EUROPEAN REGIONALDEVELOPMENT FUND

State of Play and Perspectives

Michel LAMBLIN | Programme Director

Bergen – 14 June 2011

1. Programme rationale

2. State of play

3. Results and achievements

4. The future of interregional cooperation

Overview

1. Programme rationale

EU Cohesion and Regional Policy

Objective 1: Convergence

€ 282.8 billion

Objective 2: Regional Competitiveness

and Employment

€ 55 billion

Objective 3: European Territorial Cooperation

(including INTERREG IVC)

€ 8.7 billion

RE

GIO

NA

L / N

AT

ION

AL

PR

OG

RA

MM

ES

influence

1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale

5 Acronym final conference – Date Month Year

ERDF funding: €302M (out of a €321M total budget)

Subsidy rate : 75% - 85%

Eligible area:EU 27 & Switzerland & Norway

Governance:

• 1 Monitoring Committee

• 1 Joint Technical

Secretariat

• 4 Information Points

1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale

Overall Objective: Learning by sharing

Improve the effectiveness of regional development policies

by

Enabling exchange of experiences and knowledge

Matching less experienced and more advanced regions

Transfering good practices into mainstream programmes

in the fields of

Innovation and the knowledge economy

Environment and risk prevention

1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale1. Programme rationale

2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play

APPLICATION STAGE : four calls for proposals:

Two open calls for proposals carried out (2008 & 2009) (almost 1,000 = 2 x 500 applications received)

Third call dedicated to Capitalisation projects (2010) (29 applications received)

Fourth call dedicated to Regional Initiative Projects (2011) (365 applications received)

Total number of applications received: 1,394 involving about 14 000 partners.

2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play

A total of 122 projects, involving 1,332 partners (average of 11 partners per project)

82% of the EU 27 NUTS 2 regions represented (i.e. 223 out of 271)

Budget of EUR 202M out of EUR 302M ERDF already committed

RUNNING PROJECTS

2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play

22

26

12 1113

64 5

19

4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Inn

ova

tion

& R

TD

En

tre

pre

ne

urs

hip

&

SM

Es

Info

rmat

ion

S

oci

ety

Em

plo

yme

nt

&

hu

man

cap

ital

Nat

& t

ech

ris

ks;

clim

ate

ch

ang

e

Wat

er

man

age

me

nt

Was

te

man

age

me

nt

Bio

div

ers

ity &

n

atu

ral h

eri

tag

e

En

erg

y &

su

st

tran

spo

rt

Cu

ltura

l he

rita

ge

&

lan

dsc

ape

Nu

mb

er o

f p

roje

cts

Approved projects by sub-theme (1-3 Call)

Sub-themes of Priority 1 Sub-themes of Priority 2

2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play

2. Programme state of play2. Programme state of play

Characteristics of the fourth call: 355 applications, involving 3,821 partner organisations

56% of applications in Priority 144% of applications in Priority 2

33. Results and achievements. Results and achievements

Basis for analysis: 41 first call projectsBasis for analysis: 41 first call projects

Good practices identified Good practices transferred

6400 1650

Policy instruments addressed Policy instruments improved

2100 860

Reminder of INTERREG IIIC results (2002/2006 – 264 projects – 2634 Cities and Regions involved)

3. Results and achievements3. Results and achievements

Indicators All projects Priority 1: Innovation

Priority 2: Environment

N° of good practices identified

1,121 639 482

Good practices successfully transferred

29 15 14

A. Identification/sharing & transfer of good practices

3. Results and achievements 3. Results and achievements

A. Identification/sharing & transfer of good practices

Projects Examples on transfer of good practices

Priority 1: MINI EUROPE (Mainstreaming INnovative Instruments for SME development)

• Flevoland (NL) and North West England (UK) set-up the “summer entrepreneurship” initiative based on the experience of the Mid Sweden (SE)

• Maramures County (RO) set-up its first cluster in mechanical industries based on the knowledge of the partners in HU, IT and UK

Priority 2: FLIPPER (Flexible Transport Services and ICT platform for Eco-Mobility in urban and rural European areas)

The municipality of Purbach (AT) directly used the survey methodology about citizen’s needs developed by Livorno Transport Operator (IT) to identify users requirements that are useful to improve transport service design.

3. Results and achievements 3. Results and achievements

B. Exchange experience/improvement of knowledge/match less with more experienced regions

Indicators All projects Priority 1: Innovation

Priority 2: Environment

N° of interregional events organised to exchange and disseminate experience (average 11 events/project)

449 269 180

N° of participants in these events 10,529 6,399 4,130

N° of staff members with increased capacities (average 40 people/project)

1,639 1,025 614

N° of ‘spin-off’ activities resulting from the exchange of experience

23 22 1

3. Results and achievements 3. Results and achievements

B. Exchange experience/improvement of knowledge/match less with more experienced regions

Projects Examples of ‘spin off’ activities

Priority 1: ERIK ACTION (Upgrading the innovation capacity of existing firms)

• Banská Bystrica Region (SK) and Western Macedonia (EL) submitted a common proposal on research driven clusters in the wood sector to the FP7

• The ‘Fabrica Ethica’ transfer group within the project and 7 further regions developed a new cooperation on raising awareness to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) among SMEs

Priority 2: POWER Project partners decided to implement a new carbon reduction tool, through a CO2 calculator, in order to improve their energy saving during the cooperation.

3. Results and achievements 3. Results and achievements

C. Improvement of regional and local policies

Indicators All projects Priority 1: Innovation

Priority 2: Environment

N° of national/ regional/ local policies improved

50 42 8

3. Results and achievements 3. Results and achievements

C. Improvement of regional and local policies

Projects Examples

Priority 1: NEEBOR (Networking for Enterprises in the Eastern External Border Regions)

The Regional Council of North Karelia (FI) included a part on the development of cross-border tourism in its Regional Development Plan 2030, inspired by the Agency for Regional Development and Innovation in Bourgas (BG).

Priority 2: GRaBS (Green and Blue Space Adaptation for Urban Areas and Eco Towns)

The Regional Environment Centre for Eastern Europe (SK) succeeded in improving Bratislava’s Strategic Development Plan 2010-2020 by integrating climate change mitigation and adaptation issues and on creating an Adaptation Plan for the city.

1st call Capitalisation Projects: financial commitment

Provisional results achieved

ProjectsIVC ERDF spent

(EUR)Leverage

effect

Amount dedicated to the implementation of practices

(EUR)

B3 Regions 1.526 million x 307 = 468.6 million

ERIK ACTION 1.418 million x 17 = 24.5 million

ESF6 CIA 0.936 million x 55 = 51.3 million

ICHNOS 0.734 million x 0.9 = 0.688 million

RAPIDE 1.195 million x 18 = 21.2 million

PIKE 1.146 million X 6 = 7.2 million

TOTAL 6.955 million x 82 = 573.6 million

3. Results and achievements 3. Results and achievements

4. The future of cooperation 4. The future of cooperation

The INTERREG IVC Secretariat is working on the following ideas:

- at short notice (INTERREG IVC):

• simplification (administrative costs) – from 4th Call• thematic capitalisation at programme level (tbc) (2012/2015)

- next programming period (INTERREG VC?):

• improving INTERREG IVCo (s) type of projecto (s) target groupo priorities

• developping IRC among EU Regions • supporting Regional OPs with several tools developped under IVC• further projects:

o monitoring IRC beyond the programming periodo develop the exchange between MAs on a few horizontal matters

4. The future of cooperation4. The future of cooperation

RP

RP

RPRP(LP)

RP

PART 1- Cooperation (1–2 yrs):• Coordination (incl.

Monitoring of PART 2)

• Exchange of experience

• Transfer of good practice

• Action plan for implementation

PART 2 – Implementation (2-3 yrs)

• Implementation of

good practise identifiedROP ROP ROP ROP ROP

InterregionalCooperation Programme

InterregionalCooperation Programme

RegionalOperationalProgramme(ERDF, ESF, national or regional funds)

RegionalOperationalProgramme(ERDF, ESF, national or regional funds)

• finances PART 1• monitors PART 1• monitors PART 2

• finances PART 2• monitors PART 2

INTERREG C Project

Regional Partner

4. The future of cooperation4. The future of cooperation

A few words about EGTC:• when thinking of using EGTC to run a project, or a programme,

take care of the following aspects:

flexibility (labour laws)

reactivity (payment)

fiscality (VAT recovered? Tax on salaries?...)

=> which status applies in the country?

• an EGTC to invest together (waste or sewage treatment, tram, swimming pool, hospital or school…) YES !

• an EGTC as Managing Authority of EU programmes, beautiful !

• an EGTC to bear an international team or Secretariat, this has to be seriously examined in details…

Thank you for your attention !