Article
citation information:
Olejniczak,
K., Dębicka, A. The impact of the EU mobility
package on SMES in the Polish road transport sector: an empirical analysis. Scientific Journal of Silesian University of
Technology. Series Transport. 2025, 127, 223-236.
ISSN: 0209-3324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20858/sjsutst.2025.127.13
Karolina OLEJNICZAK[1], Anna DĘBICKA[2]
THE IMPACT OF THE
EU MOBILITY PACKAGE ON SMES IN THE POLISH ROAD TRANSPORT SECTOR: AN
EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS
Summary. In the European Union
(EU), the issues of the development of transport infrastructure, forwarding,
and logistics services, as well as regulations regarding the rules of
functioning on the market, are included in the common transport and logistics
policy. Despite many actions taken, transport policy so far has not been
rigorous enough to meet the targets needed to combat climate change and the
sustainable development goals set. One such measure in the transport sector is
the 'Mobility Package', which aims to regulate international road transport
services provided in the EU market by EU-based carriers. This includes, among
other things, improving working conditions for professional drivers and
reducing the risk of unfair competition. The paper addresses the following
research questions: what are the main assumptions of EU transport policy, what
are the characteristics of road transport enterprises in Poland, and how do
SMEs in Poland evaluate the changes resulting from the Mobility Package. To
achieve our goals, we first rely on open-access data from various sources, and
then we use the snowball sampling survey. We indicate the main assumptions of
the EU transport policy, e.g., intensification of regulation of the common
transport market at the level of EU authorities and integration of
transport organizations with sustainable development rules, and then identify
the main characteristics of Polish road transport enterprises. Our research
results also show that the impact of the mobility package on the operations of
Polish road transport companies depends significantly on the size of the
company. The assessment of the impact of the mobility package may depend on
whether or not enterprises have a development strategy. The consequences of
implementing the package are not mentioned as the main challenge for
businesses.
Keywords: mobility package, EU transport policy, sustainable development, climate
change goals, transport enterprises, business operation
1. INTRODUCTION
The continuous
growth of world trade requires actions in the area of sustainable development
of logistics, which should assume not only economic and social benefits but
also minimize negative environmental effects. Logistics services provide
sectoral connections within the local economy and connect the national and
international economies [17].
Activities related to these processes should comply with the legal requirements
applicable in a given economic area. In the European Union (EU), the issues of
the development of transport infrastructure, forwarding, and logistics
services, as well as regulations regarding the rules of functioning on the
market, are included in the common transport and logistics policy. The European
Union, like other supranational organizations, has set ambitious plans to
achieve the Sustainable Development and Climate Change Goals. Implementing
these plans will require changes in all sectors of the economy and at different
levels of government [30].
Transport is
one of the key sectors of the economy of the EU. However, achieving the goal of
climate neutrality by 2050 requires a reduction of emissions from it by 90% [9].
In addition, the EU has established in the European Green Deal [15]
and other recent documents to achieve climate neutrality by 2050, also an
intermediate target of reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 55% by 2030
compared to 1990 [37].
However,
despite many actions taken, transport policy so far has not been rigorous
enough to meet the targets needed to combat climate change and the sustainable
development goals set. This lack of rigor was particularly true for road
transport, where greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise [2].
Land transport is dominated by cars with combustion engines, which means a
widespread dependence on coal [21].
Radical or so-called "destructive" political measures designed to
overthrow existing structures, practices, behaviors,
and cultural models become necessary [35].
One such
measure in the transport sector is the 'Mobility Package' [11],
which aims to regulate international road transport services provided in the EU
market by EU-based carriers. This includes, among other things, improving
working conditions for professional drivers and reducing the risk of unfair
competition.
The purpose of
this study is to present assumptions of the European contemporary transport
policy, to collect the characteristics of road transport enterprises in Poland
against the background of selected UE countries, and then to capture the
perception of the impact of the mobility package on the business operation of
road transport SMEs in Poland. To achieve these goals, we first rely on
open-access data from various sources, and then we use the snowball sampling
method. The paper addresses the following research questions: (1) what are the
main assumptions of EU transport policy; (2) what are the characteristics of
road transport enterprises in Poland; (3) and how SMEs in Poland evaluate the
changes resulting from the mobility package. The paper is structured as
follows: section 2 provides an overview of the research process and data
collection, and section 3 refers to desk research results and snowball sampling
findings. Finally, we discuss our achievements.
2. OVERVIEW OF THE RESEARCH PROCESS
To
achieve our goals, we use several methods. In Table 1, we present the data collection
process, including data types, sample, and research subjects.
Tab.
1
Overview
of data collection
|
Data
types |
Research
subject |
|
Secondary
data GUS,
Eurostat, Business
institutions Public
institutions |
analysis
of EU transport policy assumptions analysis
of enterprises’ characteristics |
|
Primary
data Own
qualitative research: the
survey among entrepreneurs from the transport sector |
evaluation
of the Mobile Package by enterprises (n=94) |
In
the first step to collect the assumptions of EU transport policy and
characteristics of enterprises, we used the research material consisting of
statistical data from the Central Statistical Office in Poland and Eurostat, as
well as documents and industry reports of the European Commission. Further, we
used elaborations of employee’s associations, literature reviews, industry
rankings, and reports of businesses and public institutions.
A
snowball sampling method was employed to gather data in order to ascertain how
the mobility package affects business operations. The survey focused on
transport entrepreneurs in the SME sector (Tab.2).
Tab. 2
Size
of surveyed companies
|
Characteristics |
|
Number
of Firms |
|
Number
of Employees |
<10 |
29 |
|
|
10-49 |
47 |
|
|
50-249 |
18 |
|
Total |
|
94 |
According
to Naderifal et al. [25], snowball
sampling is a method used particularly when access to a well-defined group of
people is required and relevant to the research. In snowball sampling, a small
number of people with a particular set of characteristics seek out and recruit
other people with similar characteristics to take part in the study. This is
done through their network of contacts in the business community. This method
has many advantages, such as enabling access to individuals with similar
characteristics and utilizing pre-existing networks for additional credibility
in the results [39]. The study
focused on a group of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the
transport sector. Thanks to this method, the survey was completed by
entrepreneurs or owners with the most comprehensive understanding of the
researched area.
3.
EUROPEAN TRANSPORT POLICY AND THE ROLE OF THE POLISH ROAD TRANSPORT SECTOR IN
SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
The evolution of European
transport policy is deeply linked to the principles of sustainable development,
to create a competitive, unified, and resource-efficient transport area. This
policy framework is essential to address the complex challenges of sustainability,
including reliability and the need for a cultural shift towards greener
practices. The Polish Road transport sector contributes significantly to both
the national economy and the wider EU market. This sector, consisting mainly of
micro-enterprises, demonstrates Poland's dominant role in international
transport, supported by the liberalization of transport services in the EU.
This section presents the assumptions of transport policies in the EU and the
key role of Polish road transport in the European context.
3.1. Assumptions of EU transport policy
The
need to integrate transport with the assumptions of sustainable development and
the necessity to create a coherent strategy going beyond the EU was equally
important from the perspective of creating a European transport policy.
Sustainability challenges are complex and can be considered in terms of cost,
reliability, warehousing, as well as mindset, cultural change, and uncertainty
[1, 27, 28, 29, 31]. Table 3
summarizes selected documents characterizing the guidelines and changes in the
European transport policy in the last two decades.
Tab.
3
The
EU transport policy documents
|
An
EU Strategy for Sustainable Development 2001 1 Review
of the EU Sustainable Development Strategy 2006 Freight
Transport Logistics Action Plan 2007 The
EU’s Freight Transport Agenda 2007 Green
Paper: Towards a new culture for urban mobility 2007 Community
strategy to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars and light
vehicles 2007 A
sustainable future for transport – Towards an integrated, technology-led and
user-friendly system 2009 Action
Plan on Urban Mobility 2009 White
Paper: Roadmap to a Single European Transport Area 2011 A
call to action on urban logistics 2013 Sustainable
Urban Mobility Planning Annex 2013 Together
towards competitive and resource-efficient urban mobility 2013 A
European strategy for low-emission mobility 2016 A
European strategy for low-emission mobility Annex 2016 European
Green Deal 2019 Sustainable
and Smart Mobility Strategy 2020 including Mobility Package The
New EU Urban Mobility Framework 2021 |
Source:
own elaboration based on [14]
The
main objective of the European logistics policy is to create a competitive,
unified, and resource-efficient transport area and independence from oil
imports, as well as to reduce carbon dioxide emissions significantly. Specific
objectives include the reduction and, consequently, elimination of cars running
on conventional fuels, increasing the share of low-emission fuels in aviation,
shifting a significant part of road freight transport over distances of up to
300 km to other modes (rail and inland waterways), completing the European
high-speed rail network and connecting it to all airports, strengthening the
traffic management infrastructure, achieving almost zero road fatalities, and
ensuring the financing of future transport investments [7].
Additionally, in response to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on transport
and logistics, the EC Strategy for Sustainable and Smart Mobility [10] assumes
creating a transport system that will be more resilient to possible future
crises.
Under the major EU logistics policies, the
so-called Mobility Package [11] stands out.
Its main objective is the regulation of international road transport services
provided on the EU market by carriers established in Community countries,
including the improvement of working conditions for professional drivers and
the reduction of the risk of unfair competition. The package also includes
provisions regulating the rules for posting drivers, reducing cabotage,
replacing recording equipment with 2nd generation smart tachographs, and
enforcing requirements. Posting rules apply to cabotage (transport between two
or more places of loading and/or unloading in one country by a hauler from
another country) and to international transport operations. The exceptions to
the package are international transit and bilateral operations. So far, such
extensive changes have never been implemented, and they have introduced an
entirely new way of organizing the transport market [32]. The
implementation of the provisions of the package is planned in stages in the
years 2020-2025. Due to their effects, the provisions of the mobility package
may have clear consequences for the business operation of enterprises, in
particular, small and medium-sized enterprises, due to their limited
resources.
Further results build insight into the
characteristics of Polish road transport enterprises compared to other EU
countries.
3.2
Characteristics of Polish road transport enterprises
Road
transport of goods is one of the three most significant sectors of the Polish
economy, next to the wholesale and retail trade. The direct share of the
transport and storage sector in the Polish GDP is about 6 percent. Transport is
also crucial for the functioning of European companies and global supply
chains; it contributes to the generation of around 5% of GDP and employs about
10 million people in the EU [12].
Polish
companies play an increasingly important role in the EU. This is confirmed by
the growing dominance of Polish carriers in European countries. A significant
increase could be observed, among others, in the transport of goods transported
by the roads of Germany and France – in 2008, Polish carriers transported 8
percent. goods, and in 2020 - already a quarter. Polish carriers also carry
over 20% of goods in road transport from Germany to Italy, the Czech Republic,
and Great Britain [36].
It is worth noting that in Poland, the majority
of companies providing transport and warehouse management services employ up to
9 employees. According to the data of the Central Statistical Office [20], in 2020,
out of 281,724 registered enterprises in this industry, almost 98 percent were
micro-enterprises. Small (1.72%), medium (0.26%), and large (0.07%) enterprises
constitute a definitely smaller percentage of enterprises operating in this
sector. These data confirm the specificity of the transport market in Poland
indicated in the literature, including [22, 23]:
fragmentation (large number of micro-enterprises), liberalism in access to the
carrier profession, high sensitivity to the impact of the EU environment.
Liberalization of access to the EU transport
services market is one of the effects, apart from the growing trade turnover
and high price competitiveness of Polish enterprises, which contribute to
Poland's dominant position in EU road transport. In 2018, Poland had the
highest share in EU international transport (29.5%). The share of international
transport in transport performance in Poland increased from 61.5% in 2014 to
63.7% in 2018 and is much higher than the EU-28 average (Fig. 1). Looking at
the breakdown of cross-trade between different Member States in the period
2014-2018, it should be noted that Poland was the leading cross-trade carrier,
and its share in 2018 was 32.9% of all cross-trade transport in the EU,
followed by Lithuania and Romania (14.0%
and 11.5% respectively). All other Member States had shares below 10% [16].
Fig. 1. Share
of international transport in the transport performance of selected countries
Source:
own elaboration based on Breemersch T. [6]
Referring
to the dimensions of the implementation of the European logistics policy
described in part 2, it is worth noting that mainly Eastern European countries
have a much higher than average share of employees in land transport (Table 4),
which may make them more susceptible to policy changes affecting land transport
workers [6].
Tab.
4
The
importance of the road transport industry of selected countries
|
Country |
GDP
[%] |
Population
[%] |
Carriage
tkm [%] |
Road
transport workers [%] |
|
EU-28 |
100.00% |
100.00% |
100.00% |
100.00% |
|
Germany |
21.30% |
16.30% |
16.70% |
8.80% |
|
Poland |
3.00% |
7.70% |
16.60% |
11.20% |
|
Spain |
7.60% |
9.30% |
11.40% |
9.60% |
|
France |
14.90% |
12.60% |
8.80% |
13.30% |
|
United
Kingdom |
15.20% |
12.80% |
8.40% |
11.60% |
|
Italy |
11.20% |
11.70% |
5.90% |
9.10% |
|
Romania |
1.20% |
3.90% |
3.10% |
6.90% |
|
Czech
Republic |
1.20% |
2.10% |
2.60% |
3.40% |
|
Lithuania |
0.30% |
0.60% |
2.30% |
1.10% |
|
Hungary |
0.80% |
2.00% |
2.00% |
2.90% |
|
Bulgaria |
0.30% |
1.40% |
1.90% |
2.40% |
|
Slovakia |
0.60% |
1.10% |
1.90% |
1.90% |
|
Belgium |
2.90% |
2.20% |
1.70% |
2.10% |
|
Portugal |
1.30% |
2.00% |
1.70% |
1.80% |
|
Greece |
1.20% |
2.10% |
1.50% |
1.50% |
|
Austria |
2.40% |
1.80% |
1.40% |
1.60% |
|
Slovenia |
0.30% |
0.40% |
1.20% |
0.60% |
|
Latvia |
0.20% |
0.40% |
0.80% |
0.70% |
|
Croatia |
0.30% |
0.80% |
0.70% |
0.80% |
|
Estonia |
0.20% |
0.30% |
0.30% |
0.40% |
Source:
own study based on Breemersch T. [6]
Although the market of transport and forwarding
services in terms of revenue is dominated by large enterprises [38], due to the
growing demand for various logistics services, their standardization, and the
specificity of the SME sector (e.g., flexibility of operation), they
successfully compete on the European market with larger entities. As indicated
by the TSL ranking [24], the
revenues of listed companies in 2019 increased by 8.8% y/y, and the companies
whose revenues were below PLN 1 billion increased their turnover the fastest.
4. RESULTS AND FINDINGS
The
assessment of the impact of the mobility package on the operation of the
business differed between the entrepreneurs surveyed. A positive effect was
noticed mainly by medium-sized enterprises (56%). Only 11% of enterprises of
this size pointed to the package's negative impact. On the other hand, micro
and small enterprises were either unable to assess the impact of the mobility
package (approximately 40%) or pointed to its negative and neutral nature (Fig. 2).
Among micro-enterprises, no response indicated a positive impact of the package
on business.
Fig. 2. Impact
of the mobility package on business activity by size of enterprise [n=94]
Moreover, it is worth noting that companies
without a formal strategy more frequently reported negative effects of the
mobility package on their businesses (31%). On the other hand, over half
(53.3%) of companies with a formal business strategy reported that the package
had a positive impact. Furthermore, companies with a business strategy
demonstrated better comprehension of the effects of implementing the mobility
package. Conversely, more doubts about the impact of the package on their
business appeared among companies that did not have a strategy (52,4%) or
operated with an informal strategy (27%).
Among the most important consequences of the
implementation of the mobility package (Fig. 3), entrepreneurs indicated an
increase in the cost of employee wages (57.44%), more administrative duties
(53.2%), restricted access to the international transport market (41.49%), and
difficulties in being technologically equal to foreign competitors (34.04%).
According
to the companies surveyed, the mobility package is not a key challenge for the
transport industry (Fig. 4) in the next few years (indicated only by 19.1% of
respondents).
Entrepreneurs
were more concerned about 1) high financial penalties during roadside checks
(51.1%), 2) lack of employees with appropriate qualifications (48.9%), and 3)
the economic slowdown in the European Union (42.6%). Among the challenges for
the industry in which entrepreneurs operated, competition from the East (35.1%)
and domestic competition (23.4%) were often indicated. Entrepreneurs were also
concerned about challenges regarding the understanding of Polish law.
Fig.
3. The most important consequences of the implementation of the mobility
package in the opinion of the surveyed [n=94]
Fig. 4. Key
challenges for the transport industry in
the opinion of the surveyed entrepreneurs [n=94]
5. DISCUSSION
Taking
into account the above considerations, we can indicate the following main
assumptions of EU transport policy: (1) intensification of regulation of the
common transport market at the level of EU authorities; (2) integration of
transport organizations with sustainable development rules; (3) making further
economic development in the EU independent of the transport intensity of its
economy; (4) creating a unified and resource-efficient transport area; (5)
making transport independent of oil imports; (6) reducing road transport
traffic; (7) building the sector's resilience to future crises. All these
assumptions and the resulting specific provisions, including those of the
mobility package, have a certain impact on the day-to-day operations of
companies. Given the importance of Polish transport companies in the
organization of the entire European market, it is worth highlighting their main
characteristics, which are summarized in Table 5.
Tab. 5
Characteristics
of transport enterprises in Poland
|
Significant quantitative dominance of
micro-enterprises Relatively easy access to the carrier profession Sensitivity to changes in European politics Price competitiveness Dominant position in EU road transport Highest share in EU international transport Highest share in EU cross-trade transport Much higher than the European average share of
employees in road transport Competitiveness of SMEs against large ones Achieving the fastest growth in turnover by SMEs |
In
terms of the impact of the Mobility Package on the market, the opinions of
scientists and experts are diverse. According to Waśkiewicz
et al. [40]
the mobility package will have a negative impact on the unit costs of Polish
companies, i.e., also on their competitiveness in the common European market.
Borkowski and Bąk [4]
additionally indicate that the provisions of the mobility package will limit
competition in transport, contributing to an increase in the cost of transport
services. Navickas et al. [0]
point out that the requirement to periodically return the vehicle to the
country of registration will contribute to significant CO2
emissions, which is contrary to the European Green Deal. Next, Bąk et al. [3]
estimate that the mobility package will be particularly severe for small
enterprises from peripheral EU countries.
Załoga [41]
indicates that road cabotage has a positive impact on the transport market.
However, this is associated with the dissatisfaction of local companies in some
countries. Under pressure from industry trade unions, these countries are
taking steps to protect their markets. When analyzing
publications on cabotage, one can also notice various opinions. Some
researchers and institutions like Gis and Waśkiewicz [40], Ślęzak et al. [34],
and the European Commission [8]
consider deregulation in the transport market to be a positive phenomenon that
can be used by companies from Central and Eastern Europe. However, other
researchers, such as Sternberg and Hofman [33],
point to the numerous adverse effects of deregulation on transport companies in
Western European countries.
According
to the research presented, the impact of the mobility package on the operations
of Polish road transport companies depends significantly on the size of the
company. Medium-sized enterprises are more aware of the implications of the
mobility package's main assumptions, much more often indicating its positive
consequences for their business. Micro and small enterprises, on the other
hand, were more often unable to identify the impact of the mobility package or
indicated a negative outcome. It is noteworthy that among the
micro-enterprises, which according to our characteristics are the most
numerous, none of them indicated a positive impact of the changes introduced.
The assessment of the impact of the mobility package may depend on whether or
not they have a development strategy. Our research shows that enterprises that
do not have such a document, which again is most common among
micro-enterprises, are much more likely to report negative effects of the
mobility package. Among the most important consequences identified by the
enterprises surveyed were the challenges associated with the package, often of
a negative nature, such as an increase in employee wage costs and increased
administrative duties. Less frequently, companies indicated opportunities for
increased profits or business growth and expansion as a result of the
implementation of the mobility package. However, the consequences of
implementing the package are not at all mentioned as the most important
challenge for businesses. Entrepreneurs are more concerned about high
penalties, lack of employees, economic slowdown, or inability to understand
Polish regulations. This may be due to the fact that, as we have shown in our
research, the companies surveyed were often not even able to estimate the
impact of the Mobility Package on their business.
To
summarize, transport policy in the EU is based on the assumption that the
sector will be increasingly regulated at the EU level, which is also a result
of the need for a green transformation of both the transport sector and the EU
economy as a whole. Polish transport companies play a very important role in
the organization of international transport in the common European market and
have a very strong position in terms of volume, so any legislative changes,
including the mobility package, must have an impact on their operations. The
long-term consequences of these changes will require further research, but our
results already tentatively indicate, in particular, an increase in operating
costs, which will consequently lead to a decrease in the competitiveness of
these companies. It is likely that micro-enterprises will be most affected by
this phenomenon. However, our results also show that some companies, mostly
those with between 50 and 250 employees, are positive about the impact of the
package on their business. This means that, with appropriate measures, it is
possible to take advantage of the changes in the market organization. However,
again, this is more likely to be observed in larger companies, probably as a
result of greater resources.
References
1.
Abbasi M., F. Nilsson. 2016. „Developing environmentally
sustainable logistics”. Transportation Research
Part D: Transport and Environment 46: 273-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2016.04.004.
2.
Axsen J., P. Plötz, M. Wolinetz. 2020. „Crafting strong, integrated
policy mixes for deep CO2 mitigation in road transport”. Nature Climate Change 10(9): 809-818. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41558-020-0877.
3.
Bąk M., P. Borkowski, T. Czuba, A. Koźlak, A. Zamojska. 2017. Wpływ
rewizji przepisów UE w zakresie międzynarodowego transportu drogowego na
przedsiębiorstwa transportowe w Polsce. [In Polish: The impact of the revision of EU regulations on
international road transport on transport companies in Poland]. Warsaw: Ministry of Infrastructure and
Construction.
4.
Borkowski P., M. Bąk. 2018. „Short and long-term
consequences of further regulation of the European Union Road Haulage Market”. Journal of Management and Financial Sciences
11: 9-23.
5.
Brand C., T. Götschi, E. Dons, R. Gerike, E. Anaya-Boig,
I. Avila-Palencia, A. Nazelle, M. Gascon, M. Gaupp-Berghausen, F. Iacorossi, S.
Kahlmeier, L. Int Panis, F. Racioppi, D. Rojas-Rueda, A. Standaert, E. Stigell,
S. Sulikova, S. Wegener, M.J. Nieuwenhuijsen. 2021. „The climate change mitigation
impacts of active travel: Evidence from a longitudinal panel study in seven
European cities”. Global Environmental Change 67: 102224-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2021.102224.
6.
Breemersch T. 2019. „Impact of the mobility package
on European Road Freight Transport”. Transport & Mobility
Leuven. Available at: https://www.tmleuven.be/en/project/Impact-of-Mobility-Package-I-on-European-road-freight-transport/pdf.
7.
EC. 2011. The white paper.
8.
EC. 2017. An overview of the
EU road transport market in 2015.
9.
EC. 2019. The European green
deal. European Commission.
10. EC. 2020. Sustainable and Smart Mobility Strategy.
11. EC. 2020. Mobility package.
12. EC. 2020. The transport and mobility sector.
13. EC. 2021. European green deal.
14. EC. 2023. An official website of the
European Union.
15. European Parliament,
2019/2956. Resolution of the European Green Deal. p. RSP.
16.
EUROSTAT. 2019. Road freight transport by
journey characteristics.
17. Gani A. 2017. „The Logistics Performance Effect in International
Trade”. The Asian Journal of Shipping and Logistics
33(4): 279-288. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajsl.2017.12.012.
18. General Assembly. Resolution
adopted by the General Assembly on 25 September 2015, A/RES/70/1.
19. Gis W., J. Waśkiewicz. 2017. „Development of the
international freight transport sector in Poland against the background of the
EU market”. Combustion
Engines 4: 181-184.
20.
GUS. 2021. Działalność przedsiębiorstw niefinansowych w 2019 roku.
[In
Polish: Activities of non-financial enterprises in 2019]. Available at:
https://stat.gov.pl/download/gfx/portalinformacyjny/pl/defaultaktualnosci/5502/2/16/1/dzialalnosc_przedsiebiorstw_niefinansowych_w_2019.pdf.
21. Ivanova D., G. Vita, R. Wood,
C. Lausselet, A. Dumitru, K. Krause, I. Macsinga, E.G. Hertwich. 2018. „Carbon mitigation in domains
of high consumer lock-in”. Global Environmental Change 52: 117-130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2018.06.006.
22. Janczewski
J. 2012. „Problematyka zarządzania mikroprzedsiębiorstwem na rynku usług
transportowych”. [In Polish: „The issue of managing a micro-enterprise in the transport
services market”]. Zeszyty Naukowe Wyższej Szkoły Humanitas. Zarządzanie 1: 74-88.
23.
Kordel Z. 2011.
„Problemy funkcjonowania transportu samochodowego w Polsce”. [In Polish: „Problems
with the functioning of road transport in Poland”]. Logistyka
6: 9.
24.
Logistyka. 2020. TSL Ranking. Available at: https://logistyka.rp.pl/logistyka-kontraktowa/8311-ranking-tsl-2020.
25. Naderifar M., H. Goli, F. Ghaljaie. 2017. „Snowball Sampling: A Purposeful Method of Sampling in
Qualitative Research”. Strides
in Development of Medical Education 14: e67670. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5812/sdme.67670.
26. Navickas G., R. Varnauskaitė,
J. Tamelis, S. Jankauskaitė. 2023. „Mobility package in Lithuanian logistics”. Individual. Society. State. Proceedings of the
International Student and Teacher Scientific and Practical Conference. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17770/iss2023.7395.
27. Nilsson F., M. Göransson, K. Båth. 2019. „Models and technologies for
the enhancement of transparency and visibility in food supply chains”. Sustainable Food Supply Chains: 219-236. Academic Press.
28. Rodrigue J.P., B. Slack, C. Comtois. 2001. „The paradoxes of green logistics”. In: World Conference on Transport Research WCTR. Seoul.
29. Russel D.M., D. Swanson, M. Blinge. 2018. „Sustainable logistics and supply chain management:
a holistic view through the lens of the wicked problem”. World Review of Intermodal
Transportation Research 7(1): 36-56.
30. Shrestha S., H. Håvard. 2023. „Do EU goals matter? Assessing the localisation of
sustainable urban logistics governance goals in Norwegian cities”. Cities 137: 1-12.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2023.104317.
31. Sosnowski
P.C., P. Cyplik. 2022. „Closed loop supply chains and
circular economy – the possibilities of interplay”. LogForum 18(4): 413-420. DOI: http://doi.org/10.17270/J.LOG.2022.784.
32. Suproń B. 2020. „Influence of the Mobility
Package on the functioning of the polish road transport of goods sector”. Research Papers of Wrocław
University of Economics and Business 64(3): 92-106.
33. Sternberg H., E. Hofman. 2018. „Deregulation: the case of cabotage in Germany”. In: International Symposium of Logistics.
34. Ślęzak
M., Z. Kordel, J. Waśkiewicz. 2019. „Problemy funkcjonowania
polskiego transportu drogowego w przewozach ładunków”. [In Polish: „Problems with
the functioning of Polish road transport in cargo transport”]. Studia i Prace Kolegium Zarządzania i Finansów SGH 172: 89-99.
35. Thaller A., M. Wicki, E. Fleiß,
R. Maiercand, A. Posch. 2023. „Pushing low-carbon mobility: a
survey experiment on the public acceptance of disruptive policy packages”. Climate Policy 23(7): 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2023.2182755.
36. Transport
i Logistyka Polska. 2022. „Transport drogowy w Polsce 2021+”. [In Polish: „Road transport
in Poland 2021+”]. Report. Available at: https://tlp.org.pl/raport-transport-drogowy-w-polsce-2021/.
37. Tsemekidi Tzeiranaki S., M. Economidou,
P. Bertoldi, C. Thiel, G. Fontaras, E.L. Clementi, C.F. De Los Rios. 2023. „The impact of energy efficiency and decarbonisation
policies on the European road transport sector”. Transportation Research Part A 170: 1-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2023.103623.
38. TSL Ranking. 2020. Available at: https://g.gazetaprawna.pl/p/_wspolne/pliki/4552000/4552633-tabeletsl-2020.pdf.
39. Valerio M.A., N. Rodriguez, P.
Winkler, J. Lopez, M. Dennison, Y. Liang, B.J. Turner. 2016. „Comparing two sampling methods to engage
hard-to-reach communities in research priority setting”. BMC Medical Research
Methodology 16(146): 2-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0242-z.
40. Waśkiewicz J., M. Menes, W. Gis. 2018. „Eksperckie oszacowanie skali zaangażowania
krajowych przedsiębiorstw międzynarodowego transportu ciężarowego w przewozach
na obszarze Niemiec”. [In Polish: „Expert assessment of the scale of involvement of domestic
international truck transport companies in transport within Germany”]. Transport Samochodowy 1: 7-23.
41.
Załoga E. 2017. „Kabotaż drogowy a reguły rynku wewnętrznego Unii
Europejskiej”. [In Polish: „Road cabotage and the rules of the European Union's
internal market”]. Zeszyty
Naukowe Uniwersytetu Gdańskiego. Ekonomika Transportu i Logistyka 64: 201-211.
Received 07.10.2024; accepted in revised form 17.01.2025
Scientific Journal of Silesian
University of Technology. Series Transport is licensed under a Creative
Commons Attribution 4.0 International License