ESF Informal Technical Working Group meeting Support of ESI Funds to the implementation of the Country-Specific Recommendations and Structural Reforms in Member States Andrea Ciffolilli ESF Informal Technical Working Group meeting Brussels, 7-8 February 2017

Key features of the European Semester Country Specific Recommendations (CSR) provide tailor-made policy advice to Member States in priority areas, as part of the annual European Semester exercise. Our study deals with CSR linked to structural reforms, relevant to ESI Funds CSR are anticipated by Country Reports In the following slides, Structural challenges indicate both CSR and additional reform needs extracted from Country Reports

Main objectives of the analysis Assess whether and how ESI Funds contribute to implement structural challenges Conclusions on the role of ESI Funds in supporting structural reforms and Lessons for the preparation of the post 2020 programming period

Key findings of the mapping of structural challenges 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total ESI Funds relevant 235 302 316 239 1,092 332 410 429 333 1,504 Significant variance in contents, scope and depth of policy recommendations underlying structural challenges, across countries 50% of recommendations are repeated in part or fully over the period

What do structural challenges require? More than 73% call for investments, hence may be supported by ESI Funds

Broad areas covered by structural challenges (1) Active labour market and network industries roughly equivalent; 30% of structural challenges not ESIF relevant ESI Funds relevant

Most important ESF policy areas covered by structural challenges (2) Access to employment, inst. Capacity, LM relevance of education & training, integration of youth Active LM 18% Inst. Capacity 12% Edu & training 14% Inclusion, discrim. & poverty 11%

Prevailing target groups Young and older workers at the top of the list; growing importance of migrants

Alignment: to what extent ESI Funds contribute to structural challenges (1) Extensive coverage of structural challenges in programming documents (60% of ESI Funds-relevant structural challenges are addressed by Specific Objectives in the OPs) The Semester was a starting basis for the selection of priorities, especially in relation to ESF and ERDF ESF is helping more to address cyclical adjustment (access to empl., LM integration of youth, of marginalized groups, contrasting discrimination/ poverty, life-long learning…) whilst the other ESI Funds are primarily oriented towards improving the structure of the economy

Alignment: to what extent ESI Funds contribute to structural challenges (2) High alignment between policy areas targeted by the Semester and those addressed by ESI Funds The EU needs to make sure that the alignment is not only formal but leads to actual results Some adjustments may be useful to increase effectiveness

Alignment: to what extent ESI Funds contribute to structural challenges (3) The European Semester Annual policy process but, in practice, its recommendations require longer-term reforms Structural challenges vaguely defined: not clear how the recommendations are to be pursued by Member States ESI Funds ESI Funds governed by a multiannual process and require clear long-term objectives, targets and responsibilities. Cohesion policy is territorial: not necessarily coherent with structural challenges concerning a whole country Funds increasingly used to mitigate negative consequences of the crisis (e.g. need for safeguarding firms and employment), this approach is unlikely to lead to structural changes

Conclusions and lessons for the future (1) Achieving a balance between a bottom up policy approach of Cohesion policy (subsidiarity, multi-level governance, role of partnership…) and a top-down Semester process is challenging The Semester and ESI Funds should both pursue policy coordination and structural changes that may facilitate cohesion More effective alignment can be promoted by intervening on both the Semester and the ESI Funds process

Conclusions and lessons for the future (2) In relation to the European Semester: Ensure more coherence in the scope and depth of structural challenges across countries and over time Set more precise objectives and targets; consider multiannual recommendations and monitoring More attention to regional and cohesion challenges In relation to ESI Funds: Select (priority) structural challenges to be addressed by OPs, where utility and added value of Funds is greater National Governments to agree on explicit road-maps, in consultation with regions, pooling national and ESI Funds Caveats: policy objectives should be in line with available resources new constraints and adding on complexity should be avoided

Thank you for your attention! andrea.ciffolilli@ismerieuropa.com Skype: andreciffo ISMERI EUROPA Srl Research and Consulting Via G. G. Belli 39 00193 Rome, Italy Tel. +39 06 32 6912 www.ismerieuropa.com ROMA