Transcript Transport Infrastructure in Hungary and 21st century’s challenges Tamás Fleischer Institute for World Economics of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences WORLD ROAD ASSOCIATION - AIPCR SEMINAR ON.

Transport Infrastructure
in Hungary and
21st century’s challenges
Tamás Fleischer
Institute for World Economics of the
Hungarian Academy of Sciences
<[email protected]>
WORLD ROAD ASSOCIATION - AIPCR SEMINAR
ON LOGISTICS, ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY
Budapest, 25 October, 2002.
Transport Infrastructure in Hungary
and 21st century’s challenges
 - About the spatial dimension of sustainability
 - Remarks on interregional corridors (I)
Multi-level approach vs. overlap-layer priority
 - Remarks on interregional corridors (II)
Network isotropy versus east-west priority
 - Remarks on interregional corridors (III)
Structural change missed in Hungary
 - ( Suggestions for a possible structural improvement of the
inter-regional corridors )
 - Summary of the general findings
About the spatial dimension of sustainability (1)
 The general sustainability approach focus on the time dimension of
sustainability; taking care on the environmental conditions of the
future generations (inter-generational solidarity)
 Also important approach is the requirement of the intra-generational
solidarity - It can also be mentioned as spatial solidarity and spatial
interdependence.
 Inter-generational connection is a one-way relation: it is our
responsibility for future generations, - they can’t do anything for us..
 Intra-generational relation is a two-ways relation: the activity of
others can also effect our circumstances and possibilities. We have to
count on their solidarity, but this is not enough, we must also do for
defending our environment. Sustaining our activity in a changing
environment adding to the solidarity we need also a kind of selfdefence.
About the spatial dimension of sustainability (2)
 Manuel Castells: sustainability is also a fight for control over space
adding to control over time. “Space of places must retain its autonomy
and its meaning independently from the evolution and dynamics of the
space of flows”
 Space of place is our physical environment that has meaning and
importance for us, with its order, culture, rules, and internal structures.
Space of flows is the field of force of the effects arriving from outside.
This latter is not a continuous space, but space of individual effects.
Castells do not want to exclude external impacts and do not deny the
possibility of internal changes, just underlines that too rapid and too
sudden external effects not serve, but rather disintegrate internal
relations and structures. - defence is needed against.
About the spatial dimension of sustainability (3)
 Above terms can be translated to economic and transport relations
using terms as provision, (connections of the ‘space of places’) and.
accessibility, through traffic and by-passing. (trajectories of the
‘space of flows’)
Different
network
relations
relative
to a
region
Source: After Plogmann (1980), with own additions.
Remarks on interregional corridors (I)
Multi-level approach vs. overlap-layer priority
 “Single network to the single market”– The main target of the 1992
EU Common Transport Policy (CTP) was to interconnect the existing
national networks. The CTP didn’t deal with the internal problems of
individual national networks, but with the “common” level.
 Trans-European Networks (TEN) – (overlapping level) the structure
more-or-less has been formed by 1989, the collapse of the iron-curtain
hardly influenced the plans, - the system of N-S and E-W corridors
(1992, 1996)
 Hungarian Transport Policy (1996): In spite of the balanced five
strategic pillars, the “promotion of the integration to the EU” got a
dominant role and an understanding that it needs the urgent
construction of the corridors. By that way the inter-regional level of
relations (the carrier of the ‘space of flows’) had been emphasised at
an unjustified extent at the expense of the inter-city and inter-village
relations (that is the background of the ‘space of places’) within the
whole transport system
Remarks on interregional corridors (II)
Network isotropy versus east-west priority
 Pan-European Corridors: the extension of the TEN, with dominating
east-west relations. Only one (No IX ) corridor offers extensive northsouth connection, the others are incidental and imperfect (1991, 1994,
1997)
 TINA (Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment)
The backbone network is identical with the pan-European network,
the concerned countries might recommend additional elements of
secondary priority to the network. (1995-1999)
“... the Commission proposed to use the results of the Conference as basis for
the backbone network definition: the ten multi-modal Pan-European Transport
Corridors. It was understood that all parties concerned agreed on the need for
the Corridors so that further economic or financial justifications were not
required.”
(See.: TINA Final Report, 1999, p.25, 3.1.1. Backbone Network)
Remarks on interregional corridors (II)
Network isotropy versus east-west priority
Source: http://www.khvm.hu/EU-integracio/A_magyarorszagi_TINA_halozat/Image11.gif
The Helsinki-, or pan-European transport corridors
Remarks on interregional corridors (II)
Network isotropy versus east-west priority
 Pan-European Corridors: the extension of the TEN, with dominating
east-west relations. Only one (No IX ) corridor offers extensive northsouth connection, the others are incidental and imperfect (1991, 1994,
1997)
 TINA (Transport Infrastructure Needs Assessment)
The backbone network is identical with the pan-European network,
the concerned countries might have recommended additional elements
of secondary priority to the network. (1995-1999)
“... the Commission proposed to use the results of the Conference as basis for
the backbone network definition: the ten multi-modal Pan-European Transport
Corridors. It was understood that all parties concerned agreed on the need for
the Corridors so that further economic or financial justifications were not
required.”
(See.: TINA Final Report, 1999, p.25, 3.1.1. Backbone Network)
Remarks on interregional corridors (III)
Structural change missed in Hungary
Hungarian
interpretation
of panEuropean
corridors
1998 (and
since)
Source: Útgazdálkodás 1994-1998 Min. of Transport, Communication etc.
Remarks on interregional corridors (III)
Structural change missed in Hungary
The secondary
road network of
Hungary
Source: OTAB Database
Remarks on interregional corridors (III)
Structural change missed in Hungary
The main road
network of
Hungary
Source: OTAB Database
Remarks on interregional corridors (III)
Structural change missed in Hungary
The existing
motorway
network of
Hungary
Source: Homepage of the Hungarian Ministry of Economic and Transport Affairs
Remarks on interregional corridors (III)
Structural change missed in Hungary
The understanding of the
pan-European
corridors in
Hungary
Source: Útgazdálkodás 1994-1998 Min. of Transport, Communication etc.
Remarks on interregional corridors (III)
Structural change missed in Hungary
Helsinki
corridors
and
additional
elements of
the TINA
network
Source: A 8. sz. főút fejlesztési feladatai... UKIG Hálózatfejlesztési Főosztálya 2000. szept. 13
Suggestions for a possible structural
improvement of the inter-regional
corridors (1)
 Three theses for the model of the interregional corridors in Hungary:
 The interregional network, in compliance with its function, should be
created with a structure separated from the secondary and main road
networks, as one of the levels of the multi-layered transport structure.
 Instead of the earlier suggested single-centred. radial-orbital system,
today, in an open country, the development of an open grid structure
should be set as the target..
 Due to Hungary’s location, ( partly as an advantage but partly as
disadvantage), the transit traffic of the busiest Pan-European
Corridors has to be reckoned with. The aim is that the through-traffic
should disturb the life of the country as little as possible.
(cross the country with the minimum total length, avoid ecologically sensitive
or densely populated areas and those with heavy traffic loads, encourage the
use of vehicles and transport modes that pollute the environment less etc.)
Suggestions for a possible structural
improvement of the inter-regional corridors (2)
Main elements: three east-west corridors, four north-south corridors
and additional diagonal elements.
The suggested crossing of Pan-European Corridors IV and V are marked
by the thick line .
The model also demonstrates two sensitive areas (the resort area of Lake
Balaton and the conurbation of Budapest) through which it would not be
practical to force transit traffic.
Suggestions for a possible structural
improvement of the inter-regional corridors (3)
Suggestions for a possible structural
improvement of the inter-regional corridors (3)
Suggestions for a possible structural
improvement of the inter-regional corridors (3)
Suggestions for a possible structural
improvement of the inter-regional corridors (3)
Source: Fleischer Tamás – Magyar Emőke – Tombácz Endre – Zsikla György (2001):
A Széchenyi Terv autópálya-fejlesztési programjának stratégiai környezeti hatásvizsgálata. 109 p.
A Budapesti Közgazdaságtudományi és Államigazgatási Egyetem Környezettudományi Intézetének
tanulmányai, 6. szám. Sorozatszerkesztő Kerekes Sándor és Kiss Károly. Budapest, 2001 december
Summary of the general findings
 (1) Requirement of a multi-layer transport network. We admit the
importance of interregional corridors, but consider them as one layer of the
whole system of transport networks. The (economic, social, cultural etc.)
development and the sustainability of the different regions equally need
the well functioning operation of each layers of the transport system.
 (2) Necessity of the isotropy of the transport network. (Equal importance to
each direction) For the Central and Eastern part of Europe a greater priority
was given in the nineties to the directions ended in the EU while secondary
importance to the internal interregional relations.
 (3) Avoiding to reinforce the over-centralised national structure.
 (4) These models and principles has to be debated first and accept a
consolidated form of them. The next step would be - based on a set of
adopted principles, - a revision of the old desires; studying to what extent
they serve the present targets and objectives - or they give answers on the
questions of the past.
Transport Infrastructure in Hungary
and 21st century’s challenges
Tamás Fleischer
Institute for World Economics
of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences
<[email protected]>
THANK YOU FOR
YOUR ATTENTION
!
WORLD ROAD ASSOCIATION - AIPCR SEMINAR ON LOGISTICS,
ENVIRONMENT AND ECONOMY
Budapest, 25 October, 2002.