La presentazione è in caricamento. Aspetta per favore

La presentazione è in caricamento. Aspetta per favore

Una metodologia di Analisi Costi-Benefici nellImpact assessment delle politiche dei trasporti Andrea Tedeschi, Giuseppe Siciliano, Carlo Vaghi XI Riunione.

Presentazioni simili


Presentazione sul tema: "Una metodologia di Analisi Costi-Benefici nellImpact assessment delle politiche dei trasporti Andrea Tedeschi, Giuseppe Siciliano, Carlo Vaghi XI Riunione."— Transcript della presentazione:

1 Una metodologia di Analisi Costi-Benefici nellImpact assessment delle politiche dei trasporti Andrea Tedeschi, Giuseppe Siciliano, Carlo Vaghi XI Riunione Scientifica SIET Trieste, giugno

2 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Sommario Introduzione e obiettivi Descrizione del progetto Metodologia Impatti Conclusioni

3 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Introduzione: lImpact assessment Limpact assessment è uno strumento utilizzato dalla Commissione Europea per la valutazione ex-ante di progetti; è volto ad aiutare la decisione del decisore politico. La metodologia è stata sviluppata ed implementata allinterno di uno studio di IA commissionato dalla Commissione Europea con lobiettivo di stimare ex-ante alcuni fra i maggiori impatti delle politiche a favore dellimplementazione di un Maritime Common Space in Europa. EC guidelines, pivotal steps of an IA: 1 – identifying the problem 2 – define the objective 3 – develop main policy options 4 – analyse the impacts of the options 5 – compare the options 6 – outline policy monitoring and evaluation

4 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Rationale del progetto Customs and tax rules Immigration, trade Statistics Environment and waste Phytosanitary, veterinary and healt protection Security and safety regulations Rallentano il trasporto marittimo ed intermodale, generando ridondanze e maggiori costi (posizione svantaggiata rispetto al trasporto stradale) E necessaria una razionalizzazione, armonizzazione e riduzione di queste procedure, per aumentare la competitività dello SSS e stimolare modal shift dalla strada. Complessità procedure amministrative in SSS intra EU

5 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Attività del progetto: identificazione dei bottlenecks, misure, policy option ed analisi costi benefici Identification of 4 Policy Options A) Simplification of regulations on carriage of dangerous goods in the case of Authorised Regular Shipping Services B) License of Authorised Regular Shipping Service to be connected with operators (not with vessels) C) Separation of areas in ports (Community and non-Community goods) D) One-stop administrative shops in ports E) Enhanced electronic data transmission (elimination of paperwork) F) Single document for all administrative procedures G) Maximum elimination of administrative procedures in ports H) Use of English as second official administrative language 1) Additional time, delay of the ship and/or of the goods 2) Different procedures for SSS and road transport (in particular for dangerous goods) 3) Specific national procedures 4) Individual interpretations of EU legislation 5) Language requirements (English not universally accepted) 6) Not all ports recognise electronic manifests 7) Authorised Regulars Shipping Service Licence only for specific routes (linked to the vessel – not to the operator). 8) Use of IT for customs purposes is not the rule in all ports 9) Administrative procedures for security standards Identification of 9 Bottlenecks Identification of 8 Measures 1. Evaluation of the measures 2. Grouping of the measures 3. Policy Options proposal 4. PoEs and DG TREN s feedbacks 5. Policy Options to be assessed BAU: Do-nothing Policy Option B1: Licence of Authorised Regular Shipping Service linked to operators, with simplifications of dangerous goods procedures Policy Option B2: One-stop shops, Single Document, Electronic data transmission, use of English Policy Option C: Maximum elimination of procedures 1. Assessment of the DO NOTHING SCENARIO Quantitative evaluation of the SSS trade (EU and DG Goods) Trends forecast (modal shift) 2. EVALUATION of the main IMPACTS Economic, Environmental, Social 3. COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS for each Policy Option 4. POLICY OPTIONS COMPARISON Cost Benefit Analysis

6 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Descrizione del progetto: le policy options Policy OptionsMeasures involvedDescription A Do-nothingNo measureEvolution of the market according to the baseline scenario B1 Licence of Authorised Regular Shipping Service, with simplifacations of dangerous goods procedures Authorized Regular Shipping Service Licence to be linked with operators; Simplification of regulations on carriage of dangerous goods in the case of Authorized Regular Shipping Services. Simplification of the regulations on Dangerous Goods, in the case of Authorised Regular Shipping Services; once authorized, there would be no need to stick to the complex procedures set by the IMDG Code and by Directive 2002/59 and by national regulations. A simplified regime could be devised. Harmonisation of regulations on maritime transport to the ones for road transport Linking the licence of Autorised regular liner service to the operators and not with routes/vessels. B2 One-stop shops, Single Document, Electronic data transmission, use of English Electronic data transmission; One-stop administrative shops in ports Single document; Use of English as a second official language for administrative procedures in SSS. Issuing of a single document and identification of one-stop administrative shops for traders (which also implies the implementation of appropriate information technologies for data transmission). Possibility of using English as the second language for all the maritime in relation to all administrative documents and procedures. C Maximum Elimination of administrative procedures Sum of B1 and B2 and Maximum Elimination of administrative procedures in port. Complete elimination of administrative procedures for vessels carrying EU-cleared goods between EU ports; Complete elimination of administrative procedures on EU-cleared goods; Reduction of inspection on vessel /goods in case of EU goods and of vessel with only EU goods on board; Maintaining a single electronic information flow and one shop stop concept (electronic single document delivered before ships arrival); single shop in ports, guaranteeing the ship-owner and the ship agent a single counterpart for the payment of fee and any other information exchanges; Extension of the status of Regular Authorised Shipping Service to operators and simplification of DG procedures (as PO B1);

7 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Metodologia LACB è uno degli strumenti che allinterno dellIA si usa per effettuare la misurazione degli impatti. La peculiarità della metodologia oggetto dello studio sta nellapproccio usato per implementare lACB, data lampia portata geografica degli impatti prodotti dalle politiche soggetto della valutazione. Approccio congiunto bottom-up (generalmente usato in CBA per progetti di trasporto a livello locale) e top down

8 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Metodologia: top down and bottom up approach

9 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Main assumptions: ritardi su merci e navi dovuti a procedure amministrative No delay on vessels seems to be generated when carrying administrative procedure (<1h); Different scenarios on delays on goods: no delay on goods for some major ports of the northern range (for instance Belgium) is generated; Delay for inspections affects only non-EU goods; Moreover, answers received by the stakeholder consultation have been considered and the following assumptions are set: for each time range, an average time (in hours) has been considered; The overall delay is expressed as a probability value, weighted against different percentages for each time range (related to percentage of answer within the time range 1 ); Weight= >24 Delay (P) on goods Delay (P) on vessel Average time chosen Form. on GOODS50%41%9%5%9%0% Form. on VESSELS40%48%3%0%1% Dangerous Goods5%55%14%0% Phytosanitary2.5%32%5%0%5% Animal origin2.5%18%5%0% 5% Weighted average delay1, (1) the percentage only refers to the total number of answers received on the specific issue of delays and not on the whole of the answers to the consultation. In case answers are not provided to the specific question, the reference sample has been eliminated from the calculation; Weight Delay on goods Delay on vessel Form. on GOODS50% Form. on VESSELS40% Dangerous Goods5% Phytosanitary2.5% Animal origin2.5% Weighted avg. delay1,480.47

10 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Quantificazione degli impatti: Bills of Lading Peculiarità dellACB utilizzata: Assessment costi di investimento (implementazione) su larga scala Assessment dei costi/benefici di gestione time costs, valutati mediante lutilizzo di stime del valore del tempo di trasporto merci inventory costs + delay costs time related costs dei FTE (personale Full Time Equivalent) coinvolti Il calcolo è basato sul numero dei B/L (sui quali i controlli vengono effettivamente effettuati) piuttosto che sul numero di unità di carico movimentate o sulle tonnellate/km. Si è tenuto conto dei diversi segmenti del trasporto SSS (container, Ro-Ro, Ro- pax, Ro-Lo, bulk), e delle diverse specificità delle merci (dangerous goods, animali vivi ecc..) Inoltre, si è tenuto conto dello status delle linee intra EU (Authorised Regular Shipping Services e non ARSS), e dello status dei beni trasportati su queste linee (EU e non EU goods). [1] [1] Cabotage excluded.

11 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo ContainerRo-RoRo-LoRo-paxBulk Vessel size800 TEU350 LU 100 LU TEU 80 LU 20,000 tonnes Load Factor of vessels70%80% 80%(LU), 70%(TEU) 80% N of lines in the EU SSS market ,000 [1] [1] Avg n of port calls per line Avg n of B/L's per line per vessel Avg n of line loops per year Type of VesselB/L per year Ro-Ro10,615,153.9 Ro-Lo1,016,094.9 Container9,277,669.5 Ro-Pax2,811,288.4 Bulk200,000 Total23,920,206.7 The assumptions made on average vessels capacities and load factors, validated y experts and stakeholders interviewed during the study [1] ; the following parameters were assessed: [1] Average vessels capacities (considered for each type of vessel evaluated); average vessels loads (considered for each type of vessel evaluated); the share of cargo embarked/disembarked in each port of call on a shipping line (considered per each type of vessel evaluated); conversion factors[2] from the number of LU[3] to the number of B/L;[2][3] conversion factors[4] from the number of tonnes to the number of B/L;[4] (1) Based on our elaborations and data from previous study, interviews to experts and validation of the gathered data at the Antwerp meeting April 15th 2008; (2)1,4 LU per B/L in Ro-Ro traffic and 2,5 TEU per B/L in containerised one; (3) Containers and Loading Units; (4) 1,4 LU per B/L in Ro-Ro traffic and 2,5 TEU per B/L in containerised one. Main assumptions: Il calcolo del numero del B/L per anno

12 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Modal shift: riduzione dei costi esterni By improving the internal efficiency of SSS, the policies determine a modal shift from Road and Rail. Thus, there is a positive impact in terms of reduction of external costs. In the Base-line scenario, the modal shift for SSS of EU Goods in 2020 is equal to 8.6 bln tkm (0.77% of the total 1,116 bln tkm of SSS of EU Goods forecast). Based on indications from the previous EC Studies ISIC and MTCP, it is assumed that the EMS will determine an overall additional modal shift of: +0,097% in the Low Scenario +0,194% in the High Scenario In terms of external costs saved, the advantages equal an average of: 14.0 million Euro per year in the Low Scenario (ref. 2020) 28.0 million Euro per year in the High Scenario (ref. 2020)

13 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo % reduction of P (Delay) on Goods (1) PO B1PO B2PO C Discount rate50%20% Formalities on vessels1%21% Formalities on Goods7%25%31% Dangerous Goods40%25%40% Phytosanitary0%25% Animal origin0%25% Other standard goods7%25%31% Weighted avg. delay8%25%30% Riduzione dei Time cost dovuta alla riduzione dei ritardi sulle merci (incremento della puntualità) Assumptions: A reduction in the time required for carrying out administrative procedures could produce a proportional probability reduction in the delays on goods. However: most delays are not directly associated to standard procedures (they are caused by periodic inspections on goods); Delays are not produced by the time spent preparing documents (before the arrival port the ship). Delay (prob.) on goods BAUPO B1PO B2PO C Formalities on vessels Formalities on goods Dangerous goods Phytosanitary Animal originsproducts Other standard goods Weighted avg delay % Impact on Delay = Impact on Time reduction x discount rate (Low for Po B1 and High for PO B2 and C). /t*hour Container1.22 Ro-Ro2.98 Ro-Lo2.98 Ro-Pax2.98 Bulk1.02 Dangerous goods 4.0 Cost for delays on goods for each scenario ( per call) + Time values applied -9%-2% Avg. cost reduction of delays on goods (h per call) Quantification of impacts (4/7)

14 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Assumptions: The consultations results and the data gathered through different interviews have been used for quantifying average delays in port; Delays on vessels, rare and never higher than 1 hour; Overall delay is expressed as a probability value, weighted against different percentages for each time range: the percentage of answers within each time range has been associated to the probability of happening of the specific event. -60% Costs for delay on vessels for each PO scenarios ( per call) -45%-2% Avg. cost reduction of delays on vessels (h per call) Percentage reduction of P (Delay) on Goods PO B1PO B2PO C Formalities on vessels1%44%59% Formalities on Goods3.7%43%62% Dangerous Goods50%30%50% Phytosanitary0%30% Animal origin products0%30% BAUPO B1PO B2PO C Formalities on vessels Formalities on Goods Dangerous Goods Phytosanitary Animal origin Other standard goods /h Container476 Ro-Ro625 Ro-Lo625 Ro_pax625 Bulk Costs for one hour vessel Impact on vessels delay = impact of time reduction (however, only delays time ranges shorter than 1 hour have been considered). Quantification of impacts (5/7) Riduzione dei Time cost dovuta alla riduzione dei ritardi sulle navi

15 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Options comparison (1/4) Policy Option id ImpactB1Low B1HighB2LowB2HighC1LowC1High A External costs saved by modal shift BPersonnel cost savings C Time cost savings (improvement of punctuality rate for goods in door-to- door transport) ,62173,1 DShip cost savings E=A+B+ C+D Total Benefits ,321.72,470.12,624.72,808.9 F=B+C+ D Total Internal Benefits (No Modal Shift) ,176.52,179.62,442.12,443.6 G Design, Developmt & Training H Running I = G+H Total costs J NET PRESENT VALUE ,861.92,010.32,007.22,191.4 L = E/G Benefit/Cost Ratio L = F/G Internal Benefit /Cost Ratio ,8 M IRR8.9%12.0% 61.3%62.5%60.7%61.9% Cost-Benefit Analysis: results overview Values in MEuro (PV, discount rate ratio = 4%)

16 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Analisi costi benefici: comparazione dei diversi impatti Reduction of external cost caused by modal shift Reduction in personnel costs Reduction of costs for improvement of punct. Rate on goods Focus on benefits (Policy Option C) Total Cost and Benefit (Values in M) PO B1PO B2PO C IRR Low8.9%61.3%60.7% IRR high12.0%62.5%61.9% IRR related to different Policy Options Red. delay on vessel costs Total Cost and Benefit related to personnel and Ship (M)

17 CERTeT – Centro di Economia Regionale, Trasporti e Turismo Conclusioni La comparazione totale dei costi e dei benefici, per tutte le opzioni, ha mostrato risultati positivi: a fronte di costi di implementazioni trascurabili si possono ottenere grandi benefici a livello comunitario. Nel caso in cui siano considerati solo i benefici interni (correlati solamente alle operazioni SSS), la comparazione fra costi e benefici risulta più bilanciata. Trade off fra semplificazione procedure perorata dalla (DG TREN e DG MARE) e riduzione della security potenziale dovuta alla riduzione di controlli doganali (DG TAXUD) che dovranno essere superate. Sussistono grandi differenze per quanto riguarda tempi delle operazioni e procedure fra nazioni e fra range portuali. Pilot exemption certificate e separation of areas in ports (non-EU goods, EU-goods, Schengen traffic). Misure infrastrutturali costose e non attuabili nella maggior parte dei porti. Il tema degli Infected vessels non è stato considerato. La commissione ha adottato nel gennaio 2009 una comunicazione ed una proposta legislativa sullimplementazione di un European Maritime Space without barriers, in cui vengono recepiti i maggiori risultati di questo studio

18 Andrea Tedeschi, Giuseppe Siciliano, Carlo Vaghi XI Riunione Scientifica SIET Trieste, giugno 2009 GRAZIE PER LATTENZIONE memit.unibocconi.it Master Universitario in Economia e Management dei Trasporti, della Logistica e delle Infrastrutture


Scaricare ppt "Una metodologia di Analisi Costi-Benefici nellImpact assessment delle politiche dei trasporti Andrea Tedeschi, Giuseppe Siciliano, Carlo Vaghi XI Riunione."

Presentazioni simili


Annunci Google