Determinación del nivel sanguíneo basal

The specialist literature typically distinguishes between three levels of integration amongst transport providers. The first level includes initial negotiations (timetable), exchange of infor- mation and joint communication to passengers. The next level already includes coordination, which provides an organised framework for the cooperation (e.g.: Swiss timetable construc- tion conference every two years). At the highest level, in addition, drawing up joint develop- ment plans and unified cooperation with the associated activities of other businesses and fields (e.g.: urban development) also appear.

In many cases (for example in Budapest) the integrated tariff is only used for monthly, quarterly and yearly season tickets, and not for single line tickets.

Usually expanding the joint tariff to the tickets takes place in the next step of the integration, which has already been carried out in most western European towns.

The exclusivity of the unified tariff could be an influencing factor, as situations may occur where the integrated zone based ticket is more expensive than a ticket that is based on dis- tance and only valid for a particular provider. In these cases the passenger has a choice.

BUs TRAVEL TIME (HOUR:MIN) BUs TIcKET PRIcE (EUR) AVERAGE WEEKdAY BUsEs fOR THIs ROUTE TRAIN TRAVEL TIME (HOUR:MIN) TRAIN TIcKET PRIcE (EUR) AVERAGE WEEKdAY TRAINs fOR THIs ROUTE Austria - - - 2:38-3:15 44.20 32 czech Republic 5:20 11.20-15.00 5 3:09-3:59 16.40-23.90 19 United Kingdom 4:10-4:30 1.66- 14+4 2:25-3:23 36.66 34

Holland - - - Nincs köz-_vetlen - -

Hungary 3:40 11.54 1 direct+1 _transfer 3:11-4:02 13.00-14.86 29

Germany 7:15-8:00 44.00-69.00 2 3:32 82.00-90.00 21

Portugal 3:30-5:00 11.30 – 17.00 80 2:35-3:20 15.40-27.50 37

spain 6:00 19.40 10 2:20 61.30-78.10 24

In most cases the integrated tickets and season tickets only cover a defined, geographical- ly confined zone (province, region, agglomeration belt). For villages and towns not included in these zones, different tariffs are applicable dependent on the background of the provider (national, private, mixed) and on the price setting authority (local authority, organisation, own provider).

table 4: organisations responsible for the tariffs in many eu urban regions

Based on the transport system of the above urban regions, it can be established that in the cases where the tariff is set by the provider, the ticket prices are more likely to differ with longer distances travelled and for a more even supply and better utilisation of the capacity, with off-peak time reduc- tions being more usual. The integration level can also be lower compared with transport tariff systems operating on authority pricing.

TARIff dEcIsION

cOMPETITION

THERE Is NO cOMPETITION MONITOREd cOMPETITION fREE cOMPETITION

supervisory authority

BRNO, OsTRAVA, PRAGUE, BUdAPEsT, KATOWIcE, KRAKOW, ŁÓdź, WARsAW,

WROcLAW, UTREcHT, BELfAsT, LONdON, MAR-

sEILLE, PARIs, MAdRId, sEVILLE, VALENcIA, GENEVA, MILAN, NAPOLI, PALERMO, ROME, TORINO

GOTEBORG, cOPENHAGEN, LILLE, BORdEAUX, RENNEs, TOULOUsE. Operator makes rec- ommenda- tions

GRAZ, LINZ, VIENNA, AUGsBURG, HALLE Operator decides BIRMINGHAM, BRIsTOL, cARdIff, cOVENTRY, LEEds, LEIcEsTER, NOTTINGHAM, sHEffIELd source: Hodson/EU commission, 2005. supplemental

table 5: Changes in passenger number as a percentage in eight urban regions following the introduction of an integrated ticketing system

Similarly favourable changes were observed in Switzerland following the expansion of the inte- grated tariff systems: according to a 2004 study, in Bern, after the validity of the suburban railway season tickets had been extended to all means of transport within the city, dependent on the route a 14-26% increase in demand was observed. The number of passengers has increased by 15-16% in the public transport of Geneva following the introduction of the integrated season tickets. In addition to seasonal tickets, the joint tariff for tickets has expanded to several new Swiss towns and regions in the past 1-2 years, thus currently the joint tariff can be said to be widespread in all significant urban regions.3

In Italy the joint tariff (not always unified tariff) was also received favourably by the public: in the period between 1991 and 2002 according to a statistical survey carried out in 69 Italian towns, the introduction of the integrated tariffs increased the amount of travel on public transport by 2.09% on average in the short-term, with 12% in the long-term. If the integrated ticketing system is implemented in addition to season tickets and single line tickets with the development of a zone system, the number of passengers on urban transport can grow by 7% in the short-term and in the long-term by as much as 34%. When the system is expanded to cover larger areas, involving urban transport, based on the model calculations (Abrate et al. 2007) carried out, the passenger number could grow by 5% in the short-run with 25% in the long-term.

On the whole, it can be established that the comfort resulting from interoperability and the extra services provided by greater choice were both favourably echoed by the passengers. Due to the more efficient operation resulting from the collaboration it also received a positive response from public transport providers; therefore following the development of an appropriate organisational background we recommend the expansion of the system in Hungary.

References

[1] Abrate, G. – Piacenza, M. – Vannoni, D.: The impact of Integrated Tariff Systems on public trans- port demand: Evidence from Italy Regional Science and Urban Economics, Vol. 39. No. 2. March 2009. pp. 120-127.

[2] Scottish Executive Social Research, 2004. Integrated Ticketing in Scotland – Needs Analysis and Options. Transport Research Series. November 2004. Edinburgh.

URBAN

REGION REVIEWEd PERIOd TOTAL cHANGEs (%) ANNUAL cHANGE (%)

Manchester 1999-2001 4 % 2 % Hamburg 1967-2002 19 % 0.5 % stockholm 1973-2001 25 % 0.8 % Vienna 1988-2001 24 % 1.7 % Rome 1995-1997 6 % 3 % Paris 1975-1993 33 % 1.7 % Lisbon 1973-1998* - 2.6 % N.A. source: ELTIs, 2003.

* In Lisbon, the first regulations for a joint tariff took effect in 1998, only progressing to the “ medium” level from 2003. Contrary to the urban regions of the other inspected countries, in 1973 Portugal was still characterised by low motorisation with a strongly backward economy.

For developing a more efficient system for driver training and examination, it is essential to know what the profession’s opinion is and to understand how much support there is for the planned measures. A study prepared on the grounds of these can provide help in draw- ing up the development guidelines as well as specific technical measures. The analyses and recommendations of this project were based on the information provided by question- naires, personal consultations, interviews with the experts involved as well as through the experiences of conferences organised for various technical groups.

In our article we strictly only use the questionnaire and the results of certain consultations as a refer- ence. Therefore, the validity of our statements, although in several issues we have reached a clear conclusion, is still limited, as not all standpoints of the profession are included.

We have surveyed three professional groups, driving school managers, specialist instructors and experts working in various fields of training and examination with questions associated with train- ing and the continuing education of technical instructors, and on the organisation and the quality of the training. From the nearly 1,000 questionnaires 266 were returned accordingly: 133 by driving school managers, 122 by technical instructors and 11 by examiners, training supervisors or other professionals involved in training and examination. This article summarises the responses given for 17 questions of the questionnaire together with the comments provided on professional development and the experiences of the professional consultations.