DOCSLIB.ORG

Annual Report of the Cohesion Fund 1996

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Annual Report of the Cohesion Fund 1996 % ζ·:· j-r ''■'■" European Union • 2· Regional Policy ι· * Ι and Cohesion ··· Ι ·-·-· Annual report of the Cohesion Fund 1996 European Commission European Union Regional Policy and Cohesion Annual report of the Cohesion Fund 1996 European Commission PREFACE The present annual report on the activities of the Cohesion Fund covers the calendar year 1996. It has, however, been necessary to include some remarks on activities in earlier years as well as comments on planned measures for the future in order to give the reader the full picture of the current affairs of the Fund. The reporting format is largely unchanged from previous reports and reflects the detailed requirements of the Annex to Annex II to the Cohesion Fund Regulation. Nevertheless, comments made by the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on earlier reports have been duly taken into account and adjustments made in the presentation. In particular attention has been given to a detailed explanation of how the conditionality principle has been implemented and to the Commission Decision on information and publicity measures. The specific requests for a section on ultra-peripheral regions and for a developed section on evaluation have also been met. The report fulfils the legal requirements of the Cohesion Fund Regulation. It is hoped that it will also serve as a useful reference for all who are interested in the promotion and furtherance of the economic and social cohesion of the Union. Annual report of the Cohesion Fund 1996 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Economic and Social Cohesion is one of the main objectives of the Treaty on European Union. During 1996 the Cohesion Fund continued and reinforced its contribution to the achievement of this objective. 1996 was in many ways a key year for the Cohesion Fund: the teething troubles of a new instrument for cohesion had been dealt with and the Fund was fully operational; experience gained since the first operations in 1993 formed the backbone of current management practices and the first ex post evaluations, i.e. the assessment of the effects of completed projects, could be undertaken. The importance of this last point can hardly be overstated: the weight of the Cohesion Fund as an instrument to favour economic and social cohesion depends on its ability to demonstrate the usefulness of the completed projects, be it in terms of better transport facilities, shorter travel distances, savings in transport time, more efficient goods handling, reduced air pollution and better environment in the towns and cities concerned, improved fresh water management ranging from catchment, supply and distribution of drinking water for human consumption to proper treatment of used water and sewage and environmentally friendly handling of solid waste, to mention but a few examples. In the coming years, more and more Cohesion Fund projects will be completed, thus providing the basis for an overall evaluation of the efforts of the Union and the Member States. 1996 was also the mid-point year between 1993, the year of the fírst project decisions, and 1999, the last year covered by the present Fund Regulation. Appropriately, therefore, a mid• term review of Member State eligibility with respect to the GNP criterion was carried out in 1996. All four Member States continue to be eligible. Furthermore, 1996 was the first year in which the Commission undertook an examination of Member States' compliance with their economic convergence programmes in the field of public deficits; the conditionality principle was applied by Commission decisions in June and November concerning Spain, Portugal and Greece. On each occasion, all three Member States were considered to have a budgetary performance within the targets recommended by the Council. The financing strategy of the Fund was further consolidated in 1996 in line with the provisions of the Cohesion Fund Regulation. The balance between the two areas of assistance - transport infrastructure and environment - reached an almost perfect 50/50 distribution. This reflects the determination of the Commission, which is fully supported by the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, to achieve an equal level of financing for the two areas of Cohesion Fund financing for the whole period. The result in 1996 brings this objective clearly within reach. In line with remarks made by the European Parliament in its opinion on the 1994 Cohesion Fund Annual Report and reiterated concerning 1995 and by the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee, the efforts to allocate a higher proportion of finance within the transport sector to rail transport facilities continued. Annual report of the Cohesion Fund 1996 Furthermore the projects financed in the most remote regions received special attention in 1996; a separate section of this annual report gives more details (see point 2.3.5). The Fund finances transport infrastructure projects only where they are either part of the trans-European Transport Network (TEN - transport) or feed the network directly. This represents the strategy for setting priorities for the Cohesion Fund in the field of transport infrastructure, a strategy which has already shown its usefulness in relation to completing missing parts of the TEN. The directives concerning the supply of drinking water, waste-water treatment and the treatment of sewage continue to set the priorities for assistance in the field of environment. Other environment measures, which may be seen as improving environmental levels, may also be eligible and may receive part-financing from the Fund. Some examples concern projects relating to coastal protection, reafforestation and desertification, habitat protection and nature conservation. The polluter-pays principle is applied whenever a project is part-financed by the Cohesion Fund. Through a procedure of double consultation of the responsible departments in the Commission, every project is submitted to detailed examination and verification of compliance with Community legislation. This procedure also aims at assuring that the best evaluation practices available are applied. The Commission stated in the 1995 report on the Cohesion Fund that there is room for improvement of analytical methods and their practical application. In line with this statement the Commission has carried out a study with external consultants on the Application of the Polluter-Pays-Principle in Cohesion Fund Countries to gain further insight into the practical and theoretical issues involved. The main results of this study are presented in Chapter 2. The combating of unemployment and the creation of new job opportunities is a high priority for the Commission. The 1995 annual report on the Cohesion Fund presented some first estimates of the short and long term employment effects of funded projects. The present report develops these estimates further and also outlines some key findings from the study carried out for the Commission by the London School of Economics into the overall socio-economic effects of projects. The section on employment is also a direct response to the requests from the European Parliament, the Economic and social Committee and the Committee of the Regions for more information on the job-creation generated by the Cohesion Fund. The European Investment Bank continues, under the agreement with the Commission, to be consulted for its financial and technical expertise on major projects presented by the Member States. This increases the quality of assessment of the proposals beyond what the Commission itself can provide and therefore gives added value. Budgetary implementation for the year was, once again, close to 100% - an impressive f gure considering that each individual project must be fully scrutinised before commitments and payments can be made and that continuous monitoring and checks on physical indicators are made prior to any further release of funding. Annual report of the Cohesion Fund 1996 The monitoring and follow-up of projects has continued on a high level throughout the year. The Monitoring Committees have held regular meetings and have included representatives from local and regional bodies as well as national level. It is important to underline that no cases of fraud have been reported on Cohesion Fund projects; the responsible authorities of the Member States and the Union have carried out numerous inspections and checks in this respect, as described in Chapter 5.4. Some cases of irregularities have been detected and the necessary corrective measures taken. In June 1996 the Commission adopted, after having received the observations of the European Parliament, a Decision on information and publicity measures. The Decision includes details on the use of bill-boards, brochures, audio-visual presentations, TV and other media. Each project part-financed by the Cohesion Fund must be given appropriate information and publicity. These measures may be included in the request for Fund financing, which will make modern and efficient publicity attractive for the promoter of a project. Annual report of the Cohesion Fund 1996 CONTENTS PREFACE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CHAPTER 1 - IMPLEMENTATION OF COHESION FUND PRINCIPLES 9 1.1 Background 9 1.2 Conditionality 9 1.3 Mid-term review 11 1.4 Information and publicity measures 11 1.5 First Cohesion Report 13 CHAPTER 2 - FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE COMMITTED AND PAID BY THE FUND 14 2.1 Budget available 14 2.2 Breakdown by Member State 15 2.3 Budget implementation
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Public-Private Partnerships Financed by the European Investment Bank from 1990 to 2020
    EUROPEAN PPP EXPERTISE CENTRE Public-private partnerships financed by the European Investment Bank from 1990 to 2020 March 2021 Public-private partnerships financed by the European Investment Bank from 1990 to 2020 March 2021 Terms of Use of this Publication The European PPP Expertise Centre (EPEC) is part of the Advisory Services of the European Investment Bank (EIB). It is an initiative that also involves the European Commission, Member States of the EU, Candidate States and certain other States. For more information about EPEC and its membership, please visit www.eib.org/epec. The findings, analyses, interpretations and conclusions contained in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the EIB or any other EPEC member. No EPEC member, including the EIB, accepts any responsibility for the accuracy of the information contained in this publication or any liability for any consequences arising from its use. Reliance on the information provided in this publication is therefore at the sole risk of the user. EPEC authorises the users of this publication to access, download, display, reproduce and print its content subject to the following conditions: (i) when using the content of this document, users should attribute the source of the material and (ii) under no circumstances should there be commercial exploitation of this document or its content. Purpose and Methodology This report is part of EPEC’s work on monitoring developments in the public-private partnership (PPP) market. It is intended to provide an overview of the role played by the EIB in financing PPP projects inside and outside of Europe since 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • T12 Traffic Management.Pdf
    Page 2 / 99 Submitted by: Task 12 group leader, Paul van der Kroon Prepared by: Group leader: Paul van der Kroon (The Netherlands) Group members: Austria Markus Bartsch , Sigrid Pirkelbauer , Michael Schneider Cyprus Alexis Avgoustis Denmark Finn Krenk Finland Petteri Portaankorva France Christophe Desnouailles Germany Georg Stern Italy Sandro La Monica, Pier Paolo Cartolano The Netherlands Bert Helleman Henk Jan de Haan Maarten Amelink (supporting consultant) Sweden Maria Nichan i Henrik Sundquist Bjorn Carselid Switzerland Gerhard Petersen / Markus Bartsch United Kingdom David Stones Nicholas Taylor (supporting consultant) Felicity Keen Overview meetings: 3–4 June 2009 Utrecht, the Netherlands 24 –25 September 2009 Stockho lm, Sweden 19 –21 January 2010 Paris, France (joint meeting with task group 11) 19 –20 May 2010 Frankfurt, Germany 6–7 October 2010 Vienna, Austria 10 –11 February 2011 Rome, Italy 22 –23 June 2011 Helsinki, Finland 3–4 November 2011 Bern, Switzerland 22 –23 February 2012 Copenhagen, Denmark Edited and published by: CEDR's Secretariat General Approved and amended by: CEDR's EXECUTIVE BOARD on 29 June 2012 Addressed to: CEDR's GOVERNING BOARD on 27 September 2012 This document expresses solely the current view of CEDR. Readers should not consider these views to be statements of the official position of CEDR's member states. ISBN : 979-10-93321-00-4 Traffic management to reduce congestion Page 3 / 99 This report is: FOR DECISION 1. Executive summary Purpose of the paper Congestion on the European road network has increased significantly over the past decade. This is the result of an increase in car ownership and car use in most European countries.
    [Show full text]
  • URSA MAJOR Evaluation Report
    URSA MAJOR Evaluation Report Project reference: I.208.S.258.O1 Version: 1.0 www.its-platform.eu . Document Information Authors NAME ORGANISATION Luca Studer Politecnico di Milano – Mobility and Transport Laboratory Giovanna Marchionni Politecnico di Milano – Mobility and Transport Laboratory Marco Ponti Politecnico di Milano – Mobility and Transport Laboratory Valeria Paglino Politecnico di Milano – Mobility and Transport Laboratory Reiner Dölger Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr, Landwirtschaft und Weinbau Rheinland-Pfalz Revision NAME ORGANISATION Paola Mainardi Sina S.p.A. Stephanie Kleine Ministerium für Wirtschaft, Verkehr, Landwirtschaft und Weinbau Rheinland-Pfalz Henk Taale Rijkswaterstaat Water, Traffic and Environment URSA MAJOR Version 1.0 2/97 Table of Contents Document Information .................................................................................................................. 2 Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................... 3 List of Abbreviations/Acronyms .................................................................................................. 5 1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 7 1.1 Impact on Traffic Efficiency ........................................................................................... 7 1.2 Impact on Safety ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • W&C Standard Template
    BASE PROSPECTUS SIAS S.p.A. (incorporated with limited liability under the laws of the Republic of Italy) €2,000,000,000 Euro Medium Term Note Programme Under the €2,000,000,000 Euro Medium Term Note Programme (the “Programme”) described in this Base Prospectus, SIAS S.p.A. (“SIAS” or the “Issuer”), subject to all applicable legal and regulatory requirements, may from time to time issue notes in bearer form and in any currency agreed between the Issuer and the relevant Dealer(s) (as defined below) (the “Notes”). The maximum aggregate nominal amount of all Notes from time to time outstanding under the Programme will not exceed €2,000,000,000 (or its equivalent in other currencies at the date of issue), save that the maximum aggregate principal amount may be increased from time to time, subject to compliance with the relevant provisions of the Programme and applicable laws and regulations in force from time to time. Notes will be issued in Series and, in the case of Secured Notes (as defined below), will be subject to, and have the benefit of, (i) an Italian law-governed intercreditor agreement dated 8 October 2010 (as amended or supplemented from time to time, the “Intercreditor Agreement”) between, inter alios, the Issuer, Mediobanca – Banca di Credito Finanziario S.p.A. as intercreditor agent (the “Intercreditor Agent”), Deutsche Trustee Company Limited as trustee (the “Trustee”) and the other Secured Creditors (as defined below) and (ii) one or more Italian law-governed deeds of pledge over the Issuer’s receivables and monetary claims (crediti pecuniari) arising pursuant to the Intercompany Loans (as defined below) granted out of the proceeds of the Secured Notes (the “Deeds of Pledge”) to be entered into by the Issuer in favour of the holders of the relevant Series of Secured Notes and the Trustee on or about the date of issue of each Series of Secured Notes.
    [Show full text]
  • 2015 Annual Report CONTENTS
    2015 Annual Report CONTENTS 01 Album 18 Profile 19 Message from the Chairman and CEO 20 Corporate governance 21 Corporate management structures 22 New directions and strategy 25 Stock market and shareholder base 28 Sustainable development 41 CONCESSIONS 44 VINCI Autoroutes 56 VINCI Highways 62 VINCI Airports 70 VINCI Railways 72 VINCI Stadium 74 Other public amenities 77 CONTRACTING 78 VINCI Energies 90 Eurovia 100 VINCI Construction 114 VINCI Immobilier 117 GENERAL & FINANCIAL ELEMENTS 118 Report of the Board of Directors 216 Report of the Chairman of the Board on corporate governance and internal control procedures 222 Report of the Vice-Chairman and Senior Director of the Board of Directors 224 Consolidated financial statements 303 Parent company financial statements 320 Special report of the Statutory Auditors on regulated agreements and commitments 322 Persons responsible for the registration document 324 Cross-reference table for the registration document 326 Cross-reference table for the annual financial report 327 Cross-reference table for workforce-related, environmental and social information Cover photo – The Arturo Merino Benitez Airport in Santiago de Chile will double its capacity to 30 million passengers by 2020. Key data Key data Group Revenue (1) 280,000 €38.5 billion projects (2) Market capitalisation at 31 December 2015 185,452 €34.8 billion employees worldwide (3) Net income attributable to owners of the parent €2,046 million Revenue (1) Ebitda (4) Operating income (in €m) (in €m and as a % of revenue (1) ) from ordinary
    [Show full text]
  • 2014-EU-TM-0588-W Medtis 2 Interim Evaluation Report V2.2
    MedTIS corridor Evaluation Report MedTIS 2 Project reference: 2014-EU-TM-0588-W Project location: France, Italy, Spain, Portugal Version: 2.2 www.its-platform.eu . Document Information Authors NAME ORGANISATION Sara Lefèvre Algoé Floriane Le Garrec Algoé Carlos Pelayo Algoé Bernard Fer ASFA Paola Mainardi SINA S.p.A. Claudio Gombi SINA S.p.A. Davide Poggio Autostrada dei Fiori Carlo Nieri SALT S.p.A. Carlos Fuentes SEOPAN Ines Viegas Transportes, Inovaçao e Sistemas, S. A Distribution DATE VERSION DISSEMINATION 20-12-2019 V2.2 MedTIS SC and EU EIP MedTIS corridor Version 20-12- 2/41 MedTIS 2 Action - 2014-EU-TM-0588-W 2019 Table of Contents Document Information .................................................................................................................. 2 Table of Contents .......................................................................................................................... 3 List of Abbreviations/Acronyms .................................................................................................. 4 1 MedTIS 2 Action presentation ............................................................................................... 5 2 Objectives of the evaluation ................................................................................................. 7 3 Evaluation methodology ....................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Key Performance Indicators .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Ppps Financed by the European Investment Bank from 1990 to 2017 February 2018 Terms of Use of This Report
    PPPs financed by the European Investment Bank from 1990 to 2017 February 2018 Terms of Use of this Report The European PPP Expertise Centre (EPEC) is part of the Advisory Services of the European Investment Bank (EIB). It is an initiative that also involves the European Commission, Member States of the EU, Candidate States and certain other states. For more information about EPEC and its membership, please visit www.eib.org/epec. This publication has been prepared to contribute to and stimulate discussions on public- private partnerships (PPPs) as well as to foster the diffusion of best practice in this area. The findings, analyses, interpretations and conclusions contained in this publication do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the EIB or any other EPEC member. No EPEC member, including the EIB, accepts any responsibility for the accuracy of the information contained in this publication or any liability for any consequences arising from its use. Reliance on the information provided in this publication is therefore at the sole risk of the user. EPEC authorises the users of this publication to access, download, display, reproduce and print its content subject to the following conditions: (i) when using the content of this document, users should attribute the source of the material and (ii) under no circumstances should there be commercial exploitation of this document or its content. Purpose and Methodology This report is part of EPEC’s work on monitoring developments in the PPP market. It is intended to provide an overview of the role played by the EIB in financing PPP projects inside and outside Europe since 1990.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Europe Beautiful
    Beautiful ROADS of Europe I Beautiful ROADS of Europe Edited by Donaldas Andziulis Ex Arte | 2013 Vilnius II BEAUTIFUL ROADS OF EUROPE . Gritsun E hoto: hoto: UDK 625.7(4)(084) P Be28 Executive editor / compiler Donaldas Andziulis Editorial assistants Jayde Will, Marta Kuzmickaitė Designers Birutė Vilutienė, Ieva Kuzmienė Prepress Anatolij Kostrov Proof-reading Aingeal Flanagan All images in this book have been reproduced with the knowledge and prior consent of the individuals and organisations concerned. Every effort has been made to ensure that the credits accurately comply with the information supplied. © Ex Arte, 2013 ISBN 978-609-8010-24-4 First edition. Printed in Lithuania. The publishing of this book ‘Beautiful Roads of Europe’ is the name of this book. was funded by Here, the word ‘beautiful’ encompasses many things: aesthetic enjoyment, fantastic architecture, technical mastery, workmanship, road safety, and expanded trade. Have a pleasant journey on the beautiful roads of Europe! MA S I PR hoto: hoto: P Contents Roads of Europe – Benefits and challenges 6 NATIONAL ROAD NETWORKS Austria 12 Belgium 16 Cyprus 24 Denmark 28 Estonia 32 Finland 36 France 40 Germany 44 Greece 48 Hungary 52 Iceland 56 Ireland 60 Italy 64 Latvia 68 Lithuania 72 Luxembourg 76 Malta 80 Netherlands 84 Norway 88 Poland 92 Portugal 96 Romania 100 Slovenia 104 Spain 108 Sweden 112 Switzerland 116 United Kingdom 120 4 BEAUTIFUL ROADS OF EUROPE 5 Roads of Europe – Benefits and challenges Roads have been the lifeblood of our society since ancient times, whether for travel, trade, exploration, or conquest. The Silk Road from China to Europe, which is over 6,000 km long, has existed for more than 2,000 years.
    [Show full text]
  • NATIONAL REPORT on MOTORWAYS ISSN: 1848-0233 the Croatian Association of Toll Motorways Concessionaires
    THE CROATIAN ASSOCIATION OF TOLL MOTORWAYS CONCESSIONAIRES 2018 NATIONAL REPORT ON MOTORWAYS ISSN: 1848-0233 The Croatian Association of Toll Motorways Concessionaires Širolina 4 10 000 Zagreb - CRO Publisher: HUKA phone: + 385 1 65 15 375 Editorial Board: Miro Škrgatić, Editor in Chief e-mail: [email protected] Brankica Bajić, Technical Editor [email protected] www.huka.hr Graphic design: Modacom plus d.o.o. Miro Škrgatić Photographs: HUKA Archive President Printed by: Kerschoffset d.o.o. Miloš Savić Published: May 2019 Vice-President CURRENT STATE OF THE NETWORK As on 31 December 2018, the total length of the motorway network in Croatia amounted to 1,306.53 km. Motorways are operated by 4 companies: • Hrvatske autoceste d.o.o. (operates motorways A1, A3, A4, A5, A10 and A11) • BINA-ISTRA d.d. (operates the so called Istrian Y – A8 and A9) 2018. 2018. • Autocesta Rijeka-Zagreb d.d. (operates motorways A6, part of A1 and A7, the Krk Bridge and part of D6 State Road from Novigrad to Netretić) • Autocesta Zagreb-Macelj d.o.o. (operates motorway A2) Motorway and semi-motorway network (in km) Company Total network Total network Total network ORT ON MOTORWAYS ORT 2017 2018 plan for 2019 P In 2018 there was HAC* 925.80 918. 50** 918.80** no opening of new ARZ* 187.03 187.03 187.03 stretches of BINA-ISTRA 141.00 141.00 141.00 motorway but new AZM 60.00 60.00 60.00 interchange TOTAL 1,313.83 1,306.53 1,306.83 Lipovljani was open for traffic on A3 Opening of new stretches in 2018 RE NATIONAL CROATIA motorway.
    [Show full text]
  • Portugal Walking Routes in the Lezíria Do Tejo Region
    PORTUGAL WALKING ROUTES IN THE LEZÍRIA DO TEJO REGION CO-FINANCED BY: PORTUGAL WALKING ROUTES IN THE LEZÍRIA DO TEJO REGION 02 RIBATEJO RIBATEJO 03 CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 3 Introduction 34 Chamusca FROM THE HEATH TO THE BANKS 4 The region of Lezíria do Tejo OF THE TAGUS 5 The Trails Network Distance: 10 km; Duration: 3h; Degree of Difficulty: Easy. 6 How to use this guide 39 Coruche 7 Safety recommendations ROUTES FROM THE VALLEY TO THE GROVE Distance: 9.7 km; Duration: 3h; 8 Almeirim Degree of Difficulty: Easy. RIBEIRA DE MUGE, A NATURAL TREASURE Distance: 11.3 km; Duration: 4h; 44 Golegã Degree of Difficulty: Easy. PAUL DO BOQUILOBO NATURE RESERVE 13 Alpiarça Distance: 9.9 km; Duration: 3h; Degree of Difficulty: Easy. THROUGH THE CAVALO DO SORRAIA RESERVE Ribatejo is located in the heart of Portugal, some 50 km from Lisbon, and offers visitors excellent 49 Rio Maior Distance: 10.2 km; Duration: 3h; cuisine, good wines, rich heritage and typical Portuguese hospitality – all attractions that will SERRA DE AIRE E CANDEEIROS Degree of Difficulty: Easy. guarantee memorable moments. NATURE PARK 18 Azambuja Distance: 4.5 km; Duration: 3h; Boasting a mild climate and some 3,000 hours of sunshine per year, the region has a vast range Degree of Difficulty: Difficult. of architectural heritage that is classified as being of national interest, with examples from many CASTRO DE VILA NOVA DE SÃO PEDRO Distance: 7.3 km; Duration: 3h; different historical periods. 54 Salvaterra de Magos Degree of Difficulty: Easy. ESCAROUPIM NATIONAL FOREST Its natural heritage is perfect for leisure activities and for contemplating its diverse landscapes.
    [Show full text]
  • European Public-Private Partnership Transport Market September 2017 European Public-Private Partnership Transport Market
    European Public-Private Partnership transport market September 2017 European Public-Private Partnership transport market Directors Javier Parada Partner in charge of the Infrastructure Industry, Spain Miguel Laserna Directing Partner of Financial Advisory- Infrastructures Coordinated by Karolina Anna Mlodzik Kate McCarthy Published by Deloitte University EMEA CVBA Contact Infrastructure Department Deloitte Madrid Torre Picasso - Plaza Pablo Ruiz Picasso 1, 28020 Madrid, Spain +34 91514 5000 www.deloitte.es September 2017 2 September 2017 Contents INTRODUCTION 5 1. OVERVIEW 1.1. The transport infrastructure gap 6 1.2. 2016 European PPP transport market 9 1.2.1.European greenfield PPP transactions that reached financial close in 2016 9 1.2.2. European greenfield PPP transport projects with a preferred proponent announced in 2016 14 1.2.3. European greenfield PPP transport projects with a pre-qualified or shortlisted proponent in 2016 16 1.2.4. European PPP transport refinancings in 2016 16 1.2.5. European PPP transport M&A transactions in 2016 19 1.3. Conclusions 22 2. THE MAIN PLAYERS 2.1. Top 35 ranking 24 2.2. Main players’ current strategy 25 Main players’ role in the infrastructure lifecycle 25 Sponsors 26 Operators 27 Institutional investors 27 3. CONTEXT FOR EUROPEAN PPPS 3.1. Policy and regulation trends 30 3.1.1. Regulatory changes: Directives 2014/23/UE, 2014/24/UE and 2014/25/UE 30 3.2. Funding and financing trends 32 3.2.1. An investment plan for Europe: the Juncker Plan 33 3.2.2. Europe 2020 Project Bond Initiative 39 4. EUROPEAN GREENFIELD PPP TRANSPORT PIPELINE 4.1.
    [Show full text]
  • Croatia National Report on Motorways 2018
    CROATIA NATIONAL REPORT ON MOTORWAYS 2018 I Current State of the Network As on 31 December 2018, the total length of the motorway network in Croatia amounted to 1,306.53 km. Motorways are operated by 4 companies: - Hrvatske autoceste d.o.o. (operates motorways A1, A3, A4, A5, A10 and A11), - BINA-ISTRA d.d. (it operates the so-called Istrian Y - A8 and A9), - Autocesta Rijeka - Zagreb d.d. (operates motorway A6, part of A1 and A7, the Krk Bridge and part of D6 State Road from Novigrad to Netretić) - Autocesta Zagreb - Macelj d.o.o. (operates motorway A2). Company 2017 2018 Total network Total network Total network plan for 2019 1. HAC d.o.o.* 925.80 918.50** 918. 80 2. ARZ d.d.* 187.03 187.03 187.03 3. BINA-ISTRA d.d. 141.00 141.00 141.00 4. AZM d.o.o. 60.00 60.00 60.00 TOTAL 1,313.83 1,306.53 1,306.83 OPENING OF NEW STRETCHES IN 2018 In 2018 there was no opening of new stretches of motorway but new interchange Lipovljani was open for traffic on A3 motorway. Tunnels and Bridges on the Network – length in sole one direction Company Km of Tunnels Km of Bridges Total Tunnels and Bridges HAC** 27.38** 8.51 35.89 ARZ 12.88 14.56 27.44 BINA ISTRA 5.31 9.36 14.67 AZM 3.50 7.87 11.37 TOTAL 49.07 40.30 89.37 *revised km according to km of network in service **As of 1stJanuary 2018 St.
    [Show full text]