Annex 1. Updated Mailing List from Member States

Main contact Other contacts/CC Mail MS Name Email Name Email

AT Reinhard HALLER [email protected] Thomas Spiegel [email protected] BE Laurent DEMILIE [email protected] Petar Boyanov Benov [email protected] BG Tzvetina TZENOVA [email protected] Anita Angelova [email protected] CY Elpida EPAMINONDA [email protected] CZ Vit SEDMIDUBSKY [email protected] Anna Batulkova [email protected] Reiner Nagelkrämer [email protected] Stefanie Reincke [email protected] DE Georg HENKELMANN [email protected] Karen Vargas [email protected] Lina Harms [email protected] DK Thomas ROUSING-SCHMIDT [email protected] EE Anti MOPPEL [email protected] Kristjan Kaunissaare [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]>; [email protected]; EL Evagelia DIMITRAKOPOULOU [email protected] [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] ES Maria CORRAL [email protected] Arto Tevajärvi [email protected] Juhani Tervala [email protected] FI Lassi HILSKA [email protected] JL TEN-GROUP [email protected] Malla Paajanen [email protected] Guy POIRIER [email protected] FR Lucie ROUX [email protected] Paul JOHO [email protected] Jordan CARTIER [email protected] Tomislav Hodak [email protected] HR Kristijan LEZAIC [email protected] Katja Veneti [email protected] Szebeni László [email protected] HU Beatrix HORVATH [email protected] Erika Saltarelli [email protected] IE Michael MORRISSEY [email protected] IT Federica POLCE [email protected] Maria Margherita [email protected] Main contact Other contacts/CC Mail MS Name Email Name Email LT Ramūnas RIMKUS [email protected] LU André BISSEN [email protected] Iveta Rubika [email protected] LV Sergejs LUKINS [email protected] Ilze Aleksandroviča [email protected] Andris Maldups [email protected] MT Lucienne MEILAK [email protected] Wim VERGEER [email protected] NL Gerko SLOTMAN [email protected] Lambert Smeets [email protected] Adrian Mazur [email protected] PL Michal KWIATKOWSKI [email protected] Michal Strzelichowski [email protected] Ana Cristina Silva [email protected] Germano Martins [email protected] Hélder Cristóvão [email protected] PT Isabel Carvalho SEABRA [email protected] IMT - dseap.secretariado [email protected] Jose Cruz [email protected] Margarida Costa [email protected] Marcosde Jesus [email protected] RO Catalin COSTACHE [email protected] SE Emil FASTEN [email protected] Melissa Frodin [email protected] SI Matjaz VRCKO [email protected] Stanislav Trčík [email protected] SK Rastislav FARKAS [email protected] Ludmila Vodzinská [email protected] UK Andrew PRICE [email protected] Andrew Ashbourne [email protected] Annex 2. List of the National Programmes per Member State

Transport National programmes

Bulgaria o Operational programme “Innovations and Competitiveness” [BG] o Operational programme “Regions in Growth” [BG] o Operational programme “Transport and transport infrastructure” [BG]

Czech Republic o Enterprise and Innovation for Competitiveness [CS] o Integrated Regional Operational Programme [CS] o Transport [CS]

Cyprus o Competitiveness and sustainable development [EL]

Estonia o Operational Programme for Cohesion Policy Funding 2014-2020 [ET]

France o Operational Programme ERDF-ESF Guadeloupe et St Martin Etat 2014- 2020 [FR] o Interregional programme Rhône 2014-2020 [FR] o Interregional programme Réunion Conseil Régional 2014-2020 [FR] o Regional programme Guadeloupe Conseil Régional 2014-2020 [FR] o Regional programme Languedoc-Roussillon 2014-2020 [FR] o Regional programme Martinique Conseil Régional 2014-2020 [FR] o Regional programme Mayotte 2014-2020 [FR]

Greece o ATTICA OP [EL] o CONTINENTAL GREECE OP [EL] o CRETE OP [EL] o EASTERN MACEDONIA-THRACE OP [EL] o IONIAN ISLANDS OP [EL] o NORTH AEGEAN OP [EL] o PELOPONNESUS OP [EL] o SOUTH AEGEAN OP [EL] o THESSALY OP [EL] o TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE, ENVIRONMENT AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OP [EL] o WESTERN GREECE OP [EL] o WESTERN MACEDONIA OP [EL] o CENTRAL MACEDONIA OP [EL] o COMPETITIVENESS, ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATION OP [EL] o EPIRUS OP [EL]

Italy o National Operational Programme on Infrastructures and Networks [IT] o ROP Basilicata ERDF [IT] o ROP Calabria ERDF ESF [IT] o ROP Campania ERDF [IT] o ROP Puglia ERDF ESF [IT] o ROP Sicilia ERDF [IT]

Latvia o Growth and Employment [LV]

Lithuania o Operational Programme for EU Structural Funds Investments for 2014- 2020 [LT]

Hungary o Integrated Transport OP [HU]

Malta o Fostering a competitive and sustainable economy to meet our challenges [MT]

Poland o OP Development of Eastern Poland [PL] o OP Infrastructure and Environment [PL] o ROP 1 Regional Operational Programme for Dolnośląskie Voivodeship 2014-2020 [PL] o ROP 10 Regional Operational Programme for Podlaskie Voivodeship [PL] o ROP 11 Regional Operational Programme for Pomorskie Voivodeship [PL] o ROP 12 Regional Operational Programme for Śląskie Voivodeship [PL] o ROP 13 Regional Operational Programme for Świętokrzyskie Voivodeship [PL] o ROP 14 Regional Operational Programme for Warmińsko-Mazurskie Voivodeship [PL] o ROP 15 Regional Operational Programme for Wielkopolskie Voivodeship [PL] o ROP 16 Regional Operational Programme for Zachodniopomorskie Voivodeship [PL] o ROP 2 Regional Operational Programme for Kujawsko-Pomorskie Voivodeship 2014-2020 [PL] o ROP 3 Regional Operational Programme for Lubelskie Voivodeship 2014- 2020 [PL] o ROP 4 Regional Operational Programme for Lubuskie Voivodeship 2014- 2020 [PL] o ROP 5 Regional Operational Programme for Łódzkie Voivodeship 2014- 2020 [PL] o ROP 6 Regional Operational Programme for Małopolskie Voivodeship 2014-2020 [PL] o ROP 7 Regional Operational Programme for Mazowieckie Voivodeship 2014-2020 [PL] o ROP 8 Regional Operational Programme for Opolskie Voivodeship [PL] o ROP 9 Regional Operational Programme for Podkarpackie Voivodeship [PL]

Portugal o Competitiveness and Internationalisation OP [PT] o Regional OP Azores (Autonomous Region) [PT] o Regional OP Madeira (Autonomous Region) [PT]

Croatia o Competitiveness and Cohesion OP [HR]

Romania o Large Infrastructure Operational Programme [RO] o Regional Operational Programme [RO]

Slovenia o Operational Programme for the Implementation of the EU Cohesion Policy in the period 2014 – 2020[SL]

Slovakia o Integrated Infrastructure [SK] o Integrated Regional Operational Programme [SK]

Spain o Andalucía ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES] o Canary Islands ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES] o Ceuta ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES] o Extremadura ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES] o Melilla ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES] o Sustainable growth ERDF 2014-20 OP [ES]

Sweden o Central Norrland [SV] o Upper Norrland [SV]

United Kingdom o United Kingdom - ERDF England o United Kingdom - ERDF West Wales and The Valleys

Annex 3: Data collection template for the financial funding sources

Proje Locatio Sectio GIS ID Proje Project Type Type Proje Proje Beneficia Type Mode Contributi Total Total Expenditur Expenditur Total Total Total Total Total co- Total ct n n of ct short of of ct ct ry of of on to the expenditu expenditur e e co- co- co- co- financing co- code countr name TEN-T title descripti proje proje Start End country netwo transpo indicator re for the e "Financial "Financial financi financi financi financi from financin y code Sectio on ct I ct II Date Date code rk rt project "Financial source" source" ng ng ng ng other g from n (year) (year) (€) source" (€) 2014 (€) 2015 (€) from from from from sources other (source (source (source other other other other (€) sources reporting reporting reporting sources sources sources sources Nation (€) the the the (€) (€) (€) (€) al Other expenditur expenditur expenditur CEF EIB ERDF CF fundin (specif es) es) es) g y amou nt and source )

The guidelines for filling in the table are presented below: • Project code: code used by the reporting source • Location country code: code of the country where the project was running • Section name: section where the project was located • GIS ID of the TENtec section: GIS ID of the section, available in TENtec • Project title: indicate the project title • Project short description: short description of the project • Type of project I – drop-down list:

o Studies o Mixed (studies and works) o Works

• Type of project II – drop-down list:

o New construction o Rehabilitation/ Upgrade o New implementation e.g ERTMS implementation

• Project Start Date and Project End Date: years when the project was started and finished. • Beneficiary country code: code of the country(ies) benefited from the project • Type of network - drop-down list:

o Core o Comprehensive o Core and Comprehensive

• Mode of transport - drop-down list:

o Road o Rail: ERTMS o IWW o ITS o MOS o RRT o Ports o Airport o Multimodal

• Contribution of the project to the indicator – drop-down list: o Rail: electrification o Rail: track gauge 1435mm o Rail: ERTMS implementation o Rail: Line speed>=100km/h in accordance with art. 39 para. 2. Item a) (ii) of the Regulation 1315/2013

o Rail: Axle load (>=22.5t) o Rail: Train length (740m) o Road: Express road/ motorway o Road: Availability of clean fuels o IWW: CEMT requirements for class IV IWW o IWW: Permissible Draught (min 2.5m) o IWW: Permissible Height under bridges(min. 5.25m) o IWW: RIS implementation (% of km on which the minimum requirements set out by the RIS directive are met)

o Ports: Connection to rail o Ports: Connection to IWW CEMT IV o Ports: Availability of clean fuels o Ports: Availability of at least one freight terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent charges

o Ports: Facilities for ship generated waste (only for seaports) o Airports: Connection to rail o Airports: Availability of at least one terminal open to all operators in a non- discriminatory way and application of transparent, relevant and fair charges

o Airports: Availability of clean fuels o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Capability for Intermodal (unitised) transhipment

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): 740m train terminal accessibility o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Electrified train terminal accessibility o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Availability of at least one freight terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent charges • Total expenditure for the project (€): total amount of money invested to the project from all financial sources. • Total expenditure "Financial source" (€): total amount of money spent to the project by the reporting fund. • Expenditure "Financial source" 2014 (€): amount of money spent to the project by the reporting fund in 2014. • Expenditure "Financial source" 2015 (€): amount of money spent to the project by the reporting fund in 2015.

The following columns are filled in only if the project is co-financed by any other financial sources. • Total co-financing from other sources (€) CEF: amount of money from CEF spent on the project. • Total co-financing from other sources (€) EIB: amount of money from EIB spent on the project • Total co-financing from other sources (€) CF: amount of money from CF spent on the project • Total co-financing from other sources (€) National funding: amount of money from national funding spent on the project • Total co-financing from other sources (€) Other: amount of money from other funds spent on the project. Please, specify amount and source.

Annex 4: Data collection template for the Member States Project Location Section GIS ID Project Project Type of Type of Project Project Beneficiary Type of Mode of Contribution Total Expenditure in Expenditure in code country name of TEN- title short project project Start End country network transport to the expenditure 2014 (€) 2015 (€) code T description I II Date Date code indicator for the Section (year) (year) project (€)

o Studies o Mixed (studies and works) o Works

• Type of project II – drop-down list:

o New construction o Rehabilitation/ Upgrade o New implementation e.g ERTMS implementation

o Core o Comprehensive o Core and Comprehensive

• Mode of transport - drop-down list:

o Road o Rail: ERTMS o IWW o ITS o MOS o RRT o Ports o Airport o Multimodal

• Contribution of the project to the indicator - drop-down list:: o Rail: electrification o Rail: track gauge 1435mm o Rail: ERTMS implementation o Rail: Line speed>=100km/h in accordance with art. 39 para. 2. Item a) (ii) of the Regulation 1315/2013

o Airports: Availability of clean fuels o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Capability for Intermodal (unitised) transhipment

o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): 740m train terminal accessibility o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Electrified train terminal accessibility o Rail Road Terminals (RRT): Availability of at least one freight terminal open to all operators in a non-discriminatory way and application of transparent charges • Total expenditure (€): total amount of money spent to the project by the Member State. • Expenditure in 2014 (€): amount of money spent to the project by the Member State in 2014. • Expenditure in 2015 (€): amount of money spent to the project by the Member State in 2015.

Annex 5 Guidelines for Member States

GUIDANCE NOTES

Part A

Please read this guidance notes before starting to fill in the data collection template.

Objective

The objective of this data collection exercise is to a) Identify national data/information sources existing in each Member States where this information/data can be (partly) found. This means that in the future this exercise can be done without this request to the Member States – Data collection sheet 1 b) look to the past (years 2014 and 2015) and collect the information about the projects in each Member State from the core and comprehensive network that contribute to the TEN-T implementation that are not being reported to the EC. The Consortium has already collected the information from CEF and TEN-T programme, EIB loans database, DG Regio and corridors project list from 2014 – Data collection sheet 2

Data collection template

This file is organised in the 5 sheets described below:

 Data collection 1: contains the request on the identification of data/information sources and used reporting tools  Data collection 2: correspond to the template to fill in the projects data information. Please follow the indications in the cells and in the guidance notes part B to facilitate the analysis of the data in a later stage.  Guidance notes: guidance notes on how to fill in the data  Contact person: identify a contact person responsible for filling in the questionnaire, so that we can contact that person in case of doubts.  Consultant contact details: contain the consultants contact details for questions and to send the data collection template filled in.

Selection criteria for the projects

The projects should be selected according to the following criteria:

 Projects that are located in the core and comprehensive network. You can consult the core and comprehensive network on TENtec  Projects that run between 2014 and 2015: menaing projects that have started before 2014 but where still running on 2014 and/or 2015 or later: projects that started somewhere in 2014 and/or 2015 and are still running  Type of projects: only works (implementation) and/or mixed projects, but not studies. Pilot works should be classified as "works"  Type of works: works that lead to upgrade / rehabilitate projects (current maintenance should not be included)  Projects that contribute to the objectives of TEN-T (article 4). The objectives are indicated below in part B.  Projects above 1 million

The projects to be selected should be the ones that are not already being reported in the corridors project list from 2014, submitted to EIB/CEF/TEN-T programme/DG Regio. It should be mainly projects in the comprehensive network.

PART B Please find below the explanation of each collumn from data collection2

Collumn Name of the field Explanation A1 ID This should be filled in by Panteia B1 Location_country_name Country name using the country code e.g PT for Portugal C1 Location_section_name Section name, could be identified between city A and city B. If you have the name of the section according TENtec, please don't fill in this field but the E1 collumn D1 Section_TENT Section name from TENtec E1 Project_title Indicate the project title F1 Project_short_description Write a short description of the project. A short paragraph is enough, the idea is to understand the type of project G1 Type_of_project Indicate if it is new construction, rehabilition that lead to an upgrade, etc H1 Project_start_Date report in the format mm.yy, if you don't know the month use "00.2014" I1 Project_end_Date report in the format mm.yy, if you don't know the month use "00.2014" J1 (i) accessibility and connectivity of all regions of the Union, including remote, outermost, insular, peripheral and mountainous regions, as well as sparsely populated areas; (ii) reduction of infrastructure quality gaps between Member States; (iii) for both passenger and freight traffic, interconnection between transport infrastructure for, on the one hand, long-distance traffic and, on the other, regional and local traffic; Cohesion through: (iv) a transport infrastructure that reflects the specific situations in different parts of the Union and provides for a balanced coverage of all European regions; K1 (i) the removal of bottlenecks and the bridging of missing links, both within the transp.infrast. and at connecting points between these, within MS' territories and between them; (ii) the interconnection and interoperability of national transport networks; (iii) optimal integration and interconnection of all transport modes; To which objective (article 4 from Regulation 1315/2013) the project (iv) the promotion of economically efficient, high-quality transport contributing to further economic growth and competitiveness; is contributing to (v) efficient use of new and existing infrastructure; Efficiency through: (vi) cost-efficient application of innovative technological and operational concepts; L1 (i) development of all transport modes in a manner consistent with ensuring transport that is sustainable and economically efficient in the long term; (ii) contribution to the objectives of low greenhouse gas emissions, low-carbon and clean transport, fuel security, reduction of external costs and environmental protection; Sustainability through:(iii) promotion of low-carbon transport with the aim of achieving by 2050 a significant reduction in CO2 emissions, in line with the relevant Union CO2 reduction targets; M1 Increasing the benefits(i) formeeting its users the through: mobility and transport needs of its users within the Union and in relations with third countries; (ii) ensuring safe, secure and high-quality standards, for both passenger and freight transport; (iii) supporting mobility even in the event of natural or man-made disasters, and ensuring accessibility to emergency and rescue services; (iv) the establishment of infras. requirements, in the field of interoperability, safety and security, which will ensure quality, efficiency and sustainability of transport services; (v) accessibility for elderly people, persons of reduced mobility and disabled passengers. N1 Beneficiary_country Fill in using the country code e.g PT for Portugal O1 Type of network Indicate if it is core or comprehensive network by using "core" or "comprehensive". This can be consulted in TENtec or in the annex 1 from the Regulation 1315/2013 P1 Mode_of_transport Indicate the transport mode e.g air, road, rail, airport, port, iww, multimodal, ITS, MoS, ERTMS, RIS Q1 Total expenditure 2014 (€) The amount spent in 2014 for this project, in euros R1 Total expenditure 2015 (€) The amount spent in 2015 for this project, in euros S1 Total amount spent with the project If the amount spent is not known, but the total amount of the project is, please indicate the total amount. In that case, please also indicate the duration of the project in collumn V1 T1 Duration of the project Total duration of the project U1 Comments Any comment that you believe it will be relevant. Annex 6 FAQ’s Frequently Asked Questions – FAQ’s

Question/ Remark Answer

Report only the projects above 1 million € ( work and mixed Can Panteia add some criteria regarding the scale of the projects that shall be projects: study + works). It should be clear that the projects have 1 reported? Otherwise it could happen that even small projects like local traffic to be on the Comprehensive and Core Network and not on a side light upgrade would be included. street of an urban area.

2 Will the collected database be implemented in TENtec? Yes, the idea is to include the data collected into TENtec.

The template will serve as a basis for future reporting obligations Is the requested Excel table in the format that will be used for reporting in 3 according to Art. 49.3, however, minor adaptations due to future? "lessons learned" might be necessary.

4 The information for 2015 is not available yet. If this is the case, please use indicative project information.

The exercise is exactly to collect all the other projects from core and comprehensive network that are not reported to the EC via Does the information concern only projects with EU funding or MS need to 5 CEF or EIB or DG Regio or the corridors project lists, as Panteia provide data for projects with other types of funding (national, PPP, loans, etc.)? have access to those. In the end, a duplication check will be done to guarantee that projects are not reported twice.

It would facilitate the process if each Member State could act as 6 Is it ok if the information is sent in pieces instead of compiled by country? national coordinator, compile all the information from his country and send everything in a bundle. If not, please send them in parts.

In general, we need to list projects which have a broader scope As the 4 TEN-T objectives is a broader definitions, is it ok if the criteria to select (covering also the Comprehensive Network) than the specific 7 the projects follow the infrastructure requirements as set out in art. 39, 2 a) for infrastructure requirements stated in Article 39, since they are rail and 39, 2 c) for road of the TEN-T Regulation? related to the Core Network. Therefore we propose that the decision about whether the project fulfils one or more of the four Question/ Remark Answer

objectives (Cohesion, Efficiency, Sustainability, Increasing the benefits for its users) shall be done by checking whether this project satisfies at least one of the criteria determined for each objective in Article 4. These criteria are also provided on the “Guidance notes” tab of the Excel sheet. It is up to Member States to determine the impact of each of the objectives.

Yes,. All projects running during 2014-2015 needs to be identified and Clarifying question about timeline of the projects that shall be included. included, even if they will be finalized at a later stage. 8 Should a project that was ongoing in 2014-2015, but will be finalised only in 2016 In fact it's like taking a snapshot for 2014-2015 (in terms of be included? technical and financial implementation), doesn’t matter if projects started before this period or if they will end after this period., as long as they were running somewhere in 2014 and/or 2015. For ports, airports and RRTs we are particularly interested in As regards ports, airports, and RRTs: Are there any types of projects that you are hinterland connectivity, last mile access, rather than e.g. maritime 9 especially interested in regarding these modes of transport? access or aviation. We are also interested in innovation projects, clean fuels and ICT.

The ports and airports are not state owned, and therefore MoT does not have all Please forward this request to them or send Panteia the contact 10 the relevant info. details so that they could contact them.

The Core Network is defined as a subset of the Comprehensive network (entire TEN-T), and the Core Network Corridors (CNCs)

are part of the Core Network to facilitate the completion of the Clarification on the location (core, comprehensive, coore network corridors) of Core Network by 2030. 11 the projects that should be reported, to avoid collecting information that the Since we have the information on CEF co-funded and EIB co- Consortium already have. financed projects on the CNCs, we only need the remaining

national projects, which are not yet covered (geographically) on the Core and the Comprehensive network. Question/ Remark Answer

So all projects which are not on your CNC project list, but which are in line with the selection criteria we communicated on 08/04/2016. Please include projects that are either works or mixed projects (works + studies), meaning that if it is only a study, it should not 12 Shall MS provide information only about the projects that include works? be reported. On the other hand if it is works but had a study before, you should include both. Shall MS provide information only about the projects that lead to upgrade / 13 Yes, this is correct. rehabilitate projects If "re-opened" lines will lead to an upgrade (not maintenance or 14 Shall we report reopening lines projects and new lines projects? rehabilitation), then please report those too. "New lines" should be reported too. This is correct as the projects located on the CNC shall be already Shall MS provide information only about the projects that are not located in the 15 included to the Core Network Corridors project list from the CNC? corridors studies from 2014. In case that a project is located on two or more sections of TEN-T network, shall In those cases, you don’t need to split the expenditures per 16 MS split the relevant expenditures per section? Furthermore how to split costs section, just identify the sections in the cell where that is asked. for horizontal projects? Those projects only need to be reported if they are above 1 million and if they play an important role in long-distance freight and passenger traffic, integrate the main urban and economic Roads - does MS need to collect information only on TEN-T network which is centres, interconnect with other transport modes or link 17 strictly in TENtec system with ID nr., or should they also collect information on all mountainous, remote, landlocked and peripheral NUTS 2 regions transit streets which connects the cities with TEN-T network? to central regions of the Union. If the project is a current maintenance work should not be reported, but if it is a rehabilitation that leads to an upgrade yes.

Annex 7 Country Fiches for the MS Progress Country Fiches for the MS Progress

Introduction

This country analysis is presented with more detail in Chapter 5.3. This annex is presentig a two page summary per country.

On the one hand, it is presented the information on project investments and on the other, data on the progress of the indicator implementation. The analysis has been conducted at country level with the goal towards linking the projects conducted within the network with improvements in infrastructure. It should be noted that only those projects where data on costs were available, were taken into account. This analysis is considering the projects running solely in one country, as the financial information of cross boarder projects was provided without indicating each country share. This information in terms of budget and number of projects is provided in Chapter 3 (table 11).

A summary for the 28 MS is presented in this Annex and present the following content:

General information: • Map with the core and comprehensive network illustrated (Source: TENtec) • Number of projects in 2014/2015 per network type

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial investment information • Total project expenditure in 2014/2015 per transport mode and type of funding source • Realisation of the TEN-T network: technical parameters indicators • Indicators calculated per transport mode

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network: levels of financial investment vs technical compliance realisation • The project’s contribution towards the state of implementation of the network in 2014/2015.

Before reading the following analysis, there are a couple of notes explained below regarding the source data/information and due limitations of analysis.

General information:

The projects on the type of network core/comprehensive correspond to the projects that covered both type of network e.g horizontal projects, or where this information was not provided by the sources.

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The information provided by the funding sources entails several aspects to bear in mind, as the data provided in not in the same level for all the sources, e.g while data from EIB cover the period 2014-2015, the data from DG Regio only cover 2014, as 2015 was still not available. This details are explained below for each of the funding sources:

CEF (Entails the previous TEN -T 2007-2013 results and CEF 2014 Results)

The projects from CEF Programme are organised in a database providing almost all the needed information for this study. The previous TEN-T Programme, now managed by INEA, still had projects running and that information was provided together with CEF Results from 2014. INEA indicates for each project, the beneficiaries, the country location, transport mode, type of project (study, works or mixed), expenditures spent in 2014 and 2015, CEF funding and total cost of the project. This enabled to introduce the data into the financial database and to run the procedures defined to select the relevant projects for analysis (detailed in chapter 3). The information about the budget share for each country, for the horizontal projects that run into more than one country is not presented for CEF projects, neither for any other of the sources, which doesn't enable to consider these "common projects" in the country analysis. According to our methodology, in the future, this should be identified, so that horizontal projects could be analysed at a country level (i.e one project, but specific share per MS). Also, the contribution to the indicator that this project is contributing to, is needed to perform a more detailed analysis of investment in the projects on the network and due realisation of the network. The CEF Results 2015 were not available when the data collection was done. The results were available in the beginning of July. Although, the recommendation for the future to collect the data from the EU Funding sources is between April and June, the results from CEF 2015 can be included when the MS data collection is being done.

EIB

The projects from EIB were provided in a database with aggregated figures. The country, expenditures for 2014/2015, EIB share and total cost of the project is provided. The information about the transport modes(s) were missing, so this was filled in according to the description of the projects. In the future, this information should be requested, to guarantee that the transport mode is identified without any uncertainty.

DG Regio (Cohesion Fund, ERDF, CF+ERDF)

The Projects coming from DG Regio, due to the format of the data provided, were very difficult to tackle and assumptions had to be done. No information about the type of projects is presented, so it is assumed that they are all works and/or mixed (study + works). The information per project only present the total amount/cost of the project and no indication of the duration of the projects, so that extrapolations could be done. The Operational Programmes per country provide the investment in 2014 (2015 is missing). To be able to use this data, the individual projects were associated to the respective Operational Programme, as both excel files had a code for this. This means that the number of projects of DG Regio is underestimate, as it is being considered one project as the Operational Programme that contains a set of projects. This was the only possible way to use this data in a meaningful and reliable way. Due to this, the number of projects is underestimate and also, the expenditures are also only for 2014, so when comparing to the other sources, it is known that the budget for DG Regio projects should also be higher for the reporting period. Finally, the categories Cohesion Fund projects, ERDF projects and ERDF+CF were used but in the future the projects catalogued with CF+ERDF should present the budget splitted to have the two categories CF and ERDF.

Member State

The data collected from the MS was requested in a format that would allow to perform the analysis needed for this study. However, there were several obstacles regarding this data request consultation, i.e One month was not enough for the majority of the countries to collect the data; April as the data collection month was not the adecuate, as some countries only have their financial figures closed in May/June; and finally, some of the requested information per project was not provided. Due to the short time to treat the data, there was not enough time to go back with further requests/clarifications to all MS, which means that some information is still missing. MS reported some projects that were also reported via the EU sources, which lead us to create a procedure to detect some duplications of projects more easily. This duplication check is very difficult as different sources have different titles and descriptions of the same projects, which means that although is the same project, it might not be detected. This means that despite this duplication check that was done, some projects might face the risk of being reported twice. In the future, the recommendation is to first collect the information from EU sources and send this to MS to complete. This way, this obstacle will not appear again.

CNC Project list 2014 studies

The projects from the CNC Project list developed in 2014 were used as a starting point to collect projects contributing to the TEN-T networks that were collected by the Consultants together with MS at that time. However, the quality and uncertainty of some of the data for this study purpose was not the best. There is information missing and the funding source identification is the most crucial one, as it is not possible to assign the funding source to some projects. The solution found to be able to include this projects was to created a category called "Other Financial Sources". This should be National/Regional sources, as the projects with EU Funding, were reported by EU Institutions. Also, by the description (which is lacking for several projects) it is not clear if the projects are studies, works or mixed, which again, compromise the reliability of all data collected via the CNC Project List. The Project list was done in 2014 which means that the projects reported with starting date 2015 were a prediction that might not occurred.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

The calculation of the indicators compliance is based on the TENtec data, downloaded in March 2016, and therefore it is linked to the current filling rates of TENtec for 2014 (as presented in table 7, Chapter 2). This justifies why some of the indicators shows 100% of compliance, when it is known that it cannot be the case. It is related with the filling rate of the indicator and the current data that was provided and validated by the MS. As already mentioned in Chapter 2, the data for 2014 and 2015 will be completely and accurately filled in by the current studies launched by the European Commission. This lead to the recommendation regarding the relevance of the completeness and accuracy of the data in TENtec and the necessity to have MS filling in this information on a more frequent basis.

AUSTRIA (AT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

When looking at projects running solely in Austria, 104 projects have been identified from the reviewed sources. The combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amount to 10.304 m Eur. The majority of projects (76 projects) were running on the core network, while 18 projects addressed the comprehensive network. Furthermore, 10 projects covered both type of networks or the type of network was not specified.

Total Type of network expenditures Number of (m Eur) projects Comprehensive 489 18 Comprehensive/Core 1.775 10 Core 8.039 76

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec AUSTRIA (AT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The funding sources used to fund the Austrian TEN-T network in 2014 – 2015 were MS / National funding, CEF and EIB financing. The highest investment was done by the MS / National funding – 4.649 m Eur (93%), while EIB financing was significantly lower, 230 m Eur. The funding from CEF correspond to 2% of the total expenditures - 102 m Eur.

The highest share of the projects (61 projects) are related to rail, followed by road projects (27 projects). In terms of expenditures these are also the transport mode related projects with higher figures. For the other transport modes the number of projects is significantly lower and varies between 5 projects for IWW, 4 for RRT, 3 for Ports and 2 for both Multimodal and Airports.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network BELGIUM (BE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the available sources, 57 projects were identified for Belgium, 46 of which were located on the core network, while for 11 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network. In total, the expenditures for Belgian projects in the years 2014 – 2015 amounted to 3.397 m Eur. Total expenditures (2014 and 2015) Number of Type of network (m Eur) projects

Comprehensive/Core 587 11 Core 2.809 46

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec BELGIUM (BE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Three financial sources were used to fund the projects running in Belgium in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding, CEF and EIB. The highest investment was done via MS / National funding (1.365 m Eur), which corresponds to 87% of all expenditures. The investment made by EIB, which was the second biggest financial source, reached 131 m Eur. CEF contributed with the equivalent to 5% - 75 m Eur.

With regards to the transport mode, 49% of the projects were related to Rail. The overall costs for these projects amounted to 1.372 m Eur, representing 40% of the total expenditures. The second largest amount of projects (14 projects) addressed the IWW network, and accounted for 24% of the total expenditures, followed by Road projects that represented 27% of the total costs spread across 7 projects and Ports also with 7 projects (8% of the total expenditures). Only 1 project addressed Airports and represents the smallest share of expenditures (1% of the total costs).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network BULGARIA (BG): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total, 39 projects were reported for Bulgaria, with the combined budget of 3.534 m Eur . The majority of the projects were running on the core network (21 projects), while 7 projects addressed the comprehensive network. For 11 projects, the location covered both types of network and/or was not defined.

Total Number expenditures Type of network of (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 196 7 Comprehensive/Core 1.642 11 Core 1.696 21

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec BULGARIA (BG): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The highest amount of expenditures comes from MS / National financial sources (1.293 m Eur), followed by ERDF + CF (646 m Eur). The share of the other financial sources in the total amount of investments was significantly lower: EIB – 40 m Eur (2%), ERDF – 21 m Eur (0,8 %), CF – 12 m Eur (0,6%), CEF – 3,5 m Eur (0,2%).

The largest investments were made in multimodal projects which amounted to 1.674 m Eur (47% of the total expenditures). The second largest investment was made for Roads and amounted to 1.211 m Eur (34% of total expenditures), while 17% of the total costs were invested in the development of Rail transport. In IWW and ITS, only 1% was invested.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network CROATIA (HR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 37 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects in 2014 and 2015 amounting to 1.985 m Eur. 56% of the projects (22 projects) addressed the comprehensive network, while for 4 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network. The remaining 11 projects pertained the core network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 128 22 Comprehensive/Core 1.784 4 Core 74 11

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec CROATIA (HR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The majority of the investment (1.904 m Eur - 95,9%) for the development of the TEN-T infrastructure in 2014 – 2015 was done from MS / National funding. The share for the other funding sources was very small: 66 m eur (3,3%) invested by ERDF, 13 m Eur (0,7%) – by EIB, 1 m Eur (0,1%) – by CF.

Cost-wise, the highest expenditures are documented for the EIB co-financing programme during 2014- 2020; the project aims at co-financing ESIF supported schemes in Croatia during the programming period 2014-2020 under a Structural Programme Loan (SPL) and is not mode specific. It is purposed for improving the societal needs (such as pollution abatement).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network CYPRUS (CY): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 2 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects in 2014 and 2015 amounting to 206 m Eur. For both projects the appartenence of a specific network couldn’t be determined and/or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur)

Comprehensive/Core 206 2

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec CYPRUS (CY): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The majority of the investment (204 m Eur or 98,8%) for the development of the TEN-T infrastructure in 2014 – 2015 was done from MS / National funding. The share for the other funding sources were 204 m Eur - 98,8%.

The majority of the investment (204 m eur or 98,8%) for the development of the TEN-T infrastructure in 2014 – 2015 was done from MS / National funding. The share for the other funding sources were around 2 m Eur - 1,1%.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network CZECH REPUBLIC (CZ): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 97 projects which satisfy the selected criteria, were identified for the Czech Republic. In total, these projects amount to 8.322 m Eur. The majority of projects were implemented on the core network (50 projects), while 27 projects were carried out on the comprehensive network. The type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network for 20 projects.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 2.142 27 Comprehensive/Core 2.956 20 Core 3.224 50

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec CZECH REPUBLIC (CZ): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The projects financed in the Czech Republic in 2014 – 2015 had four financial sources: CEF, CF, ERDF and MS / National funding. The expenditures coming from MS/ National funding corresponds to slightly more than half of the total of the expenditures - 3.409 m Eur. The second higher funding source was CF, 46% (3.066 m Eeur). ERDF and CEF showed almost the same amount of investments (61 and 60 m Eur respectively). The most attention, both in terms of total expenditures and number of projects, was given to the Rail network. Seventy projects were running in 2014-2015 to improve the quality of the Czech Rail network, which accounted for 5.874 m Eur or 71% of the total expenditures. There were 23 projects addressing Road, amounting to a total of 2.351 m Eur (28%). For the other modes of transport the number of projects, as well as expenditures, were significantly lower. For IWW, 3 projects were reported with the total costs amounting to 82 m Eur (less than 1%). The smallest investments were made in Airport projects (15 m Eur). For other categories/modes of transport no projects were reported.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network DENMARK (DK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 24 projects were identified for Denmark, which have the total expenditures amounting to 436 m Eur. Ten projects were running on the core network and nine on the comprehensive network. For five projects, no information was available on the type of network and/or covered both types of network. Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 267 9 Comprehensive/Core 119 5 Core 50 10

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec DENMARK (DK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Two financial sources were used to fund the TEN-T projects running in Denmark in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding and CEF. The highest amount of investments was done via MS / National funding (405 m Eur), which constituted 94% of all expenditures. The investments made by CEF were significantly lower, around 24 m Eur (6%).

The reported projects addressed only three modes/categories: Rail, Road and Ports. The majority of the projects (15 projects) were focused on improving the Rail infrastructure, followed by 8 Road projects. Only 1 project was identified for Ports.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network ESTONIA (EE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 14 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 397 m Eur. The majority of the projects (8 projects) addressed the core network, with only two projects purposed for the comprehensive network. The type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network for the remaining 4 projects.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 11.660 2 Comprehensive, Core 365 4 Core 21 8

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec ESTONIA (EE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

For Estonia, 92% of the investment came from ERDF + CF, namely 365 m Eur. The remaining 8% (33 m Eur) of the expenditures were invested by MS / National funding sources.

Projects funded covered the following modes of transport: road, rail (network-wise) and multimodal, ports and airports (node-wise). Most projects referred to ports (10 out of 14), followed by road (2 projects) and rail and multimodal with 1 project each.

In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were allocated to rail (79.3% of the total costs), followed by road investments (9%), ports (12%) and multimodal projects (3,5%). The following figures reflect this remark.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network FINLAND (FI): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 53 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 3.494 m Eur. Almost 72% of the projects (38 projects) addressed the core network and for the remaining projects, 12 belonged to the comprehensive network. For 3 of the projects, the type of network was not indicated and/ or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 182 12 Comprehensive, Core 531 3 Core 2.780 43

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec FINLAND (FI): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: Three funding sources were financing the Finnish TEN-T projects in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding, CEF and ERDF. The majority of the expenditures were covered by MS / National funding (1.424 m Eur), while the other financial sources provided significantly lower share of investments: 24 m Eur (2%) came from CEF and 16 m Eur (1%) from ERDF.

All modes were represented in Finland’s projects. Most projects were reported for road (22 projects), rail (15 projects) and ports (10 projects). Multimodal and Airports had two projects each and there was one project for each ITS and RRT.

In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were allocated to rail (52,2% of the total costs), followed by road investments (16,6%) ports (16,3%) and airports (14,7%). The costs for the remaining modes altogether, did not exceed 0,1% of the total costs.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network FRANCE (FR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 45 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 4.834 m Eur. Almost 50% of the projects (25 projects) addressed the core network. For 19 projects (40%) the type of network was not indicated and/or covered both types of network and less than 1% was allocated to the comprehensive network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 6 1 Comprehensive, 4.434 19 Core Core 394 25

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec FRANCE (FR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

The biggest share of investment came from MS / National funding, which reached 4.198 m Eur (89,5%). Additionally 326 m Eur (7%) were invested via EIB, while 158 m Eur (3,4%) were coming from CEF. The smallest amount (6 m Eur) was covered by ERDF.

In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were allocated to rail (39.5% of the total costs – 3.819 m Eur), followed by ports (4.0%), road covered 3.8% of the expenditures, inland waterway investments (2.1%) while airports, did not exceed 1 % of the total costs.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network GERMANY (DE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 570 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 52.047 m Eur. For the majority of the projects (474 projects), the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network, while the remaining 96 projects (or 18% of the projects) were due to the core network. No projects were solely identified for the comprehensive network. Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive, Core 39.849 474

Core 12.198 96

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec GERMANY (DE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

For Germany MS/National funding played the key role in terms of the investment in TEN-T network - 44.203 m Eur, which corresponds to 97% of the total investment done in 2014-2015. The other funding sources only contributed with less than 3%: 868 m Eur (1,9%) by ERDF, 389 m Eur (0,9%) – by CEF, 119 m eur (0,3%) – from EIB.

For the modes of transport , the largest share of the projects (294 or 33,5% of the total projects) were related to road, followed by rail and inland waterways (121 and 110 projects respectively). Altogether these three types covered more than 90% of the projects analysed for Germany. For the other modes, the number of projects was significantly lower; 26 for ITS, 14 for ports, 3 for airports, 1 for RRT and 1 for multimodal transport.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network GREECE (GR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 60 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 15.895 m Eur. Almost half of the projects (27 projects) addressed the core network alone. The remaining projects were almost equally shared between the comprehensive network and the projects for which no type of network was identified and/ or covered both types.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 494 14 Comprehensive, Core 9.387 19 Core 6.013 27 TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec GREECE (GR): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

The majority of the investment done for the development of Greek TEN-T infrastructure network was done via MS / National financial instruments (11.782 m Eur). The second higgest share of investment (3.409 m Eur - 22%) was covered by ERDF + CF, while the other sources investment was significantly lower: CEF - 154 m Eur, ERDF – 88 m Eur, EIB – 81 m Eur.

The investments were done in the following modes of transport: road, rail, (network-wise) , ports and airports (node-wise). and two multimodal projects with 30% of the expenditures. Most projects referred to road and rail (26 and 27 projects respectively), followed by the other modes.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network HUNGARY (HU): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 82 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 9.115 m Eur. 72% of the projects (59 projects) addressed the core network, with slightly more than 7% of the projects purposed soley for the comprehensive network. For the remaining projects the type of network was not defined and/or covered both types.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 164 6 Comprehensive, 3.579 17 Core Core 5.372 59

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec HUNGARY (HU): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

Half of the investments (2.625 m Eur) for the development of TEN-T infrastructure was done via MS / National funding. The second highest funding source was ERDF + CF, with 41% of total investments (2.168 m Eur). The remaining 10% of the expenditures were funded from CF (406 m Eur) and EIB (80 m Eur).

In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were documented for rail (73,5% of the total costs – 6.699 m Eur), followed by road (15,4% - 1.407 m Eur). The port projects amounted to 11 m Eur and the multimodal less than 1.000 m Eur. Altogether, they represented approximate 11% of the total expenditures.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network IRELAND (IE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 12 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 374 m Eur. 76% of the projects (9 projects) addressed the core network, with slightly less than 8% purposed only for the comprehensive network. For the remaining projects the type of network was not specified in the reviewed sources and/or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 6 1 Comprehensive, Core 194 2 Core 175 9

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec IRELAND (IE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

Three funding sources have funded projects in Ireland in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding, EIB and CEF. MS was responsible for over three quarters of the total expenditures (191 m Eur), while EIB covered 22% (55 m eur) and CEF investments amounted to 6 m eur (3%).

The projects were focused on road (network-wise) with 3 projects, rail (network-wise) with 6 projects and 2 IWW and on ports with 1 project respectively. In terms of expenditures, the highest costs were documented for road (61% of the total costs – almost 230 m Eur), followed by rail (14% - 54 m Eur) and finally ports with 5 m Eur and IWW - almost 86 m Eur.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network ITALY (IT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 114 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 16.704 m Eur. For 58% of the projects (68 projects), the type of network was not identified and/or covered both types of network. There were 46 projects (40%) dedicated entirely to the core network, while no projects were defined for the comprehensive network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive, Core 13.021 68

Core 3.683 46

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec ITALY (IT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

In Italy, the majority of the costs (92% - 13.684 m Eur) related to the TEN-T projects was covered by MS / National funding. The share of investments done by the other financial sources was significantly lower: EIB (643 m Eur - 4%), ERDF (383 m eur - 3%) and CEF (171 m eur - 1%).

All modes were covered by the projects identified for Italy. Rail (55 projects), ports (25 projects) and road (21 projects) were the most frequent modes in the project lists. Together, they represented 89,5% of the projects. Airports (6 projects), RRTs (4)and inland waterways (2) represented the remaining 10,5%. One project was not classified in the above mentioned categories.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network LATVIA (LV): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total, 59 projects were identified from the reviewed sources. The combined budget of these projects in 2014 and 2015 amounted to 1.734 m Eur. Thirty six projects were located on core network and twenty projects were located on the comprehensive network. For the remaining three projects the location was not specified and/or covered by both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 79 20 Comprehensive, Core 499 3 Core 1.156 36

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec LATVIA (LV): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

For Latvia TEN-T network, there were three funding sources, two of them funding in almost equal shares, MS / National funding (470 m Eur) and ERDF + CF (468 m Eur). Furthermore 0,2% of investments were coming from CEF (2 m Eur).

The total expenditures for each mode of transport were in line with the number of projects identified: Road investments constituted 44% of the total expenditures (768 m Eur), Rail – 36% (631 m Eur), Ports – 18.4% (319 m Eur), Airports – 1% (17 m Eur).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network LITHUANIA (LT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Overall, 10 projects were identified from the reviewed sources, with combined expenditures for all projects for 2014 and 2015 amounting to 2.025 m Eur. 30% of the projects (3 projects) addressed the core network, and one project was dedicated to the comprehensive network. For 6 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered by both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 2 1 Comprehensive, Core 1.973 6

Core 50 3

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec LITHUANIA (LT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

The projects funded in Lithuania in 2014 – 2015 were financed via four financial sources: CEF, EIB, and ERDF+CF, MS / National funding. The expenditures coming from ERDF+CF represent 90% of the total expenditures amounting 1.784 m Eur. The other financial sources provided significantly lower investments: MS / National funding was responsible for 7% of total expenditures (148 m Eur), 2% by CEF (30 m Eur) and 1% by EIB (14 m Eur).

Three modes were addressed by the projects identified for Lithuania: rail (6 projects), road (3 projects), airports (3 projects). Cost-wise, road and rail almost equally shared the total amount of expenditures with 50% (1.012 m Eur) and 49,9% (1.011 m Eur) respectively. Consequently, the other two modes represented less than 0,1% of the total expenditures.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network LUXEMBOURG (LU): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 12 projects were identified for Luxembourg. The total costs of these projects for the years 2014 – 2015 amounted to 666 m Eur. Three projects were running on the core network and for 6 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types. Three projects were defined for comprehensive network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 21 3 Comprehensive, Core 35 6

Core 610 3

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec LUXEMBOURG (LU): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network:

Only two funding sources contributed to TEN-T projects in 2014 – 2015, which MS / National funding and CEF. The majority of investments (73 m Eur - 94%) was done via MS / National financial sources, while CEF was responsible for the remaining 6% of investments (5 m Eur).

All the identified projects were aimed to improve rail infrastructure, no projects are identified for other modes of transport.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network MALTA (MT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 15 projects were identified for Malta, which in total amount to 149 m Eur. In contrast to the other countries, the majority of the projects (10 projects) were running on the comprehensive network, while 4 projects were implemented on the core network. For 1 project the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 55 10 Comprehensive, Core 80 1 Core 15 4

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec MALTA (MT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Two funding sources were responsible for the investment in the TEN-T network related projects in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding and ERDF + CF. The latter one was responsible for 53% of total expenditures (80 m Eur), while 47% of total investment (69 m Eur) came from MS / National funds.

The most attention, both in terms of number of projects and expenditures, was given to Roads. There were 13 projects (93%) running towards improvement of the Road infrastructure in 2014 – 2015, with a total budget of 138 m Eur (93% of the total expenditures). For Ports, 2 projects were implemented that amounted to 11 m Eur (7.4% of the total expenditures).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network THE NETHERLANDS (NL) Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources, 100 projects were identified for the Netherlands with total expenditures of 9.224 m Eur in the years 2014 – 2015. The majority of projects were located on the core network (79 projects), while 15 projects were located on the comprehensive network. For 15 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 780 15 Comprehensive, Core 725 14 Core 7.720 71

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec THE NETHERLANDS (NL) Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Almost all investments (4.957 m Eur - 98%) of the TEN-T projects in 2014 – 2015 came from MS / National financial instruments. The share of other funding was very low: EIB was responsible for 48 m Eur, while CEF was responsible for 29 m Eur.

The projects were defined for 5 modes of transport: IWW, Multimodal, Ports, Rail, Road. The majority of the projects (38 projects) addressed the IWW network, while almost a third of the projects aimed towards improving the Roads. The next largest group were the projects that were focused on the improvement of Rail (26 projects). When looking into the division of the expenditures between the modes, it was observed that the situation differed significantly. Almost 59% of all expenditures (5.863 m Eur) were invested in Road. The budget of the IWW related projects in 2014 -2015 was 1.874 m Eur (26%), while the Rail projects accounted for 1.297 m Eur or 13% of the total expenditures.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network POLAND (PL): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total 243 projects that satisfy the chosen criteria have been identified for Poland. The budget of these projects combined amounted to 25.381 m Eur. The majority of the projects (147 projects) were implemented on core network and 24 projects concerned the comprehensive network. For 72 projects it is not possible to identify the type of network from the collected data and/or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 944 24 Comprehensive, Core 14.304 72 Core 10.133 147

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec POLAND (PL): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Almost half of all investments came from MS / National funding, which amounted to 11.099 m Eur. The second highest investment (42,2% - 9.403 m Eur) belongs to the ERDF + CF. Additionally, 1.043 m Eur (4,7%) were invested by EIB, while 720 m Eur (3,2%) came from CF. The lower share of expenditures (17 m Eur - 0,1%) was covered by CEF.

In terms of expenditures, the largest investments were made in road transport (66% of total expenditures), followed by rail (29% of total expenditures). For other modes/categories the investments were significantly lower and varied between 474 m Eur for Ports, 493 m Eur for Airports and 256 m Eur for Multimodal (2%, 2% and 1% of total expenditures respectively).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network PORTUGAL (PT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

Forty two projects have been identified for Portugal, which in total amount to 1.940 m Eur. For the majority of projects (23 projects) it is not possible to identify whether they addressed core or comprehensive infrastructure from the collected data and/or if they covered both types of network. Seventeen projects were carried out on core infrastructure and two on comprehensive.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 21 2 Comprehensive, Core 1.190 23 Core 729 17

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec PORTUGAL (PT): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The two major funding sources of the Portuguese TEN-T network were ERDF and MS / National funding, accounting for 58% (474 m Eur), and 40% (383 m Eur) of total expenditures respectively. The CEF investments in the Portuguese projects amounted to 24 m Eur (2%), while EIB invested 6 m Eur (0,5%).

With regard to funding, ports and rail projects had the largest total costs of 714 m Eur (44% of total expenditures) and 764 m Eur (41% of total expenditures) respectively. The costs of road projects amounted to the 10% (317 m Eur) of the total expenditures for Portuguese projects in 2014 - 2015. For airports the expenditures were significantly lower and amounted to 99 m Eur (3%), followed by IWW on which 46 m Eur (2%) was spent. The smallest investments were made for Multimodal transport (around 1 m Eur).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network ROMANIA (RO): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources 76 projects are identified, which amount to 5.704 m Eur. The majority of the projects were running on core network (56 projects), while 9 projects took place on comprehensive network. For the rest 11 projects no data about type of network was available from the collected information and/or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur)

Comprehensive 377 9 Comprehensive, Core 1.648 11 Core 3.679 56

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec ROMANIA (RO): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Four financial sources were used to fund the projects for Romania in 2014 – 2015: MS / National funding, CF, EIB and ERDF + CF. The latter one provided the highest share of investments (1.649 m Eur - 51%). The investment made by MS / National funding, which was the second highest financial source, corresponds to 1.526 m Eur (47,3%). Furthermore, 1,6% of the total expenditures were covered by CF (52 m Eur), while 0,1% was funded by EIB (3 m Eur).

The expenditures for road infrastructure represent 50% of all costs associated with Romanian projects that were running in 2014-2015. The second largest investments (1.881 m Eur) were done in rail infrastructure, while 385 m Eur (10,6% of total expenditures) were invested in Ports.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network SLOVAKIA (SK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total 57 projects were identified for Slovakia. The total expenditure for these projects amounts to 4.282 m Eur. The majority of the projects took place on core infrastructure (43 projects), while 6 projects addressed the issues of the comprehensive network. For 8 projects the type of network has not been specified and/or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 207 6 Comprehensive, Core 1.897 8 Core 2.178 43

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec SLOVAKIA (SK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

From the four funding sources for Slovakia, three of them contributed with similar shares. From those, the major contributor was the MS / National funding (1.498 m Eur - 37%), closely followed by ERDF + CF (1.377 m Eur - 34%) and CF with 1.104 m Eur (28%). The EIB investments constituted 1% of the total expeditures amounting to 36 m Eur.

The largest investments were done in development of road infrastructure, which amounted to 2.550 m Eur (60% of total expenditures). The second biggest investments were done into rail networks and amounted to 1.165 m Eur (27% of total expenditures). For the other modes/categories the investments were significantly lower and amounted to 534 m Eur (12%) for multimodal transport, 7 m Eur (0.2%) for Ports and 26 m Eur (1%) for RRTs.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network SLOVENIA (SI): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

From the reviewed sources 18 projects were identified for Slovenia. The total budget of these projects amounted to 745 m Eur. The projects that were implemented on the core network represent the majority of the sample (12 projects), while only 1 project was carried out on the comprehensive network. For 5 projects the type of network was not defined and/or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 30 1

Comprehensive, Core 333 5 Core 383 12

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec SLOVENIA (SI): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Slovenia received funding for the TEN-T network implementation from five sources. The two major contributors were MS / National instruments and ERDF + CF, contributing with 37% (192 m Eur) and 36% (188 m Eur) respectively. Regarding EIB (54 m Eur) and CEF (53 m Eur), both contributed with similar shares of 10% of total expenditures. The lowest investment came from CF (38 m Eur - 7%).

The defined projects addressed three modes of transport: ports, rail and road. The majority of the projects (56%) were carried out to develop rail infrastructure. These projects accounted for the largest share of expenditures (49%). Seven projects (39%) addressed road and had a total cost of 336 m Eur (45% of investments). The only port related project had a budget of 42 m Eur (6% of the investments).

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network SPAIN (SP): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

For Spain 279 projects were identified from the reviewed sources. On the core network 86 projects were run in 2014 - 2015, and 15 projects were run on the comprehensive network. For the majority of the projects (178) the type of network is not specified and/or covers both types of network. The combined expenditure for all the projects in 2014 and 2015 was 82.728 m Eur.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 209 15 Comprehensive, Core 9.405 178 Core 73.114 86

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec SPAIN (ES): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

The majority of the investment in TEN-T network (52.433 m Eur - 90,8%) was done by MS / National funding. The share for the other funding sources was significantly lower: 2.779 m Eur (4,8%) by ERDF+CF, 2.003 m Eur (3,5%) – by ERDF, 411 m Eur (0,7%) – by EIB. CEF also contributed with 116 m Eur (0,2% of the total expenditures).

The largest investments were made in the development of Rail infrastructure which accounts for 56.652 m Eur which represents 68% of all expenditures. Around 17.152 m Eur (21% of total expenditures) was invested in Ports, which is the second largest group. The expenditures for other modes, RRTs and Road were significantly lower and vary between 6.253 m Eur (8%) and 2.460 (3%), respectively. Airports and multimodal projects represent less than 1%.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network SWEDEN (SE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In total 50 projects were identified for Sweden from the reviewed sources. The combined expenditures for these projects amounts to 3.427 m Eur. The largest share of the projects (38 projects) were implemented on the core network, for 8 projects the type of network was not specified and/or covered both types of network. Four projects took place on the comprehensive network.

Total Number expenditures Type of network of (2014 and 2015) projects (m Eur) Comprehensive 145 4 Comprehensive, Core 1.285 8 Core 1.996 38

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec SWEDEN (SE): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

For Sweden TEN-T network implementation, the MS/ National Funds was the major contributor, with almost 97% of the total investment done (2.858 m Eur). CEF contributed with a smaller part of 76 m Eur and EIB with 26 m Eur.

Half of the Swedish projects (25 projects) were targeted toward improving rail infrastructure. The combined budget of these projects amounts to 1.135 m Eur (33% of total expenditures). The number of projects for road is approximately half of those for rail (12 projects), however their total budget represents the larger share of expenditures (46%). The third largest investment category is ports, which accounts for 470 m Eur (14% of total investments) divided over 9 projects.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network UNITED KINGDOM (UK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

General information

In the United Kingdom a total of 98 projects were determined that satisfy the chosen criteria. The combined budget for these projects amounted to 4.852 m Eur. Of the 98 projects, 8 were located in the core network while for the remaining 90 projects it is not possible to identify the network from the collected data and/or covered both types of network.

Total expenditures Number of Type of network (2014 and 2015) projects

(m Eur) Comprehensive, Core 3.932 90

Core 920 8

TEN-T Network: core and comprehensive network

Source: TENtec UNITED KINGDOM (UK): Current state of implementation of the TEN-T network

Realisation of the TEN-T network: financial information

Four funding sources were identified as funding sources for the TEN-T network in United Kingdom: CEF, EIB, ERDF and MS / National funding. The latter one was responsible for the higher share of expenditures (4.181 m Eur - 91%). The investments coming from other financial were significantly lower: EIB investments amounted to 221 m Eur (5%), ERDF investments – 153 m Eur (3%), and CEF investments – 45 m Eur (1%).

The largest investment was made for road projects (67% of total expenditures), followed by rail projects (29% of total expenditure). For the port projects and multimodal infrastructure the level of investment is significantly lower. A total of 156 m Eur (3% of total expenditure) was invested in port projects while 26 m Eur (1% of total expenditure) was invested in multimodal infrastructure.

Assessment of the realisation of the TEN-T network

Annex 8: Progress indicator calculation

Progress Progress Indicators for the indicator (%): indicator: realisation of the variation (%)variation Mode TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017 2015/2016 2016/2017 Core network Comprehensive network Track gauge Total Core network Comprehensive network Rail Traction Total

Progress Progress Indicators for the indicator (%): indicator: realisation of the variation (%)variation Mode TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017 2015/2016 2016/2017 Core network Total km compliant Comprehensive network Road for type Total

Progress Progress Total Total Total Total indicator (%): indicator: expenditure expenditure expenditure expenditure variation (%)variation Mode Type of network 2014 (€) 2015 (€) 2016 (€) 2017 (€) 2015/2016 2016/2017 Core network Comprehensive network Road Total Progress Progress Indicators for the indicator (%): indicator: realisation of the variation (%)variation Mode TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017 2015/2016 2016/2017 Core network Comprehensive network CEMT Class IV Total Core network Comprehensive network RIS Total Core network Comprehensive network IWW Draught Total

Progress Progress Indicators for the indicator (%): indicator: realisation of the variation (%)variation Mode TEN-T network Type of network 2014 2015 2016 2017 2015/2016 2016/2017 Core network Comprehensive network Connection to rail Total Core network Connection to CEMT Comprehensive network Ports Class IV Total

Annex 9 Matching application

Introduction The CorridorProjectMatch application was developed to deduplicate records in project datasets for the project: Article 49.3 Study: Review of Existing Sources of Information/Data and Support for the Preparation of the Progress Report on the Implementation of the TEN-T Network. This Annex sets out the rationale behind the developed application, describes the approach taken, gives instructions on how to change the code if required, and describes the tools required to work with it.

Objective As part of the study, an Excel file with the TEN-T projects was compiled and could contain duplicate projects. As the data was compiled from a variety of sources, a simple deduplication may miss identical projects that have different descriptions. The objective of the application is to generate a list of likely matches for each record in the Excel file and to calculate a matching score for each of these potential matches. Based on the supplied data a human being can then make an informed decision.

Application The CorridorProjectMatch application was developed in Java and allows a user to parse a Microsoft Excel file (Office 2010 format) to extract project records. These records are then filtered and any matches scoring above a threshold are presented to the user as potential duplicates for each record. The application builds up a matching score by analysing the contents of certain columns of information and, given an allowed error margin, adding a weighted score to the matches’ total score.

Application flow The application is a Java application developed in NetBeans. When running, the application performs a number of steps described in this section: • logs are written to System.out (the output window in NetBeans, or the command-line interface if running from there) • The config file /config/matcher.cfg is loaded • A list of stop-words for English is loaded. Stop-words are words that add no meaning and are filtered out in the tokenisation process to enable free text matching. • The Excel input file is opened. The fourth sheet is expected to contain the input data (this is hardcoded into the source). • Starting from the second row (hardcoded) until the last row in the sheet, every row is processed: o Source name is extracted, if empty “BLANK” is used. Records are stored by source name, sources are treated as categories. It is assumed there are no duplicates inside sources, but across sources. o Expenditures for 2014, 2015 and totals are extracted o Network type is extracted with 4 options: . CORE . COMPREHENSIVE . COMPREHENSIVE, CORE . UNKNOWN (in case of any other type, it is assigned to unknown and a diagnostic message is printed on the log) o A Project instance is created with: . Source . Row number (in Excel row numbers, not 0-based) . Location countries (based on comma-separated string) . Location section name . Project title . Short description . Start year . End year . Beneficiary countries (based on comma-separated string) . Network type . Mode of transport . Expenditures 2014 . Expenditures 2015 . Total expenditures o The project is added to its source’s data structure • The Excel file is closed • An output csv file is opened and its header line written • For each project for each source, all projects of other sources are checked and match scores calculated. Comparisons are only performed once: i.e. A->B will result in B->A being skipped. The best n matches (currently 2 as per config setting) are written to the output file: o A description of the currently analysed source is printed to file o A description of the currently analysed project is printed to file o A description of the source to match is printed o A description of that source’s project is printed o A match score is calculated (for all matches, one or more empty cells leads to no match): . Location countries are matched: if the list of countries matches exactly, the configured weight is added to the current match’s score . Beneficiary countries are matched: if the list of countries matches exactly, the configured weight is added to the current match’s score . Start year is matched: if the difference between start years is smaller than the max. error loaded from config, the configured weight is added to the current match’s score . End year is matched: if the difference between start years is smaller than the max. error loaded from config, the configured weight is added to the current match’s score . Network type is matched: if both are not unknown, and the types match then the configured weight is added to the current match’s score . Mode is matched: • If they are the same the configured weight is added to the current match’s score • Otherwise: o the mode string is split along “/” and matches between individual modes are counted

o Potential matches is calculated as max (modes in a, modes in b) o Total number of matches between individual modes in a and modes in b is counted o Floor (Weight from config * (matches/potential matches)) is added to this match’s total score . Expenditures 2014 is matched: • If ABS (expenditures 2014(A) – expenditures 2014(B))/expenditures 2014 (A) is smaller than the max. error defined in config, weighted score is added to this match’s total score . Expenditures 2015 is matched: • If ABS (expenditures 2015(A) – expenditures 2015(B))/expenditures 2015 (A) is smaller than the max. error defined in config, weighted score is added to this match’s total score . Total expenditures matched: • If ABS (expenditures total (A) – expenditures total (B))/expenditures total (A) is smaller than the max. error defined in config, weighted score is added to this match’s total score . Location section name is matched: • String is tokenised • The same approach as with multiple modes is applied to tokens . Project title is matched: • String is tokenised • The same approach as with multiple modes is applied to tokens . Project description is matched: • String is tokenised • The same approach as with multiple modes is applied to tokens o If the score is above the minimum threshold loaded from config, the match is added to the project o Up to the maximum matches allowed loaded from config are written as potential matches to the output file

Config file The config file allows the user to change settings for the application without needing to deal with source code changes. By default, the application loads the config file in: config/matcher.cfg. Any changes saved to the config file are loaded when running the application

This section describes the settings: • Data settings: o inputPath: path to Excel file to load (relative to project folder) o outputPath: path to csv file to write (relative to project folder)

o stopWordsPath: path to English stop words file (relative to project folder) • Match settings: o minScoreThreshold: minimum score for a match to be considered as a potential match o maxOptionsPerSource: maximum number of potential matches to write out per project o xxxWeight: maximum score to give to matches on match item xxx o xxxMaxError: maximum absolute difference between project A and project B for match item xxx to consider it a match o xxxRelativeError: if the absolute difference between project A and B divided by the value for project A is smaller than this for match item xxx, it is considered a match

Input file format The input file should be an Excel file (Office 2010 or later .xlsx) with the input table in the fourth sheet. This sheet is generally a normalised version of the original data. The normalisation consists of: • changing the encoding so that non-Western characters are properly represented (i.e. Slavic characters) • removing non numerical values from start and end year and the expenditure columns • ensuring that type of network is one of {CORE; COMPREHENSIVE; CORE, COMPREHENSIVE; “”} • Ensuring that countries are separated by , and modes are separated by / The “FinancialDatabase” file provided by the Contractor to the Contractee can be used as a template.

The columns for this table should be: • Source • ID • "Location_country_name (the country(ies) where the project is located)" • "Location_section_name (section where the project is located)" • "Section_TENT (If the ID used for the TENtec is used, please write it here)" • Project_title • Project_short_description • "Type_of_project (e.g new construction, maintenance, rehabilition, etc)" • "Project_start_Date (format mm.yy)" • "Project_end_Date (format mm.yy)" • "To which objective (article 4 from Regulation 1315/2013) the project is contributing to • "Beneficiary_country (country code)" • "Type of network: core or comprehensive network (i.e ""core"" or ""comprehensive"")" • Mode_of_transport • Total expenditures 2014 (€) • Total expenditures 2015 (€) • "Total amount spent with the project (if the information about the year 2014 and 2015 is not known, but only the total amount for the project)"

Tokenisation Free text fields are tokenised. This means the whole text is cut into words. I.e. “Type of network” is cut into an array containing the following tokens: {TYPE, OF, NETWORK}. During tokenisation English stop words are removed, words of less than two characters are ignored, only unique words are counted. The matching is case- insensitive.

Running the application There are a number of steps to run options to run the matching application: • Install Java JDK8u • Make sure input is in correct format and folder • Change the Config in Text editor , if necessary • Double click Run.bat • After it finishes, see the output • See above section for further instructions

Changing the matching One can add or change the way existing matches are performed by changing the Match class inside the CorridorProjectMatch class. Adding a new column to match on will require: • adding code to get and parse that Cell (cells are column offsets in a Row) in CorridorProjectMatch.main(String[] args) • adding a new field and code to init and get to the Project class (examples enough) • add a new function to the Match class and call it from the Match.calcScore() function.