曝光臺 注意防騙 網曝天貓店富美金盛家居專營店坑蒙拐騙欺詐消費者

8.2.1 The en-route cost-effectiveness KPI is obtained by dividing the total real en-route costs
(i.e. deflated costs) used to compute the Route Charges by the number of kilometres
charged to airspace users. This information is derived from Member States’ submissions
for the purposes of the EUROCONTROL Enlarged Committee for Route Charges31.
8.2.2 Figure 103 summarises the main relevant cost-effectiveness data and shows the changes
in the cost-effectiveness KPI32 between 2003 and 2011 for the EUROCONTROL Area.
The year 2008 is the latest for which actual figures are available at the time of this
analysis.
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009P 2010P 2011P 08/03 11/08
Contracting States (Route Charges System) 30 30 31 31 31 34 34 34 34 30 34
Total en-route ANS costs (M€2008) 5.843 6.074 6.171 6.241 6.407 6.662 6.812 6.733 6.924 10% 4%
National costs (M€2008) 5.277 5.502 5.512 5.567 5.733 6.002 6.115 6.058 6.264 9% 4%
EUROCONTROL Maastricht (M€2008) 125 125 122 124 129 128 147 139 146 3% 14%
EUROCONTROL Agency (Parts I & IX) (M€2008) 440 447 536 550 545 532 550 537 513 17% -5%
Km charged (Million) 6.589 7.047 7.472 7.823 8.321 8.851 8.567 8.539 8.818 28% 0%
Real unit costs (€2008/km) 0,89 0,86 0,83 0,80 0,77 0,75 0,80 0,79 0,79 -14% 4%
Figure 103: En-route ANS cost-effectiveness KPI for EUROCONTROL Area (€2008 prices)
8.2.3 In 2008, the en-route real unit cost for the European ANS system was €0.75 per km.
Given that its value was €0.89 per km in 2003, this implies that between 2003 and 2008,
real unit costs decreased by -14% (i.e. -2.9% per annum).
8.2.4 This means that the notional target set by the PRC (i.e. reduction of unit costs by -3% per
annum for the period 2003-2008) has been reached, which is a positive achievement. This
performance improvement directly translates into cumulative “savings” of some
€3 billion with respect to constant 2003 unit costs. Figure 103 shows that the favourable
traffic increase between 2003 and 2008 (+28%) contributed to the unit costs reduction,
during the period, but undoubtedly better cost control and greater cost-effectiveness
31 The en-route ANS cost data provided in Figure 102 (i.e. 6 662 M€ for 2008) differ from the information provided
in Figure 103 (i.e. 6 810 M€ for 2008). The data provided in Figure 102 reflects the information provided by
ANSPs in the context of the ACE Benchmarking analysis (see Section 8.7). The discrepancy between the two
data sets is mainly due to the fact that the ACE data set also includes information for States which were not
technically integrated in the Route Charges System in 2008 (i.e. Ukraine, Estonia and Latvia).
32 Note that the growth rates displayed in the last two columns of Figure 103 are computed for consistent samples of
Member States for which a time series was available (i.e. 31 over the 2003-2008 period and 36 over the 2008-
2011 period).
PRR 2009 89 Chapter 8: Cost-effectiveness
awareness have also played a significant role in this performance improvement.
8.2.5 The Provisional Council (PC 28, November 2007) adopted its objectives for 2008,
including an efficiency objective to “Reduce the European average real "en-route" unit
cost per km by 3% per annum until 2010, whilst maintaining or improving the current
level of service delivered.” In other words, this would correspond to a reduction of the
real en-route unit costs of -6% on the period 2008-2010 (see dark arrow in Figure 104
above). Figure 104 indicates that the Pan-European target adopted by the PC will not be
met by 2010.
5.5% -1.0%
-2.0%
-3.5%
-3.5%
-4.3%
-2.8%
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009P
2010P
2011P
2012P
2013P
2014P
Total en-route ANS costs (€2008)/ km
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
Costs Per Km Total Costs (1999= index 100) Traffic (1999=index 100)
All States in CRCO system Source : EUROCONTROL
PRC notional target PC adopted target
Figure 104: Real en-route unit costs per km (KPI), total costs and traffic
8.2.6 Figure 104 shows that the decreasing trend in unit costs significantly decelerated in 2008.
This is clearly the end of a positive business cycle for the European ANS system. Real
en-route unit costs are planned to increase by +5.5% in 2009. It is important to note that
this planned en-route unit costs increase (Figure 104) is due: (a) to a forecast increase of
en-route costs by +2.3% and (b) to a forecast decrease in traffic volumes of -3.2%.
　
中國航空網 m.k6050.com
航空翻譯 www.aviation.cn
本文鏈接地址：Performance Review Report 2009(65)