Competitive tendering contracts: Why is Norway lagging behind? Presentation at THREDBO 9 Lisbon, Portugal, 6th September 2005 Trine Hagen, Institute of Transport Economics

2 Source: Jon-Terje Bekken, TØI, 2005

3 Local tendering in Scandinavia What characterizes cooperation between authorities and operators in public transport, in the cases where contracts are ventured into as a result of competitive tendering? How do counties and operators handle the need to adjust contracts during the contractual period? Are there differences between the Scandinavian countries?

4 Method Case studies Document studies Interviews with authorities

5 Main results (1) Norwegian contracts are less extensive than Danish and Swedish ones – Bonus – Quality – Responsibilities of the authorities: vaguely formulated, if any – Few arenas for contact and development of cooperation are defined – The right to negotiate is not formalised

6 Main results (2) Similarities in Scandinavia Negotiations do take place on a regular basis Talks/contact between operators and authorities are common What’s different in Norway? Less is regulated by contract Practice is more important in Norway

7 Conclusions (1) Norwegian tradition: talks, negotiations are informal – all based on local companies and well known counterparts In order for Norwegian public transport to work, the relationship between operators/authorities must be good When little is regulated by contract, practice becomes more important

8 Conclusions (2) The Norwegian market: Changing The need for more formalised contracts will probably rise Practice will be less important as contracts become more formalised Norway will follow the development in Denmark and Sweden