LEADER / CLLD Approach and expectations from the EU - Pedro Brosei 28 October 2015

Added value of CLLD/LEADER 2 ADDED VALUE OF CLLD Flexible response to needs Mobilises knowledge, energy and resources Linkages and synergy. Horizontal and vertical New markets, products, and ways of doing. Social innovation Transfer of good practice, joint solutions to common problems RESULTSRESULTS Networking and cooperation ( also Article 32.. d CPR) Innovation (Article d CPR) Integrated multi -sectoral localstrategies(Article 32.2.c CPR) Community led partnerships - Participatory and partnership approaches (Article 32.2.b CPR) Sub - regional areas - Thelocal territorial approach (Article 32.2.a CPR)

Evolution of the LEADER approach experience Leader I ( ) – experience : following the criticism of the « single project » approach in the structural policy laboratory Leader II ( ) – laboratory : limited to less favoured rural areas, innovation, pilot actions; introduction of transnational cooperation maturity phase Leader + ( ) – maturity phase : eligibility of all rural areas; reinforcement of the role to be played by networks and of transnational cooperation (Leader + type measure for the new Member States ) Leader axis « Integrated Leader » ( ) – Leader axis – no specific Leader programmes; Leader as a methodological approach following the general programming of rural development + LEADER under IPARD, + Axis 4 of the EMFF Leader approach as a base for the community-led local development (CLLD) approach carried out by local actors in the 4 ESI-Funds

4 Community-led local development (CLLD) in the new framework Europe 2020 strategy: Territorial development on sub- regional level as a cross-cutting issue for inclusive growth Common Sttrategig Framework for the ESI-Funds addresses CLLD as a tool for territorial development Partnership Contracts will had to address CLLD Common Provisions Regulation for the ESI-Funds: offers a common approach to support community-led local development: single set of rules (art ), which are complemented by fund-specific features (in case of EAFRD and EMFF).

From LEADER I to LEADER/CLLD FundsEU Budget (EUR)LAGs Leader I EAGGF-Guidance, ESF, ERDF 450 million217 Leader II EAGGF-Guidance, ESF, ERDF 1.7 billion821 Leader EAGGF-Guidance2.1 billion893 in EU-15 (+ 250 under Leader+ type measure in 6 NMS) Leader Axis EAFRD5.5 billion  = 6% of the EAFRD funding Total public: 8.9 billion in 27 Member States CLLD „Leader 5.0“ EAFRD, ESF, ERDF, EMFF EAFRD: +/- 4.5 billion (min. 5% in each RDP) Total public funding in RDPs: 9.4 billion Expected LAGs supported by RDPs in 28 Member States 3

Indicative allocation of budget for LEADER (total public) Source: ENRD LEADER sub-group, state of play: April 2015

ESI-Funds supporting CLLD across MS

Lessons learnt from the past which are reflected in the legal framework Some rigidities in the use of LEADER as driver for CLLD Limited quality of strategies Unclear responsibilities of different involved parties Limited LAG's capacities to develop and implement a Local Development Strategy (LDS) Limited level of participation and limited interest by the private sector 8

What was the way forward for ? Strengthening the role of LDS as central tool to meet core objectives at local level, unlocking strategies from RD measures Greater focus on animation and capacity building Strengthening the participation of the private sector in the partnerships Reinforced networking tools for LAGs on EU and national level Streamlined transnational cooperation 9

High quality local development strategies integrated multi- sectoral Local innovation cooperationnetworking 10 Linkages between develop- ment actions Analysis of the development needs and potential of the area Objectives, including clear and measurable targets for outputs or results Community involvement in the development of the strategy Action plan Management and monitoring arrangements Financial plan(viable budget) (see Art CPR)

Elaboration of local development strategies - Contribution to programme objectives - Coherence and consistency with "top- down" or other strategies - Local needs identified through SWOT analysis - Bottom-up process 11

The mobilisation of the key actors and building the partnerships Build on existing experience whenever possible Encourage bottom-up processes Range of sectors to be included in the partnerships Clarity on the administrative and financial capacity as well as the tasks of LAGs Balance between "public" and "private" and the role of the civil society Working procedures, rules and structures for decision- making 12

Tasks of the LAGs (Art. 34 (3) CPR) a)building the capacity of local actors to develop and implement operations including fostering their project management capabilities; b)drawing up a non-discriminatory and transparent selection procedure and objective criteria for the selection of operations, which avoid conflicts of interest, and ensure that at least 50% of the votes in selection decisions are cast by partners which are not public authorities, and allow selection by written procedure; c)ensuring coherence with the CLLD strategy when selecting operations, by prioritising those operations according to their contribution to meeting that strategy's objectives and targets; d)preparing and publishing calls for proposals or establishing an ongoing project submission procedure, including defining selection criteria; e)receiving and assessing applications for support; f)selecting operations and fixing the amount of support and, where relevant, presenting the proposals to the body responsible for final verification of eligibility before approval; g)monitoring the implementation of the CLLD strategy and the operations supported, and carrying out specific evaluation activities linked to that strategy.

Selection of local development strategies: an effective process Timing: One or several selection rounds Types of calls depending on the readiness of LAGs Selection criteria have to reflect the added value of the CLLD approach Strategies should compete against a common standard rather than against each other Selection committee: Administrative arrangements in case of multi-funding Overall coordination of the selection process 14

How to ensure a more efficient use of LEADER/CLLD? 15 Support capacity-building at all implementation levels Raise awareness of specificities of CLLD for all players involved in CLLD: MAs, Pas, Audit Authorities, LAGs/ project promoters Clear division of responsibilities, avoid duplication Reduce administrative burden for all Simplify procedures for public co-financing Simplified procedures for small projects Simplified cost options (small projects, running costs, etc.) Speed of overall approval process and payments Encourage advance payments (to LAGs and beneficiaries) Keep additional rules to necessary minimum Avoid restrictions of eligibility which limits the capacity of the LAGs to respond to local needs and support innovation Evaluate efficiency of delivery systems

Thank you for your attention!

Advantages of the common CLLD approach Common approach for local development under all European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF): fosters integrated regional development 17 Added value for rural areas: more comprehensive strategies and LAG- partnerships, improvement or rural- urban relationships, synergies with the groups of the fisheries' areas. Harmonized rules for planning and implementation "Multi-Fund" LEADER-strategies enable a contribution of the different related EU policies to reach regional/local Rural area EAFRD ERDF ESF

Member States with CLLD possible also in urban areas