Presentation on theme: "DG Regional and Urban Policy Brussels, 30 May 2013"— Presentation transcript:
1DG Regional and Urban Policy Brussels, 30 May 2013 Ex post evaluation of ERDF and CF: first discussion with Member StatesDG Regional and Urban PolicyBrussels, 30 May 2013Cohesion Policy
2Introduction Legal obligation – until 31 December 2013 Thematic breakdown plus presentation of data and findings by Member State. Synthesis report.Methods depending on questionsCombination of "simple" review with deepening studies on selected questionsA dialogue oriented evaluation: hearings, discussions with Member StatesCoordination with ESF
3SME, research, Innovation Why this evaluation? 25% of expenditure, some categories do not tell where the money goes (€15 billion "Other investment in firms", €9 billion "other measures to stimulate research, innovation, entrepreneurship in SMEs").Questions: What is the overall policy mix in regions? What is the rationale?What is the effectiveness of different schemes for SMEs? What is the justification for financial support?
4SME, research, Innovation Methods:Literature review and fact findings: 15 (?) case studies on OPs investing the most in RDI and SMEsTheory based impact evaluations on behavioural changes on 3 or 4 selected cases.Expert meetings, two seminars with MSContact in REGIO: Adam Abdulwahab and Marielle Riché
5SME, research, Innovation – questions for Member States Any evaluations available or planned in ?Can you suggest academic experts and literature?Any other evaluation questions?Any support scheme that would be interesting to assess?
6Venture capitalWhy this evaluation? There is some evidence that financial instruments are more cost-effective than grants (and that the innovation success of the US is in part based on VC)Questions:What are the main schemes? How do they work? What cost to set-up and run?What are their effects? What is the mechanism? Are there situations/contexts where this works/doesn't work?
7Venture capital 2 Methods: case studies, beneficiary surveys Questions:Do you have significant VC schemes? How costly to set-up/run? Do they focus on specific sectors/firm size? Are they considered successful?Do you have good evaluations/case studies already?Contact in REGIO: Daniel Mouqué
8Large enterprise support Why this evaluation? Counterfactuals so far do not favour money to large firms. This evaluation will use non-CF techniques to assess to what extent this applies elsewhere (eg across Cohesion countries, to fdi) and how non-financial support compares?Questions:What are the main forms of support?What are their effects? What is the mechanism?Differ by support type, country, new/existing, etc?Are impacts sustainable? Wider benefits?
9Large enterprise support 2 Methods: literature review, beneficiary surveys, case studiesQuestions:Do you have significant support to large enterprises? Are they usually existing/new/FDI investments, financial/non-financial support?Do you have good evaluations/case studies already?Contact in REGIO: Daniel Mouqué
10Transport Why this evaluation? Questions Transport remains a major investment area for cohesion policy (planned € 75 billion). Need to assess the impact. It will include mapping of major projects to verify if they amount to a network.QuestionsWhat has the ERDF contribution helped to achieve?To what extent have ERDF contributed to creation of a coherent transport network?Are the supported (major) projects financially sustainable?
11TransportMethodsDesk research and fact finding (incl. analysis of information provided in the monitoring system, AIRs, evaluation reports, etc.)Modeling of transport effects (time saving, CO2 emissions, GDP?) with TransTools10 (?) regional case studies to assess – among others – the financial sustainability of transport projects3 meetings with the MS to discuss findings
12Transport Questions to Member States Do you have any comments on questions and methods?Are there any volunteers for the case studies?Are there any evaluations in this field you would recommend to us?Do you plan to launch any evaluations in this field between 2013 and 2015?Can you suggest any academic experts and literature?Contact: Jan Marek Ziółkowski, DG REGIO
13Environment - Financial Sustainability Primary areas: water supply, wastewater treatment, municipal solid waste treatmentPolluter/user pays principle and affordabilityReviewing provisions in MS to ensure financial sustainabilityReviewing financial sustainability of projects that were subject to ex post CBA (we already have a baseline), plus examining a limited number of additional projectsLimited number of case studies
14Environment - Green growth Why this evaluation? "Green growth" has become a popular concept but it lacks clear and shared understandingQuestions:Is there a widely accepted definition of "green growth"?If not, what could be a definition for development policy purposes?MethodsLiterature reviewExpert seminarsPossibly a very limited number of case studies
15Energy Efficiency Why this evaluation? During the period €6 billion has been dedicated to support energy (EE). This is a new area for many MA and it is important to evaluate achievements so far and identify conditions for success/failureQuestions:Are EE projects selected within an integrated approach? What are the achievements so far delivered by EE in buildings? In the case of residential buildings, to what extent have EE investments contributed to the alleviation of energy poverty? Have absorption patterns changed since 2009?
16Energy Efficiency Methods: Literature review and in-depth analysis: 10 case studies on OPs investing the most in EEFinancial instruments: Analysis in 3 or 4 selected cases.Expert meetings, seminar with MSQuestions:Suggestions for academic experts / existing literature?Evaluations available or planned in ?Contact in REGIO: Patty Simou16
17Tourism and Culture Volumes: Nearly € 12 billion allocated 2007-13 Why this evaluation? Wide variation of funding across MS. Lack of evidence on the added value of investment in these policy areas.Questions: What is the evidence in terms of growth and jobs delivered by ERDF support in these policy fields? (could include the issue of social inclusion); To what extent are the projects financially sustainable?Methods: Use of categorisation data to ID the Ops with largest allocations; mapping, a survey of MAs to explore the focus and enquire the logic of intervention, case studies;
18Tourism and Culture Comments on questions and approach? Any volunteers for case studies?Which of your evaluations you recommend? Do you plan more evaluations in ?Can you suggest academic experts and literature?Contact in REGIO: Samuele Dossi
19Urban Development (including Social Infrastructures) Why this evaluation? :€11 billion ERDF co-financing projects within the territorial dimension theme, including more than €10 billion for integrated projects for urban and rural regeneration.Questions:What are the main themes addressed by integrated urban development strategies in OPs devoting a substantial financial allocation to this theme?What are the objectives … local urban development "per se" or strategic territorial development objectives?
20What are the main rationales to justify the specific delivery mode? What is the evaluation evidence available on ERDF co- financed urban development strategies and interventions currently available?How is integrated urban development organized within OPs? Degree of freedom allowed to localities/ municipalities? Degree of coordination /What are the main rationales to justify the specific delivery mode?Methodsreview of evaluation evidence in MS and studies carried out by EC, themetic seminar with MS, expert meetings, conceptual analysis;
21Urban Development (including Social Infrastrutures) Comments on questions and approach?Which of your evaluations you recommend? Do you plan more evaluations in ?Can you suggest academic experts and literature?Contact in REGIO: Samuele Dossi
22European Territorial Co-operation Why this evaluation? :- Over €7 billion allocated to ETC.70 ETC programmes;Outputs and results of programmes not very clear.Evaluation questions:For Cross-Border programmes: how has co-operation been enhanced, and what has been delivered via cooperation - in the fields of economic activity, environment and transport?
23- For Interreg, URBACT, INTERACT: are there structures in place for knowledge capitalisation? What evidence is there that regions/partners/Member States are using this knowledge?- For TNC programmes: What evidence is there of the influence of TNC programmes on 'mainstream' programmes, for example via alignment of resources?Methods- Review of quantitative and qualitative evidence contained in AIRs. Review of other evaluation evidence in MS and held by technical secretariats eg INTERACT.- Case studies of up to 4 regions, survey, interviews.- Thematic seminars with groups of MS, expert meetings.
24European Territorial Co-operation Questions for Member States:Any evaluations available or planned in ?Can you suggest academic experts and literature?Any nominations for programmes to be evaluated?Contact in DG REGIO: Juliet Martinez
25Geography of expenditure Why this evaluation? to determine the regional breakdown of ERDF and CF at NUTS3 for each general category of expenditures.Questions: 1. What is the regional breakdown at NUTS3 level for each general category of expenditures financed from ERDF /CF?2. Are there significant differences between payments and commitments data?Methods: Desk research, quantitative (especially statistical) analysis and reliability checks, samples, surveys, other sources of information outside of the monitoring systemContact in REGIO: Alida STAICUCohesion Policy
26Geography of expenditure - questions for the MS - - Comments on questions and approach?- Do you have NUTS 3 breakdown in your monitoring systems?
27Macro-modelling and econometrics Why this evaluation? Need to estimate impacts at the regional and national levels.Questions: What are the growth and jobs impacts of Cohesion Policy?Methods: 2 Macro-models (RHOMOLO and QUEST) as well as counterfactual econometric workContact in REGIO: Daniel Mouqué
28Delivery systemWhy this evaluation? Wide variation of funding and performance across MS. Delays are widespread.Questions: Reasons for success or failure. Does capacity building make sense? Would a concentration of REGIO on problematic programmes make sense? Is a "lighter" approach to smaller and well-run programmes appropriate?Methods: Literature review, around 15 case studies. Expert meetings, two seminars with MSContact in REGIO: Kai Stryczynski
29Delivery system – questions for Member States Comments on questions and approach?Any volunteers for case studies?Which of your evaluations you recommend? Do you plan more evaluations in ?Can you suggest academic experts and literature?