Transcript Document

A Community Initiative
Baltic Sea Region INTERREG III B
Neighbourhood Programme
Belarus
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
Germany
Latvia
Lithuania
Norway
Poland
Russia
Sweden
Content of the presentation
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Programme area
Programme thematic content
Programme management
Programme budget
Project partnership and management
Project budget
Project implementation
Good practice
Main challanges
INTERREG III B programmes
Alpine Space
Baltic Sea Region
Archimed
North West Europe
North Sea Region
CADSES
Atlantic Area
Westers
Mediterranean
South West Europe
Northern Periphery
Transnational cooperation on spatial
planning and regional development
Most remote
regions
(3 programmes)
Cooperation area:
 Denmark
 Sweden
 Finland
 Germany (North – East)
 Estonia
 Lithuania
 Latvia
 Poland
 Norway
 Belarus (North – West)
 Russia (North – West &
Kaliningrad)
Strategic objective:
Strengthening
economic, social and spatial cohesion
by promoting
transnational economic relationships
in order to reach an increased level of BSR integration
and to form a region with sustainable growth prospects.
Programme priorities
Priority 1:
Promotion of spatial development approaches and
actions for specific territories and sectors
Priority 2:
Promotion of territorial structures supporting sustainable
BSR development
Priority 3:
Transnational and bilateral institution and capacity
building in the Baltic Sea Region
Programme priorities
Priority 4 – border regions (committed)
Priority 5:
• Cross-border (INTERREG III A) priority
Estonia-Latvia-Russia (North)
Priority 6:
• Cross-border (INTERREG III A) priority
Latvia-Lithuania-Belarus (South)
Priority 7:
Technical Assistance
Measures in Priority 1
Priority 1: Promotion of spatial development
approaches and actions for specific territories and
sectors
Measure 1.1: Supporting joint strategies and implementation
actions for macro-regions
Measure 1.2: Promoting sustainable spatial development of
specific sectors
Measure 1.3: Strengthening integrated development of
coastal zones, islands and other specific areas
Measures in Priority 2
Priority 2: Promotion of territorial structures
supporting sustainable BSR development
Measure 2.1: Promoting balanced polycentric settlement
structures
Measure 2.2: Creating sustainable communication links for
improved spatial integration
Measure 2.3: Enhancing good management of cultural and
natural heritage and of natural resources
Measures in Priority 3
Priority 3: Transnational and bilateral institution and
capacity building in the Baltic Sea Region
Measure 3.1: Promotion of transnational institution and
capacity building
Measure 3.2: Bilateral maritime cooperation across the
Baltic Sea
Examples of eligible activities:

Transnational studies and strategies

Preparation of investments

Transnational exchange of experience

Training of professional staff

Workshops, seminars, networking, etc.
BSR INTERREG III B management structure
Monitoring Committee
....
Supervising the programme
Steering Committee
Selection of projects and funding decisions
National
Sub-committees
Investitionsbank Schleswig-Holstein
Managing
Authority
Paying
Authority
Joint Secretariat
day to day programme management
Project
Partner
Project
Partner
DE
S
PL
LT
LV EST RU
BY
Project’s
Lead Partner
Project
Partner
DK
Project
Partner
FIN
Information and
support
Municipalities &
Regions
N
Programme funding
ERDF funds:
Norwegian national:
Total programme funding:
149.0 M EURO*
6.0 M EURO
155.0 M EURO
All ERDF available for III B priorities was committed in 1-8
rounds
*including the additional funding from the new MS and IIIA priorities
Partnership (minimum requirements)
• partners from three different countries
• two countries should be financial contributors
• one partner from EU
The Lead Partner Principle (example)
Lead Partner Principle
full financial and legal responsibility for:
•
•
•
•
•
project management system
submitting Application Form
signing the Subsidy Contract
reporting of the project progress
requesting payments
Examples of partners that can apply for
funding from the BSR INTERREG III B
National, regional and local public authorities:
• Ministries;
• regional councils;
• municipalities, etc.;
Examples of partners that can apply for
funding from the BSR INTERREG III B (2)
Institutions that could be considered as “Public equivalent
bodies”:
•
•
•
•
•
associations;
academic institutions;
research institutes;
foundations;
NGOs and non-profit organizations (communitybased, humanitarian, industrial, cultural, etc.);
• development agencies, etc.
BSR INTERREG III B Project Budget
1. ERDF contributions
up to 75% for Objective 1 regions
up to 50% for other regions
2. National co-funding
Partner’s own funding – eg. public funds at national, regional
or local level
Project implementation
European Commission
Joint Secretariat / PA
submit
Payment Request
Joint Secretariat / PA
Lead Partner submits activity
and
audited financial report
Submit activity and
audited financial reports
to Lead Partner
PA - Paying Authority
Europ. Commission
effects
payment to PA
Lead Partner
Project Partners
Paying Authority effects
payment to Lead Partner
Lead Partner effects
payments to Project
Partners
Reports
Payments
Good practice at strategic level
• A joint pool of ERDF funds on a joint bank account
without national “sub-accounts”
• Tasks of Managing and Paying Authority carried out by
single, competent institution which is not a public
authority
• Lead Partner principle (clear responsibilities between MA
and project)
• Joint management structures/bodies including a strong
joint transnational Joint Technical Secretariat
• National sub-committees responsible for disseminating
information at national/regional level
• Work of Monitoring and Steering Committees facilitated by
various task forces.
Good practice at operational level
General tools:
• English as official programme language
• An up-to-date website as most important info tool
• Project database
Related to project life cycle:
• Pro-active project development - Seed Money, Partner
Search Forum, Information Seminars, Individual Consultations
• Application, assessment and approval –Joint and transparent
decision making (unanimous
decisions, clear documentation
of assessment and approval)
• Pro-active project implementation - Lead Partner Seminar,
Seminars for financial managers and auditors, Quality
Workshops, Publicity and communication training etc.
Challenges for project partners
Problem:
Way out:
“Simple” Objective 1 programmes
preferred (infrastructure
investments)
Convince decision makers of
added value of transnational
networking and cooperation
Culture and language barriers
Learn English!
High technical and quality
requirements of transnational
projects
Invest in human resources –
training of qualified staff in
public administrations
Low awareness about the
programme
Increased information activities
at national and programme level
Considerable administrative
workload
Make use of standardized tools,
training, support actions!
Significant competition among
projects
… lobby at your decision
makers….?!
Thank you for your attention!
www.bsrinterreg.net