Intermodal ticketing between rail and other modes

Transcription

1 High Speed rail connected Intermodal ticketing between rail and other modes Bertil Hylén Formerly Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI) Framnäsbacken 8, SE Solna, Sweden Tel Tel November 2013 Abstract Europe should, according to the EU White Paper (EU 2011), by 2020 establish the framework for a European multimodal transport information, management and payment system. The White Paper also stresses the connection of High Speed rail with other modes of transport. This paper describes how six European countries have introduced various schemes for multimodal or intermodal passenger transport including through ticketing for long distance rail combined with local/regional public transport. These schemes are referred to as ICReg. Different systems for revenue distribution between the parties involved rail operators, local operators, Passenger Transport Authorities (PTA) also exist. The six countries described in this paper (Spain, Italy, Great Britain, Germany, Denmark, Sweden) have chosen different schemes but in most other European countries there are no similar schemes at all. There are century-old barriers between long distance and local/regional operators which need to be broken down. The author recommends that the rail and public transport sectors should not wait for ITS or the EU to solve intermodal problems on a European scale but start developments on a small scale taking into account different market conditions and easily available technical solutions. Keywords High-speed rail, public transport, connections, intermodality, ticketing, information 1

2 Summary of contents 1. Introduction Spain and Italy Great Britain Germany Denmark Sweden Discussion and conclusions References Funding Acknowledgements Summary of tables and figures Table 1 Basic transport data... 4 Figure 1 British rail passengers access to stations... 6 Figure 2 Journey purpose... 9 Figure 3 Reasons for not using Resplus tickets... 9 Figure 4. Resplus ticket (translation of certain parts) with connection information

3 1. Introduction A paper dealing with the European transport sector must bear in mind the Lisbon Treaty (EU 2007) and the EU s transport policy. The provisions in the Treaty s Title VI concern transport by rail, road and inland waterway and deal among other things with better transport safety, the prohibition of discriminatory conditions of carriage, and competition between different modes of transport. It is also stated that the goals of the treaty shall be achieved through a common transport policy. The transport policy is manifested through the EU White Paper (EU 2011). According to the White Paper the EU should by 2050 complete a European high-speed rail network, triple the length of the existing high-speed rail network by 2030 and maintain a dense railway network in all Member States. Furthermore Europe should, by 2020, establish the framework for a European multimodal transport information, management and payment system. Connecting in a broad sense rail with other modes of transport is therefore a pan-european challenge. This paper deals with how rail services, High Speed (HS) and conventional Inter City rail (IC), connect to other forms of public transport. Focus will be on information and ticketing, how passengers can benefit from seamless transport with one source of information and one ticket. The physical aspects of connecting HS rail with other modes of transport and the urban environment are not dealt with in this paper but in other papers (Hylén, Jonsson, 2012; Sitran; Vickerman) Several EU projects such as LINK (EU 2010) and CLOSER (EU 2012) have dealt with different aspects of connecting long distance and regional/local transport. LINK found that the current status in Europe is heterogeneous; to travel across Europe on a single ticket is a splendid vision, but in reality is often very difficult. CLOSER stated that the interface between long- and short-distance transport in a door-to-door trip is frequently the weak link in the transport chain. Various recent papers have dealt with connecting rail with other modes but the ticketing aspects are seldom mentioned. High Speed rail is not always seen as the most suitable solution from an economic point of view. The scope for HS rail in Britain, although with 60 million inhabitants, may be seen as limited by Britain s economic geography. (Preston, 2013). The United States has no HS lines but it has been pointed out that such services (if they are realised) must be transit-oriented. Connections to HS rail stations and ticketing issues must not be overlooked. (Johnson, 2012). Despite the considerable distances in the US alternatives to high speed should be considered and the Swiss nationally integrated conventional rail and bus system may be seen as superior to the spotty integration in US public transport. (Maxwell) The integration of different modes of transport in order to create a seamless journey has been developed gradually in Europe over the last years. Evidence from different countries shows that different solutions have been developed, creating regional seamless travel often has priority. Seamless travel where long-distance modes are connected to regional or local modes of transport are less developed and found in just a few countries. The improvement of seamless regional travel is also the focus of the EPTA project (EU 2013). In this paper the different solutions or schemes will be called Inter City Regional = ICReg. Public Transport Authority (PTA) will be used regardless of national and regional differences in legislation, 3

4 organisation, mandate etc. Ticket does not necessarily mean a piece of paper; SMS and other smart solutions develop rapidly. As a rule ticket refers to a single ticket for one journey, multi journey tickets and passes will be mentioned separately. The ICReg schemes described in the case studies in the paper have been initiated more or less independently and vary a lot in organisation and set up, information about how the schemes work behind the scenes is sometimes difficult to obtain and this difficulty may be reflected in the paper. One must also bear in mind that the rail and public transport sectors differ from country to country and Spain is of course a lot bigger than Denmark. There is a common ambition, however, to combine Inter City travel (mostly by train) with regional or local public transport on one ticket; here referred to as ICReg. A few countries have implemented different ICReg schemes - Spain, Italy, Great Britain, Germany, Denmark and Sweden - the paper focuses on these schemes. The paper concludes with some comparisons and recommendations. Table 1 Basic transport data Population Millions Area Km 2 Cars / inhab. Pass km rail 10 9 Pass km bus 10 9 Public transp. market share% Inter City bus services Spain Deregulated Italy Deregulated Gr. Britain Deregulated Germany Recently dereg. Denmark Restricted Sweden Deregulated Source EU transport in figures 2013 (data refer to 2011) 2. Spain and Italy Spain and Italy are the most recent addition to the ICReg schemes described below. In Spain the Combinado Cercanías scheme allows a HS or InterCity rail passenger to continue his journey with a regional train, Cercanías, at the HS or InterCity destination. A special Cercanias ticket free of charge has to be collected from a ticket machine. At the moment all Cercanías services are operated by RENFE (Spanish State Railways) so there may be little need for clearing of revenues (or costs) for this scheme. New solutions develop gradually certain regional bus connections to major holiday resorts can be booked through RENFE s web site; HS or InterCity passengers arriving in Alicante/Alacant can obtain free tickets for the interurban tramway to the important holiday resort Benidorm. In Italy the new entrant on the HS rail market, NTV, has in 2013 signed agreements with the PTAs in Firenze and Napoli. The agreements make possible that high-speed rail tickets can be used for local public transport as well within a period of validity of 24 hours from the arrival. 4

5 In 2013 Spain and Italy still have few PTAs with overall responsibility for all modes of public transport. In the Barcelona, Madrid, Rome and Milano areas combined tickets or passes for regional services by train-metro-tram-bus are available. All schemes do not have the same degree of integration; in some cases only monthly passes have full intermodal validity, in other cases also single tickets can be used for travel by all modes of regional transport. PTAs are now being set up in several areas for instance in Andalucía/Sevilla in Spain and Campania/Napoli in Italy. 3. Great Britain The British rail model is widely known; since about 20 years almost all train services are operated by private companies under contract with central government. This is different from most other European countries where there are still incumbent state owned railways. Timetables, fares and other operating conditions are mainly controlled by the contracts (franchises), sometimes in great detail. Most franchises receive public subsidy for the operations. The bus sector is almost the other way around; most buses operate on commercial terms with little public subsidy and PTAs (which do not cover the whole of the Britain) have little influence over timetables or fares. Despite these prerequisites (or perhaps because of them) an ICReg scheme called PLUSBUS has been set up by the five leading bus and train operators in Britain (Arriva, First, Go-Ahead Group, National Express, Stagecoach) and the two trade bodies, the Confederation of Passenger Transport and the Association of Train Operating Companies, ATOC. The Rail Settlement Plan, RSP (which is a commercial division of ATOC), has a central role in the PLUSBUS scheme and in British rail ticketing on the whole. Unlike its counterparts in other countries such as Germany and Sweden ATOCs role is governed by the British rail legislation. All franchised rail operators have to sell all kinds of rail tickets and RSP is the clearing house for rail revenues. RSP is also the clearing house for PLUSBUS tickets - the 290 towns and cities around Britain are regarded as shadow stations in the rail ticketing system. PLUSBUS means that you buy a train ticket (through a range of channels, also on-board trains) from A to B and add on bus validity in B s target zone. The passengers can make as many local bus journeys as they like on participating bus and tram services anywhere in the urban area (as defined by a travel zone map) of the selected town, on the day or during the period that the ticket is valid. (This is not always the case in other ICReg countries.) PLUSBUS is currently available in 290 towns and cities across Britain, with interchange available through 417 National Rail stations. PLUSBUS does not only mean day tickets, in most towns you can also add a season ticket/pass to your rail pass that way you get seamless travel also for commuting. PLUSBUS is small compared to ICReg schemes in other countries, one million tickets per year are sold but the scheme is growing fast. It is run by an independent partnership called Journey Solutions with one person dedicated to PLUSBUS. This may be a good example of Keep it simple but RSP s central role in allocating revenue in the British rail sector has to be remembered. Finally it should be noted that in Britain tickets can be bought on board all buses, except in central London. This is not the case in Sweden and some other countries. 5

6 No evaluation or survey of PLUSBUS has been carried out so far. However, surveys of passenger satisfaction are regularly carried out by the independent organisation Passenger Focus (Passenger Focus 2012). These surveys are quite extensive with a sample of rail passengers. Some responses are relevant for ICReg; 76% of long distance passengers found that connections with other forms of public transport were satisfactory or good, car parking facilities only scored 60%. Responses were also grouped according to journey purpose; Business and leisure passengers ranked connections with other forms of public transport higher (76%) slightly lower than commuters (70%). Great Britain s only HS line so far is HS1 connecting London to the continent. However, a new line from London to the north, HS2, is under discussion. The new line may not serve existing centrally located stations with established bus/taxi connections. This has been criticised; it is for instance claimed that the new line does not link up properly with the existing transport network (Sunday Times). Figure 1 British rail passengers access to stations British rail passengers' access to stations 14% 22% 45% walk bike taxi bus/coach 13% 4% 2% tram/metro car Source: Passenger Focus 4. Germany Germany has chosen its own railway model where infrastructure and a majority of passenger operations are in the hands of Deutsche Bahn (DB). A more detailed description of the German rail sector is found in Hylén Passenger and freight traffic has been deregulated for the past 15 years and all licensed operators have access to DB infrastructure. Besides DB there is several dozen passenger rail operators, they almost exclusively operate regional services contracted by the PTAs. Urban public transport, bus, tram and metro is mainly operated by local publicly owned companies. More than 120 operators and PTAs are engaged in the City-Ticket scheme developed by the Association of German Transport Companies (VDV) and DB. The City-Ticket concept means that a journey with DB is combined with a local journey at the point of origin and/or destination in about 120 towns and cities in Germany. Timetable information is available on DB s website where 6

7 information can be found for travel between practically all stations/stops and street addresses in Germany and between almost all railway stations in Europe. A ticket for the journey is purchased through DB sales channels. The additional cost for the local journey is roughly 2. For customers with discounted travel card ( BahnCard ) the local journey is included in the annual card price. DB then pays the PTA or the local operator for their portion of the journey. This payment takes into account the proportion of passengers who normally have discounted travel in the respective cities. In a press release 2 Dec (DB 2012) DB stated that 230 million City-Tickets had been sold since the start of the scheme 2003 (23 million per year). According to the 2011 Annual report DB had long distance passenger per day or about 124 million per year. We can then calculate 23:124 = 0,185; thus follows that almost every fifth long distance passenger in Germany uses the City-Ticket. Tickets can at the moment only be bought through DB or travel agents. DB may therefore be considered to have a dominant position in the scheme but from the customer s point of view Germany must be said to be very convenient for public transport users, among other things as regards ticketing. DB s and PTAs machines offer a wide range of tickets, including the possibility to purchase City- Tickets. Machines are very widespread and can also be found for example at airports and in other non-railway environments. German PTAs also have ticket machines to a much greater extent than in other countries. 5. Denmark Compared to the other countries described in this paper Denmark is relatively small, both considering area and population. Just as in neighbouring Sweden there is no HS rail and the substantial investment schemes decided in 2013 do not include HS rail. Nevertheless seamless public transport has the highest priority and in several respects Denmark is quite advanced. As demanded by Danish legislation (Denmark 2012) the whole country is covered by six PTAs who are responsible for bus services but not train services within their area. The law also demands that the PTAs shall cooperate with railway operators in order to create a seamless journey with one ticket. Furthermore the law states that the PTAs may, together with rail operators, develop nationwide intermodal information and ticketing scheme. The non-profit organisation Bus og Tog ( Bus and Train ) was set up in the ies by the PTAs and the rail operators in order to fulfil the law s objectives. The PTAs and the rail operators run the nation-wide journey planner similar schemes can be found in other countries. After finding the desired journey details the customer is linked to the relevant PTA where he can purchase a ticket, on paper, on mobile phone or other media. Tickets can be issued between any bus or rail station, or rather zone, in Denmark. Also tickets between only rail stations are valid on local public transport in the departure and arrival zones by default this is probably unique in Europe. Bus og Tog points out that 97% of all long distance train journeys start and/or finish with other modes of transport on one ticket. Approximately 60% of all public transport is now included in the nationwide Danish 7

8 travel card system ( A full roll-out of the Danish Rejsekort in all PTAs is expected in a few years. The revenue distribution is carried out by Bus og Tog based on surveys, when a national smart travel card is implemented the distribution will be more precise. A seamless journey demands that all operators have real time information about bus and train services so that customers can be informed delays, changed connections etc. This is the case at the moment for all train operators and some of the PTAs. An interesting feature is alarm on demand ; as an option customers may request to be informed in real time about changes to their journeys of course this only functions where operators or PTAs provide real-time information. Evaluation studies carried out by Bus og Tog have shown that Combined bus-train journeys with through tickets have increased by 50% from 1996 to 2012 Customers are very pleased with the journey planner One national journey planner reduces costs for PTAs and operators 6. Sweden In 1990 the responsibility for local and regional public transport had been decentralised to the 24 (today 21) PTAs. This meant a considerable improvement and growth of local/regional public transport but many transport professionals felt a need for better information, coordination and through ticketing. One objective was to provide a whole journey by for instance local bus + long distance train + regional train with one ICReg ticket with guaranteed connections. The non-profit company Samtrafiken was therefore set up on a voluntary basis. Samtrafiken is today owned by about 50 PTAs, operators and some other travel organisations. Samtrafiken runs the journey planner Resplus ticketing The actual ticketing is not Samtrafiken s responsibility. Instead, Resplus ( Travelplus ) tickets between stations and bus stops can be bought through different sites or channels. The most common is the site of the dominant train operator SJ AB. The dominating hardware, used by several sales channels, is operated by Linkon which is a subsidiary of SJ AB. The revenue from Resplus tickets is distributed by Linkon on behalf of Samtrafiken to the operators and PTAs involved for each individual journey. A typical Resplus journey consists of a combination of regional bus + long distance train + local/regional train. There are also ways to buy a ticket from/to a certain zone without specifying the final stop/station. An average of 1,3 changes between PTAs/operators are made during a Resplus journey. The sales of Resplus journeys amounts to 215 M per year (1 800 M SEK). This may be compared to the turnover of the dominant train operator SJ AB; M per year. Resplus journeys are therefore a significant part of the public transport market in Sweden. Surveys of Resplus- and other long distance passengers show; 8

9 Figure 2 Journey purpose Journey purpose 14% 35% Leisure 51% "Work related", business, non daily commuting Health care, education Source: Samtrafiken Figure 3 Reasons for not using Resplus tickets Reasons for not using Resplus tickets 24% 20% 27% 29% Did not know about Resplus Walked/cycled to/from station Used season or stored value tickets for connections Other reasons Source: Samtrafiken Furthermore Samtrafiken has surveyed what Resplus passengers appreciate most; 1) The Get there guarantee (see Section 6.2) 2) Simple ticketing in one step, no need to use several sites or similar 3) The way different modes, operators, PTAs, can be combined Finally it should be mentioned that there have also been extensive improvements of stations and interchanges in Sweden this is, however, outside the scope of this memo. 9

10 6.2 TLS, Trafikledningssamverkan When you buy a Resplus ticket the timetable for your journey is shown on the ticket - of whatever medium. This timetable takes into account the minimum connection times according to the national connection plan (Samtrafikplan). Connection times vary between 2 and 20 min depending on local conditions, historical punctuality, station/interchange layouts etc. The connection plan is a voluntary scheme and not imposed by any regulatory body or authority. The whole point of Resplus, seamless mobility, intermodal transport etc. is to ensure that passengers get there = get to their final destination free of worries in a secure manner, especially in the case of delays and disruptions. Resplus partners therefore provide a Get there (KomFram) guarantee. This does not mean that connections are always held common sense must apply but PTAs and operators use a support system developed for such situations; TLS (Trafikledningssamverkan) is a traffic control cooperation system developed by Samtrafiken. This connects the traffic control of the railways, PTAs and some of the bus/rail operators working for the PTAs. Delays are in some cases automatically monitored (through the rail traffic control system and GPS for buses), in other cases entered manually by traffic control staff. Access to TLS is given to operators, PTAs and also to media. Sometimes transport minded radio broadcasters actually coordinate activities to sort out disruptions. If a certain train/bus number or station is entered in TLS the system shows the number of passengers with a Resplus ticket and which connecting bus or train they are booked on. Traffic control at PTAs or operators can then decide if a connection shall be held, passengers diverted to another interchange station, take the next bus or be provided with a taxi. Certainly, the public transport world is far from perfect. Connections don t always work; passengers are not always adequately informed etc. but the get there guarantee is appreciated by customers. Figure 4. Resplus ticket (translation of certain parts) with connection information Ticket ZRY1055S0001 Odenplan T - T-Centralen SL Dep Arr Metro Stockholm C - Gävle C Snabbtåg 2 kl SJ Dep Arr Train Carriage Seat Window In case of disturbances if you are changing to another service please contact onboard staff who will assist you 10

11 7. Discussion and conclusions Goal 8 of the EU White Paper (EU 2011) states By 2020, establish the framework for a European multimodal transport information, management and payment system. Integration between different mode of transport and travel with a single ticket - in other words ICReg solutions - therefore has high priority. The European situation today is very fragmented, however. Rail and public transport passengers face a fragmented world where information and ticketing have to be obtained from several sources. If passengers feel uncertain about conditions at the destination they may go by car all the way, therefore solving the last urban mile problem is important. The EU has pointed out that the rail and public transport sectors lag behind air and road transport in ITS, Intelligent Transport Systems. New IT solutions also for rail and public transport develop continuously, and there is no shortage of ideas for new Europe-wide solutions. The IT sector sees great scope in the combination of public transport, parking and car-sharing as well as combinations with non-transport services. The countries described in this paper have chosen different ICReg solutions. They have in various ways managed to break down century-old barriers between long distance operators and local/regional operators/ptas. They have introduced intermodal travel on one ticket and surveys in Denmark and Sweden show that passengers appreciate this service. However, it is difficult to state that the use of public transport in general has increased as a result of ICReg schemes (Table 1). In most other European countries there are no similar systems at all and progress is slow and difficult. It must be remembered that compared to HS rail investments ticketing systems are cheap. Integrating a journey planner and the actual ticketing or the provision of a proof of payment may be attractive and technically easy but some caution may be in order. When tickets can be bought from more than one service provider site at different prices there may be competition and discrimination problems. One solution may be that the journey planner (perhaps for a certain fee?) could suggest and link to ticketing sites. Despite high EU ambitions it may be dangerous to hope that an EU-wide system will solve all problems by 2020 or later. An EU-wide system may not be the best solution; it may not even be needed. Instead, Realistic ICReg markets should be defined The administrative barriers between modes and operators must be broken down All parties involved must be convinced that ICReg is a win-win business Regional and national action should come first Establish cross-border schemes where such markets exist or are possible to develop Several projects and studies, for instance LINK (EU 2010) and EPTA (EU 2013), have shown that legal and administrative barriers delay intermodal solutions with cooperation between different actors such as PTAs, operators and other service providers. Work on the removal of such barriers should have the highest priority; the technical aspects are generally easier to deal with. Transport conditions in general geography, population, car ownership, congestion etc. vary between countries; therefore solutions must be adapted to national and regional needs. Exchange of best practice as in the EPTA 11

12 project is most valuable. All parties and actors on all levels from ministers to bus drivers must cooperate in order to create intermodal services with the customer in focus. 12

13 References DB Press information about extended CityTicket facilities Denmark Bekendtgørelse af lov om trafikselskaber EU Treaty of Lisbon amending the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty establishing the European Community, (OJ 2007 C 306/01, ) EU LINK The European Forum on Intermodal Passenger Travel EU White Paper Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area Towards a competitive and resource efficient transport system. Brussels, COM(2011) 144 final EU CLOSER Connecting LOcal and Short-distance networks for Efficient transport EU EPTA Enhancing public transport authorities in Europe. Interreg IVC Hylén; B Germany and the deregulation of its railways. Paper been presented at Thredbo 12 Conference on competition and ownership issues in land passenger transport, Durban, South Africa, Sep Hylén, B., Jonsson, D Höghastighetsstationer i andra europeiska länder. CTS Working Paper 2012:10. Johnson, B. American intercity passenger rail must be truly high-speed and transit oriented. Journal of Transport Geography 22 (2012) Maxwell, R. Converting a Large Region to a Multimodal Pulsed-Hub Public Transport Network. Transportation Research Record Paper No Passenger Focus National Passenger Survey Spring NPS - Main Report Preston, J. High Speed Rail in Britain: about time or a waste of time? Journal of Transport Geography 22 (2013) Sitran, A. Forthcoming. The development of the high-speed rail services and its intermodality with the local transport supply: critical elements based on the analysis of a sample of Italian medium-sized cities Sunday Times 15 Sep HS2 will clog up the rail system warns freight expert Vickerman, R.W. Forthcoming. High-speed rail and regional development: the case of intermediate stations 13

14 Funding The work for this paper has been funded by the EU Jean Monnet Programme (Information and research activities) and CTS, Centre for Transport Studies, Stockholm, Sweden. The Jean Monnet Programme has also financed a workshop on The High-Speed train and its intermodality in mediumsized cities in Spain and Europe March 2013 in Barcelona, Spain. Acknowledgements These persons have most kindly supplied information about ICReg schemes in their respective countries and checked draft versions of this paper: Spain; Pau Noy, Fundacio Mobilitat Sostenible, Barcelona, Spain Great Britain; Jonathan Radley, Journey Solutions, London, Great Britain Germany; Nils Laschinsky, Verein Deutscher Verkehrsunternehmen, Köln, Germany Denmark; Claus M Steenberg, Bus og Tog, Köbenhavn, Denmark Sweden; Mattias Andersson, Samtrafiken, Stockholm, Sweden 14