DOCSLIB.ORG

Motorways of the Sea – from Concept to Implementation Within the Baltic Sea Area

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Motorways of the Sea – from Concept to Implementation Within the Baltic Sea Area Informationen zur Raumentwicklung Heft 7/8.2012 381 Motorways of the sea – from concept Maciej Matczak to implementation within the Baltic Sea area 1 The concept of Motorways van Miert Report) in 2003. The Report con- of the Sea sidered the concept as one of the eighteen new infrastructure projects in the European A free movement of commodities, citizens Union. The fact that the Report defines four and financial resources are pillars of the main areas of concept implementation is European Union. For that reason, an ef- also of great significance. The four main ar- ficient and effective transport system is a eas are as follows (High Level Group TEN-T necessary element for the functioning and 2003): development of the EU. A variety of geogra- (1) Motorway of the Baltic Sea phical and special structures of cargo flows as well as environmental concerns require (2) Motorways of the Sea of Western Europe modern and friendly transport and logistics (leading from the Iberian peninsula via the solutions for Europe. The Motorways of the Atlantic Arc to the North Sea and the Irish Sea (MoS) concept aims at introducing new Sea) intermodal maritime-based logistics chains (3) Motorways of the Sea of South-East Eu- in the EU. These chains should be more rope (connecting the Adriatic Sea with the sustainable and more efficient in commer- Ionian Sea and the Eastern Mediterranean cial terms than road transport. including Cyprus) The qualification “motorways of the sea” (4) Motorways of the Sea of South-West Eu- was for the first time defined in the White rope (Western Mediterranean) connecting Paper “European transport policy for 2010: Spain, France, Italy including Malta and time to decide” (European Commission linking the Motorways of the Sea to South- 2001). The Commission proposed the devel- East Europe. opment of MoS as a “real competitive alter- native to land transport”. Unfortunately, the Additionally, the Report defines a list of pre- authors of the document did not present a requisites or parallel actions for successfully precise definition of the sea motorway con- launching the new sea motorway projects: cept, which consists of several, generally • concentrating freight on maritime routes known transport policy ideas such as short sea shipping, sustainable development, in- • convincing haulers, shippers and forwar- termodal transport, shifting the balance ders about the benefits and merits of the between the modes of transport, linking maritime alternative modes of transport, and development of • eliminating customs checks and other Trans-European Transport Infrastructure. administrative burdens and developing To sum up, according to the document, sea electronic reporting for port authorities motorways should become a “real competi- • providing appropriate facilities that tive alternative to land transport”. should preferably be specifically desig- According to the assumptions, the concept ned for this activity (e.g. ro-ro terminals, of sea motorways consists of several ship- logistic equipment, parking places) and ping line connections which are an exten- direct access to ports sion of land routes. MoS should substitute • adhering to free market competition ru- land transport and resolve bottleneck prob- les lems on roads. Main elements of the MoS concept are shipping connections, seaports, • ensuring year-round navigability in the regulations and coordination issues. Baltic Sea with icebreakers. Dr. Maciej Matczak A very important element of the sea motor- The network of Motorways of the Sea con- Gdynia Maritime University way implementation process is placing the sists of facilities and infrastructure of at ul. Morska 81–87 81-225 Gdynia concept on the list of the priority projects in least two ports in two different Member Poland the Report of the High Level Group on the States. The sea motorway should consist of E-Mail: Trans-European Transport Network (Karel the following elements: port facilities, elec- [email protected] Maciej Matczak: 382 Motorways of the sea – from concept to implementation within the Baltic Sea area tronic logistics management systems and tural Funds by Member States or their re- administrative and customs procedures as gions or federal states (infrastructure). Ac- well as infrastructure for direct land and tually, TEN-T and Marco Polo funding are sea access including winter access to secure of crucial importance for the MoS concept year-round safety navigation. development (see Table 1). The foregoing report has become a basis for The calls for MoS project proposals were redefining priority projects in 2003/2004. In launched in 2005 (within TEN-T) and 2007 the Decision No. 884/2004/EC of the Euro- (Marco Polo) by the TEN-T Executive Agen- pean Parliament and the Council of 29 April cy (TEN-TEA) and the Executive Agency 2004 formal approval of the projects and for Competitiveness and Innovation (EACI, new guidelines for Trans-European Net- Transformation of Intelligent Energy Execu- (1) works (TEN) were established. Thirty new tive Agency). These special agencies are re- Priority Project 21: West Med Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN- sponsible for implementing the TEN-T and Corridors (2006), High Qual- ity Rail and Intermodal Nordic T) projects were indicated among which Marco Polo programmes on behalf of the Corridor Königslinie (2008), 21 incorporated the MoS concept. Despite European Commission. Moreover; they ef- Motorways of the Sea projects plenty of documents issued, discussing the in the Baltic Sea Area Klai- ficiently manage the entire project life cycle péda-Karlshamn link (2008), notion of a sea motorway, a detailed defi- (organizing calls, supporting the Member Motorways of the Sea Esbjerg- nition of the concept was not developed at States), prepare financial decisions and pro- Zeebrugge (2008), Baltic Link Gdynia-Karlskrona (2009), MoS that time. vide feedback to the European Commission. 24 (2010), MOS4MOS (2010), So far, the MoS projects, which have been MIELE (2010), Motorway of A more precise definition of the MoS was the Sea Rostock-Gedser established in Vademecum issues in con- selected and financed by the Agencies, are (2010), The Baltic Sea Hub and as follows: Spokes Project (2010), MonaLi- junction with the call for proposals TEN-T sa (2010), LNG infrastructure of 2005. The document indicates crucial ele- 1. TEN-TEA: 12 projects (calls 2006–2010)1 filling stations and deployment ments of the MoS concept like eligibility of in ships (2010) 2 projects, evaluation criteria, beneficiaries 2. EACI: 3 projects (calls 2007–2010) . (2) Marco Polo: Ro-Ro Past France and eligible costs or financing plan with re- It could be stated that the portion of MoS (2007), FRES MOS (2009), Gulf- lationships to other support programmes. in overall transport projects is very low: in stream.mos (2010) According to the document, the eligible case of TEN-T, MoS projects only constitute (3) costs of the programme included: 0.7% of the total budget (TEN-TEA 2011). The TEN-T budget is divided into two parts: Multiannual In- • investment aid in infrastructure and faci- Within the Marco Polo programme, 104 dicative Perspective (MIP) and projects were selected. Within this amount, Annual Perspective (non-MIP). lities Projects funded under the only three are MoS projects. Multi-Annual Calls (MIP) are • start-up aid related to capital costs expected to help complete the The financial sources available in the TEN-T network as approved • studies related to the Motorways of the framework of the MoS concept in the fund- by the European Parliament Sea projects. and the Council with a target ing period 2007–2013 for projects are as fol- completion date of 2020. In lows: general, Multi-Annual projects Moreover, the funding sources were point- are of a larger size and longer ed out in the TEN-Regulation and TEN-T • Marco Polo: approx. EUR 450 million al- duration than Annual projects. Guidelines (TEN-T fund), the Marco Polo 80 to 85 % of the TEN-T budg- located to five types of action (catalyst, et is allocated through Multi- programme, the Structural Fund Pro- Motorways of the Sea, modal shift, traffic Annual Calls. Annual Calls are grammes (Cohesion funds, ERDF, INTER- intended to complement the avoidance, common learning) Multi-Annual Calls, thus also REG) and in national state aid programmes. giving priority to projects that TEN-T funding has been applied for by the • TEN-T: approx. EUR 8 billion in total in- address key TEN-T issues such Member States (infrastructure), Marco Polo cluding about EUR 450 million for the as bottlenecks or cross-border 3 projects. funding by companies (service), EU Struc- MoS project . In both cases, TEN-T and Marco Polo, the last call for proposals was launched in 2011. In case of TEN-T, the call for proposals end- Table 1 ed (the deadline was 23 September 2011). Characteristics of TEN-T and Marco Polo support for the MoS concept The total budget of the call was EUR 150 Marco Polo TEN-T million, for MoS EUR 40 million (European - Transport services - Infrastructure and facilities Commission 2011a). The financial contri- - Ancillary infrastructures - Start-up aid - Modal shift objective - Creation of a transport network bution of TEN-T co-financing for MoS in - Private sector driver - Public sector driven 2011 is 20 % for infrastructure works and - Direct call for proposals - Member State pre-selection facilities (implementation projects), 30 % Source: www.mos-helpdesk.eu (20.07.2010) for cross-border sections, 50 % for pilot ac- Informationen zur Raumentwicklung Heft 7/8.2012 383 tions, 50 % for studies or study parts of pro- unit (TEU) in 2009 and 7.395 million TEU in jects, 30 % for start-up aid, i.e. depreciation 2010 (with a majority of feeder traffic, Matc- of capital costs. zak 2011b: 13). The Marco Polo call for proposals 2011 re- The Baltic Sea is almost an inland sea of ferring to MoS was open until 16 January the European Union.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Tren-2003-01588-07-00-En-Tra
    COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 1 October 2003 COM (2003) 564 final Amended proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending the amended proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL amending Decision No 1692/96/EC on Community guidelines for the development of the trans-European transport network presented by the Commission pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC Treaty EN EN EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 1. Introduction and summary ........................................................................................... 3 2. Priority projects for an enlarged Union........................................................................ 4 2.1. A selective methodology.............................................................................................. 5 2.2. A limited number of new projects................................................................................ 5 2.3 Declaration of European interest.................................................................................. 6 3. The mechanism for supporting motorways of the sea ................................................. 7 4. Increased coordination between Member States.......................................................... 9 4.1. European coordinators for individual projects or groups of projects......................... 10 4.2. Coordinated procedures prior to the authorisation of projects................................... 11 5. Components of impact assessment ...........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • EIB Financing of the Trans-European Networks
    Sectoral brochure European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank EIB financing of the Trans-European Networks European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank • European Investment Bank EIB support for TENs The need to provide freedom of movement of goods, persons, energy and information underpins the fundamental developmental and integra- tion aims of the European Union (EU). At the heart of European policy, the expansion of the Trans-European Transport and Energy Networks (TENs) remains a key objective for the European Investment Bank (EIB), alongside other lending priorities, such as reinforcing economic and social cohesion in the EU, supporting EU energy objectives, forging links with EU partner countries and protecting the environment. European transport networks European policy aims to build an inte- grated network of basic transport infra- structure, transforming the networks built under national considerations into an efficient and sustainable Europe-wide infrastructure system. This network of motorways, railways, waterways, ports and airports is intended to link the 27 Member States to one another and with the countries of the European Neigh- bourhood. Capacity problems and consequent con- gestion along long-distance routes in the EU are restraining factors for both trade and mobility. Better use of existing infra- structure is paramount in order to reduce Transport Networks (TEN-T) is the need to area that will be supported by EU exter- mounting costs and contain the environ- integrate the poorly endowed transport nal policy, the EU has identified 30 pri- mental impact of transport.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. Towards the North Sea-Baltic Corridor Work Plan
    1. Towards the North Sea-Baltic Corridor work plan Background Transport is a vital element of European integration and smooth and effective cross border transport is a key element in the effectiveness of the Single Market and the creation of jobs and growth. Moreover, the construction of new transport infrastructure can provide many of those jobs. Similar to the environment, transport is a policy that is easily understood and can find support among the citizens of Europe at a time when the concept of European integration is under heavier criticism than ever before. Transport clearly requires cooperation between Member States on policies created by the Union to facilitate the smooth transit of goods, services and people throughout the European Union (EU) for the benefit of all its citizens. In 1994 the EU initiated the trans-European transport network policy. In the first years, the policy concentrated on supporting 30 priority projects across the EU. With the reform of the TEN-T guidelines in the years before 2014 the concept of a dual layer structure was introduced, consisting of a comprehensive network and a core network based on a common and transparent methodology. Regulation No 1315/2013 of 11 December 2013 established the core network through nine core network corridors involving all the member states and covering the whole of the enlarged EU. The core network corridors enable the Member States to achieve a coordinated and synchronised approach with regard to investment in infrastructure, so as to manage capacities in the most efficient way. It should be multimodal; that is to say it should include all transport modes and their connections as well as relevant traffic and information management systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Individual Project Contribution to the Common European Transport Space
    Individual project contribution to the Common european transport space Papadimitriou, Stratos Chlomoudis, Costas Koliousis, Ioannis Department of Maritime Studies University of Piraeus Today’s agenda .Introduction –the general context .A single European Transport Area .The Connecting Europe Facility .The Corridors: Introduction and how these contribute to the general concept .Q+A Introduction . The transport industry is globalized (in terms of functional, business and regulatory terms) . But also has local issues to address (administrative procedures, customs, taxation, immigration, safety and security, waste, health protection,…) . EU has a vision to automate, improve and upgrade the industry A single European transport area 1. A true internal market for rail services 2. Completion of the single European sky 3. Capacity and quality of airports 4. A framework for inland navigation 5. Road freight issues 6. Multimodal transport of goods: e‐Freight Create the appropriate framework to allow for tracing goods in real time, ensure intermodal liability and promote clean freight transport Promoting a European maritime transport area without barriers • Unlike road transport, which has been reaping the benefits of the internal market since 1993, shipments of goods by sea between the ports of the European Union are treated in the same way as shipments to third countries. • Maritime transport between Member States red tape (many documentary checks and physical inspections by the customs, health, veterinary, plant health and immigration control,
    [Show full text]
  • CEF Support to Scandinavian - Mediterranean Corridor May 2020
    CEF support to Scandinavian - Mediterranean Corridor May 2020 Innovation and Networks Executive Agency Table of Contents 1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 3 2. Action portfolio: State of play .................................................................................................................. 4 2.1. Operational implementation ........................................................................................................... 4 2.1.1. Maritime........................................................................................................................................ 5 2.1.2. Air .................................................................................................................................................. 6 2.1.3. Rail ................................................................................................................................................. 6 2.1.4. Road............................................................................................................................................... 9 2.2. Financial Progress ...........................................................................................................................12 3. Challenges affecting the implementation of Actions ............................................................................13 4. Conclusion and Outlook .........................................................................................................................14
    [Show full text]
  • Econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Scholl, Bernd Book Part Introduction Provided in Cooperation with: ARL – Akademie für Raumentwicklung in der Leibniz-Gemeinschaft Suggested Citation: Scholl, Bernd (2019) : Introduction, In: Scholl, Bernd Perić, Ana Niedermaier, Mathias (Ed.): Spatial and transport infrastructure development in Europe: Example of the Orient/East-Med Corridor, ISBN 978-3-88838-095-2, Verlag der ARL - Akademie für Raumforschung und Landesplanung, Hannover, pp. 5-13, http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0156-0952007 This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/213371 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen
    [Show full text]
  • 2014B12 Enn1.02.Emar
    Subscribe to the bulletin Select Language Pow ered by Translate I n d u s t r y N e w s Commission appoints eleven European coordinators for the new transport infrastructure policy The European Commission today appointed European coordinators for each of the nine core network corridors of the trans-European transport network (or TEN-T), as well as for the European Rail Traffic Management System (ERTMS) and for Motorways of the Sea. The core TEN-T transport network creates two North–South corridors, three East–West corridors; and four diagonal corridors. The core network will transform East–West connections, remove bottlenecks, upgrade infrastructure and streamline cross-border transport operations for passengers and businesses throughout the EU. It will improve connections between different modes of transport and contribute to the EU's climate change objectives. The coordinators will be responsible for coordinating priority transport projects and reporting back to the Commission. Vice-President Siim Kallas said: "The appointment of these coordinators marks further progress in implementing the core TEN-T network. Their role will be essential to make the corridors a success and start a new era of participation. The new EU transport infrastructure is off to a good start." Most of the coordinators have already gained wide experience of EU transport policy implementation over the last eight years working on the TEN-T priority projects: Pavel Telička (North Sea–Baltic corridor) Pat Cox (Scandinavian–Mediterranean corridor) Carlo Secchi (Atlantic Corridor) Péter Balázs (North Sea–Mediterranean corridor) Laurens Jan Brinkhorst (Mediterranean corridor) Karel Vinck (ERTMS) Karla Peijs (Rhine–Danube corridor) have been reappointed for a period of four years.
    [Show full text]
  • Objectives and Mandate of the Group
    NETWORKS FOR PEACE AND DEVELOPMENT Extension of the major trans-European transport axes to the neighbouring countries and regions Report from the High Level Group chaired by Loyola de Palacio November 2005 European Commission Extension of the major trans-European transport axes to the neighbouring countries and regions Pictures of the cover of the HLG report courtesy of: British Rail, Egnatia Odos A.E, ESA and Port Autonome de Marseilles. Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OPERATIONAL CONCLUSIONS 1. OBJECTIVES AND MANDATE OF THE GROUP........................................................................ 10 2. BACKGROUND.................................................................................................................................. 11 2.1. NEED TO CONNECT BETTER THE EUROPEAN UNION AND ITS NEIGHBOURS .................................... 11 2.2. TAKING STOCK OF COMPLETED AND ON-GOING EXERCISES ........................................................... 12 2.2.1. Revision of the trans-European transport network ................................................................. 12 2.2.2. Recent international conferences and regional exercises ....................................................... 13 3. METHODOLOGY FOR IDENTIFICATION OF PRIORITY AXES AND PROJECTS ........... 15 3.1. INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................. 15 3.2. STEP 1: CRITERIA FOR IDENTIFYING MAJOR AXES.........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Download (529Kb)
    COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES Brussels, 20.1.2009 SEC(2009) 18 COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT Accompanying document to the REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRANS-EUROPEAN TRANSPORT NETWORK GUIDELINES 2004 – 2005 Pursuant to Article 18 of Decision 1692/96/EC {COM(2009) 5 final} EN EN ANNEX ANNEX 1: IMPLEMENTATION DETAILS INTRODUCTION Part 1 considers the main developments on the TEN-T modal networks as outlined in Annex I of the guidelines Decision i.e. road, rail, inland waterways, ports, airports and combined transport. Part 2 looks in more detail at the horizontal issues of interoperability, research and development, and environmental protection. In part 3 there is a general assessment of the development of the TEN-T during the period in question and a more detailed section on the TEN-T priority projects. The part 4 on Community funding, provides an overview of the financing of TEN-T with particular reference to financial support from the EU during the reference period. PART 1 IMPLEMENTATION IN GENERAL Total investment in the TEN-T network in the EU-27, which amounted to EUR 101.74 billion in the 2004 – 2005 period (EUR 50.4 billion in 2004 and 51.3 billion in 2005),has increased in comparison with the investment of 2002 -2003. Table 1 shows the investments in TEN-T infrastructure in the years 2004 and 2005 per country and per mode of transport in millions of EUR and in % of the GDP per country.
    [Show full text]
  • Possibilities for Motorways of the Sea Development in the Eastern Part of the Adriatic Sea
    POLISH MARITIME RESEARCH 1(77) 2013 Vol 20; pp. 87-93 10.2478/pomr-2013-0010 Possibilities for Motorways of the Sea development in the eastern part of the Adriatic Sea Bojan Beškovnik, Ph.D. Intereuropa, Global logistics service, Ltd. Co., Slovenija ABSTRACT This article presents a wider perspective on possibilities of Motorways of the Sea development in the Adriatic Sea, with a special emphasis on the eastern coast of the Adriatic Sea. A complete overview of Motorways of the Sea development has been presented, and key elements influencing the development of Motorways of the Sea were analysed. It has been ascertained that there exist a lot of bottlenecks in the connection to the transport infrastructure in South East Europe. Superannuated port infrastructure, unsuitable inland connections, and nonexistent IT tools for electronic data exchange between all participators in the logistics chain hinder dynamic development of Motorways of the Sea. All these elements were thoroughly analysed, and a proposal for a macro transport strategy suitable for South East Europe has been exposed. It has been accentuated that there is a future for Motorways of the Sea introduction but all described bottlenecks have to be further analysed and removed in a short period of time, to stimulate private sector for financial investments. Key words: Motorways of the Sea; port infrastructure; intermodality; inland connections; South East Europe; Adriatic Sea INTRODUCTION Europe, as Grimaldi introduced the service between Genoa and Palermo, and the International Association of Turkish hauliers Today, intermodality and the use of sea transport route is introduced a RO-RO (roll on–roll off) service between Turkey an important topic of European transport policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Second Work Plan of the European Coordinator Pat Cox
    Scandinavian DECEMBER 2016 Mediterranean Second Work Plan of the European Coordinator Pat Cox Mobility and Transport DECEMBER 2016 This report represents the opinion of the European Coordinator and does not prejudice the official position of the European Commission. Second Work Plan of the European Coordinator Scan-Med Table of Contents 1 Towards the sec ond Scandinavian-Mediterra nean Corridor work pla n..................3 1.1 General Introduction ...........................................................................3 1.2 Technical Introduction .........................................................................4 2 Characteristics of the Scandinavian-Mediterranean Corridor ..............................6 2.1 Corridor alignme nt ..............................................................................6 2.2 Corridor c harac teristic s ........................................................................8 2.3 Compliance with technical infrastructure parameters of the TEN-T guidelines (inc l. KPI ana lys is results) .............................................................................8 3 Results of the transport market study ......................................................... 19 4 Capac ity issues ....................................................................................... 20 5 The identified planned projects .................................................................. 21 6 Financ ing issues and tools......................................................................... 24 7 Critic al issues
    [Show full text]
  • The Road Ahead
    THE ROAD AHEAD CEE TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DYNAMICS Joint Atlantic Council – PwC Report “Central Europe can realize its enormous market access potential through the advancement of the favourable geostrategic position of Croatian ports, bridging the development gap between East and West of Europe while ensuring accessibility, connectivity and cohesion of the entire EU”. The President of Croatia Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic´ THE ROAD AHEAD CEE TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE DYNAMICS DID YOU KNOW…? The Three Seas region accounts for 28% Five key TEN-T corridors play a paramount 1. of the EU’s territory and 22% of its 6. role for the Three Seas region (North population, but only 10% of its GDP. Sea-Baltic, Baltic-Adriatic, Rhine Danube, Orient / East-Med and Mediterranean) Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) has made – more than EUR 384 billion across 2. unprecedented progress after decades over 2,000 projects is still needed of underinvestment: approx. 5,600 to complete them. kilometres of new motorways have been built over the last 20 years. But the gap Financial needs for further transport is still significant – a citizen of the “old EU” 7. infrastructure development in broadly has on average twice as many kilometres defined CEE (including Balkans and CIS) of motorways to drive on his/her have been estimated at EUR 615 billion counterpart in CEE. through 2025, which equals to just below EUR 170 to be spent per capita in CEE Business leaders still believe that each year. 3. inadequate transport infrastructure is a substantial barrier to business growth CEE is expected to outpace Western in CEE – in the WEF Global Competitiveness 8.
    [Show full text]