The LEADER+ Synthesis Evaluation Expert Meeting on Guidance for Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework Seminar in Monitoring and Evaluation of the.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Support for the coordination of activities TECHNOLOGY PLATFORMS Context, Rationale and State of Play Presentation by Julie Sors European Commission Rotterdam,
Advertisements

REGIONAL (TERRITORIAL) DEVELOPMENT
1 The new ESF Investing in your Future -
Jean-Michel Courades, DG AGRI Rural Development Networking and Cooperation
Partnerships: influencing local economic and employment development Brussels, October 9th, 2007 Gabriela Miranda Policy Analyst OECD, LEED Programme.
Commission européenne The European Social Fund Investing in your Future.
1 EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region Evaluation: Setting Outcome Indicators and Targets Seminar: 15 March 2011, La Hulpe Veronica Gaffey Acting Director.
1 DG Regio Evaluation Network Meeting Albert Borschette, Brussels, 14 October 2010 Ex post evaluation of Interreg III - Presentation of Final Results Pasi.
Samuele Dossi DG for Regional Policy - Evaluation
Community Strategic Guidelines DG AGRI, July 2005 Rural Development.
European Week of Regions and Cities The Leader Approach from a Local Perspective Günter Salchner LAG Ausserfern/Austria.
Oct Przemyśl, Polska One LAG, one life Robert Lukesch International LEADER Conference.
LEADER (M) Preliminary thoughts on preparing the future Leader+ Steering Committee Meeting / Leader+ Observatory Seminar Brussels / Belgium – 29 June 2006.
Cyprus Project Management Society
Seminar on community-led local development Keeping it simple Brussels, 6 February
Leader as a part of the new CAP
LEADER -The acronym ‘LEADER' derives from the French words "Liaison Entre Actions de Développement de l'Économique Rurale“ which means, ‘Links between.
Implementation of Leader Axis measures by Jean-Michel Courades AGRI-F3.
ATI Inea-Agriconsulting Italian Network Unit Leader + Kraków, Polska December the 1st, 2005 C. Andrea Pelagallo Deputy Coordinator of the Italian Network.
How the European Social Fund can contribute to social enterprises? Workshop 7: Structural funds (ESF, ERDF) for social enterprises Strasbourg, 16 January.
Managing authorities working with cities Regions for Economic Change 17 th February 2009 Peter Ramsden Pole Manager.
Regional Policy Managing Authorities of the ETC programmes Annual Meeting W Piskorz, Head of Unit Competence Centre Inclusive Growth, Urban and.
The implementation of the rural development policy and its impacts on innovation and modernisation of rural economy Christian Vincentini, European Commission.
Riga – Latvia, 4 & 5 December 2006
“Implementation of the bottom-up approach under Axis 4. LEADER - Main conclusions and key elements from Extended report “ by Mr. Panayiotis PATRAS, ELARD.
EU-Regional Policy Structural actions 1 LESSONS FROM THE THEMATIC EVALUATION OF THE TERRITORIAL EMPLOYMENT PACTS Veronica Gaffey, DG Regional.
The place-based approach for territorial cohesion in the EU policies 5 November, Rome Patrick Salez DG REGIO, Directorate for Policy conception and coordination.
OVERVIEW OF LEADER METHOD IMPLEMENTATION The Ministry of Agriculture of the Republic of Lithuania RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Chief specialist.
Contribution of the Territorial Cooperation Programmes to the EU Strategy for the Danube Region Kiril Geratliev, Director General “Territorial Cooperation.
The LEADER approach to integrated rural development in the EU UNDP International Conference, Kosice, 5 October 2009 Jean-Michel COURADES AGRI G1 - Consistency.
Guidance notes on the Intevention Logic and on Building a priority axis 27 September 2013.
Strategic Priorities of the NWE INTERREG IVB Programme Harry Knottley, UK representative in the International Working Party Lille, 5th March 2007.
Regional Policy Common Strategic Framework The Commission's revised proposal for the CPR - COM (2012) 496 of 11 Sept.
Governing rural-urban partnerships: lessons from the field Betty-Ann Bryce Regional Development Policy Division, Public Governance.
LEADER Funding tool or philosophy for successful and sustainable development Successful implementation of LEADER with reference to specific cases.
1 European Union Regional Policy – Employment, Social Affairs and Inclusion Community-led local development Articles of the Common Provisions Regulation.
Transnacionalno teritorialno sodelovanje Program Jugovzhodna Evropa Margarita Jančič, MOP,DEZI Novo mesto,17. april 2008.
1 LIFE+ COUNCIL WORKING GROUP 4 OCTOBER Discussion Points 1. LIFE+ in Context: Environment funding under the Financial Perspectives.
Ⓒ Judith Bermúdez Morte LEADER experience, lessons for the future György MUDRI, European Commission DG AGRI G.1 Building bridges for Transnational Cooperation-
EU COMMON STRATEGIC FRAMEWORK FUNDS IN ENGLAND INITIAL PROPOSALS FROM HMG 21 NOVEMBER 2012.
EU Projects – FP7 Workshop 6: EU Funding –What’s Next? Carolina Fernandes Innovation & Funding Manager GLE Group.
LEADER / CLLD Approach and expectations from the EU - Pedro Brosei 28 October 2015.
The LEADER approach and the Community-Led Local Development
1 EUROPEAN FUNDS IN HALF-TIME NEW CHALLENGES Jack Engwegen Head of the Czech Unit European Commission, Directorate General for Regional Policy Prague,
Focus on Governance and territorial achievements in Leader Plus period European Commission Évora, Portugal, 2007 Jela Tvrdonova.
REGIONAL POLICY EUROPEAN COMMISSION The contribution of EU Regional/Cohesion programmes Corinne Hermant-de Callataÿ European Commission,
Seminar on community-led local development How to choose effective strategies, strong partnerships and coherent areas? Key building blocks for.
Jela Tvrdonova, The EU priorities:  Use the Leader approach for introducing innovation in the thematic axis  better governance at the local level.
Interreg IIIB Trans-national cooperation: Budget comparison : 440 million EURO 420 m EURO (Interreg IIC prog.) + 20 m EURO (Pilot Actions)
The delivery of rural development policies: Some reflections on problems and perspectives in EU countries INEA conference: The territorial approach in.
The EU Water Initiative and the EU ACP Facility New Instruments to promote sustainable development of water resources and affordable access Antonio Garcia-Fragio.
URBACT IMPLEMENTATION NETWORKS. URBACT in a nutshell  European Territorial Cooperation programme (ETC) co- financed by ERDF  All 28 Member States as.
"The role of Rural Networks as effective tools to promote rural development" TAIEX/Local Administration Facility Seminar on Rural Development Brussels,
URBACT INFODAYS PORTUGAL TOWARDS URBACT III Lisbon 21st January 2015.
Principles 7 Main obstacles articulated in implementing the leading ESF Principles  Uncertainty on advantages  Assumed higher administrative costs 
Leader Axis Rural Development Policy by Jean-Michel Courades AGRI-F3.
Regional Policy Integrated Territorial Approaches Madrid, 22 February 2013.
1 Wladyslaw Piskorz Head of Unit ‘Urban development, territorial cohesion’ European Commission Directorate-General for Regional Policy Seminar organised.
CLLD in Portugal Minha Terra Network (Member of ELARD)
Leader as a part of the new CAP
ESF Committee plenary meeting in Rome
Northern Periphery Programme Preparatory Project
Workshop with the 8 PAF related Proposals & the Habitats Committee
EuropeAid F3 Roberto Ridolfi, Head of Unit F3
A new financial instrument
ODRAZ - Sustainable Community Development / EESC
Purpose of the presentation
Technical Working Group meeting 21 March 2012 Brussels
Evaluation network meeting Brussels, September 22, 2009
Commission proposal for a new LIFE Regulation CGBN meeting
Presentation transcript:

The LEADER+ Synthesis Evaluation Expert Meeting on Guidance for Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework Seminar in Monitoring and Evaluation of the LEADER Approach Brussels / Belgium – 25 September 2006 Bernd Schuh

Some aspects emerging from the MTE evaluations

From LEADER II to LEADER+ and further... LEADER I future LEADER II LEADER+ LEADER (M) innovation activation potential Co-operations and networking LEADER spirit higher maturity higher activation of actors and better cooperation better performance higher influence in RD LEADER is (still) fun integration in RD LEADER is definitely accepted key role for fostering integrated sustainable development more isolated comparably small programme increase of bureaucracy common understanding of vocabulary only in some countries connected to mainstream RD risk of losing juvenile lightness and dynamics competition between RD measures learning

LEADER Mainstream programme The place of LEADER in rural development Mainstream programme LEADER Programme Rural Policy Programme L LAG Programme L Structuring combined programme delivery at local level Incubator/pathfinder Niche specialist The beating heart of mainstream rural policy

Lessons from LEADER+ Problems with the rules of the game Different interpretation of features: bottom-up approach, pilot nature, delimitation of areas The restrictive character of some rules: –n+2: speed kills –Priority themes – nice, but... –Global Grant – fascinating and ambiguous –Evaluation – too early, too little

Bottom-up Authorities Local people LAG Connecting and improving the two realms of bottom-up is a matter of multi- tier learning Real bottom-up is definitely not the opposite of top-down!

Balanced pilot strategies Some stakeholders are satisfied that at least the local elite is mobilised by LEADER. Others want an inclusive approach, but see the limits. There are at least three mechanisms working for a balanced strategy: -Good LAG staffing for animation -Eligibility of voluntary work and labour contribution -Advance payments

Area delimitation Social Capital Human Capital Institutional Capital Thematic/variable geometry Felt identity / Administrative boundaries /

Thresholds and limits to : what for? Even if mitigated in the regulation 1698/05, it works like a scissor in administrators heads Ceiling of LAG costs at 15% of total budget: could be detrimental for incipient LAGs, in peripheral areas, in difficult environments 50% public partners: generally accepted and understood, but be aware of circumvention on one side and implicit disregard of public partners on the other; rather pursue actively the tripartite approach

Rural-urban relationships In general less emphasized, except some good examples in densely populated rural areas Again: inhabitants threshold leads to exclusion of towns and markets: the Emmentaler principle Intended territorial split between ERDF and EAFRD in some EU10 countries would annihilate axis 4

European priority themes The four themes: What for? Gender: Some achievements, but more due to the approach itself than to the prescription Youth: Seen as extremely important; some despondency how to address/include them. There are interesting approaches, but more experience is needed

The global grant system GG is seen as key element in decentralised management and financing If the GG is not applied, there is mostly a quasi-GG system respecting strategic sovereignty of the LAG In general, autonomy of LAGs is more respected than in LEADER II GG can be undermined, even reversed in its effects by bureaucracy and co-funding problems

Lessons from LEADER+ P rogramming & implementation Previous experiences: the joker in the game LEADER is a joyful experience - the programme offered high satisfaction to the actors Flexibility to answer the systemic changes & challenges (priority themes, activation) Let the good times come!- the positive results

Lessons from LEADER+ Cooperation/ networking The sleeping giant Expectations: Spreading of know-how and good practice Building up critical mass Pooling of resources Preparing the grounds for / facilitating mainstreaming The reality: The joker previous experience wins again Cooperation/ networking not like in Action 2+3 Problems: the why, the logic, the partners

Complementarities between LEADER and rural development programmes The threat of losing virginity Sustainable regional development as strategic task –difficult starting conditions: Complexity Multi-actor approach Unclear final aim + Administrative framework: Top-down sector policies as competitors Bottom-up: nothing but a brake in efficiency? Overall, commonly accepted, long term strategy in the regions LEADER in conflict with other hinge functions in the areas

The drivers for good LAG performance previous experiences – the joker again a wide range and variety of actors clear common understanding of the terminology Good connection with programme management learning is structured in some way Shiny, happy people