Brukerverktøy

Nettstedverktøy


vedlegg:method_for_economic_valuation_of_assigning_routes

4.4.2 Method for Economic valuation of assigning routes

Method for socio-economic valuation of train route allocation A train route is the infrastructure capacity necessary to operate a train between two locations within a specific period.

The method described in this appendix is used to value consequences of train route allocation in three potential conflict situations:

  • Conflict between passenger trains
  • Conflict between freight trains
  • Conflict between passenger train and freight train

This valuation is carried out with the assistance of a cost-benefit analysis (CBA) in line with guidelines from the Directorate for Financial Management (2014) and the Norwegian National Rail Administration (2015). A CBA will form part of the data for evaluation of the train route in a conflict situation.

A CBA calculates the benefit and costs involved with a measure compared with the reference alternative where the measure/measures is/are not implemented When valuing a potential train route allocation, the measure will involve an operator being allocated a train route. The reference alternative will normally represent the situation in which no one is allocated the train route, while at the same time the rest of the route plan is implemented as anticipated. This method then values the consequences of an operator being allocated the desired train route, compared with a situation in which no one is allocated the train route. It is important here to note that if an operator already has the train route, the reference alternative for the operator must continue to be a situation in which they do not have the train route.

It may also be relevant for the Norwegian National Rail Administration to define a reference alternative with partial allocation of the train route if both operators can be allocated parts of the train route without conflict. The socio-economic profitability (priced net benefit) of several possible train route allocations is compared by carrying out a number of CBAs. This is shown in Figur 1. The figure illustrates the fact that two analyses are carried out: CBA A and CBA B calculate the socio-economic profitability of allocating the desired train route (prioritising) Operator A and Operator B respectively, compared with the reference alternative when no one is allocated the train route.

Figure 1: Illustration of CBA – reference alternative and alternative allocations (measures).

The priced consequences are classified into main groups according to who is affected in the same way as in the Norwegian National Rail Administration method handbook (Norwegian National Rail Administration, 2015). In other words, the stakeholders affected and associated changes to their benefits and costs compared with the reference alternative are divided into four main groups:

  • Benefit for passengers
  • Benefit for the operator
  • Benefit for the public sector
  • Benefit for third parties

At the same time, it is important to be aware that allocation of train routes may involve non-priced consequences (such as encroachment upon nature, consequences for local and regional development) which this method does not capture but which nevertheless may be of importance to the Norwegian National Rail Administration's priorities. Non-priced consequences will be highlighted in the analysis by means of a structured description, if necessary.

In a conflict situation, the scope of a CBA will be assessed for each individual instance. A gradual, four-stage CBA will be used as a basis. Depending on how clear the results of the first stage are, implementation of further stages and hence a more extensive analysis will be assessed. The analysis will deal with stage 1 first, and the results from stage 1 will determine whether there is a need for further analysis with stage 2, and then whether to continue with stages 3 and 4. The four stages are as follows:

  • Stage 1: Benefit for passengers (benefit for reference traffic)
  • Stage 2: Transport model. Change in demand due to allocation of train route and operating revenues (mainly ticket revenues).
  • Stage 3: Benefit for third parties. Consequences for third parties are the sum of changes to accident expenses, noise expenses, health benefits, expenses relating to local emissions and emissions of climate gases.
  • Stage 4: Benefit for the public sector, tax finance and operate a benefit. Consequences for benefit for the public sector are the sum of changes to infrastructure charges, operating and maintenance expenses, public procurement (expenditure) and tax on profits (revenues).

Note: Benefit gains and expenses from stages 3 and 4 are derived from changes to traffic work combined with standard rates. The benefit for third parties and the public sector are therefore correlated with demand changes (stage 2) so that a change in demand will provide an indication for stages 3 and 4.

The benefit of train route allocation is valued in Norwegian kroner, but viewing the distribution effects may also be relevant. This can be done by assessing the number of hours saved on account of the train route allocation, for example.

The calculations are based on reported figures from the operators applying for allocation of the train route in question. The figures reported will be quality assured by the Norwegian National Rail Administration and can also be supplemented with model calculations. This method also uses as a basis a range of standard criteria taken from Merklin and the Norwegian National Rail Administration's method handbook (Norwegian National Rail Administration, 2015). The model tools used in the analysis of the models which are most compliant with the analysis to be carried out by the Norwegian National Rail Administration. There will be an individual assessment of each conflict, whether model calculations are necessary and which model is to be used. The areas for which the criteria are applicable, including an explanation, as well as the stage at which the various criteria are applicable, are listed in Tabell 1.

Table 1: Description of important standard criteria used as a basis in the analysis

Type of criteria Explanation Stage in which the criteria are included
Time expenses Value of: travelling time, transfers, running hours, waiting time, delays. The time expenses are dependent on the purpose of the trip (work trip, leisure trip or business trip) and whether the trip is above or below 50 km. Rates for the main mode of transport are used for commuter trips. Stage 1
Transport tender Price and expense criteria for car travel, train travel, bus travel and flights. Stage 2
Accidents NOK per vehicle-km Stage 3
Local emissions NOK per vehicle-km Stage 3
Noise NOK per vehicle-km Stage 3
CO2 emissions CO2 emissions per vehicle-km and NOK per tonne of CO2 Stage 3
Health Health benefits of travel transferred from walking and cycling Stage 3
Wear and tear on infrastructure NOK per vehicle-km for cars, buses and flights. NOK per gross tonne-km for passenger trains and freight trains. Stage 4
Charges to the state NOK per vehicle-km Stage 4

Passenger travel

The four stages described above are used as a basis for a CBA for train route allocation. The scope of the analysis will be assessed according to the results emerging. Stage 1 calculations will be carried out first. If the results do not indicate a clearly prioritised train operator, further stages will be carried out.

Stage 1: Benefit for passengers (benefit for reference traffic) The consequences for benefit for passengers if a train operator is allocated the desired train route (given priority) are divided into:

  • Reference trips with the priority train operator

For this group, benefit for passengers is calculated as the sum of changes to:

  • Time expenses. The rates for time are listed in Table 2.Feil! Fant ikke referansekilden.

The valuation is based on the reference traffic and changes to the quality of the train service. Changes to the quality of the train service if a train operator is allocated the train route are described in the form of changed time spent (including a change in the number of transfers) for an average reference passenger. The distribution effects of the measure can be indicated by means of the number of hours saved and may be included in the analysis together with the quantified benefit in NOK. It may be desirable to view both the quantified benefit and the hours saved as some trade routes are dominated by a type of passenger with a high time value. The train route allocation may affect an extremely large number of passengers using a service without this being directly reflected in the quantified benefit, but it can be highlighted using hours saved.

A reference passenger is a train passenger who travels with the priority train operator in the reference alternative on relations where the train service is affected by the train route allocation. The value of a change in the train service for an average passenger is summarised as changed generalised costs (GC).

Table 2: Rates for travelling time aboard (2013 - NOK per hour)

Source: Jernbaneverket 2015

Stage 2: Trenklin transport model

The Trenklin model will be used in this stage to estimate future demand for rail travel. This model takes into account crowding and weights the time costs by a value depending on how crowded the train is. The model calculates the demand effect and crowding changes GC via two mechanisms. Both sitting and standing passengers are given a higher GC in the case of high coverage (crowding) on the train. The inconvenience increases as crowding increases, leading to an increased GC. When the GC increases, demand will be reduced and crowding will decrease. In the case of a train route allocation resulting in less crowding, demand will increase, which will again increase crowding and lead to an increased GC. The model comes up with an equilibrium solution. Changes in ticket costs as a consequence of the train route allocation will also be calculated. Stage 1 is also included as basis for stage 2. The following points will be included in stage 2:

  • Travel transferred from other train operators, cars, buses, flights and walking/cycling
  • Increased travel activity

The following are calculated:

  • Change in demand
  • Change in benefit for passengers from transferred traffic and increased travel activity
  • Ticket costs
  • Other benefit/cost

The change in benefit for passengers per trip transferred from other train operators, other modes of transport or increased travel activity are normally assumed to be half of the change in benefit for passengers per reference trip. This criterion is known as «Rule of Half» and is in line with the methodology on which Merklin is based – passengers who stop using other transport options will normally have a lower benefit change than passengers who nevertheless use the service of the priority train operator.

Stage 3: Benefit for third parties

Consequences for third parties are the sum of changes to:

  • Accident expenses
  • Noise expenses
  • Expenses relating to local emissions
  • Expenses relating to emissions of climate gases
  • Health benefits
  • Other benefit/cost (open item)

Benefit for third parties is a direct consequence of changes to traffic work (vehicle-km) multiplied by standard rates per vehicle-km for accidents, noise, low commissions and omissions of climate gases.

Stage 4: Benefit for the public sector, tax finance and operate a benefit.

The consequences would benefit from public sector are calculated as the sum of changes to:

  • Infrastructure charges (any revenues from operator)
  • Operating and maintenance expenses
  • Public procurement (expenditure)
  • Tax on profits (revenue)
  • Other revenues/expenditure (open item)

Everything except for the last item is determined by assumed traffic work in combination with standard rates, or equivalent items from calculation of the change in operator benefit.

Operator benefit is calculated the priority train operator, other train operators, buses and flights. The consequences for operator benefit are equal to the change in results for the various operators, which in turn is the sum of changes to:

  • Market revenues
  • Operating expenses (e.g. infrastructure charges that will be included in state revenues)
  • Capital expenses
  • Public procurement
  • Other revenues/expenses
  • Tax

It may, for example, be relevant to compare with results from various model runs. The operator benefit for buses and flights will normally be calculated on the basis of standard criteria for operating expenses, operating revenues and tax on earnings. The latter is also applicable for the transport option known as «other train operators» which is only represented using explicit figures if the Norwegian National Rail Administration themselves add this information.

Traffic calculations

Figures used for passenger traffic calculations are produced by train operators, calculations from the Norwegian National Rail Administration and standard criteria. A list of the figures which the train operator needs to report and which are used in the analysis is provided below.

Table 3: Figures used for passenger traffic calculations, reporting from train operator

Reporting from train operator Stage in which the figures are included
Number of reference trips linked to the train route in question:
- The traffic data at relation level and after departure, alternatively
distribution of all working days, Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays
(«line profiles»), on relations where the train service is affected by the
train route allocation.
- Route table that describes the train service for the applicable reference
traffic.
- Travel purpose distribution for the reference traffic (work trip, leisure
trip and business trip), divided into long and short journeys
(above/below 50 km)
Stage 1 and 2
Ticket revenues linked to the relevant train route and any discount
arrangements
Stage 2
Change of the following units if the train route is allocated to the train operator
(compared with the reference alternative):3
- Market revenues
- Operating expenses (e.g. infrastructure charges)
- Capital expenses (interest and deductions)
- Public procurement
Stage 4

Calculations carried out by the Norwegian National Rail Administration and standard criteria are listed in Feil! Fant ikke referansekilden.

Table 4: Figures used for passenger traffic calculations, from the Norwegian National Rail Administration

Calculation and standard criteria from the Norwegian National Rail Administration Stage in which the figures are included
Change in passenger time (hours saved) in the event of allocation of the train route. Stage 1
Distribution of trips according to type of passenger, above and below 50 km Stage 1
Number of trips with priority train operator in the event of allocation of the train route. Applicable to relations where the train service is affected by the train route allocation. Stage 2
Proportion of increased traffic transferred to trains (net) from cars, buses, flights, walking/cycling and/or due to increased travel activity. Both the number of trips and passenger-km. Stage 2
Change in passenger-km if the train route is allocated Stage 2
Proportion of reference trips up to 50 km Stage 2

Stages 1 and 2 in particular are dependent on the reported figures for the train operator and calculations by the Norwegian National Rail Administration. Calculations for stages 3 and 4 are largely based on standard rates and will often be negligible as most of the benefit of train route allocation falls to the reference traffic on the train route in question. The socio-economic benefit of the measure will be summed up at the end of each stage. No discounting will take place as all benefits and all expenses occur over the course of a single year. If the results of stage 1 do not provide a clear indicator of which operator should be given priority, further stages will be implemented.

Freight traffic

The four stages described at the start of this document are used as a basis for a CBA for train route allocation. The scope of the analysis will be assessed according to the results emerging. In the case of a train route conflict with freight traffic, it is likely that all four stages will need to be implemented in order to find which train operator should take priority.

Stages 1 and 2: Benefit for freight customers (passenger benefit) and transfer of traffic

The consequences for freight customers (e.g. combination loads) are not specified initially. This is why the passenger benefit (benefit for freight customers) will be calculated according to the same principle as passenger traffic, and ideally using models such as Merklin and/or the National Goods Model. For reference traffic, the passenger benefit is calculated as a change to the GC, which in this case is the sum of price, time expenses and delay expenses. For new traffic, the passenger benefit is calculated as half of the change in generalised costs per tonne-km, multiplied by the number of new tonne-km.

Stage 3: Benefit for third parties

Consequences for third parties are the sum of changes to:

  • Accident expenses
  • Noise expenses
  • Expenses relating to local emissions
  • Expenses relating to emissions of climate gases
  • Other benefit/cost (open item)

For freight trains and trucks, benefit for third parties is a direct result of changes to transport work (vehicle-km) multiplied by standard rates (per train/vehicle-km or gross tonne-km) for accidents, noise, low commissions and omissions of climate gases. This method is not based on standard criteria for shipping traffic, and hence supplementary calculations have to be carried out in order to represent the benefit for third parties in the case of goods transferred from ships.

Stage 4: Benefit for the public sector, tax finance and operate a benefit.

The consequences would benefit from public sector are calculated as the sum of changes to:

  • Infrastructure charges
  • Operating and maintenance expenses
  • Tax on profits (revenue)
  • Other revenues/expenses (open item)

Everything except for the last item is determined by assumed traffic work in combination with standard rates, or equivalent items from calculation of the change in operator benefit (but with the opposite sign).

Operator benefit is calculated for the priority freight operator, other freight operators on the railway, trucks and ships. The consequences for operator benefit are equal to the change in results for the various operators, which in turn is the sum of changes to:

  • Market revenues
  • Operating expenses (e.g. infrastructure charges or other charges)
  • Capital expenses
  • Other revenues/expenses (open item)
  • Tax

The changes for the priority freight operator are based on their reported figures for all of the above items; apart from infrastructure charges, which are based on standard criteria if the changes to the charges are not reported. The calculations are carried out for trucks and ships given standard criteria for operating expenses and an assumption of a normal return on capital. This is also applicable for other freight train operators, who are only represented using explicit figures if the user itself adds this information. It is possible to deviate from the criteria relating to normal return on capital in situations in which the market is beyond such equilibrium, e.g. if transporting goods by truck is very profitable.

Traffic calculations

Figures used for freight traffic calculations are produced by freight operators, calculations from the Norwegian National Rail Administration and standard criteria. A list of the figures which the freight operator needs to report and which are used in the analysis is provided below.

Table 5: Figures used for freight traffic calculations, reporting from freight operator

Reporting from freight operator Stage in which the figures are included
Change in the following unit if the train route is allocated to the freight operator, compared with the reference alternative:
- Tonne of goods transported
- Net tonne-km
- Gross tonne-km
- Train-km
- Market revenue
- Operating expenses (e.g. infrastructure charges)
- Capital expenses (interest and deductions)
Stages 1, 2, 3 and 4
Type of fuel for the freight train used on allocation of the train route. Diesel or electric. Stages 3 and 4

Calculations carried out by the Norwegian National Rail Administration and standard criteria are listed in Tabell 6.

Table 6: Figures used for freight traffic calculations, from the Norwegian National Rail Administration

Calculations and standard criteria from the Norwegian National Rail Administration Stage in which the figures are included
The proportion of the increase in freight transport (measured in both tonnes and tonne-km) transferred to the railway (net) from trucks, ships and reduced transport Stages 1 and 2
Distribution of change in freight transport (tonne-km) over areas Stage 3

In the event of a train route conflict with freight traffic, it will be necessary in some situations to identify all stages in the analysis to be able to identify which operator is to be given priority. The socio-economic benefit of the measure will be summed up at the end of each stage. No discounting will take place as all benefits and all expenses occur over the course of a single year.

Summary input data reported by the operators in a conflict situation

Table 7: Passenger traffic, reporting from train operator

Number of reference trips linked to the train route in question:
- The traffic data at relation level and after departure, alternatively distribution of all working days, Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays («line profiles»), on relations where the train service is affected by the train route allocation.
- Route table that describes the train service for the applicable reference traffic.
- Travel purpose distribution for the reference traffic (work trip, leisure trip and business trip), divided into long and short journeys (above/below 50 km)
Ticket revenues linked to the relevant train route and any discount arrangements
Change of the following units if the train route is allocated to the train operator (compared with the reference alternative):
- Market revenues
- Operating expenses (e.g. infrastructure charges)
- Capital expenses (interest and deductions)
- Public procurement

Table 8: Freight traffic, reporting from freight operator

Change in the following unit if the train route is allocated to the freight operator, compared with the reference alternative:
- Tonne of goods transported
- Net tonne-km
- Gross tonne-km
- Train-km
- Market revenues
- Operating expenses (e.g. infrastructure charges)
- Capital expenses (interest and deductions)
Type of fuel for the freight train used on allocation of the train route. Diesel or electric.

The train operators and freight operators must describe criteria on which the estimates are based. This is particularly applicable to the reported figures for market revenues and operating expenses.  

References

Norwegian National Rail Administration (2015). Metodehåndbok. Samfunnsøkonomiske analyser for jernbanen 2015, Norwegian National Rail Administration. http://www.jernbaneverket.no/Marked/Leverandorinfo/Jernbaneverkets-Metodehandbok-i-Samfunnsokonomiske-analyser---JD-205-/ Directorate for Financial Management (2014). Veileder i samfunnsøkonomiske analyser. Directorate for Financial Management. http://dfo.no/Documents/FOA/publikasjoner/veiledere/Veileder_i_samfunns%c3%b8konomiske_analyser_1409.pdf

vedlegg/method_for_economic_valuation_of_assigning_routes.txt · Sist endret: 2017/03/21 08:41 (ekstern redigering)