Axis 4 of the EFF: The Leader Approach in European Fisheries
Areas…
Marseille, 26th SeptemberMonica Burch, FARNET Support Unit
2
FARNET and the EU FLAGs (Fisheries Local Action Groups)
success stories and lessons learnt from LEADER dissemination into fisheries areas
introducing the LEADER approach to EU urban policy (ESF, ERDF)?
future plans for CLLD in 2014-20 in the EMFF (European Maritime and Fisheries Fund)
The Leader Approach in European Fisheries Areas…
3
Sectoral challenges
Fisheries areas challenges
dwindling fish stocks
fishing overcapacity
lack of competitiveness
Vulnerability of small scale fisheries
lack of organisation and integration
within the sector and along the chain
Rising costs (especially fuel)
Low attractivity of employment in
fisheries
urbanisation pressure
environnemental degradation
peripheral areas
depopulation in some small
fishing communities
lack of economic alternatives
A fisheries focus
4
The sustainable development of fisheries areas
€600M or 13% of the
EFF (€826M total public)
Average budgets: €3.3
million – but huge range
(€200,000 - €17 million)
Differences in strategies,
partnerships & areas.
Nearly 2/3 have formal
cooperation with
LEADER.
Over 300 groups with integrated local development strategies,
implemented by bottom-up partnerships in 21 countries
5
An Axis 4 example...
6
Forms of LAG-FLAG coordination
EFFEFF EARDFEARDF ERDFERDF ESFESF
LAG/FLAGLAG/FLAG
Seperate selection committees
One LAG-FLAG Common accountable body
FLAGFLAG LAGLAG ERDFERDF ESFESF
ACCOUNTABLE BODY
ACCOUNTABLE BODY
LAG / FLAG cooperation
7
Other formal coordination
Defining areas that fit strategies
Boundaries for coastal strips and rivers
Boundaries for dispersed fishing communities
Other forms of coordination
• Board members - cross partners
• Common admin and fin. support
• Shared staff
• Shared premises
• Technical coordination meetings
• Agreed criteria and procedures
Same or similar boundaries
Demarcation
LAG/FLAGLAG/FLAG
How to achieve synergy & respect specificity?
8
different forms of cooperation : Adapt model of cooperation to needs
advantage when building on prior experience
But not force things into artificial structures (divided up into too small packages
(eg merely distributed to Leader groups) – need to look at all the alternatives &
chose option best suited to area. Ideally no blanket rule at national level
Ensure fit between strategies and programme goals (budgets, types of
measures, criteria…..)
Adapt boundaries to fit what you want to achieve (FI, IT, FR…)
Build partnerships from allies required to achieve change.
.
A few lessons…
9
introducing the LEADER approach to EU urban policy (ESF, ERDF)?
reticence on the part of urban policies (partly because sums of money much bigger – and already many actors)
Need to convince the cities if it is to appear in Operation Programmes (Ops)
CLLD often used in deprived areas… but can also be used in other types of areas (industrial districts, knowledge districts, city centres…) or specific target groups or by theme (employment, entrepreneurship, low carbon transport, food, water…)…
10
Expectation for Axis 4 to be strengthened
Option for multi-funding (but rules need to be really simple within any ONE fund)
flexible tool for fisheries communities - possibilities for fisheries focused strategies & broader coastal development (link water-land)
Future plans for CLLD in 2014-20 in the EMFF
11
Thank you for your attention!
FARNET Support Unit36-38 rue Saint LaurentB - 1000 Bruxelles+32 2 613 26 50