47 hours in traffic, €5.3bn lost: Germany rethinks road repairs

The condition of Germany’s road network has been a major concern for carriers for years. Repairs, weight restrictions and sudden bridge closures do more than lengthen journeys. When deliveries are tied to strict time windows, even a delay of a few minutes can disrupt an entire transport operation.

A study prepared by EY-Parthenon and Bridge the Momentum, with support from DKV Mobility and Vitronic, examines the issue from an economic perspective. Its authors argue that investment decisions should combine the condition of infrastructure with actual traffic volumes, route reliability and the importance of individual routes to businesses.

Drivers spent 47 hours in traffic – but the headline figure is only part of the story

In 2025, drivers in Germany spent an average of 47 hours in traffic, compared with 43 hours in 2024. Delays increased in 77% of the German cities included in the analysis. The resulting economic cost was estimated at €5.3bn.

There is an important caveat to these figures. They primarily reflect urban traffic, while the effects of roadworks, bridge closures and long detours on long-distance routes are only partly captured. The study therefore concludes that the total cost to the economy is likely to be higher.

For road freight, average speed is not always the most important measure. Predictable journey times can matter more. The report identifies five factors that should be considered when assessing the network: journey-time reliability, consistency of travel times, network accessibility, disruption management and logistics productivity.

A route may have an acceptable average journey time and still be a poor choice for logistics if that time fluctuates significantly from one day to the next. For time-critical deliveries, this uncertainty directly affects operating costs and planning.

Freight transport shows every day how the road network really performs: where traffic keeps moving and where it comes to a standstill, says Jérôme Lejeune of DKV Mobility.

One bridge closure can add 50m kilometres to journeys

The report illustrates the scale of the challenge with several real-world examples.

On 3 June 2026, the Friedrich-Ebert-Brücke on the A565 in Bonn was completely closed after structural damage was identified. Several months earlier, ADAC had modelled precisely this type of scenario.

According to the calculations cited in the study, a complete closure could result in more than €170m in annual economic losses and around 50m additional kilometres being driven on detours. Traffic would also be diverted onto roads around Cologne that are already heavily used.

The closure of the Rahmede bridge on the A45 had even wider consequences. The motorway is one of the main routes for heavy goods traffic.

In 2022, the Institut der deutschen Wirtschaft estimated that potential losses could reach €1.8bn. A later analysis put the actual cost at around €1.5bn. Approximately two-thirds came directly from congestion and detours, while the remainder reflected the indirect effects of reduced accessibility.

Cases such as these support a broader approach: authorities should assess not just an individual bridge, but also the impact its closure would have on the entire corridor.

Truck traffic is putting pressure on infrastructure built for a different era

The study also highlights the growing structural pressure on the network. Freight transport activity in Germany has doubled since 1991, while much of the infrastructure was designed for significantly lower traffic loads.

Germany’s motorways include 27,915 bridge structures or bridge components. Of these, 8,083 – about 29% – require modernisation, according to figures cited in the report. Federal roads contain another 3,030 such structures, representing around 12% of the total. The problem extends beyond bridges. The study says that about one-sixth of the carriageway surface on federal motorways and roughly one-third of the surface on federal roads has limited usability.

The condition ratings for motorway bridges have also deteriorated. Between 2000 and 2023, the share rated good or very good fell from 30% to 10%. Over the same period, the proportion rated satisfactory or worse rose from 37% to 47%.

Germany’s bridge modernisation programme is falling well behind schedule

The report cites an assessment by the Federal Court of Auditors, Bundesrechnungshof, of the motorway bridge modernisation programme, which has a target date of 2032. Between 2022 and 2024, Autobahn GmbH completed modernisation work on fewer than 300 bridge structures under the programme. That was about 40% of the number planned for the period.

To meet the programme’s target, around 590 structures would have to be completed annually from 2025 onwards. The authors quote Bundesrechnungshof as saying that this pace is far beyond the capacity demonstrated so far.

The federal budget allocated around €11bn to road investment in 2026, while total funding of €52.2bn is planned for 2025–2029. Autobahn GmbH nevertheless estimates that the current five-year plan requires an additional €5.5bn. The report also notes that higher construction costs are absorbing a significant share of the nominal increase in spending.

Road condition is not enough: freight and economic importance should count too

This is where the proposed Economic Reach Index, or ERI, comes in.

The index is designed to answer more than a technical question about the condition of a road. It would also assess how much economic activity depends on that route operating reliably.

The authors use the Hamburg–Hanover–Wolfsburg corridor to explain the idea. They compare it with a hypothetical route in a similar technical condition, but carrying much less traffic and of lower economic importance.

Under a traditional system, both sections could receive a similar repair priority. Once economic significance is included, the heavily used logistics corridor would rank much higher because a loss of capacity or a major failure would affect more shipments and businesses.

The report also shows why average journey time alone is insufficient. In its model example, a trip that normally takes 90 minutes could stretch beyond 130 minutes in less favourable conditions. The authors stress that this is an illustration, not a measurement of actual travel time on this specific corridor.

Carriers have valuable data, but little of it informs long-term planning

The study points to a significant gap. Freight operators have detailed knowledge of the reliability of individual road sections, recurring congestion and network bottlenecks. However, this operational experience is not collected systematically or used consistently in long-term infrastructure planning. As a result, insights generated every day by thousands of transport operations feed into investment decisions only to a limited extent.

The authors illustrate the problem with a hypothetical freight forwarder planning a shipment between Hamburg and Wolfsburg. Its transport-management system shows journey times, toll costs and roadworks on the A7, but not the current weight restriction on a bridge. The information exists, but it is held in another system.

For a shipment with little time to spare, one missing update can turn a planned route into an operational risk. Although the example was created for the report, it highlights the data-integration gap the authors want to address.

Toll Collect offers one of Europe’s most detailed sources of truck-traffic data

Germany does not need to build every data source from scratch. Toll Collect records journeys on individual road sections, as well as vehicle characteristics, through the tolling system. The authors describe it as one of Europe’s most detailed road-traffic databases. Because the toll is mandatory, it covers almost the entire population of vehicles subject to the system.

Other relevant sources include pavement-condition data, bridge and tunnel inspections, and information from traffic-management centres.

The difficulty is that Toll Collect data are not currently matched systematically with information about infrastructure condition. The report argues that combining actual road usage with asset condition could be particularly valuable when deciding which repairs should come first.

There is, however, a legal barrier. Data collected through the tolling system may be used only for purposes defined by law, which currently restricts its routine combination with road-condition data. The authors therefore call for a legal mandate covering this type of use.

A digital twin could help authorities anticipate closures

The second pillar of the proposal is a digital twin of the road network: a model combining infrastructure condition, traffic volumes and potential economic consequences. It would do more than display roads on a map. Authorities could use it to test scenarios, such as the effect of closing a specific bridge for eight months, which package of repairs would best improve network stability within a limited budget, or when postponing maintenance would begin to drive up future costs sharply.

Boris Wagner of Vitronic notes that much of the necessary technology is already available.

Innovative sensors, digital models and data analysis already provide a clearer picture of infrastructure condition and road conditions. The next step is to use that information consistently when setting priorities and measuring results, Wagner says.

From firefighting to forward planning

The authors envision a shift away from reacting to failures after they occur and towards identifying risks earlier.

Under this approach, road condition, traffic volumes and the economic impact of a potential closure would be assessed together. Repair schedules could then be updated as new data became available.

Germany is still at the beginning of this process. The authors place the current level of data integration between the first and second of four development stages, moving from separate information pools towards partial integration. They point to the Netherlands as a more advanced example, where Rijkswaterstaat uses around 400 operational dashboards alongside sensor-based infrastructure monitoring.

The proposed model would also change how infrastructure is funded

The concept also addresses infrastructure financing. The authors suggest that annual funding needs could be calculated using data from the digital twin, the ERI, sensors and traffic-load information.

The proposed funding mix is explicitly presented as a basis for discussion rather than a finished solution. It could include net revenue from truck tolls, federal budget funding, private capital and public-private partnership projects.

For me, the key question is ultimately simple: what economic impact does each euro spent generate? It makes no difference whether the money comes from road tolls, the federal budget or private capital, says Michael C. Blum, an EY-Parthenon partner specialising in mobility and infrastructure.

Start with a single pilot corridor

The authors are not calling for an immediate rollout across Germany’s entire road network. They propose beginning with one pilot corridor where infrastructure, traffic and economic-accessibility data could be combined. The test would show whether the new prioritisation method actually produces better results.

According to the study, this would not require entirely new systems. Relevant data already exists in the tolling system, ZEB, asset-management platforms and traffic-control centres. The main challenge is connecting those sources.

The authors also stress that the pilot ERI calculations included in the report are illustrative and do not prove that the overall model works. Only a real-world test could validate its effectiveness.

The question is not only how much Germany spends, but where

The scale of the problem is particularly important for heavy goods transport. Freight activity has doubled since 1991, thousands of bridges require modernisation and the closure of a single structure can result in losses of billions of euros. As a result, the order in which repairs are carried out increasingly affects carriers’ operating costs.

The question of how many billions are needed has been settled. Now the question is how to manage them, concludes Rainer Scholz of Bridge the Momentum.

That is what distinguishes the proposal from a traditional repair strategy. Investment priorities would depend not only on the technical condition of a bridge or road, but also on how much traffic and economic activity would be disrupted if that part of the network failed.

For carriers, this is one of the study’s most important conclusions. For now, however, it remains a proposal whose practical effectiveness still needs to be tested.