Inland Waterway Transport Solutions

IWTS is aiming on a NSR wide rise on the share of IWT transport in the modal split. We will focus on the facilitation of transport on smaller, un/underused, complementary waterways with links to the main TEN-T corridors since a significant share of goods moved on those main corridors originates from or is bound for places outside the main links. Freight forwarders and shippers don’t tend to use those complementary waterways at the moment for the reasons below:

Waterway infrastructures, logistics and planning:

Investments in smaller waterways and their infrastructures like ports, bridges, locks and terminals decrease. Planning processes and Investment cycles are long. Not using and investing in these infrastructures is losing them on the long term. Inland waterway assets based on (also transnational) logistic opportunities are often not explored and applied, between regions, but also between the Netherlands, Belgium and Germany. Long term spatial planning (10 to 30 years) based on credible data for inland navigation is not common in many regions.

Vessels:

Currently new, contemporary tonnage in European IWT is usually a larger standard 110 meter vessel, not suitable for all waterways. The fleet for the smaller waterways in in average older than 50 years and rapidly shrinking. New logistic solutions with small innovative push barges and transshipment systems lack critical mass, they are to small to enter really the market. Due to different certification rules it is also difficult to exploit these barges in other NSR states. Joined development will make them suitable for all NSR regions.

Crewing:

Although training and education is not yet standardized, the European Commissions DG MOVE is about to set those standards for the entirety of IWT personnel in close cooperation with the Central Commission for the Navigation on the Rhine (CCR) (current revision of the EC directive 96/50/EC on IWT crewing – with direct involvement of the lead partner MAH), focusing on an competence based educational standard, which very well facilitates the use of advanced IWT simulators. Smaller waterway navigation is not yet in the focus of any of the crewing-related legislation

Very different regional settings regarding policy and culture in IWT:

Policy differs per member state, each country has its own challenges: Germany tends to not invest any more in her extended smaller waterways. The UK has a long tradition in inland navigation, fragmented policies and tends to restore waterways that were used in the past and wants to connect waterways. Sweden lost its tradition in inland navigation a long time ago and is now looking how to improve its inland navigation opportunities. Sweden has international legislation for inland waterways that complicate operations and just accepted a new inland waterway legislation. Belgium and the Netherlands have quite a tradition in inland navigation but must be keen on keeping and  developing it when in concerns smaller waterways.

Conclusion:

Making the complementary waterways more easily accessible for IWT transport will create sound business models and therefore ease the shippers tendency towards a modal shift.