 

Market results 

LIB Index 

not considered 

market results 

COM Index 

ACCESS Index 

LEX Index 

Prices, quality, 

public funds, … 

Causes and consequences of liberalisation are analysed separately. 

Competitive situation 

Practical market access 

barriers 

Legal requirements 





A modular structure enables the Liberalisation Index to be updated 

without changing the calculation logic. 

Consolidation levels of the LIB Index 

1. Overall Index 

2. Sub-indices 

3. Subject areas 

4. Determinants 

5. Sub-criteria 

Information 

barriers 

Licensing 

Independent 

inspection authorities 

LEX INDEX 

Administrative 

barriers 

Safety 

certificate 

Fees 

ACCESS INDEX 

Operational 

barriers 

Homologation 

of rolling stock 

Level of detail 

required 


© Copyright IBM Corporation 2007 

... 

... 

... 

Consolidation level 

Data level 

(230 items 

of data per 

country)



Evaluation of responses on a scale of "one" to "ten" 

enables a high level of differentiation. 

Sub-index/Subject area/ 

Determinant/Sub-criterion 

L.II Regulation 

of market access 

1. Market access 

of foreign RUs 

A) Transit and 

access rights FT 

B) Transit and 

access rights PT 

2. Market access 

of domestic RUs 

Weights 

2007 

45% 

40% 

50% 

50% 

40% 

1 

closed 

closed 

2 

3 

91/ 

440/ 

EEC 

91/ 

440/ 

EEC 

4 

Open access 

without 

cabotage 

(reciprocity) 

Open access 

without 

cabotage 

(reciprocity) 

Open access 

with 

cabotage 

(reciprocity) 

Open access 

with 

cabotage 

(reciprocity) 

Determinant Subject Sub- Weighting of Weighting of Weighting of 

area criterion determinant subject area sub-criterion 

Open 

access 

without 

cabotage 

Open 

access 

without 

cabotage 

Open 

access 

with 

cabotage 

Open 

access 

with 

cabotage 



5 

6 

7 

8 

Extract from the 

evaluation scheme 

9 

10 

Evaluation of the 

responses on a 

scale of 1 to 10



Various sources ensure the reliability of the data. 

Sources 

Competent points of contact at: 

– Railway undertakings 

– Railway regulation bodies 

– Ministries and public authorities 

– Incumbents and network operators 

– National statistical offices, Eurostat 

– European Commission 

Railway experts 

Railway industry 

IBM Global Business Services Network 

Current studies and annual reports 

Evaluation 

Non-responses are a component part of the 

scope of the results 

Verification of completed questionnaires 

on the basis of secondary sources 

Paired comparisons and plausibility checks 

Experts' assessments 

Feedback loop with the points of contact in the 

individual countries 

Additional information: 

230 items of data were collected for each 

country (6210 items of data in total). Only 1.71% 

of the questions did not receive a response. 

The research results are reliable thanks to multiple validation and the methodical 

procedure adopted. 





The weighting of the responses reflects the significance of the 

access barriers and therefore the relative cost of entry. 

Content of the LEX Index 

Organisational structures of the incumbent (25%) 

Regulation of market access (45%) 

Competencies of the regulatory authority (30%) 

Content of the ACCESS Index 

Information barriers (5%) 

Administrative barriers (20%) 

Operational barriers (50%) 

Share of accessible domestic market (25%) 

= 

20% LEX + 80% ACCESS 

LIB Index 2004: 

30% LEX + 70% ACCESS 

A consistent distinction is made between law-in-the-books values (LEX) and 

law-in-action values (ACCESS). 

Adapting the weights of the sub-indices reflects the process of dynamic liberalisation 

since law in action is gaining more and more significance. 








3 Conclusion 



2 Results of the Study 


LEX Index 2007 (passenger and freight transport) 

All countries have developed positively in the LEX Index. 

GB Great Britain, 969 

DE Germany, 905 

NL Netherlands, 865 

SE Sweden, 857 

SK Slovakia, 853 

CZ Czech Rep., 839 

PT Portugal, 829 

RO Romania, 822 

DK Denmark, 821 

LT Lithuania, 820 

AT Austria, 819 

IT Italy, 819 

PL Poland, 783 

NO Norway, 777 

BE Belgium, 740 

EE Estonia, 738 

FI Finland, 732 

HU Hungary, 731 

BG Bulgaria, 722 

ES Spain, 711 

LV Latvia, 683 

CH Switzerland, 670 

SI Slovenia, 622 

GR Greece, 619 

FR France, 595 

LU Luxembourg, 551 

IE Ireland, 312 

Comment 

50% of the 

countries scored 

777 points or more 

in the LEX Index. 

The average is 748 

points. 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





ACCESS Index 2007 (passenger and freight transport) 

On average, the law-in-action values are lower than the law-in-the-books values. 


















IT Italy, 640 





ES Spain, 610 





Comment 

The ACCESS values are on 

average 77 points lower than 

the LEX values: Actual 

market opening often lags 

behind the legal provisions. 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





ACCESS Index 2007 (passenger and freight transport) 

7 countries: significantly better practical access conditions than the rest. 


















IT Italy, 640 





ES Spain, 610 





Comment 

In the ACCESS Index, there 

are two groups who 

statistically stand out 

significantly from each other. 

The differences within the 

groups are relatively small. 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





As in 2002/2004, the status of rail liberalisation in Europa can be classified 

into three market opening categories. 

Market opening categories - LIB Index 2002/2004 and 2007 compared 

LIB Index points 

800 – 1.000 

600 – 799 

300 – 599 

100 – 299 

Groups in LIB Index 2002/2004 

No country with more than 800 points 

On Schedule 

Delayed 

Pending Departure 

Groups in LIB Index 2007 

Advanced 

On Schedule 

Delayed 

No country with less than 300 points 

As a result of the continued positive development of liberalisation, the last category in 

2002/2004 - Pending Departure - no longer applies in 2007. There is however a new 

top group in 2007 - Advanced. 





Rail Liberalisation Index 2007 (passenger and freight transport) 

For the first time, more than 800 points were scored: GB, DE, SE and NL. 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1.000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 






The top group remains nearly unchanged and is moving closer together. 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1.000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 






The midfield group is going through a process of intense liberalisation. 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1.000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 






Market entry barriers are highest in LU, FR, GR and IE. 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1.000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





COM Index 2007 (passenger and freight transport) 

The level of competitive dynamics varies greatly. 













IT Italy, 296 










ES Spain, 151 





Comment 

All countries in the first group of the LIB Index 

also occupy the top places in the COM Index 

and vice versa. One exception is EE which is in 

the second group (On Schedule) in the LIB 

Index. 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 



 

Content of the COM Index 

(measurement of competitive dynamics) 

Extent and development of the modal split of rail 

Number of licensed/active external RUs in relation to 

the length of the network 

Market shares and market share growth of external RUs



LIB Index 2007 - freight transport 

EU-driven liberalisation is showing its effect. 













ES Spain, 785 







IT Italy, 734 








Comment 

High median: 

780 points 

High average: 

771 points 

Low st. deviation: 

85 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





LIB Index 2007 - passenger transport 

There are very different levels of development of market opening. 















IT Italy, 617 








ES Spain, 486 





Comment 

With a value of 131, the 

standard deviation is 

significantly higher (factor 1.5) 

and, on average, the values are 

166 points lower than in freight: 

liberalisation in passenger 

transport is far less advanced 

than in freight transport. 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 



 

FT = freight transport | PT = passenger transport



Paired comparison of the LIB Index PT with the LIB Index FT: 

Only Germany scores more than 800 points in both types of transport. 

DE Germany, 809/844 

GB Great Britain, 798/848 

DK Denmark, 757/811 

SE Sweden, 742/908 

NL Netherlands, 732/887 

AT Austria, 727/852 

PL Poland, 692/786 

CZ Czech Rep., 679/798 

EE Estonia, 667/727 

CH Switzerland, 662/848 

RO Romania, 650/797 

SK Slovakia, 643/756 

LT Lithuania, 624/744 

PT Portugal, 619/797 

IT Italy, 617/734 

SI Slovenia, 585/743 

LV Latvia, 576/733 

NO Norway, 574/836 

BG Bulgaria, 557/761 

FI Finland, 540/732 

HU Hungary, 533/740 

BE Belgium, 518/780 

ES Spain, 486/785 

LU Luxembourg, 474/688 

FR France, 431/727 

GR Greece, 429/690 

IE Ireland, 206/458 

passenger transp. 

freight transp. 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 

Countries arranged acc. to PT values in LIB Index |FT = freight transport | PT = passenger transport 








3 Conclusion 



3 Conclusion 


Very different entry conditions in spite of continued overall market 

opening compared with 2004. 

Advanced 

On Schedule 

Delayed 

All countries studied have continued to open their rail 

markets compared with 2004 and the overall 

differences have become somewhat smaller. 

There are however still no uniform entry conditions. 

Some countries still have high market entry barriers. 

Three categories reflecting the status quo of 

liberalisation can be distinguished. 

In principle, market entry is now possible for national 

and foreign rail freight companies in every country 

studied but RUs wishing to enter the market still find 

rather restrictive access conditions in some 

countries. 



3 Conclusion 


More extensive opening of the markets for rail freight transport than for rail 

passenger transport. 

Advanced 

On Schedule 

Delayed 

External RUs are already licensed and active in rail 

freight transport in most of the countries. 

There are however still very large differences 

between the countries in rail passenger transport. 

Some countries for example deny market access to 

external RUs completely, but there are others in 

which numerous RUs have been operating 

successfully for a long time. 

Railway regulation still varies considerably across 

countries. There are for example countries which 

have implemented the EU requirements on paper 

only and/or which have conferred only weak 

competencies to their regulatory bodies. Very few 

countries have regulatory bodies which are really 

able to ensure non-discriminatory network access. 

The countries in the Advanced group are an 

exception in this respect. 



3 Conclusion 


Actual market opening generally lags behind the legal provisions. 

Advanced 

On Schedule 

Delayed 

There are still 6 countries that grant rail freight 

companies only access to their infrastructure with 

restrictions. 

It is interesting to note that Romania and Bulgaria, 

which launched railway reforms before joining the EU 

on 1 January 2007, are already in the On Schedule 

group and thus have more liberalised railway markets 

than some EU founding members. 




Thank you for your attention. 

A study by IBM Global Business Services 

in conjunction with Prof. Dr. Dr. Christian Kirchner, 

Humboldt University, Berlin 

Presentation in Brussels, 17 October 2007

IBM Contact 


Should you have any questions, proposals or comments, 

please contact the following members of staff at IBM: 

Dr. Götz Volkenandt 

Industry Leader Travel & Transport 

Northeast Europe 


Tel +49 (0)30 7203 4207 

Fax +49 (0)30 7203 4206 

Mobile+49 (0)170 331 0 441 

Email goetz.volkenandt@de.ibm.com 

IBM Germany GmbH 

Nahmitzer Damm 12 

D-12277 Berlin 

Alexander Auner 

Senior Managing Consultant 

Strategy & Change 


Tel +41 (0)58 333 5905 

Fax +41 (0)86 079 470 6937 

Mobile+41 (0)79 470 69 37 

Email alexander.auner@ch.ibm.com 

IBM Switzerland 

Vulkanstrasse 106 

CH-8048 Zürich 




Annex 

1 Content and weights of the LEX Sub-index p. 3 

2 Content and weights of the ACCESS Sub-index p. 4 

3 Content and weights of the COM Index p. 5 

4 Country reports p. 6 

5 Method for calculating the infrastructure charges p. 61 

6 Glossary p. 62 

7 List of abbreviations p. 63 




Content and weights of the LEX Sub-index: law in the books 

Subject areas and determinants of the LEX Index, 

weighted 20% in the LIB Index. 

Subject areas/Determinants 

LI – Incumbent's organisational structures 

1. Status of independence of the incumbent from state 

2. Degree of vertical separation – Infrastructure/Transport 

3. Degree of horizontal separation – Freight/Passenger Transport 

LII – Regulation of market access 

1. Market access regime for foreign railway undertakings 

2. Market access regime for domestic railway undertakings 

3. Legally regulated access to service facilities 

pursuant to Annex II No. 2 of Directive 2001/14/EC 

LIII – Competencies of the regulatory body 

1. General aspects of the regulatory body 

2. Objects of regulation 

3. Powers of the regulatory body 

percentage share 

25 per cent 

5 per cent 

80 per cent 

15 per cent 

45 per cent 

40 per cent 

40 per cent 

20 per cent 

30 per cent 

30 per cent 

30 per cent 

40 per cent 




Content and weights of the ACCESS Sub-index: law in action 

Subject areas and determinants of the ACCESS Index, 

weighted 80% in the LIB Index. 


AI – Information barriers 

1. Process duration for obtaining information 

2. Quality of impersonal information provision 

3. Quality of personal information provision 

AII – Administrative barriers 

1. Licence 

2. Safety certificate 

3. Rolling stock homologation 

AIII – Operational barriers 

1. Infrastructure access conditions 

2. Infrastructure charging system 

3. Other service facilities and services (Annex II No. 2 of Directive 2001/14/EC) 

AIV – Share of accessible domestic market per market segment 01/2004-05/2007 

1. Freight transport 

2. Passenger transport under a public service contract 

3. Purely commercial passenger transport 


5 per cent 

40 per cent 

30 per cent 

30 per cent 

20 per cent 

35 per cent 

25 per cent 

40 per cent 

50 per cent 

25 per cent 

50 per cent 

25 per cent 

25 per cent 

50 per cent 

25 per cent 

25 per cent 




Content and weights of the COM Index: Competitive dynamics 

Subject areas and determinants of the COM Index 


CI – Development of the modal split (20 per cent) (1) 

1. Level of the modal split of rail freight transport 2005 

2. Level of the modal split of rail passenger transport 2004 

3. Development of the modal share of rail freight transport (1995 – 2005) 

4. Development of the modal share of rail passenger transport (1995 – 2004) 

CII – Number of external RUs 2006/7 (20 per cent) 

1. Licensed RUs (excluding incumbent) in relation to the length of the network 

2. Active RUs (excluding incumbent) in relation to the length of the network 

3. Ratio of active RUs to licensed RUs 

CIII – Market shares of external RUs 2006/7 (60 per cent) 

1. Market shares of external RUs in per cent (2) 

2. Market share growth of external RUs in percentage points, January 2004 to March 2007 


20 per cent 

37.5 per cent 

37.5 per cent 

12.5 per cent 

12.5 per cent 

20 per cent 

40 per cent 

50 per cent 

10 per cent 

60 per cent 

75 per cent 

25 per cent 

(1) In order to ensure comparability, those years were used for which reliable and complete data on European-wide basis was available. Most of 

the figures for 2006 are not yet available. Sources: Eurostat, Prognos, IBM analyses 

(2) Shares of the passenger and tonne-kilometres carried. 




Overview of Country Reports 

DELAYED (300 – 599) 

Luxembourg 

France 

Greece 

Ireland 

1. All 

ON SCHEDULE (600 – 799) 

Austria 

Denmark 

Switzerland 

Poland 

Czech Republic 

Romania (new) 

Portugal 

Slovakia 

Norway 

Estonia 

Lithuania 

Italy 

Slovenia 

Bulgaria (new) 

Latvia 

Belgium 

Hungary 

Finland 

Spain 

ADVANCED (800 – 1.000) 

Great Britain 

Germany 

Sweden 

Netherlands 

countries investigated in the course of the study have opened up their rail markets to a greater extent than in 

2004 and differences between the countries are on the whole slightly less pronounced. However, there are still no 

standardised entry conditions, as high market barriers still exist in some countries. The countries can be allocated 

to three different categories which reflect the status quo of liberalisation. The following pages contain extracts 

from the detailed long version of the “Rail Liberalisation Index 2007“. 




Country Report 

AT Austria – On Schedule 


ÖBB: holding structure with 

functional separation of 

infrastructure and transport 

Open access: no restrictions in 

FT, PT open only to int. groupings 

and domestic RUs in the purely 

commercial segment (only ÖBB 

active) 

Discretionary award of public 

service contracts for PT 

Regulatory authority cannot order 

coercive measures or fines, 

objections to its decisions have a 

suspensive effect 

ACCESS Index COM Index 

Licences: one of the lowest 

barriers in Europe 

Homologation: relatively 

complicated, but Memorandum of 

Understanding signed with NL, DE, 

IT and CH to simplify the process 

Infrastructure charges FT: € 2.33/ 

tpkm 

Infrastructure charges PT: € 2.94/ 

tpkm for LDPT; € 1.89/tpkm for 

SDPT 

Train path allocation: ÖBB Infrastruktur 

Betrieb AG for rail networks 

of ÖBB and Raab-Oedenburg-Ebenfurther 

Eisenbahn AG 

Extract from the detailed country 

report contained in the long version 

of the “Rail Liberalisation Index 

2007“ 

10 external rail freight operators 

with a market share of 7.7% in 

2006 (2005: 5.9%): incumbent 

RCA is losing market shares 

Hardly any competition in PT: the 

RUs operating apart from ÖBB 

are state-owned (exception: 

Außerfernbahn) 

External rail passenger operators 

provide transport on their own 

networks 

Modal share of rail in FT: 29% 

(2005) 

Modal share of rail in PT: 7.8% 

(2004) 

The substantial improvement in Austria‘s position compared with the previous Liberalisation Index is due primarily 

to the amendment of the Railway Act and the reform of ÖBB. This has lowered market entry barriers, apart from 

the comparatively complicated homologation process. The initial effects of ongoing market opening are particularly 

apparent in the freight segment, where RCA‘s competitors have increased their market shares. In the passenger 

transport market, on the other hand, hardly any intramodal competition is noticeable. 




Position in the Rail Liberalisation Index 2007 

AT Austria, 788 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





BE Belgium – On Schedule 


Since 1.1.05: SNCB holding with 

2 subsidiaries, Infrabel S.A. 

(infrastructure) and SNCB S.A. 

(transport) 

The FT and PT divisions do not 

draw up separate balance sheets 

Open access for rail freight 

operators 

PT: access only pursuant to Dir. 

91/440/EEC 

Regulatory authority: DRS has 

extensive competencies since 

Dec 2006 (objections have no 

suspensive effect, relatively high 

coercive measures & fines) 


Licence: only international transport 

possible, only diesel locos 

Safety certificate: market barrier, 

as high degree of detail and fees 

(up to € 96,500 for Part B, 

depending on train km.), 

processing period of three months 

is not observed 

Homologation: most of the 

technical experts at the 

homologation body SSCIF are 

SNCB employees 

Infrastruc.charges FT: € 2.08/tpkm 

Refuelling facilities: access still 

problematic in part 





3 newcomers active in 

international FT in Belgium : DLC, 

Trainsport and Rail-4-Chem 

2 more RUs are licensed, (SNCF 

Fret and ERS) but not yet active 

Improvement in the modal split in 

FT from 12.2% (1995) to 12.9% 

(2005) and in PT from 5.8% 

(1995) to 6.3% (2004) 

SNCB has monopoly in PT 

Although Belgium has notified legal implementation of the first two railway packages, practical implementation has 

not yet been effected completely. Although rail freight operators have open access to the Belgian rail network, this 

is made difficult owing to the absence of or failure to provide service facilities, the workload and expense to obtain 

a safety certificate and owing to the special licensing regulations. 





BE Belgium, 649 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





BG Bulgaria – On Schedule 


Full vertical separation of 

infrastructure (NRIC) and 

transport (BDZ) since 2002 

1st and 2nd railway packages 

implemented, e.g. open access in 

freight transport since 1.1.07 

Access in PT only pursuant to Dir. 

91/440/EEC for foreign RUs 

Network Statement does not yet 

satisfy requirements of EU 

Railway office is responsible for 

regulation,licensing, etc. - 

objections to decisions of the 

authority have a suspensive 

effect 


Obtaining information for foreign 

RUs: high market barrier, as e.g. 

separate “fees“ have to be 

negotiated for processing inquiries 

in English 

No empirical values for 

homologation processes 

Standard contract for network 

access 

Linear infrastructure charging 

system, no discounts 

PT under a public service contract 

is reserved for the incumbent BDZ, 

there is no purely commercial PT 





Marginal competition in FT: in 

addition to the incumbent BDZ 

there are 2 smaller RUs active, 

BRC and Bulmarket, with a 

market share of 3% 

Modal share FT in 2005: 25.2 per 

cent 

BG is an important transit country 

for Greece and Turkey: some 

RUs have already stated their 

interest in handling international 

transports between Western 

Europe and TR via BG in future 

PT: BDZ has a monopoly 

Bulgaria has created the legal framework for a liberalised rail market and has transposed the first and second 

railway packages into national law. However, both the freight and passenger rail markets are dominated by the 

state-owned BDZ. The two private RUs provide niche services in the freight segment. Obtaining information from 

the railway authority is complicated. 





BG Bulgaria, 652 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





CH Switzerland – On Schedule 


Organisation of incumbents BLS/ 

SBB: separate balance sheets for 

freight and other divisions 

Passenger transport and infrastructure: 

incumbents do not 

prepare separate balance sheets 

Trasse Schweiz AG responsible 

for infrastructure marketing and 

allocation as well as timetabling 

since 1.4.06 

Open access in standard gauge 

FT without any restrictions 

PT: to date only exclusive 

franchises / transport contracts 

(discretionary award) 


Information processes and 

administrative homologation and 

access processes are exemplary 

in Europe 

Infrastructure charge in FT 

(provided by SBB and BLS for 

standard gauge): € 5.00/tpkm 

External RUs have access to 

service facilities incl. SBB 

maintenance facilities 

Used rolling stock: not for sale, 

only leasing 

Share of ordered but unused train 

paths in FT is relatively low: 15% 





Modal split for rail has increased: 

in FT from 40% in 1995 to 44% in 

2005 and in PT from 12.9% in 

1995 to 14.1% in 2004 

24 RUs currently active on the 

standard gauge network: 6 in FT 

and 18 in PT 

External rail passenger operators 

have historic franchises 

Market share of external rail 

freight operators around 25% 

Although Switzerland’s score is at the bottom third of the LEX Index owing to the organisational structure of the 

incumbents BLS and SBB and the restricted competencies of the regulatory authority (e.g. no fines or coercive 

measures, objections have a suspensive effect), the freight segment has one of the most open and nondiscriminatory 

access regimes in Europe. 





CH Switzerland, 757 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





CZ Czech Republic – On Schedule 


SŽDC responsible for train path 

allocation and NS since 2003 

Incumbent ČD: transport and 

infrastructure separate in 

organisational,legal, accounting 

and functional terms; separate 

balance sheets for RFT/ RPT 

divisions 

Open access to RFT for RUs 

In PT access only pursuant to Dir. 

91/440/EEC for foreign RUs 

Legally guaranteed access to all 

services as prescribed by EU 

Regulatory authority DÚ: decisions 

made by Min. of Transport 


Railway authority DÚ responsible 

for licences, safety certificates and 

homologation of rolling stock 

Licences (€ 305 fees): managing 

directors of RUs must have 

university degree and 3 years of 

management experience 

Safety certificate (€ 35 fees): 

issued within 3 months 

Public service contract RPT: 

discretionary contract award 

Infrastructure charge: € 4.50/tpkm 

for RFT 





Negative trend in modal split for 

rail: from 40.1% (1995) to 24.5% 

(2004) for RFT and from 9% 

(1995) to 6.7% (2005) for RPT 

No market shares are published 

for the 19 external RUs 

The incumbent is awarded most 

of the public service contracts for 

(network-wide) RPT 

The incumbent ČD ultimately still 

enjoys monopoly status in RPT 

and RFT 

The Czech Republic has created important legal conditions for enabling competition on rail. Accordingly, national 

external RUs have open access to both the rail freight and the rail passenger market, although there has been no 

change to date in the dominant market status of the incumbent ČD. 





CZ Czech Rep., 738 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 Advanced points 

On Schedule 

600 On – Schedule 799 points 

Delayed 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





DE Germany – Advanced 


DB AG has a holding structure: 

DB Netz AG has functional, legal, 

organisational and accounting 

separation from the DB RUs and 

the holding 

There is open access to RFT and 

for national RUs to RPT / for 

foreign RUs open access to RPT 

on a reciprocity basis and 

pursuant to Dir. 91/440/EEC 

Network access is monitored by 

BNetzA, the regulatory authority 

with the widest competencies in 

Europe 

EBA monitors unbundling 


Comparatively low information and 

administrative barriers 

Infrastructure charges: € 3.10 for 

RFT, € 6.41 for LDPT and € 4.14 

for SDPT per tpkm 

Access to SDPT: discretionary 

award or tenders (without 

exclusive rights) 

Access to LDPT/ RFT: open 

access (purely commercial 

transport in both cases) 

Market for maintenance facilities, 

rolling stock and skilled personnel 

functions well 





Market shares of external RUs in 

RFT rose from 6.9% in 2003 to 

16.4% in 2006 

More than 330 active external 

RUs 

50 external RUs are active in 

SDPT, their market share rose 

from 9.9% (2003) to 15.2% 

(2006) 

3 external RUs are active in 

LDPT: market share < 1% 

Modal split in RPT: 7.9% in 1995 

to 9.4% in 2006 

Modal split in RFT: 15.2% in 

1999, 17.4% in 2006 

Germany not only confirmed its position in the first group of the Rail Liberalisation Index – in 2007 this is the 

Advanced group – but actually moved up from third to second place. Germany is the only country to achieve more 

than 800 points in both the freight segment and also in the passenger segment. 





DE Germany, 826 points: Advanced 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





DK Denmark – Advanced 


Complete vertical separation of 

infrastructure and transport: 

Banedanmark (infrastructure), 

DSB (RPT); DSB Goods was sold 

to DB in 2001 

Open access to RFT and to 

purely commercial, national RPT 

and for foreign RUs in RPT, but 

without cabotage rights 

No legal specifications regarding 

access to refuelling and 

maintenance facilities 

Ad hoc regulation body convenes 

only as required, no experience of 

regulation to date 


EU licences: only valid for transit 

and cross-border RFT, a new 

licence has to be obtained for the 

national market 

Train path allocation is rated as 

customer-friendly and transparent 

Infrastructure charges: RFT € 4/ 

tpkm; RPT € 0.25-2.9/tpkm 

RPT is under public service 

contracts throughout the network, 

purely commercial transports are 

possible, but non- existent 





Positive trend in the modal share 

for RPT: 1995 8%, 2004 9% 

Negative trend in the modal share 

for RFT: 1995 7.3%, 2005 6.6% 

2 external RUs in RPT with a 

market share of 3.4% (2006): 

Arriva and NOB (Véolia) 

RFT is dominated by Railion 

Denmark, the only national 

competitor is CFL Cargo with a 


Hector Rail plans to go into 

operation in 2008 

As in 2002 and 2004, Denmark offers the necessary conditions for a liberalised rail transport market. It is 

remarkable that while Denmark is only allocated to the European midfield in the LEX Index (law in the books), it 

belongs to the top group in the ACCESS Index (law in action). 





DK Denmark, 788 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





EE Estonia – On Schedule 


The state bought back AS Eesti 

Raudtee in January 07 from BRS 

for USD 200m / Only accounting 

separation of infrastructure and 

transport at Eesti Raudtee 

Open access to RPT and RFT, 

but purely commercial RPT has to 

be performed in competition with 

network-wide transport under a 

public service contract 

Regulatory tasks are handled by 

the Ministry of Economic Affairs 

and Communication 


Comprehensive information 

available about network access 

and licensing processes 

Licences and safety certificates 

are issued within 1 month 

Safety certificates from other EU 

Member States (incl. Part A) are 

not recognised 

Infrastructure charges can 

fluctuate during the year 

RFT infrastructure charge: Eesti 

Raudtee € 5/tpkm, Edelraudtee € 

12/tpkm 

Lead time for regular train path 

applications: 12 months 





Most PT services are provided by 

only a few external RUs: LDPT 

under a public service contract is 

provided by Edelraudtee, SDPT 

in the Greater Tallinn Area (60% 

of all rail under a public service 

contract) by Elektriraudtee (RUs 

of Eesti Raudtee) 

RPT makes up 25% of train km, 

RFT for the remainder, 30% of 

which is handled by external RUs 

Modal split: RFT 71.1% in 1995, 

64.6% in 2005 (highest modal 

split share in the EU), RPT 4.8% 

in 1995, 1.5% in 2004 

Estonia has meanwhile rejected its privatisation concept (sale of the infrastructure and transport divisions to a 

private, foreign investor), which was unique in Europe. Since the LIB Index 2004 Estonia has improved 

substantially: RUs are now always entitled to open access both to RFT and to RPT, and the new regulatory 

authority has more regulatory competencies than the ERA which existed in 2004. 





EE Estonia, 691 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





ES Spain – On Schedule 


The new Railway Act 39/2003 

came into force in the 2nd half of 

2004 and forms the basis for 

opening the rail sector 


infrastructure (ADIF) and 

transport (RENFE) 

Open access with cabotage rights 

for foreign rail freight operators 

only on reciprocity basis, national 

RUs have open access to FT 

without restriction 

RPT closed to external RUs 

Regulatory authority CRF still 

under construction 


Very detailed NS available n 

English and Spanish, but no clear 

regulation governing train path 

cancellations 

ADIF issues safety certificates: this 

process takes more than 7 months 

Homologation process is not 

transparent 

Infrastructure charges for RFT cost 

only a few eurocents 

Infrastructure charges for RPT 

(HST): € 9.45/tpkm between 

Madrid and Barcelona 

No properly functioning market for 

used locomotives 





Modal split for RFT dropped from 

9.3% (1995) to 4.6% (2005) 

Modal split for RPT: 5.3% (1995) 

– 4.6% (2004) 

The first external RU (Continental 

Rail) became active in RFT In 

Feb. 07 (joined by Acciona Rail 

Services in July), COMSA RAIL 

was issued a safety certificate in 

July 07 but is not yet active 

Market shares of external RUs 

are still only marginal 

No competition in RPT, as this is 

reserved for the incumbent 

In January 2004, the market was still not open to competition, but a few national external rail freight operators are 

now trying to gain a foothold. According to external RUs, their initial experience of network access is generally 

positive, except for the issuing process for safety certificates and the homologation process for traction stock. 

However there is no effective regulatory authority to provide support. 





ES Spain, 630 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





FI Finland – On Schedule 


Full vertical separation of the 

transport and infrastructure 

divisions of the incumbent VR 

Foreign RUs have open access 

excluding cabotage rights 

Domestic RUs have open access 

to the FT market 

The national RPT market is 

closed to external RUs 

The regulatory authority Finnish 

Rail Agency has no experience of 

regulation whatsoever as no 

external RUs are active 

RHK is responsible for marketing 

and operating the rail network 


An “Access Guide for Railway 

Undertakings” provides detailed 

information about licensing 

procedures and network access 

The NS is available in Swedish, 

Finnish and English 

No proof of insurance required to 

obtain a licence 

Infrastructure charges: €2.14/tpkm 

for FT, between € 0.35 and € 0.76/ 

tpkm for PT 

Ad-hoc applications for train paths 

must be answered by the RHK 

within 5 days 





The state-owned VT holds a 

100% market share in both rail 

freight and rail passenger 

transport 

The modal split for rail has 

dropped in Finland in recent 

years 

The modal split for RFT in 1995 

was 28.1% compared with 23.3% 

in 2005 

The modal split for RPT dropped 

from 5.2% to 4.7% between 1995 

and 2004 

Although Finland transposed the second railway package into national law in 2006, with the exception of cabotage 

rights for foreign rail freight operators, no emergence of competition on rail can as yet be established. There is still 

no other external RU active in the Finnish market. 





FI Finland, 636 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 




FR France – Delayed 



RFF is an independent 

infrastructure manager but has a 

contract with SNCF for the 

procurement of business, so that 

e.g. infrastructure management is 

handled by SNCF 

Open access for rail freight 

operators 

Access rights to RPT for foreign 

RUs are restricted to the basis of 

Dir. 91/440/EEC 

The national RPT market is 

completely closed 

The regulatory authority MCAF 

still has no powers of decision 


NS is available in several 

languages, so that non-personal 

provision information is easy, 

compared with the personal 

provision 

Average infrastructure charge in 

FT is comparatively low: € 1.00 – € 

1.50/tpkm 

Homologation and safety certificates 

are still a very high barrier 

Access to transhipment terminals, 

freight terminals, sidings and 

refuelling facilities is described as 

discriminatory in parts 





The modal split for rail in FT in 

France dropped from 18.8% to 

14.8% between 1995 and 2005, 

compared with the PT segment 

which rose from 7.5% to 8.6% 

between 1995 and 2004 

There are 7 licensed rail freight 

operators, but only 2 are actually 

active on the national network, 

the other 5 are either construction 

companies or handle crossborder 

services, such as CFL 

SNCF still has a monopoly status 

in PT 

Access to infrastructure in France is now possible for RUs in RFT and there are already some RUs active in the 

freight transport segment. However, the market share of external RUs is still very low. Obtaining a licence is still a 

very bureaucratic and complicated procedure. Moreover, the regulatory authority does not have adequate 

competencies and structures to ensure non-discriminatory network access. 





FR France, 574 points: Delayed 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





GB Great Britain – Advanced 


Rail reform 1994: incumbent was 

split into more than 100 

companies, Network Rail 

responsible for infrastructure 

management since 2002 

Domestic and foreign RUs have 

open access to the FT network, 

open access to RPT only for 

international or purely commercial 

transports 

Public service contracts for RPT 

are awarded through tenders with 

exclusive rights 

The regulatory authority ORR has 

wide competencies 


The authorities have 13 years of 

experience of liberalisation, which 

has a positive effect on the 

relevant processes 

GB has published its first NS for 

the year 2008 

Infrastructure charges (€ 7-9/tpkm) 

and cancellation fees (€ 1200 - 

€2200 per train) are higher than 

average. 

99.9% of RPT contracts are 

awarded through tenders 

(exclusive rights) / open access 

only to the Heathrow - London- 

Paddington line 





No longer an incumbent, 9 active 

RUs in RFT and 33 in RPT 

RPT performance increased by 

40% between 1995 and 2004, 

RFT performance by 35% 


The modal split for RFT rose from 

7.1 per cent in 1995 to 11 per 

cent in 2005 an. The modal split 

for RPT increased from 4.3 per 

cent in 1995 to 5.4 per cent in 

2004 

A further increase in the modal 

split is restricted owing to 

capacity bottlenecks 

Great Britain again ranks in first place as both the legal framework and also practical access conditions are 

extremely market friendly compared with the European average. The results of the LEX Index, in particular – i.e. 

the formal criteria, are outstanding. Great Britain achieved almost full points (980 of 1,000 possible points) and 

thus ranks first, far ahead of the other countries. 





GB Great Britain, 827 points: Advanced 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 




GR Greece – Delayed 



Holding structure of the 

incumbent OSE: there is not yet 

functional separation of 

infrastructure and transport 

Foreign and domestic RUs have 

open access to RFT 

There is still a legally protected 

monopoly in RPT 

The Greek Ministry of Transport 

doubles as regulatory authority 


2007: first NS published by 

infrastructure manager EDISY 

Licences of other EU Member 

States are recognised / OSE is still 

responsible for safety certificates 

Very low Infrastructure charges: 

average of € 0.65/tpkm for both 

RPT and RFT 

As no external RUs are active, 

there are no empirical values 

available as regards access and 

licensing processes 





OSE still has monopoly status 

Rail has traditionally played only 

a minor role in both FT and PT 

Between 1995 and 2005 the 

modal split for RFT nevertheless 

rose from 2 to 2.6 per cent 

In RPT the modal split dropped 

from 2.7 per cent to 1.8 per cent 


To date, no external RUs have 

applied for access to the Greek 

rail network 

Because of the legal and practical market access conditions, Greece is allocated to the last group, as it was in 

2002/2004. The regulatory authority exists only on paper and has no fixed organisational structures. No external 

RU has as yet applied for access to the Greek rail network. 





GR Greece, 559 points: Delayed 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





HU Hungary – On Schedule 


No functional separation of 

infrastructure and transport of the 

incumbents MÁV/Gysev 

Train path allocation is handled 

centrally through the external 

train path agency VPE 

Open access to RFT and for 

national RUs to purely 

commercial PT 

RPT: foreign RUs have open 

access on a reciprocity basis to 

cross-border transports / 

discretionary award of public 

service contracts for national RPT 


Key information about network 

access is only available in 

Hungarian 

No regulations governing safety 

certificate / homologation 

Degressive infrastructure charging 

system: € 1.48/tpkm- € 1.75/tpkm 

(FT/PT) 

Access to freight terminals (most 

of which are privately owned) is 

rated as problematic 

100% discretionary award of public 

service contracts for network-wide 

RPT, exclusive rights for MÁV/ 

Gysev, no purely commercial RPT 





The modal split for RFT dropped 

from 33% in 1995 to 23.4% in 

2005. RPT increased from 11.5% 

to 13.2% between 1995 and 

2004. 

Currently 4 rail freight operators 

active on the national rail network 

in addition to MÁV Cargo and 

Gysev, with a market share of 

5%, RPT: 100% MAV/Gysev 

MÁV Cargo is to be privatised 

before the end of the year, so that 

RFT will be completely privately 

owned by the end of 2007 

External RUs report that access to the Hungarian rail network was difficult in the initial phase of market 

liberalisation. This situation has improved in recent years. The Hungarian regulatory authority has wide powers and 

competencies in a European comparison. However, there are still no empirical values about how well it functions in 

the resolution of conflicts. 





HU Hungary, 637 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 




IE Ireland – Delayed 



There is only accounting 

separation of transport and 

infrastructure at the incumbent 

Iarnród Éireann 

Foreign and domestic RUs have 

open access to the Irish rail 

freight network 

RPT is still reserved by law for 

the incumbent 

No legislation has been issued to 

date for the establishment of a 

regulatory authority 


No NS published to date 

The NS, the infrastructure 

charging system and access to 

service facilities are not regulated 

EU licences are recognised 

There are no empirical values 

available for licensing, safety 

certificate and homologation 

NSA is an independent body 

responsible for safety certificates 

and homologation 





RFT: the modal split dropped 

from 9.8% in 1995 to 1.6% in 

2005 

RPT :the modal split dropped 


and 2004 

Although there has been open 

access to the Irish RFT network 

since 1.1.2007, the incumbent is 

still the only active RU 

No applications for access to the 

Irish rail market have yet been 

submitted to the ministry 

RPT is still reserved for the 

incumbent 

Ireland ranks in the lowest position in the LIB Index 2007 owing to the legal and practical access conditions. 

Because of its island location, amongst other things, Ireland was granted exceptional status as regards 

transposition of the first railway package (deferral to 15.3.2008). No special provisions were agreed for Ireland in 

respect of transposition of the second railway package. 





IE Ireland, 333 points: Delayed 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





IT Italy – On Schedule 


FS holding: separate balance 

sheets for the infrastructure (RFI 

S.p.a.) and transport divisions 

(Trenitalia S.p.a.) 

FT: open access only with 

restrictions (cabotage for foreign 

RUs only on a reciprocity basis) 

Open access to purely 

commercial national PT and for 

foreign RUs on a reciprocity basis 

and pursuant to Dir. 91/440/EEC 

Discret. award of public service 

contracts for national transport. 

Regulatory authority URSF 

cannot impose fines 


Safety certificate complicated as 

RUs e.g. have to prove they 

employ trainers 

Infrastructure charge per tpkm 

(degressive): FT: € 2.38, SDPT 

€5.57 and LDPT € 2.38 

The manufacturer is responsible 

for homologation , the RU for 

matriculation, both processes 

comparatively complicated 

Most of the service facilities are 

operated by Trenitalia 

Driving licence is valid only for the 

RU concerned 





National freight transports are 

handled almost exclusively by 

Trenitalia Cargo 

In Italy 25 RUs are licensed in 

addition to FS but only 16 of them 

are actually active on the RFI 

network: 10 in FT and 6 in PT 

Modal split: 

FT: 1995 10.5 % - 2005 9.3 %, 

PT: 1995 5.8 % - 2004 5.3 % 

The market share of external rail 

freight operators currently 

amounts to 8%, but is only 

marginal in PT 

Italy was one of the pioneers in the legislative liberalisation of rail and still has a comprehensive legal framework in 

place. However, if the FS initiative to change infrastructure charges (abolition of the discount) and working 

conditions (FS contracts for all RUs) succeeds that would undoubtedly slow down the liberalisation process. 





IT Italy, 676 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





LT Lithuania – On Schedule 


LG holding: accounting, 

organisational and legal 

separation of infrastructure, FT 

and PT 

Open access for foreign RUs to 

both purely commercial RPT and 

RFT (exception: transports 

between enclave Kaliningrad and 

Russia are still reserved for LG) 

Purely commercial RPT would 

have to be performed in 

competition with network-wide 

transport under a public service 

contract (discretionary award to 

LG) 


No proof of insurance required for 

a licence 

Part A of safety certificates from 

other EU Member States is 

recognised 

There are no empirical values 

available about access to the rail 

network 

Average infrastructure charges per 

tpkm are equivalent to € 6.50 for 

RFT, € 4.87for LDPT and € 2.77 

for SDPT 

Train paths can be cancelled free 

of charge 





The modal split for RPT dropped 

sharply between 1995 (7.2%) and 

2004 (1.3%) 

There was also a substantial 

decline in the modal split for RFT 

from 50% in 1995 to 38% in 2004 

Although 3 external RUs have a 

licence and a safety certificate, 

they are not yet active 

At present the incumbent LG is 

still the only RU which provides 

RPT and RFT in Lithuania 

At present, rail plays only a marginal role in the passenger transport market in Lithuania. The modal split for RFT 

also dropped sharply, but is still at a high level. Lithuania has created the legal framework for opening both the 

RPT and RFT markets, but the incumbent LG is nevertheless still the only active RU. 





LT Lithuania, 684 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





Luxembourg – Delayed 


The rail network is owned by the 

Grand Duchy of Luxembourg and 

is operated by CFL on the basis 

of a contract for the procurement 

of business. 

There is only separate accounting 

of infrastructure and transport at 

CFL, but not functional separation 

Open access to RFT 

Open access to PT for foreign 

RUs on a reciprocity basis 

Public service contracts for 

national PT are awarded on a 

discretionary basis 


Obtaining information in LU is very 

complicated, as the competent 

bodies are not prepared to supply 

information 

Cross-border long-distance 

transport is handled exclusively by 

the incumbents of the neighbouring 

countries, SNCF and 

SNCB, on the basis of cooperation 

agreements 

Purely commercial national 

transport does not exist in LU, 

public service contracts are 

awarded to CFL on a discretionary 

basis 







and 2005 

The RPT share of the modal split 

dropped from 5.5% to 4% 


No external RUs are active in LU, 

so that there has been no change 

in the monopoly status of CFL 

Rail-4-Chem and B-Cargo are in 

the process of applying for a 

safety certificate 

In contrast to most other European Member States, in Luxembourg there are still no noticeable results of the 

legally prescribed market opening. Although the Grand Duchy has transposed some minimum requirements on 

paper, there are still no external RUs active on the national network. 





LU Luxembourg, 581 points: Delayed 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





LV Latvia – On Schedule 


July 2007: functional separation 

of transport and infrastructure of 

the incumbent LDz (holding) 

Open access to RFT, RPT only 

pursuant to Dir. 91/440/EEC 

Discretionary award of public 

service contracts for national 

transport (tenders as from 2008) 

Independent authority PUC 

stipulates RPT prices to be paid 

by end customers 

Regulatory authority SRA cannot 

impose coercive measures/fines, 

objections to SRA decisions do 

not have a suspensive effect 


Personal provision of information is 

easy but only some documents are 

available in English 

NS is not binding 

Incumbent LDz is involved in the 

issue of safety certificates 

SRA issues FT licences, 

PUC PT licences 

Safety certificates issued free of 

charge 

PUC stipulates Infrastructure 

charges: RPT: € 3.43- € 4.07/tpkm 

(40% increase compared with 

2006), RFT: € 6.72/tpkm 





4 external RUs active in RFT with 

a market share of 10% 

The only external RU in RPT to 

date discontinued operations in 

2006 (international connections) 

In 2006 one external RU applied 

for a licence for RPT, but has not 

yet obtained it 

Severe drop in modal split for 

both RPT and RFT 

RPT: 1995 17.1% - 2004 5.6% 

RFT: 1995 58% - 2005 18.6% 

87% of RFT is transit traffic (LV 

seaports - neighbouring countries 

– RUssia / Belarus) 

The Latvian rail market is still dominated by the incumbent LDz. In the rail passenger market in particular, the 

latest increases in infrastructure charges have reduced the attractiveness of this market segment for external RUs. 

Moreover, the incumbent LDz is involved in the issue of safety certificates, which could impair the neutrality of the 

issuing process 





LV Latvia, 650 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





NL Netherlands – Advanced 


2001: separation of ownership of 

transport (NS) and infrastructure 

(ProRail) 

2005: transposition of the second 

railway package 

Foreign rail passenger operators 

have access only pursuant to Dir. 

91/440/EEC 

National purely commercial PT 

closed until 2015 

Tenders and discretionary award 

of public service contracts for 

national PT 

Reg. authority NMa effectively 

regulates& monitors competition 


NS in several languages (NL, DE, 

EN) 

Licences are free of charge 

Safety certificates, issued by IVW, 

valid for FT and PT 

Homologation: MoU signed with 

DE, IT, CH and AT for reciprocal 

recognition 

Lead time for regular train path 

applications: 5 months 

Infrastr. charges (per tpkm: €1.15 

for RFT, € 1.60 for LDPT and € 

1.10 for SDPT) comparatively low 

Increasing number of tenders for 

public service contracts for RPT 





3 RUs active in SDPT market: 

Arriva, Noordned and Syntus 

(NS-Connexxion joint venture) 

NS and Thalys offer int. RPT 

NS has excl. franchise until 2015 

for city connections not under a 

public service contract / HSA 

(NS-KLM joint venture) has excl. 

franchise for HSL until 2022 

9 RUs active in RFT 

Railion‘s competitors have a 


Modal split: 

RPT 1995 10.2% - 2004 8.1% 

RFT 1995 2.8% - 2005 3.6% 

Despite the central geographical position and key importance of the port of Rotterdam for Europe (important 

factors for the high attractiveness of this market, particularly for transit traffic) the modal split for rail in FT is low 

(3.6% in 2005). The NMa, which is responsible for regulation, ensures non-discriminatory access to rail 

infrastructure and has already successfully resolved several conflicts 





NL Netherlands, 809 points: Advanced 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





NO Norway – On Schedule 


January 2007: complete opening 

of the RFT market 

Foreign RUs have access to PT 

only on the basis of Dir. 

91/440/EEC 

No tenders, only discretionary 

award in PT 

External RUs can offer RPT 

services only on their own or 

disused lines 

SJT railway authority is also 

responsible for regulation: it 

examines NS only on request, 

final decision lies with Minister of 

Transport 


Verification intervals for safety 

certificate/ licences based on RU 

risk rating, only one in Europe 

Licences, safety certificates and 

homologation of rolling stock are 

free of charge 

Infrastructure charges: RFT 

€1.47/tpkm – combined transport 

and passenger trains free 

No cancellation fees but RUs 

which regularly use less than 80% 

of their ordered train paths are 

given lower priority in train path 

allocation 





To date only discretionary award 

of PT to NSB, NSB subsidiaries 

and the state-owned Flytoget AS 

1 external rail passenger 

operator: Ofotbanen, from Narvik 

to Sweden, but line has no 

connection to rest of network 

2 external rail freight operators 

active: mainly ore transports 

between Narvik and Kiruna (no 

connection to rest of network) 

Modal split: 

RFT: 1995 15.2% - 2005 12.0%. 

RPT: 1995 4.8% - 2004 4.5%. 

With only a few exceptions, the market for operating RPT in Norway is closed to external RUs. Although RFT is 

open to competition, there has been no change in the number of private RUs in Norway in recent years. These 

private RUs run mainly on one line in the north of Norway, which is not connected to the remainder of the 

Norwegian rail network. 





NO Norway, 698 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





PL Poland – On Schedule 


Holding concept: functional 

separation of transport / infrastructure 

of the incumbent PKP 

Open access: RFT and national 

purely commercial RPT 

Foreign RUs have access only on 

the basis of Dir. 91/440/EEC 

Tenders and discretionary award 

of public service contracts for 

national RPT 

Access to traction current is not 

guaranteed by law 

Director of the reg. authority UTK 

(railway office) is appointed and 

recalled by Minister of Transport 


Licences: expire after 6 months if 

unused, no statutory regulation of 

insurance / paid-up capital 

Safety certificate: Part A of other 

EU certificates is recognised, Part 

B is examined within 3 months 

Homologation fees: max. 25,000€, 

homologation of new classes is a 

lengthy and bureaucratic process 

Average infrastructure charges per 

tpkm: RFT € 4.25, LDPT € 3.20 

and SDPT € 1.36 





Modal split: 

FT 1995 51% - 2005 27% 

PT 1995 15% - 2004 8% 


RFT: 

2006 16.8% 

first half of 2007 23%. 


RPT: 2006 9-11 %. 

There are currently 29 active 

external rail freight operators and 

10 rail passenger operators. 

According to UTK, a total of 48 

external RUs are licensed 

Poland has successfully implemented market opening for external RUs in the freight transport segment. There are 

also apparent signs that the rail passenger market is also opening. Despite these on the whole positive trends, 

there are still some areas with discrimination potential, according to external RUs, e.g. in the facilities and station 

charging systems, access to service facilities, the language regulations for train drivers at the Polish border. 





PL Poland, 739 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





PT Portugal – On Schedule 



transport and infrastructure at the 

incumbent CP 

Transposition of 2nd railway 

package: infringement 

proceedings initiated owing to 

failure to notify transposition 

Foreign rail passenger operators 

have access only on the basis of 

Dir. 91/440/EEC 

PT: only national PT under public 

service contract is regulated 

(tenders /discretionary award) 

New authority IMTT: regulation, 

licensing, safety etc. 


Obtaining information in person is 

difficult because of structure of 

IMTT 

Average Infrastructure charges 

comparatively low: € 1.30 – 

€1.45/tpkm for RPT and RFT 

Although the law envisages 

tenders, the only tender to date 

was conducted in 1990 (shuttle 

service across Ponte 25 de Abril) 

Since then all contracts have been 

awarded to the incumbent CP with 






Declining share in modal split for 

RFT, from 6.8% in 1995 to 5.3% 

in 2005, decline for RPT was 

even more drastic, from 8.3% in 

1995 to 4.5% in 2004 

CP still has monopoly status in 

RFT, but this may change in the 

coming year as 2 external RUs 

are currently applying for access 

to the Portuguese network 

Two RUs active in RPT: CP and 

Fertagus (22 km shuttle service 

across Ponte 25 de Abril) 

Portugal was awarded almost the same number of points in this year’s Rail Liberalisation Index as in 2004 and has 

therefore fallen back from the first into the second group, because of the greater progress made in terms of 

liberalisation in most of the other countries. Re-enactment of the railway law No. 231/2007, which was not taken 

into account in this study (cut-off date 1 May 2007) , transposed Directive 2004/51/EC into national law. 





PT Portugal, 707 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





RO Romania – On Schedule 


3 separate companies since 1998 

: CFR Infrastructură S.A. 

(infrastructure), CFR Marfă S.A. 

(RFT), CFR Călători S.A. (RPT) 

Open access to RFT (also for 

foreign RUs) and to purely 

commercial PT (only nat. RUs) 

Foreign RUs have access to PT 

only on basis of Dir. 91/440/EEC 

Tenders for national RUs for 

public service contracts for PT 

Ad hoc regulatory authority at 

Ministry of Trans.: Railway Supervision 

Council, 6 complaints from 

external RUs since 2005 


NS also available in English 

Homologation of rolling stock 

issued by other EU Member States 

recognised after 3 weeks‘ 

examination (according to AFER) 

Infrastructure charges per tpkm: 

€ 4.20 for FT and € 2.80 for PT 

Public service contracts (networkwide 

PT) renewed in tenders every 

four years 

Purely commercial PT currently 

exists only on non-interoperable 

lines (25% of total network) 





Modal split: in 1995 rail still had a 

share of 41% of total FT, but this 

dropped to 21% in 2005 

In addition to CFR there are 

currently 23 external rail freight 

operators active, sharp rise in 

market share of external rail 

freight operators from 2.2% in 

2002 to 25.6% in 2006 

Market share in RPT in 2006 was 

only 1.2% 

In addition to CFR there are 

currently CFR 3 RUs active in PT, 

some of which also offer RFT 

Liberalisation of rail has had a dynamic effect on development of the rail freight transport market. There are 

currently a total of 23 external rail freight operators active on the Romanian rail network, accounting for a market 

share of 25.6 per cent. In the rail passenger market, external RUs still play only an insignificant role, with a total 

market share of just 1.2 per cent. 





RO Romania, 722 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





SE Sweden – Advanced 


Since 2001 complete separation 

of FT (Green Cargo), PT (SJ) and 

infrastructure (Banverket) 

Open access to RFT for domestic 

RUs since 2001, for foreign RUs 

since 2004 

Public service contracts for LDPT 

awarded in public tenders with 


Tenders for pub. serv. contracts 

for SDPT by individual regions, 

granting exclusive rights 

SJ has exclusive rights to purely 

commercial RPT (exceptions: cf. 

COM Index) 


Low administrative barriers and no 

fees for homologation, licences or 

safety certificates 

Lead time for regular train paths: 

6 months 

Low infrastructure charges per 

tpkm: FT € 0.5, LDPT € 0.80 and 

SDPT € 0.45 (emission surcharge 

for diesel locomotives of € 0.04 per 

litre diesel) 

No cancellation fees 

Functioning market for rolling stock 

and skilled personnel 





In addition to SJ there are a 

further 7 RUs active in RPT 

14 RUs are currently active in 

RFT 

Market shares of external RUs: 

FT 45%, public service contract 

PT 55%, purely commercial PT 

10% (but only in night train 

transport and on a franchise from 

SJ) 


from 38% in 1995 to 36% in 2005 

The modal split for RPT rose from 

6.5% to 7.6% between 1995 and 

2004 

With the exception of Great Britain, which is a special case, the market share of external RUs is the highest in 

Europe. One of the reasons for this high market share is that the practical market barriers for both RPT and RFT 

are the lowest anywhere in Europe and the market is highly attractive. Purely commercial PT is however still 

reserved by law for the incumbent SJ. 





SE Sweden, 825 points: Advanced 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





SI Slovenia – On Schedule 


Only accounting separation of 

infrastructure and transport at the 

incumbent SZ 

Open access for cabotage in RFT 

not yet guaranteed by law 

(infringement proceedings 

initiated) 

Foreign RUs have open access to 

cross-border RPT, but national 

RPT market under public service 

contracts is reserved for the 

incumbent until 2010 

Ministry of Transport acts as 

regulatory authority 


To date no external RUs have 

received a national licence or 

safety certificate, so that no 

empirical values are available on 

how well the issue processes 

function 

Fees are comparatively very low: 

e.g. € 35 for homologation 

Infrastructure charges per tpkm: € 

1.80 for SDPT, € 2.45 for LDPT 

and € 3.70 for FT – i.e. European 

average 

Train path conflicts are resolved by 

way of auction 






48.4% (1995) to 22.5% (2005) 

In RPT, rail raised its share from 

3.9% (1995) to 4.5% (2004) 

Only RU is the incumbent 

Slovenske železnice (SŽ) 

Three Austrian rail freight 

operators are currently applying 

for access 

With the exception of transposition of Directive 2004/51/EC, the requirements to grant external RUs access to 

Slovenian infrastructure are satisfied. The national rail passenger market for transports under a public service 

contract is reserved exclusively for SŽ until 2010. Practical market access conditions will become apparent only 

when external RUs have joined the market. 





SI Slovenia, 665 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 





SK Slovakia – On Schedule 


There has been vertical 

separation of infrastructure and 

transport at the incumbent ŽSR 

since 2002 

Open access to RFT 

Foreign RUs have access to RPT 

only pursuant to Dir. 91/440/EEC 

Only discretionary award of public 

service contracts for national RPT 

No legal regulation of purely 

commercial RPT 

Regulatory authority ÚRŽD 

monitors competition on rail and 

can impose fines up to an 

equivalent of € 285,000 


Licence: fee of € 52,000, licence is 

valid indefinitely, even if unused 

Safety certificate: fee of € 85 

Homologation is rated as very 

unbureaucratic, fee between € 14 

and € 28 (e.g. 2 weeks for an 

electric multi-system locomotive) 

Infrastructure charges per tpkm: 

RFT € 8.84, LDPT € 1.83, SDPT € 

1.42, amongst the highest FT 

infrastructure charges in Europe 






38% (1995) to 25% (2005) 

Modal split for RPT dropped from 

12.4% (1995) to 6.4% (2004) 

33 RUs (FT) now have a licence, 

and although 27 of them are 

active in addition to the 

incumbent, they account for a 

total market share of only 3%, 

most of them are industrial 

railways 

After the only external RU in RPT 

discontinued operations, there 

are no longer any external RUs 

active 

Despite market opening, a good legal framework, and a higher number of external rail freight operators, it has not 

yet been possible to achieve a turnaround in the modal split trend for rail. However, the modal split for rail is still 

one of the highest in Europe, at 25 per cent. 





SK Slovakia, 700 points: On Schedule 
















IT Italy, 676 







ES Spain, 630 





Advanced 

800 – 1,000 points 

On Schedule 

600 – 799 points 

Delayed 

300 – 599 points 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 




Calculation method for the average infrastructure charge 

In view of the different infrastructure charging systems which are currently in use in Europe, 

calculation of an average charge was based on several assumptions. The following paramters 

served as the basis for calculating infrastructure charges : 

Rail freight transport: 

Infrastructure charge in EUR/train path kilometre between the two largest national freight 

terminals for a 960 gross tonne long-distance freight train with diesel locomotive 

Long-distance rail passenger transport : 

Infrastructure charge in EUR/train path kilometre between the two largest national cities for a 

590 gross tonne electrified Euro-/Intercity train with approx. 750 seats 

Long-distance rail passenger transport: 

Infrastructure charge in EUR/train path kilometre in the largest national conurbation area for a 

270 gross tonne electrified regional train with approx. 400 seats 



Glossary 

External RU 

Incumbent 

Open access 

Purely commercial 

transport 

RU 

Transport under a 

public service contract 


Railway undertaking which has entered the rail market in the course of 

liberalisation and offers rail transport services (usually in addition to the 

incumbent). 

(Former) state undertaking which had a market-dominant position prior to 

liberalisation. 

RUs have access to a national rail market which is not restricted by any rights of 

individual undertakings. 

Rail transport services provided by an RU on its own initiative and without any 

support from the state. 

Railway undertaking: a company which provides rail transport services. 

Rail transport services ordered by the state in the form of transport contracts and 

for which the public purse normally provides subsidies or compensates for 

losses sustained from the provision of these transport services. 



Abbreviations 

Abb. 

€/ EUR 

FT 

HSL 

MoU 

OA 

PKm 

PT 

Dir. 

RFT 

NS 

LDPT 

SDPT 

RPT 

tpkm 

train km 

Directive 


Explanation 

Euro 

freight transport 

high-speed line 

Memorandum of Understanding 

Open access 

passenger kilometres 

passenger transport 

rail freight transport 

network statement 

long-distance rail passenger transport 

regional rail passenger transport 

rail passenger transport 

train path kilometre 

train kilometre

Rail Liberalisation Index 2007 - Deutsche Bahn AG

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?