WP C-4a Sub work package on Periphery Issues

Background Objectives Work process Results Taking the results forward Document Date Page

Background WP C-4a Improving accessibility to peripheral areas is one of the key objectives of MoS Reduce road congestion and/or Improve access to peripheral and island regions and States (TEN-T guidelines Article 12a) Linked to Commission’s overarching aims of economic, social and territorial cohesion Stipulated by the Lisbon Treaty (Article 158) Reflected in EU’s inclusive growth strategy Europe 2020

Key challenges No peripheral based MoS applications to date & perceived bias towards modal shift No specific framework for the Commission to assess quality of such applications No criteria for weighing periphery based applications up against cargo shift based

Objectives of WP C4a 1.To develop a better understanding of the potential benefits of improved accessibility to peripheral areas 2.To influence the criteria for MoS proposals in order to give real opportunity for peripheral areas to obtain funding for MoS TEN-T projects

Transnational process involving the following StratMoS partners Napier Troms Vest Agder Hull Aberdeenshire / Aberdeen Hordaland Rogaland

Work process for WP C4a Coordinated by Lead Partner Review of background documents for the MoS regime to identify factors which might be limiting peripheral based MoS applications Two workshops (Stavanger, Aberdeen) Definition of peripherality, justification for support, what it means, bottlenecks for increasing volumes of freight Input from all partners to final report & criteria

Factors which may be limiting peripheral based MoS applications Unclear status for applications seeking only to promote access to peripheral areas Evaluation criteria less specific for socio economic cohesion than for modal shift Less availability of tools and methods for assessing socio economic cohesion & accessibility benefits Limiting eligibility to Category A seaports may be restricting some peripheral areas

There is a need for a more strategic view of peripheral areas There is a need for better understanding of the benefits to the wider EU Community of improved territorial, economic and social cohesion  The need to reinforce the strategic position of peripheral areas on the TEN-T network is also reflected in the Annual Activity Report for Priority Project 21 on MoS which called for a dedicated aid system for islands and ultra-peripheral regions

How to facilitate peripheral applications under future MoS calls Revised checklist for MoS applications to facilitate development & evaluation of periphery based applications Compare peripheral MoS applications to other peripheral based ones rather than modal shift applications Operationalise definition of peripherality to clarify which project applications should be considered as ‘peripheral based’

Preliminary suggestions for a revised checklist for North Sea call Proposed checklist questions developed under the following headline topics: 1.Does the project comply with criteria for peripherality? 2.Does the project contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion? 3.Does the project contribute to improved accessibility to peripheral areas? 4.Is the project differentiated from any similar existing services?

Long term recommendations Stronger emphasis under MoS on accessibility of peripheral areas & territorial cohesion Combine existing funding instruments Greater coordination TEN-T and Marco Polo Benefits of greater coordination TEN-T and Marco Polo/weaknesses of Marco Polo in relation to MoS reflected in Annual Activity Report for Priority Project 21 Would require explicit “cohesion/accessibility objective” under Marco Polo

Taking the results forward Submitted & presented to North Sea MoS Task Force in Bruges 8/12/10 Will be presented to European Commission DG MOVE and EACI, the Agency dealing with Marco Polo Could be distributed to industry associations & Member States representatives Wider application for future MoS calls under North Sea programme?