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.”
Charging, Tolling & RUC

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • On a WIM – a global view of weigh in motion
    May 25, 2016
    Q-Free’s Andrew Lees looks at regional characteristics and technology trends in the global Weigh-In-Motion market. The principles of Weigh-In-Motion (WIM) are well established. Data derived from vehicles passing over in-ground sensors can be interpreted for vehicle classification (axle counts and spacing) and positive identification (especially when linked to image capture) applications as well as to derive individual axle and gross vehicle weight (GVW).
    Read More
  • Can GNSS solve the tolling world’s woes?
    December 5, 2013
    Kapsch’s Arno Klamminger and Wolfgang Fleischer consider the need for an agnostic approach to technology for charging and tolling. Periodically, given the march of technology, it is worth pausing and taking stock of where we have got to and where we go next. Such reflections are necessary if we are to take full advantage of what we have at our disposal and, potentially, avoid decisions which push us down technological culs de sac. A look at the use of Global Navigation Satellite System (GNSS)-based technol
    Read More
  • MaaS by any other name
    February 6, 2020
    Has the roll-out of Mobility as a Service stalled - or could it just be that multimodal travel is simply happening under a variety of different names?
    Read More
  • Developments in urban traffic management and control
    February 1, 2012
    Mark Cartwright, Centaur Consulting, discusses developments in urban traffic management and control. Despite the concept of UTMC (Urban Traffic Management and Control) having been around for some years now, there remains a significant rump of confusion as to its relationship with its similar-sounding cousin UTC (Urban Traffic Control). To many people, the two are one and the same. However, this is not the case.
    Read More

Highlighted Content