Synthesis Report - European Commission - Europa

Synthesis Report Ex-post Evaluation of the ERDF 2000-2006
In addition, a similar amount of funding from the ERDF went to RTDI intended to assist the
development of specialist research centres across the country as well as the adoption of new
technology by SMEs. This, however, was less effective in the BMW region than in the SE because of
the more limited ability of the centres and firms concerned to absorb the funding.
Although there was no apparent narrowing of the disparity between the two regions between
2000 and 2006 as a result of these various measures, their effect may have been to prevent a
further widening.
At the same time, it is difficult to say whether regional development became more balanced over
the period in terms not only of the difference between the two regions but equally importantly of
those between urban and rural areas within the two regions. This was a major objective of
development policy but no coherent set of indicators were devised to monitor progress in this
respect.
The main effects of cohesion policy, however, were arguably:
• to focus attention on the widening disparity between Dublin and the rest of the country
and the concentration of economic growth in the former, which was unsustainable in the
long-term, and so to encourage the adoption of a regional rather than a national strategy;
• to contribute to the development and expansion of multi-annual programming, the more
extensive adoption of a partnership approach at national and local level and to more
monitoring and evaluation of programmes..
UK
The UK was a net contributor to the funding of cohesion policy over the 2000-2006 period.
Nevertheless, the four regions eligible for full funding under Objective 1 (Merseyside, South
Yorkshire, Cornwall and Isles of Scilly and West Wales and the Valleys) and the two eligible for
phasing-out funding (Highlands and Islands in Scotland and Northern Ireland) between them
received an amount from the ERDF equivalent to around 0.4% of their GDP. Moreover, these
regions together accounted for just under 12% of UK population, not so much less than Objective
1 regions in Germany (around 18%). Nevertheless, the amount of EU funding received was small in
relation to that from the national government, though the ERDF was involved in a number of high
profile projects, as indicated below.
The rate of growth of GDP per head of all 6 of regions assisted exceeded that of the non-assisted
regions in the UK over the period (on average by 0.7% a year).
In all the regions, the main focus of development policy, to which the ERDF contributed, was on
strengthening business competitiveness which was achieved through:
• supporting SMEs, both directly and indirectly through the provision of advice, services and
access to finance, to assist them to modernise and diversify (by end- 2006, over 70,000
SMEs had received assistance);
• improving transport networks, such as by converting Newquay airport in Cornwall from
military to civilian use and by completing the Liverpool South Parkway Interchange in
Merseyside, which provides fast links to Liverpool John Lennon Airport as well as access
to up to 11,000 planned jobs in the vicinity;
• improving telecommunications, including the provision of broadband to the whole of
Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly;
130