4 th Coordination Meeting WP4 – Assessment of the Adriatic port system and its integration with hinterland 4 th of March, 2015 Shkodra, Albania

WP 4 - Partners University of Ljubljana University of Belgrade University of Sarajevo Region of Istria – lead partner

WP 4 - Objectives To identify current and potential traffic volumes related to maritime passenger transport To identify quality of current infrastructures and services and potential development To identify common needs and priorities related to passenger maritime transport and its integration To give proposals for the harmonization of regulations in Adriatic area

Introduction The scenario construction requires deep insight into the current situation Current situation Cruise marketWorldMediterraneanAdriaticFerry marketWorldMediterraneanAdriatic

Introduction

Data gathering Questionnaires – 21 ports – Limited quality – Not all are of international importance Available online sources Available studies CountryPortFerryCruise Albania Durres Saranda Vlore Croatia Dubrovnik Korčula Krk Mali Lošinj Pula Rab Rovinj Greece Igoumenitsa Italy Ancona Bari Chioggia Pescara Ravenna Termoli Trieste Montenegro Bar Slovenia Koper Piran

Shipping Description of countries – Socio-ecomic data – Basic transport indicators (roads, rails, airport) – Main attractions Description of ports – Port capacities/infrastructure Passengers' area and ICT services Passengers' facilities Facilities in the walking distance from the ports – Port traffic

Cruise shipping 20 active cruise ports in Adriatic; top 3: Venice, Dubrovnik and Corfu – Cca 70% of all traffic in Adriatic – Trieste is home port for 4 operators – Ravenna is home port for 8 operators – Ancona is home port for 3 operators – Bari is home port for 10 operators Cruise Pax. movements 3,687,2084,111,1864,730,1534,819,4435,118,126 Adriatic cruise pax. share in the Mediterannean 16.9%17.1%17.6%18.6%19% Cruise calls 2,9193,0753,2303,2343,219 Adriatic cruise call share in the Mediterannean 21.6%21.7%21.9%23.3%22.3% The importance of Adriatic is raising!

Cruise shipping In average cruise traffic is increasing in Adriatic by 31.5% ( ) The number of passengers starting/ending their voyage in Adriatic increased in average by 24.4% Cruise ship calls have increased by 5.4%

Ferry shipping We retrieved routes, operators, sailing time and frequency as well as average prices for international cross-Adriatic ferry routes 15 operators, 37 cross-Adriatic routes (not all towards the ports included in the project) Most common booking: 2 passengers plus a car

Ferry shipping Ferry traffic is in general decreasing since 2004 In majority of cases data on number of passengers was retrieved from online sources – Partners did not provide the number of passengers on single routes Port No. of passengers (2013) Change (2010– 2013) Ancona1,064,562-29,9% Bari * 1,095, % Ravenna4,996-37,3% Bar43, % Dubrovnik ** 44, % Rovinj *** 31, % Pula32, % Piran **** 24, % Igoumenitsa900, % Vlora83, % Note: * - drop of 21.5% in 2013 ** - period 2011–2013 *** - period 2010–2012 **** - period 2009–2012; increase of 64.4% if 2008 is included

Road transport Road infrastructure Traffic flows – Impossible to link those flows to maritime transport

Rail transport Rail infrastructure Seaport-railway interface Key investmenets in railway sector Rolling stock Routes and frequencies as well as train type indication

Airports Number of airports in teh Adriatic-Ionian region Characteristics of the airports Number of passengers by country and by operator Traffic trends Connectivity of the airports Airport within the Adriatic basin Transportation connectivity RailRoadPort Tirana x Sarajevo x Dubrovnik xx Pula xx Rijekaxxx Split xx Zadar xx Zagreb x Podgoricaxx Tivat xx Belgrade x Pristina x Ljubljana x Trieste xx Venicexxx Rimini xx Anconaxxx Pescaraxxx Barixxx Bolognaxxx Verona x Florencexx Romexx Naplesxxx

Legal framework Overwiev of existing legal framework – Harmonized with EU legislation in member states – Still to be harmonized in Montenegro and Albania (ongoing process)

Scenarios Development scenarios Passenger shipping Scenario A - Pesmistic scenario Traffic flows decrease faster than in past or increase slower than in the past Scenario B - Realistic scenario Traffic flows follow the determined trends Scenario C - Optimistic scenario Traffic flows decrease less than in the past or increase faster than in past

Scenarios Current situation

Scenarios Plans

Scenarios TRANSTOOLS

Scenario making ScenariosPesmisticRealisticOptimistic

SWOT - Cruising 15 ports Strenghts: – Proximity to city centres, – Historical and/or touristic attractions – Terminal services Opportunities: – Growing demand for cruisers and maritime tourism in the Mediterranean region

SWOT - Ferry 15 ports Main influencing factor: – Road connections – Terminal infrastructure

Activities and impacts

Scenarios - Ferry Scenario A – Pesimistic scenario  The lack of European and national initiatives to switch road flows to the sea (towards achieving more sustainable modal split)  The least rentable ferry lines will be cancelled  The decline of ferry flows will continue

Scenarios - Ferry Scenario B – Realistic scenario  The European/national initiative to transfer traffic flows from the road to the sea is recognized  Limited investments into ferry terminal infrastructure and services (parking area, wi-fi, info-points etc.)  Ferry flows will not further decline and ferry lines will continue to operate

Scenarios - Ferry Scenario C – Optimistic scenario  The European/national initiative to transfer traffic flows from the road to the sea is recognized  The improvement of port's road hinterland connections  Investments into port's infrastructure  The facilitation of boarding process (less administration, faster process, automatization, etc.)  The growth of hinterland economies  Better exploitation of existing lines, possibly the establishment of new lines  Ferry flows will start to increase

Scenarios - Cruising Scenario A – Pesimistic scenario  The extension of the economic crisis resulting in lower purchasing power of the citizens and reflecting in lower demand for cruise tourism  The increment of the cruise voyage prices to maintain the level of total revenues (if the demand proves to be non-elastic)  The decline of the interest of cruising companies to visit North Adriatic due to new navigation restrictions in Venice area  The delay in realisation of passenger terminal investments or no interventions planned at all  The lack of interest of residuals to share their living environment with large number of strangers (noise, waste, more criminal activities, increased prices etc.)  The decline of determined trends in terms of cruise ship calls and cruise passenger arrivals

Scenarios - Cruising Scenario B – Realistic scenario  Limited investment into passenger terminal facilities and services (creation of separated and safe passengers' areas, wi-fi, info- points, applications, the provision of more options to reach hinterland (services) etc)  Continuous efforts to promote the Adriatic­­-Ionian region  The continuation of determined trends in terms of cruise ship calls and cruise passenger arrivals

Scenarios - Cruising Scenario C – Optimistic scenario  Improved tourist offer (more attractions, better packages etc.) resulting in increased interest for the Adriatic-Ionian destinations  Better rail and road connections with the hinterland, together with better transport services and options resulting in the expansion of the catchment area  The improvement and modernization of the existing passenger terminals or the construction of new dedicated passenger terminals  Good airways connections from the closes international airport (especially important for the ports that have an ambition to become a home, meaning that they have adequate in port facilities)  The improvement of determined trends in terms of cruise ship calls and cruise passenger arrivals

WP 4 - OBJECTIVES To identify current and potential traffic volumes related to maritime passenger transport To identify quality of current infrastructures and services and potential development To identify common needs and priorities related to passenger maritime transport and its integration To give proposals for the harmonization of regulations in Adriatic area

Thank you for your attention!