European Regional Policy 2007-2013: Regional Competitiveness Objective

1. European Regional Policy 2007-2013: Regional Competitiveness Objective From Objective 2 to Regional Competitiveness: Experiences & Lessons Turin, 15-16 September 2005 Professor John Bachtler European Policies Research Centre University of Strathclyde, Glasgow

2. European Policies Research Centre • specialises in comparative research on public policy throughout Europe • focus on monitoring and analysis of regional development policies at European and national levels • policy advice and exchange of experience through two networks: • EoRPA (European Regional Policy Research Network) - national government departments responsible for regional policy – 10 countries • IQ-Net (Improving the Quality of Programme Management) – regional and national Structural Fund programme management authorities from 12 Member States www.eprc.strath.ac.uk/iqnet/

3. IQ-Net partners – regional and national programme management authorities • Belgium • Min of Flemish Community • Austria • Lower Austria • Styria • Denmark • North Jutland/Nat Agency • Italy • Lombardy • Tuscany • IPI/MAP • Finland • Western Finland Alliance • Ministry of the Interior • Hungary • National Office for • Regional Development • France • DATAR/CNASEA • Spain • País Vasco • Germany • North-Rhine Westphalia • Saxony Anhalt • Sweden • Norra Norrland • Norra • United Kingdom • North-East England • ODPM • Wales (WEFO) • Western Scotland (SEP) • Greece • Min of Economy & Finance

4. From Objective 2 to Regional Competitiveness: Experiences & Lessons • Objective 2 programmes and regional competitiveness issues: review of trends • Programme management and delivery: strengths and weaknesses • Looking forward: pressures and opportunities • Looking forward: questions and issues

5. Objective 2 programmes and regional competitiveness:review of trends • Relationship between Structural Funds and Lisbon • Priorities for support • business competitiveness • employment • knowledge economy and innovation • sustainable development • accessibility

6. Objective 2 programmes and Lisbon:shared objectives • some congruence between the objectives of the Lisbon agenda and Structural Funds objectives (economic growth, high employment, low unemployment, environmental sustainability) • most Lisbon investment themes are present in SF programmes (employment, IT infra, R&D, HRD, business development, social inclusion, environmentally sustainable development) • share of SF support allocated to fields directly relevant for Lisbon is high in O2 regions, frequently above 50% (much less in O1 regions – 18-33 percent)

7. Objective 2 programmes and Lisbon: differences and tensions • Tensions • economic growth vs economic and social cohesion • different priority to higher aggregate EU rate of growth • important spatial dimension to Structural Funds • Structural Funds decentralised, Lisbon is top down • prioritisation of investment

8. Objective 2 programmes and regional competitiveness: business development Trends – shifts from…… • general business investment support (often through grant schemes), especially for new start-ups and SMEs • provision of premises, creation or equipping of business centres • site (re)development / rehabilitation ......towards more support for • inter-firm cooperation / business networks • advisory/counselling services to business (esp. strategic planning, internationalisation) • integrated, multi-service business support within business centres • targeted start-up support (university graduates, young entrepreneurs, women, innovative activities, employment-intensive growth areas) • micro-enterprises and community enterprises • access to finance Problems with business demand because of downturn in the business cycle

9. Objective 2 programmes and regional competitiveness: employment Trends – shifts from…… • general skills-based training measures (employed / unemployed) • sector-specific training programmes • investment in the training infrastructure ......towards more support for • targeted training on specific groups eg. women, youth, disabled, immigrants (ltd) • development of new training methods (ICT teaching techniques, distance learning, HRD management) • training related to innovation and ICT Community development remains important for urban programmes – mix of social, employment and economic measures – more cross-cutting approaches Problem of some programmes (c.40%) being without ESF component

10. Objective 2 programmes and regional competitiveness: innovation & the knowledge economy Trends – shifts from…… • investment in RTD infrastructure (science parks, technology centres, university facilities) • incentives for business R&D and innovation • business-research links ......towards more support for • integrated support (regional innovation system approach) – research services, entrepreneurship, training, business advice • broadening of business-research links  innovation networks • ICT: access/use by businesses (e-commerce), communities, public sector • access to specialist finance (risk capital, venture capital, seed capital) • environmental RTDI • human capital – training of researchers

11. Objective 2 programmes and regional competitiveness: sustainable development Trends – shifts from…… • environmental infrastructure projects eg. waste-processing • clean-up and rehabilitation of derelict / contaminated sites • protection /enhancement of areas of ecological interest ......towards more support for • company-based environmental and energy management • development of green areas, outdoor space, natural parks, protected areas • investment in renewable energy sources • sustainable development management/monitoring projects • preservation of biodiversity / wildlife

12. Objective 2 programmes and regional competitiveness: accessibility Trends – shifts from…… • basic transport infrastructure – road and rail networks, ports, telecoms ......towards more support for • secondary infrastructure links (feeder roads, bottlenecks, missing links) • development of multimodal and intermodal transport facilities • logistics projects to improve use of physical/ICT infrastructure • improvement of transport-related services (eg. port services) • information exchange networks (eg. joint municipal computer systems)

13. Objective 2 programmes and regional competitiveness: overall trends • More strategic approach to interventions • Better integration of support – linking interventions together eg: • RTDI – technology centre facilities, with technology transfer, brokerage, access to finance, training, community awareness etc • Human resources – competence development combined with interfirm cooperation, ICT • Greater targeting – identifying and addressing gaps in the system; focusing support on specific groups • Territorial focus – in some programmes • Investing in capacity to support/manage interventions

14. Programme management and delivery Implementation of Structural Fund Programmes - strengths and weaknesses: • management • delivery – project generation, selection, appraisal • monitoring

15. Programme management - trends • Shift in programme management responsibilities towards the regions • Delegation or decentralisation of aspects of programme delivery to regional and local intermediaries • Streamlining of administration eg. use of measure managers • Use of larger or framework projects • Better information exchange within programme networks

16. Programme management -challenges • Strategic constraints: • fragmentation of eligible areas • relationship between EU and domestic policies • Coordination problems increasing – vertically and horizontally • Mixed record on ERDF:ESF coordination • Need for investment in capacity building - resources inadequate for coordination / implementation • Involvement of the private sector

17. Project delivery - trends • Improved implementation systems – more rigorous project selection procedures, better financial control and evaluation and improved monitoring systems • Emphasis on project quality and stronger underlying strategic rationale (legacy) • Better communication with partners (part driven by publicity and communication) – increase in intensity and sophistication of communication • Progressive shift to ‘pro-active management’ – part driven by strategic ambitions, part defensive to avoid problems with n+2

18. Programme delivery - challenges • Standard measures going well, but difficulties with implementing more innovative types of measures • Impact of n+2 – pressure to spend has impact on project quality in some MS • Over-ambitious systems - problems of over-complex project application, selection and monitoring systems • Accessibility problems, eg. measures structured to suit administrative bodies rather than beneficiaries • Under-used/exploited area is project follow-up and aftercare • Poor integration of environment into project application process in some programmes

19. Programme monitoring • Step change in quality of monitoring – ambitious measures to improve: • monitoring infrastructure • indicator frameworks • monitoring practices • capacities • Despite investment, monitoring remains a weakness in many programmes related to: • partial and unreliable data from beneficiaries • differences in interpretation among implementing bodies • systemic problems

20. Looking forward: external pressures • Less money • New thematic priorities • No EU-level geographical targeting • New financial management arrangements

21. Looking forward: internal pressures Evolution of added value since 1989 suggests the need to rejuvenate some Objective 2 programmes: Added Value • “accommodation” • (1989-93) 2. “development and innovation” (1994-99) 3. “consolidation” (2000-06)

22. Looking forward: new opportunities • Advanced process of regional restructuring / diversification platform for development • Stronger regional institutions – devolution / deconcentration of economic development • Networks of intermediaries – economic, social and environmental actors • Legacy of partnership – taken on within domestic policies • Greater national and EU policy coherence • shared commitment to Lisbon agenda (to greater or lesser extent) • process of formulating a shared agenda – CSF/NSRF • concrete steps being taken to align EU and domestic policy priorities

23. Looking forward: challenges Questions/issues: • regional policy vs sectoral policy priorities? • spatial focus of interventions – broad/narrow; areas of opportunity/need; urban/rural? • limits to Lisbon (potential conflicts, capacity issues?) • adapting programme management – fewer resources, need for coordination? • supportive SF Regulations? • implications of State aid reforms?