Synthesis Report - European Commission - Europa

Synthesis Report Ex-post Evaluation of the ERDF 2000-2006
defined but also in this case even if more widely defined. Tackling the problem effectively,
therefore, typically requires cooperation across regional and even national boundaries.
A third and related issue is illustrated in particular by the experience in Midi-Pyrénées, where the
emphasis was very much on giving local authorities the freedom to determine their own
development strategies, which led to some lack of coherence between them, which in turn has led
to environmental policy at least being centralised in the present programming period. Whereas,
therefore, the authorities on the ground may know best which uses of funding are best suited to
meeting local needs, there still needs to be some overall coordinating framework in place to
ensure consistency between the measures implemented.
A fourth issue concerns the planning of environmental policy and the capacity of the authorities,
especially at the regional level, to do this effectively, as well as integrating it into an overall
strategy for regional development. Although, therefore, the importance of protecting and
improving the environment was emphasised as being important for development at the beginning
of the programming period, there was little attempt to relate the projects undertaken with other
aspects of development policy in the case study regions over the period. Decisions on the
construction of environmental infrastructure were, therefore largely taken independently of
measures implemented in other policy areas, such as for example support of tourism.
Accordingly, the environmental projects undertaken had less effect on economic development
than they might potentially have done.
An exception to this, however, is the policy pursued in South Finland of concentrating support on
the development of environmentally-related business activities. As indicated above, this was
accompanied by the creation of clusters and is closely linked to a wider, long-term strategy of
encouraging the growth of knowledge-based industries, which begins with ensuring a high level
of education among working-age population. The use of Objective 2 support in South Finland
also illustrates what can be done with a relatively small amount of funding, exemplifying the
wider effects of investing in feasibility plans and innovative pilot projects.
3.6.6 Main findings
More generally, the main findings of the evaluation are that the funding provided by cohesion
policy over the period was directed less to measures for stimulating economic development and
more to improving living conditions and the standard of life in the parts of the EU assisted.
Although in the short-term, the contribution to economic growth was in general limited, in the
longer-term, the improvements brought about, especially in both more rural and more deprived
urban areas, are likely to lead to more balanced as well as more sustainable development. As
such, cohesion policy in this particular area served unquestionably to further social and territorial
cohesion and may, ultimately, result in more sustained economic development.
Whether the funding, by being used to a significant extent to help Member States move closer to
compliance with EU Directives on water and waste, was deployed in the most effective way given
the objectives of cohesion policy is an open question. It is clear that the less developed parts of
the EU had to move in this direction and so needed to find the finance for such a move. It is also
clear that the investment undertaken and its results have helped to even up living and working
conditions both between and within regions, so alleviating a possible constraint on to the
development of the less favoured areas. At the same time, it is arguable that it would have been
better to have a more thorough assessment of the potential effects of using the ERDF in this way
at the beginning of the programming period rather than at the end.
100