Skip to main content

European Commission approves funding for transport infrastructure

The European Union has unveiled a list of 195 transport projects that will receive US$7.4 billion (€6.7 billion) of funding under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF). This investment is expected to unlock additional public and private co-financing for a combined amount of US$11 billion (€9.6 billion). The selected projects are primarily located on the core trans-European transport network (TEN-T). Among the beneficiaries are flagship initiatives such as the rehabilitation of the Brasov Sighisoara rail s
June 28, 2016 Read time: 2 mins
The European Union has unveiled a list of 195 transport projects that will receive US$7.4 billion (€6.7 billion) of funding under the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF). This investment is expected to unlock additional public and private co-financing for a combined amount of US$11 billion (€9.6 billion).

The selected projects are primarily located on the core trans-European transport network (TEN-T). Among the beneficiaries are flagship initiatives such as the rehabilitation of the Brasov Sighisoara rail section in Romania, the railway connection Aveiro Vilar Formoso in Portugal, the development of a standard gauge railway line in the Rail Baltic corridor, the implementation of the SESAR Deployment Programme and the modernisation of railway line E30 (the Zabrze – Katowice – Krakow section) in Poland.

Launched in November 2015, the second CEF calls for proposals  generated 406 eligible project proposals. With US$14 billion (€12.49 billion) of requested EU funding, the calls were widely oversubscribed. This allowed the Commission to select the projects with the highest European added value, while guaranteeing a balanced distribution geographically and between the transport modes.

The proposed funding decision must now be formally approved by the Connecting Europe Facility Coordination Committee, which will meet on 8 July 2016.

Related Content

  • July 17, 2012
    Progress towards a pan-European cooperative infrastructure
    Kallistratos Dionelis, General Secretary of ASECAP, makes the case for a lightly regulated, staged progression towards a pan-European cooperative infrastructure environment, the achievement of which should look to engender cooperation between the public and private sectors. Such an approach, he says, is the only real path to success.
  • September 15, 2016
    Deadlines approach for Europe’s automatic crash alert system
    The EU-co-funded I_ HeERO (Infrastructure_ Harmonised eCall European Pilot) project is working to ensure the readiness of national networks of call centres - known as public safety answering posts (PSAPs) - to deal with automated crash alerts arriving via the continent-wide 112 emergency phone number. Following on from its HeERO and HeERO2 pre-deployment predecessors, which enjoyed €16m (US$17.76m) in EU funding, the new initiative runs from 1 January 2015 to 31 December 2017. It has €30.9 million (US$34.
  • April 29, 2016
    Most Americans support usage fees to pay for transportation infrastructure
    Nearly two-thirds of Americans would support the use of road-usage fee options such as vehicle miles travelled or mileage-based user fees to help fund transportation costs, according to a new America Thinks national public opinion survey conducted by Kelton Global on behalf of infrastructure firm HNTB Corporation. The survey, Transportation Mobility 2016, also found that close to 170 million Americans (69 per cent) agree priced managed lanes should be considered when making improvements to US highways.
  • June 17, 2016
    Brooklyn eyes Bogota’s BRT system
    David Crawford considers the increased interest in bus rapid transit and looks that the latest trends. Bus rapid transit (BRT) is gaining an increasingly high profile in the US public transport agenda, for two main reasons. One is the potential for ‘trains on wheels’ to save substantially on installation costs as compared with other modes such as underground metros or light-rail transit. Another, highlighted in the case of New York City, is the value of having a rapid surface-based alternative available whe