great expectations. perspectives of the regional development programme in romania from the point of...

.

Great expectations. Perspectives of the Regional development programme in Romania from the point of view of the potential future beneficiaries * by Biagio Perretti**•* This presentation represents the opinions of the author and not necessarily the official position of the Consortium implementing the FPTSF project.•** Phare Project: Programming and implementation of preaccess support for PHARE ESC and transition to Structural Funds. Romania. International consortium. lead partner FORMEZ Italy

1.1.Perspectives of SF Interventions in Perspectives of SF Interventions in Romania. The Regional Operational Romania. The Regional Operational Programme in the framework of the Programme in the framework of the strategic guidelines for 2007-2013 strategic guidelines for 2007-2013

2.2.Local needs, project ideas and perspectives Local needs, project ideas and perspectives from the point of view of potential from the point of view of potential beneficiariesbeneficiaries

3.3.Consistency of beneficiaries expectations Consistency of beneficiaries expectations and the EU strategic priorities for the next and the EU strategic priorities for the next programming periodprogramming period

4.4.Key issues for the future. Key issues for the future. 5.5.ConclusionsConclusions

Overview and IntroductionOverview and Introduction

The cohesion regions in The cohesion regions in RomaniaRomania

Regional development in Regional development in RomaniaRomania

* From: REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS IN ROMANIA by Maria Vincze Babeş-Bolyai University, Faculty of Economic Sciences Cluj-Napoca, Romania 2004

% financial allocation*

12184818112

* preliminary estimations

National emergencies reserve Territorial cooperation

Human Resources

Programmes Competitiveness

Transport - Environment Regional Development

Technical assistance

Operational programmesOperational programmes erdf-cf Romania erdf-cf Romania

Potential Beneficiaries Potential Beneficiaries involved in the surveyinvolved in the survey

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Municipality

County

Associat., Consor., NGOs

Chamber of Commerce

Branch of national body

Educational Institution

Number of Project ideas per Number of Project ideas per areas of interventionareas of intervention

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

transport

educational infrastructures

social services

Health services

environment

utilities

Grants for SMEs

SMEs services

industrial development

tourism

cultural heritage

Urban reabilitation

Financial weight of project Financial weight of project ideas per areas of interventionideas per areas of intervention

0,00%

5,00%

10,00%

15,00%

20,00%

25,00%

30,00%

35,00%

transport

educational infrastructures

social services

Health services

utilities

environment

Grants for SMEs

SMEs services

industrial development

tourism

cultural heritage

Urban reabilitation

Qualitative indicators of project Qualitative indicators of project readinessreadiness

Main categories of projecs

Involvement of stake-holders

institutional setting

PPP frameworks

technical projects ready

to starttransport *** *** n ***tourism- cultural ** ** ** ***educational infrastructures *** ** n *Health social services *** ** n *utilities environment ** ** * ***industrial infrastructures ** ** * **Urban reabilitation ** * * **Grants/ services for SMEs * * * *max:*** medium** low*

Availability of project ideas per programme priorities*

* Expected, still under negotiation

healthIndustrial

development

tourism

transport

urban restoration

other

Project ideas versus Strategic Guidelines

Projects per areas of intervention

Europe attractive places to invest and work

knowledge and

innovation for growth

More and

better jobs

the territorial

dimension of Cohesion

Policy ROP projects

transport * * Grants/ services f or SMEs * industrial inf rastructures * tourism-cultural * * Health -social services ** * Urban rehabilitation * **

NON ROP projects Utilities - environment* ** educational inf rastructures * ** max:*** medium** low*

Project ideas versus Strategic Guidelines

0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1

Europe attractive places toinvest and work

knowledge and innovation forgrowth

More and better jobs

the territorial dimension ofCohesion Policy

1.1.Focus on Entrepreneurship Focus on Entrepreneurship promotionpromotion

2.2.Tourism promotion for the Tourism promotion for the diversification of rural economydiversification of rural economy

3.3.Promotion of public private Promotion of public private partnerships for better public partnerships for better public services services

Opportunities for the implementation of the Lisbon strategy and strategic

guidelines in Romania

1.1.Adverse selection due to co-Adverse selection due to co-financing uncertaintiesfinancing uncertainties

2.2.Traditional approaches in Traditional approaches in innovative areasinnovative areas

3.3.Uncertainties in institution Uncertainties in institution building for programme and building for programme and project implementationproject implementation

4.4.Inertia effects bringing to focus Inertia effects bringing to focus on pre-accession limited fields of on pre-accession limited fields of interventionintervention

Treats for the implementation of the Lisbon strategy and strategic

guidelines in Romania

1.1.Information and capacity building at Information and capacity building at the level of beneficiaries.the level of beneficiaries.

2.2.Finalization of programme priorities Finalization of programme priorities and expected instruments and expected instruments

3.3.Fast clarification of institutional asset Fast clarification of institutional asset for programme managementfor programme management

4.4.Clear allocation of co-financing Clear allocation of co-financing responsibilities coherent to the responsibilities coherent to the prioritiespriorities

……Conclusions aConclusions annd future d future prospectsprospects

Perretti@unibas.itPerretti@unibas.it

Thank you for your Thank you for your attentionattention!!