1. Categorisation of EU interventions Cohesion 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
across thematic sectors
across Objectives
across Member States

3. Structure of categorisation system 2007-13 - 5 dimensions
Ex-ante
+ “Priority Themes” - 86 codes
Form of Finance - 4 codes
Territorial dimension - 11 codes
Ex-post only – reported according to the combination of codes
+ Above three dimensions and
+ Economic Dimension Codes
Location Dimension – N° of Nuts II/III codes varies by MS
(ESF also has participant data ... 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 2007-2013 2014-2020
N° Dimensions 5
5 + 3
Frequency of data
Once per year - 30/06
Once per year 31/1
Coverage
Decided – selection
+ spending
Level of reporting OP
Priority axis /Inv. priority
Concentration on EU priorities
Through Lisbon Earmarking
Through thematic objectives for ERDF or "Intervention fields" for ESF
Climate tracking
Informal
Formalised with defined weightings

7. Dimensions : vs
Ex-ante and ex-post
1."Priority theme" => "Intervention Field" 86
104 – with amendments
2. Form of Finance
4 codes
4 codes – with amendment
3. Territorial dimension
11 codes
8 codes – with amendments
4. Territorial delivery mech
NEW
5. Thematic Objective (ERDF)
6. ESF Secondary Theme
6 codes

8. Dimensions : vs
Ex post selection / spending only
Economic Dimension
23 codes
24 + changes
Location
National NUTS codes
No change

9. Programme structure / reporting level
Thematic Objectives => Policy purpose, the “why”
100+ Intervention Fields => “what” investments System 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 to SMEs vs investments by SMEs
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 vs SMEs
Distinguish risk prevention Climate /Env vs human activities
Distinguish public vs private culture and tourism investments
Water supply vs conservation

12. Improved ventilation of inteventions
Energy efficiency, cogeneration, energy management
… to become …
Energy efficiency renovation of public infrastructure
Energy efficiency renovation of existing housing stock and demonstration projects
Energy efficiency in SMEs
Intelligent Energy Distribution Systems at low voltage levels (smart grids)
High efficiency co-generation and district heating

13. Changes to existing dimensions
Principal reasons for changes to the existing dimensions is that these 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: Essentially keep list with small adjustments. 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 is that these 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: Essentially keep list with small adjustments. Very important for RTDI / Business support, labour market (green jobs)
Location: No change

15. Tracking climate change – ERDF-CF
COMMISSION has made a political commitment that 20% of EU budget will contribute to climate mitigation / adaptation. We need 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 be tracked ex-ante and ex-post
Also we propose 4 new specific new codes
(NB: No formal biodiversity tracking)

16. Why 3 new dimensions?
Principal reasons for the three new dimensions is that these dimension are needed for programming and would have clear added 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 – Secondary theme dimension is linked, in major part, to the need to identify contribution of the ESF to other thematic objectives (including climate 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?