1 / 16

Enhancing Cohesion Policy for Future EU Objectives: CPMR Proposals and Developments

This project focuses on developing and proposing enhancements to the post-2020 Cohesion Policy to align with EU objectives. It emphasizes the importance of regions and local authorities taking ownership of the EU agenda, mobilizing investments across Europe, and ensuring the effective functioning of the Single Market. Detailed proposals and positions are discussed in various meetings and position papers, addressing key areas such as simplification, territorial cooperation, financial instruments, partnership, and the European Social Fund. The aim is to strengthen the Cohesion Policy for the future, with a constructive approach to address challenges and opportunities.

rarrington
Download Presentation

Enhancing Cohesion Policy for Future EU Objectives: CPMR Proposals and Developments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Development of CPMR proposals for post-2020 Cohesion policyEurocities meeting26.04.2017 Nick Brookes Director for Cohesion Policy Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions

  2. ‘Principles’ position paper (Nov 2016) • The European project needs Cohesion Policy to achieve EU objectives across Member States and regions • Regions and local authorities need Cohesion Policy so that they take ownership of the EU policy agenda • The EU investment efforts need Cohesion Policy to mobilise investments across Europe’s territories • The Single Market needs Cohesion Policy to function effectively

  3. Detailed proposals (June 2017) Statutory meetings 2017 • JunePolitical Bureau (Rogaland, NO): CPMR position on post-2020 Cohesion Policy • October/November (Helsinki, FI): Analysis / Reaction to 7th Cohesion Report CPMR Cohesionpolicy meeting (Core Group) 16 May: discussion withEric Von Breska, Director for DG REGIO 6 discussion groups to feed in to JuneCohesion Policy paper: • Simplification (Provence Alpes Côtes D’Azur, FR) • Territorial Cooperation (Friesland/Noord Holland, NL) • ESF (Emilia Romagna, IT) • Partnership (Vastra Götaland, SE) • Territorial dimension (CPMR secretariat) • Financial instruments/EFSI (Mecklenburg Vorpommern, DE)

  4. Financial InstrumentsLead region: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern • Will bemostlikelystrengthened for the post-2020Cohesionpolicy • Best approachis constructive!: • Financial instruments best suited to particularsectors (i.e. innovation, low-carboneconomy) • No targetsfor financial instruments at programme level • Need for furthercapacity building

  5. Cohesionpolicy and EFSILead region: Mecklenburg-Vorpommern EFSI extendeduntil 2020… and mostlikely post-2020, soneed for constructive approach!: • Defineclearroles and boundariesbetween the twopolicies and opportunities for combination • Adressunevenplayingfieldbetween EFSI / Cohesionpolicy (e.g state aids) • Streamlined communication for EFSI and Cohesion Policy

  6. SimplificationLead region: Provence-Alpes-Côte d’Azur • Very broad area of work! CPMR work focused on: • Timing of adoption of the legislative proposal • Procedures to designate managing authorities • Cohesion Policy as other programmes (i.e. Horizon2020, with regards to State aid • Uncertainty created by the retroactivity of rules and guidelines • Need for auditors to work constructively and proactively with managing authorities

  7. Territorial CooperationLead region: Dutch provinces • Better articulation between three strands • More alignmentbetween programme area priorities and macroregional and sea basin strategies • Single set of rules and processfor ETC programmes • Needs-basedapproachto definethematicpriorities • Transitional cooperation programme between UK and EU Member States

  8. Partnership and MLGLead region: Västra-Götaland Pillar of Cohesionpolicy! Advanced in development: • Timelyadoption of legislation • Improvingquality of ‘informal’ involvementof partners • ERDF fundingimplemented at regionallevel • Improvealignmentstrategic documents Possibilities for the future: • Ex ante conditionalityto strengthenrole of the Commission guardingpartnership? • Positive incentives or ‘carrots’: i.e. benchmarking, awards for best partnerhsip, etc.?

  9. European Social FundLead region: Emilia Romagna • Survey with 30 CPMR regions on the future of the European Social Fund • Key messages arising from survey: • The ESF has an essential territorial dimension that mirrors areas of regional competence • Better coherence is needed between the European Social Fund and the European Semester • More flexibility for regional authorities will lead to efficiencies and cost savings in terms of ESF implementation • The Youth Employment Initiative should be integrated into the ESF

  10. Issues under discussion

  11. 1. Architecture of the policy • Not clearthat all regionswillbesupported in the future... • Ideagainingground: single category of regionsfor post-2020? • Pros: • Guaranteedcoverage for all Europeanregions • Simpler and more transparent • 2. Link with EU semester • A main priority for the European Commission • CPMR position: weacceptrelationship and wantit to be positive and constructive • Scenarios: • Cohesionpolicyfullysupporting Country SpecificRecommendations • - Cohesion Policy couldbeused as a ‘carrot’ to deliverrecommendations and carry out structural reforms

  12. Cohesion policy eligibility projections

  13. 3. Flexibility Elusive concept… differentmeanings Differentpossibilities to explore: • A single fund? • A single set of rules for all ESI funds? • A flexibilityreserve for managingauthorities? 4. More simplification… Some issues related to simplification needfutherreflection • Differentiation in the management, audit and control? • and if so, basedon whichcriteria?

  14. 5. Territorial dimension • Specificproposals to betterlink Article 174 to Cohesion Policy (islands) • Defendingspecificinterests of outermostregions (article 349) and NorthernSparselyPopulated Areas

  15. Manythanks for your attention! Nick Brookes CPMR Director nick.brookes@crpm.org www.cpmr.org

More Related