Workshop 1: PROJECT EVALUATION

1. Workshop 1: PROJECT EVALUATION • Quantification during project evaluation is essential for reducing the bias in the decision making process • Cost-benefit analysis is a key ingredient when judging projects and deciding on co-financing rates • Cost-effectiveness analysis cannot be considered a substitute of CBA in all cases. It can be useful when dealing with environment related projects • CBA or any other mechanism are only one criteria on the basis of which project selection must take place • Make sure that projects are sustainable

2. Workshop 1: PROJECT EVALUATION (cont.) • Grants never transfer a white elephant project into a viable project • Co-financing rates should be determined according to performance indicators, such as contributions to the real economy and financial performance of projects • When doing “back of the envelope” analysis and thereby using a “rule of thumb” approach, this might help in identifying good or bad projects early on. This analysis / approach is not a substitute for thorough CBA whereby important elements such environmental impact play a role.

3. Workshop 2: Programme Level Evaluation Achieving a Balance (1) • Hard rationale for evaluation – efficiency, opportunity costs, market failures; (Economic Analysis Skills) • Securing “buy in” and installing an “evaluation mentality” among wide stakeholder partnership; (People Skills)

4. Workshop 2: Programme Level Evaluation (cont.) Achieving a Balance (2) • Context of fast change “multiplicity and heterogeneity” with multi-level, multi-actor, multi-object components; (People & Institutional Skills) • Demand for robust, useable common standards and frameworks and devices to control variety and produce communicable results; (Technical, Analytical Skills)

5. Workshop 2: Programme Level Evaluation (cont.) Achieving a Balance (3) • Need to create and sustain open programme learning with self imposed obligations; (People and Institutional Skills) • Space for managers to manage and be accountable for spend against consistent and followed through measures; (Management and Financial Control Skills)

6. Workshop 3 : Policy EvaluationPolicies covered by papers : Sustainable regional development Gender equality Environment Information societyIs there a thematic evaluation “trap’? Need to include an assessment of regional developmentUse and interpretation of indicators. Judgement. Aggregation.“Impossible” evaluation questions ? Need to focus on policy issues.

7. Workshop 4: Usefulness of impact analysisProvide an analytical framework to economic impacts Design alternative scenarios Identify trade-offs for policy decisions

8. Workshop 4: Usefulness of impact analysis (cont.)DiversityTheoretical frameworkLevel of aggregationGeographical / sectoral focusTop-down vs. bottom-upMethods of estimationData requirements

9. Workshop 4: Usefulness of impact analysis (cont.)User perspectiveAppropriateness Realism Accuracy Judgment

10. Workshop 4: Usefulness of impact analysis (cont.)ChallengesMore interaction between experts and users Exploit complementarities between distinct approaches (macro aggregate vs. regional) Development of microstudies as inputs for macro-models Promote new approaches in line with EU policy agenda, e.g. sustainable development

11. Workshop 5: Capacity building • Institutional and intellectual dimension • Involves a wide range of factors • Issue at the national level • Needs guidance, support and training • Needs to be inclusive • Hindered by gaps • Benefits from sharing experience • Needs clarity of purpose?

12. Workshop 6: Developing Standards for Evaluation and Ethical Issues Rapporteur: Dr. Petri Virtanen, Net Effect Ltd (Finland) & Finnish Evaluation Society

13. Workshop 7 : Learning from and using evaluations Evaluation without LEARNING is pointless Learning should occur between ALL STAKEHOLDERS Learning is MUTUAL Learning makes use of SUCCESSES and FAILURES Learning includes TACIT knowledge Learning should include the MISSING LINKS Learning should include the PAST, PRESENT and FUTURE

14. Workshop 8 : Evaluation, Accountability and Performance Accountability and learning at all stages in life cycle and all types of evaluation Ownership of evaluation is based on partnership – Commission, Member State, Region, Local level Quantified and Qualitative information – need for better balance Democratic accountability and learning politicians  civil society

15. Workshop 8 : Evaluation, Accountability and Performance (cont.)  Transparency from start – dissemination and communication  Incentives – link to processes  More focused ex post evaluationsthemes quantitative / qualitative balance