title: Report from the Commission on the implementation of Regulation (EEC) No 3118/93 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers may operate national road haulage services within a Member State (cabotage) - 2nd report

eurovoc_concepts:
road cabotage
road transport
transport licence
transport quota
transport regulations

text: COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 28. 02. 2000 COM(2000) 105 final REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION on the implementation of Regulation (EEC) N° 3118/93 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers may operate national road haulage services within a Member State (CABOTAGE) 2ND REPORT REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION on the implementation of Regulation (EEC) N° 3118/93 laying down the conditions under which non-resident carriers may operate national road haulage services within a Member State (CABOTAGE) 2ND REPORT 0. 0. 1. 0. 2. 0. 3. 0. 4. Introduction This Report is a sequel to COM(1998) 47 final of 4. 2. 98 which covered the use of cabotage authorizations up to the end of 1995. This 2nd Report extends the analysis up to the end of June 1998 when, under Article 12. 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) N° 3118/93 of 25 October 19931, quantitative restrictions on cabotage were lifted. (Note quantitative restrictions on intra-Benelux cabotage had been previously lifted in 1992). The geographical scope of the cabotage regime remains that of the European Economic Area (EEA) and the abolition of quantitative restrictions applies to the EEA as a whole. Finally it is recalled that Austria, which was not included in the EEA arrangements in July 1994, only joined the cabotage regime in January 1997 as a result of Protocol N° 9 to the Accession Treaty2 that brought Austria into the Community. This Report has five sections. The first section discusses the data supplied under the Cabotage Regulations. The second section is devoted to an analysis of the data supplied under the Cabotage Regulations between July 1990 and June 1998. The third section gives preliminary comments on cabotage data from the road transport sample surveys. The fourth section draws some conclusions. Finally the fifth section outlines recommendations for future monitoring of cabotage. This Report is prepared by virtue of Article 11 of Regulation 3118/93, which requires the Commission to submit a report to the Council on the application of this Regulation every two years. For the sake of completeness and comparability it starts from the introduction of cabotage (under Council Regulation (EEC) N° 4058/89)3 at the beginning of July 1990 to the abolition of quantitative restrictions at the end of June 1998. As the previous report, COM(1998) 47, this Report covers the EEA area; a copy will again be sent for information to the EEA Council. 1. Data supplied under the Cabotage Regulations 1 OJ L 279 of 12. 11. 1993, p. 1. 2 OJ C 241 of 29. 8. 1994, p. 361. 3 OJ L 390 of 30. 12. 1989, p. 1. 2 1. 1. 1. 2. 1. 3. 1. 4. Regulation 4058/89 and Regulation 3118/93 (until the end of June 1998) prescribed that record books should accompany cabotage authorizations. These record books provided the data for the compilation of statistics on the use of cabotage authorizations on a 100% basis. The abolition of the authorizations resulted in the abolition of the associated record books. However the Council clearly indicated in paragraph 2 of Article 12. 3 of Regulation 3118/93 that monitoring of cabotage should be continued after the abolition of authorizations at the end of June 1998; hence a new form of data collection was required after June 1998. Fortunately this need arose at the same time as the review of the “Road Statistics Directive” (Council Directive 78/546/EEC of 12 June 19784 as modified by Council Directive 89/462/EEC of 18 July 19895) was drawing to a close. This review lead to the adoption, in the form of a regulation, of Council Regulation (EC) N° 1172/98 of 25 May 19986 which extended, inter alia, the types of journey to be covered in the sample surveys so as to include cabotage. More details of the cabotage data collected under the “road transport sample surveys” are given in Section 3. Under the various Community instruments, each Reporting State has to supply data to the Commission on “tonnes” and “tonne-kilometres” relating to cabotage movements performed by their own hauliers on a quarterly basis with separate data for each (other) partner EEA State where cabotage could be carried out. As in the previous report, COM(1998) 47, quarterly data has been aggregated on a half-year basis and the analysis is restricted to “tonne-kilometres” (tkm). Further, to facilitate comparisons with tables and matrices in the previous report, the same order of States has been retained in this Report. This order is “Germany (D), France (F), Italy (I), Netherlands (NL), Belgium (B), Luxembourg (L), United Kingdom (UK), Ireland (IRL), Denmark (DK), Greece (GR), Spain (E), Portugal (P), Iceland (IS), Norway (N), Finland (FIN), Sweden (S), Liechtenstein (FL), Austria (A)”. For convenience, the previous report distinguished 2 periods, “1st period” (July 1990 to June 1994) and “2nd period” (July 1994 to December 1995) when the cabotage regime was extended to EEA (except Austria). It is useful in this Report, to further define “3rd period” as “January 1996 to June 1998” and “whole period” as “July 1990 to June 1998” so as to succinctly describe developments over time. 1. 5. The data supplied by the Reporting States for the 3rd period is complete except as follows: Spain: no data supplied; France: 1st half 1998. 4 OJ L 168 of 26. 6. 1978, p. 29. 5 OJ L 226 of 3. 8. 1989, p. 8. 6 OJ L 163 of 6. 6. 1998, p. 1. 3 To reduce difficulties in the interpretation of the results, the missing data has been estimated. Estimated values for Reporting States are generally shown in the tables in italics. This rule is not followed in the large matrices given in Tables 7 and 8. 1. 6. This Report also makes use of tkm data on national and international transport from the “road transport sample surveys” supplemented by other sources. This data is needed in order to calculate: (a) (b) “penetration rates”, where “cabotage in a State” is expressed as a % of the “national transport in the same State” , and, “activity rates” , where “cabotage by hauliers of a Reporting State” is expressed as a % of “international transport by hauliers of the same State” (only hauliers with an international licence are allowed to undertake cabotage). In contrast to the previous report, however, this Report interprets national (and international) transport to cover “own account” hauliers in addition to “hire or reward” hauliers. There are two reasons for this. Firstly, Commission Regulation (EC) N° 792/94 of 8 April 19947 extended the cabotage regime to “own account” hauliers. Secondly, recent work on producing more consistent time series of data for national (and international) transport has concentrated on “own account + hire or reward” and not on the split between “own account” and “hire or reward”. Analysis of the data supplied under the Cabotage Regulations between July 1990 and June 1998 From Table 5 it can be seen that cabotage reported under cabotage authorizations was 10. 5 billion tkm during the whole period (from July 1990 to June 1998). However, national transport for those States where cabotage was authorised at the time amounted to 6400 billion tkm during the same period; consequently cabotage only represented, on average, a penetration rate of 0. 164% (or 1 part in 600) in national transport during the whole period (see Tables 5 and 6). International transport (again in tkm) over the whole period was approximately one quarter of national transport; hence cabotage corresponded to, on average, 0. 66% (or 1 part in 150) of the activity of international hauliers during the whole period. Due mainly to the rapid increase in the number of cabotage authorizations (from 15298 for “July 1990 to June 1991” to 85098 in 1997), cabotage increased 6-fold from 176 million (mio) tkm in 2nd half 1990 (352 mio tkm on an annual basis), to 2224 mio tkm in 1997 (see Table 3). Despite a further 30% increase in the number of cabotage authorizations available in 1st half 1998 (as compared to either half year in 1997) a small absolute decline to 1010 mio tkm was reported in 1st half 1998 (2020 mio 1. 7. 2. 2. 1. 2. 2. 2. 3. 7 OJL 92 of 9. 4. 1994, p. 13. 4 2. 4. 2. 5. 2. 6. 2. 7. 2. 8. 2. 9 tkm on an annual basis). This is considered to be due to fairly substantial under-reporting in this half year, probably due to the fact that hauliers knew that they would not have to justify their need for authorizations for the following quarters to their authorities (for further comments on under- reporting see § 3. 7 – 3. 9). As national transport only grew by some 20% from 1990 to 1998, Table 6 shows that the average penetration rate of cabotage in national markets increased 5-fold from 0. 05% in 2nd half 1990 to 0. 25% in 1997. The apparent decline to 0. 22% in 1st half 1998 is considered to be due to under- reporting (see also § 3. 7 – 3. 9). Similarly, while cabotage corresponded to about 0. 2% of the activity of international hauliers in 2nd half of 1990, it rose to about 1% in 1997. The average use of a (2-month) cabotage authorization is given in Table 4. It was 30800 tkm over the whole period (July 1990 to June 1998). The average use rose rapidly from 23000 tkm (2nd half 1990) to 47500 tkm (1993) but then declined steadily to 26100 tkm (1997) with an apparent sharp further fall to 18200 tkm (1st half 1998). Again the decline in average use is thought to be partially due to under-reporting (see again § 3. 7 - 3. 9). The hauliers from the Benelux States have been the most active in the cabotage market; Table 3 shows that 58. 7% of all cabotage was done by Benelux hauliers (indeed 31. 2% was done just by Dutch hauliers) despite the Benelux collectively having only 22. 5% of the cabotage authorizations (see Table 2). Consequently, Table 4 shows that, over the whole period, hauliers from each of the 3 Benelux States had an average use between 70200 and 86900 tkm per authorization compared to 16400 tkm per authorization for non-Benelux hauliers. Other “active” hauliers in the cabotage market were from Sweden (5. 0% of all cabotage tkm, with 3. 7% of all cabotage authorizations, and average use of 42000 tkm), France (12. 7%, 10. 6% and 36700 tkm respectively) and Denmark (6. 7%, 7. 6% and 27300 tkm respectively). German, Italian and United Kingdom hauliers were not very active in the cabotage markets achieving only 5. 3%, 3. 1% and 3. 0% respectively of the this was despite these States being allocated a relatively large market; number of 6. 7% respectively). (12. 8%, 10. 6% and Consequently their average use per authorization was only 12600, 9100 and 14000 tkm respectively. authorizations Only 2% of the cabotage was carried out by hauliers from the “low labour cost” States (Greece, Spain, Portugal) despite the fact that hauliers from these 3 States were allocated 16. 2% of the cabotage authorizations. Average use of authorizations by Greek, Spanish and Portuguese hauliers were thus only 20, 5500 (estimate) and 3700 tkm respectively. Fears that hauliers from “low labour cost” States would provide “unfair” competition for hauliers in “high labour cost” States thus continued to be unfounded. 5 2. 10 Table 5 shows that 68. 3% of all cabotage was carried out in Germany, the most popular “Partner State”, the proportion having risen from 64% (1st period) to 73% (2nd period) but then declined to 69% (3rd period). Table 6 shows that the penetration rate of cabotage in the German national market has risen from 0. 12% (2nd half 1990) to 0. 75% in 1997 (but further see § 3. 7 – 3. 9). As German hauliers only performed 5. 3% of all the cabotage carried out, it is evident that Germany has a very substantial negative balance as far as cabotage is concerned. 2. 11. While 12. 6% of cabotage was carried out in France, the 2nd most popular “Partner State”, cabotage penetration was 0. 21% in the French national in 1997. Further, as French hauliers performed 12. 7% of all market cabotage, there was an almost exactly “zero” balance of cabotage as far as France is concerned. 2. 12. 2. 13. 2. 14. 2. 15. 2. 16. The 3rd most popular “Partner State” was Italy where 6. 9% of all cabotage was performed. As inactive (performing only 3. 1% of all cabotage), Italy had a negative balance on cabotage. themselves were rather Italian hauliers The only other States with apparent negative balances on cabotage were Spain, Greece and Norway. However, in the case of Spain, some caution is needed since data for Spanish hauliers has had to be estimated from 1996 onwards and, even just prior to that, there were indications of under- reporting. In the case of Greece, the negative balance was due to the fact that Greek hauliers did not report doing any cabotage after 1991. In the case of Norway, although twice as much cabotage has been done in Norway than by Norwegian hauliers, the penetration rate in Norway was only 0. 25% in 1st half 1998. Table 7 shows the amount of cabotage carried out by hauliers from each Reporting State (the rows of the matrix) in each Partner State (the columns of the matrix) during the 3rd period (January 1996 to June 1998). Similarly Table 8 gives the corresponding matrix for the whole (8 year) period (July 1990 to June 1998). Table 9 ranks the leading “caboteurs” (cabotage by hauliers from a specific Reporting State in a specific Partner State) for the 1st, 2nd, 3rd and whole periods in terms of the ranked order for the whole period (July 1990 to June 1998). The 1st ranked “caboteurs” were Dutch hauliers in Germany. They performed 2814 out of 10517 mio tkm over the whole period of 8 years, i. e. 27% of all cabotage (i. e by all hauliers in all States). “Dutch hauliers in Germany” held the 1st rank in all 3 periods accounting for 19%, 31% and 29% of all cabotage in the 3 periods respectively. Similarly, the 2nd ranked “caboteurs” were Belgian hauliers in Germany, accounting for 10% of all cabotage (1055 out of 10517 mio tkm). While “Belgian hauliers in Germany” held the 2nd rank in the 1st and 2nd periods (accounting for 14% and 11% respectively) they accounted for only 7% in the 3rd period, being overtaken by “Luxembourg hauliers in Germany” (with 9%) and “Belgian hauliers in France” (with 8%). 6 2. 17. Other noteworthy “caboteurs” in the 3rd period were “Swedish hauliers in Germany” and “French hauliers in Germany” (each about 6. 5%). 3. 3. 1. 3. 2. 3. 3. 3. 4. Preliminary comments on cabotage data from the road transport sample surveys The proposal to include cabotage in the Road Statistics Directive (78/546) was made by the Commission in 1987, COM(87) 548 final of 20 November 1987, which explicitly proposed to include cabotage in the types of journey (listed in Article 1 of the Directive) that should be covered by (sample) surveys under the Directive. The Council, however, in adopting Directive 89/462 (which modified 78/546), specifically excluded cabotage on the grounds that it was still, at that date, “illegal”. Drafts for a second modification of the Road Statistics Directive were in preparation for a long time and it was not until 25 May 1998 that the Council formally adopted a replacement for the Road Statistics Directive in the form of a Regulation (1172/98). Even then, its final adoption was accelerated by the imminent cessation of data on cabotage from the Cabotage Regulation (3118/93). As is customary, Member States were given a period to adjust their surveys inter alia, cabotage; consequently the new Regulation so as to include, (1172/98) only applies to data collected from 1. 1. 1999 onwards. The Council was conscious of the gap that would arise for cabotage data between the end of the Cabotage Regulation (i. e. 30. 6. 1998) and the formal start of the Road Statistics Regulation (i. e. 1. 1. 1999). The Council therefore asked Member States to provide the Commission, if possible, with cabotage data from their road transport sample surveys for the missing period, i. e. 2nd half 1998. Six States (five Member States and Norway) have, so far, responded to this request. They had already started to collect data on cabotage in their sample surveys (as stated above, the draft of the Road Statistics Regulation had been in preparation for a long time). The Commission’s services were also conscious that a change in the source of data on cabotage (July 1998) might be “confounded” with the effects of the abolition of quantitative restrictions on cabotage (also July 1998). The Commission’s services therefore asked States to provide, where possible, data on cabotage from the sample surveys for the period prior to 2nd half 1998; this would enable comparisons to be made between the two sources of is cabotage data for the same period. In making such comparisons, necessary to exclude intra-Benelux cabotage since intra-Benelux cabotage was freed from quantitative restrictions in 1992 (only an insignificant amount was recorded in the cabotage data collected under the cabotage regulation after 1992). it 3. 5. In consequence, the Commission’s services have already received fairly extensive data from some Member States and Norway on cabotage from the sample surveys prior to 1999. However, as statistical experts from the States have pointed out, the sample surveys generally only cover about 1% of all journeys carried out; and, of these journeys, only a very small proportion are 7 cabotage. Consequently, as this cabotage data had not, generally, been collected with a view to its publication at a fine level of detail, it had not been subjected to the data quality controls normally carried out prior to publication. To accommodate these justified warnings from the statistical experts, this Report combines the quarterly data on cabotage from the sample surveys both “over time” and “over Reporting States”; the conclusions drawn from this “aggregated data” should thus be sufficiently reliable. 3. 6 An examination of the data received so far from the road transport sample surveys indicates that: There was no “explosion” of cabotage when quantitative restrictions were abolished in July 1998. This provisional conclusion is based on data from 5 States (France, Netherlands (excluding intra-Benelux), United Kingdom, Norway and Finland). These are the only States that have so far provided data from sample surveys for both 1st half and 2nd half 1998. This data shows only a 2% increase in cabotage tkm after quantitative restrictions were abolished in July 1998. It should be noted that these 5 States accounted for 45% of the cabotage carried out under the Cabotage Regulation in 1st half 1998. 3. 7 A comparison of the data from the Cabotage Regulation with that received so far from the sample surveys indicates that: (i) There was, generally, progressive under-reporting in the Cabotage Regulation. The adjustment factor has been estimated as 1. 1 for 1996, 1. 4 for 1997 and 1. 8 for 1st half 1998. The adjustment factor for 1997 is based upon data for 8 States (France, Belgium and Netherlands (both excluding intra-Benelux), United Kingdom, Denmark, Norway these states accounted for 80% of the and Sweden and Austria); cabotage carried out under the Cabotage Regulation in 1997. It should therefore be a fairly reliable adjustment when it comes to combining the two series of data on cabotage that will be required in the future when only data from the sample surveys will be available. The adjustment factor for 1st half 1998 is only based, so far, on 4 States (Netherlands (excluding intra-Benelux), United Kingdom, Norway and Finland). These 4 States accounted for only 33% of the cabotage carried out under the Cabotage Regulation in 1st half 1998, so that this factor must be regarded as provisional. The adjustment factor for 1996 has been set so as to provide a smooth evolution of cabotage carried out under the Cabotage Regulation. It is assumed that no adjustment is required prior to 1996. Although the adjustment factors are themselves imprecise, this does not affect the broad conclusions given in § 3. 8 and §3. 9 below. (ii) There is, currently, considerable under-reporting of cabotage in the sample surveys for a few States, mainly in Scandanavia. 3. 8. Applying the provisional adjustment factors given in §3. 7 (i) to the main results given in Section 2 of this Report thus yields amended figures as follows: 8 (i) cabotage carried out by hauliers from all States: – – – in 1996: 2215 mio tkm (2014 x 1. 1); in 1997: 3114 mio tkm (2224 x 1. 4); in 1st half 1998: 1818 mio tkm (1010 x 1. 8), 3636 mio tkm on an annual basis. (ii) cabotage accounted for about 0. 35% (0. 25% x 1. 4) of national markets in the EEA area as a whole in 1997, and (provisionally) about 0. 40% (0. 22 x 1. 8) in 1st half 1998. (iii) cabotage in Germany accounted for: – – – in 1996: 1560 mio tkm (1418 x 1. 1), 0. 8% of the German national market; in 1997: 2122 mio tkm (1516 x 1. 4), 1. 0% of the German national market; in 1st half 1998: 1240 mio tkm (688 x 1. 8), (provisionally) 1. 2% of the German national market. Applying a similar adjustment, cabotage corresponded to some 1. 4% (1. 0% x 1. 4) of the activity of international hauliers in 1997. The provisional nature of the adjustments means that it would be imprudent, at this stage, to carry through the adjustments to other more detailed results of Section 2. Conclusions Cabotage operations grew considerably during the 8 years from July 1990 to June 1998. However, even in 1997, tkm performed in national transport (i. e. transport within a State by resident hauliers) was 300 times larger than cabotage. Additionally, tkm performed in international transport was 70 times larger than cabotage. 68% of all cabotage was carried out in Germany, but even, in 1997, German national transport was still 100 times larger than cabotage carried out in Germany. Provisional results from the sample surveys indicate that there was no “explosion” in cabotage in the 2nd half 1998 after quantitative restrictions were lifted. Efficient hauliers can still find opportunities to carry out cabotage in other States; in the EEA there is still little evidence to suggest that hauliers with low labour costs necessarily provide “unfair competition” to hauliers with high labour costs. 3. 9. 3. 10. 4. 4. 1. 4. 2 4. 3. 4. 4. 9 5. Recommendations for future monitoring of cabotage should use sampling rates The Commission does not recommend, at this stage, any additional data collection exercises to be undertaken for monitoring of cabotage. However, in their States implementation of Statistics Regulation 1172/98 that will be sufficient to provide reliable data on cabotage on an annual basis (and preferably on a half-yearly basis). This would ensure adequate monitoring of cabotage as required under 2nd paragraph of Article 12. 3 of the Cabotage Regulation 3118/93. (and sampling methods) 10 LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Cabotage by hauliers from each Reporting State, by half year in 3rd period (January 1996 to June 1998). Table 2: Number of (2-month) cabotage authorizations allocated to each Reporting State, by calendar year. Table 3: Cabotage by hauliers from each Reporting State, by calendar year. Table 4: Average use of (2-month) cabotage authorizations for each Reporting State, by calendar year. Table 5: Cabotage in each Partner State and National transport, by calendar year. Table 6: Penetration rate (cabotage in each Partner State/National transport) and Relative penetration rate, by calendar year. Table 7: Matrix showing cabotage by hauliers from each Reporting State in each Partner State for 3rd period (January 1996 to June 1998). Table 8: Matrix showing cabotage by hauliers from each Reporting State in each Partner State for whole period (July 1990 to June 1998). Table 9: Leading “caboteurs” (cabotage by hauliers from a Reporting State in a Partner State) in 1st period (July 1990 to June 1994), 2nd period (July 1994 to December 1995), 3rd period (January 1996 to June 1998) and whole period (July 1990 to June 1998). 11 Table 1 Cabotage by hauliers from each Reporting State by half year in 3rd period Units: tkm (1000's) Reporting State Half year 1-6,1996 7-12,1996 1-6,1997 7-12,1997 1-6,1998 D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS N FIN S FL A 34781 120461 25002 325962 171835 80442 36707 8713 50387 0 11122 6311 0 4482 26985 82082 30 37287 111786 22584 394842 183949 66172 26205 8783 48271 0 11122 3217 0 5571 32045 76623 102 48954 125342 25508 383497 205108 109760 33108 4827 57481 0 11122 5037 0 7653 31536 78919 284 15690 55345 128869 20948 362117 178603 89060 13209 3038 84219 0 11122 9557 0 4527 29587 73041 128 16625 48130 125342 23582 286186 161634 129075 8761 5068 83525 0 11122 11811 0 4768 35380 58333 1468 15423 Total 985302 1028559 1143826 1079995 1009608 12 Number of (2-month) cabotage authorizations allocated to each Reporting State Table 2 Reporting State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS* N* FIN* S* FL** A Total 7-12,1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1-6,1998 7,90-6,98 % 1085 2278,5 2507,5 1883 2072,5 896,5 1885 2074,5 897,5 2159 934,5 1962,5 661 1388,5 1528,5 308 712 647 562 1180,5 1299,5 688,5 625 641 1346,5 1482,5 676,5 292 613,5 1440 1585,5 685,5 898,5 816 388,5 297,5 2628 2172 2174 2262 1602 746 1362 722 1554 710 1662 942 4452 3681 3685 3834 2715 1264 2309 1224 2634 1200 2814 1597 5 198 296 590 7862 10318 8531 6501 8539 6507 8888 6773 6292 4794 2934 2235 5355 4080 2837 2162 6106 4653 2785 2121 6525 4971 3701 2820 17 23 870 669 3063 2333 4018 3061 57 43 4256 17685 18536 32498 47366 61602 85098 6047 5000 5005 5209 3687 1719 3138 1663 3578 1631 3823 2169 13 514 1794 2354 22 7649 16066 6707 5546 5552 5778 4090 1909 3482 1845 3969 1811 4243 2406 15 567 1992 2613 37 2767 55329 43885 12,8% 36283 10,6% 36319 10,6% 37800 11,1% 7,8% 26758 3,6% 12474 6,7% 22768 3,5% 12064 7,6% 25964 3,5% 11840 8,1% 27749 4,6% 15738 0,0% 73 0,8% 2818 2,8% 9478 3,7% 12636 0,0% 159 2,1% 7023 341829 100,0% Notes: * for 1994: 7-12,94 ** for 1995: 5-12,95 Column "%": "Reporting State" as a % of "Total" 13 Table 3 Cabotage by hauliers from each Reporting State Units: tkm (1000's) Reporting State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS* N* FIN* S* FL** A Total 7-12,1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1-6,1998 7,90-6,98 % 9037 55983 43667 37786 45280 63633 46456 23582 48130 329180 552423 72068 104299 48047 32819 12757 58409 196 5497 3319 65557 34176 7501 69160 0 12822 2660 73960 20361 26012 109835 33183 5,3% 70322 98457 125161 172218 187596 232247 254211 125342 1331079 12,7% 3,1% 47586 40516 45754 37804 128279 201685 226233 350103 588582 720804 745614 286186 3285290 31,2% 41581 139233 142233 233747 236641 319838 355784 383711 161634 2014402 19,2% 8,3% 14843 3,0% 3444 0,8% 5760 6,7% 14876 0,0% 0 1,4% 2013 0,6% 57 0,0% 0,3% 1,8% 5,0% 0,0% 0,5% 175788 645534 745089 880801 1145579 1676713 2013861 2223821 1009608 10516794 100,0% 78038 114351 146614 198820 129075 8761 46317 62912 47531 41097 5068 7865 17496 13882 11130 83525 98658 141700 78956 105808 0 0 0 0 11122 22244 18152 38211 11811 14594 8366 5799 0 0 0 0 4768 12180 4484 1419 35380 5099 61123 30000 58333 33099 128715 158705 151960 1468 412 15423 32315 875476 317674 86868 709860 196 151474 58753 0 32904 190632 530812 2033 47738 80131 40617 5409 58768 0 19169 2619 0 22244 9528 0 10053 59030 132 21 Notes: * for 1994: 7-12,94 ** for 1995: 5-12,95 Column "%": "Reporting State as a % of "Total" 14 Table 4 Average use of (2-month) cabotage authorizations for each Reporting State Units: tkm (1000's) Reporting State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS* N* FIN* S* FL** A Total 7-12,1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1-6,1998 7,90-6,98 Ratio 18,8 29,0 10,1 40,5 62,9 48,2 6,1 19,4 23,2 0,0 2,9 0,1 32,5 58,3 17,6 65,4 100,3 74,3 27,8 20,4 43,4 0,3 3,8 4,1 28,0 47,5 19,5 93,4 93,1 92,1 26,3 10,9 46,7 0,0 8,1 3,0 16,6 57,6 20,8 100,0 145,9 107,4 29,8 7,5 37,8 0,0 11,5 2,8 12,6 46,8 10,3 91,3 87,2 61,7 17,8 9,1 30,0 0,0 13,6 3,6 0 7,2 17,2 56,1 10,5 37,5 9,1 113,0 86,7 66,5 15,1 8,3 29,6 0,0 4,7 3,9 0 8,7 16,7 54,7 1,0 9,2 35,7 7,3 106,4 74,2 65,6 15,4 8,1 21,2 0,0 4,5 3,4 0 15,0 25,3 51,8 3,1 23,0 40,2 42,1 47,5 35,3 35,4 32,7 10,1 29,8 5,4 83,9 61,0 67,8 8,6 2,8 23,2 0,0 3,4 3,9 0 14,0 20,0 37,8 7,2 7,6 26,1 7,2 22,6 4,2 49,5 39,5 67,6 2,5 2,7 21,0 0,0 2,6 4,9 0 8,4 17,8 22,3 39,7 5,6 18,2 12,6 36,7 9,1 86,9 75,3 70,2 14,0 7,2 27,3 0,02 5,5 3,7 0 11,7 20,1 42,0 12,8 6,8 30,8 0,41 1,19 0,29 2,82 2,45 2,28 0,45 0,23 0,89 0,001 0,18 0,12 0 0,38 0,65 1,37 0,42 0,22 Notes: * for 1994: 7-12,94 * for 1995: 5-12,95 Column "Ratio": Ratio of "Reporting State" to "Total" 15 Cabotage in each Partner State Units: tkm (1000's) Table 5 Partner State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS* N* FIN* S* FL** A Total 7-12,90 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1-6,98 7,90-6,98 % 730698 78297 183633 89483 5609 11232 464 27890 3119 4357 3132 34900 14537 54737 98633 103194 12286 13398 23172 16741 306 115 34620 35648 5489 4965 2310 2989 368 83 21871 14835 9996 920 98678 402470 470038 578950 785512 1229711 1417816 1516105 687969 7187249 68,3% 61439 107128 151304 200319 306064 297410 135865 1330300 12,6% 16034 6,9% 28051 0,7% 5998 6879 1,7% 4786 0,05% 145 304053 2,9% 11956 39382 0,4% 606 22309 0,2% 1587 53963 0,5% 0 329326 3,1% 5502 64858 0,6% 352 0 0,0% 0,6% 60632 4934 0,05% 1,0% 7 0,00% 0,1% 175788 645534 745089 880801 1145579 1676713 2013861 2223821 1009608 10516794 100,0% 80967 121277 11489 11504 31677 28849 1239 559 50677 42805 7614 6807 2395 4683 22530 10168 76839 56977 8474 9526 0 0 22504 13761 2187 609 40602 22766 5 0 10797 53153 3677 12310 1031 21974 1653 1070 5766 35738 4064 0 14841 494 25699 2 4302 71033 8692 30967 665 41548 5476 1909 7717 47332 8874 0 7740 1506 13224 0 84907 5644 21806 262 36935 3653 1009 4199 35332 8115 0 1786 138 4977 107268 15099 Notes: * for 1994: 7-12,94 ** for 1995: 5-12,95 Column "%": "Partner State" as a % of "Total" National transport Units: tkm (1000 million's) State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS N FIN S FL A Total 1990 167,3 117,6 141,8 22,9 12,4 0,4 130,6 3,9 9,4 9,7 69,2 10,9 1991 184,8 120,2 142,4 23,3 13,3 0,4 124,6 4,2 9,0 10,7 72,0 11,7 1992 188,0 122,2 144,5 26,6 13,8 0,5 121,3 4,7 9,4 10,2 73,6 10,6 1993 184,5 117,9 142,0 26,0 14,6 0,5 128,6 4,2 8,8 11,4 75,5 10,0 1994 197,4 124,1 146,9 25,7 17,5 0,5 137,8 4,4 9,5 10,8 77,2 11,2 8,4 19,3 25,2 1995 201,3 135,3 162,4 27,0 19,0 0,5 143,7 4,5 9,3 12,4 78,7 11,1 9,4 21,3 27,8 1996 199,2 136,5 163,6 27,6 17,2 0,4 146,2 4,7 9,4 12,5 76,3 11,3 10,4 22,2 29,8 696,1 716,6 725,4 724,0 815,9 863,7 867,3 16 % 1997 1-6,1998 7,90-6,98 101,4 203,1 72,5 139,0 87,3 171,3 14,1 27,6 9,2 18,0 0,2 0,4 77,9 149,2 2,4 4,7 5,0 9,7 6,6 13,0 40,1 78,8 5,9 11,5 1543,4 24,1% 1026,5 16,0% 1231,3 19,2% 3,3% 209,4 2,0% 128,8 0,1% 3,6 1094,6 17,1% 0,6% 1,2% 1,4% 9,5% 1,4% 35,8 74,8 92,5 606,8 88,8 11,6 23,8 31,4 5,9 12,1 14,2 41,5 89,1 115,8 0,6% 1,4% 1,8% 11,3 904,4 5,8 460,6 17,1 0,3% 6399,5 100,0% Penetration rate = Table 6 Cabotage in Partner State National Transport Units: Parts per 1000 Partner State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS* N* FIN* S* FL** A Total 7-12,1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1-6,1998 7,90-6,98 1,18 0,27 0,40 0,52 1,11 0,73 0,18 0,31 0,34 0,00 0,16 0,06 2,18 0,46 0,69 0,58 1,26 0,29 0,29 1,18 0,33 0,01 0,21 0,08 2,50 0,50 0,71 0,46 1,68 0,61 0,29 1,17 0,25 0,04 0,30 0,94 3,14 0,91 0,63 0,22 0,77 0,93 0,22 0,74 0,50 0,27 0,46 1,45 3,98 1,22 0,58 0,22 1,25 0,52 0,27 0,83 0,11 0,39 0,46 0,72 0,43 0,01 0,40 6,11 1,48 0,44 0,32 1,63 1,33 0,29 1,22 0,21 0,62 0,60 0,80 0,82 0,07 0,48 7,12 2,24 0,49 0,42 1,68 1,40 0,29 1,45 0,50 0,81 0,75 0,84 1,32 0,03 0,76 0,51 0,90 1,03 1,22 1,40 1,94 2,32 7,46 2,14 0,71 0,42 1,76 3,10 0,34 1,62 0,25 1,73 0,98 0,74 1,94 0,09 1,29 0,96 2,46 6,78 1,87 0,61 0,26 1,34 5,16 0,28 0,69 0,21 0,87 0,89 0,69 2,52 0,04 1,81 0,74 2,19 4,66 1,30 0,59 0,37 1,43 1,33 0,28 1,10 0,30 0,58 0,54 0,73 1,46 0,06 0,93 0,88 1,64 Notes: * for 1994: 7-12,94 ** for 1995: 5-12,95 Relative penetration rate = Cabotage in Partner State / National transport / / Total Cabotage Total National transport Partner State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS N FIN S FL A Total 7-12,1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1-6,1998 7,90-6,98 2,34 0,54 0,78 1,04 2,20 1,44 0,36 0,62 0,67 0,00 0,31 0,13 2,42 0,51 0,77 0,64 1,40 0,32 0,32 1,31 0,37 0,01 0,23 0,09 2,43 0,49 0,70 0,45 1,63 0,60 0,28 1,14 0,24 0,04 0,29 0,92 2,58 0,75 0,52 0,18 0,63 0,76 0,18 0,61 0,41 0,23 0,38 1,19 2,83 0,87 0,41 0,16 0,89 0,37 0,19 0,59 0,08 0,28 0,33 0,52 0,30 0,01 0,28 3,15 0,76 0,23 0,17 0,84 0,69 0,15 0,63 0,11 0,32 0,31 0,41 0,42 0,04 0,25 3,07 0,97 0,21 0,18 0,72 0,60 0,13 0,62 0,21 0,35 0,32 0,36 0,57 0,01 0,33 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 17 3,04 0,87 0,29 0,17 0,72 1,26 0,14 0,66 0,10 0,70 0,40 0,30 0,79 0,04 0,53 0,39 1 3,10 0,85 0,28 0,12 0,61 2,35 0,13 0,31 0,10 0,40 0,41 0,31 1,15 0,02 0,83 0,34 1 2,83 0,79 0,36 0,23 0,87 0,81 0,17 0,67 0,18 0,36 0,33 0,44 0,89 0,03 0,56 0,54 1 Matrix showing cabotage by hauliers from each Reporting State in each Partner State for the 3rd period (1/1996-6/1998) Table 7 Units: tkm (1000's) Rep. Year Partner State State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS N FIN S FL A TOTAL 96-98 55388 67930 15721 10802 852 4578 96-98 336463 136104 1122 55293 1955 7674 604 30709 20533 774 5 1615 69932 1605 3718 5 12539 224497 96-98 98159 13135 240 144 1723 110 D F I DK GR E P IS N S FL A NL 96-98 1542995 121753 8665 1734 B L 96-98 388938 433386 19336 194 96-98 462609 4672 5989 0 0 UK 96-98 6729 70519 4828 7710 4152 IRL 96-98 6526 124 0 0 6 96-98 96-98 96-98 96-98 0 0 2710 35580 93 0 0 600 208 0 15 218 353 0 0 0 2 0 18 40 105 0 0 10 79 0 12 3 86 22 3098 0 2 78 124 0 96-98 13248 FIN 96-98 126303 96-98 341936 96-98 886 97-98 36046 263 9937 153 129 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 55 21 3842 76 32500 500 22743 335 4413 50228 0 30 0 359 181 245 6917 0 820 5819 1515 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 339 0 0 5 0 0 32 140 1672 101 14135 0 0 0 0 71 983 0 0 0 0 706 294 20 238 303 0 15709 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 23479 4119 0 0 7 0 0 0 877 0 28 0 0 0 0 24 0 56 1866 530 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13574 19770 0 0 16700 32422 0 3 507 242 0 54 0 57 0 9 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 0 0 1 6747 0 22558 2178 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 611800 117624 1034 1752604 420 901129 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 474509 117990 30429 323883 0 55610 35933 0 27001 155533 368998 0 1104 2012 1096 2 47738 96-98 258249 1217 1214 1365 364 267 1755 0 19790 924 34619 Total 96-98 3621890 739339 255397 26670 72836 2829 115456 16074 8148 38464 169554 22064 0 51106 3290 89067 7 15099 5247290 Percentage 69,0 14,1 4,9 0,5 1,4 0,1 2,2 0,3 0,2 0,7 3,2 0,4 0 1,0 0,1 1,7 0,0 0,3 100,0 18 Matrix showing cabotage by hauliers from each Reporting State in each Partner State for the whole period (7/1990-6/1998) Table 8 Units : tkm (1000's) Rep, Year Partner State State D F I NL B L UK IRL DK GR E P IS N FIN S FL A TOTAL 4387 5 12539 552423 D F I 90-98 99652 299075 31275 20270 1070 12290 90-98 804565 214084 2391 113658 3412 35187 90-98 294140 23899 816 382 0 3346 2 0 0 4730 36588 28490 1706 13 2756 151277 3535 110 55 6158 76 NL 90-98 2814183 174571 71237 31927 91 105556 534 12463 585 54235 2114 B L 90-98 1054820 777339 73517 22425 152 69384 90-98 847584 10557 11042 206 3813 0 UK 90-98 35706 138744 37105 17356 12517 30 0 731 1248 13131 251 0 1667 38800 226 12680 23059 151 356 733 0 136 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 339 76 0 5 0 0 125 198 1752 158 14850 0 0 6 0 71 983 0 0 0 0 742 368 IRL 90-98 15117 1600 4 166 DK 90-98 605516 6469 12491 3226 GR 90-98 196 0 0 90-98 90-98 94-98 E P IS N 0 94-98 17822 FIN 94-98 154623 S 94-98 496133 FL 95-98 907 9129 89373 1222 762 7543 312 0 37 78 175 0 0 42 274 356 0 0 17 2 0 31 83 150 0 A 97-98 36046 263 9937 153 0 0 0 0 0 44 0 14 0 0 0 3 48 421 0 18 115 0 41 6 266 22 129 69427 7215 16 0 123 13 0 0 55 1429 0 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 78 0 122 2489 1094 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 43 0 0 0 441 4513 0 23238 924 45390 0 0 0 0 14709 24420 0 0 51578 49884 0 16 509 269 0 54 0 60 0 9 0 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 0 0 1 8051 0 27170 3761 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1331079 329180 1034 3285290 420 2014402 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 875476 317674 86868 709860 196 151474 58753 0 32904 190632 530812 0 1104 2033 1096 2 47738 Total 90-98 7187249 1330300 730698 78297 183633 4786 304053 39382 22309 53963 329326 64858 0 60632 4934 107268 7 15099 10516794 Percentage 68,3 12,6 6,9 0,7 1,7 0,0 2,9 0,4 0,2 0,5 3,1 0,6 0 0,6 0,0 1,0 0,0 0,1 100,0 19 Table 9 Leading "caboteurs" (cabotage by hauliers from a Reporting State in a Partner State) Units: tkm (1000's) "Relation" 7/1990-6/1994 7/1994-12/1995 1/1996-6/1998 7/1990-6/1998 N° tkm % N° Tkm % N° tkm % N° tkm % NL in D B in D L in D F in D B in F DK in D S in D D in I I in D F in I NL in F FIN in D F in E UK in F F in B 1 2 4 3 6 5 7 8 9 12 14 2814183 26,8 1054820 10,0 553606 18,8 400019 13,6 240584 290822 193433 219131 183789 140892 8,2 9,9 6,6 7,4 6,2 4,8 1 2 6 3 5 7 4 9 8 717582 30,9 265863 11,5 144391 177280 150520 128136 154197 6,2 7,6 6,5 5,5 6,7 1 4 2 6 3 7 5 47356 2,0 14 55089 2,4 11 1542995 29,4 388938 462609 336463 433386 258249 341936 67930 98159 7,4 8,8 6,4 8,3 4,9 6,5 1,3 1,9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 847584 804565 777339 605516 496133 299075 294140 52461 1,8 16 25519 1,1 8 136104 2,6 10 214084 17527 0,6 10 35291 1,5 10 121753 2,3 11 174571 15 28320 1,2 9 126303 2,4 12 154623 48705 1,7 12 32640 1,4 13 69932 1,3 13 151277 38935 1,3 14 29290 1,3 12 70519 1,3 14 138744 23194 0,8 11 35171 1,5 16 55293 1,1 15 113658 NL in UK 11 51624 1,7 13 31189 1,3 22743 0,4 16 105556 NL in I B in I E in F 10 13 15 IRL in UK 16 52408 42568 32442 29899 1,8 1,4 1,1 1,0 10164 11613 21351 16049 0,4 0,5 0,9 0,7 8665 19336 35580 23479 0,2 0,4 0,7 0,4 71237 73517 89373 69427 8,1 7,7 7,4 5,8 4,7 2,8 2,8 2,0 1,7 1,5 1,4 1,3 1,1 1,0 0,7 0,7 0,8 0,7 D in F "Top 16" "All" 22356 0,8 21908 0,9 15 55388 1,1 99652 0,9 2571318 87,1 2057834 88,8 4565957 87,0 9045868 86,0 2950878 2318626 5247290 10516794 20