Presentation on the New EU Funding Programme 2014-2020

1. Session 4/2
The Future of
Structural Funds
2014-2020
Patrick Willcocks
Visiting Teaching Fellow
School of Business

2. Stop Press
https://audioboo.fm/boos/1950241-eu-commissioner-influx-ofromanians-and-bulgarians-not-a-reality
http://www.euractiv.com/specialreport-industrial-renaiss/eu-eyessofter-climate-policies-news-533721
http://www.euractiv.com/specialreport-industrial-renaiss/eu-triesrevert-de-industrialisa-news-533704
http://www.euractiv.com/specialreport-enablingtechnolog/kroes-future-going-grow-roses-news-533725
http://www.euractiv.com/infosociety/usage-data-illustratesfailure-e-news-533586

3. Objectives
By the end of this session you should understand
– The lead up to the new programme
– The focus of the new Programme 2014-2020
– The main geographical foci
– Including Resources
– Strategic Direction
– The UK direction

4. KEY BACKGROUND WORK
• The Barca Report 2009
● EU2020
●
launch 2010
5th Cohesion Report 2010

5. The Barca Report 2009
need for significant change
- primarily place based
- more strategic direction
- concentration of limited priorities
- more evaluation/output related
- transitional regions

6. Fifth report on economic, social
and territorial cohesion
‘Cohesion policy should
continue to play
a critical role in these difficult
times, in order to deliver smart,
sustainable and inclusive
growth, while promoting
harmonious development of
the Union and its regions
by reducing regional
disparities.‟

7. Fifth report on economic, social
and territorial cohesion
KEY RESULTS
 Reinforcing Strategic Programming
 Increasing thematic concentration
 Strengthening performance through
conditionality
 Improving evaluation
 New financial instruments

8. Fifth report on economic, social
and territorial cohesion
KEY RESULTS

Reinforcing partnership

Reducing Administrative burden

Architecture of Cohesion Policy

9. LOBBYING

10. LOBBYING
1. Compulsory urban earmarking in the
mainstream programmes.
r
2. Tackling the realities in all our cities
3. Cities at the table: strengthening multi-level
governance beyond the regions
4. Thematic concentration supporting new
partnerships
5. Financial engineering to design instruments
with direct access for cities
6. Conditionality: keeping it urban and integrated

11. THE NEW PROGRAMME

Agreed budget

Regulations for the whole programme

Regulations for ERDF

Regulations for ESF

Regulations for the Cohesion Fund

12. THE NEW PROGRAMME – How the
Commission Sees it – 10 key elements
Appropriate levels of investment in the regions
2. Targeted growth
3. Accountability and results
4. Pre-conditions for funding
5. Coordinated action
6. Simplification of procedures
7. Expanded urban dimension
8. Cross-border cooperation
9. Consistency and coherence
10. Financial instruments
1.

13. THE NEW
PROGRAMME

14. THE NEW PROGRAMME
Three main geographies
Less Developed Regions – equivalent to Convergence
 Transition Regions – these are NEW
 More Developed Regions – equivalent to Competitiveness
Plus
 Cohesion Fund
 Territorial Co-operation


15. How will funding be allocated?

16. The New Progamme – ERDF and
ESF Allocations

19. More coherent use of available EU funds
The Golden Thread
2007-2013
2014-2020
Lisbon Agenda
EU2020
Regulations
Regulations
Community Strategic Guidelines Common Strategic Framework
National Strategic Ref Frame
Partnership Contract
Operational Programmes
Operational Programmes
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?
│
19

20. The Golden Thread
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?
EU2020
Far more detailed than Lisbon strategy – 7 flagship programmes
underneath each with targets
Common Strategic Framework
Co-ordinates ERDF, ESF EAGFF etc – one set of rules
Partnership Contract
Much more detailed than the NSRF,. With national targets and meeting key
areas as outlined in the National Reform Programme
Operational Programmes
More focussed, ex ante conditions – e.g.need smart specialisation strategy
│
20

21. A menu of thematic objectives
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
│
21
Research & innovation
Information and communication
technologies (ICT)
Competitiveness of Small and Medium-sized
Enterprises (SMEs)
Shift towards a low-carbon economy
Climate change adaptation & risk prevention
and management

22. A menu of thematic objectives cont.
6. Environmental protection & resource
efficiency
7. Sustainable transport & removing
bottlenecks in key network
infrastructures
8. Employment & supporting labour
mobility
9. Social inclusion & combating poverty
10.Education, skills & lifelong learning
11.Institutional capacity building & efficient
public administrations

23. Concentrating resources to maximise impact
Concentration of ERDF and ESF
│
23

24. European Social Fund (ESF)
2007-2013
2014-2020
Share of ESF within Cohesion Policy budget
25%
22%
Of total Structural Fund support (ERDF & ESF), ESF will represent:
 25 % in less developed regions
 40 % in transition regions
 52 % in more developed regions
│
24

25. Ex Ante Conditionality - Smart
Specialisation – new mantra

26. Smart Specialisation – new mantra

The European Commission wants national and regional authorities
across Europe to draw up research and innovation strategies for
smart specialisation.

Smart specialisation means identifying the unique characteristics and
assets of each country and region, highlighting each region’s
competitive advantages, and rallying regional stakeholders and
resources around an excellence-driven vision of their future.

It also means strengthening regional innovation systems,
maximising knowledge flows and spreading the benefits of innovation
throughout the entire regional economy.

27. Smart Specialisation – new mantra
RATIONALE
 To develop and implement strategies for economic
transformation
 To respond to economic and societal challenges
 To make regions more visible to international investors
 To improve a region‟s internal and external connections
 To avoid overlaps and replication in development strategies
 To accumulate a „critical mass‟ of resources
 To promote knowledge spillover and technological
diversification

28. European Social Fund (ESF)
Fully in line with the Europe 2020 strategy
 Promoting employment & supporting labour
mobility
 Investing in education, skills & life-long learning
 Promoting social inclusion & combating poverty
 Enhancing institutional capacity & efficient public
administration
│
28

29. European Social Fund (ESF)
Reinforced social dimension
 20 % of ESF allocations for social inclusion
 Greater emphasis on fighting youth
unemployment
 Mainstreaming & specific support for gender
equality &
non-discrimination
│
29

30. Simplification
Common rules - funds covered by Common
Strategic Framework
 Cohesion Policy, rural development and maritime &
fisheries policy
Option of multi-fund programmes
 ERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund
│
Streamlined delivery system
 Harmonised rules on eligibility and durability
 Greater use of simplified costs
 Linking payments with results
 e-Cohesion: “one stop shop” for beneficiaries
 Proportional approach to control
30

31. Reinforcing Territorial Cohesion
Focus on sustainable urban development
 At least 5 % of ERDF resources – expectation that
decision making is devolved down
Creation of urban development platform
 Networking between cities and exchanges on urban
policy
Innovative actions for sustainable urban
development
 Subject to a ceiling of 0.2 % of the annual funding
│
Areas with specific natural or demographic features
 Additional allocation for outermost & sparsely
populated regions
31

32. An investment-oriented policy
Promoting the use of innovative financing instruments
 Extending scope to all areas of investment
 Clearer regulatory framework
 10 % bonus for innovative financing instruments &
community-led development
 A range of options offering flexibility to programme
managers
Maximum co-financing rates
 75-85 % in less developed and outermost regions
 60 % in transition regions

│
32
50 % in more developed regions

33. New Partnership Delivery Mechanisms
„The multiple challenges confronting Europe – economic,
environmental and social – show the need for an integrated
and territorial place-based approach to deliver an effective
response.‟
Integrated Territorial Investment
Community-Led Local Development

34. New Partnership Delivery Mechanisms
– Integrated Territorial Investment

35. Cohesion Fund – much the same
Supports Member States with GNI/capita < 90 % of EU27
average
Investing in environment
 Climate change adaptation and risk prevention
 Water and waste sectors
 Biodiversity including through green infrastructures
 Urban environment
 Low carbon economy
Investing in transport
 Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-T)
 Low-carbon transport systems and urban transport
│
35

36. The New Progamme – Cohesion Fund
Allocations

37. Role of Partnership Contract/Agreement
An Agreement between member state and EC
 Outlining the issues that need tackling
 The number of Operational Programmes
(regional/National)
 The broad types of intervention
 The governance arrangements (including
delegation)
 Ex ante Conditions
 The outputs/targets
Draft Bulgarian Partnership Agreement

38. What’s the Impact in the UK

Less Developed Regions
 Transition Regions
 More Developed regions
 Cross Border Co-operation
 Transnational Co-operation
 Youth Employment Initiative
 Total
€2,4bn
€ 2.6bn
€ 5.8bn
€ 0.6bn
€ 0.25bn
€ 0.2bn
€ 11,8bn

39. UK REGIONS

40. What’s the UK’s thoughts

Consultation on developing ideas
 Working on the draft partnership contract at
the moment – been ongoing for over 12
months
 Are refusing to consult on draft partnership
contract document
 Will be consulting on the Operational
Programmes (OPs)
 Will be England ERDF and ESF OPs

41. HMG’s GROWTH PROGRAMME ORGANISING PRINCIPLES
Complex EU funds
packaged as a
coherent and
consistent
programme
National and
local priorities
aligned
Variable
geographies
BETTER
FOCUS
HIGHER
IMPACT
Local decision
making and
drive
Common
A single set of
standards and
INCREASED
targets and
transparent
GROWTH
milestones
accountabilities
across England
EU regulatory
Lower cost &
requirements
simplifies
met and financial
administration
risk minimised

42. INITIAL DELIVERY ARRANGEMENTS THOUGHTS
NOTE THIS IS ENGLAND ONLY
Growth Programme
(ERDF, ESF & EAFRD)
Rural
Development
Programme
(EAFRD)
Co-financing
Organisations
Local Growth
Teams
LEPs
Community Led Local
Development, including Leader and
FLAGs
Projects
Maritime and
Fisheries
Programme
(EMFF)

43. Role of Local Enterprise Partnerships

There are no regional organisations left to
deliver the funds (except London)
 So national ERDF and ESF programmes are
proposed
 Every LEP is putting forward its overall
strategy and its European funding strategy
 Some LEP‟s might want ITI‟s but CLG against
 Namely Core Cities, London and Cornwall?

44. Timetable from Now





Draft Partnership Agreement submitted to EC
Hopefully to be agreed shortly
Drafting Operational programmes –
Consulting in April 2014
Hope to be agreed autumn of 2014
But currently behind schedule

45. Greater Birmingham and Solihull
Local Enterprise Partnership
Draft submitted October 7th 2013
Final version January 31st 2014
Awaiting comments from BIS/DCLG
£238m allocation (plus £19m YEI)
Chosen 6 priorities
•
Innovation and R&D
£30m
•
Stimulating Business and Enterprise
£45m
•
Low Carbon and Resilient Places
£35m
•
Promoting Employment and Mobility
£36.5m
•
Promoting Social Inclusion and Employability £36.5m
•
Skills for Growth and Entrepreneurship
£36,5m

46. Greater Birmingham and Solihull
Local Enterprise Partnership

47. GREATER BIRMINGHAM AND SOLIHULL LEP
ISSUES
A Complicated Picture
• Straddling a transition and a
more developed region
• A young partnership with
little history of working
together
• Want an ITI –i.e. delegated
powers but CLG not keen
• Trying to co-ordinated with
neighbouring LEPS
• Overlap LEP issues

48. Role of LEPs - Issues

49. Role of Local Enterprise Partnerships
Issues

Many more LEPs than regions so may be
difficult to deliver – might not be cheaper
 These are not full partnerships – made up of
businesses and local authorities – will need to
bring in further partners – partnership
principle
 Seeking to write the national Ops on the basis
of 39 LEP plans – how is this possible

50. Role of Local Enterprise Partnerships
Issues
• Co-ordination of national policy say on
Smart Specialisation with LEP based work
will be problematic
• Disagreement with the Commission over
LEPs – over the issue of delegated powers.
• Many LEPs lacking in expertise and
resources to deliver these programmes

51. Conclusions

Clear that new funding programmes offers
– Greater Simplification
– Greater focus on key priorities
– Greater co-ordination between funds
– Still significant funds for the UK
– More devolved delivery proposed – but
uncertain how it will work in the UK