State of play of Leader/CLLD preliminary analysis #LeaderCLLD Urszula Budzich-Tabor, ENRD CP Brussels, 23 June 2015
DG AGRI analysis of draft RDPs
Indicative allocation of budget for LEADER (total public): 9.4 billion ( 8.9 in 2007-2013) 3
Planned number of Local Action Groups per MS; ca. 2050 in total (2416 in 2007-2013) 4
Significant differences in planned allocation for sub-measures, e.g.: 30 25 20 15 10 lowest % highest% average % 5 0 Cooperation (incl. preparation) Running costs and animation
Financial data on Measure 19 (Leader) based on 46 out of 51 RDPs approved by 26 May 2015
PL CZ RO AT 75 70 65 60 UK - England DE - Bavaria BG FI - Mainland Finland LT SE SK PT - Continental Portugal HR DE - Lower Saxony + Bremen SI LV DE - Saxony IE DK EE DE - Hesse DE - North Rhine-Westphalia DE - Saxony-Anhalt DE - Schleswig-Holstein UK - Scotland ES - Aragón NL DE - Baden-Württemberg UK - Wales BE - Flanders DE - Rhineland-Palatinate DE - Thuringia DE - Berlin + Brandenburg DE - Mecklenburg-Vorpommern IT - Veneto IT - Toscana IT - Bolzano IT - Emilia-Romagna DE - Saarland PT - Azores ES - La Rioja FR - Mayotte PT - Madeira ES - País Vasco FI - Åland 300,00 No of LAGs selected 250,00 256 200,00 160 150,00 120 100,00 50,00 54 50 50 50 47 45 40 33 32 29 28 26 26 24 24 23 22 21 20 20 18 18 15 15 15 14 13 8 7 6 5 4 4 3 3 2 1 1 0,00
DE - Saxony DE - Berlin + Brandenburg DE - Saarland ES - País Vasco DE - Rhineland-Palatinate DE - Hesse EE DE - Schleswig-Holstein ES - Aragón NL DE - Saxony-Anhalt DE - Mecklenburg-Vorpommern RO ES - La Rioja PT - Azores IE PT - Madeira DE - North Rhine-Westphalia UK - Scotland IT - Toscana DK IT - Veneto LT DE - Lower Saxony + Bremen IT - Emilia-Romagna DE - Thuringia IT - Bolzano PL PT - Continental Portugal LV SK CZ UK - Wales SI SE DE - Baden-Württemberg BG DE - Bavaria FR - Mayotte UK - England BE - Flanders FI - Mainland Finland AT HR FI - Åland 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 3% 3% 3% 10% 9% 9% 8% 8% 11% 14% 13% 26% 40% 45% 40% M19 planned budget (total public) as % of total planned budget 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0%
ENRD CP screening of 28 Partnership Agreements (April 2015) with updates from some MS
MS planning to support multi-funded strategies no: BE, EE, HR, HU, IE, LU, MT and NL yes: AT, BG, CZ, DE, DK, ES, FI, FR, GR, IT, LT, LV, PL, PT, SE, SI, SK and UK perhaps: CY and RO 2 8 18
ESI Funds other than EAFRD involved in CLLD (multi-funded or single-funded LAGs) only ERDF: AT, SK ERDF & EMFF: SI ERDF & ESF: CZ, HU ERDF, ESF & EMFF: BG, DE, ES, GR, IT, PL, PT, RO, SE, UK mainly EMFF: CY, DK, EE, FI, HR, IE, LV 7 2 1 2 10
Examples of MS allocation 1 000 000 000 900 000 000 800 000 000 700 000 000 600 000 000 500 000 000 400 000 000 300 000 000 EMFF ESF ERDF EAFRD 200 000 000 100 000 000 0 Czech Republic Spain Hungary Sweden
Member States with CLLD possible also in urban areas: 16 12 Also urban areas: CZ, ES, FI, GR, HU, LT, NL, PL, PT, RO, SE, UK Only rural and fisheries areas
Other observations from PA screening Coordination mostly described in terms of demarcation, with the primary aim of avoiding overlap Measures to ensure a coordinated approach include: - Joint MA for all CLLD Funds (SE) - Joint body with delegated responsibilities (DK) - Joint Monitoring Committee (UK Sc) - Nominating a Lead Ministry (SK) - National Permanent Conference (CZ)
Leader/CLLD survey ENRD CP analysis April-May 2015
March-May 2015, questionnaire Information collected through: 1. Informal national LEADER networks and ELARD 2. MA and/or NRNs 3. ENRD Geographical Experts 30 filled questionnaires 20 Member States Note: the survey is based to a large extent on the subjective assessment of the respondents
LAG skills and skill gaps In most MS the skills of old LAGs will be to some extent used in the new period MS expecting a significant proportion of new LAGs: CZ, DE, FR, IT; new people joining the LAGs e.g. UK (Wales), IE With some exceptions, LAGs tend to have strong skills in: - Strategy development - Budget management Potential good practices: DE, EE, NL, SE, UK (England) LAGs may need capacity building in particular in: - Setting indicators and carrying out evaluation - Coordinating different funds Potential good practices: LV, SE
Examples of LAG capacity building: training/seminars: - Innovation (e.g. BE (WAL), RO) - Communication, including social media (e.g. BE (WAL), DE, NL) - Financial instruments (micro-credit, crowdfunding) (DE) - Public procurement, including e-procurement (EE, LT, RO) - Monitoring and evaluation, self-evaluation (BE (FL), DE, NL, PT, UK (WA)) - Audit, document management etc. (LT, UK (EN)) - Quality assurance (FI)
Examples of LAG capacity building: other tools - Coaching, peer learning, mentoring, communities of practice, new LAGs learning from old ones (e.g. BE (FL), BE (WAL), CZ, DE, NL) - Helplines, on-line FAQs, expert support by telephone (SE) - Support material on website, with examples of forms, documents etc. (EE, SE) - Feedback on draft strategies (FI) - Newsletter (SE) - Guidance for applicants to be customised at LAG level (UK EN)
Examples of MA/PA capacity building: Cooperation and regular exchange with NRN (DE, SE, UK (EN)); meetings between MA, PA and LAGs facilitated by the NRN (EE) Periodic meetings (3-4 times a year in PL) or video-conferences (monthly in FI) Training of MA/PA staff as trainers or facilitators for LAGs (PT evaluation, UK (EN)) Training for new MAs (e.g. regional FR, other CLLD Funds IT) FAQs and interpretation documents (FR, PL)
Proposed or suggested tools for MA/PA capacity building: Field trips (exposure visits) to get to know rural reality Study visits to see how the system works in other MS Training on simplification and supporting TNC Internships in LAGs
Emerging possibilities of exchange ( match-making ) Theme Experience needed Experience available in by Involving farmers BE (FL), BE (WA), PT RO, EE (successfully involving different actors) Animation skills GR IT (evaluating animation capacity) Social media ES NL, DE Multi-funding EE PL, SE; IT and LV (MA training) CZ (mentoring)
Themes of potential joint interest: Theme Social innovation, social enterprise, inclusion... Integration of migrants Urban-rural linkages Innovative approaches: action planning, U- theory Working with young people Improving delivery: sharing of responsibilities between MA, PA, NRN, LAG; simplified cost options etc. Supporting and approving TNC projects MS potentially interested to explore ES, HU, LT... DE, SE... BE (FL), HU, NL... NL, UK, FR... LT, LV, NL... BE (FL), DE, FR, IT... BE (FL), DE, EE, IT...
Themes for future work agreed by the Leader/CLLD subgroup meeting in April 2015 Approaches to multi-funding Delivery systems (simplification, umbrella projects, roles) Capacity building for LAGs How to support TNC effectively Measuring the success of Leader/CLLD Leader/CLLD as a tool to achieve local development priorities (creating jobs, targeting the young or the elderly, addressing poverty and social inclusion) Leader/CLLD and innovation LAGs as communicators