Volume List  / Volume 1 (1)



1 / 1 / 28 - 40 Pages


Zoran Radmilović - University of Belgrade, Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, Vojvode Stepe 305, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia -

Vladislav Maraš - University of Belgrade, Faculty of Transport and Traffic Engineering, Vojvode Stepe 305, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia -


The inland waterway cargo transport in Europe is very competitive in relation to other, surface types of transport. Compositions of pushed barges can generate more ton-kilometers per distance unit than any other type of surface transport. Only pipeline transportation is more cost-effective than inland navigation, but it also has certain disadvantages like volume of investment, capability of only one type of liquid cargo (mostly crude oil), need for the flow to be always constant and to correspond to the full nominal capacity and travel conditions that reduce its flexibility. The development of this type of traffic in Europe was not satisfactory since its share according to traffic modal split was decreasing in the course of the last decades as a result of very rapid development of road transportation. Circulation volume in tons on inland waterways is significantly changing in very wide range from one European country to the other. It is, for example, very high in the Rhine region, while on the Danube it is app. 10 % of the possible throughput capacity of this navigable way. This paper deals with advantages and disadvantages of inland navigation, as well as, some specific characteristics of inland waterway cargo transport on main inland waterways in Europe.

Download Article

Number of downloads: 5417


This paper is based on the project TR36027: “Software development and national database for strategic management and development of transportation means and infrastructure in road, rail, air and inland waterways transport using the European transport network models” which is supported by the Ministry of science and technological development of Republic of Serbia (2011-2014).


Anonymous. 2005. Binnenschiffahrt und Umwelt. Duisburg.


Commission of the European Communities. 2006. Communication from the Commission on the Promotion of Inland Waterway Transport NAIADES – An Integrated European Action Program for Inland Waterway Transport [online]. Available from Internet: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/iw/prospect.


Economic Commission for Europe – Inland Transport Committee. 1996. The White Paper on Trends in and Development of Inland Navigation and its Infrastructure [online]. Available from Internet: www.unece.org/trans/doc/finaldocs/sc3/TRANS-SC3-138e.pdf.


ECORYS Transport and METTLE. 2005. Charging and pricing in the area of inland waterways - Practical guideline for realistic transport pricing. Final Report, European Commission - DG TREN.


Hilling, D. 1995. Sustainable transport in UK…a role for the waterways, The Dock and Harbour Authority, 76: 283-287.


Österreichisches Institut für Raumplanung. 1999. European Danube Transport Research – Evaluation of the Danube Waterway as a Key European Transport Resource – EUDET [online]. Final Report, Transport RTD Program, Available from Internet: http://cordis.europa.eu/transport/src/eudet.htm.


Radmilović, Z., et al. 2005. River ports and piers of Serbia. Belgrade: Port of Belgrade.


Radmilović, Z., et al. 1998. A River Pushboat – Barge Tow Link as Bulk Queueing System [CD], in Book of Abstracts of 8th World Conference on Transport Research, 51 p.


Radmilović, Z.; Hrle, Z.; Muškatirović, J. 2003. Power Unit – Cargo Space Linк in Inland Waterway Navigation. Journal of Advanced Transportation 37(1): 119-138.


Seitz, M., et al. 2006. Container Liner Sevice Danube – COLD. Final Report, Vienna.


US Department of Transportation – Maritime Administration. 1994. Environmental Advantages of Inland Barge Transportation. Final Report.

Quoted IJTTE Works

Related Keywords