Synthesis Report - European Commission - Europa

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Synthesis Report Ex-post Evaluation of the ERDF 2000-2006 • some 278,350 gross jobs being created or maintained between 2000 and 2004; • around 8,460 SMEs in Berlin, Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Sachsen receiving investment support; • some 1,022 business start-ups in Berlin, Brandenburg and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern; • some 2,065 RTDI projects being funded in Brandenburg, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and Saxony; • the improvement of telecommunications and the provision of equipment in universities and research institutes in Thüringen; • the development of institutes of applied research (Fraunhofer-institutes) in Sachsen, amounting to around 46,000 square metres of floor space and establishing cooperation with 380 enterprises. At the same time, a significant though slightly smaller amount of funding went to improving transport networks, designed to bring the standard closer to that in the Western part of the country, and resulting in the construction or upgrading of several thousand kms of roads, motorways and railway lines, with the emphasis on the last (which accounted for over half of the ERDF going to transport). In addition, a similar amount of support went to environmental projects, in particular to investment in wastewater treatment plants and sewage pipelines and to the clean-up and regeneration of urban areas (in Sachsen, for example, funding was provided to projects in 26 separate towns and cities), with the aim of increasing the attractiveness of the regions concerned and improving the quality of life. Expert opinion is that that a large part of the investment in RTDI in Objective 1 regions would not have taken place without EU funding. It is also likely that experimentation with innovative measures would have been more limited. While the Structural Funds in Germany are integrated into existing arrangements for supporting regional development, which reduces the potential for innovation, there were, nevertheless, some innovative aspects. These include: • the pursuit of a strategy integrating the activities of different Departments, which is not the norm in Germany but which was enforced by the programming approach; • the adoption of systems for monitoring and evaluating expenditure, which for the most part did not exist before in respect of regional policy. Ireland High and sustained growth in Ireland over the previous programming period meant that by 2000, GDP per head was considerably above the EU average. Much of the growth, however, had been concentrated in Dublin and the surrounding area as well as in the South-East of the country. The disparity between these parts and the rest of Ireland was explicitly recognised by the division of the county into two NUTS 2 regions for the 2000-2006 programming period. The effect was that the Border, Midland and Western (BMW) region remained eligible for EU funding under Objective 1, while the Southern and Eastern (SE) region received phasing-out funding. At the same time, the amount of funding from the ERDF and Cohesion Fund together was reduced significantly (to only around 0.2-0.3% of GDP). Accordingly, the ERDF accounted for only around 128
Ex-post Evaluation of the ERDF 2000-2006 Synthesis Report 10% of overall financial support going to regional development over the programming period, considerably less than before. Growth of GDP per head in Ireland continued to be well above the EU average throughout the period. The rate was much the same in the two regions, so that the disparity between them in these terms also remained unchanged. This disparity, however, arises partly from commuting from the BMW region to the SE and partly from the relative concentration of multinational companies in the SE region. Since much of the profits of these companies go abroad, the difference in terms of income per head is much smaller. This difference seems also to have remained much the same over the period. Cohesion policy very much supported national development policy over the programming period, the aim being to channel development away from Dublin and improve infrastructure and the business environment in less favoured areas, in large part to attract inward investment. In practice, the ERDF was concentrated very much on improving transport links both within and around Dublin to ease congestion in the city and between towns and cities across the country to reduce travel time and increase the accessibility of the more remote areas. The result was: • the completion of 555 kms of motorway, including between Dublin and Galway and between Kilkullen and Waterford, with significant savings in travel time; • the upgrading and expansion of capacity on the mainline rail network, resulting in time savings of 38 minutes overall and much improved links to Dublin from Galway, Ballina and Sligo; • the Dublin Port Tunnel road, relieving congestion in the city; • the completion of the Dublin ring road, to avoid traffic having to go through the city; • the completion of the LUAS light railway in Dublin, though the effect on travel times and congestion was reduced by the separation of the two lines; • the completion of phase 1 of the DART upgrade around the coast in Dublin to take traffic off the roads; • a Rural Transport Initiative which piloted local bus services for rural communities to improve their access to services and to encourage more people to remain in the areas concerned, so reducing depopulation. The projects were carried out in the context of rapid population growth, stemming largely from inward migration, which led to a similarly rapid growth of traffic, fuelled in addition by rising real income levels. The observed easing of congestion and reduction in travel times were, therefore, relatively small, though there is no question that without the projects being undertaken, the situation would have worsened considerably in both respects. Funding, though on a much smaller scale, also went to support investment in telecommunications which led to increased access to broadband for SMEs in rural areas in both the BMW and SE regions. These areas were also the main target of support to environmental infrastructure which resulted in: • some 770 thousand additional people being connected to clean drinking water supply; • the construction and upgrading of wastewater treatment plants, adding sufficient capacity to meet the needs of over 3 million people. 129
Page 1:
Cohesion Policy Ex-Post Evaluation
Page 4 and 5:
Synthesis Report Ex-post Evaluation
Page 6 and 7:
Page 8 and 9:
Page 10 and 11:
Page 12 and 13:
Page 14 and 15:
Page 16 and 17:
Page 18 and 19:
Page 20 and 21:
Page 22 and 23:
Page 24 and 25:
Page 26 and 27:
Page 28 and 29:
Page 30 and 31:
Page 32 and 33:
Page 34 and 35:
Page 36 and 37:
Page 38 and 39:
Page 40 and 41:
Page 42 and 43:
Page 44 and 45:
Page 46 and 47:
Page 48 and 49:
Page 50 and 51:
Page 52 and 53:
Page 54 and 55:
Page 56 and 57:
Page 58 and 59:
Page 60 and 61:
Page 62 and 63:
Page 64 and 65:
Page 66 and 67:
Page 68 and 69:
Page 70 and 71:
Page 72 and 73:
Page 74 and 75:
Page 76 and 77:
Page 78 and 79:
Page 80 and 81: Synthesis Report Ex-post Evaluation
Page 176: Consult this website for further in
show all

Synthesis Report - European Commission - Europa

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?