1. The current EMFF performance: assessment of shared management measures
Marta Ballesteros CETMAR
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

2. Index OVERVIEW OF THE EMFF CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION STATUS
FROM DESIGN TO IMPLEMENTATION: MAIN FINDINGS
POLICY RECOMENDATIONS
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

3. EMFF Hierarchy of objectives
1. OVERVIEW OF THE EMFF
EMFF Hierarchy of objectives
Period: Budget: 8.6 billion EU contribution: 6.4 billion Shared management: 89% Member States: 27 Priority Areas: 6
Source: adapted from DG-MARE
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

4. Policy design: innovations in the EMFF
European Structural and Investment Funds
Common Provisions Regulation
Simplification and effectiveness
Reduce administrative cost and burden
Synergies among EU funds
Results-oriented approach
Focus on performance
Systematic use of conditions and incentives
Common Monitoring and Evaluation System
Common indicators for performance assessment
Systematic tool for follow-up and support for decision-making
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

5. 2. CURRENT IMPLEMENTATION STATUS
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

6. Implementation Summary: 2014-2017
Low implementation rate: 7% of the EMFF EU contribution spent
Delays in the launching of the programme at Member State level: effective in 2016.
Higher implementation level in policy related measures and standard concepts
Financial implementation level by Union Priority (in %)
Source: own elaboration, data from FAME SU, DG-MARE, European Commission.
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries

7. Evolution of the EMFF implementation 2014-2017
Source: own elaboration, data from FAME SU, DG-MARE, European Commission.
2018: significant barriers for effective implementation have been overcome
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development

8. 28/05/2015
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

9. UP1 Sustainable Fisheries. Measuring performance at Member State level
An asset of the EMFF: performance can be assessed combining financial, output and results achievements.
UP1 Sustainable Fisheries. Measuring performance at Member State level
Source: own elaboration, data from FAME SU, DG-MARE, European Commission. Denmark is not included
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

10. 3. FROM POLICY DESIGN TO IMPLEMENTATION: MAIN FINDINGS
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

11. Is the EMFF a simpler and better financial instrument?
Increase the legal complexity: 30 regulations applicable at EU level
Increase the administrative cost: 7-15%
Increase the administrative burden for Managing Authorities and beneficiaries
Increase the complexity of the process for the approval of the Operational Programmes
European Structural and Investment Funds
Common Provisions Regulation
Results-oriented approach
Rigid intervention logic that limits adaptiveness
Admissibility criteria have increased work overload
Detailed catalogue of measures with combined eligibility criteria; some render the measures inapplicable in practice
En el EFF eran solo 2 normas.
Los costes se reducjeron de media entre un 2 y un 5% para el resto de los fondos.
The EMFF has one of the most expensive application of all EU Funds. Study of administrative burden by beneficiaries’ profiles shows that SMEs are the ones that need to invest more into project application compared to public bodies, natural persons or POs. (EMFF, Expert Group Survey, 2015)
How the links between the different levels of the programme build on each other to generate the changes and results intended is explained in the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) intervention
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

12. Potential beneficiaries
Common Monitoring and Evaluation System
Lack of accuracy of the current system to reflect performance. Targets set without guidelines for the Member States in the programming phase
Potential to become a strategic tool
Response to legal uncertainty by increasing regulation: self-blocking system.
Implementing approach focused on compliance rather than performance
Financial difficulties to cover the national contribution
Member States
Potential beneficiaries
Low co-financing rates limit the attractiveness of the fund.
Growing number of rules, admin burden and controls are disincentives to apply for support.
Uncertainties put some investments plans on hold.
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

13. Remarks Early warnings
Expenditure levels in Union priorities and measures should not be linked to the opportunity or necessity of a given measure.
Critical measures for sustainable fisheries such as training or innovation are underperforming.
Early warnings
Evidence indicates a likely underspending in the UP1 Sustainable fisheries by the end of the programme due to the low demand from potential beneficiaries.
Short-term policy objectives (landing obligation, achievement of maximum sustainable yield) and the fund effective implementation call for addressing the disaffection of the fisheries sector with the EMFF.
EUR 500 million might be potentially at risk in 2018 due to the decommitment procedure.
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

14. 4. Policy recommendations
Legal certainty: on-line publication of the interpretations of the regulations by the Commission services to the questions raised by the different MS
Simplified cost options: Commission may provide further assistance based on experience on the ground.
Avoid the risk of the EMFF providing financial support where it is easier rather than where it is needed the most.
Set a transitional period between EMFF and the post-2020 Fund.
Set the monitoring system before the start of the programming period.
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)

15. Thank you for your attention
24/01/2019
Presentation for the Committee on Fisheries (PECH)