1. New partnership dynamics in a changing Cohesion policy context Laura Polverari and Rona Michie Meeting with Economic and Social Partners European Commission, 9 December 2009

2. Laura Polverari and Rona Michie, Bruxelles, 9 December 20092 Background and outline  Paper prepared for the IQ-Net consortium –circa 100 interviews in 15 Member States and with EU level stakeholders –discussed at the Åre IQ-Net conference, 2-4 December 2009  Focus on Socio-Economic and other Non- Governmental Organisations (‘SENGOs’) –how is Art.11 being implemented? –what factors explain the degree to which SENGOs are involved? What constraints and facilitators? –what is the evidence on SENGOs’ influence on programme management? –what issues/lessons for Cohesion policy 2014+? IQ-Net consortium

3. Laura Polverari and Rona Michie, Bruxelles, 9 December 20093 Constraints to effective partnership Constraints internal to partners organisations Programme level arrangements General constraints Institutional factors (culture, resources, leadership, capacities, perception …“annoying insects”) Perception of partnership as strategic by MA Complexity, technicality and timetable of involvement mechanisms Lack of agreement on purpose and role of SENGO involvement Lack of binding rules on partnership  but no consensus on this

4. Laura Polverari and Rona Michie, Bruxelles, 9 December 20094 Actions supporting effective partnership Addressing PMCs’ shortcomings More environments for discussion Regional PMC-type bodies Strategic Advisory Committees More/better targeted information Efforts to keep partners involved Dedicated information platforms Better targeting/channelling of information Capacity Building Targeted initiatives for SENGOs, e.g. Sachsen-Anhalt Kompetenzzentrum, Welsh 3-SET, Slovenian CNVOS, Italian 2000-06 TA project Training Use of TA rare, even discouraged Initiatives by the SENGOs Continuous contact amongst SENGOs Capacity Building Organisation of internal information flows Informal communication

5. Laura Polverari and Rona Michie, Bruxelles, 9 December 20095 Changing partnership dynamics?  New territorial and strategic scope of OPs refocusing of partnership (different composition)  BUT no radical reshaping in the way partnership is operationalised  SENGOs more involved in programme design than in stages of implementation (as in 2000-06)

6. Laura Polverari and Rona Michie, Bruxelles, 9 December 20096 Influence  SENGOs interviewed found it difficult to assess their influence –“influence is a strong word” –“no immediate influence”  Only a minority were positive about the degree to which they had been able to affect decision-making  Yet a cultural change was noted and there is evidence of concrete impact of SENGOs’ action (on programme design or project selection)

7. Laura Polverari and Rona Michie, Bruxelles, 9 December 20097 Conclusions 1.Programme managers largely satisfied with how SENGOs are involved BUT some fundamental constraints remain 2.SENGOs are more involved in programme design than other stages of programme management 3.SENGOs largely do not perceive their influence to be significant 4.The accountability role of horizontal partnership is undeveloped  SENGOs do not hold MAs to account 5.The Commission’s role in this area is limited  at least in EU15, COM is marginal as a partner and as an enforcer of SENGO inclusion

8. Laura Polverari and Rona Michie, Bruxelles, 9 December 20098 Looking forward: emerging issues Rationale and scope for SENGO involvement  need for a more explicit reflection amongst MS authorities, MAs and SENGOs on the rationale and purpose of SENGO involvement  potential for strategic frameworks with agreed responsibilities and mutual commitments Adequacy of regulatory provisions  no support for more stringent rules, soft tools instead  separation of ERDF and ESF hinders effective SENGOs involvement The reform of Cohesion policy  potential for SENGOs to be involved in debates over future policy  need to ensure that positive experiences matured over decades of Cohesion policy are not lost (in EU15)  a new role for the European Commission? (e.g. as with evaluation)

9. Laura Polverari and Rona Michie, Bruxelles, 9 December 20099 Thank you for your attention.