The Future of European Rail: Beyond Funding, Towards Integration
The European Commission’s proposal to increase the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) budget to €51.5 billion for 2028-2034 signals a commitment to infrastructure development. However, with the estimated cost of completing the core Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) reaching approximately €515 billion, a tenfold increase in funding needs, the focus is shifting from simply how much is spent to how it’s spent.
The Shifting Landscape of Infrastructure Funding
A key change in the proposed framework separates CEF Transport funding for international and cross-border projects from national and regional partnership plans covering internal network sections. While seemingly logical – Brussels funds connections between nations, and member states manage their own networks – this division introduces significant risks. Member states, prioritizing domestic concerns like energy or defense, might postpone investments in their national TEN-T sections.
Without these crucial national links, cross-border projects risk becoming isolated, well-funded but ultimately ineffective “infrastructure islands.” True European rail integration demands technical and operational continuity along entire routes, not just impressive border crossings.
Defining “Cross-Border”: A Critical Challenge
The definition of a “cross-border project” itself is under scrutiny. Clarity is needed to prevent funds from being diverted to projects with predominantly national interests. Limiting cross-border projects to mere border segments is insufficient. To maximize impact, these sections must connect to major urban centers, ensuring they serve real transportation needs.
For example, proposals like a Stockholm–Turku–Helsinki connection lacking a direct land link raise questions about viability. Prioritizing projects like Rail Nordica, which offer genuine connectivity, is crucial. The core issue is control of the agenda: a clearly defined project list is essential to prevent budget fragmentation.
Megaprojects and Funding Allocation
The allocation of funds is similarly impacted by large-scale projects. Currently, Rail Baltica absorbs approximately 20% of CEF Transport funds allocated to the rail sector. Reducing the maximum co-financing rate for projects in cohesion countries – from 80% to 75% – could potentially free up resources for a wider range of initiatives. While a 5% difference may seem small, it can have a substantial impact on projects with multi-billion euro price tags.
Changes to already-funded projects also pose a risk. The relocation of a station on the Porto–Lisbon high-speed line from a central to a peripheral location, for instance, threatens the project’s timeline and potential ridership. CEF 3 should prioritize mature, ready-to-implement projects, avoiding concepts that remain politically or technically unstable.
Balancing Geographical Priorities and Military Mobility
The CEF 3 budget must balance civil transport needs with the demands of military mobility. Currently, 44% of EU contributions to military mobility initiatives are concentrated in Germany, Poland, Lithuania, and Latvia. While strengthening the East-West corridor is strategically crucial, Southern Europe risks being underfunded in civil transport. Establishing four priority military corridors in conjunction with NATO aims to address this imbalance, but geopolitical pressures remain strong.
CEF Transport, becomes a vital tool for maintaining investment balance and upholding the original objective: the cohesion of the European transport network.
Looking Ahead: Key Priorities for CEF 3
Doubling CEF resources is a positive step, but insufficient to complete the core TEN-T network. The critical debate now centers on:
- Clearly defining “cross-border projects” to ensure genuine international connectivity.
- Protecting the budget from large-scale projects that could limit flexibility.
- Selecting only mature projects ready for immediate implementation.
- Achieving geographical balance between Eastern, Western, and Southern Europe.
Without strict criteria and robust oversight, CEF 3 risks becoming a fragmented instrument, funding scattered interests rather than fostering a truly integrated European rail network. At a time when rail transport is essential for both climate transition and strategic security, Europe cannot afford inconsistent investments.
Did you know?
The Connecting Europe Facility also supports innovation in the transport system, aiming to improve infrastructure utilization, reduce environmental impact, enhance energy efficiency, and increase safety.
Pro Tip:
Stay informed about upcoming CEF calls for proposals by regularly visiting the European Commission’s funding and tenders portal: https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/connecting-europe-facility_en
FAQ
- What is the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF)? The CEF is an EU funding instrument for strategic investment in transport, energy, and digital infrastructure.
- What is the TEN-T network? The Trans-European Transport Network is a Europe-wide network of roads, rail lines, ports, and airports.
- What is the main challenge facing CEF funding? The estimated cost of completing the TEN-T network significantly exceeds the available CEF budget.
- What is the risk of separating CEF funding from national plans? National sections of the TEN-T network may be postponed if member states prioritize other investments.
Explore more insights into European rail infrastructure and policy on RailwayPro.
