Transcript Slide 1

Territorial Development
SAWP Meeting, 3 July 2012
Peter Berkowitz, Head of Unit DG REGIO C.1
1
CLLD – The LEADER Acquis
• Significant experience to build on: LEADER (EAFRD), Axis
4 (EFF), Urban Community Initiative (ERDF) and EQUAL (ESF)
• Bottom-up approach: implemented by local communities
through public-private partnerships
• Focused on specific sub-regional territories, which can be
urban, rural, fisheries dependent, cross-border or a mix of
several
• Carried out through integrated and multi-sectoral local
development strategies
2
CLLD Approach
• This local development approach is obligatory for EAFRD
and optional for ERDF, ESF and EMFF
• There are also possibilities to carry out other forms of local
development
under ERDF, ESF and EAFRD, based on
experience of MSs
3
CLLD - Local Development Strategies (LDS)
• Selection criteria for LDS are defined by MS
• Three options for delivery:
 joint funding
1. one area – one strategy,
2. integrated funding for functional areas
 mono-funding
3. one area – one Fund
• Approval of LDS only after the OP submission;
several rounds of calls for applications are possible
Deadline: 31/12/2015



4
CLLD - Lead Fund
• Tool to help the management of jointly funded LDS. It
covers all management costs (running, animation and
networking costs)
• The use of Lead Fund is optional for jointly-funded strategies.
Each managing authority remains responsible for the
operations funded with their OP
• Joint selection committee set up by the respective Managing
Authorities for the LDS, takes the formal decision on the
Lead Fund, taking into account: the activities foreseen in the
LDS, type of the territory, availability of funding from different
Funds and and the willingness of the LAG to use a lead fund
5
CLLD - The Content of LDS
• Description of the integrated and innovative character
of the strategy and a hierarchy of the objectives:
strategy should address development needs and potential of
the area covered, as well as the linkages between the sectors;
contain
new approaches to tackling problems, clearly
indicating the intervention logic
• Including clear and measurable targets for outputs and
results: using at least common indicators defined in the Fund
specific Regulations, linked to types of actions funded under
the LDS. Possibility to develop shared indicators for CLLD
6
CLLD - Selection of Local Action Groups
(Art. 30)
•
Selection criteria for LAGs should be defined at national
level taking into account the content of the delegated act
(Art. 29.6) and existing local development structures and
processes
•
Draft Delegated Act: population: 10.000 – 150.000
inhabitants, (exceptions justified in the programmes; area
of limited size: sub-regional for LAG and smaller than
NUTS 3 for FLAGs) which is coherent from a geographical,
economic and social point of view
7
CLLD - Tasks of LAGs
• CPR contains the minimum tasks to be delegated to LAGs, MS
can extend this list
• Full delegation of tasks is also possible– LAG as an
Intermediate Body
• Important: LAG should draw-up project selection criteria,
assess and select operations for financing, the eligibility of
which can be verified by the responsible body, where relevant
• Decision making level: neither the public sector nor any single
interest group shall represent more than 49% of the voting
rights
8
CLLD - European Territorial Cooperation
programmes
• CLLD is an option for ERDF, incl. ETC programmes
• LAG has to be composed of representatives of at least two
countries
• LDS to be selected by the Monitoring Committee.
Operations to be selected by LAG
• Example: CLLD in twin cities located at the border
9
CLLD - Negotiations of EAFRD provisions
on LEADER
Council WP on Rural Development
• Nov. 2011: Presentation of the legal proposal (art. 28-31 CPR +
art. 42-45 EAFRD)
• Jan 2012: 2nd presentation focused on “LEADER as part of CLLD”
• May 2012: Non-paper “Application of the multi-fund approach to
CLLD from the perspective of LEADER ”
• Presidency compromise text with technical amendments /
improvements of wording to Art. 43, 44 and 45 of EAFRD
10
Specific Rules on CLLD in the EAFRD
• Possibility of additional tasks for LAGs to those in Art. 30 CPR [art.
42(1)]
• Possibility to request advances if allowed by the RDP (max. 50%
of the budget for running costs and animation) [art.42(2)]
• Preparatory support: definition provided + possibility for LEADER
start-up kit [art. 43(1)]
• Co-operation activities: definitions provided + administration rules
for MAs [art. 44]
• Running
costs
and
animation:
definitions
provided
+
empowerment for DA as regards animation [art. 45]
• Support for LAGs by networking structures at the EU and national
level [art. 52(3)(g) and art. 55(3)(b)]
11
CLLD - Fund specific provisions under EMFF
• Criteria for the definition of fisheries areas
- “area with sea or lake shore or including ponds or a river estuary with a
significant level of employment in fisheries or aquaculture and
designated as such by the Member State” (Art. 3.5)
- generally smaller than NUTS 3 (Art. 60)
- MS to include selection procedure & criteria in OP
• Features of LDS (Art. 61)
• Tasks assigned to FLAGs incl. requirement for specific
selection body for EMFF supported projects (Art. 62)
• Specific objectives for LDS (Art. 65)
• More detail on eligible costs (preparatory support (Art.
64), running costs and animation (Art. 67)
• Rules for cooperation activities (Art. 66)
12
Integrated Territorial Investment
(Art 99, CPR)
•
ITI is a tool which facilitates integrated investment for the benefit of a
particular geographical area - mechanism for the set-up of flexible
"sub-programmes"
•
It is meant to be used where:
•
There is an integrated territorial strategy to underpin investments (at any subregional level)
•
The implementation of the territorial strategy requires integrated investment from
more than one priority axis (or operational programme)in a coordinated manner
•
There is no formal involvement of the local community – an ITI and the
underpinning strategy can be set up and implemented top-down
•
There are alternatives to ITI in the "toolkit" provided (e.g. a specific
OP, integrated operations, "multi-investment-priority" priority axes)
13
Integrated Territorial Investment (2)
(Art 99, CPR)
• Each managing authority remains responsible for their OP
 Close coordination between MAs is necessary
 Practical arrangements at national/regional level can be
found as MA tasks can be delegated
• ITI can be set-up both at the beginning and during the
programming period
• ITI implementation tasks can be delegated to any
competent legal entity and, in the case of Article 7 ERDF,
shall be delegated to the municipality or another
appropriate territorial entity concerned
14
ITI. Entry point for programming:
Thematic
dimension:
Territorial
dimension:
Concentration on Europe 2020 objectives
Smart growth
Sustainable growth
Inclusive growth
Research &
Innovation
ICT
SME
Low-carbon economy
Resource efficiency
Risk prevention
Sustainable transport
Employment
Social inclusion
Combating poverty
Education
Integrated strategies and measures
Cities and urban areas
City-regions, metropolitan areas
Rural areas, etc.
Governance
mechanism:
I
T
I
15
Priority axis 1 (ESF):
Promoting employment
and supporting labour
mobility
EUR 50 million
Priority axis 2 (ERDF):
enhancing the
competitiveness of SMEs
EUR 50 million
Priority axis 3 (ERDF):
supporting the shift
towards a low-carbon
economy in all sectors
EUR 50 million
ITI FOR THE INTEGRATED
DEVELOPMENT OF
CITY X
EUR 310 million (ERDF+ESF)
Priority axis 4 (ERDF):
action to improve the
urban environment,
including regeneration of
brownfield sites and reduction
of air pollution
EUR 40 million
Priority axis 5 (ESF):
Investing in
education, skills and
life-long learning
Priority axis 6
(ERDF): Developing
education and
training
infrastructure
EUR 50 million
Priority axis 7
(ESF):
Promoting social
inclusion and
combating
poverty
EUR 20 million
EUR 50 million
16
ITI and CLLD
ITI (ESF, ERDF, CF)
CLLD (CSF Funds)
Multisectoral, integrated approach to territorial development – investments based on a
territorial strategy
Strategy is elaborated by the
region/municipality (no formal community
involvement)
The territorial strategy is elaborated
bottom-up by local communities: cannot be
imposed if there is no local initiative
The strategy can be implemented by the
MA or another body. Certain delegation of
tasks is obligatory under Article 7 of ERDF
The strategy is implemented by LAGs with
strict balance of representation.
Delegation of certain tasks (in particular
project selection) to LAGs is obligatory
Involves combination of funds from multiple
priority axis (or operational programmes)
In the case of ERDF and ESF, CLLD is
implemented within a single investment
priority
All types of investment
Community-defined projects, mostly of
small scale
No specific methodology
Methodology set out in regulation
17
Urban Development (Article 7, ERDF)
• An integrated approach to urban development is obligatory
for all MS: minimum allocation = 5% of ERDF at national
level (can include a contribution from several operational
programmes)
• Delegation of management to cities is obligatory, but the
extent of delegation may vary (similarly to CLLD)
 Minimum: elaboration of selection criteria and project
selection, possibly complemented by an eligibility check by the
MA
 Maximum: full delegation, city becomes an intermediate body
• The text will need to reviewed in the light of changes made
in the programming and thematic concentration blocks
(content of the PC, OP, possibility for "multi-investmentpriority" priority axes)
18
The Urban Development platform
(Article 8, ERDF)
•
Promoting the practical implementation of the urban dimension in
direct dialogue with cities
•
No project funding!
•
Exchange of experience and capacity building
(e.g. conferences, working groups for specific issues, best
practice, etc.)
•
Target group:
 Cities implementing integrated urban development strategies
Cities implementing urban innovative actions
 Laboratory for new cohesion policy instruments
 No overlap with URBACT, CoR, Eurocities, etc.
19
Urban Innovative Action
(Article 9, ERDF)
• Up to 0.2% of the total ERDF allocation (at EU level)
= ca. 370 Mio. € (2014-2020)
• Direct management by the Commission
• To promote innovative and experimental approaches and
solutions in the field of sustainable urban development
• Possible for all thematic objectives of cohesion policy
• For example: forward-looking and cutting-edge studies,
pilot projects and demonstration projects of EU interest
(innovative character, transferability)
20
Territorial Development
Thank you for your attention!
21