Regional Policy 2011 Annual reports EU Overview reporting 23/11 – MS Evaluation Network REGIO B2 – Evaluation and European Semester J Walsh / A Abdulwahab

Regional Policy Key points Focus of strategic reports / calendar Data transfer Indicators / evaluations - Core indicators (ERDF/CF) Categorisation (inputs) – Dimensions Next steps Submisison / publication COCOF presentations – early 2012 End March Commisison summary Inter institutional debates

Regional Policy Focus of NSRs 2012 Clear picture on programme implementation and achievements of CP compared to its objectives – evidence on the performance and effectiveness Assessing impacts of the economic and financial crisis on the programmes Contribution to Europe 2020 and Growth Compact A source of input to the next round of programming - good data quality important

Regional Policy Time Schedule June 2012 Submission of OP annual reports July 2012 Following the submission of the 2011 AIRs, the Commission will engage in quality checks and seek to correct with the programmes the clear inaccuracies – Deadline 30/9/2012 October 2012 Commission will present the MS with a harmonised analysis of the data from the AIR Commission will provide each MS with an extract from its database on the financial implementation of the Ops December 2012 The body of the reports should be presented electronically through SFC, by no later than 31/12/2012

Regional Policy Core Indicators 2012: Progress Achieved Results of 2011: Programmes accelerating, progress against all core indicators Reporting on targets have improved but achievements are still better reported Increased coverage but not all OPs reporting core indicators Reporting actual values (instead of contracted) increased Many technical problems seem resolved Decimals: dot vs. comma Typos or incomprehensible numbers 5

Regional Policy Most Frequent Problems Much of the data in SFC is still of insufficient quality for automatic aggregation. Recurrent mistakes: Not Cumulative (vs. annual) values Incorrect Measurement units – i.e. measurement unit for induced investment (m vs ) Missing target values Baselines are included in target values Quality of job creation indicator: completion vs. construction, double counting, men+women 6

Regional Policy Categorisation - introductory remarks Categorisation … vital part of monitoring, transparency, strategic reports An information system (not control / eligibility) for tracking financial inputs Decided Programmed Reprogramming Allocated to projects, by MS, Objective, themes But not procured or spent Progress, improvements in reliability

Regional Policy Overview Project selection data 1.Priority Themes a)By MS b) By themes c) Lisbon earmarking d) Reprogramming 2.Form of finance 3.Territorial dimension 4.Economic Dimension 5.Location – NUTS

Regional Policy 1. Project Selection - aggregate trends DateEUR Billion% allocated 09/ % 12/ % 12/ % 12/ % Mid-2012 (informal) % Total Budget decided (2012) %

Regional Policy 1 a) Allocated reported by Member States Compare each MS to EU average.. why? Different selection procedures / definitions Different balances between Infrastructure and soft measures Remaining data weaknesses (+/- 8 bn corrections 2011): Annualised / non cumulative reporting; Some reports not based on selection but procurement, spending; Missing / incomplete / erroneous data.

Regional Policy Allocated 2010

Regional Policy Allocated 2011

Regional Policy Allocated mid /2012)

Regional Policy Allocated (2011) vs payments (09/2012)

Regional Policy MS trends NB: Differences in selection definitions … but expect that MS uses it own defintion consistently Some MS have already front loaded – 100% selection (risk of dormant projects ? failure in implementation?) Some MS have indicated that open selection processes will soon see full allocation (i.e. DE, PL, UK) Other MS have still have to formalise significant selection processes

Regional Policy 1 b) Thematic Implemenation by Objective

Regional Policy Project Selection major themes

Regional Policy Components of "Rail"

Regional Policy

Components of "road"

Regional Policy

GR= 460%; DK = 570%

Regional Policy

Components of ENV

Regional Policy Thematic trends Data already 11 Months old … long time lag Persistent sectoral delays in some MS clear Rail, Energy, Broadband, Capacity Building, Etc; Growing signs of over / under programming not reflected in formal reprogramming;

Regional Policy Convergence – AIR 2011 – rate of selection by Lisbon earmarks

Regional Policy 1 c) Convergence : Rate of implementation of Lisbon earmarking 2010 AIR

Regional Policy RCE : 2011 AIR Rate of selection by Lisbon earmarks CZ: 250% or over for Lisbon / non-Lisbon; GR: 216% for Lisbon earmarked

Regional Policy RCE : 2010 AIR Rate of implementation of Lisbon earmarking vs non earmarked

Regional Policy 1 d) Reprogramming Can take different forms Thematic reprogramming (see below) Reprogramming co-financing Increase co-financing within regulatory limits Top up (programme countries) Reprogramming to accelerate use flexibility within priority axes

Regional Policy 1 d) Decided thematic reprogramming – 28 billion - 8% total EU NB : IE = 41%

Regional Policy Thematic reprogramming - Graph

Regional Policy Decided reprogramming - EU Positive mNegative m Net Change m Net Change % Rail1, , % Road2, , % Other transport1, , % Energy1, % Broadband % Environment2, , , % Culture & social2, ,578.41, % Innovation & RTD6, ,607.32, % Entrepreneurship , % ICT services1, , % Generic Bus. Supprt1, % Human capital , , % Labour market2, , % Capacity Building % Social Inclusion % Territorial Dimension1, % Technical Assistance % Sum:28, ,069.72,421.4

Regional Policy Other Dimensions …

Regional Policy Form of finance

Regional Policy Form of finance

Regional Policy Territorial Dimension

Regional Policy Territorial Dimension

Regional Policy Territorial Dimension Comments: -Improved ventilation: IT, UK NB: Rural = Mountains, Islands, sparsly populated, RUP and other rural Other = ex-Border regions, Cooperation (transnational, interrregional..)

Regional Policy Economic end use – 2010

Regional Policy Economic Dimension – AIR 2011

Regional Policy Economic Dimension Less than 20% of allocations to projects not allocated to economic end use; … but very high rates of non allocation in UK, LU, FR, BE, IE, BG, DK and ETC; Improved reporting in SE; Neary 60% allocated to service sectors - including 'public sector'.

Regional Policy

PT = 50%

Regional Policy Labour Market measures (63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 69) by economic sector – AIR 2011

Regional Policy Location (NUTS 2/3)

Regional Policy Next Steps National reports – by end 2012 Outputs / results / evaluations Crisis response EUROPE 2020 contribution Future pointers / reprogramming / post2014 COCOF presentations by delegations Commission analysis Report by 31/3/2013