KEY MESSAGES of the Polish Presidency Conferences in the field of Cohesion Policy

Transcription

1 of the Polliish Presiidency Conferences iin the fiielld of Cohesiion Polliicy

2

3 of the Polish Presidency Conferences in the field of Cohesion Policy The Polish Presidency of the Council of the European Union began at a crucial moment in the debate on the future of the Cohesion Policy. After four years of informal discussions, the Commission presented its communication on A budget for Europe 2020 on 29 th June launching formal negotiations on the EU policies and their budgets in the new Multiannual Financial Framework. Later on 6 th October, the proposal legislative package on Cohesion Policy was published revealing details of the Policy scope and implementation to be discussed and agreed upon by the Member States. The new challenges that Europe is facing as well as the constraints in national budgets caused by the recent economic crisis determined the Polish Presidency goals. Increasing the effectiveness of existing tools became of paramount importance and focused the Presidency Programme on seeking methods to better use a stimulating role of the EU budget and the potentials of existing policies and instruments. Thus, enhancing the Cohesion Policy s capacity in achieving European strategic goals became the priority under the motto of Cohesion Policy as an efficient, effective and territorially differentiated response to EU development challenges. Among the three strategic objectives that were formed under the Presidency Programme, the principle aim was to strengthen the attributes of the Cohesion Policy with an integrated approach to development and results-orientation. It is aimed at reinforcement of the Cohesion Policy s role as the territorial development policy under the new EU economic governance system and Europe 2020 Strategy. To achieve this and in addition to the formal discussions held at the Council s Structural Actions Working Party (SAWP), the Presidency launched a series of conferences and seminars. Debated issues ranged from the territorial dimension of the EU development challenges and policies with particular attention paid to the role of Cohesion Policy and to effective instruments for territorial development, including tools for urban and local levels. Discussions also took place on how to strengthen the Cohesion Policy s unique characteristics an integrated approach to development, multi-annual strategic programming, multi-level governance and an evidence-based approach - to make the Policy more effective and less burdensome for the beneficiaries. Altogether, the Presidency organized the following events with a wide participation of Member States delegates, representatives from the European Commission, European Parliament, Committee of Regions, Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions of Europe and other important international, national and regional partners as well as professionals and academics: Conference on Evidence Based Cohesion Policy, Gdańsk (Poland), July 7-8, 2011 Seminar on Territorial Dimension in Development Policies, Ostróda (Poland), July 18-19, 2011 Working meeting on the Future of Territorial Cooperation Programme at External Borders of the EU, Warsaw (Poland), August 30-31, 2011 Joint Conference of ETC Transnational Cooperation Programmes, Katowice (Poland), September 15-16, 2011 Conference on Territorial Dimension of the European Social Fund, Warsaw (Poland), September 29-30, 2011 Conference on Catalysing reforms ESF Support for Better Governance, Warsaw (Poland), October 19-20, 2011 Conference on Effective Instruments for Territorial Development, Warsaw (Poland), October 24-25, 2011 Third Annual Conference concerning the financial instruments (JESSICA, JEREMIE), Warsaw (Poland), October 27-28, 2011 Conference on Cohesion Policy and Catching-up Regions, Lublin (Poland), November 17-18, 2011 Integrated approach to development a key to smart, sustainable and inclusive Europe, Poznań (Poland), November 24, 2011 Meeting of Ministers responsible for EU Cohesion Policy (Regional Policy), Territorial and Urban Development,, Poznań (Poland), November 25, The main ideas and policy recommendations raised during the debates have been gathered in the form of key messages most of them are enclosed below. They constituted the basis for the Polish Presidency to prepare its draft Conclusions on the territorial dimension of EU policies and the future Cohesion Policy as well as its draft Roadmap towards promoting and enhancing an integrated, territorial approach based on the Territorial Agenda of the European Union 2020 the documents initially discussed at the Directors General responsible for regional policy, territorial and urban development meeting in Warsaw, 3-4 November. The Polish Presidency hopes that the outcomes of those debates will serve as a support mechanism for Cohesion Policy negotiations and will be referred to by the Members States and the following Presidencies during this process. 3

4 CONTENT Key messages of the following events: Evidence-Based Cohesion Policy, Gdańsk (Poland), July 7, Territorial dimension of development policies, Ostróda (Poland), July 18-19, Working Meeting on the Future of Territorial Cooperation Programmes at External Borders of the EU, Warsaw (Poland), August 30-31, Joint Conference of ETC Transnational Cooperation Programmes, Katowice (Poland), September 15-16, The Territorial Dimension of the European Social Fund, Warsaw (Poland), September 29-30, Catalysing reforms - ESF support for better governance, Warsaw (Poland), October 29-30, Effective instruments supporting territorial development, Warsaw (Poland), October 24-25, Conference 3rd Annual Conference JEREMIE and JESSICA: Delivering Results, Warsaw (Poland), October 27-28, Meeting of Directors General responsible for EU Cohesion Policy (Regional Policy), Territorial and Urban Development, Warsaw (Poland), November 3-4, Cohesion Policy and Catching-up Regions, Lublin (Poland), November 17-18, Integrated approach to development a key to smart, sustainable and inclusive Europe, Poznań (Poland), November 24, Meeting of Ministers responsible for EU Cohesion Policy (Regional Policy), Territorial and Urban Development, Poznań (Poland), November 25,

5 of the Polish Presidency Conference Evidence-Based Cohesion Policy, Gdańsk (Poland), July 7, 2011 Ministry of Regional Development Department of Structural Policy Coordination ul. Wspólna 2/ Warsaw, Poland tel fax Polska Prezydencja w Radzie Unii Europejskiej 2011 The aim of the conference The main objective of the conference was to demonstrate how evidence from evaluation should be used to enhance the result-oriented, effective and efficient Cohesion Policy, bearing in mind the important contribution of this policy in achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. The conference clearly showed that in order to achieve higher performance in CP, the quality and relevance of evaluations, indicators should be improved and coupled with carefully designer incentives. Orientating Cohesion Policy on results and showing directions for its concentration in the context of the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy was another essential aspect of the discussion. Cohesion Policy should play a leading role in promoting evidence-based approach as the basic standard for the delivery of public policies. Messages from the opening session Cohesion Policy as an important element of the new EU budget should be less spending and more achieving (Johannes Hahn). Thematic concentration as well as reinforced monitoring, and evaluation system designed for delivering better evidence are crucial in this respect. Cohesion Policy is becoming more ambitious as an instrument of creating competitive advantages (not only distribution but concentration on investments that bring added value and structural change) (Michał Boni). In order to meet the new challenges, the Cohesion Policy implementation system should be more result-oriented and evaluation should play a significant role as an instrument of assessing and communicating the outcomes of the policy (Danuta Hübner). Thematic concentration is not the sole remedy there are other important success factors of improving CP effectiveness, such as performance framework, ex-ante conditionality as well as incentives for better results (Laszlo Andor). Messages from the High Level Discussion Toward more concentrated Cohesion Policy The concentration approach should be one of the principles of Cohesion Policy. At the same time decisions in the fields of concentration must always take into account the diversity of the development and growth challenges of the EU territories. Seeking common European objectives does not necessarily mean the same methods of delivery. Concentration should be connected not only to choosing the few strategic priorities on the EU level but also to achieving the critical mass on the ground - on the lowest levels of CP implementation. Aligning Cohesion Policy with the Europe 2020 strategy should be done carefully with consideration for local and regional needs and potentials.

6 Messages from session Focus on indicators As it was agreed during the session introducing more result-oriented and evidence based approach needs to avoid recurring mistakes in the use of indicators. Therefore, it is essential to consider the following: strengthening the link between outcome indicators and policy as well as ensuring political ownership needed for increasing the role of result-orientation; respecting the methodological standards - selected indicators must be reasonable, normative, robust, responsive to policy, feasible, debatable but not in all cases necessarily comparable across the EU countries; making a clear distinction between indicators which serve different purposes (monitoring vs. evaluation, context vs. result indicators, policy vs. bureaucracy vs. project levels); elaborating clear definitions of common indicators 1 to ensure comparability between the EU Member States; the necessity to be selective about which indicators are essential, by clear decisions on the demand side and an adequate response on the supply side; developing methodologies to define reliable targets describing the policy s success. Focusing on result indicators demands a strengthening of the role of the data provided by official statistics. Improvements should concern among others - timeliness of data (e.g. EU-SILC), regionalization of selected data and development of the indicators which better reflect the phenomena in a globalised world. In this area the Beyond GDP initiative should be developed and applied. Practical realization of the integrated approach requires full coherence between the ERDF and ESF indicator systems. Messages from session Focus on evaluation Knowledge gaps concerning the effects of Cohesion Policy interventions still exist due to a lack of evidence. The solution is to ask the right questions (more why and how than how much, and not what works but what works best ), in the right areas (not to ask questions if we already know the answers), in a focused way (small lessons learnt from each evaluation, but big ones from the whole process) in order to accumulate useful knowledge. Accumulated evaluation knowledge should be utilized in a systematic way in order to base all programming documents and Cohesion Policy delivery on facts and evidence. Dissemination and good communication of the evaluation results (for instance EU/CP evaluation database) is a precondition which enable knowledge synthesis by means of useful meta-evaluation methods (for instance conference background report). A precondition for credibility of evaluation within Cohesion Policy is the use of relevant and rigorous methods and a need for further methodology development in order to respond to policy makers requirements and needs. Messages from session Focus on performance incentives Performance tools (conditionalities, incentives and sanctions) need to be implemented as a part of systemic and shared framework, in which all stakeholders are involved. Macro-fiscal, structural and outcome-based conditionalities acting as financial incentives present a number of caveats and should be approached with caution. National performance reserve could be applied in such areas where necessary preconditions have already been ensured and there is only a need to mobilise the institutions to deliver better results. However, if the key preconditions are not fulfilled, the ex-ante conditionality should be applied. A possible tool for enhancing the performance orientation of future Cohesion Policy could be a combination of ex-ante conditionality (focused on the achievement of pre-conditions for policy effectiveness, strictly linked to Cohesion Policy) and performance reserve (which set aside at national/op s level, focused on the achievement of final objectives, relevant for the context and the strategy of the programme) measured with statistical indicators. Instead of using financial sanctions linked to the delivery of output or results, a more diffused usage and stricter monitoring of the envisaged actions should rather be considered. In a similar manner, programming process should be more result-oriented, in order to clearly show how all actions planned will lead to the final desired results and all responsibilities are clearly defined. 1 Proposed in EC paper Concepts and Ideas. Monitoring and Evaluation in practice of European Cohesion Policy European Regional Development and Cohesion Fund 6

7 Messages from the closing session Result-oriented approach demands a reform of the programming system as well as creation of an adequate incentive system. Future Cohesion Policy should become more anchored in the theory of change and more clearly based on objectives and indicators. The instruments of evaluation should support these changes. Result-oriented approach should be introduced to all European Policies in order to increase possibilities to achieve Europe 2020 Strategy goals Effects of Cohesion Policy have many important dimensions - not only economic but also i.e: increasing institutional capacity, strengthening strategic approach to planning regional development policy, strengthening the structures of civil society, strengthening empowerment and identity of regions improving the quality of public services. That was clear from the debate that evaluation should be a key element of the Cohesion Policy management system. Thanks to evaluation, Cohesion Policy has potential for renewal and indeed the policy has constantly evolved. It is thus incontestable that evaluation will continue to have a fundamental role to play in the future Cohesion Policy. This will require strengthening capacities, intelligently targeting resources (e.g. with regard to monitoring), achieving increased political ownership and better and more systematically communicating the outcomes of evaluation work. It will also require achieving the right balance between continuity and change. It should be also clearly stated that, despite the needed changes, Cohesion Policy remains the most evaluated policy and could be taken as an example for other EU policies and also for many domestic policies of many Member States. 7

8 of the Polish Presidency Seminar Territorial dimension of development policies, Ostróda (Poland), July 18-19, 2011 Ministry of Regional Development Department of Structural Policy Coordination ul. Wspólna 2/ Warsaw, Poland tel fax Polska Prezydencja w Radzie Unii Europejskiej 2011 The objective of the seminar: The main objective of the seminar was to create an informal discussion forum on the role of the territorial dimension in public policies in the contemporary world. Therefore, world-renowned researchers and eminent representatives of the European Union, the OECD, the World Bank and the Member States met during the seminar for an open exchange of views on ever-evolving paradigms of development, their impact on policy-making and possible future ways of securing a comprehensive and integrated approach to the design and operation of public policies at European, national and regional levels. Theoretical foundations Different concepts of social, economic and territorial development - which relate, among others, to the benefits of concentration (agglomeration, diffusion, interconnections) as well as to the policies which take more into account territory or rather "people in places - do not have to be mutually exclusive and can even complement each other to form the policy-mix approach". There is no "one-size fits all" policy solution and the particular places, people and context matter. Different regions face different constraints on growth, and therefore they require different policy interventions. The Territorial dimension (perceived as a way through which intervention takes into account the specific characteristics of a place in order to unleash its potential and to engage different actors and through which policy impact on territory is measured) should help to achieve European goals. This must be accomplished by a combination of external knowledge and the unique potential embedded in the place itself. Since prosperity does not come equally to every place because persistent and even increasing territorial differentiation is a feature of development (the observed patterns of growth) there is a need to review the concept of social, economic and territorial cohesion. In this context cohesion (in terms of reduction in disparities of GDP) should be perceived as only one of the many development goals to be achieved (such as: competitiveness, growth, social inclusion, etc.). Many other goals of development policies manifest territorial dimensions. Thus, there is a still gap between what the theory says about the processes of concentration and deconcentration and adequate policy responses on the ground. This gap needs to be bridged, by effective communication of the territorial dimension agenda between all stakeholders - based on evidence from theory and practice - and going beyond the cohesion/regional policy circles. Policy actions within the place-based approach should rise above the spatial context in an intentional and explicit way and simultaneously introduce an integrated multi-sectoral package of institutions and investments (capable of targeting various aspects of well-being at the same time). Such policy actions should be designed through a combination of endogenous and exogenous forces, with the exogenous actions being instrumental in bringing external information and values and changing the balance of bargaining power in places within the framework of the relevant multi-level governance tools. Integration provides a strong foundation for development policies and thus the integrated approach forms a crucial part of the regional policy not only at the programming phase but also at the stage of policy implementation where monitoring and evaluation play significant roles.

9 Increasing people s opportunity in the places they live calls for the inertia that produces underdevelopment or prevents efficient use of resources to be overcome, and requires not only innovations in formal and informal institutions but also new integrated investments within and across place s: the knowledge to design and implement them in a given place can be produced by the creative tension/conflict between the agents endogenous to the place and the exogenous ones which run the place-based development policy (from the EU, the national and/or the regional and local levels). Thinking about the future programming and implementation of public interventions requires better understanding of the dependency culture which may result from external support: passivity of local actors, lack of creativity and innovative approaches, growing position of rent-seekers. Thus, thorough knowledge on the part of the people (policy-makers at different levels and non-governmental actors) about their territory, its strengths, weaknesses and potentials must form the basis for the future development of given territories. Despite growing awareness of the importance of the territorial dimension in pursuing public policies, the actions undertaken are often based on a sectoral approach and do not take account of integration or territorial specificity. Therefore, various attempts at translating the theoretical concept of territorial dimension into practical policy applications were invoked during the seminar, including: - Typologies of regions (presenting their relative positions on the basis of such parameters as: 1) regional innovation typology, 2) different combinations of environmental and energy challenges, 3) demographic challenges) to be applied in the implementation of the Europe 2020 objectives. - The work on bridging the Territorial Agenda with the Europe 2020 Strategy, by applying territorial keys (accessibility, services of general economic interest, territorial capacities/endowments/assets, city networking, functional regions) to set the role of the territory in achieving the Strategy s goals and to position different types of regions in the context of the Strategy s objectives. The place-based i.e. territorial and integrated dimension of Cohesion Policy serves several purposes, such as: searching for the appropriate balance between concentration and diffusion; unlocking inefficient development equilibria by boosting innovation and modernisation and enhancing political responsibility. Cohesion Policy is neither just about solidarity nor just about competitiveness: it is a development policy aimed both at growth and social inclusion. Its objective is not to compensate for income gaps, but rather to improve the opportunity of people in different places of the European Union to do things that they value, by enhancing their freedom to choose either to use the resources in their place of residence more efficiently or to move (permanently or by way of commuting) to other places. Transforming theory into practice There are some guiding lines, which can be drawn from the discussion on territorial dimension of public policies or placebased approach that should be applied by the Commission and the Member States in the new programming period: An integrated, territorially (place) based, comprehensive policy at European level should draw on the mix of local knowledge, networking and top-down solutions, based on practical implications of the theoretical concepts. Key words for such a policy are coordination between policy fields (horizontal coordination) and between different actors from different levels (multilevel governance), using territorial potential by providing external knowledge combined with local spirit, realization of pan-european development goals with objectives and instruments tailored to the particular geographical features. Having in mind the lack of clear definition of territorial development (difficulties with the concept of territorial cohesion, difficulties with aligning inter-governmental processes of TA2020 and urban maters with the EU Cohesion and other policies) we need to explain and promote the concept to the external world (through: seminars, talks, discussions at the highest political level). To ensure proper and efficient interactions between different policies, the approach to programming and shaping the inter-institutional relationships needs to be changed into a more integrated one. It appears that there is an agreement that new system of programming proposed by the EC (CSF, Partnership Contracts, Operational Programmes) and the new system of enhanced performance (ex-ante conditionality, concentration, result orientation) is widely regarded as an opportunity for promotion of territorial integrated approach with some important conditions: 9

10 1. alignment (integration) of ways in which different funds/policies operate (avoiding further sectoralization) improving linkages (also in institutional terms) between discussion on the EU budget, Europe 2020 Strategy and the rules for different policies; 2. allowing for flexibility justified by the strategy and different starting points of different territories; 3. improvement of the ability and quality of institutions dealing with the new approach on the European Commission side as well as on the Member States side; 4. use of the integrated approach at both levels - the diagnostic one (an interdisciplinary analysis of the territorial contexts and of sectoral linkages between interventions) and on the level of projects selection; 5. and the provision of and debate on evidence on an ongoing basis which demonstrates the effectiveness of integrated policies which take account of the territorial dimension. Due to the difficulties in explaining how the old paradigm (redistributive policy) is being transformed into the new place-based approach despite the strong theoretical basis (Barca report, OECD reports and other analyses) it is necessary to continue to clarify the role of Cohesion Policy and its territorial dimension. The concept of cohesion is still associated with redistribution, compensation and convergence. However the concept means that it is not about a top-down redistribution but above all about place-based policy and institutional interactions through the multi-level governance system, about a commonly shared methodology and internally rooted knowledge, about efficient institutions and tailor-made, thus integrated, investments. Both, the tailor-made innovations that are needed to shape institutions and to design investments and the integration of sectoral policy actions and investments can take place only on the ground, at project level. But the appropriate framework and incentives must be set by a general national strategy (Partnership Contract, Operational Programmes). The key point is to identify places either NUTS2 regions, functional, including urban, or cross -(regional or national) border areas which face similar challenges/opportunities. Therefore, we should explore if innovative typologies of regions can be used to help define the needs of the places based on their relative position measured by different parameters. At the same time Operational Programmes should: a) set a system of incentives (ex ante conditionalities, focus on measurable results, evaluation of impact) aimed at reducing rent-seeking behaviours and governing the creative conflict between endogenous and exogenous actors; b) build a platform for an open and structured public debate involving private actors, social and economic partners and active citizen organizations; c) frame the process and the criteria for the development and selection of some integrated projects (the strategic projects) that can represent the backbone of OP s implementation. Three conditions must be satisfied at EU level for the Partnership Contract and the Operational Programmes to do the appropriate job. First, the Cohesion Policy Regulation must be as similar as possible for all the Funds, must foresee the above-mentioned framework and must refrain from being too detailed and prescriptive or from introducing over-complex or unfeasible conditionalities or performance reserves. Second, sectoral segmentation at the European level must be reduced to a minimum, by creating teams that negotiate with, and monitor, countries in a unified way. Third, a significant investment in human resources must be made within the Commission so as to match the revised conceptual framework and to engage countries on a high strategic level. It is necessary to work on the implementation mechanisms in order to ensure clarity, result orientation and reduction of administrative burden. Moreover we have to guard the existing principles (subsidiarity, flexibility, combination of external knowledge and internal spirit, assuring concentration with regard to themes and territories) as well as guaranteeing that the policy is focused on objectives and outcomes rather than on the expected procedural compliance. This will require a fundamental shift on the Commission s side. Equally important is to improve the effectiveness of presentation of the results of policy intervention based on evidence (which is still insufficient despite a massive number of evaluations produced), thus a need arises to develop of a comprehensive system of relevant indicators capable of measuring different types of territories. The seminar has proven that the academia, international organizations and the Member States have at their disposal both theory and good practices related to the implementation of the place-based approach. It is indispensable, now, to overcome possible inhibitions and put the existing knowledge into practice i.e. territorialisation of the Europe 2020 Strategy as well of particular development policies. Cohesion Policy plays a special role here, as it should be transformed into integrated development policy which coordinates (or shows the way to coordinate) actions aimed at unleashing the potentials of all European territories towards achieving the strategic development objectives. 10

11 of the Polish Presidency Conference Working Meeting on the Future of Territorial Cooperation Programmes at External Borders of the EU, Warsaw (Poland), August 30-31, 2011 The objective of the working meeting Ministry of Regional Development Department of Territorial Cooperation ul. Mysia Warsaw, Poland tel fax prezydencja@mrr.gov.pl The Presidency's intention was to hold an in-depth discussion about territorial co-operation on the external borders of the EU which has been realised through the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI CBC), Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA CBC) and the European Territorial Cooperation. In particular, the goal was to provoke a debate between the Member States aimed at developing solutions to improve cooperation, promote an integrated approach to EU actions and at incorporating this subject into the discussion on the future of EU Cohesion Policy. The conference clearly has shown that there is a need for simplification, better harmonization of the next generation ENPI CBC programmes with ETC and better coordination of policies under which currently running programmes have been implemented. The meeting also provided an opportunity to discuss the possibility of including funds for non-eu partners in the framework of transnational cooperation Programmes under the ETC. Participants from 17 Member States, Croatia, European Commission and Joint Technical Secretariats of ETC and ENPI CBC programmes took part in the meeting. The discussion proved that the unanimous consent exists to developing solutions that will bring advantages to both the potential beneficiaries of the Programmes and the institutions managing the Programmes. That is why it is very important that the conference s conclusions will be taken into account during the works on the draft regulations on both Cohesion Policy and European Neighbourhood Instrument in order to assure the common approach for cooperation at EU internal and external borders. Added value of the territorial cooperation programmes at external borders of the EU There is a common belief that programmes have a strong potential. First calls for proposals have proven that the institutions from Member States and Partner Countries are interested in joint cooperation. Added value of ENPI is based on: Polska Prezydencja w Radzie Unii Europejskiej 2011 Strategic level Transformation the border from an obstacle into a possibility for development, Relations improvement between the participating countries the EU - partner countries, Increase of people-to-people contacts across the border, Promotion of shared political and economic values, Contribution to stability and prosperity in border regions. European Commission clearly expressed that the future programmes priorities should be integrated to the Cohesion Policy priorities (so far the regional policy dimension has not been taken into account sufficiently). It was also jointly stated that the future programmes should be based on a shared management model (where applicable). Moreover EC representatives declared that programmes shall be implemented in the spirit of the partnership between the Member States, regions and European Commission and the ETC (INTERREG) example should be the starting point for their implementation modalities.

12 In order to ensure better coordination in the next programming period between European Territorial Cooperation Programmes (implemented at EU internal programmes) and programmes implemented at the EU external borders there is a strong need for elaborated dialogue between all types of stakeholders (Member States, Regions, Partner Countries, European Commission). EC underlined that relevant Commission services (DG DEVCO, DG REGIO, EEAS) participate in the preparations of the future regulations for CBC at the EU external borders. It is necessary to ensure that the cross-border programmes implemented at the EU external borders beyond 2013 will contribute to achieving the EU strategic development goals defined e.g in the Europe 2020 Strategy. Therefore it is essential to find a good way for inclusion of these programmes in the Common Strategic Framework and Partnership Contracts. Major challenges of ENPI CBC next generation Programmes: Better integration of priorities of territorial cooperation programmes at EU external borders and EU Cohesion Policy, Maximum approximation of ENPI to European Territorial Cooperation (ETC) / Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) CBC rules. In order to achieve the above mentioned goals and make ENPI CBC more visible and result-oriented instrument further steps are needed: Elaboration of clear and quantified targets and result indicators for each Programme, Establishing of effective monitoring and evaluation system as tools of effective management, Programme should focus on the border regions in the smaller area. In current programming period the Financing Agreement (FA) is signed only between European Commission and Partner Countries. Although, the European Commission shall still play an active role in the process, Member States should also be involved in the negotiating process and should be a party to FA. Otherwise FA cannot stipulate the rights towards Member States. Cooperation with Partner Countries under the ETC transnational programmes should be promoted. Therefore current legal impediments to such a cooperation need to be eliminated (institutions from Partner Countries should be allowed to participate in all programmes). Cooperation with the Russian Federation Russian partners do not want to be regarded any more as beneficiaries of the ENPI CBC programmes as they co-finance the programmes. Practical implication of that fact is the necessity to jointly prepare rules, which would be acceptable for both - Member States and the Russian Federation. Model of the cross-border cooperation with Russia should be developed as today Russia is neither part of Official Development Assistance mechanism nor European Neighborhood Policy. Programme level Thinking about the future implementing systems of the programmes requires a detailed analysis of current binding provisions. All the rules which are highly evaluated should be maintained. Examples of such rules are as follows: N+3 rule for the entire programming period, One set of rules for both EU and partners countries beneficiaries, High level of Technical Assistance (TA), TA 100% financed out of programme sources, Possibility of setting up of the JTS branch offices. There are number of challenges concerning the implementing systems of the programmes which should be addressed during the work on future regulations for Cohesion Policy and European Neighbourhood Instrument. Most important are as follows: 12

13 Lack of clear definition of roles of Programme authorities already in the regulation (clear definitions should be given already in the regulation), National Authorities do not take the co-responsibility of the Programme; their tasks should be described in the new Regulations (e.g. recoveries, coordination and facilitation of the registration procedures), Need for derogations from the PRAG rules is a time-consuming process, project selection procedures should be simplified, i.e. the same process should not be repeated at different levels (e.g. PSC & JMC & EC), Descriptions of the management and control system ex-ante approved by the European Commission (following the ETC approach) will be a good solution. As the programmes implemented together with the Partner Countries are very challenging more active role of the INTERACT Programme is highly desired. As a good example INTERACT role in the ETC programmes should be taken into account. Project level Future implementing systems of the programmes should be as friendly for the applicants, beneficiaries, regions and involved countries as possible. Therefore number of possible amendments to current procedures should be carefully examined. Examples of possible changes are as follows: JTS should answer the public expectations (e.g. giving answers on eligibility of partners, combining training & assessment) following the ETC approach, Preparatory costs should be eligible, Approval of the Large Scale Projects should be reviewed as the need to get twice the European Commission s approval (summary and full Application) is a time consuming process, Rule of origin should be compliant with the legal requirements in the Member States and Partner Countries, Coherent tendering procedures for all partners involved should be applied, Members States should not be forced to apply PRAG rules as their public procurement system is compliant with the EU standards, There should be one single contract document general and special conditions and derogations in the documents make the contract difficult and not beneficiary friendly. At the same time it is important not to abandon current provisions which are beneficiary friendly, i.e. such as: High-rate of co-financing out of the Programme funds (90% of eligible costs) which positively influence the interest of the potential applicants, Advance payments should be maintained. Next steps The working meeting has proven that there is a strong need for the discussion on the territorial cooperation at EU external borders after In particular, it is important to take into account the experiences of practitioners of this type of cooperation, mostly from beneficiaries, regions, Member States and Partner Countries. PL Presidency will take into account key messages of the meeting in its further work. Ministry of foreign affairs of Finland has informed the participants about the possible follow-up meeting which could be organised in Helsinki in December

14 of the Joint Transnational Cooperation Conference organised under the Polish Presidency Joint Conference of ETC Transnational Cooperation Programmes, Katowice (Poland), September 15-16, programmes, 1 goal: to improve the quality of life in European regions The aim of the conference For the very first time, all 13 Transnational Cooperation Programmes from the third objective of the European Cohesion Policy were brought together on 15 th and 16 th September 2011 at a conference in Katowice organised under the Polish presidency. These INTERREG Programmes stimulate practical collaborations in large geographical areas with common interests. Together they cover the complete territory of the EU and most of its neighbours, and even embrace unexpected areas where there are shared activities, such as the Caribbean or Indian Ocean regions. At the conference, the transnational projects which were showcased demonstrated strong impact and real results. Workshops explored in detail the EU added value of these initiatives. Ministry of Regional Development Department of Territorial Cooperation ul. Mysia Warsaw, Poland tel fax prezydencja@mrr.gov.pl Polska Prezydencja w Radzie Unii Europejskiej 2011 The following month, the experience of the Katowice conference was brought to Brussels at a special workshop during the Open Days event, with speakers from the Commission, Parliament and Polish Presidency of the Council reviewing the impact of Transnational Cooperation and looking ahead to the next funding period. This workshop took place shortly after the publication of the Commission s legislative package for the new Programming period ( ), so the outcomes of the Katowice event could be discussed in the context of the new regulations. Messages from the conference and from the transnational workshop Transnational Cooperation is demonstrably a very efficient instrument for achieving greater cohesion in Europe, advancing EU integration in practical ways, close to its citizens and for relatively little money. Transnational Cooperation can be clearly seen as a specific financial instrument for Territorial Cohesion. These practical ways for integration include enhancing territorial assets through joint innovation activities by SMEs, research institutes and public organizations in different countries and joint addressing of territorial challenges, such as reducing flooding or fire risks or transport bottle necks in different countries The Transnational Programmes operate in zones with different territorial specificities and a wide variety of cooperation experiences, so projects differ from one Programme to another. But they all have common features, stimulating growth and jobs and improving quality of life, thus improving territorial cohesion. It became clear however that Programmes could improve the delivery of even more strategically aligned actions if they could improve the territorial justification of their choice of themes for cooperation. The ESPON knowledge database could be helpful in this respect. Some projects entail investments; but projects without investments can also demonstrate a high level of transnationality, with the proposed actions leading to concrete results for the benefit of all partners. Examples of such outputs include: defining transnational quality labels or marketing strategies; carrying out feasibility studies and tests that will develop a project to a pre-investment stage; setting up virtual universities, establishing SME networks; developing common strategies etc.

15 Half-way through implementation of the current Programmes, six topics can be identified as common denominators of the variety of initiatives in progress: Innovation, Environment, Transport, Demographic Change, Renewable Energy and Cooperation with neighbouring countries. An important special feature of Transnational Cooperation is that its projects create often informal- structures on a broad geographical level that no existing level of governance covers. This is particularly apparent in projects dealing with integrated rail transport and green corridors, flood protection in river catchment areas, or supply-chains in SME networks. Since they have no specific sectoral focus, Transnational Programmes can play the role of coordinators between various financial instruments at different governmental levels. For example, Transnational Programmes in the Baltic and Danube regions became the basis for new macro-regional strategies. In the future, Transnational Programmes need to improve the efficiency of delivery mechanisms and develop common sets of data for comparative reporting. Differing rules in different countries can cause transnational projects major difficulties during the joint implementation of their action plans in more than one country. Therefore participants welcomed the proposal of the Commission about harmonisation of eligibility rules. However participants confirmed a major improvement could still be attained on 3 sets of rules that complicate the execution of transnational projects. Therefore participants asked the Commission to also harmonise rules on public procurement, state aid and audit to simplify the implementation of transnational cooperation projects.. 15

16 of the Polish Presidency Conference The Territorial Dimension of the European Social Fund, Warsaw (Poland), September 29-30, 2011 Ministry of Regional Development Department for European Social Found Management ul. Mysia Warsaw, Poland tel fax prezydencja@mrr.gov.pl Polska Prezydencja w Radzie Unii Europejskiej 2011 The aim of the conference The Treaty of Lisbon gave new dimension to cohesion the territorial dimension, which constitutes one of the elements needed to achieve cohesion and, at the same time, the greatest challenge to the Community policies. The spatial dimension determined many socio-economic problems and hence it should be reflected in respective Community policies and their instruments. It also poses a challenge to the European Social Fund, which from a tool for sectoral policies implementation has to develop into a more flexible instrument considering the potentials and needs following from the specificity of the given territories in the national, regional and local terms. The objectives of the Polish Presidency in the area of the Cohesion Policy cover strengthening of its attributes - integrated approach to development and orientation on the results, in order to emphasise the territorial development policy under the new EU economic governance system and the Europe 2020 Strategy. One of the elements aimed at increasing the effectiveness of the Cohesion Policy is strengthening of its territorial dimension. The Presidency undertakes a number of debates on the territorial dimension of the Cohesion Policy in view of its thorough discussion. On 18 and 19 July in Ostróda a Experts Seminar on Territorial Dimension in Development Policies was held. Many conclusions from the debate were repeated during the conference entitled Territorial Dimension of the ESF. The debate on the conference Territorial Dimension of the European Social Fund clearly emphasized that despite the ESF orientation on providing support to people, it is an instrument of territorial action and impact. The discussion in the course of the conference covered the mechanisms of European Social Fund territorialisation and the spatial approach to the implementation of the social objectives of the Europe 2020 Strategy. Conclusion from the plenary session Territorial approach as the new paradigm for the ESF and the Efficient territorialisation: Despite the fact that the territorial dimension of the European Social Fund was emphasised only by its name in the Treaty of Lisbon, there is a conviction that it has always been its part and characteristic feature. Territorialisation of the policy and instruments of its implementation constitutes a means of reaching an objective, but it is not the objective itself. There is no one-size-fits-all solution and thus it was stressed that territorialisation and efficiency are interconnected. When using the territorial approach to implement the actions funded from the European Social Fund - efficiency should be the main starting point and criterion of applying thereof. Institutional capacity building at all levels of management, also at the regional and local level is a significant element ensuring the success of applying the territorial approach. Without the right preparation of the actors taking part in the implementation of individual policies, the implementation of actions on different levels established on the basis of a territory is more difficult. In order to use the possibilities offered by the application of the territorial dimension in the actions supported by the European Social Fund it is necessary to establish the institutional and administrative capacity at different levels of intervention. In order to efficiently use the territorial approach in respect to actions funded from the European Social Fund, apart from the improvement of the institutional capacity, it is essential to build mutual trust between the actors operating at individual geographical levels, who should also have the awareness of co-responsibility for the effects of implementing individual policies.

17 The role of local partnerships as the tool of effective territorialisation was also emphasised. When acting on the regional and local level one cannot forget about the need of strategic thinking. It is important to keep a specific balance between things that are strategic and top-down and things that are implemented and bottomup. In order for the actions on the regional and local level to be effective, they should be integrated into a broader strategic context. Policy framework strategies of action have to be as flexible and general as to allow for their adjustment to the general policy framework and enable specialised delivery. The efficiency of territorial approach use in reference to the actions supported from the European Social Fund will not be optimal if correct and efficient coordination is lacking. The motto that appeared during the conference and which illustrated the conducted debate goes as follows: think globally and locally, act globally and locally, which paraphrases the often quoted slogan think globally, act locally Conclusions from the block Territorialisation of social policies in the context of the Europe 2020 Strategy objectives - challenges and benefits The territorial approach to the implementation of the Europe 2020 Strategy objective concerning the increase in employment should be applied, in particular, in the context of implementing the policies towards high-risk groups on the labour market (i.e. the disabled, the long-term unemployed, persons aged 50+). It is necessary to connect the labour market needs to the educational offer at the local level. The educational and training policy at the regional and local level should be flexible and it should correspond to the labour market needs. The competences and skills have to correspond to the needs of the local labour market. It results in the need for education and training considering the needs of local and regional labour market. It is necessary to develop the system of regular enhancement of the quality of education at the central level, however, as it comes to the territorial dimension of education it is important to gather competences in a flexible manner and tailor them to the potential and needs of a given territory. Efficient territorialisation of education is precondition by the existence of adequate competences at the regional and local level in respect to the staff providing the educational offer - teachers, trainers, instructors, coaches. Establishment of partnership between entities operating in the area of employment constitutes a key condition of efficient implementation of the employment policy and of ensuring general access to the labour market services (employers, labour market institutions, non-governmental organisations). Many problems from the area of social inclusion require a specific approach that would be adjusted to a given territory. The manner of responding to poverty in metropolitan areas and rural areas constitutes an example of such a differentiation of the approach as regards a given territory. In order to efficiently fight it, we need to develop mechanisms, which will be tailored to the territorial specificity 17