Transcript Planning and Timely Implementation of Structural Funds

Planning and Timely Implementation
of Structural Funds Interventions
Katarína Mathernová
Director, DG Regional Policy
European Commission
24 November 2005
Brussels
Focus of the Presentation
●
●
Institutional capacity and efficient
government as related to the effective use of
EU Structural funds
Planning and implementation challenges with
particular emphasis on
–
–
The next financing period 2007-2013
Convergence countries/regions, especially the
new Member States
2007-2013: Unprecedented
Challenges
●
●
●
●
●
New MS
Financial flows
averaging around
3.5% GDP p.a.
Step increase
Need for strong
institutional capacity
from the start
Cannot afford “not
getting it right”
●
●
●
●
Ireland 1973-86:
0.9% of GDP and
1987-1999: 1.9% of
GDP
Gradual increase
Institutions built
overtime
Time for “fine-tuning”
and adjustments
overtime
Basic Preconditions to
Successful Implementation
●
●
●
Integration of SF inflows with national
economic and budgetary planning is vital
Strategic approach to programming, based
on economic needs of the MS and its regions
Need for strong central counterpart in each
MS (signalling function; political clout to make difficult
reallocation decisions on n+2)
Partnership, Planning and
Communication
●
●
●
●
●
Developing and perfecting the overall
strategy is important but not sufficient
Delivery structures play an important role in
successful implementation of programmes
(and financial absorption)
Centralised vs. decentralised system
IRL: Centralised, but balanced by a broad and genuine
consultations with key domestic stakeholders
Three important components: partnership,
planning and communication
Partnerships
●
●
●
●
●
Between the MS and the EC (who shares the
same goals)
Among central government ministries and
departments
With regional authorities and municipalities
With social partners and
With private stakeholders
● Effective coordination is key
● Broad and early consultation with
stakeholders important
Planning
●
●
●
●
●
●
Strategic priorities vs. “dividing the cake”
Early political agreement on the content and
process of planning procedures – important to
strengthen the ability of key officials to deliver on the
chosen strategy
Ex-ante evaluation – a good tool to ensure that
operational elements of programmes consistent with
objectives
Delivery structures and capacity
Project pipeline
Flexible programming – pick “early winners”
(high spending elements early in each OP)
Planning for Implementation
●
●
●
●
Once programmes agreed upon, project
implementation starts
Project pipeline
Only strong and well developed priority
projects should go first
Preparation of works (project documentation)
needs to be ready to avoid current time lags
between project approval and
commencement of works (selection and
tendering procedures)
●
Ex ante and ongoing evaluation
Communication
●
●
●
Among government agencies involved in
various OPs
Vis-a-vis final beneficiaries – often good
schemes fail due to the lack of
communication where procedures for
accessing funds are too complex
Wider public, where transparency and
credibility of selection procedures is critical
Tools to assist
●
JASPERS – a joint initiative of EC, EIB and
EBRD
–
–
–
–
–
●
To assist the new MS with project preparation in
the programming and planning stages
A new entity with about 60 staff in Lux and
regional offices
Annual action plans per country
Concentration on large projects, but not
exclusively
Voluntary instrument for MS
Technical assistance in the CF and ERDF
To sum up...
●
●
●
●
The next period – a great opportunity but
also a big challenge
The step increase in resources will require
strong institutional capacity and coordination
P-P-C
But keep in mind. . .financial absorption is not
an end in itself! What matters is physical
investments and good quality projects that
contribute to economic development and real
convergence of the new MS and their regions
with the rest of the EU.