1. Data needs for Passenger Mobility in the context of the White Paper goals
Paolo Bolsi
DG MOVE - Unit A3
Economic Analysis and Impact Assessment
Workshop on Passenger Mobility, 17th June 2013

2. Actual challenges for transport sector
Growing congestion
(not only in Urban areas)
Oil scarcity and corresponding price increase
Greenhouse Gases and climate change

3. If we stick to the business as usual…
- The oil dependence of transport might still be little below 90%;
- Renewable energy sources use would only marginally exceed 10% use;
- CO2 emissions would remain one third higher than their 1990 level;
- Congestion costs could increase by about 50%;
- Accessibility gap between central and peripheral areas might widen;
- Social costs of accidents and noise would increase.

4. A change is needed!
Transport has to use less and cleaner energy, better exploit (a more modern) infrastructure.
How to do it?
New technologies for vehicles and traffic management to lower transport emissions and reduce congestion;
Greater integration between modal networks to provide efficient multimodal travel options.

5. While in urban environments
Cities suffer most from congestion, poor air quality and noise exposure. Urban transport is responsible for a quarter of CO2 emissions!
- A higher share of travel by collective transport will allow for increasing density and frequency of service, thus generating a virtuous circle for public transport modes!
- Smaller, lighter, more specialized road vehicles, with new engine technologies (electric, hydrogen, hybrids) should be encouraged!
Both leading to halving the use of "conventionally fuelled" vehicles in cities by 2030 (phase out by 2050).

6. The role of monitoring
Given the relevance of those challenges it's extremely important to have statistical indicators to assess the actual situation and its future evolution:
- How can we measure passenger mobility in urban areas?
- How can we measure the use of non-conventionally fuelled cars like hybrids, electric and hydrogen cars, that are considered fundamental to overcome our future challenges?
- How can we assess the modal split in the urban environment?
- How can we assess the modal split for the medium distance?
- How can we monitor those future trends on transport?

7. The 2011 White Paper strategy 4 “i”s, 40 actions and 10 goals
nternal market: Create a genuine Single European Transport Area by eliminating all residual barriers between modes and national systems. I
nnovation: EU research needs to address the full cycle of research, innovation and deployment in an integrated way. I
nfrastructure: EU transport infrastructure policy needs a common vision and sufficient resources.
The costs of transport should be reflected in its price in an undistorted way. I
nternational: Opening up third country markets in transport services, products and investments continues to have high priority. I

8. Selected goals from the White Paper
(1) Halve the use of conventionally fuelled cars in urban transport by 2030; phase them out in cities by Achieve essentially CO2-free city logistics in major urban cities by 2030.
(2) By 2050 the majority of medium distance passenger transport (> 300 km and < km) should go by rail.

9. Evidence-based policy
Increasing need of statistical evidence to support policy making
To help take decisions
To monitor the effects of policies
…but resources devoted to the collection of statistics cannot be increased, as well as the burden on respondents
Solutions should focus on increasing comparability and use of already existing information
With better evidence, better policies!

10. Transport modelling
Transport modelling is an important tool used in the preparation of Impact Assessments;
A Reference scenario is prepared at regular time intervals (about 2 years): joint initiative of DG CLIMA, DG ENER, and DG MOVE (in association with JRC) ;
The Reference scenario serves as a benchmark for assessing the impacts of new initiatives in several energy, transport and climate policy areas and is subject to extensive consultation of the MS;
The quality of the results is dependent on that of available inputs: detailed and reliable statistics are needed for model calibration.

11. Data needs
(1) Transport activity in urban areas, expressed in pkm for various modes (buses, passenger cars and vans, powered two-wheelers, rail, tram and metro) and by technology of vehicles (for passenger cars);
(2) Transport activity by distance class (> 300 km and < km) in pkm for all passenger modes (coaches, passenger cars, passenger vans, powered two-wheelers, rail, aviation, and inland navigation).

12. The role of National Travel Surveys
National Travel Surveys are a very detailed source of data about passenger mobility and they could be very useful to monitor the White Paper goals;
They can provide multi-dimensional information on distance travelled, the mode of transport used, the purpose of the trip, the time spent travelling, origin and destination of the trip, and other data with particular focus on passenger mobility;
By obtaining the distances travelled per trip, we could get modal split per distance classes;
PM surveys could provide very valuable information for determining and evaluating GHG emission policies and alternative technologies, as well as for transport and environmental modelling;
Considering the communality of purposes of those surveys, at a certain extent (as proved by SHANTI) it's possible to extract comparable figures about passenger mobility in Europe!

13. Statistical challenges
Still, some difficulties arise:
Not all the definitions and the methodologies tend to be similar, data is not immediately comparable;
There's no common definition neither of Urban Environment, nor of medium distance: how can we get a modal split in pkm for those two contexts? (adopt the degree of Urbanisation?)
How can we include new vehicle technologies in those surveys? (connection with national vehicle registers information by VIN, maybe?)
How do we overcome national differences in terms of reference periods and periodicity?
A certain degree of harmonization (and post- harmonization) will be necessary!

14. Benefits of harmonisation
Regular, consistent, homogeneous and robust data on passenger mobility available to all  indication of general trends, possibility to compare/assess own performance, better basis for policy making, more complete information for users/businesses, etc… Having in mind the growing importance of mobility from an economic, social and environmental perspective!

15. …but objective (or perceived?) difficulties
Discontinuity in time series: this can be avoided if a new harmonised basis is intended as a point of convergence. As the information collected by those surveys tends to be similar, pre/post harmonization options can be explored to obtain consistent data with the least burden for statistical institutes;

16. …but objective (or perceived?) difficulties
Financial costs: Budget constraint of Statistical Institutes are well-know, but filling the gaps to allow harmonised passenger statistics could imply considerable advantages with limited additional collection costs and better use of current resources. While PM surveys are costly, the option of adding questions on passenger mobility to other EU surveys or census, is also costly, and not as effective. Having said this, there's also an option to currently explore possibilities to modulate/add questions on passenger mobility to Tourism or household surveys. Our main focus is to use available resources more efficiently, with less costs and more advantages for everyone, also by adopting new technologies.

17. Building a reference scenario
A common reference for Travel Surveys is useful: - to MS which do not have own travel surveys, as a basis to start their national collection; - to MS which have already their own survey, as a basis to facilitate comparisons and possibly progress towards consistent definitions/indicators/methodologies.

18. Thank you for your attention