Change low graphic options | Change language | Skip content to navigation
Page context: Home > Education > Education Bulletin > Education Briefings
World Bank transport strategy
Transport and climate change
Global terminal operator- APM-Arab World responses
Hava-Is seminar - Lessons from 25 years of neo-liberal attacks
No global institution has had more direct impact on the lives of transport workers in developing countries over the last two decades than the World Bank. So ITF has taken a keen interest in its transport strategy for the next five years, which was launched in May in a document called Safe, Clean and Affordable: Transport For Development.
Within hours of launching the document in Washington, the World Bank's new global transport chief, Marc Juhel, was on his way to London, where he presented it at the ITF. He stayed for the whole day to allow key affiliate leaders from Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Middle East to question him about the Bank's plans and seek assurances about how transport workers will be treated as they are implemented.
The World Bank already invests more in transport than in any other sector -- transport projects account for about 20 per cent of all its lending -- and the new strategy suggests this is likely to increase further. The Bank also uses policy advice and "technical assistance" to influence laws, institutions and regulatory arrangements. For example, the Bank's new strategy revealed that it is currently advising the Iranian government about the future of Tehran's transport system.
At the ITF seminar, Juhel was challenged to take up the issue of the continued imprisonment of Mansour Osanloo, leader of the country's bus workers' union. He was told that it was inappropriate to support a government's transport reforms at a time when the same government is denying basic trade union rights to transport workers. He was also reminded that recipients of Bank investments are now supposed to comply with core labour standards.
Most of the discussion at the seminar centred, however, on the Bank's policy approach to transport restructuring, including its support for privatisation. For example, the Bank's new strategy continues to advocate the "landlord model" for ports and airports, under which governments retain ownership but privatise services such as stevedoring and ground handling.
Juhel defended these policies, and responded to vivid accounts of the impact of railway privatisation on workers and communities by pointing out how much public subsidy state-owned railways and ports had required. Julio Sosa, of 'La Fraternidad' Sociedad de Personal Ferroviario de Locomotoras, informed him that, following 85,000 retrenchments and the decimation of passenger services and much of his country's track network, Argentina's railway receives more public subsidy than it did before it was privatised.
The World Bank also favours private delivery of urban passenger transport services, although its new strategy moves away from the liberalisation approach that broke up integrated public transport systems in its previous generation of restructuring policies. That policy contributed to increasing problems such as traffic congestion and denial of basic services to poor people, which the new strategy is aiming to tackle. The Bank now concedes that governments have key roles in planning, financing and regulating public transport, and that publicly run mass transit is also an "acceptable policy option", albeit not its preferred one.
The new strategy also gives greater priority than before to road safety. Safe, Clean and Affordable points out that around 1,200,000 people are killed on the world's roads every year, with the toll increasing fastest among the poorest people. The strategy document points out that "low- and middle-income countries bear about 90 percent of the current burden of road deaths and injuries", and adds: "Bank projections indicate that between 2000 and 2020 road crash fatalities will increase by more than 80 percent in low- and middle-income countries, but will decrease by nearly 30 percent in high-income countries."
Like other global institutions, the Bank is also increasingly concerned about the impact of transport on the environment, through climate change and other effects of pollution. The new strategy outlines various ways in which the Bank is aiming to control and mitigate carbon emissions, but says nothing about the impact on global warming of the Bank's overall development model, which promotes international trade as the route to economic growth and poverty reduction.
Challenged about this at the London seminar, Juhel acknowledged that climate change and the rising price of oil could force governments and international institutions to rethink global production and distribution systems. He referred to the absurdity of the fact that bottles of Fijian mineral water can be bought in his local supermarket in Washington, but suggested that market pressures -- in the form of changing consumer choices and rising fuel costs -- would force change.
Washingtonians can certainly manage without Fijian mineral water, but, as we are already seeing with food price rises in developing countries, and the reaction to them of the people most badly affected, oil price rises also bring great hardship. Moreover, both the environmental and social impact of biofuels are coming under growing scrutiny.
It is here that we see most clearly the tensions at the heart of the World Bank's transport strategy. Indeed, the rapid rise of climate change up the political agenda, at the same time that pressure to tackle global poverty through the Millennium Development Goals is also intensifying, is the main reason for the elaborate revision of the new strategy since the first draft was published in February 2006.
The Bank is aiming to expand access to transport, which it points out is essential to enable people to reach jobs and public services, and for small producers to get their goods to market. But it also points out that the more transport there is, the more energy it consumes and the more emissions are produced. Therefore, among other things, policy makers must "consider how to alter the demand for and modal distribution of transport in economically efficient ways to reduce aggregate carbon intensity."
Pressure to reduce emissions will focus particularly on private road transport, which accounts for around 70 percent of them, and aviation, which accounts for 12 percent, says the document, adding: "These modes are in many circumstances (though not always) the most energy intensive per traffic unit; moreover, they are fastest growing in terms of traffic volumes. Sea and inland waterway transport are together 11 percent, and railways (freight and passenger) 2 percent of total emissions."
In addition to modal shifts, the strategy looks to increased public transport for some of the solutions, and to changes in people's travel behaviour, companies' logistics decisions and technology choices for others. The document adds:
"Within the policy mix, it seems likely that taxes on fuel will need to play a central role because carbon emissions are directly correlated with fuel consumption. Thus, pricing signals will affect both the immediate consumption and, if high fuel costs are expected to be permanent, the longer-term technological and behavioral responses to achieve greater energy efficiency. Moreover, revenues from such taxes can provide part of the source of public investment in less carbon-intensive transport.
"However, price mechanisms alone are unlikely to be politically or socially acceptable, nor sufficient for the challenge. It will take concerted and sustained long-term effort using a mix of policies, applied over decades and on an international scale, just to stabilize the level of transport-related greenhouse gas emissions. The good news is that many of the transport policy measures that can help reduce greenhouse gas emissions have other benefits."
In this context, the strategy promises "greater attention to railways and inland waterways for freight; better urban public transport services; urban road traffic demand management to reduce congestion and facilitate better performance of public transport; support of nonmotorized transport, management of vehicle emissions, safe driving behavior (which is also more fuel-efficient driving behavior), and so on."
However, if those measures and market shifts can indeed contribute to delivery of the "safe" and "clean" goals of the World Bank's strategy, the rising costs involved will also intensify pressure on transport providers to reduce other costs. This, together with the Bank's third policy objective -- to make transport more "affordable" -- suggests that ITF and its affiliates need to pay attention to the impact of the Bank's strategy on the jobs, pay and conditions of transport workers.
One ITF affiliate representative after another told Juhel at the London seminar that their members had already paid for the Bank's approach to transport restructuring with increased unemployment and insecurity, and that they would not tolerate more of the same. Although the Bank's strategy includes commitments to labour standards and consultation with unions, it does not explore how these should be applied in practice.
Juhel was told that ITF shares the goals of "safe, clean and affordable" transport, and that the Bank and its client governments should regard transport workers as rich sources of knowledge about how to achieve them in sustainable and equitable ways. But unions could not be partners in change unless their members' rights to secure employment, union representation and collective bargaining were given equal priority. Those considerations needed to be factored into the Bank's policy advice about legal, institutional and regulatory change, and into the way in which its transport projects were designed and implemented.
Brendan Martin is a consultant to ITF and can be reached on bmartin@publicworld.org
There is no longer any serious debate about whether climate change is taking place or not, or whether such change is caused by human activity. The scientific evidence is overwhelming. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change there is greater than 90 percent likelihood that most of the observed warming is due to human-generated greenhouse gases. If action is not taken now, the Stern Review concluded that a 2 degrees centigrade temperature rise is likely by 2035 (the threshold marker for dangerous climate change identified by scientists).
Transport is a significant and growing source of carbon emissions. Currently, the transport sector accounts for about a quarter of total emissions from fuel combustion. OECD countries together with many countries in central and eastern Europe account for 71% of worldwide emissions from transport (Summary document of European Conference of Ministers, 2007).
Transport emissions have increased by 120% over the past 30 years (Human Development Report, 2007/8), and are gradually increasing in all regions of the world. In the EU, transport continues to be the fastest growing consumer of energy and therefore producer of greenhouse gas emissions. In the UK, for example, transport was the only sector where emissions grew between 1990-2004. In some countries, the growth in transport emissions has outweighed the reductions made in other sectors. Transport is also the fastest growing consumer of energy in developing countries.
In 2001, freight activity accounted for 30-40 per cent of transport related CO2 emissions in OECD countries (OECD Information Paper). More goods are transported further and more frequently than before. Since 1992, freight volumes have grown by 43% in Europe (TRUST report drawing on figures from the European Environment agency). The dominant transportation mode for freight is road (75% in OECD countries) linked to the changing needs of supply chains and freight flows, particularly just-in-time production. Evidence seems to suggest that technological improvements (related to fuel and vehicle efficiency) will not be able to outweigh the increase in volume of road freight transport and reduce emissions.
When considering emissions from transport, it is important to look at the specifics of different modes including:
· While aviation currently contributes about 3% of global emissions (13% of CO2 emissions from all transport sources), the growth in air travel has seen emissions from international aviation increasing by 87% between 1990-2001. The IPCC in its special report on Aviation and the Global Atmosphere anticipates that aircraft emissions will continue to grow significantly despite technological improvements. The total impact of aviation is estimated to be two to five times higher than the effect of CO2 alone due to the release of gases at high altitude and contrail and cloud formation.
· Recent reports suggest that emissions from shipping could be double the amount previously believed, with ships contributing 5-6% of global emissions. Ship emissions are projected to grow by 70% by 2020 as global trade expands. The impacts of emissions from shipping are not only of concern for global warming, but also for the health of seafarers, port workers and communities living near ports.
· Ports are a major source of pollutants from vessels, cargo-handling equipment and trucks. Factors contributing to pollution levels include the “hotelling” of ships while at shore (their auxiliary engines are kept on), the speed of the ship as it approaches the port and the length of time at port. Numerous studies have shown that high concentrations of emissions related to port activities are harmful to human health (ILWU research paper, 2006).
· Road transport is the largest contributor of emissions within the transport sector. Passenger transport accounts for the largest part of road emissions, mainly through expanded private car use. However, freight emissions have been growing faster than passenger emissions in OECD countries, a trend expected to continue (European Conference of Ministers of Transport).
· Railways are a relatively energy-efficient transport mode yet the share of rail transport, both passenger and freight, has been declining in most OECD countries. In developing regions, “the industry has continued to decline in many countries that have not privatised, as well as in others that have done so”. (FES Briefing Paper, Brendan Martin, 2007).
The growth in transport emissions raises important questions for trade unions concerning the way in which the restructuring of transport has been geared towards economic growth and the competitive needs of multinational corporations. This approach has had many implications for workers and unions, including harmful effects on human health. It highlights that the development of technologies alone cannot be effective in reducing emissions from transport, and that a more holistic approach encompassing wider economic and social changes is necessary.
Unions cannot address the environmental impact of transport separately from wider issues of how transport is controlled and organised in the context of globalisation and the impact on workers and unions. We need to turn to our existing policies on globalisation and transport workers, and deepen our perspective on how climate change is linked to an unsustainable model of development which “,,,is having a major impact on workers, communities and populations all around the world. It has led to an acceleration in economic inequalities between rich and poor, within and between countries, a reduction in the influence of governments compared to that of corporations and a cut in the importance of public services”. (Resolution No 7, ITF Congress 2002).
An Arab world seminar focusing on APM terminal operators concluded with a need to develop a minimum set of principles based on international labour standards that APM Terminals should respect. Other seminar outcomes included a commitment to increasing union strength in the region, engaging APM in dialogue and organising workers in the terminals.
The seminar was held in Aqaba, Jordan, from 4 – 6 December 2007, with participants from Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Morocco, and Oman.
Overall the aim of the seminar was to provide a forum for port unions in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries to share experiences of their engagement with APM Terminals, a major player in the ports sector in the region. APM Terminals is one of a several Global Network Terminal Operators that the ITF is seeking to engage on the issue of labour standards. The seminar also aimed to support the unions in developing common and complimentary responses, and consider how best to inform, participate and benefit from the ITF’s global dialogues with global operators.
Company and trade union relations
From participant reports the level of engagement between participating unions and the company varies from country to country. However, on the whole, the relationship between APM and participating unions in the region has been difficult.
Egypt: There was no contact between the union and the company as yet.
Morocco: APM Terminals’ Tangier terminal had now been completed. Tangier is the linking point between Africa and Europe and the terminal was built to help the company to be more competitive in Europe. The terminal was not yet fully open for business and at the time of the seminar was still going through a preparatory phase. The approach of the management in Tangiers appeared to be to use workers who were just entering the labour market. The terminal had employed about 600 workers so far and many of them were recruited from the government agency for revitalising employment. This is a phenomenon that should be examined more closely.
There were no official communications between the company and the union as yet. However, the union was taking the initiative and was involved in the establishment of a Tangier convention in cooperation with political parties and civil society groups. The convention was aimed at all foreign companies operating in Tangier (another terminal concession has been awarded to a consortium with CMA-CGM and Eurogate amongst the companies). Issues included in the convention are freedom of association and sectoral level collective bargaining.
Jordan: The participating union represented workers in the container terminal and was affiliated to the general port union. APM Terminals took over the running of the Aqaba Container Terminal when it was privatised and in August 2006 it was awarded a 25 year contract. Many workers were dismissed following privatisation and the company was against unionisation, prefering individual contracts with the port workers instead of a collective agreement. However, a group of workers managed to establish a union. Elections were held in June 2007 and the company eventually accepted the union. 550 out of the 750 workers are in the union.
The management showed good intentions at the first meeting. It expressed its readiness to engage due to its concern over the company’s assets and reputation, and employee relations. It was agreed that regular meetings should be held. However, disagreements arose when the union sought to regain benefits that the workers had lost e.g. social benefit fund and raised issues relating to pay and conditions. The matter was not resolved until the union finally informed the company of its intention to initiate strike action. The Ministry of Labour, the General union of port workers, and the General federation of Jordan TU, intervened to mediate and a deal was finally reached on 19th October 2007. The union had presented the company with a two-week deadline to respond to their demands or face strike action on 21 October.
Bahrain: APM Terminals took control of Mina Sulman terminal in December 2006 and has rights to develop a new container terminal with a local firm as a partner. The union organises in the container terminal where about 40% of the workers are members and in Weismuller, a Swiss company which works in cooperation with APM Terminals, where 80 – 85% of the workers are unionised.
Initially the union met with the local APM Terminals management and agreed to have monthly meetings with a human resources representative and 4 monthly meetings with the executive manager. However, following the initial meeting, the human resources manager would not agree to requests for meetings. It was the union’s intention to try again for a meeting in January 2008.
The union also reported that workers had been intimidated for joining the union by individual managers and supervisors, a matter that had been raised with the management. The union was concerned over the adequacy of safety measures in place and the need to raise awareness of workers about health and safety issues. There had also been no effective response from the local management in relation to the union’s concerns over the issue of staff assessments which appeared to be carried out in a random fashion.
Oman: In general, union work was still new in Oman. The national trade union federation which participated in the seminar was formed in 2005. There are about 4,000 workers in Salalah where APM Terminals has its operations. There used to be a union but following recent problems, the union was terminated by a decision of the Ministry of Labour. The problem had now been solved, and a new union committee was formed in coordination with the national centre. The federation was working to develop trade unions to cover the ports but union awareness was generally still weak and support was needed from the ITF and other international trade union organisations to develop union work in the country.
As unions need as much information as possible about APM terminals and Maersk, information exchange on developments relating to APM was supported. In addition as Arabic is a common language this should facilitate communication within this network of APM unions and the ITF will ensure that unions are updated on engagement with Maersk and APM terminals at a global level.
The need for an internal discussion for a shift to a class-based struggle and an end to business unionism formed part of the concluding remarks by Asbjorn Wahl, National Coordinator for the Campaign for the Welfare State.
Asbjorn was speaking at a seminar on the state of the European trade union movement and lessons from the ongoing global neo-liberal attacks of the last 25 years, organised by Turkish Civil Aviation Union (Hava-Is) for its members. 65 shop stewards and members attended on December 3 2007.
Wahl began by observing that Europe's trade union movement is on the defensive. His view is that they are also in a deep political and ideological crisis, and are unable to fulfil their role as the defenders of the immediate economic and social interests of their members.
Wahl pointed out that behind this development is the ongoing neo-liberal transformation of society. “Capitalist interests have gone on the offensive, and we have seen an enormous shift in the balance of power between labour and capital. Multinational companies have, of course, been at the forefront of this development.
The post-war "social pact" between labour and capital, the policy of peaceful coexistence between unions and employers, has broken down.” But he counselled against the idea of passively complaining about “inevitable and external factors”, stating that “The paradox labour faces is that while the economic and political climate in which the trade unions must operate has changed enormously, most unions have continued to pursue the policy of the social pact.”
Wahl explained in detail what he called “the historic compromise between labour and capital” based on the welfare state or so-called Keynesian economics. He elaborated on the ideological pillars of the social pact as well: “…real social achievements formed the material basis for an ideology of social partnership which remains deeply rooted in European trade union leaders.”
Wahl criticised European trade unions that have been drawn deeper into business unionism and legal formalism rather than shifting towards a strategy based on class analysis and an assessment of the balance of power. The outcome of this being the “acceptance by the dominant part of the trade union movement of a step-by-step reduction in welfare and working conditions.
Through negotiations, trade unions have gradually accepted increasing "flexibilization" of work.” He mentioned the growth of rightwing populist, neo-fascist and fascist parties as the most dangerous result of this trade union policy of indulgence.
Wahl concluded with a list of “concrete tasks” for European unions including: “Organise, organise, organise!!!; Fight informal / precarious jobs; Fight flexibilisation (incl. flexicurity); Defend jobs and employment protection; Defend public pension systems; Protect trade union and workers’ rights.”
“Business unionism and the social partnership policies will have to be replaced by a joint class-based struggle in which democratic control of economy and production is crucial. This will also entail an ideological struggle inside the trade union/labour movement.”
A lively and frank discussion followed on the problems of the European trade union movement as well as the labour movement in general. Kemal Ulker, Hava-Is Education Officer
 |
Section home:
Education
Other pages for Education:
About ITF Education | Education Materials | Educators' Network | Programmes/Activities | Research for Education
Other pages for Education Bulletin:
Other pages for Education Briefings:
Briefings 2006 | Briefings 2007
Main Sections:
Home | About us | Solidarity | Flags of Convenience campaign | Seafarers | Dockers | Civil Aviation | Railways | Road transport | Urban Transport | Fisheries | Tourism | Inland Navigation | Women | Education
Transport International Magazine
accessibility | site help | site map
ITF House, 49-60 Borough Road, London SE1 1DR | +44 20 7403 2733 | mail@itf.org.uk