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

  • Report supports calls for EU target to reduce serious road injuries
    November 24, 2016
    Newly-published research carried out for the European Commission recommends that the EU should set a target to reduce the number of people seriously injured in road collisions. The report, Study on Serious Road Traffic Injuries in the EU, claims that 135,000 people were seriously injured on European roads in 2014, according to figures published by the European Commission for the first time in April. While the number of deaths on European roads has fallen dramatically over the last decade, serious injuri
  • Minnesota study finds support for automated speed enforcement
    December 14, 2012
    A recent study by the University of Minnesota found strong support for automated speed enforcement, particularly in work zones and school zones and if revenues from fines are dedicated for road safety programs. Presenting the findings, Frank Douma, associate director of the State and Local Policy Program in the Humphrey School of Public Affairs said automated speed enforcement has been deployed in fourteen states and in many countries, especially in Europe. Automated speed enforcement is proven to be an ef
  • Environmental impact assessments - where now?
    February 1, 2012
    Peter George, MVA Consultancy, questions the future direction of environmental impact assessments
  • Is driver information heading for multi-channel mayhem
    October 22, 2013
    Colin Sowman talks to TRL’s research director Dr Alan Stevens about the future for cash-strapped road authorities’ driver information systems.