1. Viimsi Spa, Estonia 15th September, 2011 LEADER approach today and after 2013 – new challenges Petri Rinne ELARD CLLD as a Successful Story in the Czech Republic 2014 – 2020? Ing. Radim Srsen, Ph.D. President of ELARD http://www.elard.eu Brussels, Belgium 28th May, 2014

2. New EU Programming Period

3. Why territorial dimension in the EU?

4. Why territorial dimension ?  Difference in GDP/pax between the most developed and poorest EU region is 13x  The richest EU region is 3x above EU average, the poorest one 4x below  Significant polarisation between rural and urban areas, esp. in SE Europe – Bratislava, Praha, Budapest  Tematic interventions in the current programming period 2014 – 2020 proved to support and deepen the inequality between rural and urban areas

5. What are the instruments to face it ???  ITI (Integrated Territorial Investments)  Top-down approach  Strategic integrated investments to the area specified in advance  Combination of soft and hard instruments  Combination of different EU funds + interventions = synergy effect  Engaging all stakeholders = public-private partnership  Delegation of in-advance planning, decision making and financing to the hands of regional players = „EU subsidiarity principle“

6. What are the instruments to face it ???  CLLD (Community-led local development)  Area-based approach  Bottom-up approach  Local public-private partnerships: Local Action Groups  Innovative approach  Integrated and multi-sectoral approach  Networking  Cooperation  De-centralised administration

7. EUROPE 2020 Strategy Smart growth Sustainable growth Inclusive growth Disappearing regional disparities Importance of linkages between rural and urban areas Multilevel governance and subsidiarity Inclusion of all stakeholders in the process of planning and implementing integrated strategies of local development

8. TERRITORIAL DIMENSION IN THE CZ INTEGRATED INSTRUMENT Region Town with surround. area Town with surround. area LAG ITI IPTD CLLD RPC NPC Metropolitan areas Regional centres Rural areas OPERATIONAL PROGRAMES Coordination MMR ORSPMMR NOC MAsStakeholders

9. Identification Process Problem Area due to PA Identified Problems due to PA OP – specific goals Selected needs of development with Territorial Dimension EU tematic goals

10. Schematic illustration of TD types of territories

11. ITI metropolitních oblastí schématické znázornění Pražská metropolitní oblast. Ostravská metropolitní oblast. Brněnská metropolitní oblast. Plzeňská metropolitní oblast. Hradecko- pardubická metropolitní oblast. Ústecko – chomutovská metropolitní oblast

12. LEADER – successful Czech story ? 12

13. EU Integrated Instruments 2014 – 2020 Region ITI Metropolitan Area / IPTD CLLD/LAG ITI ESTC Border of a counntry Border of a country

14. 14 Local action group ERDF ESFEAFRD EMFF Local governmentsLocal entrepreneursLocal NGOs, civil society LOCAL DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY Project 3 EAFRD Project 3 EMFF Running costs, animation, networking possibly through „lead Fund “ Project 1 ERDF Project 2 ESF

15. From the governance point of view: door openers needed!

16. Place-based interests Project organisations Businesses Non-profit organisations CREATIVE PERSONS Local municipalities Professional associations Universities Other interests From the “glocal” point of view: door openers needed!

17. CLLD in the Czech Republic  Total allocation: cca 1billion EUR Integrated Regional Development Program – 37% Rural Development Program – 17% OP Employment – 11% OP Enviroment – 5% OP Industry, Innovation for Competition – 12%??? OP Education – 8% OP Technical Assistance – 10% (running costs)

18. Role of LAGs in the Czech Republic  LAG as LEADER/CLLD implementation body  LAG as beneficiary  LAG as animator in the rural areas  LAG as a building stone of partnership and strategy on regional level

19. Struggle for CLLD +++++++  huge support of regional partners Accociation of Local Governments Association of Regions Accociation of Cities National Network of LAGs  very good political support  strength of the National Network of LAGs 178 out of 181 LAGs as members  almost 100% coverage of area

20. Struggle for CLLD - - - - - - -  political instability  institutional instability  length and exhausting from the negotiating process  LEADER as such very limited in relation to LAG needs  at least 5% co-financing of running and animation costs (and just 10% overall)

21. Think globally… …act locally

22. MANY THANKS FOR YOUR ATTENTION! Radim SRSEN ELARD President radimbz@seznam.cz http://www.elard.eu European LEADER Association for Rural Development (ELARD) Rue du Trone 60 B-1050 Brussels