Evaluation of Transport Infrastructures Crossing the Pyrenees - A
Sensitive International Border Zone
de Oña, Juan.
University of Granada, Spain
Zamorano, Clara
Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain
Sánchez Vicente, Alfredo.
Transport Research Center-TRANSyT Polytechnic University of Madrid, Spain
ABSTRACT
The present paper presents the initial findings of a Research Project currently
being carried out for Spain’s Ministry of Public Works (Ministerio de Fomento)
with a view to analysing the effects, both on the environment and on
accessibility, of an increased permeabilisation of the Pyrenees.
A rational and environment-friendly permeabilisation of the Pyrenees is seen
by both the Spanish government and the European Union as a key factor to
ensure the harmonious socio-economic development of the Iberian Peninsula,
as well as to limit the detrimental effects of the region’s peripheral location
within the European Union, a situation that was further enhanced when
several Eastern European recently became new EU members.
The present study was carried out using an accessibility model and an
environmental model which, together with a traffic model, have been validated
on a nationwide scale. These models enable us to quantify the effects on
accessibility and the environment of the construction of new infrastructure in
the Pyrenean region. The cross-border scope of the research project under
way, which analyses the eight regions making up the Working Community of
the Pyrenees, makes it of particular interest, both from a methodology
standpoint and as regards the results obtained and the difficulties
encountered.
1.- INTRODUCTION
One of the main aims of the European Union is that all its member countries
should achieve genuine convergence, characterised by a stable territorial
balance that ensures harmonious growth in all EU member states, thus
avoiding internal tensions of an economic nature.
Infrastructures play a fundamental role in this effort to attain true convergence
within the European Union, all the more so in peripheral countries, such as
Spain, Greece and Ireland, which suffer from a marked lack of
competitiveness –due to their peripheral location– vis-à-vis more centrally
located countries. This undoubtedly imposes a geographical handicap on the
former regions.
© Association for European Transport 2004
The Pyrenean mountain range forms a major barrier between the Iberian
Peninsula and the rest of Europe. Unlike the Alps, the Pyrenees –excepting
the coastal strips– have no major road or railway infrastructure.
Both the European Union and the Spanish government wish to increase the
permeability of the overland transport networks across the Pyrenees as a
means of countering the historical isolation of the Iberian Peninsula, which
could now be enhanced by:
•
•
•
The incorporation of the Central and Eastern European Countries
(CEEC) into the European Union.
Future trends in the structural and cohesion fund distribution policies
once the above countries become new EU members
An eastward shift in the centre of gravity of the EU’s economic activity
due to the joining of these new countries
In recent years, Spain has made considerable efforts to improve its transport
infrastructures throughout its national territory. However, on the Pyrenean
border it is confronted with a very different infrastructure policy followed by its
neighbouring country – France. The undeniable environmental value of the
region, which is among Europe’s richest and most beautiful natural areas, with
a remarkable diversity of wildlife species and landscapes, is one of the main
reasons stated by France for putting a brake on the development of transport
infrastructures across the Pyrenees.
The main objective of this research project, which is still under way, is to
establish suitable proposals for the permeabilisation of the Pyrenees without
jeopardising the region’s privileged environmental features.
Two main aspects should be considered with regard to the regions involved:
the need for territorial accessibility and the need to protect the environment. In
order to take both aspects into account, specific accessibility and
environmental quality indicators were built using a Geographic Information
System (GIS), a tool that provides the most effective means of analysing and
displaying the results.
These indicators were used to make a diagnosis of the current situation and,
on the basis of different potential scenarios (involving the construction of
different infrastructures), assess the repercussion of each scenario both on an
aggregate and on an individual basis (accessibility and environment), with a
nationwide as well as a regional scope.
2.- THE PYRENEES: A SENSITIVE REGION AND A BORDER BETWEEN
TWO COUNTRIES
2.1.- Geographical, Territorial and Socio-economic Features.
The Pyrenees is a 440 km long mountain range stretching between the
Cantabrian and the Mediterranean seas. It crosses the Spanish autonomous
© Association for European Transport 2004
communities of Navarra, Aragón and Catalonia; the Principality of Andorra;
and the French regions of Aquitaine, Languedoc-Roussillon and MidiPyrénées.
The entire territory covers 212,000 km2, or 6.4% of the total surface area of
the European Union, and has a population of 17.8 million people. Population
density varies considerably from one area to the other, with the inner
Pyrenees having a sparser population.
Border regions are subject to a wide range of situations as regards both their
socio-economic and territorial development, and the level of maturity of crossborder and inter-regional co-operation. There is only one conurbation
straddling the Franco-Spanish border, located on the Basque coast.
Moreover, while on the Spanish side we find major cities, though quite distant
from the border, on the French side there is a larger number of towns, which
are smaller and closer to the frontier. The importance of these towns is
particularly noteworthy in the Spanish regions, where Zaragoza, for instance,
accounts for 50% of the population in the Aragón autonomous community,
while Barcelona accounts for 60% of that of Catalonia; both cities play a major
role in the Spanish economy as a whole. Fig 1 below shows the distribution of
towns in the area of study.
Figure 1. Distribution of towns in Spain–Working Community of the Pyrenees.
France has a higher population density than Spain, with an average of 111.4
inhab/Km2 for the former versus 79.1 inhhab/Km2 for the latter. On the
Spanish side of the border the situation is quite heterogeneous. Population
densities in both the Basque Country and Catalonia exceed the national
average, with 284.3 and 193.2 inhab/Km2, respectively, while Aragón and
Navarra, with 24.5 and 51.6 inhab/Km2, respectively, are considerably below
the national average. On the French side the situation is more homogeneous.
The population density in the French regions is close to the Spanish national
average (71.0 inhab/Km2 in Aquitaine, 56.8 inhab/Km2 in Midi-Pyrénées and
84.9 inhab/Km2 in Languedoc-Roussillon), but below the French national
average.
© Association for European Transport 2004
As regards the two countries’ socio-economic data, France’s GDP, at roughly
the European (EU-15) average, considerably exceeds the Spanish figure,
which is still much lower than the European average. However, in the
Pyrenees the figures are similar on either side of the border. The Spanish
Pyrenean regions have a higher per capita GDP than the national average,
while that of the French regions is below their national average. Navarra ranks
the highest (its per capita GDP is close to the French average) while Aragón
and Languedoc-Roussillon show the lowest levels.
From an environmental viewpoint, the Pyrenees is among Europe’s most
beautiful locations, with outstanding environmental quality. The heterogeneity
of its geomorphology, climate and altitude has given rise to areas with widely
differing environmental features and, hence, to numerous types of habitats
with endemic wildlife and plant species, many of which are at risk of imminent
extinction. In view of all this, large areas within the Pyrenean region have
been placed under special protection in order to ensure they remain intact.
Fig. 2 below aims to give an idea of the complexity involved in carrying out an
inventory and cross-border study in these areas (in Spain only National Parks
and areas belonging to the Red Natura 2000 network are shown, while the
National Parks shown in France include the outer buffer area).
Figure 2. Protected Spaces in the Area of Study.
2.4.- Trans-Pyrenean Transport Infrastructures
At present there are four railway links between Spain and France (Table 1 and
Fig 3), although the only ones that offer international services are IrúnHendaye (Atlantic side) and Port Bou-Cerbere (Mediterranean side). Owing to
the existing differences between the two national railway networks as regards
track gauge, signalling systems and line electrification voltage, international
© Association for European Transport 2004
services have to undergo a technical adaptation process at the border to
overcome such difficulties.
TRACK TYPE ELECTRIFICATION
Irún-Hendaye
Canfranc
PuigcerdáLa Tour de
Carol
Port BouCerbere
TYPE OF TRAFFIC
International passengers and goods
Closed
Double
Yes
Single
No
Single
Yes
Passengers – no direct
international link
Double
Yes
International –
passengers and goods
Table 1 : Current situation of the railway network in the Pyrenees.
Figure 3 : Current situation of the railway network in the Pyrenees.
In Fig 4. it can be seen that the permeability of the Pyrenees by road is
greater than by rail, although it should be noted that the highest capacity
roads are located at either end of the border (Atlantic and Mediterranean
coastal fringes). These roads also withstand the highest volumes of heavy
traffic. Inland roads are used to interconnect the regions, to enable the
movement of people, but they are hardly used for road freight, which only
takes place on the coastal motorways.
© Association for European Transport 2004
Figure 4 : Current situation of the road network in the Pyrenees.
2.5.- Mobility Problems
The situation of transport infrastructures in the Pyrenees determines the
movement patterns of people and goods.
As regards the transport of people across the Pyrenees, the trend over the
past 30 years is characterised by a steady increase in the number of
passengers using road and air transport, which compares with the stagnation
and steady loss of market share shown by rail transport.
In 2001 average daily traffic (ADT) across the Pyrenees exceeded 99,000
light vehicles (159,000 in summer). This flow was split as follows: two thirds
by coastal roads and one third by inland mountain roads. Inland road links are
essentially used by local traffic – the kind of traffic that occurs between the
regions making up the Working Community of the Pyrenees. However, nationto-nation and transit traffic are mainly concentrated on the coastal passes.
It is worth noting the significant peaks occurring on these two coastal
motorways during the summer period, particularly at La Junquera, where daily
traffic reaches 2.5 times the yearly average.
Light vehicle traffic has risen by 42 % over the past ten years. Currently, light
vehicle flow at the La Junquera pass is 15 % higher than at Biriatou. Of the
two motorway links, the Biriatou pass (A 63) has shown steady growth over
the past 15 years, compared with a more irregular trend at La Junquera.
Although recent years have seen a recovery in railway passenger traffic, rail
transport still accounts for a very small share of total international passenger
traffic. Rail travel across the Pyrenees mainly takes place on TALGO trains,
given their ability to run both on Iberian gauge (Spain) and on international
© Association for European Transport 2004
gauge track (France). Railway traffic volume is highly skewed towards Port
Bou, which has five daily TALGO trains running in either direction, while only
one a day crosses the border at Irún.
Road freight has shown a spectacular acceleration, especially since Spain
and Portugal joined the European Union in 1986, rising from a yearly growth
rate of 4.5 % to close to 13 %. At present, freight transport between the
Iberian Peninsula and the rest of the EU is roughly shared equally by road and
sea carriers, while the market share held by railway carriers is approximately
5%, including combined road-railway transport modes. In the case of goods
exchanges between Spain and France, roads are the predominant mode of
transport, with 78 % of total tonnage, followed by sea (16 %) and rail (6 %).
Regarding the estimated future trend in traffic by mode of transport, the most
optimistic forecasts by the Pyrenean Observatory point to a trend similar to
that registered in the past nine years, during which the road mode accounted
for 82% of growth, versus 16% for maritime transport and 2% for rail transport.
Taking into account the enlargement of the European Union, the volume of
goods carried is expected to double over the next two decades. Thus, an
additional 100 to 120 million tonnes will need to be accommodated by the
available infrastructures. It will not be possible to sustain such an increase in
road freight without an attendant rise in accidents and a deterioration of the
environment in the Pyrenees. Therefore, action must be taken to find a new
balance between the various modes, transferring part of the volume of goods
to rail and sea transport, while at the same time improving road
infrastructures.
2.6.- Differing viewpoints
Following the coming into effect of the Maastricht Treaty (1993), the European
Commission set up an overall framework for the development of the transEuropean transport network, drawing up a list of 14 priority projects. Said list,
know as the Essen priority project list, only contemplated the Pyrenean border
in connection with the improvement of the existing railway corridors. Project
Number 3, (Southern high-speed train) calls for the construction of two new
railway lines, one at either end of the mountain range.
In 2001 the European Commission published the White Paper on Transport
(CE, 2001) in an attempt to mark a turning point in EU policy on this sector.
The white paper calls for increasing to 20 the list of priority European
infrastructure projects. Two out of the six new projects are directly related to
the promotion of railway transport across the Pyrenees (Fig. 5):
Ø Project 16. High-capacity trans-Pyrenean railway link, involving the
construction of a base tunnel in the central part of the mountain range,
and a European-gauge railway line mainly intended for freight
transport.
Ø Project 19. Inter-operability of high-speed lines in the Iberian Peninsula.
© Association for European Transport 2004
Figure 5.- Priority EU projects in the Pyrenees
The aim of maximising the permeability of the Pyrenees was clearly set out in
the Spanish proposals to the Van Miert Group1 directly involving this area,
namely:
Ø The currently active Essen projects (Project 3, southern high-speed
train; and Project 8, Spain-Portugal-Central Europe multi-modal
corridor)
Ø The projects considered by the Commission in its White Paper on
Transport (Project 16, with the special feature that the first stage
should be the opening of the Pau-Canfranc-Zaragoza line; and
Project 19)
Ø The permeabilisation of the Pyrenees by road (Pamplona-Orthez,
Zaragoza-Somport-Pau, Lérida-Viella-Toulouse, and BarcelonaToulouse)
Achieving the permeability of the Pyrenees is also an aim of the Working
Community of the Pyrenees2 (CTP). The CTP is particularly concerned with
internal communications among the Pyrenean regions. Hence, it proposes the
diversification and improvement of the road network to meet the mobility
requirements of the citizens of these areas.
1
High-level group, consisting of 27 representatives of the member States and prospective
new members, created in late 2002 to study the assessment and selection criteria for new
trans-European priority projects.
2
Inter-regional cross-border co-operation body formed by the three French regions
(Aquitaine, Languedoc-Roussillon and Midi-Pyrénées), the four Spanish autonomous
communities (Aragón, Catalonia, Navarra and the Basque Country) and the Principality of
Andorra
© Association for European Transport 2004
The aim in this case is to prevent the loss of rural population and the decay of
a number of economic activities owing to existing imbalances between
regions, caused by difficult terrain and differences in accessibility. For the
CTP, the broad lines of action for economic development are based on
increasing the number of exchanges in the Pyrenees; the essential
prerequisite for this is the improvement of communications and
telecommunications.
The French approach to the Pyrenean problem is radically different, since,
although 25% of traffic across the Pyrenees involves direct exchanges with
France, the rest is transit. Such traffic is a source of concern for the French
authorities, which complain about the saturation it produces in its
infrastructures, as well as the detrimental effect on the surroundings. This
approach has traditionally led French leaders to abstain from resolutely
promoting new access routes to Spain across the Pyrenean arc.
The measures proposed by France in connection with the Pyrenean border
are aimed at promoting sea and rail transport. As regards roads, the official
French policy is one of non-construction of new infrastructures, particularly
across the central area, which is to remain free of heavy-vehicle transit. The
French authorities, have, however, undertaken to upgrade some passes.
3.- IMPROVING
ENVIRONMENT
ACCESSIBILITY
WHILE
CARING
FOR
THE
As indicated previously, the present study forms part of an ongoing research
project in which a number of indicators have been developed for the
assessment of transport infrastructures in environmentally sensitive areas.
In such sensitive areas, the aims that justify the planning and building of
transport infrastructures (improving accessibility, promoting economic
development, etc.) come into conflict with the conservation of the environment
(disruption of habitats, deterioration of environmental quality, etc.)
It is our aim to develop a work tool that allows agreements to be reached
between the two nations’ governments when it comes to planning transport
infrastructures in the Pyrenees. Such tools rely on two models implemented
on a Geographic Information System – an accessibility model and an
environmental model.
The analysis focuses on the potential territorial effects that the construction of
four high-capacity road infrastructures would have on the Pyrenean area
(Figure 4). These four infrastructures are grouped into three different
scenarios:
q
Scenario 1: All four proposed links are built: Pamplona-Orthez,
Huesca-Somport-Pau, Lleida-Toulouse via Vielha and BarcelonaToulouse via Puigcerdá
© Association for European Transport 2004
q
Scenario 2: Only two out of the four proposed links are built: HuescaSomport-Pau and Barcelona-Toulouse via Puigcerdá.
q
Scenario 3: None of the proposed projects are carried out - this is the
base case scenario.
3.1.- Accessibility model
The building of new infrastructure has a positive effect on accessibility, which
plays an essential role in the assessment of the effects of transport
infrastructure improvements.
Demand for transport arises from the need to access a number of
opportunities which are unavailable at the point of origin. Any improvements in
the transport system are mainly aimed at providing easier access to such
opportunities.
Following a comprehensive study of the available bibliography, it can be said
that there is no ”ideal” accessibility indicator, but rather a number of mutually
complementary indicators. In this case, four types of indicator were selected
(Table 2) among those developed on a national scale under the Transyt
project, in collaboration with the Department of Human Geography of the
Complutense University of Madrid:
Ø Location indicator - the average access time to the main centres of
economic activity (Iij), with a weighting for the level of income at the
destination point (Rj).
Ø Network efficiency indicator - this is a “relative”, indicator that
eliminates the effect of geographic location, only reflecting the quality of
the infrastructure; it calculates the ratio between the “real” impedance
(Iij) along the network, and the “ideal” impedance (IIij) along a virtual
network with ideal characteristics.
Ø Daily accessibility indicator – this refers to activities within reach,
measured in destination income units (Rj), in a maximum of four hours,
this being the maximum travel-time threshold if a round trip is to be
completed in a single day.
Ø Economic potential indicator – this refers to activities within reach,
measured in destination income units (Rj), affected by an impedance
function that penalises the more distant destinations (Iij).
© Association for European Transport 2004
Type
Units
Location
indicator
minutes
Interpretability
Accesibility
adimensional
Daily
accessibility
indicator
inhabitants
Economic
potential
indicator
€/minutes
n
Ai =
Indicator
value
Network
efficciency
indicator
Formulation
∑ (I
Rj
I ij
n
ARi =
Indicator
value
⋅Rj)
n
∑
j =1
Accesibility
Indicator
value
ij
j =1
∑ II
j =1
⋅ Rj
ij
n
∑R
j =1
Accesibility
j
Ai = ∑ Pj ⋅ f (tij )
j
Indicator
value
Accesibility
n
Rj
j =1
I ij
Ai = ∑
Table 2. Accessibility Indicators Built
3.2.- Environmental model
When working at the individual project level, there are established tools
available for performing environmental impact assessment. However, when
the work involves a broader geographical scope, as well as decisions
regarding major transport infrastructure plans or schemes, the methodologies
for identifying or assessing environmental impacts are not so clearly defined.
On reaching such a stage of the planning process, we encounter certain
unknown factors when it comes to assessing the type of environmental
impacts that could arise and how they should be considered. Strategic
Environmental Assessment (defined in Directive 2001/42/CE) is a recent tool
that establishes the context within which to assess this kind of effects and
impacts, but a number of aspects have yet to be defined regarding the specific
scope of application and the most suitable methodologies. In many cases the
effects involved are difficult to assess and quantify, and it is sometimes more
appropriate to consider them as environmental risks.
For the purposes of the present paper, a trial environmental risk calculation
was performed with the aim of influencing the subsequent planning of the
above-mentioned infrastructures. When performing the trial, these proposed
infrastructures were defined as mere corridors along which would run the
route of the final project. On the basis of this route, it is possible to calculate
the environmental risk defined simply by the area of land that could be
affected by such a corridor, classifying such land according to its preliminary
environmental quality. The larger the area of high-quality land potentially
affected by the corridor, the greater the environmental risk. This
environmental risk can serve as the starting point to compare different
technically viable alternatives and take a number of decisions regarding, for
instance, the level of information, detail and scale of the subsequent
environmental impact assessment. Likewise, it may be considered
unnecessary to go through the procedure if any of the alternatives is
© Association for European Transport 2004
dismissed, or if the environmental risk is deemed to be very small or
negligible.
The Department of Construction and Rural Roads of the Polytechnic
University of Madrid has developed a methodology based on GIS and on the
comprehensive modelling of all environmental parameters which, under the
currently effective legislation, must be taken into account when carrying out a
strategic environmental assessment. Using such a methodology, an
environmental quality map was built for each of the Pyrenean areas (French
and Spanish) given the scarcity of uniform cartography available for both
areas and the differences in data availability between them. The maps
obtained are:
SYNTHETIC MODEL FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF SPANISH NATURAL
QUALITY.
The cartography and environmental information available was standardised.
This included the Spanish Forestry Map, together with Corine Land Cover,
Habitat, Landscape, Soil and Protected Spaces cartography. Hence, 12
variables were established using models that analysed the information from
these six maps, based on the natural value, the singularity, the naturalness
and the levels of protection of the different elements of the environment.
It was decided to construct the final map (first version) in raster format,
assigning a 12-component vector to each 100 by 100 m square of the
territory, corresponding to the standardised value of the 12 modelled
variables. The values for each square were ordered hierarchically based on
the Euclidean distance from the origin of the co-ordinates, or vector (0,0..0).
The resulting sequence was then reclassified, leading to the first Synthetic
Map of Spanish Natural Quality, which establishes five quality levels. This
map was combined with the cartography of Spanish national and autonomous
community protected spaces, leading to a final cartography which constitutes
the basis for carrying out subsequent analyses.
QUALITY MAP FOR THE FRENCH AREA
The preliminary quality map for the French area was constructed in a similar
fashion. However, only the variables from the Corine Land Cover and
Landscape maps were introduced, which explains a slight “overvaluation”
effect in the French zone. An extensive and laborious cartography search
allowed us to make use of a number of official maps from the Environmental
European Agency (EEA) on land uses (Corine Land Cover, 1:350.000 scale)
or soil types (Soil Index Type, 1:1.000.000 scale – this was finally not used,
as a serious error was detected in its basis of projection). These, together with
the donation of a landscape map made a few years ago in France (IFEN,
1994), became the basis for developing the provisional quality map for the
French Pyrenean region. The French protected space maps available on the
web sites of the three French regions were not included in the quality map, but
were subsequently used as a means of enhancing and clarifying the results.
The model is highly susceptible of enrichment through new additions
© Association for European Transport 2004
whenever new updates and improvements of the existing cartography become
available.
4.- INITIAL RESULTS OF THE CARTOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
4.1.- Accessibility Model
Based on the three scenarios defined in the previous section, accessibility
maps were developed for the regions under study, according to the Economic
Potential and Network Efficiency indicators (Figures 6 and 7).
© Association for European Transport 2004
Figure 6. Accessibility analysis for the various scenarios (1, 2 & 3) according to the Network efficiency indicator.
Figure 7. Accessibility analysis for the various scenarios (1, 2 & 3) according to the Economic Potential indicator.
© Association for European Transport 2004
The economic potential indicator takes into account the income of the
destinations reached. Note that the highest potential values are concentrated
around the major cities, particularly around the Barcelona metropolitan area.
The variations between the different scenarios are higher for French towns than
for Spanish ones, due to the weight of Barcelona. The effects are more clearly
observable around the latter cities than in the Pyrenean zone. Hence, the
largest differences occur between scenario 3 (base case) and scenario 2, due
to the construction of the Toulouse-Barcelona link, compared with smaller
differences between scenarios 2 and 1.
In this initial stage of the project, income levels outside the area of study were
not taken into account when building the Economic potential indicator. This has
led to a distinct edge effect, with the lowest indicator values located at the limits
of the region under study.
Such an edge effect is not observable with the Network Efficiency indicator, as
this indicator eliminates the geographic location effect and only gives a measure
of infrastructure quality. It can be seen in scenario 3 that the highest values are
obtained in the areas having the densest networks, with the Pyrenean border
showing the lowest values. Note, however, that in scenarios 1 and 2 it is
precisely the Pyrenean border that shows the greatest improvements upon
increasing the density of the network across the border.
4.2.- Environmental model
Likewise, the environmental quality maps mentioned above were used to carry
out an environmental risk analysis associated with the potential construction of
the four new high-capacity roads that would link Spain and France across the
Pyrenees. Figure 8 below shows the integrated environmental quality map for
the CTP area.
© Association for European Transport 2004
Figure 8. Preliminary Integrated Environmental Quality Map.
The quality maps were intersected with the map of planned infrastructures in
order to quantify the percentage of territory, within each of the prior quality
assessment categories, which might be affected by the construction project. In
order to calculate the area potentially affected, a 2 km buffer zone was applied
around each of the existing infrastructures connecting the origin and destination
points of the proposed new infrastructures. The chosen width of the buffer zone
is based on the likelihood that the proposed new infrastructures would run
parallel to, or a short distance from, the existing ones. Hence, a 2 km strip on
either side seems reasonable to give an idea of the quality of the territory
susceptible of being affected by the new projects.
The results, presented in overall terms for each corridor, are as follows:
TERRITORY AFFECTED ACCORDING TO QUALITY (ha)
VERY
HIGH
% HIGH
% MED.
% LOW
VERY
% LOW
TOTAL
% (ha)
BCN-TOU
11459 12,8 25192 28,1 17894 19,9 30272 33,7
4929
5,5
LLEI-TOU
13459 12,3 17428 15,9 39223 35,7 34398 31,3
5327
4,9 109836
HUE-PAU
14038 21,9 18900 29,5 13839 21,6 12614 19,7
4699
7,3
64093
2479
5,9
41861
PAMP-ORT
2991
7,1 16240 38,8 14389 34,4
5760 13,8
89747
SCEN. 1
41947 13,7 77761 25,5 85347 27,9 83046 27,2 17436
5,7 305539
SCEN. 2
25497 16,6 44092 28,7 31734 20,6 42887 27,9
6,3 153841
9628
Table 3. Territory Affected by the Proposed Infrastructure.
The results highlight the difficulty in finding locations that are suitable, from an
environmental standpoint, for new infrastructure projects in the Pyrenean
region. The four corridors considered in this study would affect a considerable
© Association for European Transport 2004
amount of territory rated as high-quality and very high-quality, with a distinct
environmental risk, assuming that the entire infrastructure would be constructed
above ground (this analysis does not take into account the various levels of
impact associated with different construction options).
Despite the preliminary nature of the analysis and the need for more information
on the French zone in order to provide final conclusions, the results allow us to
compare the different levels of repercussion among the various corridors,
considering the stretches of territory presenting the most problems, and hence,
at an early stage in the decision-making process, to seek possible alternatives
or more suitable procedures. Therefore, this type of analysis should be
incorporated into a set of established techniques aimed at assessing the overall
environmental impact of a given infrastructure, on a very broad scale and at a
high level in the decision-making process. The uncertainty as to the specific
location of the infrastructure makes it impossible to obtain concrete results;
however, estimated data such as the affected surface area, potential combined
emissions of pollutants, energy consumption etc, provide essential information
in order to take the most appropriate decisions.
It is during the stage involving the definition, requirements analysis and design
of transport options that the most important decisions can be taken regarding
corridors, transport modes, location of support infrastructures or overall system
improvement policies, leading to more environmentally sustainable solutions
while at the same time providing an improvement in communications, this being
the ultimate aim in the various regions involved.
Moreover, following the definition of a number of construction alternatives at the
individual project scale, overall analysis enables the subsequent specification,
in terms of depth and detail, of the environmental impact assessment that
needs to be carried out on the individual sections of the infrastructure,
depending on the specific problems associated with each of them. Thus, after
estimating the overall impact, the main emphasis can be placed on accurately
establishing the environmental effect on those locations previously identified as
the most sensitive.
5.- CONCLUSIONS
The performance of this study has revealed a number of factors that we wish to
highlight:
First, the difficulty in consolidating data from the two neighbouring countries,
France and Spain, in order to carry out a homogeneous study of the Pyrenean
area as a whole, despite the efforts of the Working Community of the Pyrenees
and the Pyrenean Transport Observatory since their respective creations. A
particularly problematic aspect is the need to work with cartography from
several sources, with different projection methods and systems, different scales
and levels of detail. This is compounded by the fact that, in many cases, the
corresponding metadata are not available.
© Association for European Transport 2004
The highly specific features of the Pyrenean area, since the abruptness of the
terrain in the central massif presents major challenges to the construction of
new infrastructures without harming one of Europe’s most environmentally
privileged areas. An in-depth analysis must be made of the environmental
implications – territorial, atmospheric, energy consumption etc – giving due
consideration to overall as well as local effects, both on an overall and on a
detailed basis, taking into account all the possible options for the improvement
of the transport system. According to the present preliminary analysis, the four
proposed infrastructures (grouped into two scenarios) represent a potential
impact that needs to be seriously taken into account when carrying out the
complete study.
As regards the accessibility analysis, we foresee the need for a more detailed
analysis of the indicators in relation to the environmental study, which is to form
the final phase of this study.
The importance – for the Iberian Peninsula in its relationship with Europe, as
well as for the Pyrenean regions in order to achieve a greater measure of
integration – of increasing the permeability of the Pyrenean mountain range.
The considerable environmental impact of a potential increase in the number of
heavy vehicles crossing the central massif, not only resulting from the
construction work itself, but also from the emission of pollutants, noise, etc.
Therefore, serious consideration should be given to the possibility of not
allowing heavy vehicles on the central road passes across the Pyrenees.
Any efforts to improve freight transport across the Pyrenees should focus on a
genuine optimisation of the border passes and the construction of a base rail
tunnel across the Central Pyrenees (following the opening of the Canfranc
tunnel).
The proposed methodology constitutes a useful means of assisting the
decision-making process involving transport infrastructures in environmentally
sensitive areas. It contributes to an early detection of the environmental risk
associated with such projects, thus allowing such risk to be minimised in
subsequent stages of the planning process.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The performance of this study, which forms part of the Project “Análisis de los
impactos territoriales producidos por los modos de transporte terrestre definidos
en el Plan de Infraestructuras 2000 – 2007: Conexión de la red española a las
redes transeuropeas” (Analysis of the territorial impacts generated by the
overland transport modes defined in the Infrastructure Plan 2000-2007:
Connection of the Spanish network to the trans-European networks) was made
possible by the Research Funding Programme (2002) of the State Secretariat
for Infrastructures of the Spanish Ministry of Public Works.
REFERENCES
© Association for European Transport 2004
APARICIO MOURELO, A. & SÁNCHEZ VICENTE, A (2003). Pirineos: Mejorar de
las infraestructuras de apoyo al transporte internacional. Fundación Francisco Corell,
Departamento de Transportes (ETSICCP, UPM).
CALLIZO, J. & ZAMORANO, C. (1998). Inserción de la travesía ferroviaria por el
Pirineo Central en las redes transeuropeas de transporte. Unpublished Study.
GOBIERNO DE ARAGON.
COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES (2001). White Paper:
“European Transport Policy for 2010 : Time to Decide”, 2001
EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCY (2001) Road freight transport and the
environment in montainous areas. Copenhague: EEA.
GUTIÉRREZ, J., GONZÁLEZ, R., & GÓMEZ, G. (1996). The European high –speed
train network. Predicted effects on accessibility patterns. Journal of Transport
Geography, vol 4, n 4, pp. 227-238
INSTITUT FRANÇAIS DE L'ENVIRONNEMENT / JACQUES THORETTE.(1994):
Source: DUPIAS Georges ; REY Paul ; Document pour un zonage des régions phytoécologiques; Février 1985; CNRS ; vectorized by Ifen (Institut français de
l'Environnement) ; 1994
MINISTERIO DE FOMENTO; MINISTÈRE DE L’ÉQUIPEMENT, DES
TRANSPORTS ET DU LOGEMENT (2000 y 2002) Observatorio hispano-francés de
tráfico en los Pirineos. Documentos nº 1 y 2. Madrid: Ministerio de Fomento.
OTERO, I et al. (1999). Impacto Ambiental de carreteras: Evaluación y Restauración.
Comunidad de Madrid-CICYT, 1999.
TRANSyT (UPM), UCLM, UCM, U. Sevilla (Estudio en marcha). Estudio del caso
Pirineos. Impactos territoriales del Plan de Infraestructuras 2000-2007: Conexión con
la Red Transeuropea. MINISTERIO DE FOMENTO; Research Project.
ZAMORANO, C & SÁNCHEZ VICENTE, A. (2004). Infraestructuras en Pirineos, el
papel del ferrocarril. VI Congreso de Ingeniería del Transporte. Zaragoza.
© Association for European Transport 2004