15 REGIONS

1. 15 REGIONS EVALUATION OF THE MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS OF COHESION POLICY PROGRAMMES AND PROJECTS OVER THE LONGER TERM IN 15 REGIONS (1989-1993 TO THE PRESENT) Final Report Professor John Bachtler Professor Iain Begg Dr Laura Polverari Professor David Charles

2. Objectives and scope • OBJECTIVES • To examine the achievements of ERDF programmes and, where applicable, CF • To assess • programme relevance • effectiveness • utility of achievements • SCOPE • 15 regions of the EU15: • Objective 1/Convergence Regions • Phasing-in/Out Regions • Objective 2/RCE Regions

3. Methodology • Desk research • Fieldwork – 20-70 semi-structured interviews per region • Online survey • Quantitative analyses– productivity, employment, expenditure • Regional seminars • Project case studies

4. Challenges • Scope of research • coverage • timescale • Unavailability and deficiencies of data • financial allocations and expenditure • lack of regional breakdown for MOPs/NOPs • data quality • Establishing causalities

5. EQ1 – To what extent did the programmes address regional needs and problems over time?

6. Initial needs and evolution • Initial needs • Four broad types of, sometimes overlapping, needs: • major underdevelopment across all indicators • sparsity and peripherality • weak economic base • spatial and labour market disequilibria • Evolution of needs • improvement in basic infrastructure and services • varied evolution of most other themes • improved innovation, increased entrepreneurship or sectoral diversification often persists as need

7. Development of strategies • Approach to strategy • different interpretations of ‘strategy’ • explicit strategies vs. implicit strategies • initial focus on ‘tried and tested’ interventions, e.g. infrastructure. • Thematic trends over time: • greater emphasis on R&D&I, from 2000 • more support to entrepreneurship/SME interventions • increased emphasis on urban regeneration, community development • continuity in tourism, environment, CBC • more region-specific and coherent strategies, but….. • ……strategies largely not underpinned by theory

8. Relevance • High relevance – programme strategies relevant across the study period: • Sachsen-Anhalt, Norte, Galicia, Burgenland, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, Ireland and Nordrhein-Westfalen • Moderate to high relevance - programme strategies relevant for much of the time, or for some areas of need: • Basilicata, Campania and Andalucía • Moderate relevance - programme strategies only partially relevant • Dytiki Ellada, Itä-Suomi, Algarve, Aquitaine and North East England

9. Expenditure • Objective 1/Convergence - predominance of infrastructure spending • Phasing-in/out - infrastructure focus in 1989-93 but diversifying to enterprise support and, later, structural adjustment and innovation • Objective 2/RCE- shift in focus from enterprise to innovation

10. EQ2 – To what extent do ERDF achievements meet regional objectives and needs in each programme period and across all periods?

11. Achievements • Inevitable data problems • Most visible results from infrastructure and other capital projects • True especially of earlier programming periods • Lower achievements in economic development - fragmentation • Findings highlight problems with strategies, such as: • Additionality and deadweight, especially in enterprise support • Ensuring critical mass and scale of investments • Long-time scales for bringing some projects to fruition - may span programming periods • Lack of allowance for sustainability (maintenance and running costs) • Aggravating territorial imbalances in some regions

12. Effectiveness • The extent to which programme objectives were achieved: • achievement of programme objectives • achievement of targets related to measures and priorities • Cohesion policy intervention 1989-2012 effective on the whole • Yet substantial variation by period, theme and region • ‘Effectiveness’ not meaningful where objectives/targets not adequately set • Effectiveness higher for large-scale physical investments: • Infrastructure, environmental improvements and business infrastructure • Results for business support and social cohesion more disappointing • Possible explanation is relative ease of setting targets where projects are known and costed at programming stage • Improvements in effectiveness over time in most regions • Except Norte and Campania (due to unrealistic objectives)

13. Utility • The extent to which programmes led to impacts in line with ‘society's needs & the socio-economic problems to be solved’ • Infrastructure-led strategies addressed basic needs • Less successful in stimulating economic transition notably in less developed regions • Better targeting improved utility of enterprise and innovation • Gains visible over time • Little improvement on social problems in industrial regions • Tourism and cultural interventions in many CS a critical but not sufficient dimension of development

14. Overall contribution of ERDF programmes to regional development • Example of being transformative across the board: • Ireland, affecting nation as a whole • Significant overall transformative effect on region: • Characterised by successful sequence of development • Algarve, Andalucía and Galicia • Enabled transformation in specific fields: • Aggregate effect less evident • Most of other regions • Significant effects on key elements of development • Less-well funded regions such as Burgenland or Itä Suomi • Key message is that scale of funding matters

15. EQ3 –What are the main lessons learnt on the effectiveness and utility of ERDF interventions in each region?

16. Lessons learnt: Programme design • Validation of the current programming approach – and need for it to be extended to promote: • scenario-thinking • contingency planning , sensitivity analysis • a long-term approach to competitiveness to ensure resilience • realism of expectations – timescales, resources • explicit recognition of constraints • external coherence and synergies

17. Lessons learnt: Strategic planning • Effective strategy development requires programme authorities to invest in analytical and planning capacity: • conceptual thinking • evidence-based approach • framing of ERDF programming within wider policy effort • capture societal and institutional facets of economic development • exposing planning and decision-making to external challenge

18. Lessons learnt: Results-orientation & achievements • Improvement in results-orientated management: • start with an underlying development theory • identify the necessary (pre-)conditions • periodic monitoring of the effects of measures and projects on end-users with • ad hoc fieldwork investigations • qualitative as well as quantitative monitoring • encourage rigorous, objective and ambitious evaluation • evaluate the programmes ex post • focus on the achievements realised and how they met objectives (effectiveness) and changed the region (utility) • foster debate on achievements

19. Lessons learnt: Investment choices & achievements • Learn lessons from past experience with investment choices and achievements with respect to: • operational costs of capital projects • overprovision of certain forms of intervention • complementing public investment in innovation with private sector support • integrated strategies for enterprise support • sufficient scale for community development activities

20. Implications for the future of Cohesion policy • The study has provided clear evidence to support the direction of Cohesion policy in 2014-2020 • However, there are significant obstacles • changes to policy priorities and management practices takes time • major effort is required to build administrative capacities and promote learning to deal with the deficits identified • primacy of the need to encourage a more sophisticated approach to long-term strategic analysis and planning • need to think strategically beyond 2020: regional roadmaps for countries and regions – where are the problems? what needs to be done?

21. Thank you for your attention…. Evaluation Available at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/information/evaluations/index_en.cfm#15 RegionalPolicy