1. LDMR Programme A good practice for integrated development in Hungary 31st March 2011

2. 1.The importance of integrated approach in Cohesion Policy and in the LDMR Programme 2.The concept and methodology of the LDMR Programme 3.Lessons learnt from the LDMR Programme

3. 1.The importance of integrated approach in Cohesion Policy and in the LDMR Programme 2.The concept and methodology of the LDMR Programme 3.Lessons learnt from the LDMR Programme

4. Integrated approach in Cohesion Policy - 1 A horizontal issue, repeatedly raised during the debate on the future of Cohesion Policy An important factor and a good practice of the policy – Multi-level governance developments aligned with territorial needs and potentials, at the same time compatible with EU level objectives – Multi-sectoral nature complex management of various development needs; synergistic effects Integrated approach: simultaneous, harmonised management of the development objectives and aspects of different nature and of different levels - more effective

5. Integrated approach in Cohesion Policy - 2 Place-based approach / integrated approach with more emphasis in various key EU-documents (some examples): – Territorial Agenda, 2007: encourages furthering territorial cohesion – Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion, 2008: further emphasises importance of territorial dimension – Lisbon Treaty, 2009: territorial cohesion as an objective – EU2020 Strategy, 2010: increased role of regional/local levels – 5th Cohesion Report, 2010: CSF, territorial cohesion, partnership, local development Local development, generally: place-based, endogenous development process; bottom-up approach, participative; integrates different actors and sectors

6. LDMR Programme – an integrated local development initiative The LDMR Programme was a local development initiative with resource allocation on the basis of micro-regional strategic plan Innovative solutions: with place-based, integrated programme for the development actions aligned with territorial needs and for the efficiency in the uptake of funds – In Hungary, development gaps within NUTS2 or even LAU1/NUTS4 level eligibility areas as subregional units (micro- region) – The development objectives and the implementation process respected the local socio-economic and environmental aspects and synergies – Actively involved local communities in order to ensure long term synergies

7. 1.The importance of integrated approach in Cohesion Policy, and in the LDMR Programme 2.The concept and methodology of the LDMR Programme 3.Lessons learnt from the LDMR Programme

8. Reasons for launching a local development type programme - 1 (HUF 1000/inhabitant) The LDMR Programme, and the micro-regional planning process were introduced on the recognistion of practical problems in getting access to development finance: The spatial distribution of grants did not help efficiently the convergence of the least developed micro-regions…

9. Reasons for launching a local development type programme - 2 The grant application schemes often hinder the implementation of complex projects Generally, local actors submit their applications without territorial coordination – no or negative synergies Previous micro regional planning exercises were not attached to financial allocations Most of the projects aimed at infrastructure development – training, employment, and Roma integration interventions remained at the level of plans The mobilisation of internal resources is difficult on both the economic and social side Further reasons:

10. Objectives of the Programme - 1 Many micro-regions face growing problems, such as poverty, unemployment, the lack of enterprises and quality public services: social injustice is inherited from generation to generation Particularly adverse effects on Roma population Low level of economic, infrastructural development Unemployment Serious educational and health deficiencies More people living in poverty, irreversible process

11. Objectives of the Programme - 2 In 2008 the LDMR Programme addressed these issues: complex, targeted, territorial and resource- based approach Aims: – Stop the widening of development gaps – Stronger focus on the micro-regions needs, development schemes and potentials – Without significantly changing an approved and working system of operational programmes!

12. Planning the Programme - 1 First: identified the 33 LDMRs using a complex indicator involving 32 (social, economic and infrastructural) indicators - situated in four different NUTS2 regions

13. Planning the Programme - 2 Pre-allocated budget: HUF 96.9 bn (EUR 358 mn) Distribution: 1/3 evenly distributed, 1/3 per number of inhabitants, 1/3 per number of settlements Resources per micro-region: HUF 1.3-4.3 bn (EUR 4.8-15.9 mn) From a total of 8 OPs – 6 OPs provided financial contribution to project implementation – 2 OPs supported the technical assistance to planning (local capacity building, facilitation, etc.) Development areas: economic, settlements, human infra, human resource

14. The local planning process: unified methodology Formalised planning Unified methodology Involvement of local actors Min. 7 events 150 / 5000 participants Roma participation Output Micro-regional development strategy and project package Reserve project list Approval, submission Development Committee (partnership) Council of the Micro-region Capacity building, Devt. Committee (SROP) Coordinators (IOP) Lead/sectoral experts (IOP) Equal opport. experts (IOP) Statistical data (IOP)

15. Assessment of planning documents Overall detailed assessment NDA, line ministries, RDAs Personal consultation with each micro- region This dialogue is lacking from the normal process Central panel Preliminary approval of projects NDA, line ministries, Child Poverty, civil organisation Dedicated calls, elaboration Announcement, detailed elaboration of pre- approved projects Approval, implementation In the usual way

16. 1.The importance of integrated approach in Cohesion Policy, and in the LDMR Programme 2.The concept and methodology of the LDMR Programme 3.Lessons learnt from the LDMR Programme

17. The positive results of the integrated local development approach - 1 Level of the statistical micro-region closer to the local needs and potentials A better coordination of resources at the programme level (various OPs, more complex management of problems) … …and at project level (higher cross-financing rate, efficient dialogue – harmonisation of resources and local needs, the calls for proposals adapted to micro-regions needs) Lagging-behind areas: lighter and more flexible terms, independent from the competition easier access to funds Involvement of civil organizations and the business sector active cooperation of local stakeholders… Helped to reinforce ownership and local governance:

18. The positive results of the integrated local development approach - 2 …Improvement of the rural-urban relations (planning requirement to take into account the infrastructure conditions and deficiencies, and [public] services) Dialogue between the micro-regions and the institutions first-hand information, coordination of needs and resources Allocation of the resources for each micro-region cost- effective planning External support elimination of the lack of local expertise, experience and lack of resources, facilitation Projects to truly assist the most disadvantaged communities reducing disparities within the given territory

19. Factors hindering the implementation of the Programme Mono-fund system: sometimes unfavourable structure of OPs; further limitation by the national action plans, and calls for applications Limited cross-financing, different eligibility, contracting, reporting and control routines Differences between the funding mechanism of EAFRD and Structural Funds – real problem because of the rural character of these micro-regions Unusual processes: difficult to manage (e.g. information asymmetry, inflexible call criteria, communication problems of a process with multiple actors) The attitude of local stakeholders, the lack of experience in local planning and cooperation, background deals Primarily caused by the structure of the grant application system, the legal regulations, and difficulties at local level

20. Overall conclusions The LDMR Programme was a complex and resource-consuming process The importance and necessity of the integrated approach is undisputable, but … … the local development approach is not a universal response, on the other hand, in many cases the implementation of such integrated programmes is a best solution: – Strengthens cohesion at different levels – Allows complex management of problems, strongly highlights the local needs and potentials, and aligns them with common objectives – Partnerships and endogenous processes may be a basis for take-off and long term development of a given territory How to go on? – Improvement of the concept: use of the lessons learnt + solution of identified problems – Integrated, place-based, complex, multisectoral use of the different resources – Further strengthen the integrated approach = more effective achievement of Cohesion Policy objectives

21. Thank you for your attention