E12 Atlantica Transport. Datum Händelse Namn

Transcription

1 E12 Atlantica Transport Datum Händelse Namn

2 E12 connceting to the bigger picture

3 Cross-border cooperation between partners in Finland, Sweden and Norway along the E12

4 E12 Atlantica Transport Orderers: Kvarken Council (lead part), Blå vägen and MidtSkandia Regional Council of Ostrobothnia, Region Västerbotten and Nordland Fylkeskommune + 14 other partners and financiers 2.5M EUR in 2½ years (January 2016 May 2018) Finland + Sweden 2,197,500 EUR Norway 381,691 EUR Investigation and cooperation funds E12 Atlantica BA3NET, sister project December 2016 May 2019 Cerum/University of Umeå, University of Vaasa and Nord University Tool for the analysis of the impact of cross-border infrastructure investments and for the calculation of the related public expenditure

5 Finland and Sweden Total budget 2,197,500 Financiers Regional Council of Ostrobothnia Region Västerbotten Kvarken Council Vasek, Vaasa Regional Development Company Inab, Infrastruktur i Umeå AB Umeå Municipality Storuman Municipality Vindeln Municipality Beneficiaries Kvarken Council Vasek, Vaasa Regional Development Company Inab, Infrastruktur i Umeå AB Umeå Municipality Storuman Municipality Vindeln Municipality Lycksele Municipality Vännäs Municipality Lycksele Municipality Vännäs Municipality

6 Norway Total budget 381,691 Financiers Rana Municipality Beneficiaries MidtSkandia Port of Mo i Rana Rana Utviklingsselskap MidtSkandia Nordland fylkeskommune Helgelands Havn IKS Alstahaug Havnevesen KF Mosjöen Havn KF Private cash financing Mo industripark Polarsirkelen lufthavnsutvikling

7 Organization OPERATIONAL STEERING GROUP FI: Mathias Lindström, Riitta Björkenheim SV: Lilly Bäcklund, Bertil Hammarstedt NO: Arne Langset, Trond Nygård PROJECT MANAGEMENT Andreas Forsgren (SV) Anna Måtts-Fransén / Pekka Mäkinen (FI) Majken Hauknes / Thure Mårtenson) (NO) ADMINISTRATION (economy, BAcontacts, project support) Maria Snickars, Susanna Ehrs and Elin Lindqvist COMMUNICATION Johanna Häggman REFERENCE GROUP / WORKING GROUP WP 1 Andreas Forsgren WP 2 TBC WP 3 Grete Vesteraas

8 Position of the route Current situation Several completed projects related to the route TEN-T Comprehensive 600M since 2006 International cooperation (e.g. ÅVS E12) Several actors interested in cooperation Development needs Shared vision and target Reducing border barriers More explicit link with trade and commerce Developing and coordinating research in transport, logistics and innovations Freight database

9 Purpose and targets To strengthen cooperation between the ordering organizations and the partners To reduce border barriers To continue the development of the transport corridor along the E12 from Helgeland to Ostrobothnia

10 WP1 Functional transport route Problem: the route is continuously influenced by factors related to the surrounding world New establishments Planned investments Different and new geographical areas -> new threats, opportunities, bottlenecks, opportunities for optimization Means/measures Standardized method for the assessment of route development (key figures and indicators) Cross-border system analysis Traffic census Port and terminal managers group Case studies and pilots Impact Getting structures and materials for continuous analysis, development and investigation related to the route Rapid identification and possibility to make revisions for the good of the region Examination of present situation Efficient logistics solutions

11 WP2 Cross-border strategies Problem 1: Infrastructure planning No structures for cross-border infrastructure planning at national level E.g. analysis of Umskar tunnel and the Kvarken Strait crossing Transport and infrastructure planning is a strictly national process; predominantly north-south infrastructure with insufficient viewpoint on cross-border issues Complex national processes and models Means/measures 1: Surveying the methods and processes of infrastructure planning along the route BA3NET: test an object and try it out in country-wise models Dialogue with the national transport agencies and other interest groups Impact 1: Shared view of processes along the route National attention and awareness of the problems Discussion at national level about cross-border infrastructure Improving the partners competence of planning processes

12 WP2 Cross-border strategies Problem 2: Traffic strategy No shared strategic agreement on freight and passenger traffic issues along the route Defective quality of national data on cross-border transport demand Risk of not working in a united manner for the route as a whole Defective competence on cross-border issues and TEN-T functions in comparison with other planning Means/measures 2: Identifying the lowest common denominator Producing background materials for TEN-T functions and impact on planning and processes Creating a joint cross-border traffic strategy Checking the quality of Freight database and determining its ownership and usage Impact 2: Acting united in cross-border infrastructure issues along the route Analyses and models which support cross-border planning Strengthening the position towards national transport agencies More precise and accurate background material for the planning of cross-border infrastructure

13 WP3 Cooperation Problem: Long-term cooperation No cross-border vision and target Act united and determine the domain for cooperation No shared attitude towards other regions and routes No structure for meetings at a strategic level for regional development Means: Investigate current forms of cooperation Create shared visions and targets Identify the domains for cooperation Survey, examine and suggest various forms for cooperation Create meeting opportunities for private and public actors Impact: Create a foundation for long-term cooperation along the route Present suggestions for future forms of cooperation Effective exchange of competence and information between the public sector and business life (annual Nordic forum)

14 Thank you!