Transcript Managing authorities working with cities Regions for Economic Change 17th February 2009 Peter Ramsden Pole Manager.

Managing authorities working
with cities
Regions for Economic Change 17th
February 2009
Peter Ramsden Pole Manager
Who are the designated management bodies?
•
•
•
•
•
Managing Authority
Certifying Authority
Competent Body for Payments
Intermediate Bodies (as appropriate)
Audit Authority
• National Strategic Reference Framework coordination
body
• Responsible bodies for ‘horizontal’ policies
–
–
–
–
State Aids
Public Procurement
Environment
Equal Opportunities
Key Management Authority functions
• Partnership management
• Communications and publicity
• Project pipeline
• Project appraisal and selection - contracting
• ‘Client’ management / aftercare
• Programme monitoring
• Coordination with other programmes
• Financial management
• Servicing the Monitoring Committee
Programme management
Programme Monitoring Committee
Managing
Authority
Intermediate
Bodies
Beneficiaries
Projects
Schemes
European
Commission
Certifying
Authority
Payments to Beneficiaries
may be via a designated
‘competent body’, depending
on
the
Operational
Programme concerned
Delegation of tasks
MAs may delegate tasks but not responsibility to Intermediary
bodies – e.g. to:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
provide application and claims guidance
provide support to applicants
receive and register eligible applications
appraise projects
ensure compliance of application and claims
monitor projects’ progress
monitor financial profiles
support the partnership
support committees
Sectoral programme structures
OP
Industry
Priority
Measures
SMEs
Finanical
initiatives
Innovation
Climate for
Investment
URBACT II
• An exchange and learning programme for cities. Supported out
of the European Territorial Cooperation Objective under the
ERDF 2007-2013
• Strategy to implement the EU Cohesion policy and the LisbonGothenburg Strategy for competitive, socially integrated and
sustainable cities
• Main objectives are to improve the effectiveness of urban
development policies and strengthen the common concept of
integrated urban development
• To date there are 21 thematic networks and 6 working groups
plus two pilot networks. At least 253 project partners, over
3000 members of Local support groups
URBACT methodology
Exchange Model
Making the best
of the city
Place
Cooperation and coproduction
with inhabitants
and communities
Interactive approaches
Simultaneous actions
5-Partnership
2-Atmosphere
People
C
A
3-Project
Conflictive
Cooperation
B
Institutions
1- Community
4-Savoir-faire
6-Contracts
(A, B, C)
Innovations in URBACT 2
• A 4 or 6 month development phase in which
partnership is completed, baseline study carried
out and work programme drawn up
• Local support groups formed in Partner cities
• Local action plans developed
• The ERDF (and some ESF) Managing authorities
implicated in all Fast Track projects and majority
of others
Different levels of engagement of MAs
with URBACT projects
• Occasional involvement – attending kickoff and final meeting, information sharing
• Active involvement – attending all meetings
• Learning apart, learning together
• Membership of local support groups
URBACT ll Policy context:
Mainstreaming URBAN
• Urban strands in all three Cohesion Policy Objectives
• Mainstreaming of the URBAN Community Initiative
(Art. 8 of Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006)
• Operational Programmes are not required to include specific
urban actions
• Challenge of including local actors into the implementation
• But many programmes are organised in a sectoral
hierarchic logic
• This is a challenge for the integrated approach
• Need for cooperation between cities and their Managing
Authorities to improve programme quality and performance
Potential benefits for
cities
– Exchanging knowledge and good practice
– Drawing on urban expertise (local support group,
Lead Expert, thematic experts, URBACT support)
– Understanding needs, building capacity to act, and
experience of implementation
– Enhanced relationships with MAs
– Learning with others by peer review of LAPs
– Learning by building local support groups
– Better prepared project applications for funding
– New policies developed in partnership with MAs and
parent ministries
MA ERDF
Veneto
Timis
oaria
MA ESF
Veneto
Lead Partner
Venice
MA
MA Romannia
Nea
Alarkan
nasoss
komotin
i
Torin
o
MA
ESF MA
Andalusia
Sevilla
MA
Piemont
e
Vantaa
MA ERDF
Andalusia
MA
Lead Expert
DG
REGIO
Thematic
experts
Ambitions of cities working
with MAs
• Develop an adult relationship between cities
and MAs
• Conduit up and down (for ideas, projects and
policies)
• Influence the policy and design of
programmes
• Access financing packages
• Learn to build urban policy
• Matching the demand and offer
• Influence the Terms of Reference for calls for
proposal
City ambitions
• Building capacity and understanding
constraints
• Finding out about funding opportunities
• Management approach
• Learning about city needs
• URBAN mainstreaming
Opportunities for Managing
Authorities to learn from
URBACT experience
• Learning about concrete urban operations
• Getting in touch with local actors,
• Opportunity to support integrated urban
operations
• Testing new governance structures in the
cooperation with cities
• Converting good models into general practice
• Forming learning networks with other Managing
and authorities and implementing bodies
• Facilitating the implementation of OPs
Issues
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Complex structures – in cities and in MAs
Need for variable geometry
MAs need to ensure fairness (across all cities)
No ‘one size fits all’ URBACT projects are very diverse
in objectives and working methods
Political issues between levels of governance
Integration is difficult across sectoral programmes or
priorities, and across funds
Degree of access to programmes varies
Need for capacity building - on both sides
[email protected]
www.urbact.eu