PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE EUROPE? - TU Berlin

234
not connected to any idea of common funding schemes. The Trans-European Networks
(TENs) of the European Commission, however, were always intended to be at least partly
financed by the European Community/Union. The idea of coordinating and financing a
series of priority infrastructure links first emerged in the early 1990s. The development
of the TENs was always closely linked to the creation of the European Single market. In
their most ambitious form, the complete TENs master plans foresaw public and private
investments in the amount of 220 billion ECU until the year 2000 alone, of which the EU
itself was prepared to supply about one tenth in grant funding. 10
TEN infrastructure investments can be categorized into two main categories:
network investments in underprivileged regions disbursed through the regular structural
funds, and priority investments funded though the TEN budget line. Additionally, the
European Investment Bank has provided funding for both types of investments.
The TENs were not only the first spatial concept in European policies (Buunk
1999:) but also the EU’s first large scale infrastructure policy. Although the TENs are
frequently dismissed as simply expressing Member state preferences for national network
connections that were yet to be completed, Piodi (1997:24) presents an important
alternative interpretation:
10 The development of the Trans-European transport networks has been assessed in much detail in the
literature. In particular, there are four book-length manuscripts exclusively dedicated to the TENs, so it
cannot be the place of the present study to reassess the entire process here. For a (now already outdated)
account examining key TEN themes for the not only the transport, but also the energy and
telecommunications sectors, see Debra Johnson’s and Colin Turner’s (1997) Trans-European Networks.
For a policy-oriented account that (too) neatly divides the discussion over trans-European transport
infrastructures into different sectors, see John Ross’ (1998) Linking Europe. For an engaged, prointegrationist
and pro-multi-modal plea for the future development of the TENs, see Mateu Turró’s (1999)
Going Trans-European. Finally, Tim Richardson’s Ph.D. thesis (2000) presents the kind of critical,
discourse-analytical and planning theory-inspired assessment on the TEN process which is closest to my
own study. Even his thesis, however, only marginally touches on the development of the Pan-European
(Helsinki) Corridors and the TINA Process which I discuss in more detail Chapter 6.