D5 Annex report WP 4 - ETIS plus

D5 Annex WP 4: ETIS DATABASE METHODOLOGY AND DATABASE USER
MANUAL – PASSENGER DEMAND
It should also provide a proper basis for comparison between modes. For this reason it should be
mentioned that the requirements for the indicators listed have been considered as a minimum
requirement and do not reflect one to one the selected variables to be included in this work
package.
The main data gap identified is the passenger OD matrix. A few countries like Germany,
Netherlands and UK etc. monitor transport on a more or less periodical base by surveys which
can be used to compute respectively derive a model based passenger trip matrix. In most
countries just link counts of different detail and quality are available which do neither allow to
identify the origin and destination of the traveller nor to analyse the type of traveller or the route
chosen. The existing national matrices also differ in the observation time as well as in the
transport type stated. While some matrices reflect all kind of transport from urban to long
distance others just monitor the long distance cross border trips above 100 km. Furthermore
transport into regions abroad are considered very differently in scope and regional detail and
some countries just concentrate on the national traffic but on a very detailed level. Other
countries like Italy and Greece state that detailed information exist but just for internal use and
therefore aggregated numbers exist for public use only.
Concerning the transport monitored one can state that if there is information the three main
modes air, rail and road are covered at least. But besides the three main modes considered there
are the modes bus, inland waterways / ferries and sea. As the data sources about these additional
modes are very rare and for a lot of countries these modes are not reflecting a major transport
share of the total passenger transport volume, we’ll consider these modes in the light of the
projects’ scope as follows.
Water based modes can be treated as public mode and will be assigned to the main modes
according to the service they offer. So passengers using a rail connection where the train will be
picked up by a ferry will be assigned to the rail mode. The same holds for the road mode where
cars are picked up. Just the few cases where only water based modes are or can be used, like
between the Greek islands, justify the separation of these modes from the others. As the number
of travellers are quite small compared to the total number of trips in Europe and the information
available is not detailed enough to allow the identification of a reliable/complete OD of the
passengers across Europe we’ll follow the suggestion mentioned above.
Another lack of information concerns the bus mode. Neither there is a source where all services
can be collected even on a country base, nor the costs and the type of service (round trip,
charter, line) can be identified. In addition the treatment of long distance bus services within the
European countries is quite different. While there is an open market in UK with very different
pricing levels, Germany restricts such services based on the argument to prevent competition to
the rail mode. The consequence is to constrain the approach selected here to the exclusion of the
bus mode. Travellers will be assigned to the other main modes.
10
Document3
27 May 2004