Europe’s transport infrastructure: safety, climate risks and resilience gaps

May 7, 2026

New STA study highlights growing need for action on preventive maintenance and climate-resilient transport systems

Many experts consider Europe’s transport systems to be fundamentally safe – but not sufficiently resilient. It is precisely this tension that is the focus of the first edition of the Smart Transportation Alliance’s (STA) new “Expert Perception Tracker”. The results of the Europe-wide expert survey paint a nuanced picture: whilst safety standards have improved in many areas, concerns are simultaneously growing about the resilience of transport infrastructure to climate risks, hybrid stresses and increasing system complexity.

The study makes it clear that whilst Europe has made significant progress in road safety and infrastructure management, it simultaneously faces structural challenges. The lack of climate adaptation in infrastructure, regional imbalances and shortcomings in preventive maintenance are viewed as particularly critical.

This brings a topic into sharper focus that has long been viewed primarily from a technical perspective: Transport infrastructure is increasingly becoming a strategic factor in resilience for the economy, security of supply and social stability.

Safety remains high – but not equally so everywhere

For the first edition of the STA Expert Perception Tracker, just under 180 experts from 27 countries were surveyed between 16 and 31 March 2026. The aim of the study was to gather qualitative assessments of the current performance of European transport systems.

The results initially paint a generally positive picture: around 56.9 per cent of respondents rate the mobility services in their respective countries as safe. Fewer than three per cent hold the opposite view.

However, behind this seemingly stable assessment lie significant regional differences. Almost 40 per cent of participants state that the quality and safety of mobility services vary greatly within their countries. This is said to be particularly pronounced in southern European countries such as Greece, Italy and Spain, but also in Finland and the UK.

In contrast, experts from countries such as Sweden, Norway and Austria report comparatively consistent safety standards and uniform infrastructure quality across different regions.

These differences highlight a structural problem in European transport policy: safety is often viewed in aggregate terms at national level, whilst regional disparities can have significant impacts on mobility, accessibility and infrastructural resilience.

Infrastructure as a crucial safety layer

The assessment of transport infrastructure itself is particularly interesting. Around 62.9 per cent of experts see significant improvements in road safety over the past ten years.

At the same time, however, more than a third of respondents state that they have perceived no improvement or even a deterioration. This reveals a mixed picture that depends heavily on regional investment levels, maintenance strategies and the pace of modernisation.

Emanuela Stocchi, President of PIARC and Interim Director General of the Italian Association of Motorway and Tunnel Operators (AISCAT), points out that whilst improvements in road safety are visible, the vision of a fully safe and climate-resilient transport system continues to present major challenges.

Infrastructure, in particular, is increasingly seen as the critical foundation of modern road safety. For regardless of vehicle technologies, driver assistance systems or digital traffic management solutions, physical infrastructure remains the central foundation for the stability, operational capability and protection of all road users.

Climate risks are becoming the key stress test

The experts’ assessment of climate resilience is particularly striking. Around 87.4 per cent of respondents view their national transport systems as highly vulnerable to increasing extreme weather events and climate-related stresses.

Only around 12.8 per cent consider existing infrastructure to be sufficiently prepared for climate emergencies.

The study thus confirms a trend that is becoming increasingly apparent across Europe: transport infrastructure is coming under growing pressure from heavy rain, flooding, heatwaves, droughts and wildfires. As a result, roads, tunnels, rail corridors and urban transport networks are not only being damaged more frequently, but are also becoming more vulnerable in operational terms.

Dr Elena De La Peña of the Spanish Road Association emphasises the central role of resilient infrastructure in this context. She notes that maintenance and upkeep are not only crucial for comfort or operational capability, but increasingly also for safety and climate protection aspects.

The findings thus highlight a fundamental paradigm shift: infrastructure resilience is evolving from a technical management task into a core strategic requirement of modern transport policy.

Preventive maintenance is becoming a key strategy

The study provides a particularly clear picture on the subject of preventive maintenance. Around 87.4 per cent of experts now regard preventive maintenance as indispensable. A further 11.4 per cent link it directly to safer operational processes.

There is thus almost complete consensus that traditional reactive repair models are no longer sufficient in the long term.

This shift is closely linked to the increasing complexity of modern transport systems. Roads, bridges, tunnels, railways and traffic control systems are now highly interconnected infrastructures of enormous economic and social significance. Failures or disruptions have a direct impact on supply chains, mobility, security of supply and economic stability.

Preventive maintenance is therefore increasingly becoming a central component of strategic resilience planning. The aim is to identify the condition of infrastructure at an early stage, address risks proactively and avoid operational disruptions wherever possible.

At the same time, digitalisation is also transforming maintenance itself. Sensor technology, AI-based condition monitoring, digital twins and data-driven monitoring systems are becoming increasingly important for managing maintenance cycles more precisely and efficiently.

Transport infrastructure as a component of strategic resilience

The results of the STA Trend Barometer also show that transport infrastructure is increasingly being viewed in the context of broader societal resilience.

This is because modern mobility and logistics systems are not only economic lifelines but also critical infrastructure in the security policy sense. Disruptions can have far-reaching consequences for supply chains, energy supply, emergency services or economic processes.

Particularly in times of geopolitical uncertainty, hybrid threats and increasing climate extremes, the question of resilient transport systems is therefore coming more into focus in European infrastructure policy.

This is not solely about physical infrastructure. Digital control and communication systems are also increasingly becoming part of the security-critical infrastructure architecture. Traffic management, intelligent traffic light systems, digital control centres and networked mobility platforms significantly expand the attack surfaces and points of failure in modern transport systems.

The discussion on resilience therefore increasingly encompasses physical, digital and organisational dimensions simultaneously.

European ‘Transport Health Index’ aims to enable comparability

In parallel with the Expert Perception Tracker, the STA presented a further initiative: the ‘European Transport Sector Health Index’. This data-based tool is designed to make the ‘health’ of national transport systems comparable.

The index is based on 16 indicators, divided into four equally weighted categories:

  • Accessibility and usage
  • Safety and reliability
  • Environmental performance
  • Efficiency and integration

The key performance indicators under consideration include, among others, public transport usage, road fatalities per vehicle kilometre, emission intensity, multimodal logistics efficiency and digital integration in the transport sector.

According to STA President Dr José F. Papí, this is intended to create a simple yet comparable assessment model that allows progress to be measured over longer periods.

The approach highlights an overarching trend: transport infrastructure is increasingly being assessed and managed on a data-driven basis. Alongside traditional safety metrics, sustainability, climate resilience, digital integration and system efficiency are gaining equal importance.

Holistic infrastructure policy is gaining in importance

The results of the STA survey make it clear that the future of European transport systems will not depend solely on new construction projects. Rather, the decisive factor will be how existing infrastructure is modernised, made resilient and maintained in the long term.

In this context, a holistic approach to infrastructure is coming to the fore. Safety, climate adaptation, digitalisation, maintenance and operational resilience can increasingly no longer be viewed in isolation from one another.

At the same time, the study shows that whilst Europe continues to have comparatively safe transport systems, there are still significant shortcomings in terms of resilience to future pressures. Climate risks, regional imbalances and investment gaps in particular could develop into key stress factors in the long term.

For policymakers, operators and infrastructure managers, this means that resilience is likely to become a more central strategic guiding principle of European transport infrastructure policy in the future – not merely as a technical necessity, but as a prerequisite for economic stability, security of supply and society’s ability to function effectively.

Related Articles

Commentary: Between crisis management and a reform backlog

An analysis of Michael Hüther’s assessment of the government The commentary by Michael Hüther, Director of the German Economic Institute, is less a traditional assessment of the government’s performance than a diagnosis of political exhaustion during a phase of...

Share This