article

The case for creating seamless European toll services

Posted: 30 June 2009 | Per Jarle Furnes, New Business Development, Q-Free | No comments yet

Europe launched wireless communication standards for tolling in 1997. During the 90s, tolling became a viable means to finance soaring road infrastructure costs as trade increased between the European countries. Many formulated visions for pan European interoperability where users subject to tolls could enjoy a seamless service or ‘one tag one contract’. However, a decade later, a seamless toll service operating across Europe remains a utopia. Only national schemes and the Scandinavian NorITS offer seamless services between different toll charging domains. In this article we try to pinpoint the challenges that pertain to this situation. In light of the recent European Commission funded research projects to identify convergent strategies on interoperability and the draft commission Decision on a European Electronic Toll Service, EETS1, we also express our views on the way ahead.

Europe launched wireless communication standards for tolling in 1997. During the 90s, tolling became a viable means to finance soaring road infrastructure costs as trade increased between the European countries. Many formulated visions for pan European interoperability where users subject to tolls could enjoy a seamless service or ‘one tag one contract’. However, a decade later, a seamless toll service operating across Europe remains a utopia. Only national schemes and the Scandinavian NorITS offer seamless services between different toll charging domains. In this article we try to pinpoint the challenges that pertain to this situation. In light of the recent European Commission funded research projects to identify convergent strategies on interoperability and the draft commission Decision on a European Electronic Toll Service, EETS1, we also express our views on the way ahead.

Europe launched wireless communication standards for tolling in 1997. During the 90s, tolling became a viable means to finance soaring road infrastructure costs as trade increased between the European countries. Many formulated visions for pan European interoperability where users subject to tolls could enjoy a seamless service or ‘one tag one contract’. However, a decade later, a seamless toll service operating across Europe remains a utopia. Only national schemes and the Scandinavian NorITS offer seamless services between different toll charging domains. In this article we try to pinpoint the challenges that pertain to this situation. In light of the recent European Commission funded research projects to identify convergent strategies on interoperability and the draft commission Decision on a European Electronic Toll Service, EETS1, we also express our views on the way ahead.

The interoperability challenge

Contrary to initial expectations, the business case for pan European toll services has been far from evident. Although there is significant cross border traffic in the North-South and East-West transport corridors, countries like Switzerland, Austria, Italy, Germany and Czech Republic have all introduced national toll services, which do not operate beyond the individual national borders. This means that, for any level of seamless service to occur between these countries, it would require the user to acquire several sets of contracts and mobile units.

There are also technical and operational problems related to the introduction of such services. We will mention just a few of these obstacles. Firstly, compliance to technology standards for toll collection is not enforced throughout Europe. Germany uses GSM/GNSS, Austria, Czech Republic and Switzerland use DSRC whereas Italy employs Telepass. Secondly, security requirements are different from country to country, causing incompatibility even when using the same communication protocol. Norway’s Autopass system, fully compliant with DSRC communication protocols, relies on a triple DES authentication scheme whereas other countries use various degrees of lower level security. Thirdly, there are different toll regimes within each country causing backwards compatibility challenges. For example, Switzerland’s distance based charging relies on ODO-meter sensory equipment whereas Germany, relying on GNSS, uses the actual route taken as the basis for the toll charge. Fourthly, national legislation for toll enforcement implies that it varies whether the driver or the owner of the car is liable for the toll being charged. For example in Denmark, the driver is liable for paying the toll whereas in Norway where there are extensive free flow tolling services, it is the car owner who is liable. To enforce a toll on a Danish vehicle driving on Norwegian toll roads, the Danish toll service provider must guarantee that the Danish tag is genuine.

Renewed focus on interoperability

After having experienced the aforementioned divergence of national toll schemes, several European research projects were kick-started to identify possible convergence strategies. Examples include CESARE, MEDIA and RCI. NorITS has cooperated with CESARE and MEDIA projects to exchange experiences of how to manage tolling in a multi-country context.

EETS Decision

In parallel to the ongoing research projects, the European Commission formed expert groups to give advice to the policies for future interoperable toll services. All these activities have contributed to the draft Commission Decision on EETS.

Technically, the Decision on EETS requires the mobile equipment to support four different protocols: GPS and GSM are included to support autonomous toll systems such as in Germany. DSRC/EN15509 supports point based toll systems, examples are France and Spain. ETSI200674 accommodates the road side infrastructure in Italy.

Although the idea of introducing seamless services is highly attractive, we raise the question of the maturity of the EETS concept. Therefore our aim in the remainder of this article is to draw attention to the fact that the quest for cross border interoperability should be business process oriented rather than technical.

Management of toll tariffs

The draft Commission Decision on EETS requires that no extra toll shall be charged to EETS users. A key question here is; how to recover the costs related to the EETS service introduction? The existing toll chargers, EETS service providers or the national authorities must clarify the cost sharing upon introducing the service. And, will local toll rebate schemes like the ones in Norway survive the principle of non-discrimination of EETS users?

Roles for type approval of technology equipment

The number of type approval bodies for DSRC equipment are scarce and the standard ETSI 200 674 is not yet validated. Who can guarantee that EETS compliant mobile equipment will be compatible with the Italian toll infrastructure? And in the hypothetical case that compatibility is not reached, who is financially liable for rectifying the anomalies?

Dispute management

The EETS Decision assumes each member state will invest in conciliation functions to ensure that EETS service providers and national toll chargers can settle their disputes in a ‘fair’ manner. This raises another two questions; one about the legitimacy and another about the establishment costs. Settling of disputes between international organisations is tricky and potentially time consuming. In the mean time, should the EETS service be halted until legal decisions are taken? The concept of conciliation services in tolling is welcomed, but who will make the upfront investments?

Diversified toll service provisions

Countries like Germany and Switzerland have, to a varying degree, implemented autonomous toll systems. France and the Netherlands might introduce similar truck tolling schemes. Other countries, like Spain and Portugal might continue their existing toll concepts, relying on DSRC based charging. Finally, others might have combinations of autonomous and point based charging. The versatility of services covering different countries and migration into any further extension require a robust design of the services and last but not least the mobile equipment. The latter might require steady updates to sustain compatibility with new toll services as they appear. This however requires a reliable communication link to service providers as manual handling of mobile equipment for upgrades will be highly costly.

The migration from nationwide to pan-European toll services

The EETS is supposed to be a supplementary service to existing national toll schemes. That is; each toll charger in Europe is required to upgrade to one of the mandatory EETS communication services. In many countries the toll charger and service provider functions reside within the same legal organisation and moreover, the bundling of toll services is vital for their business models. Hence EETS might be regarded as a service in direct competition to their business. Although increased service competition is considered politically sound, it is questionable whether the amount of billable transactions will be sufficiently high to make EETS profitable.

The way ahead – battling the EETS inertia

We have not covered several issues that could deserve the same level of attention as given above; these include the prospected unit costs of cross-border clearing of EETS transactions, diversity of classification schemes across Europe, the challenge of introducing trust between different EETS providers and toll chargers, effective means to enforce toll and finally harmonisation of clearing interfaces to ease the complexity of EETS implementation for toll chargers.

We are sure that the future brings EETS-ready toll chargers and EETS service providers. However, crossing the commercial inertia stage for EETS requires strong political endorsement not only from the European Commission to lead the process, but significant contributions from the member states. These have to exhaustively implement the Commission Decision on EETS. Possibly this will include business arrangements involving cooperation between private and public services being necessary to move toll chargers and even nations towards EETS. However, such contractual arrangements might be tested against European non-discrimination acts.

Concluding remarks

The existence of technical standards for European toll services has so far been used to satisfy procurement regulations rather than create a seamless service. Hence many countries have toll infrastructures that can technically accommodate EETS. This is notwithstanding the fact that interoperability across different toll service providers requires a business case and intense political endorsement and someone willing to finance the investments.

Furthermore, the legal framework on toll enforcement in Europe is far from harmonised. Hence, reflecting on the roaming experiences of the mobile telecom sector, it is hard to imagine EETS providers not assuming recourse liability for the EETS users’ accumulated toll charges. Tariff models in existing toll schemes might be affected if, according to the EETS Commission Decision, EETS users shall experience the same toll fees as existing local ones.

One final recommendation would be that EETS stakeholders conduct risk management to mitigate business related risks when endorsing and implementing EETS.

Reference

  1. Draft COMMISSION DECISION on the definition of the European Electronic Toll Service and its technical elements, version 13, March 2009

Related organisations