1. WP C-4a Sub work package on Periphery Issues

2. Backgound Process Outcomes Distribution Issues for discussion/ input Document Date Page

3. Background WP C-4a MoS funding scheme has 2 objectives 1.Facilitate shift of cargo from road to sea and/or 2.Improve cohesion/ accessibility to peripheral areas  ‘On paper’ cohesion/ accessibility is on an equal footing with modal shift  In practice no MoS applications based on peripheral needs and a bias towards projects promoting modal shift

4. Key challenges No specific framework for the Commission to assess the quality of periphery based applications No criteria for weighing a periphery based application up against a cargo shift based application The key challenge is to understand the potential benefits of improved accessibility to peripheral areas

5. Overall WP C objectives WP C-4a objectives 1.Justify support to peripheral regions in order to improve accessibility 2.Develop criteria for periphery based MoS applications

6. Partner organisations WP C-4a Napier Troms Vest Agder Hull Aberdeenshire / Aberdeen Hordaland Rogaland

7. Work Plan WP C-4a No.ActivityDeadline 1Study background documents for MoS regime in respect to peripheral issues, extracting justifications for improved accessibility for peripheral regions. Prepare working paper. 25 May 10 2Workshop on peripheral challenges and justifications for improved accessibility 2 Jul 10 3Prepare working paper on possible criteria for periphery based MoS application 20 Aug 10

8. Work Plan WP C-4a (continued) No.ActivityDeadline 4Workshop on criteria for periphery based MoS application 24 or 26 Aug 10 5Prepare draft paper15 Sep 10 6Collect comments to draft paper25 Sep 10 7Update draft paper8 Oct 10 8Participate in WP C meeting in NorwayEnd Oct 10 9Prepare final paper19 Nov 10

9. Documents reviewed MoS Call for Proposals 2010, 19 May 10 Open Call for tender for MoS projects in the North Sea Region 2009-2013, 9 Nov 09 Response of North Sea Commission & CPMR to EU consultation on TEN-T Green Paper, 30 April 09 Input from NSC to CPMR Working group on TEN-T revision, September 2009 Report from NMCII-project, summing up the work and positions of the project towards MoS, May 2008 "TEN Guidelines” Consultation draft TEN-T Green Paper

10. Limiting factors ‘And/ or’ sufficiently reflected in evaluation criteria/ checklist for proposals? Category A seaports limiting applications from peripheral areas? Less availability of tools for assessing socio economic cohesion & accessibility benefits? Criteria vaguer/ looser for socio economic cohesion than for modal shift?

11. Workshop discussion topics What is the definition of ‘peripherality’ in this context? What is the justification for support to peripheral regions? What does ‘improved accessibility’ mean in the context of MoS? What are the bottlenecks for increasing the volume of freight in peripheral ports?

12. Outcomes Short term initiatives Current MoS call amended to better facilitate peripheral based applications Proposed checklist for development & evaluation Document Date Page

13. Proposed checklist headings General project description Does the project comply with criteria for peripherality? Does the project contribute to economic, social and territorial cohesion? Does the project contribute to improved accessibility to peripheral areas? Is the project differentiated from similar existing services? Document Date Page

14. Outcomes Long term initiatives Response to the consultation on the Future Trans-European Transport Network Policy Stronger emphasis on Motorways of the Seas, accessibility of peripheral areas and territorial cohesion Greater coordination of MoS and Marco Polo could contribute to greater accessibility and socio- economic and territorial cohesion benefits - would require introducing objective for peripheral areas/ cohesion in Marco Polo Document Date Page

15. Suggested distribution Submit paper to North Sea task force, Commission DG Move and Agency dealing with Marco Polo. Consider distributing recommendations to industry associations and different bodies which might be interested e.g. Focal Point Meetings which represents different Member States and industry which meet regularly to discuss SSS and MoS. Clarify whether WP C4a should have a slot in the meeting in Kristiansand 3 Nov and/or the IGM in Copenhagen. Document Date Page

16. Issues for discussion/ input Applicability to Marco Polo Linking funding instruments Require introduction of peripherality in MP Scoring/ ranking of criteria Two sets of criteria or one? Distribution Document Date Page