CORDIS Archive

Out of the 15 which were invited, 11 projects were represented. Some are dealing with aspects which are related to both freight and passenger transport, while others are rather dealing with traffic information in general.

The projects managed by DGXIII (INFOTEN, EUROSCOPE, TABASCO, ENTERPRICE, CAPITALS, INCOME, QUARTET PLUS, VADEMECUM, ADEPT II) are oriented towards the demonstration of of transport telematics applications in urban areas and on inter-urban links or corridors. The DGVII (INTRAMUROS, MINIMISE, SORT-IT, STEMM, TRANSPRICE, TRANSINPOL, projects have a more study-oriented character. They research methods and methodologies for a more efficient management of the transport chain, using the different transport modes.

To facilitate the discussion, all participants gave a short introduction on their project and explained in general terms how they are dealing with the topic of intermodality.

Interchange frictions/penalties

• availability of facilities to make waiting as comfortable as possible;
• minimisation of the waiting time;
• adequate pricing mechanisms: interchanges are seen as less comfortable so pricing mechanisms are needed to make them acceptable.

However, the development of facilities to accommodate the travellers can provoke a conflict of interest between travellers and commercial benefits. On the one hand, facilities should make the waiting time as comfortable as possible and should, in some cases such as airports, make travelling more affordable. On the other hand, the shops and commercial outlays can benefit from travellers being delayed. The balance between both interests can be a delicate one.

Compared to unimodal transport journeys, intermodal transport chains will always present a disadvantage in terms of lower reliability of arrival time. For this reason, freight operators calculate with a 30% add-on to the price in order to compensate the additional risks on arrival time. Passengers desire a discount when using more than one mode for their trip.

To stimulate the actual use of intermodal transport systems, a first condition is that users get what they expect. In this connection, the following items must be addressed:

• elimination of risks of missing connections;
• optimisation of comfort and reduction of journey times. Intermodal travelling is competing against the flexibility of the private vehicle. This refers for instance to:
  • offering services like radio, television or video on buses;
  • offering short connection times which are accommodated with facilities.
• provision of discounts and incentives for using intermodal transport services.

The creation of synergy effects between projects requires the use of a common system architecture for the development of information services. This applies even more for the use of common terminology. Not only the projects should use common terminology, but also the users of the services benefit from it when they are using different services at different locations in the European Union.

A significant effort is needed for the development of both a common system architecture for information services and a common terminology. The results of the DGXIII CONVERGE project, which is addressing these issues, should also be used by DGVII.

There is much to be gained through interaction between projects in this group. This is particularly so in the drawing together of the demonstration-oriented work of the transport telematics projects and the transport chain methods and methodology issues of the transport research projects.

Future co-operation should in particular concentrate on

• the transport system and the interfaces of intermodal transport;
• the perception of intermodality by users and the physical attributes of the intermodal transport system;
• a common understanding of terms used and an agreed conceptual systems architecture.

The first clustering meeting demonstrated the large scope for co-operation between RTD projects, in terms of sharing research results, exchanging scarce data and possibly organising dissemination activities. The meeting also produced a clearer insight into the relationship between different projects which deal with similar issues.

At the end of the meeting, the Commission proposed to organised the next clustering meeting at the beginning of 1998, when new projects will have started their work as a result from subsequent calls for proposals within the Fourth Framework Programme. In the meantime, the consortia were encouraged to continue a co-operation between themselves in small, informal clusters on specific subjects of common interest. The Commission proposed to help setting up meetings with relevant projects and with policy-makers within the European Commission.