Transcript Twinning Covenant Drafting Seminar

Turkey’s regional development
on the road to the EU
September 2006
Rationale of regional Policy and
Background


The guiding concepts behind regional policy in the EU
are those of solidarity and balanced growth. On a
practical level this involves the provision of Community
level assistance to help the most disadvantaged regions
overcome their handicaps and thereby reduce
disparities in levels of development and standards of
living between more affluent and less developed regions.
Regional disparities in Turkey are extremely high with
some of the poorer regions having less than 10% GDP
of regions with the highest level per capita.
Page 2
Instruments of solidarity




Financial assistance is granted under
multiannual regional development programmes
negotiated between the regions, the Member
States and the European Commssion. This
assistance is delivered through the Structural
Funds and the Cohesion Fund
European Regional Development Fund (ERDF)
European Social Fund (ESF)
European Agricultural Guidance ad Guarantee
Fund (EAGGF)
Financial Instrument for FisheriesGuidance
(FIFG)
Page 3
Role of Structural Funds and
cohesion fund





ERDF: Finances infrastrcuture, local development
projects productive investment for job creation, and
assistance to SMEs. Delivery is at NUTS II level.
ESF: its main purpose is to fund training and recruitment
schemes to assist adaptation of the workforce to
changes in the labour market and help unemployed to
get back into back into labour market
EAGGF: finances rural development measures mainly in
lagging behind regions
FIFG: finances structural reform in the fisheries sector
Cohesion fund: special solidarity fund that helps finance
projects in environment and transport networks in MS
whose GDP is 90% below EU average.
Page 4
Priority Objectives of Structural
Funds and Community İnitiatives


Objective 1: to assist the development of regions
(NUTS II level) whose average per capita is less
than 75% that of the EU average (70% of budget
=135.9 million)
 Objective 2 assistance to regions (excluding
objective 1 regions) facing structural difficulties
to assist in the process of social and economic
conversion(11.5% of budget
Objective 3 all measures for human resource
development (excluding objective 1 regions)
Page 5
Agenda 2000 reform of Regional Policy



Structural assistance must be concentrated in the
regions whose development is lagging most behind
Simplification of structural policies with Member States
and regions taking control and directly administering
the funds provided by the EU. EU’s role reduced to
coordination and monitoring that EU funding is
properly used
Establishemnt of partnership between the European
Union, the Member States, the local authorities and
the private sector focusing on development strategies
defined to acheve Community level objectives.
Page 6
EU programmes in Turkey
before candidate country status




1996 Start of EU funding for Turkey under MEDA
Programme. Budget €33 mn, rising to €60 million in
1998.
All projects centralised with European Commission as
Contracting Authority
European Parliament decides that no projects should
involve the government
Projects implemented through NGOs and local
authorities (Mainly ad hoc projects, some in partnership with
Municipalities e.g. Sanliurfa Drinking Water Project and rehabilitation of
Balat and Fener districts of Istanbul)
Page 7
Key aspects of EU approach to
regional development funding




Participatory (or bottom up) approach to regional
planning with involvement of both public and
private sector local stakeholders.
Integrated programming based on SWOT
analysis and responding to local needs.
Funding directed primarily to the poorest regions
or those with special needs (e.g. structural
adjustment).
Capacity building at regional level to implement
programmes in a decentralised manner.
Page 8
Harmonisation with EU
Key driver for Turkish regional policies
 Creation of new territorial units
 Preparation of National Development Plan
 Creation of new structures at regional level
(PCUs, service unions, regional
development agencies)

Page 9
EU pre –accession programmes
in Turkey








End 1999 Helsinki summit: Turkey accepted as candidate country
for accession to EU
2002 adoption of Turkey Regulations for funding.
Decision to work with central government on EU funded
programmes.
Programmes geared towards alignment with the acquis ( National
Plan for the Adoption of the Acquis)
Regional development programmes required to fulfill requirements
of Chapter 21 (now 22) on Regional Policy
One third of funding to be spent on institution building
Turkey creates 26 NUTS II regions.
2003 Turkey moves towards decentralised implementation system
with the establishment of the Central Contracts and Finance Unit to
implement programmes according to EU procurement rules.
Page 10
Ongoing EU funded regional
programmes in Turkey




Gap regional development programme (2001
budget – MEDA regulation) – Budget €47
million (no Turkish co-financing)
Eastern Anatolia Development Programme
(2001 budget – MEDA regulation – Budget €45
million (no Turkish co-financing)
Samsun, Kastamonu, Erzurum NUTS II
Regional Development programme - Budget
€52.33 million (of which EU contribution €40 )
Malatya, Ağrı, Konya, Kayseri NUTS II regional
Development Programme – Budget €90.62
million of which EU co-financing € million
Page 11
Need for capacity at local level to implement
regional development programmes
Typical areas covered:
 Infrastructure projects
 Human resource development
 Income generation and employment creation
 Agricultural extension and support
 Tourism development
 Rural development
 Environmental protection and quality of life
Page 12
IPA and the Structural Funds after
2007
IPA is part of a proposal for a reformed
cohesion policy in the EU and cannot be
understood in isolation from it
 Major changes proposed for Structural
Funds 2007-2013

Page 13
The 3 political priorities

The increase in disparities in the context of enlargement leads
to concentration of cohesion policy on 3 priorities:

The convergence of countries (GNI < 90% of the average) and
regions (regional GDP < 75% of the average) and the regions
concerned by the statistical effect, that is 33% of the population of
the Union

Regional competitiveness and employment: reinforce attractiveness
and ensure that socio-economic changes are anticipated in other
regions, without Community zoning

European territorial cooperation: Cross-border, trans-national and
inter-regional
Page 14
Re-orientation of Cohesion
Policy based on the priorities of
the Union (Lisbon & Gothenburg)

Articulation around the 3 pillars of
sustainable development:

Competitiveness: innovation, research,
education
and Accessibility

Employment and social inclusion

Environment and risk prevention
Page 15
The general principles of the
reform





A more strategic approach based on
Union priorities
Budgetary and thematic Concentration
Decentralised and Territorial
approach through greater responsibility
for countries, regions and towns
Simplification of management methods
Proportionality and efficiency of
control and monitoring
Page 16
A more strategic approach

Definition of Union priorities in the strategic
guidelines established by the Council

Translation by the Member States of these
Community priorities in a national strategic
reference framework decided by the
Commission

Operational implementation by means of
regional and thematic programmes
Page 17
Concentration

Budgetary resources are concentrated on those who
need them most (budgetary concentration):

78,54% in favour of convergence:



Less-developed regions
Less-developed countries
regions concerned by the statistical effect linked to enlargement
(drop in GDP per capita)


17,22% in favour of regional competitiveness and
employment

3,94% for cross-border and trans-national cooperation
Page 18
Significant simplification

3 funds in place of 6: ERDF, Cohesion Fund, ESF

A single fund by programme

Integration of projects of the Cohesion Fund in multi-annual
programming

Identical management rules for the Cohesion Fund and the
Structural Funds

Programming and financial management by priority and no longer by
measure

National eligibility rules for expenditures and no longer
Community rules
Page 19
What is IPA

An integrated Pre-Accession Instrument to
assist candidate (Croatia, Turkey) and
potential candidate (Western Balkan)
countries

Replaces Phare, ISPA, SAPARD and
Turkey pre-accession instruments, as well
as the CARDS instrument
Page 20
The current pre-accession
instruments
 Phare:
implementation of the acquis,
investments in economic and social cohesion,
cross-border co-operation
 ISPA:
environment
and
transport
infrastructure – precursor of Cohesion Fund
 SAPARD:
CAP
development
–
Development plans
 Turkey
acquis
and
precursor
of
Rural
Rural
pre-accession instrument: same
scope as Phare
Page 21
The new pre-accession instrument

Pre-accession aid performs a bridiging function
which aims at progressively adopting the rules
and principles of Structural Funds/Rural
Development Fund management, by making
available assistance to them through the
components of Reg dev/Rural Dev/HRD.
Candidate countries are thus given the
opportunity to “practice” the Community rural
and cohesion policies by applying rules as
closely as possible to the Structural and Rural
Development funds before accession.
Page 22
Aims of IPA
Potential
candidates:
support
for
participation in the Stabilisation and
Association process all the way to their
future accession
Candidate countries: full pre-accession
support to help countries to:
 Adopt and implement the acquis
 Implement EU funds on accession
Page 23
Structure of IPA
Five components:
a) Transition
Assistance
and
Institution
Building
b) Regional and Cross-Border Co-operation
c) Regional Development
d) Human Resources Development
e) Rural Development
Page 24
Regional development component

Aims to support policy development as well as
preparation for the implementation and
management of the Community’s cohesion
policy and in particular the preparation for the
European Regional Development Fund and
Cohesion Fund.
Applies to Candidate Countries only
 Emulates ERDF and Cohesion Fund
approach


Finance investments
assistance
and
technical
Page 25
Programming




Assistance based on European Partnership (Annex I)
or Accession Partnership (Annex II)
Indicative multi-annual framework with allocation of
funds per component/country
Programmes on the basis of a single framework per
country and per component. TR authorities to prepare a
coherent strategıc framework (CSF) document following
preparation by EC of multi annual indicative planning
document (MIPD).
Programming for Regional, HRD and Rural
development components to emulate the relevant EU
Funds on accession
Page 26
Regional development operational
programmes
3 operational programmes
 Environment
 Transport
 Regional Competitiveness
Page 27
The future: more spending on
heavy cost investments


As the pre-accession support budget for Turkey
rises further fromunder regional development
will therefore focus on investment projects ( with
25% co-funding from national sources)
Much of this spending will go on heavy cost
investment to improve infrastructure such as
drinking water and sewage treatment facilities
and bring them up to EU standards.
Page 28
Important role for municipalities
in heavy cost investment
A project is currently under way to assıst
Turkey in
1) identification and prioritisation of infrastructue projects in the
field of water, waste, air and industrial pollution control
2) the development of an efficient financial mechanism for
financing projects related to EU environmental investment
heavy directives, which will include an analysis of the existing
funding mechanisms .
As the Municipalities are the main actors in the management of
environmental resources, they will be closely involved in the
consultation (survey ) phase, in the identification process, and in
proposing priority projects. The second part of the project also
includes a specific activity, intended to improve the ability of
Municipalities to efficiently and effectively manage solid waste,
wastewater and drinking water services.
Page 29
Rationale of Components


The rational of these components is that
Candidate Countries will be confronted with
exactly the same situation in the Community’s
agricultural and cohesion policies after
accession.
Under the regional development component this
means giving the beneficiary country the highest
possible approximation to Structural and Rural
DevelopmentFund practice under external Aid
Rules.
Page 30
Implementation and management
Implementation shall take place according
to the rules of External Aid.
 Components may apply different
implementation methods where this is
justified.

Page 31