John GrieveRural Development Company
First Results from RDP Programming&
Leader Past, Present & Future
1. EU Strategic Guidelines establish the Community Priorities for the period 2007-2013
2. National Strategies reflect EU-priorities according to the situation in the Member State concerned
Rural Development Policy 2007-2013Key elements
3. Establishment of national or regional programmes on the basis of SWOT analysis
4. Programme implementation accompanied by monitoring und evaluation („ongoing evaluation ') based on a Community framework
A strategic approach
27 National Strategy Plans 93 RDPs were submitted
- 88 national or regional RDPs, - 2 National Frameworks, - 3 Programs on National Rural Development
Networks
By spring 2008: all 93 RDPs approved
Rural Development Policy 2007-2013 State of play
State of play: Approval of programmes and strategies
EAFRD43%
Public27%
Private30%
Indicative Global Rural Development Expenditure
• EAFRD : € 90,8 billion (43% of total)
• Public expenditure : € 57,6 billion (27% of total)
• Private expenditure : € 64,8 billion (30% of total)
Rural Development Policy 2007-2013State of play
TOTAL : € 213,2 billion
Rural Development Policy 2007-2013 State of play
Axis 244%
Axis 313%
Axis 46%
TA & DP3%
Axis 134%
Axis 1
Axis 2
Axis 3
Axis 4
TA & DP
EAFRD-Expenditure per axis
Rural Development Policy 2007-2013State of play
49%47%
46% 46% 45%44% 44%
41% 40% 40%38% 38% 38% 38%
35% 35% 34%33%
29%28% 27%
21%
16% 15%
13%11%
10%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
BE LV HU PT ES CY GR PL RO LT EE BG FR IT MT SK SI NL LU DE CZ DK SE AT UK FI IE
Ø 34,7 %
Axis 4 split and added to the relevant axes
Old MS
New MS
EAFRD-Expenditure in Axis 1(Competitiveness) as % of Total by MS
Ø 43,9 %Axis 4 splitted and added to the relevant axes
Rural Development Policy 2007-2013State of play
Old MS
New MS
EAFRD-Expenditure in Axis 2 (Environment/Land management) as % of Total by MS
80%
74% 73% 72% 71%
63%59%
55%53%
50% 50%
44% 44%41% 41%
39% 38% 37% 37% 35% 34% 33%31%
28% 27%25% 24%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
IE FI UK AT SE DK LU CZ SI FR SK IT CY PT DE ES LT EE BE GR PL HU NL LV MT BG RO
Old MS
New MS
Ø 18,6 %
Axis 4 splitted and added to the relevant axes
Rural development policy 2007-2013State of play
35%34%
30%
28%
26%
24%
21%20%
19%18%
17% 17%15%
14% 14% 14% 14% 13%13% 12% 12% 12%
11% 11% 11% 10% 10%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
NL MT DE BG RO PL LV EE GR LT CZ HU IT FI UK DK ES SK SI BE SE LU FR AT PT CY IEFI
EAFRD-Expenditure in Axis 3 (Diversification and quality of life) as % of Total by MS
Rural development policy 2007-2013State of play
11%
10% 10% 10%10% 10%
8%
6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6%6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
4%
3% 3%3% 3% 2% 2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
ES PT IE NL DK EE IT LT UK GR DE LU SE HU AT FI FR BE CZ PL MT SI SK CY LV BG RO
Ø 6,06 %
Old MS
New MS
EAFRD-Expenditure for Leader as % of Total by Member States
Rural Development Policy 2007-2013State of play
Axis 1Axis 2
Axis 3
Cooperation
LAG Management
Axis 1
Axis 2
Axis 3
Cooperation
LAGManagement
Indicative use of Funds under the LEADER Axis
Leader I to Mainstreaming
Four generations of Leader The method consolidated and now
‘mainstreamed’ with 3 Measures, local strategies, cooperation and LAG operation.
Mainstreaming = Normalisation Mainstreaming piloted in Spain, Ireland, Finland
and Italy delivering Article 33 elements Only Finland fully mainstreamed the approach New Member States applied a limited version of
the method, mainly cooperation and networking
Wider Application: The Current Position
LAG selection not yet complete Commission have 21 programmes finalised, 500
LAGs formally selected Anticipate 1,500 LAGs minimum Equal to or greater than before Where equal more territory or people Only Valencia reduced
Wider Leader Commitments
Wider applicability Different answers to similar questions Thematic concentration vs wider accessibility Only 21 programmes limited to Axis 3 Axis 2 challenges but some are picking up Some have full Axis 3 responsibility Variety of thematic concentration
Larger Leader Commitments
Liguria 30% Northern Ireland 25.7% Aragon and Saarland
15% Sardinia 14% Extramadura 13.95% Schleswig Holstein
13.25% Valencia, Pais Vasco &
Andalucia 13%
Castillia la Mancha 12.27%
Cantabria 12% Navarra 11.65% Catalonia 11.6% Murcia 11.53% Asturias 11.25% Guyane 11.1% Madeira 11%
A Major Challenge
11%
10% 10% 10%10% 10%
8%
6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6%6% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5%
4%
3% 3%3% 3% 2% 2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
ES PT IE NL DK EE IT LT UK GR DE LU SE HU AT FI FR BE CZ PL MT SI SK CY LV BG RO
Ø 6,06 %
Old MS
New MS
EAFRD-Expenditure for Leader as % of Total by Member States
Innovation as a Priority;the Leader Experiment
Stimulation of innovation remains a priority underpinning the Leader method
Don’t be tied to a detailed list of eligible activity Selection criteria to prioritise innovation which is
integrated with the local strategy Selection criteria to require clear and measurable
objectives related to strategy Groups should look at linking Measures, responding to
the Axis objectives with new types of project Continue to experiment with new forms of governance
and ways of involving people Take the greatest possible advantage of cooperation
opportunities
The Remaining Challenges
Not possible to estimate potential in the absence of full set of strategies
Self evaluation will be critical in contributing to the measurement of success in mainstreaming
Mainstreaming poses challenges to local competences with new groups and new questions
Leader remains largely limited to small scale support with limited resources
Need to be able to assess real impact on area, to measure advances but taking account of budgets which are not significantly increased
Groups must therefore question what makes financial sense, how to optimise the priorities of cooperation, working together and the pursuit of innovation
The role and importance of evaluating what is achieved is therefore heightened