<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Development of Railway Capacity Cost and Apportionment Model</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1240873</link>
      <description><![CDATA[In 1991 the European Community issued regulations for liberalizing the European railway market by introducing open access. While open access has only been partly implemented so far, the concept of railway path pricing has been well established and is used throughout Europe. Railway path prices should help pay for construction, maintenance and operation of railway infrastructure and help guide transport decisions. Railway path pricing systems are continuously under development and capacity aspects are becoming increasingly important. In this research a capacity based cost allocation method was developed and evaluated using case study data. This showed the impact of three common allocation schemes for apportioning the costs of lost capacity. The paper presents results of this evaluation and outlines whether and how such a capacity-based cost allocation method could be introduced realistically in a path pricing system.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2013 16:49:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1240873</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Improving Ultrasonic Inspection of Rail Welds</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1097617</link>
      <description><![CDATA[RAILECT is a Research for Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises project that tests a prototype clamp-on ultrasonic inspection device with the potential to lead to a final decision on whether to weld or not weld a rail component in just 15 minutes. The device uses phased array probes and electronic scanning to detect welds that may prematurely fail. Field trials of the inspection device's prototype have been undertaken in the United Kingdom. An insert provides more detail on the RAILECT project, whose partners represent eight European enterprises. RAILECT has received funding from the European Community's Seventh Framework Program. More information is available online at www.railect.com.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:07:54 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1097617</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>European Community Emission Inventory Report 1990–2007 under the UNECE Convention on Long-range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP)</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/1097249</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This is the European Community emission inventory report under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on Long‑range Transboundary Air Pollution (LRTAP). The report and its accompanying data are provided by the European Commission on behalf of the European Community as an official submission to the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe via the secretariat for the Executive Body of the LRTAP Convention. The report is updated and produced each year for submission under the reporting requirements of the Convention. Under the LRTAP Convention, Parties (including the European Community) are obliged to report emissions data for a number of air pollutants, including sulphur oxides (SO ͯ), nitrogen oxides (NO  ͯ), non-methane volatile organic compounds (NMVOCs), ammonia (NH3), carbon monoxide (CO), primary particulate matter (PM10 and PM2.5), heavy metals (HMs) and persistent organic pollutants (POPs). This report provides information on: (a) the institutional arrangements and data sources that underpin the European Community's LRTAP Convention emission inventory (Chapter 1); (b) emission trends, by pollutant based on the emission reports received from the EU-27 Member States (Chapter 2); (c) contributions of key source categories to emissions (Chapter 3); and (d) recalculations of emission estimates previously reported (Chapter 4). Several new elements have been incorporated into this year's European Community emission inventory report compared to last year's publication (2). The report now provides an analysis of the main sources of air pollutants within the EU on a combined pollutant basis, a summary of the approaches used by the different Member States to estimate emissions from the transport sector, and an overview of projections data that countries reported to the Convention in 2009.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 14:13:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/1097249</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Online Fight Against Substandard Shipping: Promoting Quality and Transparency in Shipping</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/860078</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recognized as an essential tool in helping to promote global maritime transportation quality, transparency, and safety, Equasis is a unique website dedicated to public information. Accessible at www.equasis.org, it was created to assist in unbiased, safety-related marine information promotion. Equasis was conceived in 1997 through a quality shipping campaign launched by the United Kingdom (UK) government and the European Commission (EC). A Memorandum of Understanding regarding Equasis was signed by the EC, France, Japan, Singapore, Spain, UK, and the United States Coast Guard. Equasis covers the world merchant fleet of ships of 100 gt current under construction or in service. A non-profit-making organization, Equasis does not compete with any commercial maritime data providers and has no commercial purpose. The author describes factual, comprehensive, reliable, and understandable data available through Equasis, as well as the website audience and future development.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 03 Jun 2008 07:27:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/860078</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Airport capacity vs. demand: Mismatch or mismanagement?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/842562</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Since well-publicized congestion and delay problems encountered by European and US airports entered the political arena, there is an unprecedented pressure experienced by policy makers upon investigating and adopting strategies for managing demand and allocating scarce airport capacity. During the last few years, there is an ongoing policy debate within the European Community to undertake further work for a drastically revised regulatory framework aiming to deal with the scarcity of airport capacity through the efficient allocation of airport slots. One of the primary policy concerns lies on the compatibility of alternative slot allocation strategies in different airport settings. The objective of this paper is threefold: (i) to develop and apply a methodological framework for the multi-criteria evaluation and selection of the most compatible slot allocation strategy with respect to policy criteria and priorities in various airport settings, (ii) to examine the applicability of policy compatibility results in various airport settings and their potential acceptability from different industry stakeholders, and (iii) to provide policy recommendations for European airport policy making and planning.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:12:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/842562</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Assessment of a transport policy potential for intermodal mode shift on a European scale</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/811428</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Policies of general nature for improving the competitive position of intermodal transport have not always been successful. On the contrary, specific policies, such as targeting the supply chain or the offered services and transport are probably more effective in identifying and subsequently shifting transport from road to intermodal. The aim of the paper is the development of a methodology with the necessary tools to assess the potential of a specific policy measure to produce a modal shift in favour of intermodal transport. In addition, for the cases of positive outcomes, the necessary elements for the policy action plan are presented. The methodology comprises of three parts: a toolbox called the macro-scan, which assesses the potential for modal shift, a sensitivity analysis and the policy action plan. Thus, an insight on the impact of a modal shift on supply chains and on the potential for modal shift is acquired. The methodology, developed within the SPIN Research Project of the European Commission, will be useful to policy makers at governmental level as well as to the private sector, especially in the European Union countries.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Jul 2007 09:56:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/811428</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Off the Beaten Track</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/808825</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article describes how the European Community's policies on competition are applicable to the issue of track access.  The Community's approach has been to set very general principles requiring that pathing priorities be fair, but leaving member states to overlay their own detail.  There are two cardinal principles in the Community's approach, which applies to both international and domestic services:  an organization that runs trains cannot also allocate paths nor can it decide charging.  Train operators may bid for paths everywhere but other parties, such as intermodal operators, may only bid where national governments permit it.  Since international trains pose a particular challenge, cooperation between infrastructure managers is often necessary to create an end-to-end path.  Where infrastructure is congested, Community policy allows states and infrastructure managers significant freedom in deciding which traffic gets a path.  The Community also allows an infrastructure manager to offer customers guaranteed capacity, but not individual paths, over the longer term.  This allows the train operators to offer a continuing service to their customer each year.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 10:34:16 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/808825</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The EU Regulatory Action in the Shipping Sector: A Historical Perspective</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/806624</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The European Union (EU) has made significant maritime transport regulatory efforts in recent years, including comprehensive common rules regarding some of shipping's key aspects. Traditionally, individual EU member states have taken very different approaches to shipping regulation, so progressively transferring regulatory competencies to the European Community is noteworthy. The author examines primary underlying factors in reviewing EU maritime policy inception and primary developments through the years.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 08:07:40 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/806624</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Identifying Factors Affecting Willingness to Implement European Policy on Rail Interoperability: Econometric Analysis</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/802226</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The intent of this research is to evaluate the level of implementing rail interoperability Directives and provide insight on factors affecting bureaucratic willingness to implement rail interoperability policy in the European Community.  This is done through modeling of the choice of rail authority bureaucrats to fully implement and adopt the EC Directives into rail practices.  Formulation and estimation of the model follows the generalized ordered probit model framework, which is based on ordered-response theory.  Model estimation results reflect the level of willingness to adopt the new rail policies.  Using knowledge databases on current implementation states and additional data and information collection, the study identifies country characteristics, such as GDP, average household income, population, that may have a significant effect on the implementation level.  This information is collected from the internet websites of the EU, countries’ government, national rail agencies, national rail companies, and national infrastructure managers.  The findings provide insight to the current state of rail interoperability in European countries, as well as insight to factors affecting the willingness to implement rail policy.  Results found in this research could form the backdrop for formulating methods to overcome, circumvent, or neutralize the lack of willingness to implement, as well as other barriers preventing interoperability.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Mar 2007 07:02:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/802226</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Dispersion of Authority in the European Union and its Impact on Environmental Legislation</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/788365</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The central topics of this chapter are the achievements and limitations of environmental legislation by the European Community (EC) as well as the possible effectiveness of a central environmental authority.  After a description of the history of EC environmental legislation, the institutional frame and achievements of EC legislation pass in review.  This is followed by an analysis of factors that influence European environmental legislation.  Next the relationships between EC ad national legislations and between environmental and other policies are discussed.  Next, the chapter discusses the relationships between EC and national legislations and between environmental and other policies.  The question of whether EC standards are sufficiently stringent is answered negatively and major shortcomings are identified.  A powerful central environmental authority would not have been more effective than the present regime; four directives are used as examples.  The chapter concludes that the stringency of EC environmental legislation is mainly determined by political will – dispersion of authority is not so important – and that, notwithstanding major achievements at the European level, environmental interests have been insufficiently represented and considered and this leaves concerns for the future.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Sep 2006 07:49:47 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/788365</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Antitrust Law and Airlines: The European Perspective</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/759061</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article is a general examination of current issues relating to European Community (E.C.) antitrust law and the European airline sector.  The article focuses  on two distinct areas: the regulatory framework and the application of Articles 81 and 82 of the E.C. Treaty of Rome (Treaty of Rome) to the sector.  The purpose of the article was to examine the development of a liberalized European air transport policy and to account for the current regulatory framework , particularly in relation to E.C. antitrust laws.  The article also demonstrates that the commission will enforce Articles 81 and 82 where it is clear that there is anti competitive behavior.  The economic and legal methods employed in terms of market definition and defining abuse are clear indicators that the commission will approach this complex area carefully.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Sep 2005 07:57:20 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/759061</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>A SAFER JOURNEY</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/716463</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This article traces the history of road markings and provides an overview of the current market and standards.  The first road markings were in paint, but during World War II, Britain began to produce thermoplastics to conserve hydrocarbon stocks.  Paint continued to be the most popular marking method until 1966, when a method of spraying thermoplastic using truck-mounted equipment was developed.  Thermoplastic currently makes up most of the market in the UK and Scandinavia, while paint still dominates in the United States and southern Europe.  A new European standard has been designed to harmonize road marking throughout the European Community, and it is reported that the U.S. may also adopt the European performance standard.  The new standard enables the engineer to specify performance characteristics for a particular situation, including the level of reflectivity, the luminance value and the skid resistance.  Some issues for future development include environmental concerns, the need for wider and more visible markings for an aging population, and more extensive testing of performance levels.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 19 Jan 2002 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/716463</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>LIBERALIZATION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY (EC) AIRLINE INDUSTRY - A PROGRESS INVESTIGATION</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/658582</link>
      <description><![CDATA[As part of the European Community's (EC's) push toward a single economic market, efforts have been made to liberalize the airline industry.  This report attempts to outline the legislation put forward by the EC, investigate the progress made toward stated objectives in a number of areas, and compare the effects to date on competition.  The findings reveal that changes toward increasing competition are occurring, but that lukewarm political will is causing the pace to be slower than expected.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 12 Aug 2000 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/658582</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>WHY USE ENACTABLE MODELS OF CONSTRUCTION PROCESSES?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/512669</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Construction is a process-based industry.  In such an industry, it is important to have a clear understanding of the process. One way to achieve this is by the use of a process mode.  In a European Community funded research project, the business process of a small U.K. construction company was modeled and analyzed. Both visual modeling and enactable modeling techniques were used in this exercise.  This paper aims to show how process understanding can be better achieved by a combination of visual models and enactable models.  This is supported by examples from the construction company process studied.  The tools and techniques used in this exercise are those developed by the collaborators of the project.  The visual modeling is done using ProcessWise WorkBench and Role Activity Diagrams.  The view of the business process given by the ProcessWise WorkBench models is predominantly process based, whereas Role Activity Diagrams provide a role based view of the process.  The enactable modeling is done using RolEnact, a modeling tool that enacts formal specifications of processes.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Dec 1999 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/512669</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>THE ROLE OF PORTS IN THE TRANS-EUROPEAN NETWORK WITH EMPHASIS ON THE BALTIC REGION - THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION'S VIEW</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/480437</link>
      <description><![CDATA[No abstract provided.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 1997 00:00:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/480437</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>