1 / 21

Categorisation of EU interventions Cohesion policy 2014-2020

Categorisation of EU interventions Cohesion policy 2014-2020. John Walsh, DG REGIO Laurent SENS, DG EMPL. The categorisation system ….

shani
Download Presentation

Categorisation of EU interventions Cohesion policy 2014-2020

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. Categorisation of EU interventionsCohesion policy 2014-2020 John Walsh, DG REGIO Laurent SENS, DG EMPL

  2. The categorisation system … • An information system (not priority or eligibility list)…to increase quality of information, transparency and policy accountability on the use of cohesion policy resources across Europe. • It tracks the financial inputs and monitors programming and progress in the implementation of the cohesion programmes 2007-2013 • across thematic sectors • across Objectives • across Member States

  3. Structure of categorisationsystem 2007-13 - 5 dimensions Ex-ante + “Priority Themes” - 86 codes • Form of Finance - 4 codes • Territorial dimension - 11 codes Ex-post only – reportedaccording to the combination of codes + Above three dimensions and + Economic Dimension - 23 Codes • Location Dimension – N° of Nuts II/III codes varies by MS (ESF also has participantdata ... not ERDF/CF)

  4. Measuring Progress … in a simplified project pipeline 2007-13 Programmes => EU Financial allocations (Ex-ante) • Project preparation, calls …. • Project selection (at OP level – Ex-Post)=> data by 'priority theme' (including earmarking) + 4 other dimensions • Contracting, procurement by project promoter • Spending=> expenditure declarations (at OP/ priority axis level – not reported by 'priority themes') • Indicators / Completion => outputs / results (at OP level – not reported by 'priority themes')

  5. Categorisation System for 2014-2020

  6. Categorisation : 2007-13 vs 2014-2020

  7. Dimensions : 2007-13 vs 2014-2020

  8. Dimensions : 2007-13 vs 2014-2020

  9. Programme structure / reporting level • Thematic Objectives=> Policy purpose, the “why” • 100+ Intervention Fields => “what” investmentsSystem offers flexibility in use of “Intervention fields” against the different “Thematic Objectives”

  10. Improved ventilation of "intervention fields"Key Changes I • Innovation & R&D and SME distinguish … • Support to public vs private R&D efforts • Clarify SME supports – Services toSMEs vs investmentsbySMEs • Ventilation of e-services • E-Gov • E-health • E-Inclusion, etc • [E-commerce in SMEs] pre-existing • Social entrepreneurship

  11. Improved ventilation of "intervention fields"Key Changes II • Improved ventilation of certain categories • TEN-T priorities – core vs comprehensive – New build vs reconstructed • Energy efficiency – ventilate buildings vs homes vsSMEs • DistinguishriskpreventionClimate /Env vs humanactivities • Distinguish public vs private culture and tourisminvestments • Water supply vsconservation

  12. Improved ventilation of inteventions … to become …

  13. Changes to existing dimensions Principal reasons for changes to the existing dimensions isthatthese dimension should have added value. • Form of finance: clarify and Introduce "repayable grants"; eliminate "other forms" • Territorial dimension: clarify "Rural codes" [introduce "Macro regional dimension" delete different forms of ETC] • Economic dimension: Essentiallykeeplistwithsmalladjustments. Very important for RTDI / Business support, labour market (green jobs) • Location: No change

  14. Changes to existing dimensions Principal reasons for changes to the existing dimensions isthatthese dimension should have added value. • Form of finance: clarify and Introduce "repayable grants"; eliminate "other forms" • Territorial dimension: clarify "Rural codes" [introduce "Macro regional dimension" delete different forms of ETC] • Economic dimension: Essentiallykeeplistwithsmalladjustments. Very important for RTDI / Business support, labour market (green jobs) • Location: No change

  15. Tracking climate change – ERDF-CF COMMISSION has made a politicalcommitmentthat 20% of EU budget willcontribute to climate mitigation / adaptation. Weneed to track the contribution: • Use of Rio markers – 100% - 40% - 0% linked to 'intervention fields' to calculate climate contribution • integrated no additional burden on MAs • Can betracked ex-ante and ex-post • Alsowe propose 4 new specific new codes - 08-45-53-81 (NB: No formal biodiversity tracking)

  16. Why 3 new dimensions? Principal reasons for the three new dimensions isthatthese dimension are needed for 2014-2020 programming and would have clearadded value. • ITI/CLLD are modalities not objectives in themselves … • ERDF OPs may have multi-thematic objective priority axes. All investments must be related to TOs. • ESF – Secondarytheme dimension islinked, in major part, to the need to identify contribution of the ESF to otherthematic objectives (includingclimate change tracking) or cross cutting objectives

  17. Main characteristics … in a nutshell • Value for Ex-ante negotiation and annual ex-post monitoring • Better, more timely information on stages of project pipeline – decided, selected, [not contracted] and expenditure declared • More refined “intervention fields” learning from experience • Climate tracking will be integrated • New dimensions necessary for next programming period

  18. Differences between the Funds (1) • Most of the elements are common but there are some differences between ERDF and ESF. • - ESF Intervention Fields = ESF investment priorities (not a “what” investments as for ERDF) • => automatically includes the tracking by thematic objective • - the level of ESF reporting is at investment priority level (YEI) as all the other elements of reporting

  19. Differences between the Funds (2)ESF secondary theme dimension • Why? Result of the choice to build ESF around 4 thematic objectives • Capture ESF contribution to climate change and to other thematic objectives • Capture ESF contribution to social innovation (NB: transnationality moved to territory type 3.07, CLLD under territorial development mechanisms 4.01)

  20. ESF – Secondary Theme dimension (ex-ante & ex-post reporting) To be reported ex-ante and ex-post: • Supporting the shift to a low-carbon, resource efficient economy (100% climate weighting) • Enhancing the accessibility, use and quality of information and communication technologies • Enhancing the competitiveness of SMEs • Strengthening research, technological development and innovation • Social innovation • Not Applicable

  21. THANK YOU … • QUESTIONS?

More Related