Skip to main content

ASECAP report details division of concession risks in EU

ASECAP, the association of European tolling companies, has published a report which outlines the challenges facing authorities and tolling companies in the European Union in complying with the Directives 2014/23/EU and 2014/24/EU. The new directives come into force in April 2016 and refine and strengthen the definition of a concession and establish procurement rules for contracting authorities in respect of public contracts. One of the key areas in defining a concession is that the concessionaire must b
April 1, 2015 Read time: 2 mins
486 ASECAP, the association of European tolling companies, has published a report which outlines the challenges facing authorities and tolling companies in the 1816 European Union in complying with the Directives 2014/23/EU and 2014/24/EU.

The new directives come into force in April 2016 and refine and strengthen the definition of a concession and establish procurement rules for contracting authorities in respect of public contracts. One of the key areas in defining a concession is that the concessionaire must be exposed to risks of making a loss and the report outlined the current situation in the various EU member states.

ASECAP members collectively manage 48,000km of roadways in 21 countries including half of the EU’s 28 member states, and the report considers the risks concessions face under four headings: political and legal, economic and financial, construction related, and further risks.

It focuses in particular on how these risks are currently distributed in nine EU countries. These range from Austria, where the state-owned concessionaire 750 ASFINAG shoulder all the risks in every category to Spain where the authorities retain the liability for half of the 16 identified risks.

Speaking at a conference about the new regulations, Joanna Szychowska, head of public procurement legislation unit at DG Market said, “Many countries did not admit they were passing concessions and as they were not calling it by its proper name it was very easy to escape rules and obligations.”

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Association News on ITS
    June 20, 2016
    Association news from around the globe; Austria, Norway, Czech Republic & Slovakia associations share plans for C-ITS. ITS UK thinks countries boasting that legal autonomous vehicles will become a regular feature on their roads are straying far from the case. ITS Australia debates driverless vehicles and Eu ecall helped on its way.
  • C-ITS in the EU: ‘It has got a little tribal recently’
    April 16, 2019
    As the C-ITS Delegated Act begins its journey through the European policy maze, Adam Hill looks at who is expecting what from this proposed framework for connected vehicles – and why some people are insisting that the lawmakers are already getting things wrong
  • Best laid plans
    March 22, 2012
    Colossal is not too bold a word to describe the scale of ITS developments currently under way in Europe. The European Commission’s ITS Action Plan has six areas of focus, each of which expands out into numerous projects involving a lot of leg work by various committees, working groups or consultants. Add to that the supporting work and research efforts of the many parts of Ertico (ITS Europe); plus each of the 27 European Union member states is working on ‘transition’ of the EU’s ITS Directive into their ow
  • Outsourcing security weakness for Sweden’s driver and vehicle data
    October 24, 2017
    The security of driver and vehicle data hit the headlines this summer in Sweden and its authorities are still dealing with the fallout. David Crawford reports. epercussions from Sweden’s vehicle data outsourcing scandal continue to reverberate. Transportstyrelsen, the government’s transport agency, came under fire this summer for risking the personal security of over five million motorists by failing to implement full security checks on personnel in other countries to whom individual work packages could