The aim of the paper is to identify the main factors and mechanisms behind the development of low-emission public transport vehicles in Polish cities. This innovation is primarily connected with growing environmental requirements for transport, with the EU environmental and transport policies being the key factors. However, strategies of local governments and municipal transport companies as well as the organization of urban transport - which differs significantly between cities - also play an important role. Three basic types of approach towards low-emission buses can be observed in Polish cities: tests of electric and hybrid vehicles, purchases of small quantities of buses in order to implement new solutions, and finally attempts to replace the majority or even the entire transport fleet with low-emission vehicles. It should be emphasised that an important element which affects the development of low emission public urban transport in Poland is the fact that the country has become one of the main bus producers in Europe - a fact which is a result of both large-scale foreign investments and the success of Polish manufacturers.

One of the key challenges on the road to sustainable mobility is the development of low/zero emission urban public transport (UPT). This is crucial in order to meet environmental requirements aiming at reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emission. In some countries (e.g., Poland) reduction of air pollution is also an important reason behind the implementation of low/zero emission UPT. The aim of this study is to investigate the factors and mechanisms influencing the development of modern electromobility in Polish UPT. We have examined all 242 UPT systems in the country in terms of the characteristics of the relevant urban municipalities, such as size, economic prosperity, level of human and social capital, development paths of urban public transport in the long term as well as the institutional context and proximity and connections to other cities with experience in electromobility. Classification and statistical methods are used based on a variety of approaches, as assigning a score to various preliminarily identified indicators or applying correlation between quantities to verify the formulated hypotheses. Our analysis demonstrates that electromobility adoption is the result of a combination of favourable economic, urban, social and technological characteristic features of a given city. Zero or low emission buses are more common in large cities which are highly positioned in urban hierarchy, economically sound and which are characterized by a well-developed tertiary economy as well as by high human capital. An additional factor that positively influences the implementation of electromobility—in particular at the very first stage—is proximity to the location of low emission bus producers. The leadership in modern electromobility can be understood as part of a broader, proactive development policy of the cities aimed at improving the quality of life of their residents. This is especially important in medium-sized towns where utilizing electric vehicles can be an instrument to maintain or even develop their role and status. The results of the article may provide a basis for creating sustainable urban policies, especially sustainable mobility and improving environmental quality.

Liberalisation of railway market can be an important instrument for increasing the attractiveness of local rail services and consequently for making the railways more competitive with other means of transport, which could result in changing the modal share in the favour of railways. The differences in the railway liberalisation level as well as in the policies towards rail transport between Central and Eastern European countries are vast, hence the present situation and the future prospects of regional services are diverse. Whereas there is only one railway line in Slovakia which is not operated by the state railway company ZSSK, a few private local connections which complement a very dense network of ČD state railways are in service in the Czech Republic. Poland, by contrast, is a country where liberalisation of railway market is most advanced as several different companies are responsible for transport in the regions. However, the results of this large scale liberalisation are ambiguous as the positive effects (reopening of some lines) are balanced by isolation of the new regional government-owned systems from each other. In Austria, by contrast, the existence of several private and regional government-owned local railways which are an indispensable part of the regional transport networks has contributed to maintain an effective transport system. Although the effects of liberalisation on the local railway networks can often be ambiguous, several cases from the Czech Republic, Austria and Poland show that privatisation and municipalisation may have a positive effect on the railway service as it has enabled to maintain the service on many sections which were at risk of closure. However, the most important condition of the effective transport development seems to be an active cooperation between the railway operators and the local governments as an expression of appropriate transport policy.

Despite similar economic and legal conditions in Poland and the Czech Republic, the situation of local railway lines in each of these neighbouring countries is completely different. In Poland more than 90% of third-category and over 44% of second-category lines were closed down between 1989 and 2011, whereas the Czech Republic did away with only 14% of its regional lines during the same period. This means that two decades of transformation processes in Poland have resulted in a massive decline in the importance of the regional railway network, which is one of the most important symptoms of a rapid decline in the role of the railway transport system as a whole. By contrast, the Czech Republic still has one of the densest railway networks in Europe, thanks to the vital role of its local lines. The main reasons for this big difference between the two countries - and for the very minor importance of the regional railway service in Poland - are the lack of a realistic transport policy at the state level and the badly conducted restructuring of the national PKP railway company (PKP - Polskie Koleje Państwowe, Polish State Railways). Other reasons are the poor state of the railway infrastructure and also factors connected with the structure of settlement, as well as the historical development of the railways in certain parts of the country. These factors have merely reinforced an already vast bureaucracy and aggravated the wastage for which the PKP was known during the communist period. The main question that arises concerning the future is whether decision-makers in Poland at both national and regional levels - as well as those in the railway companies themselves - will be able to follow the Czech example, as this would appear to be the best solution for the greatest crisis the Polish railway system has seen in decades.