| Artxibo OCR | EUROPEAN CYCLISTS' FEDERATION
CYCLING FOR GROWTH:
USING EUROPEAN FUNDS FOR CYCLING
European Cyclists' Federation (ECF)
Adam Bodor, Director of EuroVelo, Cycling Tourism and Regional Policy [email protected]
3rd December 201 4
BThe ECF gratefully acknoledges financial support from the European Commission. The information and views set out in this
report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official opinion of the European Union. Neither the European
Union institutions and bodies nor any person acting on their behalf may be held responsible for the use which may be made of
the information contained therein.
1. The European Cyclists' Federation's objective for
European funds
The European Cyclists' Federation's (ECF) main mission is to have more people cycling, more
often. In order to help achieve this mission the ECF wants 10% of all public investments in
transport to be used for cycling-related measures. As is explained in this note, the figure is
currently much lower despite the fact that cycling has consistently provided higher returns on
investment than any other transport mode.
2. Lessons learned from the last financial period
In the previous Multiannual Financial Framework - which covered the period 2007-2013 -
approximately 600 million Euros was allocated for cycling. This was closer to 1 % of the EU's
total spending on transport measures during that period rather than 10% (which would equate to
6,000 million Euros). In addition, most of the 600 million Euros was allocated in just four
countries: Hungary, Poland, Czech Republic and Germany (each invested more than 100 million
Euros in cycling).
The last financial period did see many good cycling-related projects realised, both in these four
leading countries and in others. However, there was no European-level benchmarking or
guidance on how to use European subsidies for cycling projects nor was there a specific
monitoring or impact assessment system put in place for the use of European resources for
cycling.
Most of the cycling projects used European Regional Development Funds (ERDF) and the
potential opportunities offered by other EU Funds were not really taken up. Some 'non-cycling'
developments included cycling-related measures (e.g. cycle lanes on public roads, bike parking
at new railway stations etc.) but in general cyclists were forgotten about in transport and tourism
projects subsidised by the EU. This resulted in opportunities for mutually beneficial measures
being missed and even, in some cases, subsidised projects actually worsened conditions for
cyclists. Repairing such mistakes invariably costs more than if the right cycling-related measures
were included at the planning stage.
Rue Franklin. 28 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone: -32 2 880 92 74 fox: -32 2 880 92 75
www.ecf.com
Page 1/8
Disclaimer: Please note that the data included in
this report is based on the best information
publically-available at the start of December 2014
EUROPEAN CYCLISTS' FEDERATION
3. What are the EU Funds available for cycling during the
2014-2020 financial period?
EU subsidies are managed on different levels:
a) European-level programmes are distributed directly via the European Institutions. For
example:
■ The Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) can be used for the development of cycling
infrastructure measures connected to the Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T).
■ The Horizon 2020 programme can support innovation and research projects containing
cycling components.
■ The COSME programme can support the competitiveness of cycling related enterprises
(e.g. cycling related manufacturing SME's) and European-scale cycling tourism projects.
■ The LIFE programme can support environment and climate-related actions.
■ ErasmusT- and Europe for Citizens programmes can support European campaigns, events
and other "soft" measures to involve European citizens, change their perceptions and/or
behaviour (for example to promote physical activity).
b) Transnational and cross-border programmes are under the shared management of the EU
Institutions and the different member states and regions. For example:
■ The cross-border INTERREG programmes can support cooperation between authorities
and NGOs from two or three neighbouring countries implementing cycling infrastructure
development and soft measures (e.g. campaigns, education etc.).
■ The trans-national INTERREG programmes are a perfect tool for strategic cooperation
(including strategic planning, policy making, soft measures) between the authorities,
NGO's, private bodies of several (more than 3) member states in a macro-region.
■ Instrument for Pre-Accession (IPA) provides financial support to the enlargement countries
in their preparations for EU accession.
■ The European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENPI) promotes cooperation between the
Union and its neighbouring countries.
c) National and regional level authorities distribute most of the European funds available for
cycling (i.e. European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), European Social Fund (ESF) and
European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD)). These funds theoretically can
provide European co-financing for all kinds of measures including cycling infrastructure, soft
measures (e.g. campaigns, education etc.), cycling industry and cycling tourism service
development but the eligible activities depend on the priorities chosen by the member states
and/or regions and described in their relevant programming documents (see below).
4. How has the ECF been identifying opportunities for
European funding for cycling?
a) Since 201 1, the ECF has been informing its members and networks about the preparation of
the programming documents for the 2014-2020 period and encouraging and supporting
them to lobby for better references and more support for cycling.
b) Over the past few months, the ECF has been checking all available programming documents
Rue Franklin. 28 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone: -32 2 B 8 0 9 2 74 fox: -32 2 880 92 75
www.ecf.com
Page 2/8
Disclaimer: Please note that the data included in
this report is based on the best information
publically-available at the start of December 2014
EUROPEAN CYCLISTS' FEDERATION
to find out what references to cycling have been included. This work included the scanning
of:
■ relevant EU regulations;
■ Partnership Agreements - a general agreement between the EU and each member state
setting out in broad terms what EU funds should be spent on);
■ Operational Programmes (OP) - describe in more detail the priorities, objectives and
eligible activities in each member state and/or region and therefore set the guidelines for
the Calls for proposals that will follow.
Of course it will not be possible to identify exactly how much the EU will invest in cycling-
related measures during the current financial period until it finishes but using the OPs we can
get a relatively good estimation about the opportunities that are available.
c) As part of the scan of the above documents, the ECF has categorized the references to
cycling and estimated the resources that are likely to be available. We identified three
categories of references:
■ Explicit reference - "cycling, bicycle, cycling infrastructure, cycling industry etc." are listed
among the eligible actions. In the best cases, the OP even includes a dedicated cycling
fund and/or the estimated outputs include cycling (e.g. km of new bike path).
■ Implicit reference - cycling-related measures are eligible under different headings, such
as "sustainable transport / mobility, green infrastructure, green vehicles, soft mobility,
urban transport, sustainable (transport) modes, multimodality, sustainable tourism".
Although cycling was not explicitly-mentioned in the actions, it clearly fits with the
proposed objectives. Nevertheless, we used a conservative estimation, taking into
account the potentially eligible activities.
■ Indirect reference or connection to cycling - covers situations where broader themes are
mentioned, such as "land transportation, roads, tourism, SME development, training and
campaign, vehicle industry". In these circumstances we took an extremely conservative
approach and included only the possible costs of integrating some cycling-related
components into generally 'non-cycling' projects.
5. What is the current status? What are the main challenges?
a) The current state of play varies for the different types of fund:
■ For the centralized EU Funds, all programmes are approved and in some cases even the
first calls for proposals are published.
■ Regarding the national, regional, cross-border and trans-national funds, all of the
Partnership Agreements are now approved. Whilst 97% of all OPs are now submitted,
only 21 have been adopted to date. Consequently, during our scan we always evaluated
the best publically-available version.
b) We estimate that 1.325 billion Euros of EU funds can be used for cycling between 2014 and
2020 based on the explicit references included in the current versions of the programming
documents. If we take into account the implicit and indirect references as well, than cycling
related measures possibly can absorb 2.041 billion Euros of EU subsidies. This is more than
twice or, in case of all possibilities (references), more than three times as much as was
available in the former period. However, it is less than the 10% of the total EU budget for
transport-related measures that we are aiming for.
Rue Franklin. 28 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone: +32 2 B 8 0 9 2 74 fox: +32 2 880 92 75
www.ecf.com
Page 3/8
Disclaimer: Please note that the data included in
this report is based on the best information
publically-available at the start of December 2014
EUROPEAN CYCLISTS' FEDERATION
c) Some general comments and observations on these figures:
■ It is clear that the lobbying campaign of the ECF and its members and partners over the
past two years has been successful in improving the image of cycling and convincing the
relevant stakeholders of the economic potential of cycling in many countries.
■ Transport and mobility generally will receive less European resources compared with the
former (2007-2013 period), which has a negative impact on the possibilities of cycling
infrastructure development.
■ The CEF opens the possibility to co-finance cycling-related measures in the frame of TEN-
T projects but there is no separate budget line for cycling (despite the decision of the
European Parliament's TRAN Committee in September) or obligation to integrate cycling-
related measures.
■ The European Commission objected to member states and regions allocating funding for
cycling-related measures. Four member states and regions have reported to the ECF that
they had experienced negative feedback from the European Commission (DG REGIO)
when they tried to allocate EU Funds for cycling. According to the documents sent by DG
REGIO that we have seen informally, they do not consider cycling to be equal to other
modes of road transportation and asked to reduce, or even refused to integrate, cycling
in several OPs.
■ The main winner of the new allocation is the direct economic development/SME sector,
but this objective is usually not differentiated according to economic sectors. Several
member states informed us they were discouraged to allocate any resources for tourism /
cycling tourism under this objective. That said, despite this feedback from DG REGIO,
several member states were still willing to allocate dedicated resources to this sector.
■ Geographical differences are still noticeable. Of the four countries that allocated the
most resources in the previous period, three - Poland, Germany and Hungary - stayed in
the leading group. The opportunities to fund cycling-related projects over the next seven
years in the Czech Republic however, are greatly reduced when compared with the
previous period, despite the fact that it initially appeared that they were intending to
continue to allocate resources for cycling.
The Latin countries, particularly Spain and France, recognised the importance of cycling
and opened the possibility to invest more than 1 00 million Euros into cycling. Most of the
new member states (e.g. Estonia, Latvia, Romania and Bulgaria) and Italy included strong
explicit references on cycling as well. There was further good news in Greece, Sweden
and UK where dedicated resources for cycling were allocated for 201 4-2020 (even if the
amounts were limited). The 'traditional' cycling countries, such as the Netherlands and
Denmark, did not allocate any significant EU resources for cycling explicitly, most
probably because they use national and/or regional resources for these measures.
Rue Franklin. 28 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone: +32 2 B 8 0 9 2 74 Fox: +32 2 880 92 75
www.ecf.tom
Page 4/8
Disclaimer: Please note that the data included in
this report is based on the best information
publically-available at the start of December 2014
EUROPEAN CYCLISTS' FEDERATION
Overview of European funds available for cycling at a national and regional level between 2014
and 2020 based on current information
Country Estimated amount of funding available (€ million) based on: Total
Explicit references Implicit references Indirect references
Italy 44.5 12.0 31.5 88.0
Spain 135.5 96.2 15.7 247.4
Greece 5.5 18.7 7.0 31.2
Germany 123.4 6.2 1.8 131.4
Sweden 8.0 0.2 0.0 8.2
Austria 0.0 2.6 0.0 2.6
Denmark 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
The Netherlands 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3
Ireland 0.0 1.0 0.0 1.0
United Kingdom 16.7 5.3 1.9 23.8
France 196.8 25.2 22.3 244.4
Hungary 106.7 15.0 30.0 151.7
Cyprus 0.0 7.0 0.0 7.0
Belgium 11.4 0.0 0.0 11.4
Slovenia 20.0 0.0 0.0 20.0
Latvia 0.0 15.0 0.0 15.0
Estonia 20.0 0.0 0.0 20.0
Romania 25.0 0.0 46.0 71.0
Slovakia 28.7 0.0 0.0 28.7
Poland 403.7 0.0 0.0 403.7
Malta 0.0 3.2 0.0 3.2
Czech Republic 20.0 0.0 5.0 25.0
Bulgaria 40.0 85.7 4.6 130.3
Finland 0.0 6.0 0.0 6.0
Luxembourg 2.5 0.0 0.0 2.5
Portugal 6.0 9.5 0.0 15.5
Lithuania 0.0 10.0 2.0 12.0
Croatia 0.0 30.0 0.0 30.0
Rue Franklin. 28 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone: +32 2 B 8 0 9 2 74 Fox: +32 2 880 92 75
www.ecf.com
Page 5/8
Disclaimer: Please note that the data included in
this report is based on the best information
publically-available at the start of December 2014
EUROPEAN CYCLISTS' FEDERATION
Overview of all European funds available for cycling between 2014 and 2020 based on current
information
Type of fund Estimated amount of funding available (€ million) based on: Total
Explicit references Implicit references Indirect references
European-level programmes 12.8 0.0 131.3 144.1
Transnational programmes 15.4 22.8 1.0 39.1
Cross-border programmes 82.2 36.2 8.3 126.8
National and regional level programmes 1,214.4 349.1 167.8 1,731.3
Summary 1,324.8 408.1 308.3 2,041.2
European funds available for cycling
between 2014 and 2020
European-level programmes
■ Transnational programmes
Cross-border programmes
National and regional level
programmes
Rue Franklin. 28 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone: +32 2 B 8 0 9 2 74 Fox: +32 2 880 92 75
www.ecf.tom
Page 6/8
Disclaimer: Please note that the data included in
this report is based on the best information
publically-available at the start of December 2014
EUROPEAN CYCLISTS' FEDERATION
6. What are the next steps?
a) Use all the dedicated funds effectively. In those cases where there is a direct reference to
cycling or even a specific amount reserved for cycling-related measures it is important to
generate high-quality and effective projects. For all activities, we should choose the right
tools (e.g. infrastructure type) with the right parameters.
b) Realize the potential of the indirect connections and implicit references. In case cycling is part
of a bigger, general package of actions (urban mobility, sustainable tourism etc.), it is
important to lobby for more detailed and precise references to cycling in the call for
proposals. Cycling projects will be competing with other projects, so it is especially important
for these funds to develop high quality bids.
c) Integrate cycling into non-cycling projects. Where cycling is not the main focus of a project, it
is important to ensure the needs of the cyclists are still taken into account when the project is
planned and implemented. This can be ensured via the calls for proposals, guidelines and
the evaluation of the projects.
7. What will the ECF do?
a) Lobby for further European resources. Although the main negotiations about the 201 4-2020
period are now closed, we would like to improve the references to cycling in the published
calls (e.g. CEF). We will also support our members and networks to lobby for the same at
the national and regional level.
b) We propose to integrate cycling into the European Commission's 'Investment Plan for
Europe'. In support of the new Plan, we have prepared a "Cycling Investment Plan for
Europe. This plan would use the above mentioned European subsidies, combining them with
Euroepan Investment Bank (ElB), national and private resources. This plan would mean 6
billion Euro investments and include the following 4 work packages:
■ completion of EuroVelo, the European cycle route network,
■ SMART City Connected Urban cycling technologies,
■ cycling as suburban and inter-urban mass transit,
■ reindustrialisation/ repatriation of EU bicycle manufacturing and R&D.
If the plan is realised, we would create 100,000 new jobs1. Furthermore, due to cycling's
return on investment being the best in the transport sector, this plan can release 30 billion
Euros of benefits to the EU.
c) To proceed with the monitoring of the different OPs and update the current report until all
OPs are finalised.
d) The ECF would like to evaluate and communicate good practice cycling projects co-funded
by the EU. We will continue to initiate and participate in new European projects in order to
use the potential and encourage our members and networks to do similar on the national,
regional and local levels.
1 This is 10% of the jobs targeted by the Investment Plan for Europe for just 2% of the investments; making it
5 times more effective than the published expectations of the Plan.
Rue Franklin. 28 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone: -32 2 B 8 0 9 2 74 fox: -32 2 880 92 75
www.ecf.com
Page 7/8
Disclaimer: Please note that the data included in
this report is based on the best information
publically-available at the start of December 2014
EUROPEAN CYCLISTS' FEDERATION
Acknowledgements
This report was prepared by:
Adám Bodor, ECF Director of EuroVelo, Cycling Tourism and Regional Policy, [email protected]
Ed Lancaster, ECF Policy Officer - Cycling Tourism and Regional Policy, [email protected]
With the kind support of:
Within the ECF
Benjamin McEldowney, Project Assistant - EuroVelo
Elina Baltatzi, Communications Officer
Holger Haubold, Fiscal and Economic Policy Officer
Jesús Freire Valderrama, Project Assistant - EuroVelo
Theo Morrissey, EuroVelo Assistant
Externally
Alina Niculescu and Cristina Lixandroiu, INCDT
Andrzej Piotrowicz, PSWE
Daniel Mourek, Nadace Partnerstvi
Evgeny Apostolov, Bulgarian Cycling Association
Jdn Rohde, Naddcia Ekopolis
Further information
More information is available from the ECF's website:
http://www.ecf.com/advocarv/eu-fundina-2/
Rue Franklin. 28 1000 Brussels, Belgium Phone: +32 2 B 8 0 9 2 74 Fox: +32 2 880 92 75
www.ecf.com
Page 8/8 | |
