PLANNING FOR A SUSTAINABLE EUROPE? - TU Berlin

298
7.4.4 Network Assessment & Priority Corridors: Contradictory Discourses
When asked about the relationship between the work on the Helsinki priority
corridors and the more inclusive TINA networks, Commission staff provided
contradictory answers. Some still hold that the Helsinki corridors are simply the
backbone, or first-order network of the larger TINA network, thus hinting at a
continuation of a two-tier structure. This is also still mostly the position of the Regional
Policy directorate, which administers the ISPA program. DG TREN officials, by
contrast, prefer to point out that the notion of corridors is mostly “outdated,” and that one
should instead only think in term of interoperable networks. This contradictory
assessment is also reflected in the somewhat twisted, non-committal formulations
regarding the eligibility of Helsinki corridors versus additional TINA network sections
for future ISPA funding. On one hand, the TINA document repeatedly asserts the
priority of (politically defined) backbone network over the additional components:
The TINA process will eventually lead to the identification of viable investment
projects, which will, in the future extended TEN-TR, be candidates for projects of
common interest. In the context of pre-accession financing, the ISPA team will, on
the basis of the TINA findings, perform a more detailed project analysis of all projects
which will be considered for financing. (p.13)
As a final result of the TINA process, the total network is proposed for
implementation in the time horizon of 2015. However, the backbone network is seen
as that part of the network, which should have a certain priority in its construction.
(p.15., emphasis in the original.)
While the Group has not established a list of priority projects, it recommends that, in
principle, priority be given to financing the backbone network over other components
of the network. (p.88)
On the other hand, however, the TINA report also presents an interesting,
additional list of criteria for the ultimate prioritization under ISPA (see p.17):