“We do not do so much work on infrastructure any more. Everything that we could say, we had said: that Europe needs a better infrastructure. A lot of that is being done. On the whole, we have transferred our interests to an organization called ECIS, which is in Rotterdam. They do a lot of good work. But a lot of this is now in detail. I think the issue in principle is there. The Channel Tunnel has been built, the high-speed trains are being built, the crossing from Scandinavia to Denmark is being built...”
Keith Richardson, Secretary-General of the ERT1
The ERT established the European Centre for Infrastructure Studies (ECIS) in order to ensure the implementation of the infrastructure policies it had successfully put on the European political agenda. Since then, the European Commission and ECIS have worked in tandem to reach their common goal: large-scale construction of trans-European motorways, high-speed trains and other transport infrastructure.
The ERT founded ECIS, officially a research bureau, after the Trans-European Networks (TENs) had already been firmly established on the EU political agenda. Although the European Parliament had never been consulted, the European Commission was working hard on the implementation of the massively expensive and environmentally destructive TENs. The remaining barriers to the fulfilment of the ERT’s infrastructure ambitions were now mainly financial and technical.
The idea of setting up a new institution that could speed up the construction of TENs was launched at a conference in Lisbon in June 1992. According to the founder of ECIS, Umberto Agnelli of Fiat, “there was an immediate surge of support from the international audience of decision makers, which included representatives from all twelve EC governments, European transport and research associations, industry and – not least – from several members of the European Commission.”2 Encouraged by this positive response, Agnelli started selecting the members of this new body in the autumn of 1993. By the beginning of 1994, a secretariat had been opened in Rotterdam, the Netherlands.3 ECIS membership includes regional and national governments, municipalities, EU institutions, research institutes, banks and corporations.4
Since its creation, ECIS has worked closely with the European Commission to prepare the ground for TENs. The institute prepares studies on behalf of the Commission, and organizes conferences “to educate Commission officials” and others.5
Following the endorsement of the Delors White Paper by heads of state in December 1993, TENs moved into the fast lane. The Commission gave the Christophersen Working Group6 the mandate to identify a list of priority projects and also to find solutions for potential barriers to speedy construction of the projects. ECIS was “helping out” in this process.7 For example, ECIS proposed that a ‘single agent’ be set up for each transborder project, with the authority to raise private capital and press for the implementation of the project.8 The next year, “encouraged by the European Commission”, a High Level Panel on Private Finance was established. Chaired by ECIS founder Umberto Agnelli and ECIS board member Sir Alistair Morton, the Panel’s mission was to present proposals to the decisive EU Summit in Essen in December of 1994.9
When the Christophersen Group concluded that the ‘regulatory framework’ of decision-making was “a major delaying factor” for TENs projects, the Commission asked ECIS to organize a workshop on these bottlenecks” in decision-making. At this workshop in Rotterdam, “representatives from the private sector, member states and EU organizations examined ideas which could accelerate the implementation of TEN projects.”10 The helping hand of ECIS during this period was not in vain: at the December 1994 Essen Summit, EU leaders endorsed “the idea of public-private partnerships, and of ‘a single agent’” for cross-border projects.11 Both principles are used today in the implementation of TENs projects. Which powers would be given to these new supranational ‘single agents’ and how to ensure democratic control over them was not made clear. The Essen Summit also allocated substantial new funds for TENs.
The next major success for ECIS, and a classic example of its close rapport with the European Commission, was achieved in late 1995. In December of that year, Transport Commissioner Neil Kinnock presented a study on the economic advantages of the PBKAL high-speed train network (including the Amsterdam-Paris and Brussels-Cologne tracks).12 Based on the report, he informed the media that these high-speed train links would bring much higher economic growth than was commonly assumed. The author of this report, Lost and Found: the Community Component of the Economic Return on the Investment in PBKAL was Dr. Rana Roy of ECIS.13 Not one journalist seems to have checked into which independent research institute came to these optimistic conclusions, and how.
Lost and Found’s November 1996 follow-up, The Macroeconomic Effects of the PBKAL, has also been written on behalf of the Commission, which uses the report to promote investments in TENs. Both the special report by the Commission to the European Parliament on the job creation effects of TENs14 and the European Commission’s 1996 report on TENs were largely based on this ECIS study.
ECIS represents the interests of European transnational corporations by lobbying for the expansion of all kinds of transport infrastructure. In fact, ECIS talks much more about high-speed trains and freight railway infrastructure than about roads. This is not because ECIS is uninterested in new roads, but probably rather because there is no great need to push governments to build new motorways; over the past few years, there has been no lack of political will or funding for roads.
High-speed train links are something relatively new and very expensive, and the same is true for international freight rail links like the Dutch-German Betuweline.15 In addition, the fact that the high-speed trains utilize international corridors means that there is a need for ECIS’s helping hand. Despite the positive public image enjoyed by high-speed trains, the expansion of this mode of transport will not bring sustainable transport in Europe any closer. Apart from the destructive impacts that the new high-speed train tracks will have on nature areas all over Europe, high-speed trains guzzle enormous amounts of energy. These very high transport expenses result in reduced public budgets for other kinds of public transport.
With a total estimated budget of 400 billion ECU, TENs are the largest transport infrastructure programme in history. The more than 150 projects include motorways, high-speed train links, goods railway lines, airport extensions and waterways.
The TENs programme has been heavily criticized by the environmental movement. Nature protection organizations warn against the destruction of more than 60 natural sites of European importance. Although the environmental movement lobbied the European Parliament extensively in order to avoid an environmental disaster in the adoption of TENs, very few of their demands were met, and those that were adopted were seriously watered down. A Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) is now required for TENs, but construction of projects can begin long before its completion.
TENs have played a major role in the EU’s job creation initiatives, such as Santer’s Confidence Pact (see chapter 2.1). Apart from the immediate jobs which result from the pumping of billions of ECU into infrastructure building, the EU claims that the indirect effects through increased trade will create numerous employment opportunities. In its 1996 Annual Report, the European Commission published estimates of the job creation effects of the TENs projects. They claim that the 14 so-called super priority projects would result in between 130,000 and 230,000 new jobs, and that the entire TENs masterplan would create between 594,000 and 1,030,000 new jobs in Europe. Investments in the super priority projects and the complete TENs package would require a dizzying 90 billion and 400 billion ECU respectively.
These figures are to a large extent based on ECIS calculation. On the other side, the environmental movement has criticized the EU’s belief in TENs as a job creator as being based on flawed assumptions. The report Roads and the Economy, published in 1996 by the European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E), summarises the academic discussion and comes to the conclusion that “the assumption that road building generates long term employment cannot be justified on the basis of available evidence and research”.16 Today, however, the construction of TENs projects is still delayed, mainly due to the restrictive public finances that are an ironic side effect of the tight budgetary policies necessitated by the EMU project.
ECIS wants more of every type of infrastructure, as transnational companies have almost unlimited growth potential in freight transport in the years to come. The future economic model for TNCs includes a European-wide and increasingly global market which operates under so-called ‘lean production’. The internal market and its low transport prices have already resulted in an enormous increase in long distance transport of goods through Europe. One of the myriad of absurd transport examples is German milk which is carried by truck to Greece, made there into feta cheese, and then brought back to Germany and other Northern European countries for consumption. New infrastructure will only encourage this kind of transport. It will moreover make it possible for TNCs to further centralize their production and distribution centres, resulting in the loss of jobs and the transport of goods over increasing distances. Lean production involves the subcontracting of parts of the production process to a large number of suppliers. It also includes ‘just-in-time’ deliveries of the minimum required stock to shops and warehouses.17 Products are increasingly assembled and distributed from a dwindling number of distribution centres, which cover larger and larger markets.
To make this system of production possible, enormous amounts of new infrastructure are needed for quick and cheap long-distance transport. The road network, especially in northwestern Europe, is seriously congested – and in densely populated regions even huge expansions of the road network will not be sufficient to satisfy industry’s demands. So other modes of transport are also required, such as rail infrastructure and waterways for long distance transport of heavy bulk goods. Thus the strong ECIS support for the Betuweline and similar projects.
In general, the ERT’s wishes for new infrastructure are also linked with the fact that its members have a direct interest in continued increase in the use of cars. The ERT has many car producers and oil companies among its ranks, as well as corporations which supply the car industry with different parts. The construction of high-speed train links will also directly benefit Siemens, Asea Brown Boveri and many other ERT companies producing high-speed trains and related technology.
1. Personal interview with Keith Richardson, Brussels, 21 February 1997. |back to text|
2. ERT, ECIS – an Invitation to Participate, 1993. |back to text|
3. “At a suitable distance from Brussels, the region hosts first-rate research institutions and provides model solutions to the complex problems of collective investment in a modern society.” (source: ECIS leaflet, 1994) |back to text|
4. ERT, ECIS – an Invitation to Participate, 1993. The strategy behind setting up ECIS had already been introduced in the 1989 ERT report The Need for Renewing Infrastructure in Europe. In this report, the ERT had emphasized the importance of bringing together the public sector, industry, banks, service enterprises and private institutions to overcome obstacles to infrastructure implementation. |back to text|
5. For example, DG VII (Transport) requested a December 1994 seminar for an audience of 45 representatives from Central and Eastern Europe. The seminar, entitled Attracting Private Finance for Transport Infrastructure in Central and Eastern European Countries, was financed by the EU’s Phare programme. |back to text|
6. The chairman of the this working group, Commission Vice-President Henning Christophersen, left the European Commission in 1995. In 1996, he became a member of the board of ECIS. The Christophersen Working group consisted of civil servants from the EU member states. |back to text|
7. ECIS Newsletter, October 1994. This monthly newsletter looks at progress on TENs and presents news on infrastructure projects all over Europe. |back to text|
8. “An entity operating under a private legal statute would define projects and then seek funds from both the public and private sector [...] even where – as in the case of high-speed trains – the public stake may approach 70%”, ECIS Newsletter, October 1994, p.2. |back to text|
9. These proposals were published by ECIS under the title Making It Happen: Building and Financing TENs. Another ECIS publication in the busy autumn of 1994 was the November report Investment in Transport Infrastructure: The Recovery in Europe, which was discussed the following month at a workshop in Rotterdam with “a panel of senior government officials from the UK, France and the Netherlands”. |back to text|
10. ECIS Newsletter, October 1994. |back to text|
11. ECIS Newsletter, January 1995. |back to text|
12. PBKAL refers to the Paris-Brussels-Cologne-Amsterdam-London high-speed train connections which the EU hopes can become the base of an EU-wide network. |back to text|
13. ECIS Newsletter, December 1994. The report was heavily criticized in the 1995 Greenpeace study Missing Greenlinks. |back to text|
14. European Commission, The Likely Macroeconomic and Employment Impact of Investments in Trans-European Transport Networks, (SEC(97)10), 1997. |back to text|
15. The Betuweline is the goods rail road connection from the harbour of Rotterdam to the German Ruhr area. |back to text|
16. T&E, Roads and the Economy, Brussels, 1996. |back to text|
17. Mikael Nyberg, Green Capital – a report on large corporations and the environment, (to be published by Friends of the Earth Sweden). |back to text|