IPA Trainer Handbook SERBIA / pdf-File - Global Campus 21

IPA Trainer Handbook
The Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance
Challenges and Opportunities for
SerbIA

IPA Trainer Handbook
Written by:
Institut für Europäische Politik (IEP), Berlin
Bundesallee 23
10717 Berlin, Germany
Phone: +49 30 889134-0
Fax: +49 30 889134-99
Internet: www.iep-berlin.de
Published by:
InWEnt - Internationale Weiterbildung und Entwicklung
(Capacity Building International, Germany) gGmbH
Friedrich-Ebert-Allee 40
53113 Bonn, Germany
Phone: +49/228/4460-0
Fax: +49/228/4460-1766
Email: info@InWEnt.org
Internet: www.InWEnt.org
Adapted and updated by:
Dr. Michael Burisch, RBP, Riis Burisch & Partner GmbH
Mariella Falkenhain, Institut für Europäische Politik
Layout:
Matthias Jäger, Institut für Europäisches Politik
© InWEnt gGmbH, 2009

TAble Of COnTenTS
InTrOduCTIOn 9
1. fOr THe TrAIner
1.1 An Overview Of The Handbook 13
1.1.1 basic Structure Of The Handbook 13
1.1.2 Text Structure 13
1.2 Objectives Of The Handbook 13
1.2.1 Guiding Principles 14
1.2.2 learning Objectives Of each Chapter 14
1.3 Tips And Tools for Your Teaching 15
1.3.1 Methodologies And Media 15
1.3.2 Course length 15
1.3.3 Course Plan 16
2. eurOPeAn InTeGrATIOn - bASICS
2.1. The History Of european Integration 23
2.1.1 The basic rationale for european Integration 23
2.1.2 from The Schuman Plan To The Treaties Of rome 23
2.1.3 The Single european Act 25
2.1.4 from european Community To european union 25
2.1.5 The Treaty reform Of Amsterdam 27
2.1.6 The Treaty Of nice 28
2.1.7 from The failed Constitutional Treaty To The Treaty Of lisbon 29
2.2 The Institutional Architecture Of The european union 32
2.2.1 The european Parliament 33
2.2.2 The Council Of The european union 34
2.2.3 The european Council 35
2.2.4 The european Commission 36
2.2.5 The european Court Of Justice 37
2.2.6 The european Court Of Auditors 37
2.3 decision-making In The european union 39
2.3.1 The Consultation Procedure 39
2.3.3 The Co-decision Procedure 40
2.3.4 legislative Acts Of The european Community 42
IPA Trainer Handbook - Chapter
3

4
3. eurOPeAn reGIOnAl POlICY
3.1 Introduction 47
3.2 History Of eu regional Policy 47
3.3 legal basis for The Period 2007-2013 49
3.4 Objectives 50
3.5 european Structural funds And Instruments 56
3.5.1 The european Social fund (eSf) 56
3.5.2 The european regional development fund (erdf) 56
3.5.3 The Cohesion fund (Cf) 57
3.6 Structural funds And Pre-accession Aid 58
4. IPA - THe new Pre-ACCeSSIOn fInAnCIAl InSTruMenT
4.1 Introduction 61
4.2 The General IPA framework 62
4.2.1 legal basis 62
4.2.2 Objectives 63
4.2.3 funding Priorities - The five Components 63
4.4 Strategic Planning 71
4.5 Specific Programming 72
4.6 The Programming Process Step by Step 72
5. frOM An IdeA TO A COnvInCInG PrOJeCT PrOPOSAl
5.1 Introduction 79
5.2 The Analysis Phase 79
5.2.1 Preparatory Activities – Getting To Know Problems And Priorities 79
5.2.2 Analysing The Stakeholders’ Concerns, Capacities And Interests 80
5.2.3 Analysing Problems 81
5.2.4 Analysing Objectives 82
5.2.5 Analysing Strategies 83
5.3 The Planning Phase 84
5.3.1 First Column: Defining The Project 86
5.3.2 Fourth Column: Defining The Project Assumption 87
5.3.3 Second Column: Defining Objectively Verifiable Indicators
IPA Trainer Handbook - Chapter
(OvIs) Of Achievement 88
5.3.4 Third Column: Defining Sources Of Verification 89
5.3.5 finalising The draft logframe Matrix: The logic Check 89

5.3.6 Activity, resource And Cost Schedules 90
5.4 Completing An Application for IPA funding - The Project fiche 91
6. MAnAGInG IPA PrOJeCTS SuCCeSSfullY
6.1 Introduction 95
6.2 How Is IPA Assistance Managed? 95
6.3 who Is responsible for Managing IPA Assistance In The decentralised
Management System? 96
6.4 Implementing a project 98
6.5 evaluating A Project 100
COnCluSIOnS 105
Annex 107
Annex 1. Sources of information
Annex 2. Abbreviations
Annex 3. Glossary of terms
IPA Trainer Handbook - Chapter
5

IPA Trainer Handbook
1
Introduction
Introduction

InTrOduCTIOn
At the beginning of the 21st century, enlargement policy was considered one of the most important
and most successful foreign policy instruments of the European Union (EU). The successful
expansion from six members to twenty-seven has extended a zone of security, political stability,
peace and economic well-being to a great portion of Europe. For the EU, enlargement is a major
challenge and a historic opportunity at the same time.
The 2004 and 2007 enlargement marked
a cornerstone in the history of the EU. This
historic enlargement from fifteen to twentyseven
member states signified the reunification
of a whole continent divided for decades by the
Iron Curtain and the Cold War.
Even today, the map of the EU is not considered
complete: At the Thessaloniki Summit on 21
June 2003, the European Council reiterated
that the future of the Western Balkan countries
lies with the European Union. Turkey is also
approaching the EU, although its path towards
Europe is a long one.
At present, Turkey, Croatia and the Former
Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia are official
candidate countries. Turkey and Croatia
entered into accession negotiations on 3
October 2005 whereas the Former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia has not yet started
with such negotiations. The other countries of
the Western Balkans are potential candidate
countries. This includes Albania, Bosnia and
Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo
under the United Nations Security Council
Resolution 1244. These countries have clear
membership prospects provided that the
necessary requirements are met.
In fact, any country seeking membership within
the European Union must meet economic and
political conditions, known as the Copenhagen
criteria. These accession criteria require the
candidate country to be a stable democracy
and respect human rights and the rule of law
(political criterion). Moreover, the candidate
country is expected to have a functioning market
economy and the ability to cope with competitive
pressure and market forces within the Union
(economic criterion). Finally, the prospective
member state must adopt the common rules,
standards and policies that make up the whole
body of EU law (acquis related criterion).
Even before formal accession, all countries of
the Western Balkans have been progressively
brought closer to the EU. Thanks to the
Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP),
they already benefit from the Union’s preaccession
strategy as well as from free access
to the European single market for almost all
their exports. This Trainer Handbook has
been developed by InWEnt Capacity Building
International, Germany and the Institut für
Europäische Politik (IEP), Berlin to assist
candidate and potential candidate countries,
particularly Serbia in preparing or completing
the accession process. The Handbook has a
threefold objective:
1. Its goal is to provide local lecturers with
good knowledge about the European Union,
particularly regarding its history, principles
and objectives as well as its institutional
and legal framework.
2. The focus of the Trainer Handbook is on
the European pre-accession strategy that
provides the necessary framework and
instruments for preparing applicant countries
for membership. The Handbook specifically
concentrates on informing the reader
about the Instrument for Pre-accession
Assistance (IPA). Being the key tool of the
Commission’s pre-accession activities for
the period 2007-2013, IPA supports both
candidate countries and potential candidate
countries in their efforts to join the EU. They
are led to an alignment on EU standards
IPA Trainer Handbook - Introduction
9

10
IPA Trainer Handbook - Introduction
and prepared for management of EU rural, cohesion and structural
development funds. On this note, reducing disparity levels within
the candidate countries and potential candidate countries is one
essential element of IPA.
3. In this respect, the chapter on objectives and instruments of
European Regional Policy is of great relevance. Promoting the
reduction of regional disparities within the EU (through structural
and cohesion funds), European Regional Policy can be considered
as a blueprint for IPA.
Keeping the specific needs of prospective EU-Trainers in mind, the
Handbook combines background information on IPA, including its
political and financial framework, with information of practical relevance
concerning IPA programming and management.
The Handbook shall provide the trainer with specific knowledge in
the above-mentioned areas as well as training material for further
independent work. For this purpose, the book presents methods and
techniques for the presentation of facts and the transfer of know-how.
The Handbook shall finally support the trainers in the preparation of
EU-related training of administrative staff and other multipliers.

IPA Trainer Handbook
1 2
For the Trainer
for The Trainer

1.1 An Overview Of The Handbook
1.1.1 basic Structure Of The Handbook
The IPA Trainer Handbook has six chapters
with the following breakdown:
Chapter 1: For the Trainer
Chapter 2: European Integration – Basics
Chapter 3: European Regional Policy
Chapter 4: IPA – The New Pre-accession
Financial Instrument
Chapter 5: From An Idea To A Convincing
Project Proposal
Chapter 6: Managing IPA Projects Successfully
Chapters 2 to 6 cover all essentials that you
need for your seminars. Each chapter is divided
into a number of units which build on each
other. This enables you to consult a specific topic
quickly.
each chapter contains:
� text to serve as the basis of your seminar;
you may choose to photocopy the text and
distribute it to the course participants;
� learning objectives (box at the beginning of
each chapter) describing and summarizing
what course participants will know after
having worked through the chapter;
� exercises, possible activities or case
studies (at the end of each chapter) that you
can do with the course participants. These
exercises relate to the subject matter of the
chapter and are meant to reinforce newly
acquired knowledge about the EU;
� suggested readings: For course participants
1. fOr THe TrAIner
This chapter is designed to introduce you to this Handbook. It provides information on the content
of the Handbook (basic structure, learning objectives of each chapter) as well as teaching
tips for your further independent work as a trainer (methodologies, course design). Additionally,
you will find material that will help you prepare your courses (a sample lesson plan and an evaluation
form).
who are interested in further reading,
additional literature and specific internet
links are listed at the end of each chapter.
We would advise you to have a look at these
sources in order to increase your knowledge
of the European Union’s pre-accession
activities.
In the annex you can find the sources of information
and abbreviations used in the Handbook.
Additionally, a glossary of terms explains
the most important terms related to the EU and
its pre-accession activities. It serves as a reference
for definitions and explanations.
1.1.2 Text Structure
Various forms of formatting were used in order
to emphasize and highlight terms and draw attention
to certain items.
Important terms are written in bold.
Boxes contain learning objectives, definitions,
key messages, explanatory and additional information
as well as examples.
1.2 Objectives Of The Handbook
The pre-accession strategy of the EU is based
on a highly specialized system. To be able to
absorb financial support by the EU, an efficient
administration is a prerequisite. Administrative
resources for planning and programming
processes on the local, regional, and national
levels are indispensable. In this sense, not only
the implementation of pre-accession funds is
important, but also the identification of programmes
and projects.
IPA Trainer Handbook - For The Trainer
13

14
Your target groups are civil servants or other
actors (partners and key stakeholders) included
in IPA programming and/or management
who need to know about IPA in order to do their
jobs. Your task is to give them background information
on how IPA operates and the way it
is planned. Moreover, they will learn how their
idea, project or organisation could be supported
by IPA funding.
Knowledge about how the EU operates is also
important to the general public. Your job as
trainers is to help provide the public with extensive
information on the EU in general (history,
institutional architecture, legal framework) as
well as on motives, structures and goals of its
pre-accession activities.
This IPA Trainer Handbook helps you share
your knowledge with a target group in a way
that meets its particular requirements.
1.2.1 Guiding Principles
The following criteria were kept in mind while
devising the training programme:
� diversity
A diverse selection of exercises with hints
on how to use them methodologically and
didactically. This will help you develop
the curriculum and duration of the course
in a flexible way as well as matching the
specific requirements of your course.
� Modularity
The Handbook has been devised as
a series of progressive modules. This
enables you to adapt seminars, to suit
specific objectives and reach different
target groups. Modules also allow you to
choose individual chapters to suit the level
of detail required by different target groups.
� Applying knowledge
The Handbook is broken down into two
sections: the transfer of information and
the application of that information. Course
participants learn the curriculum through
didactic dialogues and group discussions.
Newly acquired knowledge is then
IPA Trainer Handbook - For The Trainer
reinforced through group exercises and
individual work. The exercises will also
make the complex issues discussed more
accessible to course participants. This
method enhances the learning experience
and the ability of course participants to
apply their newly acquired knowledge in a
work setting.
� Trainer support
In devising the Handbook, we put great
importance on your ability as the trainer to
understand the given information quickly
and effectively. We also wanted to support
you in your teaching and give you as much
scope as possible in how the curriculum is
presented.
1.2.2 learning Objectives Of each
Chapter
In Chapter 2, course participants learn about
the history of European integration, the institutional
architecture of the European Union, the
main procedures of decision-making as well as
the principal legislative acts of the European
Community.
Chapter 3 is about the Regional Policy of the
European Union and helps course participants
become familiar with the objectives of the Structural
Funds and the Cohesion Fund. Course
participants learn about the different forms of
Community intervention and how they are funded
by the EU budget.
Chapter 4 gives an overview of the Instrument
for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) particularly
with regard to its objectives, political and financial
framework and its programming process.
Chapter 5 explains how to develop a project
from an idea to a convincing project proposal
by means of a logical framework matrix. Course
participants will learn how to recognise needs
and problems on the ground and how to visualize
them in the logical framework matrix.
Chapter 6 covers the different management
types and management structure requirements

under IPA. It provides general information on
the first steps in the implementation of a project
and on principles of project evaluation.
1.3 Tips And Tools for Your Teaching
1.3.1 Methodologies And Media
Seminars should endeavour to link theory and
practice through an engaging combination of
teaching methodologies:
• didactic dialogues
You should use didactic dialogues to
convey and present the necessary
curriculum to the course participants
quickly and comprehensively. The idea of
a dialogue between ‘teacher’ and ‘student’
is important. Do not assume that course
participants have any previous knowledge
of the curriculum. For these dialogues,
you might need a blackboard, a flipchart
or a power point presentation.
• discussions
Use discussions to process the
information. The curriculum is addressed
by alternating between speaking and
listening sections. This allows course
participants to participate in the learning
experience by sharing previous knowledge
and any relevant experiences they may
have had.
• role plays
Role plays can be used to make course
participants put forward different views
and opinions during the discussions. This
type of activity enables them to become
familiar with different points of view.
Understanding and identifying oneself with
the given roles helps course participants
to appreciate other views.
• exercises
The information conveyed in didactic
dialogues is reinforced and put into
practice through exercises and case
studies. The exercises can be done either
independently or in small groups. This
type of activity helps course participants
strengthen their teamwork skills as well as
exchange ideas, thus benefiting from the
various discussions. After each exercise
or case study, the course participants can
present their results and then discuss
these results within the group.
1.3.2 Course length
A course on the Instrument for Pre-accession
Assistance covers a wide variety of topics. The
detailed structure enables course participants
to get familiar with the topic. To cover these
topics sufficiently, the course must be at least
three days long, although this Trainer Handbook
offers enough material to develop a
week-long course. The individual length of your
course should meet the requirements of your
participants.
We would suggest a three-day intensive
seminar programme. This is sufficient time to
cover the most important topics, complete exercises
and convey information on a basic level.
The following lesson plan adopts this three-day
approach and can, if desired, be extended an
additional day.
Although this lesson plan can support you in
your preparation process, feel free to modify it
as necessary:
You decide which information to stress and
� which exercises to do.
� You can determine the length of the course
by the number of exercises you choose to
use.
Of course, you may choose to single out
� parts of the curriculum. For example, you
may wish to offer a 60 to 120 minute public
lecture on a certain aspect for participants in
the intensive course.
IPA Trainer Handbook - For The Trainer
15

16
1.3.3 Course Plan
IPA Trainer Handbook - For The Trainer
Course plan
day 1 day 2 day 3
Morning Welcome and Introduction Recapitulation and Key
learning points
9.00 -
10.30
11.00 -
12.30
Afternoon
14.00 -
15.00
15.15 -
16.30
Suggested lesson plan for a three-day course focusing on the Logical Framework Approach
(LFA). (Target Group: Beginners with basic knowledge on strategic documents.)
Topic:
Participants’ project experiences -
what projects should /shouldn’t be
Methods:
Plenary work -Guided discussion,
PPT
Topic:
LFA in Steps
Method:
PPT
Topic:
Project ideas
Method:
Project idea examples presentation,
Group work - choosing example /
idea for work
Topic:
Situation analysis
(Project idea in context of strategic
documents)
Method:
PPT, Group work
continue
Topic:
Situation analysis
Method:
Group work, presentation of results,
feedback
Topic:
Stakeholder analysis
Method:
PPT, Group work
Coffee break
Topic:
Problem analysis
Method:
PPT, Group work, presentation
of results, feedback
lunch break
Topic:
Objective analysis
Method:
PPT, Group work
Coffee break
continue
Topic:
Objective analysis
Method:
Group work, presentation
of results, feedback
Recapitulation and Key learning
points
Topic:
Analysis of alternatives
Method:
PPT, Group work, presentation
of results, feedback
Topic:
Activity planning
Method:
PPT, Group work, presentation
of results, feedback
Topic:
Resource planning
Method:
PPT, Group work, presentation
of results, feedback
Topic:
Approach & Matrix
Method: PPT
Evaluation of the training

1.3.4 evaluation
The evaluation of your course is an essential part of your work as a trainer. The main purpose
of an evaluation is to assess the efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of your course. The
evaluation and recommendations of the course participants can help you improve your work in
the future. In the following, you will find a standard evaluation form that may make your preparation
easier. Once again, feel free to modify and adapt it as necessary.
[workshop’s name and date]
Dear participants,
you are participating in a [your institution] programme. As we strive to continuously improve
our performance and meet your specific needs and requirements, we would like to ask you to
complete this questionnaire to evaluate the workshop we have just completed. Your recommendation
will help us to adjust future programmes and workshops by taking into account what you
think.
The evaluation is anonymous. Your data will not be made available to third parties. It is for internal
statistical use only, enabling us to draw conclusions on the quality of our training measures.
Please be sure to fill in the complete questionnaire.
Thank you for your support!
IPA Trainer Handbook - For The Trainer
17

18
1. what is your overall assessment of the programme? I am …
• very content
• content
• more or less content
• discontented
Please give reasons for your choice:
2. what is your impression of the organisation of the programme? I am …
• very content
• content
• more or less content
• discontented
Please give reasons for your choice:
3. with the moderation and supervision of the workshop I was all in all …
• very content
• content
• more or less content
• discontented
Please give reasons for your choice:
4. With the information distributed (hand-outs, publications, floppy disk etc.) I
am …
• very content
• content
• more or less content
• discontented
Please give reasons for your choice:
5. In what ways would you say you have personally benefited from participation
in this seminar?
• very content
• content
• more or less content
• discontented
Please give reasons for your choice:
IPA Trainer Handbook - For The Trainer

6. Please try to assess the performance of the lecturers in the workshop with
the help of the scale mentioned below (1- very good; 2 - good; 3 - satisfactory;
4 - with deficiencies; 5 - poor):
Name: Mark: reason:
7. what did you like most during the workshop? what didn’t you like at all?
8. Here is some space for further comments, criticism, praise or suggestions
concerning the workshop:
Thank you!
IPA Trainer Handbook - For The Trainer
19

2
IPA Trainer Handbook
3
European Integration –
Basic
european Integration -
basics

2. eurOPeAn InTeGrATIOn - bASICS
After reading this subchapter and the suggested supplementary documents, you will:
� understand that European integration is an open-ended process, having neither a set model nor a predefined final form;
� be familiar with the many different political, economic and societal motives influencing the process of European integration;
� understand that the EU and its organizational principles are characterized by forms of (supranational) integration and
(intergovernmental) cooperation at the same time.
2.1 The History of european Integration
The history of European integration is a history characterized by constant treaty reforms and
adaptations of the Community law according to new challenges and changing economical and
political conditions. As the European Union is a Community of Law, it lives through a functioning
legal and institutional framework. Obviously, treaty reforms are inevitable in keeping the complex
system of the European Union working, especially before or after successive enlargements (from
6 to 9, 12, 15, 27+X member states). The following chapter will show that every treaty reform
occurred under specific conditions with respective differences.
2.1.1 The basic rationale for european
Integration
Although visions of the desired outcome
of the process of European integration
have differed from the very beginning, the
six founding members of the European
Union shared a number of reasons for
getting the integration process started and
these reasons have driven institutionalised
European integration forward for decades.
There were five main reasons for pursuing
european integration after world war II:
� There was a desire for security and peace,
including a desire to keep Germany under
control by integrating it into the European
community.
� There was a desire to create a new democratic
identity for Europe along the lines of the
Council of Europe (founded in 1949) and to
create a lasting alternative to totalitarianism
and aggressive nationalism.
� There was a desire for freedom and mobility,
particularly for people, goods, services and
capital, so that the forces of production could
develop in the context of a larger market.
� There was the hope that economic prosperity
would safeguard and promote democracy,
as well as create an alternative model to the
Soviet system.
Europeans aspired to maintain a separate
� identity and assert themselves vis-à-vis the
new superpowers and, consequently, they
wanted to pool their power.
2.1.2 from The Schuman Plan To The
Treaties Of rome
Today’s EU is the result of a process which
began in the 1950s with the creation of the
European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC).
A vital incentive to this starting point of European
Integration came from the famous Declaration of
9 May 1950 by Robert SCHUMAN, the French
Foreign Minister. Today the 9 May is celebrated
as “Europe Day” all over the European Union.
This Declaration (later also known as the
Schuman-Plan) took up an idea originally
conceived by Jean MONNET and others: the
reconciliation between France and Germany
must be the first step in the European
integration process. The plan also aimed at
creating conditions which would make any
future European wars unlikely, if not impossible.
The most important tool in this context was the
management and supranational supervision
of the production and trade of coal and steel,
two goods which were indispensable for any
country’s ability to wage war. This supervision
was to be provided by a High Authority (the
predecessor of the European Commission).
After France and Germany, four other
countries (Italy, Belgium, Luxembourg and the
Netherlands) decided to support the plan. On
18 April 1951, the Treaty of Paris was signed,
which established the European Coal and Steel
Community.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
23

24
Schumann Plan
Source: IEP/ InWEnt
� �
Milestones from the Schuman Plan to the Treaties of rome:
The six ECSC countries signed a treaty The then six members of the ECSC
on 27 May 1952 creating the European established the European Economic
Defence Community (EDC).
Community (EEC) and the European
� The Treaty establishing the European Coal
and Steal Community (TECSC) came into
effect on 23 July 1952.
Atomic Energy Community (Euratom) at
the Messina Conference of mid-1955. A
Committee of Experts, chaired by Belgian
Foreign Minister Paul-Henri SPAAK,
was set up to examine ways of pursuing
economic integration further. The principles
of the Spaak-Report were adopted at the
Conference of Venice in 1956.
� On 10 September 1952, the foreign
ministers of the ECSC member states
directed the ECSC Common Assembly
(the precursor to the European Parliament)
to draft a treaty to create a European
Political Community (EPC). The Assembly
submitted its draft on 10 March 1953.
� As a result of changing circumstances
in the international arena and a negative
vote in the French National Assembly on
30 August 1954, the EPC project was
abandoned .
� With the EDC in tatters, the process
of European integration underwent a
temporary period of crisis. The main
questions were concerned with how the
process could be given renewed impetus.
Western Europe’s most urgent securitypolicy
concerns were satisfied by the
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)
and by the acceptance of Germany as a
member of the defense alliance. The socalled
‘Treaties of Paris’ came into force on
5 May 1955.
May ‘50
ECSC Treaty
signed
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
On 23 March 1957, the Treaty Establishing
� the European Economic Community
(TEEC) and the Treaty Establishing the
European Atomic Energy Community were
signed in Rome (‘Treaties of Rome’). They
came into effect on 1 January 1958.
In particular, the practical agreements made as
part of the TEEC were very significant to the
economic and social future of Europe. The TEEC
was aimed at establishing a customs union
on a step-by-step basis, requiring the removal
of customs and trade restrictions between
member states and the creation of a common
external tariff for non-member countries. It was
perceived that the economic integration of
member states would then lead to a so-called
Common Market (internal market), allowing the
free movement of goods, services, capital and
people (the so-called four freedoms).
The binding nature of the TEEC stipulations was
without precedent in either European history or
international relations. Obligations laid out in
the TEEC were strengthened by the objective
stated in the preamble, calling for the creation
of ‘an ever closer union among the peoples of
Europe’.
This is clear evidence indicating that the main
motivation for the ‘Treaties of Rome’ (and
especially for the TEEC) was of a political
nature, despite the fact that these treaties were
principally concerned with economic relations.
Ever since they came into force, they have
formed a key building block in guaranteeing for
peace in Western Europe.

2.1.3 The Single european Act
The 1960s and 1970s were marked by a dialectic
between the pressure for reforms on the one
hand and institutional weakness and crises on
the other hand. The urgent need for institutional
reform increased particularly following the first
enlargement of the eC (Denmark, Ireland and the
United Kingdom) in 1973.
In 1986, almost 30 years after the Treaties of Rome,
Heads of State and Government signed the Single
european Act. It was the first modification of the
foundational treaties of the European Communities.
At this point the EC consisted of twelve member
states, with the accessions of Greece in 1981
and of Portugal and Spain in 1986. The Single
European Act came into force on 1 July 1987.
Important reforms made by the Single
european Act:
� Establishment of a core programme towards
achieving an internal market, where goods,
capital, services and people could circulate
freely, creating a single economic area;
� Introduction of the qualified majority voting
system in the Council (with a number of
exceptions);
� Strengthening of the european Parliament
by including it in the legislative process;
� Expansion of the EU’s scope in several
areas (eg. research and technology,
environment)
2.1.4 from european Community To
european union
The tremendous impacts of the internal market
apparent after the revolutionary changes in
europe in 1989 and 1990 as well as the opening
of the EC to the East created a greater need
in the early 1990s for efficient decision-making
structures and procedures, more transparency
and greater democratic-parliamentary legitimacy.
Events at the time provided a new dynamic for
the further development of the EC’s institutional
framework. The 1995 enlargement (the accession
of Austria, Finland and Sweden) and the prospect
of central and eastern European countries
joining the EU (as envisaged since the European
Council of Copenhagen in June 1993) underlined
the importance of future institutional reforms.
The issue of how to make European institutions and
procedures more representative and how to give
them greater legitimacy had become more pressing
since smaller countries like Austria joined the Union.
Moreover, the growing number of actors able to veto
decisions made consensus-building much more
difficult than it had been in the Fifties. This made
TO KnOw MOre:
Since the European Coal and Steel Community in 1952 five
successive enlargements have followed.
it almost impossible for the EU to act and led to a
serious lack of problem solving capacities.
Following two parallel Intergovernmental
Conferences (IGCs) on the Political Union and on the
Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), the Heads of
States and Governments reached agreement on the
Treaty of the european union (Teu) in December
1991 in Maastricht. It was signed in February 1992
and came into force in November 1993, following
considerable resistance to ratification in a number
of member states (rejection by a referendum in
Denmark, agreement by a referendum with only a
slight majority in France and the so-called Maastricht
Judgement by the German Constitutional Court).
The new treaty, also known as Maastricht Treaty
renamed the European Community the “European
Union”, forming what is known as the three pillars
of the EU: the supranational EC pillar along with the
two intergovernmental pillars of Common Foreign
and Security Policy (CFSP) and Justice and Home
Affairs (JHA).
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
25
Source: European Central Bank

26
first pillar:
Treaty establishing
the
European
Community
(TEC)
TO KnOw MOre:
How do the three pillars differ from each other? The three pillars differ not only in content, but also in the powers
and responsibilities of the decision-making bodies involved. From a theoretical point of view, a distinction between
supranational integration and cooperation between states can be drawn in a range of fields. Whereas the first
pillar keeps supranational features, in the second and third features of cooperation between governments prevail
(Intergovernmentalism).
In the first pillar the responsibilities of the European institutions are as follows:
The european Commission has a right of initiative, enabling it, for example, to drive the integration process
forward through targeted proposals for legislation. In the case of the second and third pillars, this monopoly of
initiative is shared between the Commission and the member states. In the first pillar, the Commission also has
many executive powers transferred to it by the two legislative bodies (the European Parliament and the Council)
so that it can exercise considerable influence over the actual implementation of policy falling within the competence
of the EC (e.g. agricultural policy, the internal market and competition policy).
The european Parliament (eP) was directly elected by the citizens of the member states for the first time in 1979
and, over the course of the integration process, has been able to consolidate its position in the first pillar. Today, it
has very extensive rights of participation in the framing of EC legislation, including co-decision rights (co-decision
procedure under TEC Art. 251) and budgetary power. In contrast, the EP (like the Commission) traditionally plays
only a limited role in foreign policy, security and defence issues, which are still considered sensitive fields relating
to national sovereignty, towards which nation states are not willing to delegate decision-making powers to the EU
institutions.
The european Court of Justice acts as the judiciary, guaranteeing effective judicial scrutiny of EC legislation and
its application. From the very beginning, it has played a central role in forging the EC into a Community based on
law and acts as a constitutional court, an administrative court, a civil court and a court of arbitration.
Under the Treaty of lisbon, the European Union replaces the present “European Communities” and the “European
Union”. The three pillars will be merged, even though special procedures in the fields of foreign policy, security and
defense will be maintained.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
european union
Second pillar:
Common
Foreign and
Security Policy
(CFSP)
European
Security &
Defence Policy
(ESDP)
foundation: The Treaties
Third pillar:
Police and
Judicial
Cooperation
in Criminal
Matters
Source: IEP

The Maastricht Treaty reform included
the following points:
� In its main legislative part, it dictated the
implementation of the economic and
Monetary union (eMu) in progressive
stages. There was a fixed timetable, leading
to the adoption of the single currency by
those member states that were able to
meet the convergence criteria.
� The introduction of new forms of
cooperation between the member state
governments, examples of which can be
seen in the Common Foreign and Security
Policy (CFSP) and in the area of Justice
and Home Affairs (JHA).
� The introduction of the co-decision
procedure for EC decision-making, which
served to strengthen the european
Parliament.
�
Other features of the Treaty included:
• The expansion of the structural funds to
supply aid to the poorest EU regions;
• The widening of the competences of
the Community to cover the following
new areas: education, culture, consumer
protection, public health, transeuropean
Networks, industry and environment;
• The creation of a European Ombudsman
to safeguard the rights of European
citizens;
• The introduction of eu citizenship.
� The Maastricht Treaty simplified the name
of the European Economic Community to
“The european Community”. Moreover,
it introduced the notion of a “European
Union”.
� A significant goal of the Maastricht Treaty
was to expand the Community’s social
dimension by covering aspects such as
workers’ health and safety, workplace
conditions, equal pay and the consultation
of employees. These aspects were included
in a separate section of the Treaty, called
the Social Chapter.
2.1.5 The Treaty reform Of Amsterdam
There were several unresolved issues (so-called
“left-overs”) in the Maastricht Treaty which led
to a new Intergovernmental Conference (IGC).
The IGC to review the Maastricht Treaty was
convened at the European Council of Turin on
29 March 1996. The result of the conference
was the Amsterdam Treaty, signed on 2
October 1997 and in force since 1 May 1999.
The Amsterdam Treaty made a number of
important changes to the Maastricht Treaty,
particularly in the following areas:
� fundamental freedoms and the
establishment of an Area of freedom,
Security and Justice: This includes
a reform of the Third Pillar of the EU
through cooperation in justice and home
affairs (CJHA) and through transferring
large parts of the Schengen acquis and
parts of the Third Pillar to the First Pillar.
It also addressed greater protection of
fundamental freedoms and the nondiscrimination
principle, while introducing a
sanctions mechanism to be used against
member states who frequently violate
human rights.
� The union and its citizens: A new chapter
on employment policy, the Maastricht
Treaty’s Social Protocol, environmental
protection, public health, consumer
protection, the fight against fraud and
better public access to EU documents
(transparency and greater subsidiarity)
were integrated into the Amsterdam
Treaty.
The Common foreign and Security
� Policy (CfSP): This involves reorganizing
the so-called troika, having the secretarygeneral
of the Council act as the ‘High
Representative’ of the CFSP in future,
establishing a Policy Planning and Early
Warning Unit and creating closer ties
between the EU and the Western European
Union (WEU). It is also concerned
with establishing the Petersberg tasks,
responsible for humanitarian and rescue
tasks in crisis management and peacekeeping
tasks. Finally, it reorganizes CFSP
finances, introduces the new Community
instrument of ‘Common Strategies’ and
limits the use of qualified majority voting.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
27

28
eu institutions, agencies and
� procedures:
• Strengthening the role of the president of
the Commission;
• Limitation of the future number of
commissioners to twenty and the number
of seats in the European Parliament (EP)
to 700;
• Strengthening the role of the EP by
enhancing its assent and co-decision
rights;
• Expansion of the jurisdiction of the
European Court of Justice (ECJ);
• Strengthening the powers of the
Committee of the Regions (COR) and the
Economic and Social Committee (ESC).
� Closer cooperation (flexibility): This
aims at ending the stumbling blocks posed
by member states unwilling or unable to
embark on further integration and contains
a general clause as well as specific
clauses regarding all three pillars. Under
certain conditions, member states desiring
closer cooperation can make use of EU
institutions and procedures.
The Amsterdam Treaty has been the subject of
much criticism. This is particularly the case with
regard to institutional reforms, particularly those
reforms essential for adapting EU institutions
and decision-making procedures in the light
of future enlargement. Examples include the
weighting of votes in the Council of Ministers
and a greater use of (qualified) majority voting.
2.1.6 The Treaty Of nice
In December 1998, The European Council of
Vienna called upon its successor, European
Council of Cologne, to establish the modalities
and a timetable for addressing the institutional
issues that remained unresolved in the
Amsterdam Treaty.
The Treaty of Nice, signed on 26 February
2001, came into effect on 1 February 2003
(after ratification from the national parliaments
of the EU member states). In contrast to the
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
Single European Act of 1987, the Maastricht
Treaty of 1993 and the Amsterdam Treaty
of 1999, the Treaty of Nice focused almost
exclusively on changing the institutional and
procedural framework of the EU to prepare it
for the accession of up to twelve new member
states.
The nice Treaty reforms included the following
points:
� The rebalancing of votes in the council
from the 1st of January 2005. The new
weighting adopted in the Treaty of Nice
made the decision procedures even more
complex. The number of votes allocated
to each member state was changed and
the number of votes allocated to applicant
countries was set.
� The definition of the future qualified
majority requiring:
•
•
72.3 percent of votes (EU-25)
a majority of member states weighted
• that the majority achieved encompasses
at least 62 percent of the Union‘s entire
population.
� The appointment of only one
Commissioner per member state
from 2005 onwards. The number of
Commissioners would be restricted upon
membership of the 27th member state.
The exact number of members would then
be unanimously determined by the Council
(the number may be no more than 27).
In order to ensure equal treatment of all
member states, a rotation system would be
introduced to determine the nationality of
the Commissioners in power.
A strengthened position of the
� Commission
President’s authority. The President can
make appointments to departments, and is
given the authority to reshuffle departmental
posts during his/her term in office. With
approval from the committee, the President
can also request the resignation of a
Commissioner. Future appointments to the
Commission must be made using qualified
majority voting (QMV).

� Expansion of qualified majority voting
to around 30 treaty provisions. Core areas,
however, were left out.
� A new allocation of seats in the european
Parliament: The number of members of
Parliament allocated to each member state
was changed and the members allocated
to each applicant country fixed.
� The Treaty facilitates the application of the
new instrument of closer cooperation,
introduced with the Treaty of Amsterdam.
The Treaty of Nice was criticized for complicating
decision-making in the EU. Moreover, the
negotiations were said to be less Community-
and more state-centred.
The Charter of fundamental rights
The special summit of the European Council of
Tampere agreed in October 1999 on the composition
and working methods of a convention
to draft a Charter of Fundamental Rights to be
submitted to the European Council. The Charter
was officially proclaimed at the European
Council of Nice in December 2000. In seven
chapters divided into 54 articles, the Charter
lists the whole range of civil, political, economic
and social rights of European citizens and all
persons resident in the EU. These rights are
divided into the following six sections: Dignity,
Freedoms, Equality, Solidarity, Citizens’ rights
and Justice.
As of today, the Charter only has the status of
a Declaration and no legally binding character.
The Charter of Fundamental Rights was integrated
into the Treaty establishing a Constitution
for Europe (TCE), which was signed in October
2004 but failed to be ratified. Upon enactment
of the Treaty of Lisbon, however, the Charter
will gain legally binding force. Due to reservations
on the part of some EU member states,
the Treaty of Lisbon only makes a cross-reference
to the Charter instead of including it in
the text itself.
2.1.7 from The failed Constitutional
Treaty To The Treaty Of lisbon
Attached to the Treaty of Nice, the declaration
on the future of the union called for a
“broader and deeper debate” about the future
development of the EU. In the Laeken Declaration
on ‘The Future of the European Union’
of 15 December 2001, the European Council
of Heads of State or Government agreed to
convene a ‘conference on the future of Europe’
inviting all main actors in the debate on the
future of the Union. The Council decided on the
composition, mandate and working methods of
this novel institution, which came to be known
as the Convention on the future of europe.
With the aim of making the preparations for
the 2004 IGC as comprehensive and transparent
as possible, the Convention was given
the task of examining the substantial questions
facing the future development of the Union
and trying to find different answers to them.
Based on a submission made by the Belgian
Presidency of the Council, the declaration of
Heads of State and Government identified four
areas:
a better allocation and separation of
1. powers in the European Union,
a simplification of the instruments of the
2. Union,
greater democracy, transparency and
3. efficiency in the European Union and
increased focus on providing European
4. citizens with a constitution.
After 17 months, the Convention finished its
work in July 2003. The Presidium of the Convention
published its results under the title “Draft
Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe”.
The Heads of State and Government signed
the Treaty establishing a Constitution for
europe on 29 October 2004 after having reconsidered
and modified certain provisions of
the draft treaty. The so-called “Constitutional
Treaty” faced a turbulent ratification process
with two difficult referendums: The people of
France and the Netherlands rejected the text of
the Constitutional Treaty on 29 May 2005 and
1 June respectively.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
29

30
Following the failed referenda in France and the
Netherlands and a period of reflection (2005-
2007), Heads of State and Government agreed
on a new reform treaty in 2007. On 13 December
2007, the new treaty was signed at a special
summit in Lisbon.
The ratification process of the Treaty of lisbon
started in December 2007. According to national
law, ratification occurs in the member states
through parliamentary vote and/or by referendum.
Despite Ireland’s rejection of the Treaty
by referendum on 12 June 2008, EU leaders
decided to continue the ratification process.
The Treaty of Lisbon amends the TCE and the
TEU. A new legal framework, institutional innovations
and tools will make the Union more democratic,
transparent and efficient.
Key elements of the Treaty of lisbon:
� The European Council will be established
as an institution, distinct from the Council.
The European Council will also be chaired
by a permanent Council President,
appointed for a period of two and a half
years.
� The Commissioner for External Relations
and the current EU High Representative for
Foreign Affairs will be replaced by a High
representative for the eu for foreign
Affairs and Security Policy. The label EU
Foreign Minister, stipulated by the Treaty
establishing a Constitution for Europe, was
dropped due to reservations on the part of
some member states.
� New Definition of QMV:
the Council
will make decisions based on the double
majority of the member states and of the
people, which constitutes an expression of
the Union’s double legitimacy. A qualified
majority will require the support of:
• 55 percent of member states
(compromising at least 15),
• representing 65 percent of the population
of the Union,
• a blocking minority needs to comprise at
least four member states.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
� Due to reservations on the part of Poland,
the new voting system will be postponed
until 2014 with an extra transition period
until 2017.
� The number of seats in the european
Parliament will be reduced to a maximum
of 751 (750 plus the president of the
parliament) with a minimum of 6 and a
maximum of 96 per country.
� The number of Commissioners will be
reduced from 27 to 15 by 2014.
� The role of national parliaments will be
strengthened. For the first time, they will be
informed about all new initiatives from the
Commission. If one third of them consider
that a proposal does not comply with the
principle of subsidiarity, the Commission
must review its proposal.
� A cross-reference to the Charter of
fundamental rights is established.
� The treaty recognises the single legal
personality of the eu.
For the first time, an
� exit clause is included
in the treaty allowing members to leave the
EU.

nOTeS fOr THe TrAIner
Possible activities:
Course participants can discuss the following questions in small groups:
1. What were the motives and aims at the beginning of the process of European
integration?
2. What is your personal view of the developments and present state of the
integration process? (Consideration should be given here in respect to
the original motives and aims.)
3. How should the process of European integration develop in the future?
What would need to be done here?
The results of the group discussions can then be discussed with the whole
class.
Suggested readings:
For those who are interested in further reading, literature and specific internet
links are listed below.
Treaty texts:
The basic legal texts on which the European Communities and the European
Union are based (founding Treaties, amending Treaties, accession Treaties
and other important documents) are available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/
treaties/index.htm#other
Other documents:
Declaration of 9 May 1950:
http://europa.eu/abc/symbols/9-may/decl_en.htm
Declaration of Laeken, December 2001:
http://european-convention.eu.int/pdf/LKNEN.pdf
Internet:
Fondation Robert Schuman: The Lisbon Treaty. 10 easy-to-read fact sheets,
December 2007, available at:
http://www.robert-schuman.eu/doc/divers/lisbonne/en/10fiches.pdf (last accessed:
15 December 2008).
Key events of European integration on the Internet pages of the European
Union: http://europa.eu/abc/history/index_en.htm
Detailed information on the Treaty of Lisbon :
http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/index_en.htm
Print literature:
• Maurer, Andreas/ Wessels, Wolfgang: The EU matters, in: Wessels/Maurer/Mittag
(eds.): Fifteen into One: The European Union and its member
states, Manchester 2003.
• Milward, Alan S.: The European Rescue of the Nation-State, London
1992.
• Pinder, John: The European Union. A very short introduction, Oxford
2007.
• Stubb, Alexander: Negotiating Flexibility in the European Union. Amsterdam,
Nice and beyond, New York 2002.
• Wiener, Antje/ Diez, Thomas (eds.): European Integration Theory, Oxford,
2004
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
31

32
The following subchapter will provide an overview of the institutional architecture of the EU. With the aid of
subchapter 2.2 and the mentioned supplementary materials you will:
� become familiar with the various institutions of the EU, as well as with their composition, tasks and powers;
� understand the interactions between EU institutions and know the policy areas in which they operate;
� learn how EU institutions cooperate with each other; and
� become informed about the proposed institutional changes laid out in the Treaty of Lisbon.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
2.2 The Institutional Architecture Of The european union
The institutional framework of the eu and its development throughout European integration history
is closely linked to ideas and concepts of Europe within the EU member states. It is essential
to have a firm grounding in the organisation and working methods of the EU institutions. This will
help you understand EU decision-making processes and procedures (see chapter 2.3) as well as
the European integration process. Just as the ‘character’ of EU member states is shaped by their
national institutional frameworks and the different actors operating within those frameworks, so
too is the ‘character’ of the European Union shaped by its institutional framework and its actors.
The EU member states have created institutions so that decisions of common interest can be
made democratically at the European level. The treaties define the powers and responsibilities of
these institutions as well as the rules and procedures they have to follow. In addition to its institutions,
the European Union has other bodies and specialised agencies fulfilling specific roles.
This subchapter is devoted to the main institutions of the European Union. They are listed in the
Treaty of the European Communities (TEC). According to Art. 7 TEC the five main institutions
of the Community are:
�
�
�
�
�
The European Parliament
The Council of the European Union
The European Commission
The Court of Justice
The Court of Auditors
The reader will find basic information on the actual competences and working methods of these
institutions (including the European Council) on the basis of the Nice Treaty and additionally on
the proposed changes laid out in the Treaty of lisbon.

2.2.1 The european Parliament
TreATY lAw:
Teu Art. 4, 5, 21, 28, 39 and 41
TeC Art. 7, 189-201, 214 and 251
The European Parliament (EP) is directly elected
by the citizens of the European Union in
order to represent their interests, and it acts as
a supranational institution. The present parliament
(parliamentary term 2009-2014)has 736
members from the 27 EU countries, elected directly
every five years. The current president
of the EP is Mr. Hans-Gert PÖTTERING from
Germany (since 2007). He is to hold this post
until the elections in 2009.
The members of the European Parliament
(MEPs) do not sit in national blocks but in the
following political groups:
European People’s Party (Christian
� Democrats) (EPP)
�
Socialist Group (PES)
Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for
� Europe (ALDE)
�
Union for Europe of the Nations (UEN)
Greens/European Free Alliance (Greens/
� EFA)
European United Left – Nordic Green Left
� (EUL/NGL)
�
�
Independence /Democracy (IND/DEM)
Others
number of seats per country (2009 – 2014 parliamentary term)
Austria 17 latvia 8
belgium 22 lithuania 12
bulgaria 17 luxembourg 6
Cyprus 6 Malta 5
Czech republic 22 netherlands 25
denmark 13 Poland 50
estonia 6 Portugal 22
finland 13 romania 33
france 72 Slovakia 13
Germany 99 Slovenia 7
Greece 22 Spain 50
Hungary 22 Sweden 18
Ireland 12 united Kingdom 72
Italy 72 TOTAl 736
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
33
Source: European Parliament

34
The European Parliament has three places
of work. Plenary sessions (meetings of the
whole parliament) are held in Strasbourg.
The General Secretariat is based in luxembourg,
although more and more offices of
the Secretariat are moving to brussels. Most
of the meetings of political groups and committees
(and also in recent times also short
planning meetings) take place in Brussels.
The European Parliament has three key responsibilities:
1. In many policy areas, the eP enacts
legislation together with the Council. Being
the only directly elected EU institution the
Parliament’s participation in the legislative
process strengthens the democratic
legitimacy of European law. The powers
of the Parliament in the legislation process
vary depending on the policy area. Whereas
Parliament’s power of influence is limited
under the consultation procedures, the
assent procedure gives the EP a stop
or go right on Council legislation. In the
co-decision procedure the EP is on an
equal footing with the Council throughout the
whole legislative process (see chapter 2.3).
Moreover, the EP has the right to examine
the Commission’s annual work programme
and to request that the Commission
proposes particular pieces of legislation.
2. The European Parliament supervises the
other eu institutions, with a particular
focus on the Commission. It has the right
to censure the Commission. Moreover, the
appointment of a new Commission and the
nomination of the Commission president
require the Parliament’s approval.
3.
Jointly with the Council, the European
Parliament exercises budgetary power.
Each year, it approves or rejects the annual
budget proposed by the Commission.
The lisbon Treaty will strengthen the powers
of the EP as regards legislative activities, budgetary
powers and approval of international agreements.
Moreover, the new treaty will change
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
the composition of the EP: the number of its
members will be capped at 751 (750 plus the
president of the parliament).
2.2.2 The Council Of The european
union
TreATY lAw:
Teu Art. 5, 7
TeC Art. 202-210
Like the European Parliament, the Council of
the EU (or Council) is one of the EU’s central
decision-making institutions. Representing
the EU member states, its meetings are attended
by one minister from each of the member
states’ governments.
The configuration of the different Council
meetings depends on the issues discussed.
For example, the Environment
Council is made up of the Environment
Ministers from each member state.
There are nine different Council configurations:
�
�
�
General Affairs and External Relations
Economic and Financial Affairs (ECOFIN)
Justice and Home Affairs (JHA)
Employment, Social Policy, Health and
� Consumer Affairs
�
Competitiveness
Transport, Telecommunications and
� Energy
�
�
�
Agriculture and Fisheries
Environment
Education, Youth and Culture
The major tasks of the Council can be summarized
as follows:
1. The Council has lawmaking power along
with the European Parliament.
2. The Council provides coordination in the
field of economic policy.
3. The Council concludes international ag-

eements between the EU and other countries
or international organizations.
4. Jointly with the European Parliament, the
Council exercises budget powers.
5. The Council has a central role in Common
foreign and Security Policy (CFSP).
6.
The Council coordinates co-operation bet-
ween the national courts and police forces
in criminal matters
In the Council, decisions are made by simple
majority, qualified majority, unanimity or by special
practices established by treaty law.
Proposed changes under the Treaty of lisbon:
Under the new treaty, the decision-making
process will be modified in a twofold manner:
1. Simplification of QMV: In 2014, double
majority voting will be introduced. A QMV
will require a majority of member states (55
percent) and of the EU population (65 percent).
The double majority voting creates
more transparence and effectiveness. Moreover,
the two conditions mirror the composition
of the EU as a Union of nations
and a Union of peoples.
Due to Polish reservations, the new voting
system will be accompanied by a new mechanism
allowing a small number of member
states (still insufficient to block the decision)
to demonstrate that they are against
a decision. If the mechanism is used, the
Council shall search for a solution between
the opposing parties.
2. Extension of QMV: Qualified majority voting
will be extended to many new areas.
2.2.3 The european Council
TreATY lAw:
Teu Art. 4, 7, 13, 17, 23, 40a
TeC Art. 11, 99, 121, 128, 214
The Heads of State and Government of the
member states together with the President
of the European Commission meet up to four
times a year as the European Council. The
president of the European Council is the Head
of State or Government of the member state
holding the 6-month rotating eu Presidency.
The European Council does not make legally
binding decisions, but it issues conclusions
or adopts positions. The European Council is
not an ‘institution’ in the legal sense defined by
treaty law (see TEU Art. 4 and 13). Defining the
general political guidelines of the EU, it is a
very important actor in the European system
and its role in the European integration process
cannot be overestimated. For the first time, the
Treaty of lisbon establishes the European
Council as an institution, distinct from the
Council of the EU.
The Secretariat is the European Council’s
administrative body. Its Secretary General
is Javier SOLANA, who is also eu High
representative for Common foreign
and Security Policy. This position conflicts
somewhat with the remit of the Commissioner
for External Relations and European
Neighbourhood Policy, currently Benita
FERRERO-WALDNER. The Treaty of Lisbon
creates the new post of High representative
Group photo of the European Council in Brussels under French Presidency, October 2008, Source: www.ec.europa.eu
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
35

36
TO KnOw MOre:
of the union for foreign Affairs and
Security Policy merging the positions of
High Representative for Common Foreign
and Security Policy and the Commissioner for
External Relations.
list of Presidencies 2008-2011
Slovenia January-June 2008
france July-december 2008
Czech republic January-June 2009
Sweden July-december 2009
Spain January-June 2010
belgium July-december 2010
Hungary January-June 2011
Poland July-december 2011
The creation of a stable presidency of the
european Council is one of the main changes
introduced by the Treaty of Lisbon. The president
will be elected by the European Council for a
duration of two and a half years (renewable
once). He/she will chair and coordinate the
Council’s work and thus guarantee continuity of
the work undertaken by the European Council.
The president cannot simultaneously assume a
national mandate.
2.2.4 The european Commission
TreATY lAw:
Teu Art. 5, 11, 18, 22, 27, 36, 39, 40, 42, 43
TeC Art. 98-124, 202, 211-219, 24
The European Commission is the quintessential
supranational actor in the institutional system
of the EU. Being independent of national
governments the Commission represents and
promotes the Community interests. Founded
in the 1950s under the initial treaties, the
European Commission is based in Brussels. It
has representations in all EU member states
and about 125 delegations all over the world.
The Commission consists of 27 members (one
per member state), known as Commissioners.
Each (except the president) is responsible
for one or more specific policy area (e.g.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
Environment or Regional Policy). Among the
Commissioners, there is one president and five
vice-presidents. At present, the Commission
is headed by José Manuel BARROSO from
Portugal. Every five years, a new Commission is
appointed. The term of the present Commission
runs until 31 October 2009.
The Commission has four key
responsibilities:
1. The Commission has a monopoly over the
initiative to legislate. The proposals for
new European legislation are presented to
the Parliament and to the Council.
2. Being the European Union’s executive
body, the Commission manages and implements
EU policies and the budget.
3. Acting as the ‘guardian of the Treaties’,
the Commission enforces European law
(together with the Court of Justice).
4. The Commission represents the eu on
the international stage. It also has the right
to negotiate international agreements on
behalf of the EU.
There are two main changes brought by the
Treaty of lisbon:
� reduction of the number of
Commissioners: As of 2014, the number
of Commissioners will correspond to twothirds
of the member states. The European
Council has the right to change the number
of Commissioners by unanimous vote.
� The President of the Commission:
The choice of candidates for president
of the Commission will be linked directly
to the results of the European elections.
Moreover, the powers of the President will
be increased, giving him/her the ability to
dismiss fellow Commissioners.

2.2.5 The european Court Of Justice
TreATY lAw:
Teu Art. 46
TeC Art. 220-245
TeC: Protocol on the Statute of the Court of
Justice of the european union
The Court of Justice of the European
Communities ensures that eu legislation is
interpreted and applied uniformly throughout
the EU.
Currently, the European Court of Justice
(ECJ) consists of one judge per member
state. In order to work more efficiently the
ECJ usually acts as a ‘Grand Chamber’ of
13 judges. It also has the possibility to sit as
chambers of five or three judges. The judges
of the ECJ are appointed by an agreement
between national governments for a period of
six years (which may be renewed). To assist
the Court of Justice and to provide better legal
protection for European citizens, a Court of
first Instance was set up in 1988. Being a
subordinate part of the European Court of
Justice, it deals primarily with cases brought
forward by private individuals, companies, and
some organizations, particularly those relating
to competition law.
The ECJ gives rulings on cases brought before
it. Through preliminary rulings, it clarifies the
interpretation or validity of an EU law to any
member state in doubt. In addition, the Court
of Justice ensures that member states and EU
institutions respect the treaties and fulfil their
obligations under EU law.
The lisbon Treaty renames the Court of
Justice of the European Communities the Court
of Justice of the European Union. Moreover,
the new treaty broadens the responsibilities
of the European Court of Justice. In particular,
the ECJ will have jurisdiction over police and
judicial cooperation in criminal matters. Finally,
some of its procedures will be changed.
2.2.6 The european Court Of Auditors
TreATY lAw:
TeC: Art. 246-248
The Court of Auditors oversees the correct
implementation of the eu budget by
checking the paperwork of any bodies handling
EU income and expenditure. So as to carry
its job out effectively, the Court of Auditors
is completely independent of all other EU
institutions.
The court has twenty-seven members, equal
to the number of EU member states. After
consulting the EP, the Council appoints the
court’s members by unanimous decision for a
renewable term of six years.
One of the main tasks of the Court of Auditors
is to present the European Parliament and
Council a report at the end of each financial
year. The Court’s annual report states whether
the EU budget is being correctly implemented
and if EU funds coming from taxpayers are
being properly collected and spent legally.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
37

38
nOTeS fOr THe TrAIner
Possible activities:
1. After each presentation of an EU institution, work with the class to summarise the most important facts. This can be done in a
discussion format.
2. Once all EU institutions have been presented, divide the course participants into small groups, assigning each group one institution
to explain with the help of a flipchart. The visual aid should illustrate the powers, responsibilities and activities of each group’s
respective institution, as well as describe how the actors of that institution are appointed or elected. At the end each group presents
its institution to the class. Afterwards, the groups can establish institutional links and describe how EU institutions and bodies
cooperate with each other.
3. Discuss the differences between EU institutions and national governments. Try to draw comparisons between them and fit the EU
institutions into the institutional framework of the government of a selected country.
Suggested readings:
Internet:
European Institutions
• European Parliament
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/
• Council of the European Union
http://www.consilium.europa.eu/showPage.ASP?lang=en
• European Commission
http://ec.europa.eu/index_en.htm
• Court of Justice of the European Communities
http://curia.europa.eu/en/transitpage.htm
• European Court of Auditors
http://eca.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/eca_main_pages/home
Consultative bodies
• European Economic and Social Committee
http://eesc.europa.eu/index_en.asp
• Committee of the Regions
http://www.cor.europa.eu/
Financial bodies
• European Central Bank
http://www.ecb.int/ecb/html/index.en.html
• European Investment Bank
http://www.eib.org/?lang=en
• European Investment Fund
http://www.eif.org/
Interinstitutional bodies
• Office for Official Publications of the European Communities
http://publications.europa.eu/index_en.htm
• European Personal Selection Office
http://europa.eu/epso/epso_index_en.html
• European Administrative School
http://europa.eu/eas/index_en.htm
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
Decentralised Bodies of the European Union (Agencies)
• Community agencies
http://europa.eu/agencies/community_agencies/index_en.htm
• Common Foreign and Security Policy agencies
http://europa.eu/agencies/security_agencies/index_
en.htm
• Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters
agencies
http://europa.eu/agencies/pol_agencies/index_en.htm
• Executive agencies
http://europa.eu/agencies/executive_agencies/index_en.htm
Print literature:
• Bomberg, Elizabeth: The European Union. How does
it work?, Oxford 2005.
• Dehousse, Renaud: The institutional architecture of
the European Union. A third Franco-German way?,
Paris 2003.
• Edwards, Geoffrey/ Spence, David (eds.): The European
Commission, London 1997.
• Jacobs, Francis/ Corbett, Richard/ Shackleton, Michael:
The European Parliament, London 2005.
• Petersen, John/ Shackleton, Michael: The Institutions
of the European Union, Oxford 2006.

After reading this subchapter you will:
� be able to distinguish between the various types of decision-making procedures and describe their basic features
(particularly with regard to the role of the EP);
� understand that the decision-making processes in the EU are part of a complex and interlocking process;
�
know the main legislative acts of the EU and be able to distinguish between them.
2.3 decision-making In The european union
Different political actors employ different processes and procedures in the exercise of their responsibilities.
This is one of the most important aspects of any political system, and is true for both
national governance and EU governance. If we want to understand decision-making processes
and policy instruments, we need to examine the processes involved. This is extremely important,
particularly concerning the EU, since EU decisions can have priority over national law and a direct
effect on the citizens, as in the First Pillar (European Community). Furthermore, the transfer of
some decision-making competences to the European level has led to a considerable decrease in
the scope for national legislation in important policy areas.
Different legally binding procedures govern how decisions are made at the European Union level.
Different institutions are involved in the decision-making process: the European Commission, the
European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. They may also be assisted by the
economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the regions.
When participating in the framing of legislation, Community institutions operate within a defined
and logical framework of competences. In general, the Commission proposes new legislation
while the Council and the Parliament pass European laws. Sometimes, the Council is the sole
legislator. The EU legislative process is characterized by a number of different procedures laid
down in the treaties. The procedures applied depend on the subject matter. There are three main
decision-making procedures: consultation, assent and co-decision.
2.3.1 The Consultation Procedure
The consultation procedure has been the standard
EC legislative procedure until the SEA
came into force in 1987. Today, the consultation
procedure is used in areas such as taxation,
agriculture and competition.
Under the consultation procedure the Commission
proposes legislation, usually by virtue
of its right of initiative. Before making a final
decision, the Council consults the European
Parliament (as well as the European Economic
and Social Committee and the Committee of
the Regions).
Treaty law distinguishes between ‘compulsory
consultation’ and ‘optional consultation’. The distinction
here is important since the adoption of
legislation requiring but failing to use compul-
sory consultation can affect its legality. Proper
consultation of the EP in those areas stipulated
by treaty law is a formal requirement. The ECJ
ruled in 1980 that failure to observe this requirement
by the Council makes the legislation in
question null and void.
The Parliament has three options: It can approve
or reject the Commission’s proposal or
suggest amendments. If the Parliament asks
for amendments, the Commission receives the
suggestions from the Parliament and has the
option to accept any of these suggestions. The
amended proposal of the Commission can then
be adopted or further revised by the Council.
The adoption of the Commission proposal requires
a unanimous vote in the Council.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
39

40
2.3.2 The Assent Procedure
The assent procedure applies mainly to the accession
of new member states, association agreements
and important agreements with third
countries. In the assent procedure, a Council
decision requires the acceptance (assent) of
the European Parliament. The Parliament may
accept or reject a proposal, but unlike in the
consultation procedure, it cannot amend it.
2.3.3 The Co-decision Procedure
The co-decision procedure (TEC Art. 251) was
introduced by the Treaty of Maastricht and has
since been extended to many policy areas. In
the co-decision procedure, the EP does not
only give its opinion. It is on equal footing with
the Council and can block a legislative proposal
at any stage in the process. Today, the codecision
procedure is the main legislative procedure
in the EU.
Legislation adopted under the co-decision procedure
requires the consent of both the Council
and the EP. Should these two institutions disagree
on a legislative proposal, a conciliation
committee is created composed of an equal
number of Council representatives and MEPs.
If the conciliation committee composes a
common draft, the Council and the EP then
have six weeks to adopt the legislation. The
Council acts by qualified majority and the EP
by an absolute majority of votes cast. If one or
the other should reject the draft, then the legislation
is defeated.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
KeY MeSSAGe:
The most important point about the co-decision
procedure is that it is impossible to adopt
legislation without parliamentary support. The
european Parliament can no longer be bypassed
in a number of important policy areas.

The table below shows the complex procedure in detail:
The Co-decision Procedure under TeC Art. 251 (formerly Art.189b)
Proposal from the Commission to the european Parliament and the Council
european Parliament / first reading with a simple majority of the vote cast
no amendments
Council of Ministers / First Reading with qualified majority
adopts the proposal or approves all EP proposals for amendment rejects proposals for amendment
Act is deemed
to be adopted
european Parliament / Second reading within 3 months after receiving the common position
rejects the common position
(by absolute majority)
legislation is defeated
Council of Ministers /Second reading within 3 months of receiving eP resolution
rejects EP proposals for amendment by a qualified majority
a conciliation committee is convened within 6 weeks
in agreement with the president of the eP
conciliation committee (15 Council representives, 15 EP representives and 1 Commission
representive) negotiate a common draft: the Council delegation acts by qualified majority, EP
delegation acts by simple majority and the Commission acts as moderator
if no agreement is reached after 6 weeks if agreement is reached within 6 weeks
legislation is defeated
legislation does not come into force until it
has been countersigned by the presidents of
the EP and the Council
proposals for amendment
proposals for amendment
(by absolute majority)
sends to the Council and
the Commission
adopts a common position and
sends it to the EP and the Commission
EP approves by a
absolute majority
if both approve, the
legislation is adopted
no response
adopts the common position
(by simple majority)
or does not respond
Act is deemed
to be adopted
approves EP proposals for amendment
by a qualified majority
(if proposals approved by Commission)
or acts unanimously
Act is deemed
to be adopted
Council approves by
a qualified majority
if either one rejects the
draft, the legislation is
defeated
Source: IEP/ InWEnt
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
41

42
2.3.4 legislative Acts Of The european
Community
The treaties (primary legislation), international
agreements and ‘secondary legislation’ form
the three major sources of Community law.
Secondary law is the entirety of the legislative
instruments adopted by European institutions
according to the provisions of the treaty. In
accordance with TEC Article 249 it comprises
three types of binding legislation (regulations,
directives and decisions) and two types of
non-binding legislation (recommendations and
opinions) together with other instruments (e.g.
Community action programmes). Legal instruments
associated with the second and third pillar
are, strictly speaking, not among secondary
legislation as they are governed by intergovernmental
relations. In the following, regulations
and directives are described in detail since
they are the main forms of EU law.
A regulation is the most powerful form of Community
legislation for intervening in national legal
systems. It is defined in the TEC as follows:
“A regulation shall have general application.
It shall be binding in its entirety and directly
applicable in all member states.” If European
institutions choose to enact legislation in the
form of a regulation, member states will have
no scope in implementation since the legislation
is directly applicable. Member states, their
institutions and their authorities must observe
EC regulations as if they were national law.
For example, if the EC adopts a regulation on
fishing on the high seas, it is even applicable in
Luxembourg.
After regulations, directives are the next most
important official instrument of the Community.
Directives are a compromise between the need
for uniform law in the Community and the desire
to maintain the greatest possible diversity
of national characteristics. The primary aim of
a directive is the approximation of laws in the
EU and not, as in the case of regulations, the
uniformity of law. Directives are defined by the
TEC as follows: “A directive shall be binding, as
to the result to be achieved, upon each member
state to which it is addressed, but shall lea-
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
ve to the national authorities the choice of form
and methods.”
Those to whom a directive is addressed (i.e.
the member states) must incorporate it within
national law. Yet member states must act in
such a way that the stated objective of the directive
is actually achieved. This means that
the act of incorporation must have a certain
‘quality’ about it. Simple administrative action
which can easily be changed by the executive
is not enough. In general, the European Court
of Justice (ECJ) has stated that member states
are to choose the form and methods which are
most suitable for ensuring the effectiveness of
the directive.

nOTeS fOr THe TrAIner
Possible activities:
• Suggested group activity on decision-making procedures (I): With the aid of
supplementary materials (see the supplementary material on ‘SOCRATES’ below)
and your assistance, have the course participants reconstruct the decision-making
procedure used in the adoption of the SOCRATES programme. Course participants
should also work out which parliamentary amendments were successful.
• Suggested group activity on decision-making procedures (II) : Have the course
participants reconstruct the decision-making procedures with the aid of the TEC.
• discuss the extent to which decision-making in the EU complies with demands
for transparency, efficiency, effectiveness and democracy. Draw comparisons with
your own country: How is legislation made? What role does your parliament play in
the legislative process?
EU decision-making processes are good subjects for simulation games. Simulation
games facilitate the understanding of decision-making processes and do so in an entertaining
way. Playing often flags up important issues which had not been addressed
sufficiently in more formal learning. It gives you as the trainer the opportunity to revisit
important elements of the subject.
Additional material:
For the SOCRATES case study the following materials are needed:
• TEC Art. 126
• Decision Nr. 819/95/EG of the European Parliament and the Council of the European
Union of 14 March 1985 on the SOCRATES Community Action Programme
(excerpts); ABL L 87.
• European Parliament: Report on the Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament
and the Council of the European Union on the SOCRATES Community
Action Programme (excerpts); A3-0250/94 of 18 April 1994.
• Common Position (EC) Nr. 33/94 of the Council adopted on 18 July 1994 with regard
to the adoption of the Decision of the European Parliament and the Council of
the European Union on the SOCRATES Community Action Programme (excerpts);
ABL C 244.
• Commission Proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and the Council
of the European Union on the SOCRATES Community Action Programme (excerpts);
KOM (93) 708 of 3 February 1994.
Suggested readings:
Specific internet links and literature are listed for those who are interested in further
reading.
Internet:
• Introduction to Decision-Making in the European Union:
http://europa.eu/institutions/decision-making/index_en.htm
• More detailed information on the co-decision procedure on the internet pages of
the European Commission: http://ec.europa.eu/codecision/index_en.htm
Print Literature:
• Bomberg, Elizabeth: The European Union. How does it work?, Oxford 2005.
• Maurer, Andreas: The legislative powers and impact of the European Parliament,
in: Journal of Common Market Studies, 41, April 2003
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Integration - Basics
43

IPA Trainer Handbook
3 4
European Regional Policy
european regional Policy

3. eurOPeAn reGIOnAl POlICY
In this chapter you will find:
� an overview of the European Regional Policy, particularly with regard to its evolution and its present shape. The focus will be
on the main objectives of the European Regional policy and the instruments used to implement it.
� Useful links to original documents and guidelines on European Regional Policy
3.1 Introduction
This chapter provides the link between general knowledge of the EU (chapter 2) with the EU´s
pre-accession activities (chapter 4 to 6). The reason is simple: The Instrument for Pre-accession
Assistance (IPA) has been developed out of the mechanisms of the Regional and Structural Policies
of the EU. Hence, basic features of the European Regional Policy tools are identifiable in
IPA, the pre-accession aid for EU candidate countries.
Why do we need a European Regional Policy? Today the European Union is one of the most important
economic zones in the world. The 27 member states of the EU form a community and an
internal market of 493 million citizens. There are however great economic and social disparities
between these countries and their 271 regions that weaken the Community’s dynamic. Today,
every fourth region has a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per inhabitant that is under 75 percent
of the average of the EU 27. With the accession of twelve new member states in 2004 and 2007,
the development gap between the regions has doubled. As a result, today most beneficiaries of
the Regional Policy are located in Central and Eastern Europe.
European Regional Policy puts into practice
the solidarity between the peoples of Europe
mentioned in the preamble of the Maastricht
Treaty (TEU). It helps to achieve one of the fundamental
objectives laid down in the Treaty: the
strengthening of the eu’s economic and social
cohesion (Art. 158-162 TEC) by reducing
disparities between the levels of development
of the various regions and the backwardness
of the least favoured regions in the Union (Art.
158 TEC).
In addition, European Regional Policy has a
significant impact on the competitiveness of
the regions and the living conditions of their inhabitants,
mainly by co-financing multi-annual
development programmes.
Apart from these broad policy objectives another
factor highlights the importance of European
Regional Policy: More than one third (35.7
percent) of the actual budget of the European
Union is spent on regional development and
economic and social cohesion. Amounting to
€347.41 billion it is the second largest budget
item for the period 2007-2013.
3.2 History Of eu regional Policy
In 1957, the authors of the Treaty of Rome
defined the main tasks of the European Community
as promoting the unity and harmonious
development of economic activities as well as
accelerated rise of the standard of living in all
member states (Art. 2, Treaty of Rome). These
objectives were to be reached by establishing
a large market based on the free movement of
goods, people, capital and services. To reduce
the economic and social disparities within the
Community and its member states two sectorbased
funds, the european Social fund (ESF)
and the european Agricultural Guidance
and Guarantee fund (EAGGF), were set-up
in 1958. After the creation of the Directorate-
General for Regional Policy in 1968, Heads of
State and Government adopted conclusions in
1972 stating that Regional Policy was “an essential
factor in strengthening the Community”.
To stimulate the endogenous development in
the less developed regions in the Community
the european regional development fund
(ERDF) was set up in 1975 for a three-year
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
47

48
period. In 1986, the Single European Act paved
the way for an integrated cohesion policy
designed to counterbalance the burden of the
single market for the less-favoured regions of
the Community.
Since the Single European Act and with the
background of the second Southern enlargement
(accession of Spain and Portugal), the
task of reinforcing European economic and social
cohesion has become the corollary of a Europe
without borders. A key factor for social and
economic cohesion remained the diminution of
regional disparities (Art. 158 TEC). In 1988, the
member states decided to double the funds allocated
for structural expenditure and concentrate
the action of various structural Funds. The
first fundamental reform regarding the structural
funds adopted by the Council in June 1988
introduced key principles such as focusing on
less-favoured regions, multi-annual programming,
strategic orientation of investments and
the involvement of regional and local partners.
The Treaty of Maastricht (Treaty on European
Union) of 1993 designated cohesion as one of
the main objectives of the Union alongside the
Economic and Monetary Union and the Single
Market. The preamble of the Treaty on European
Union (TEU) also inserted the principle of
solidarity, another reason for engaging a European
Regional Policy. The European Regional
Policy therefore embodies the solidarity of the
European Community. The Treaties specify that
the European Union should act to strengthen its
economic and social cohesion (Art. 2 TEC) and
specifically work to reduce the gaps among the
levels of development in the different regions of
the member states (Art. 158 TEC). The Maastricht
Treaty also established the creation of the
Cohesion fund (Art. 161, TEC) to support projects
in the fields of environment and transport
in the least prosperous member states of the
European Union.
The period of 2000 to 2006 was mainly characterized
by two themes: the simplification of
the design and procedures of the Cohesion Policy
as well as the preparation for enlargement
of the European Union. A significant reform of
structural policy came along with the Berlin
summit in March 1999, when Heads of State
1 Poland and Hungary: Aid for Restructuring of the Economics.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
and Government reached agreement on the
Agenda 2000. The resulting reformed regulations
on structural policy have been in force
since 2000. The Cohesion Fund was adjusted
at the same time.
In preparation for the EU’s forthcoming eastward
enlargement, Agenda 2000 also provided
the introduction of two pre-accession
instruments for the period 2000-2006: the Instrument
for Structural Policies and Pre-accession
(ISPA), which provided assistance along
the lines of the Cohesion Fund and the Special
Accession Programme for Agriculture and Rural
Development (SAPArd), which provided
assistance helping countries prepare for the
Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). These two
instruments complemented the PHAre 1 programme,
which was originally created in 1989
to support reforms and economic and political
transition in Poland and Hungary and later extended
to support institution and capacity building
as well as investment financing in the applicant
countries of the Western Balkans.
In 2002 the EU set up a european union Solidarity
fund (EUSF) to help member states
and their regions hit by a major natural disaster.
Since then, it has helped to rebuild infrastructure
and relaunch the economies of regions
affected by the flooding in Eastern Europe (in
summer 2002) and has provided assistance
to the victims of the Prestige oil disaster and
droughts in Portugal in summer 2003.
The 2004 enlargement (from EU-15 to EU-25)
was a historic step for the European Union.
However, although population increased by
20 percent, it brought only a five percent increase
in the EU’s GDP, resulting in increased
disparities in terms of income and employment.
With an average GDP per head of less than 50
percent of the EU average, the new member
states’ territory received the highest possible
level of support from the structural and cohesion
funds.
Decided by the European Council in Lisbon in
March 2000, the lisbon Strategy focused on
growth, employment and innovation. With its
relaunch at the end of 2005, cohesion policy
has been recognized as a key instrument at the

Community level contributing to the implementation
of the growth strategy and the creation
of jobs – not just because it represents around
one third of the Community budget, but also because
strategies designed at local and regional
levels must form an integral part of the effort to
promote growth and jobs.
In the current period (2007-2013) the EU Cohesion
Policy faces major challenges: Today,
every third EU citizen lives in the poorest regions
of the Union. The differences between the
levels of national and regional economic and
social development have grown significantly
since recent enlargements. For example, the
richest region is Inner London with 290 percent
of the EU’s per-capita income whereas the
Nord-Est in Romania is the poorest region with
only 23 percent of the EU average. The Heads
of State and Government tried to respond to
this situation when they adopted the budget for
the period 2007-2013 in December 2003. Approximately
€347 billion have been allocated
towards structural and cohesion funds of which
81.5 percent are destined to be spent in the
least developed member states and regions.
Compared to the previous period (2000-2006)
the financial assistance granted to new member
states (on average by year) is 166 percent
higher in the current period. By contrast, the
EU-15 countries receive 30 percent less aid.
These adjustments increase the importance of
transitional assistance granted to countries like
Spain.
In order to reduce regional disparities between
future EU member states, a new financial preaccession
instrument has been created for
the period 2007-2013. Superseding ISPA, SA-
PARD and PHARE, the Instrument for Preaccession
Assistance (IPA) inter alia supports
candidate and potential candidate countries in
their preparation for the implementation and
management of the ERDF, the ESF and the
Cohesion Fund (see chapter 4).
Finally, the Cohesion Policy undergoes a shift
in priorities in the current period: a quarter of
all resources are now earmarked for research
and innovation, about 30 percent are assigned
to environmental infrastructure and measures
combating climate changes.
3.3 legal basis for The Period 2007-2013
TreATY ArTICleS
Present Treaty of nice (TeC):
Preamble
Art. 2, 3: Objectives of the european Community
Art. 146-148: The european Social fund
Art. 158-162: economic and Social Cohesion
The Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of
11 July 2006 set down general provisions regarding
the European Regional Development
Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion
Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No
1260/1999, providing the basis for European
Regional Policy for the period 2007-2013. This
regulation is based on TEC Art. 161, which stipulates
that the Council is to coordinate the
structural funds and to make them more effective
with the purpose of meeting the objectives
set out in TEC Art. 158 and 160. In addition to
this general regulation, there are specific regulations
for individual funds such as:
� Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 of the
European Parliament and of the Council
of 5 July 2006 on the european regional
development fund repealing Regulation
(EC) No 1783/1999, Official Journal of the
European Union L 210 (31 July 2006).
� Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 of the
European Parliament and of the Council
of 5 July 2006 on the european Social
fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No
1784/1999, Official Journal of the European
Union L 210 (31 July 2006).
� Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the
European Parliament and of the Council of
5 July 2006 on a european Grouping of
Territorial Cooperation (EGTC), Official
Journal of the European Union L 210 (31
July 2006).
Council Regulation (EC) No 1084/2006
� of 11 July 2006 establishing a Cohesion
fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No
1164/94, Official Journal of the European
Union L 210 (31 July 2006).
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
49

50
3.4 Objectives
For the period 2007-2013, the activities of the structural funds and instruments are focused on
three objectives:
1.
2.
3.
Convergence
Regional Competitiveness and Employment
European Territorial Cooperation
nuTS – A THree-level HIerArCHICAl ClASSIfICATIOn
The whole European Union is covered by one or several objectives of the cohesion policy. To determine geographic eligibility, the
Commission bases its decision on statistical data. Europe is divided into various groups of regions corresponding to the classification
known by the acronym NUTS (common nomenclature of territorial units for statistics).
Since this is a hierarchical classification, the NUTS subdivides each member state into a whole number of NUTS 1 regions, each
of which is in turn subdivided into a whole number of NUTS 2 regions and so on. At the regional level (without taking municipalities
into account), the administrative structure of the member states generally comprises two main regional levels (Länder and
Kreise in Germany, régions and départements in France, Comunidades autonomas and provincias in Spain, regioni and provincie
in Italy, etc.).
The grouping together of comparable units at each NUTS level involves establishing, for each member state, an additional regional
level to the two main levels referred to above. This additional level therefore corresponds to a less important or even nonexistent
administrative structure, and its classification level varies within the first 3 levels of the NUTS, depending entirely on the
member state: NUTS 1 for France, Italy, Greece, and Spain, NUTS 2 for Germany, NUTS 3 for Belgium, etc.
The NUTS Regulation lays down the following minimum and maximum thresholds for the average size of the NUTS regions.
level Minimum Maximum
NUTS 1 3 million 7 million
NUTS 2 800 000 3 million
NUTS 3 150 000 800 000
Objective 1 – Convergence
Objective 1 is the main priority of the EU’s cohesion
policy. In accordance with the Nice Treaty,
the Union works to „promote harmonious
development“ and aims particularly to „narrow
the gap between the development levels of the
various regions“. This is why more than 2/3 of
the appropriations of the structural funds are
allocated towards helping areas lagging behind
in their development. In these areas, the gross
domestic product (GdP) is below 75 percent
of the Community average.
All these regions have a number of economic
signals/indicators „in the red“:
�
�
low level of investment;
a higher than average unemployment rate;
lack of services for businesses and
� individuals;
�
poor basic infrastructure.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
Source: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/ramon/nuts/basicnuts_regions_en.html
In the EU-27, 84 regions – within 17 member
states - with a total population of 154 million,
and per capita GDP of less than 75 percent of
the Community average will be eligible for the
first objective. Another 16 regions with a total of
16.4 million inhabitants and a GDP only slightly
above the threshold, due to the statistical effect
of the larger EU, are covered by this objective
on a “phasing-out” basis. The amount of
€282.8 billion available under the Convergence
objective represents 81.5 percent of the total.
It is split as follows: €199.3 billion for the Convergence
regions, €14 billion for the “phasingout”
regions, and €69.5 billion for the Cohesion
Fund, the latter applying to 15 member states.

wHAT Are PHASInG-OuT reGIOnS?
The accession of poorer states in 2004 and 2007 led to a significant decrease of the average GDP per capita in the European
Union. As a result of this phasing-out effect (also called the statistical effect) 18 regions with around 21 million inhabitants
which benefited from much financial assistance before the 2004/2007 enlargement would fall out of the Convergence objective
because their GDP is now below the threshold of 75 percent.
In order to compensate these regions (so called phasing-out regions), a compromise was found: Concerned regions receive
transitional financial assistance from the structural funds in the framework of the Convergence objective in the period 2007-2013
in order to avoid drastic changes between two programming periods.
which regions are eligible for objective 1?
Regions at level 2 of the NUTS classification whose GDP per inhabitant is less than 75 percent
of the Community average are eligible for funding under the Convergence objective. At present,
these are:
• bulgaria: the whole territory
• Czech republic: Střední Čechy, Jihozápad, Severozápad, Severovýchod, Jihovýchod, Střední Morava, Moravskoslezsko
• Germany: Brandenburg-Nordost, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, Chemnitz, Dresden, Dessau, Magdeburg, Thüringen
• estonia: the whole territory
• Greece: Anatoliki Makedonia, Thraki, Thessalia, Ipeiros, Ionia Nisia, Dytiki Ellada, Peloponnisos, Voreio Aigaio, Kriti
• Spain: Andalucía, Castilla-La Mancha, Extremadura, Galicia
• france: Guadeloupe, Guyane, Martinique, Réunion
• Hungary: Közép-Dunántúl, Nyugat-Dunántúl, Dél-Dunántúl, Észak-Magyarország, Észak-Alföld, Dél-Alföld
• Italy: Calabria, Campania, Puglia, Sicilia
• latvia: the whole territory
• lithuania: the whole territory
• Malta: the whole island
• Poland: the whole territory
• Portugal: Norte, Centro, Alentejo, Região Autónoma dos Açores
• romania: the whole territory
• Slovenia: the whole territory
• Slovakia: Západné Slovensko, Stredné Slovensko, Východné Slovensko
• united Kingdom: Cornwall and Isles of Scilly, West Wales and the Valleys
A phasing-out system is granted to those regions which would have been eligible for funding under the Convergence objective
if the threshold of 75 percent of GDP had been calculated for the EU at 15 and not at 25:
• belgium: Province du Hainaut
• Germany: brandenburg-Südwest, lüneburg, leipzig, Halle
• Greece: Kentriki Makedonia, dytiki Makedonia, Attiki
• Spain: Ciudad Autónoma de Ceuta, Ciudad Autónoma de Melilla, Principado de Asturias, región de Murcia
• Austria: burgenland
• Portugal: Algarve
• Italy: basilicata
•
united Kingdom: Highlands and Islands
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
51

52
Objective 2 - regional Competitiveness
and employment
Objective 2 addresses areas facing structural
difficulties, whether the areas are industrial, rural,
urban or dependent on fisheries. Though
situated in regions whose development level is
close to the Community average, such areas
are faced with different types of socio-economic
difficulties that are often a source of high
unemployment. These include:
� the evolution of industrial or service sectors;
� a decline in traditional activities in rural
areas;
� a crisis situation in urban areas;
� difficulties affecting fisheries activity.
The aim of strengthening competitiveness and
attractiveness as well as employment is pursued
through a twofold approach: First, development
programmes help regions to foster
Geographical Distribution
according to the Cohesion Policy objectives 1 and 2
Source: European Commission, Directorate General Regional Policy.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
economic change through innovation and the
promotion of knowledge, entrepreneurship, the
protection of the environment, and the improvement
of their accessibility. Secondly, more
and better jobs are supported by adapting the
workforce and investing in human resources.
In the EU-27, this objective concerns - within
19 member states - a total of 168 regions with
a population of 314 million inhabitants. Within
these, 13 regions with a total of 19 million inhabitants
represent so-called “phasing-in” areas
and receive special financial allocations due
to their former status as “Objective 1” regions.
The amount of €55 billion – of which €11.4 billion
is for the “phasing-in” regions – represents
just below 16 percent of the total allocation.
which regions are eligible for objective 2?
All regions which are not covered by the Convergence
objective or by the transitional assistance
(NUTS 1 or NUTS 2 regions depending
on the member states) are eligible for funding
under the competitiveness
and employment objective.
A phasing-in system will be
granted until 2013 to NUTS 2
regions that were eligible for
funding under the former Objective
1 but whose GDP exceeds
75 percent of the average
GDP of the EU-15.
Convergence Regions
Phasing-out Regions
Phasing-in Regions
Competitiveness and
Employment Regions

Regions eligible for transitional assistance
under the Competitiveness and Employment
objective are:
• Éire-Ireland: Border, Midland and Western
• Greece: Sterea Ellada, Notio Aigaio
• Spain: Canarias, Castilla y León, Comunidad
Valenciana
• Italy: Sardegna
• Cyprus: tout le territoire
• Hungary: Közép-Magyarország
• Portugal: Região Autónoma da Madeira
• finland: Itä-Suomi
• united Kingdom: Merseyside, South Yorkshire
Objective 3 - european Territorial Cooperation
The European Territorial Cooperation objective
is financed by the European Regional Development
Fund (ERDF) and supports cross-border,
transnational and interregional cooperation
programmes. The budget available for this objective
(€8.7 billion) represents 2.5 percent of
the total allocation for cohesion policy during
the period 2007-2013, including the allocation
for member states’ participation in EU external
border cooperation programmes supported
by other instruments (such as the Instrument
for Pre-accession Assistance or the European
Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument).
For the period 2007-2013 the European Territorial
Cooperation objective (formerly the INTER-
REG Community Initiative) covers three types
of programmes:
� 52 cross-border cooperation programmes
along internal EU borders. The ERDF
contribution is of €5.6 billion.
� 13 transnational cooperation programmes
cover larger areas of cooperation such as
the Baltic Sea, Alpine and Mediterranean
regions. ERDF contribution: €1.8 billion.
� The interregional cooperation programme
(INTERREG IVC) and three networking
programmes, namely Urbact II, Interact
II and the European Spatial Planning
Observation Network (ESPON) covering all
27 member states of the EU. They provide
a framework for exchanging experience
between regional and local bodies in
different countries. The ERDF contribution
amounts to €445 million.
In the EU-27, 181.7 million inhabitants (37.5
percent of the total EU population) live in crossborder
areas, whereas all EU regions and citizens
are covered by one of the existing 13
transnational cooperation areas.
which regions are eligible for objective 3?
� Cross-border cooperation addresses
NUTS level 3 regions along all internal land
borders and certain external land borders
and all NUTS level 3 regions along maritime
borders separated by a maximum distance
of 150km.
� for transnational cooperation: see the list
adopted by the Commission in its decision
on 31 October 2006 (http://eur-lex.europa.
eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:20
06:312:0047:0058:EN:PDF).
for interregional cooperation:
� all regions
in Europe are eligible.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
53

54
How are the funds divided by objectives and member states?
For the period 2007-2013, Cohesion Policy represents 35.7 percent of the total EU budget expenditure
(€347.41 billion). The two figures below show the division of these allocations by objectives
and by member states:
�
�
�
Convergence: 81.54 percent;
Source: European Commission, Directorate General Regional Policy.
Regional Competitiveness and Employment: 15.95 percent;
European Territorial Cooperation: 2.52 percent.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy

IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
55
Source: European Commission, Directorate General Regional Policy.

56
3.5 european Structural funds And
Instruments
Within the financial framework for 2007-2013,
the main instruments of the European Structural
Policy are:
the European Regional Development Fund
� (erdf),
� the European Social Fund ( eSf),
� the Cohesion Fund ( Cf).
The ERDF and the ESF are also called the
structural funds. The Funds contribute towards
achieving the three objectives referred
to in chapter 3.4.
3.5.1 The european Social fund (eSf)
The european Social fund was created in
1957. Over time it has become the main financial
tool through which the European Union
puts its strategic employment policy goals into
action. It is managed by the Employment and
Social Affairs Directorate-General and works
within the framework of the Convergence and
Regional Competitiveness and Employment
objectives.
The eSf supports member states in the
following areas:
� increasing the flexibility of workers,
enterprises and entrepreneurs with the
purpose of improving anticipation and
positive management of economic change;
� enhancing access to employment and the
sustainable inclusion in the market of job
seekers and inactive people, preventing
unemployment, in particular long-term
and youth unemployment, encouraging
active ageing and longer working lives,
and increasing participation in the labor
market;
� reinforcing the social inclusion of
disadvantaged people with a view to their
sustainable integration in employment,
combating all forms of discrimination in the
labor market;
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
�
enhancing human capital;
� promoting partnerships, pacts and
initiatives through networking of relevant
stakeholders such as social partners
and non-governmental organizations at
the transnational, national, regional and
local levels, thus mobilizing reforms in
the field of employment and labor market
inclusiveness.
3.5.2 The european regional development
fund (erdf)
The erdf was created in 1975 and is managed
by the Regional Policy Directorate General. It
works with the three objectives of Regional Policy:
Convergence, Regional Competitiveness
and Employment as well as European Territorial
Cooperation.
The ERDF aims to foster economic and social
cohesion in the European Union by correcting
imbalances between its regions. Moreover,
the ERDF gives particular attention to specific
territorial characteristics. ERDF actions aim
at reducing economic, environmental and social
problems in towns. Special assistance is
granted to geographically disadvantaged areas
(remote, mountainous or sparsely populated
areas).
The ERDF is active in the following areas:
� productive investment, which creates and
safeguards sustainable jobs by aiding
investment in small and medium-sized
enterprises (SMEs);
�
investment in infrastructure;
development of endogenous potential by
� measures which support regional and local
development. These measures include
support for and services to enterprises
(in particular SMEs), creation and
development of financing instruments such
as venture capital, loan and guarantee
funds, local development funds, interest
subsidies, networking, cooperation and
exchange of experience between regions,
towns, and relevant social, economic and
environmental actors.

3.5.3 The Cohesion fund (Cf)
The Cohesion Fund was established in 1994
as part of the implementation of the Maastricht
Treaty. It was mainly created to assist the least
prosperous countries of the Union in meeting
the Convergence Criteria of the Economic and
Monetary Union (EMU). Cohesion Fund aid is
made available to member states where the
Gross National Product (GNP) is less than 90
percent of the Community average. Thus the
fund is not linked to wealth at the regional level
but at the national level measured in GDP per
capita. Therefore, only the poorest countries
– but not comparatively wealthy countries like
the UK or Germany with poor regions – benefit
from this catching-up fund.
Aiming at the reduction of economic and social
shortfall and at the stabilisation of the economy,
the Cohesion Fund supports actions within
the framework of the Convergence objective.
On 1 May 2004 with the EU enlargement, all
new member states qualified for the Cohesion
Fund and became its main recipients: one third
of the funding was reserved for them between
2004 and 2006. For the period of 2007-2013
the following member states receive Cohesion
Fund assistance: Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech
Republic, Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Latvia,
Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania,
Slovakia and Slovenia. In order to avoid important
changes between two programming periods
a phasing-out system has been developed
for regions that benefited from much financial
assistance before the 2004 and 2007 enlargement.
At present only Spain receives transitional
funding as its GNI per inhabitant is less
than the EU-15 average.
Eligibility for funding is to be checked again at
the half-way point of the support period (2007-
2013) against updated GNI figures (see Commission
decision of 4 August 2006, 2006/596/
EC). If the mid-term review in 2010 shows that
a member state is no longer eligible, then that
member state loses its entitlement for the period
2010-2013. This happened to Ireland in
2003 when the Commission’s mid-term review
deemed the country as ineligible under the Cohesion
Fund as of 1 January (GNP average of
101 per cent).
The Cohesion fund supports two types
of actions:
� environmental projects that help achieve the
environmental objectives of the Community,
especially the primary objectives of the
Programme for Environment Policy and the
measures concerned with sustainable and
environmentally friendly development;
� transport infrastructure projects of mutual
interest and that are supported by the
member states; such projects include only
those that help to realize the Community’s
Trans-European Networks.
In addition, the Cohesion Fund can be used to
finance studies and measures related to technical
assistance in connection with these projects
(preliminary studies, comparative studies
for evaluating the effects of Community assistance,
information and publicity measures).
The Cohesion Fund aid is linked to macroeconomic
indicators. According to the TEU,
recipient member states have to draw up a programme
for fulfilling the TEU’s conditions on
economic convergence and the avoidance of
excessive government deficits. The Commission
has the authority to inform the Council if a
member state is unable to fulfil its obligation of
avoiding an excessive government deficit. Any
Cohesion Fund assistance for further projects
is then withdrawn once a government deficit
reaches three percent.
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
57

58
KeY MeSSAGe:
The structural funds and instruments intervene in the framework of the
three objectives of European Regional Policy (Convergence, Regional
Competitiveness and Employment, European Territorial Cooperation).
The figure below shows in which way the funds contribute to the objectives:
Source: European Commission, Directorate General Regional Policy.
nOTeS fOr THe TrAIner
IPA Trainer Handbook - European Regional Policy
3.6 Structural funds And
Pre-accession Aid
The current applicant countries cannot
take part in the Cohesion Policy and they
do not have access to structural funds and
instruments before accession. The promotion
of economic and social development
and environmental protection is however
one of the objectives of pre-accession aid
for applicant countries. The Instrument
for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) directly
prepares candidate countries (at
present these are Turkey, Croatia and The
former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)
for the successful management of structural
instruments. In this respect, structural
instruments can be considered as a direct
continuation of assistance granted under
IPA. However, EU accession opens a
completely new chapter for new member
states and offers funding opportunities that
differ significantly from pre-accession aid
in terms of scale and scope.
Possible activities:
• Course participants can discuss the objectives of Structural Policy in small groups. The results of their discussions can afterwards
be presented to the class as a whole.
• Distribute prepared cards with the objectives of Structural Policy and ask the groups to put them in some sort of hierarchical order.
Each group can then justify the order they chose and open this to a general discussion.
• Course participants can discuss the link between European Regional Policy and European pre-accession aid.
Suggested readings:
Internet:
• European Commission: Working for the Regions. EU Regional Policy 2007-2013, January 2008: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/presenta/working2008/work_en.pdf
• European Commission: Progress reports on economic and social cohesion, on the structural funds and on the Cohesion
Fund:http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/official/repor_en.htm
• Detailed information on EU Regional Policy: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/index_en.htm
• The European Commission’s Directorate-General for Regional Policy has a free mailing list you can join at:
https://www.inforegiodoc.eu/mailinglist/faces/welcome.jsp
• You then receive new information leaflets, learn about new developments and receive the monthly newsletter Inforegio News.
Print Literature:
• Allen, David: Cohesion and Structural Funds, in: Wallace, Helen/ Wallace, William/ Pollack, Mark (eds.): Policy-Making in the European
Union, Oxford 2005.
• Heinelt, Hubert (ed.): Policy networks and European Structural Funds, Aldershot 1996.
• Mattli, Walter: The Logic of Regional Integration. Europe and Beyond, Cambridge 1999.
• Schaub, Marco: European Regional Policy: The Impact of Structural Transfers and the Partnership Principle since the 1988 Reform,
Zurich 2000.

4
IPA Trainer Handbook
5
IPA - IPA The – The new New Pre-Accession Pre-accession
Financial Instrument
financial Instrument

4. IPA - THe new Pre-ACCeSSIOn fInAnCIAl InSTruMenT
In this chapter you will find:
� An overview of the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) particularly with regard to its objectives, its political and
financial framework and the programming process;
� Useful links to relevant documents, further information on IPA planning and programming, and literature about enlargement
policy and pre-accession assistance
4.1 Introduction
On 1 January 2007, the Instrument for Preaccession
Assistance (IPA) came into effect.
For the period 2007-2013, IPA will be the key
financial tool for the Community’s pre-accession
activities. All pre-accession support will be
managed and delivered with the help of this
mechanism.
IPA replaces all previous pre-accession instruments
including PHARE, ISPA, SAPARD,
CARDS and the Turkish pre-accession aid. 2
Ongoing projects and programmes supported
by these instruments will be completed by
around 2010; all new pre-accession activities
are run within the framework of IPA.
For the period 2007-2013, approximately €11.5
billion has been earmarked for pre-accession
funding. This represents 1.3 percent of the entire
EU budget for the current financial framework
(2007-2013). However, the amount is not
transferred automatically to individual recipients
but has to be applied for through written project
proposals, which are accepted or rejected by
the European Commission.
IPA provides funding for a broad range of fields
including institution building, cross-border cooperation,
regional development, human resource
development, and rural development.
IPA assistance is ultimately intended to help its
beneficiaries rise to EU levels in economic, political
and legal terms.
leSSOnS frOM exPerIenCe
The implementation and general operation of the Community’s previous
pre-accession instruments - PHARE, ISPA and SAPARD - has
been criticized because of the marked discrepancy between the
sums allocated under each of the three instruments and the actual
amounts paid out. Regarding the ISPA, a report of the European
Commission found that for the period 2000-2003 a total of €4.3 billion
had been committed, but only a little more than €1 billion had
been paid out. 3
Furthermore, in a Special Report in 2004, the European Court of
Auditors criticized the Community’s pre-accession instruments for
their bureaucratic structures and extremely difficult procedures. 4
The process of project preparation was found to be too expensive
and time-consuming. Additionally, problems concerning missing
quality indicators surfaced in the SAPARD programme. Consequently,
projects contributing to the alignment of beneficiary countries to
EU standards were often neglected.
Thus, it was requested that future pre-accession programmes
should:
• have simpler procedures so as to facilitate and speed up implementation;
• have clear targets, objective criteria and indicators for success
in order to measure progress
2 More information on the Phare programme, the Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-Accession (ISPA), the Special accession programme for agriculture
and rural development (SAPARD), the Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation (CARDS) programme and the Turkish preaccession
aid can be found at:
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/how-does-it-work/financial-assistance/former-assistance_en.htm (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
3 European Commission: Annual Report of the Instrument for Structural Policy for Pre-accession (ISPA), 2003, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/
sources/docoffic/official/reports/pdf/ispa2003/com_2004_735_en.pdf (last accessed: 9 June 2009).
4 Court of Auditors Special Report No 2/2004 concerning pre-accession aid (2004/C295/01), 14.
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
61

62
IPA provides support to two types of beneficiary
countries, candidate countries and potential
candidate countries. Candidate country
status is granted the day the European Council
officially accepts a country’s application for
membership in the European Union. Potential
candidate countries are countries that may
apply for EU membership at a later stage.
At present, Croatia, Turkey and the former
Yugoslav republic of Macedonia are
candidate countries; Albania, bosnia and
Herzegovina, Montenegro and Serbia,
including Kosovo as defined in UNSCR 1244,
are potential candidate countries.
The differentiation between candidate countries
and potential candidate countries is needed for
the following two reasons:
1. differences in the administrative,
programming and management capacity
of the beneficiary countries: Public
institutions in candidate countries have
demonstrated that they are able to manage
most of the EU funding support under
decentralised management systems with
autonomous management responsibility,
whereas potential candidate countries still
are building up administrative capacities for
decentralised management.
2. Time horizon before accession: For
candidate countries, preparation for
the management of EU Structural and
Cohesion Funds, which become available
after accession, is an immediate necessity.
This is less urgent for potential candidate
countries.
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
4.2 The General IPA framework
4.2.1 legal basis
IPA was established by Council regulation
1085/2006 of 17 July 2006, which defined
the overall framework as well as the general
principles of IPA assistance. 5 Subsequently,
detailed implementation rules were laid down
in Commission regulation 718/2007. 6
At the level of individual beneficiary countries,
two additional documents complete the legal
basis:
� framework Agreements set out the
specific rules and principles of co-operation
between the Community and a beneficiary
country concerning financial assistance
under IPA. Having the status of an
international treaty, Framework Agreements
hold supremacy over national law in
beneficiary countries.
� financing Agreements are more specific
documents signed by the European
Commission and the respective partner
country/countries following a financing
decision by the Commission and approval
by the European Council. A Financing
Agreement is the formal commitment of
the signatories to finance a particular
programme or project. 7 Financing Agreements
may be concluded on an annual
or multi-annual basis. They have a limited
validity period with clearly stated deadlines
for commitments, execution of contracts
and disbursements.
The Framework Agreement for Serbia is at:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2005:192:0028:0028:EN:PDF.
The most recent Financing Agreement between Serbia and the European Commission is available at:
http://www.delscg.ec.europa.eu/code/navigate.php?Id=844
5 Council Regulation 1085/2006 is available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/l_210/l_21020060731en00820093.pdf (last accessed: 10
June 2009).
6 Commission Regulation 718/2007 is available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2007/l_170/l_17020070629en00010066.pdf (last accessed: 10
June 2009).
7 A format for a Financing Agreement can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/financing/financing_agreement/documents/cp2003_bud_
decent_en.doc (last accessed: 10 June 2009).

4.2.2 Objectives
The general aim of IPA is to support beneficiary
countries in their efforts to meet the common
rules, standards and policies of the European
Community. These are collectively referred to
as the acquis communautaire or Community
acquis. Acquis is French for „that which has
been acquired“. It includes:
� The content, principles and political
objectives of the treaties on which the
European Union is founded;
� Legislation and decisions adopted in
application of the treaties, and the case law
of the Court of Justice;
� Other acts, legally binding or not (e.g.
Declarations, Resolutions), adopted by the
European Union;
Measures relating to the Common Foreign
� and Security Policy;
Measures relating to Justice and Home
� Affairs;
� International agreements concluded by
either the Communities, the Communities
jointly with their member states, the Union,
or the member states among themselves
with regard to Union activities.
Adopting the acquis means that candidates
must transpose the common Community
rules, standards and policies into their national
legislation and apply them to the letter.
Exceptions, limited in time and scope, may be
agreed upon only in special circumstances.
In order to become a member state, applicant
countries must have completed the adoption
of the acquis and must meet specific political
and economic criteria. Prominent among the
political criteria is that a candidate country
must possess institutions guaranteeing
democracy and the rule of law, as well as
respect for human rights, including the rights
of minorities. The economic criteria require
candidate countries to possess a functioning
market economy as well as the capacity to
cope with competition and market forces.
IPA helps prepare candidate countries to meet
all these criteria. However, its focus is on
helping them fully adopt and implement the
acquis. In addition, it helps them prepare for
the implementation and management of the
Structural funds and the Cohesion fund,
which will be available for them once they join
the EU (see also chapter 3: European Regional
Policy).
Potential candidate countries are assisted
in progressively aligning themselves to the
Acquis. In their case, IPA assistance focuses
on social, economic and territorial development
as well as the creation of financial accounting
and audit systems necessary for an effective
absorption of IPA support.
wHAT exACTlY Are THe ACCeSSIOn CrITerIA?
An applicant country must meet three sets of criteria:
1. Political criteria:
stable institutions guaranteeing democracy,
the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights
of minorities;
2. economic criteria:
the existence of a functioning market
economy as well as the capacity to cope with competition and
market forces;
3. Acquis-related criteria:
the adoption of the common rules,
standards and policies that form the Community Acquis, or
acquis communautaire.
Meeting the accession criteria is a prerequisite for all candidate
countries hoping to become a member state of the European
Union. These criteria were decided at the Copenhagen European
Council in 1993, and are therefore also known as the Copenhagen
Criteria 8
4.2.3 funding Priorities - The five
Components
8 Details can be found at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/enlargement/ec/pdf/cop_en.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
To deliver effective support for each beneficiary,
IPA consists of five components, each covering
one or more policy areas:
I. Transition Assistance and
Institution building (TAIb)
II. Cross-border Co-operation (CbC)
III. regional development
Iv. Human resources development
v. rural development
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
63

64
Component I:
Transition Assistance and Institution
building (TAIb)
Transition Assistance and Institution Building
is the principal IPA component. As set out in
Regulation (EC) No. 1085/2006, TAIB focuses
on capacity building and institution building
measures and related investments. This is
extremely important for beneficiary countries
because institutions are necessary for
conducting economic and societal reforms and
controlling their implementation.
Public institutions must be designed to one day
meet EU standards and conduct EU policies.
TAIB also supports the participation of
all beneficiary countries in Community
Programmes and agencies. Community
Programmes are a series of integrated measures
designed to strengthen the co-operation among
the member states regarding Community
policies. The Community Programmes are
financed from the general budget of the
Community. 8 All Acceding and Candidate
countries have the opportunity to participate
in the programmes, although, as a condition
of participation, an annual fee must be paid
towards the budget. This contribution can be
funded by TAIB. The participation in Community
Programmes also requires beneficiaries to
possess appropriate administrative structures.
TAIB supports build these structures. As
underlined in the IPA Programming Guide 9 , this
enables the population of a beneficiary country
to benefit from Community Programmes and
Community agencies upon accession.
Both candidate and potential candidate
countries are eligible for TAIB. However,
depending on the status of the beneficiary
country, the concrete objectives of assistance
differ. TAIB supports candidate countries in:
�
Fully adopting the acquis Communautaire,
� Strengthening reconstruction and
stabilisation if required (overlaps with
assistance managed through Components
III, IV and V must be avoided).
9 More at: http://www.2007-2013.eu/community.php (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
For potential candidate countries, the TAIB
component:
Promotes gradual alignment with the
� acquis Communautaire;
� Encourages stabilisation, reconstruction,
and reconciliation as well as regional,
human resources and rural development.
The objectives of the former CARDS
programme are thus reflected in TAIB.
� Fosters institution building - both “soft”, in
terms of know-how, and “hard”, in terms of
physical investment - to help countries meet
the Copenhagen political and economic
criteria and to enhance administrative and
judicial capacity.
Component II:
Cross-border Co-operation (CbC)
The IPA approach to cross-border co-operation
ended the use of programmes and tools such
as INTERREG, CARDS, s well as PHARE
and Tacis CBC. The second IPA component
provides a single legal basis and single
budgetary line with funds from the ERDF and
IPA that support:
1.
2.
Cross-border co-operation at borders
between member states and (potential)
candidate countries10 ;
Cross-border co-operation among potential
candidate countries, especially at the
borders within the Western Balkans. This
is of particular importance since the EU
wants to strengthen regional co-operation
in the Western Balkans and overcome the
enmity of the wars of the 1990s. Regional
co-operation is also an important part of
the Stabiility and Association Agreements
(SAAs) and a prerequisite for accession.
The CBC component is addressed towards all
beneficiary countries. In terms of objectives,
CBC promotes:
� Good neighbourly relations so as to tackle
common challenges and to strengthen
10 European Commission, Directorate-General Enlargement: IPA Programming Guide for components I (Transitional Assistance and Institution Building) and II
(Cross-Border Co-operation), 31 March 2008.
11 See the commitments taken in the Communication COM (2003) 303 of 1 July 2003 “Paving the way for a new neighbourhood instrument”.
cent_en.doc (last accessed: 10 June 2009).

security, stability and prosperity for the
benefit of all countries concerned,
� Sustainable and balanced social and
economic development in border areas,
�
and
Joint local and regional actions.
The CBC component may also support the
participation in trans-national co-operation
programmes of the Structural Funds and,
for beneficiary countries with maritime
borders, the participation in multilateral seabasins
programmes under the European
Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument
(ENPI). 12
Components III to v:
regional development, Human
resources development and rural
development
Components III to V concern candidate countries
only. Preparing them for the implementation and
management of the EU Cohesion, Structural
and Rural Development Funds is the key
concern. Specifically, components III, IV and V
pursue the following objectives:
� The regional development Component
helps prepare its beneficiaries for the
implementation and management of the
European Regional Development Fund
and the Cohesion Fund. It can finance
investments and offer technical assistance
in the areas of transport, environment and
economic development. At the level of the
European Commission, the Component is
under the responsibility of the Directorate-
General for Regional Policy.
� The Human resources development
Component supports the preparations for
the Community’s social cohesion policy
and in particular the European Social Fund.
The development of human capital and the
battle against exclusion are key aspects
of this component, which is managed by
the Directorate-General for Employment,
Social affairs and Equal Opportunities.
� The rural development Component
builds upon the Special Accession
Programme for Agricultural and Rural
Development (SAPARD) and is designed
to support the beneficiaries’ preparation for
the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and
related policies. Under the responsibility
of the Directorate-General for Agriculture
and Rural Development, it mirrors rural
development programmes for EU member
states.
Assistance under these three components
requires a functioning decentralised
management system. If candidate countries
have not yet established the necessary
structures, measures similar in nature to
those in components III to V may be funded
under component I. The latter are completed
by measures facilitating the construction of
decentralised management structures.
TO reCAPITulATe:
Both candidate and potential candidate countries receive assistance
through IPA-components I and II. Components III to V concern candidate
countries only. This reflects the specific requirements of
the two categories of beneficiary countries. As components III,
IV and V prepare directly for internal community instruments, they
require well developed administrative structures.
As a potential candidate country, Serbia is eligible only for the first
two IPA-components. But it can also benefit from support in the areas
of regional, human resources and rural development without
having established decentralised management systems. Management
of such support remains in the hands of the Commission and
is implemented through IPA component I.
12 The European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument was established by Regulation (EC) No 1638/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council
of 24 October 2006. More at http://ec.europa.eu/world/enp/pdf/oj_l310_en.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
65

66
4.3 Political And financial framework
IPA operates within a complex framework of
international agreements and planning documents
which include the following:
Multi-annual Indicative Financial
� Framework
�
Stability and Association Agreements
Accession Partnerships or European
� Partnerships
�
Progress Reports and Strategy Papers
Multi-annual Indicative Planning
� Documents
Moreover, for Component I there are yearly
national programmes and regional/horizontal
programmes and facilities, and for Component
II multi–annual cross–border programmes.
The Multi-annual Indicative Financial
Framework (MIFF) is a Commission document
that is established and presented annually
to the Council and European Parliament.
It provides information on the indicative
financial allocations by IPA beneficiary and by
component for a three year rolling period. The
MIFF is reviewed annually while maintaining its
three year planning horizon.
The general relations between the EU and the
potential candidate countries and candidate
countries of the Western Balkan are governed
by the Stabilisation and Association Process
(SAP), whose centrepiece is the conclusion of
Stabilisation and Association Agreements
(SAA).
Initiated in 1999, the SAP aims to deliver
stabilisation and provide a swift transition to a
market economy. It also promotes regional cooperation
and the prospect of EU accession.
Essentially, it is an updated version of the tried
and tested ‘carrot and stick’ approach that the
EU adopted in previous enlargement rounds
to encourage reform and prepare candidates
for membership. Under the SAP, in addition to
the prospect of eventual EU membership, each
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
Western Balkan state is offered preferential
trade agreements and assistance, financial and
otherwise. In return, each state is obliged to
conform to a package of EU measures designed
to induce widespread political, economic and
institutional reform.
Using EU phraseology, a Stabilisation and
Association Agreement embodies a choice
for europe by the Western Balkan countries
and the membership perspective offered to
them by the EU. Today, such Agreements have
been concluded with each of the countries
in the region. They represent a far-reaching
contractual relationship with the EU involving
mutual rights and obligations.
After an SAA is signed, the reform process
continues on the basis of the obligations
contained in it and a more detailed agreement,
which is agreed upon between the EU and each
beneficiary state. This is known as a european
Partnership Agreement. A Partnership
Agreement includes a list of short and medium
term priorities for reform and outlines the
financial and technical assistance that the EU
will provide for the potential candidate country.
Following these documents, a Strategy Paper
presents the overall enlargement policy of the
Commission for a specific country. It includes
a summary of the progress made over the
past twelve months. With annual Progress
reports, the Commission monitors and
assesses the achievements of each candidate
and potential candidate country over the past
year. Progress Reports are used to inform the
European Council on the progress made by
candidate and potential candidate countries on
their road towards the EU, particularly regarding
the implementation and enforcement of EU
standards. An example of a Progress Report is
presented below.
Using all these documents, the principal
IPA strategies are defined in Multi-annual
Indicative Planning documents or MIPDs.
An MIPD is established for a three-year rolling
period, with annual reviews. It follows the MIFF,
which, to repeat, indicatively allocates funds
per beneficiary country and per component.

The priorities set out in the
MIPD serve as a basis for the
detailed programming of the
IPA components. Component
I is programmed on an annual
basis and implemented through
annual programmes. The other
components are planned and
implemented on a multi-annual
basis.
Strategy Papers and Progress
Reports, the MIFF and any
revisions of the accession
partnerships and European
partnerships are collectively
referred to as enlargement
packages. For each country, the
enlargement package highlights
the progress made, identifies
priorities for each period and
contains recommendations
for further development of the
enlargement strategy and the
Stabilisation and Association
Process.
Partner countries supplement
the enlargement packages
through National Programmes
for the Adoption of the Acquis
(nPAA) in the case of candidate
countries, and national Action
Plans (nPA) for potential
candidate countries.
KeY fIndInGS In PrOGreSS rePOrT 2008 SerbIA 13
Political criteria
There was little legislative output over the full year as government and parliament
work were widely affected by divisions between political parties on key policy issues.
Issues relating to Kosovo and EU integration dominated the political discussions.
Since the presidential and legislative elections there has been increased stability
in the government and greater consensus on European integration. Serbia made
significant progress on cooperation with the International Criminal Tribunal for the
former Yugoslavia (ICTY), including the arrests of Radovan Karadzic and Stojan Zupljanin.
The parliament ratified the Stabilisation and Association Agreement (SAA) in
September 2008 and began to work on a package of laws. Serbia has good capacity
in its public administration. European integration structures were strengthened and
the National Programme for EU Integration was adopted.
Regulatory bodies performed well under difficult conditions. However, greater determination
needs to be shown by the Serbian authorities to empower regulatory
bodies. Further efforts need to be taken to ensure the independence, accountability
and efficiency of the judicial system. Corruption remains widespread and constitutes
a serious problem. Civil and political rights in Serbia are generally protected.
However, they were affected by the climate in the period immediately following the
declaration of the independence of Kosovo.
Relations between the EU and Serbia have been affected by the declaration of the
independence of Kosovo. In February, a demonstration ended in violence with the
attacks of several foreign diplomatic missions in Belgrade. The Serbian government
has vowed to use only peaceful, legal and diplomatic means and has exercised
restraint in its response to the declaration. Serbia recalled serving ambassadors
from countries that recognised Kosovo, including EU Member States. Serbian ambassadors
who had been withdrawn from EU Member States have since returned
to their posts. Serbia has so far opposed reconfiguration of the international civilian
presence in Kosovo and EULEX deployment. Serbia is encouraged to take a constructive
approach towards Kosovo’s participation in regional and international fora
and to the EU’s efforts to contribute to peace and stability in the Western Balkans.
economic criteria
The Serbian economy continued to grow strongly and the country made some progress
towards establishing a functioning market economy. Good growth rates were
accompanied by widening external imbalances and the vulnerability increased also
in the light of the global financial crisis. Fiscal policy remained expansionary, contributing
to the resurfacing of inflationary pressures in 2008. Despite recent high
economic growth rates, unemployment remains a major challenge.
There was some progress in privatisation, but structural reforms in general slowed
down. The country continued to attract the foreign direct investment (FDI), however,
some foreign investors have been affected by the unstable political climate. A
competitive and dynamic private sector has not yet been fully established. Further
efforts are needed to enable Serbia to cope in the medium term with competitive
pressures and market forces within the Union.
european standards
Serbia is well placed to implement the SAA and the Interim Agreement, thanks to
its good administrative capacity. There has been progress in the field of free movement
of goods and continued improvements in customs and taxation administrations.
However, there was little legislative output on European standards and weak
enforcement capacity in competition. Little progress has been made in the area
of information society and media. A comprehensive and effective system of public
internal financial control is still not in place. Money laundering and organised crime
continue to be a serious problem in Serbia.
13 The full report can be found at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/press_corner/key-documents/reports_nov_2008/serbia_progress_report_en.pdf (last
accessed: 10 June 2009).
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
67
Source: European Commission

68
Administratively, general rules for the financial
assistance of the Community are set up in
framework Agreements. Amongst other
things, they provide rules concerning institutions,
structures and financial procurement for a given
country.
While Framework Agreements are rarely
amended and are therefore used long-term,
financing Agreements govern shorter periods
of time. Financing Agreements define the
terms under which IPA assistance is managed,
including the methods and responsibilities of
implementation.
The table below summarises the three-stage
IPA programming framework with the first
stage preceded by Accession Partnerships or
European Partnerships.
The IPA programming framework
Source: IEP
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
To return to the Multi-annual Indicative
financial framework (MIff), the MIFF
translates the priorities defined within the
political process into the allocation of IPA
funds across beneficiary countries and the five
components. Hence it forms a link between the
Commission’s political framework regarding
pre-accession activities and its budgetary
process.
To repeat, it is established for a three-year
period on a rolling basis, meaning that it is
subject to annual reviews while maintaining a
three year planning horizon. Reviews cannot
include amendments of the total annual IPA
envelope but may include adjustments of
allocations within a given year. In the threestage
programming process outlined in table 1,
the MIFF is part of the first stage.
For the current 2007-2013 framework, IPA
Regulation 1085/2006 has set pre-accession
funding at €11.468 billion. With about €0.5
billion in 2008, Turkey is the major recipient of
IPA funds, followed by Serbia and Croatia.

The table below 14 shows the latest MIFF. Covering the period of 2010-2012, it shows the allotments
awarded to candidate countries and potential candidate countries. For ease of reference it includes
the final figures for 2007 and updated figures for 2008 and 2009.
14 Source: Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) Multi-Annual Indicative
Financial Framework for 2010-2012. See also http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/how-does-it-work/financial-assistance/planning-ipa_en.htm (last accessed:
10 June 2009).
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
69

70
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument

OvervIew Over THe IndICATIve fInAnCIAl AllOCATIOn fOr IPA In SerbIA
The IPA support to Serbia is divided into two parts. One part of the assistance supports the implementation of the main priorities
of the European partnership (Component I) while the other deals with cross-border co-operation activities between Serbia and
EU member states as well as between Serbia and neighbouring countries in the Western Balkans (Component II).
The tables below show the indicative financial allocation per component for the period 2007-2012 for Serbia in million EURO.
They highlight that the EU is going to increase the amount for both, transition process and institution building and cross-border
co-operation.
4.4 Strategic Planning
Component 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Transition
Assistance
and Institution
Building
Cross-border
Co-operation
Following the indicative allocation of funds in
the MIFF, the MIPD forms the second stage of
IPA programming. The MIPd is developed by
the Commission for a three-year period with
annual reviews. MIPDs are established for
each beneficiary country. In addition, there is
a supplement MIPD for multi-beneficiary programmes.
MIPDs are based on the needs and challenges
identified in the Accession Partnerships,
National Programmes for the Adoption of the
Acquis (NPAA), National Action Plans, enlargement
packages, and the conclusions of the
European Council and the Strategic Papers of
the Commission.
As the principal strategic document of IPA, the
MIPD defines the main priorities and areas of
intervention for all relevant components. The
beneficiary countries reflect the MIPD priorities
in their programming documents.
181,4 179,4 182,5 186,2 189,9 193,8
8,2 11,4 12,2 12,4 12,7 12,9
TOTAl 189,7 190,9 194,8 198,7 202,7 206,8
wHAT Are MulTI-benefICIArY PrOGrAMMeS?
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
71
Source: European Commission
Assistance under multi-beneficiary actions may be offered in the
form of project preparation facilities, support to small and medium-sized
enterprises, support to civil society, municipal finance
facilities and municipal infrastructure.
Multi-beneficiary programmes are designed to assist a group of
beneficiary countries. They complement the support given under
National Programmes.
Multi-beneficiary actions require co-operation between the participating
countries and encourage the establishment of regional
structures, networks of experts and civil servants, etc.
The priorities defined by the MIPD should coordinate
with the national strategies provided
that these are compatible with European preaccession
objectives. To ensure coherence
between the MIPD and the needs and priorities
identified by a beneficiary country, close consultation
with the national authorities is necessary
during the drafting of the MIPD.
The latest published Multi-annual Indicative Planning Documents
cover the years 2008-2010. They are available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/how-does-it-work/financial-assistance/planning-ipa_en.htm

72
4.5 Specific Programming
The third stage of the IPA process concerns the
concrete measures and operations that put the
priorities of the MIPD or regional and horizontal
programmes into practice. Component I and V
are implemented through annual programmes,
while components II, III, and IV are implemented
through multi-annual programmes.
Assistance under IPA Component I must take
place within the framework of national programmes
or regional and horizontal programmes.
National programmes are designed
in accordance with the concerned country’s
strategic MIPD. Regional and horizontal programmes
reflect the priorities laid down in the
MIPD for multi-beneficiary programmes. regional
programmes aim to strengthen regional
co-operation and multi-country exchanges.
They focus on reconciliation, reconstruction
and political co-operation in the Western Balkans.
Horizontal programmes encourage
beneficiary countries to co-operate in areas of
common interest, thereby achieving greater efficiency
and economies of scale in comparison
to implementation through national programmes.
Assistance under IPA Component II is programmed
in the form of multi-annual cross-border
programmes. Each programme is jointly drawn
up by national authorities from both sides of the
border, in accordance to Article 91 of the IPA
Implementing Regulation. Only in justified cases,
can assistance take place outside of joint
cross-border programmes. The selection of
joint projects in the framework of ERDF transnational
or ENPI sea basins programmes is
subject to the conditions of those programmes.
The contracting authority concerned is responsible
for tendering, contracting and payment for
beneficiaries or activities located in the relevant
candidate or potential candidate country.
Components III and IV are programmed through
Multi-annual Operational Programmes. These
are three-year programmes detailing the
main priorities of the MIPD under the Regional
Development Component and the Human
Resources Development Component. The Rural
Development Component is programmed
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
through annual Operational Programmes.
Whenever possible, programmes are drafted by
the competent authority in the recipient country
in close consultation with the concerned Commission
services. The resulting programmes
are then formally accepted by the European
Commission.
KeY MeSSAGe:
The financial and policy framework of IPA is set by the
European Commission in the Multi-annual Indicative Financial
Framework (MIFF) and Multi-annual Indicative
Planning Document (MIPD).
MIFF allocates funds per beneficiary country and per
component, MIPDs present policy priorities for each
country across various sectors.
National or operational programmes are designed, adopted
and implemented in accordance with the strategic
MIPDs.
4.6 The Programming Process Step by
Step
Programming is co-ordinated by the Commission
services with active participation by the
partner country. The outcome of the programming
process is the financing Proposal. The
Financing Proposal is the key programming
document.
Depending on the management system in the
beneficiary country, the tasks and responsibilities
of the beneficiary country and the European
Commission may differ: In the case of centralised
management, as in Serbia, the Commission
Delegation is the responsible partner for
the entire implementation of the programme.
The basic programming documents defined in
subchapters 4.3 and 4.4 include an agreement
on the priorities to be pursued by IPA. Once
this agreement has been reached, the next
programming steps are as follows:
For priority issues, so-called
1. Project fiches
are prepared and agreed upon between the
institutions involved. A Fiche is a technical

2.
3.
4.
document that:
• Defines the objectives of a proposed
project,
• Describes the present situation in the
concerned sector and identifies the issues
that the project is addressing,
• Describes the project and its components,
• Identifies the activities to be implemented,
• Defines the institutional framework and
the project management structure,
• Identifies input requirements and the
concerned budget,
• Defines the typology of sub-projects and
associated instruments (Technical Assistance,
Twinning, Supply, Works and
Grants).
Project Fiches are submitted by the
competent national authority to the
Commission. If the Commission agrees to
the Fiches, it includes them in the Financing
Proposal which is then submitted to the IPA
Management Committee for approval;
The Management Committee approves the
financial proposal with its attached projects.
The Financing Agreement is then prepared
by the Commission.
The Financing Agreement is signed by
both the Commission and the competent
national authority.
Once the Proposal has been approved, the resulting
financing Agreement is implemented
as set out in the Project Fiches, which become
key implementation documents. The Financing
Agreement includes all approved project fiches,
the related financial envelopes, implementation
monitoring and audit arrangements, and antifraud
measures.
An exAMPle frOM THe fIeld
In Serbia, the following steps were carried out in the programming
process:
• National IPA Co-ordinator (NIPAC) informs relevant state institutions
on the budget defined in the MIPD in the main fields of
support and on deadlines for submitting draft project proposals
within the programming process.
• NIPAC defines the format for submitting project ideas, project
proposals, determining deadlines.
• NIPAC and the Serbian European Integration Office (SEIO)
provide technical assistance to respective institutions during the
process of priority identification and the formulation of project
ideas.
• Directly and indirectly authorized applicants submit draft project
proposals to the NIPAC.
• Technical evaluation is made of the draft project proposals in
line with the pre-determined criteria, and modifications are made
by the NIPAC and SEIO if necessary.
• Evaluation of the draft project proposals and preparation of a
long list of project proposals, not exceeding 150 percent of the
available budget envisaged by the IPA programme for the year
(NIPAC and SEIO) is made.
• Draft project proposal summaries as defined in the wider list are
presented to the Commission delegation for opinion (NIPAC).
• Drafting project fiches in line with the IPA format and modifications
of project proposals, with technical assistance by the
NIPAC (authorized applicants).
• Evaluation of the proposed projects is made in line with the
format for evaluation and the list of project proposals, not exceeding
120 percent of available IPA budget is determined (Joint
Committee for Project Evaluation).
• The final list of project proposals is determined, completely
harmonized with the annual IPA budget; allocations are defined
Source: Republic of Serbia, The EU Integration Office.
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
73

74
exCurSuS: IPA And PrOJeCT CYCle MAnAGeMenT
Project Cycle Management (PCM) describes management activities and decision-making
procedures used during the life-cycle of a project. PCM specifies key
tasks, roles and responsibilities, key documents and decision options.
For project design and project management in the context of pre-accession aid, the
European Commission adopted its own project cycle methodology in 1992. Since
then, candidate and potential candidate countries are required to use this version of
PCM in their pre-accession projects. The Commission has published detailed Project
Cycle Management Guidelines 15 in which the standard cycle of operations for
managing the Community’s external assistance projects is as follows.
The project cycle starts with a programming phase, which is intended to identify
and agree upon the main objectives and priorities for IPA co-operation. For this,
the programming documents defined in subchapters 4.3 and 4.4 are used. The
aim is to provide a relevant and feasible programming framework within which programmes
and projects can be prepared. The key questions to be answered at this
stage are: What are the pre-accession priorities and what is the Community’s focus
for assistance?
This is followed by the identification phase, in which line ministries and agencies
in the beneficiary country are required to formulate project ideas, often through
project identification sheets, in line with set priorities and objectives. Thereafter,
the relevance and feasibility of these project ideas are assessed. The key questions
during this phase are: Does the project idea meet priority needs and will it be
consistent with the Community’s policy priorities? The outcome of this phase is the
identification of project proposals to be covered by financial co-operation.
Next, in the formulation phase, line ministries and agencies are required to formulate
project fiches related to the approved project proposals. Frequently, the
ministry of finance of a beneficiary country will participate in this work to ensure
15 The Guidelines are available at http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/multimedia/publications/publications/manuals-tools/t101_en.htm (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument

consistency between co-funding requirements and national co-financing possibilities. The
guiding questions at this stage concern the project’s feasibility and the sustainability of project
outcomes. Completed project fiches are assessed by Commission services and after approval
included in the Financing Proposals and eventually the Financing Agreements. The phase
ends with the signing of Financing Agreements.
The implementation phase follows the formulation phase. It includes several steps:
• Preparation of project documents which define inputs and describe actions to be financed:
-Terms of Reference for technical assistance
-Technical specification for supply of goods and detailed designs forconstruction works
-Guidelines for applicants for grant schemes
-Contracts for twinning programmes
- Tendering and contracting to select suppliers applying open and fair competition
methods. For this the Commission prescribes the use of its Practical Guide to Contract
procedures for eC external actions. 16
• Project implementation and contract administration, during which project activities are carried
out and the related funds are disbursed
• Monitoring to assess implementation performances and achievements in order to take corrective
actions
Finally, in the evaluation phase the impact of the project is assessed. Have objectives been
achieved? What shortcomings and mistakes occurred during implementation? What lessons
have been learned that can be applied to future projects?
The IPA form of PCM emphasises three main principles:
1. Decision-making criteria and procedures are defined at each phase of the cycle (including
key information requirements and quality assessment).
2. The phases in the cycle are progressive – each phase must be completed before the next
phase can be tackled successfully.
3. New programming and project identification draw on the results of monitoring and evaluation
as part of a structured process of feedback and institutional learning.
Depending on scale, scope and specific operating modalities of the project, the duration and
importance of each PCM stage can vary. A large and complex engineering project may for
example take many years to pass from identification to the implementation phase, whereas a
project that aims to provide emergency assistance in a post-conflict context may take a few
weeks. However, in all cases PCM pursues four main objectives:
1. IPA projects should support overarching policy objectives of the EU and of the beneficiary
countries.
2. Projects should be relevant to an agreed strategy and to the real problems of target
groups.
3. Projects should be feasible, meaning that they should be well designed with realistic
objectives.
4. Projects should provide sustainable benefits.
In order to achieve these aims, PCM:
• Requires the active participation of key stakeholders and aims to promote local ownership,
• Uses well defined tools, inter alia the logical framework approach
• Incorporates key quality assessment criteria into each phase of the project cycle,
• Requires high-quality key document(s) at each stage of the project cycle with commonly
understood concepts and definitions, so as to support well-informed decision-making.
The following chapter will illustrate the process of developing a project proposal by showing in
greater detail what activities are carried out in the identification and formulation stages.
16 The Practical Guide is often referred to as the PRAG. It is the first sole working tool, which explains the contracting procedures applying to all EC external aid
contracts financed from the European Communities general budget (Budget) and the 10th European Development Fund (EDF). The Practical Guide and additional
information is available at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/implementation/practical_guide/index_en.htm (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument
75

76
nOTeS fOr THe TrAIner:
Possible activities:
Course participants can discuss the following questions in small groups. The results can then
be discussed with the whole class:
1. What are the motives driving EU enlargement policy? What are the benefits of enlargement
for the EU?
2. What are the key objectives of IPA?
3. What are the reasons for the distinction between candidate and potential candidate countries?
Why do potential candidate countries only benefit from the first two IPA components?
4. Considering that the MIFF has a three year planing horizon, do you think policy changes
within beneficiary countries will be taken into account?
5. What impliciations does the fact that IPA amounts are indicative have? Why isn´t EU aid
under IPA quaranteed?
Suggested readings:
Internet:
• Accession treaties:
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/treaties/index.htm#accession
• All key documents of the enlargement package 2008 are available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/press_corner/key-documents/reports_nov_2008_en.htm
• European Commission, Directorate-General Enlargement: IPA Programming Guide for components
I (Transitional Assistance and Institution Building) and II (Cross-border Co-operation), 31
March 2008:
http://www.strategija.hr/fgs.axd?id=598
• European Commission, Understanding Enlargement: The European Union’s Enlargement
Policy, 2007, available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2007/understanding_
enlargement_102007_en.pdf
• Gjorgjievski, Mate: EU Instrument for Pre-accession assistance: The path to a successful start,
in: Center for EU Enlargement Studies: Using IPA and other EU funds to accelerate convergence
and integration in the Western Balkans, Budapest 2008, pp. 69-88, available at:
http://web.ceu.hu/cens/assets/files/IPA.pdf (last accessed: 15 December 2008).
• Latest MIPD for Serbia (2008-2010):
http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/how-does-it-work/financial-assistance/planning-ipa_en.htm
• Website of the Directorate General for Enlargement:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/enlargement/index_en.htm
Print literature:
• Calic, Marie-Janine: EU Policies towards the Balkans: Fostering Ownership of Reforms, in: The
International Spectator, 38 (July-September 2003) 3, pp.111-123.
• Fraser, Cameron (ed.): The Future of Europe. Integration and Enlargement, London and New
York 2004.
• Neill Huggent (ed.): European Union Enlargement, Houndmills 2004.
• Lippert, Barbara: Enlargement: The political and constitutional implications, in: Carr, Fergus/
Massey, Andrew (eds.): Public Policy and the new European Agendas, Northampton 2006, pp.
99-131.
• Sedelmeier, Ulrich: Eastern Enlargement, in: Wallace, Helen/ Wallace, William/ Pollack, Mark
(eds.): Policy-Making in the European Union, Oxford 2005.
IPA Trainer Handbook - IPA - The New Pre-accession Financial Instrument

5
IPA Trainer Handbook
5
from IPA An – The Idea New Pre-Accession To A
Financial Instrument
Convincing Project Proposal

5. frOM An IdeA TO A COnvInCInG PrOJeCT PrOPOSAl
In this chapter you will find:
� how to recognise basic needs and problems on the ground and present them in a project proposal using a
logical framework matrix
� that the different key elements of a project are closely interrelated and how these links can be visualised in the
logical framework matrix
5.1 Introduction
This chapter will take you through the process of developing a project from an idea to a project
proposal that may qualify for IPA funding. Special emphasis is put on the Logical Framework
approach. The logical framework is a cause-effect model of project interventions. It is used to
develop the overall design of a project, facilitate project implementation, and strengthen monitoring
and evaluation. A major advantage is that it can communicate the essential elements of a
project clearly throughout the project cycle. The Commission requires the use of Logframes for
all IPA projects.
TO KnOw MOre:
The Logframe approach was developed in 1969 to assist the US Agency of International Development in
improving its project planning and evaluation system. Today it is used (in one form or another) by most multilateral
and bilateral aid agencies, international NGOs and many governments. The European Commission has
generally required the use of Logframes as an element of its project cycle management system since 1993.
Logframe analysis is a very effective analytical and management tool when understood and intelligently applied.
However, it is not a substitute for experience and professional judgment and must also be complemented
by the application of other specific tools (such as Economic and Financial Analysis and Environmental Impact
Assessment) and through the application of working techniques which promote the effective participation of
stakeholders.
The analysis of problems and needs, their
structuring in a cause-effect relationship and
the choice of strategy for solving identified problems
are the main elements of the first LFA
phase. In the following phase, the results of the
analysis phase are transcribed into an operational
plan ready to be developed into the project
application form.
Once the planning process is completed, you
should be able to lay out your project’s objectives
in a systematic and logical way. Thus,
your presentation should:
� Reflect the causal relationship between
the different levels of your project’s
objectives,
Indicate how to check whether these
� objectives have been achieved, and
Consider which factors outside the control
� of the project may influence its success.
For IPA, you are expected to summarise these
features in the form of a matrix, which shows
the logical framework of your project. Each box
contains specific and unique information. This
is the logical framework Matrix or logframe
Matrix.
5.2 The Analysis Phase
5.2.1 Preparatory Activities – Getting
To Know Problems And Priorities
Before starting the analytical work - preferably
jointly with stakeholder groups, you should become
familiar with the situation on the ground.
Current statistical data such as surveys, policy
reports or census data as well as discussions
with members of the administration or experts
on the major pre-accession challenges will help
you identify the problems to be tackled.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
79

80
GeTTInG reAdY
Understanding the problems you will face is an
essential prerequisite of good project planning.
Knowing the national and EU policy priorities
is equally important. In this respect, key preparatory
activities include an analysis of the IPA
strategy framework and the institutional context
in which the project will take place.
Collect all relevant documents from the European Commission such as
the annual Progress Report, the European Partnership and the Multiannual
Indicative Planning Document (MIPD).
• Collect the strategy documents of relevant institutions at a national,
regional and local level
• Collect all relevant formats, guidelines etc.
• Research the Internet for similar projects, similar fiches etc.
• Prepare a report on the institution applying for the project – its history,
decision-makers, recent projects
• Get English language copies of the institution’s statutes, lists of executive
members, annual accounts
• Ascertain the cost of key budget items: staff, travel, translation
•
•
Get all necessary agreements of the decision makers in the applying
institution
Use the Commission Q+A opportunities
5.2.2 Analysing The Stakeholders’ Concerns,
Capacities And Interests
Individuals, societal groups and institutions that
have a specific interest in the success or failure
of the project are called stakeholders. They
can influence the project in different ways: as
part of the problem or as part of the solution, as
allies or opponents of the project. It is important
for all involved in the project planning process
to understand and recognise stakeholders’
concerns, abilities and interests. If the stakeholders
themselves have analysed the existing
situation, information on all relevant study results
should be collected and analysed; at a minimum,
study results should be discussed with
the stakeholders.
TO KnOw MOre:
Stakeholder analysis is the process of identifying those affected by a
project with the intention of:
• Getting their views on the situation/problem that will be addressed by
the project;
• Investigating their needs and their preferred solutions;
• Investigating what contacts exist between the potential project
leader(s) and other stakeholders;
• Investigating what can be their/his/her influence, power or contribution.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
Findings of a stakeholder analysis can be
summarised in a matrix like the one presented
below, which concerns the preparation for a
project aiming at the reduction of river pollution
that the European Commission uses in its PCM
Guidelines. 17
Findings are to be used for project design in
order to ensure that:
Resources are well targeted to meet the
� needs of priority stakeholders;
Management arrangements fairly promote
� stakeholder participation and ownership;
� Conflicts of stakeholder interests are
recognized and addressed in the project
design.
A stakeholder analysis ultimately aims at maximizing
the social, economic and institutional
benefits of a project to target groups and beneficiaries.
At the same time, it helps minimize the
potential negative impacts on the project.
17 European Commission, Directorate General Development; EuropeAid Co-operation Office: Aid Delivery Methods - Project cycle management Guidelines,
March 2004.

Stakeholder analysis matrix
5.2.3 Analysing Problems
Problem analysis helps identify
the factors that are at the root of
the problem a project seeks to
solve. It also establishes a formal
cause and effect relationship
between the different aspects of
the problem. The outcome of a
problem analysis can be visualised
in a problem tree like the one
presented here. 18
18 European Commission, Directorate General Development; EuropeAid Co-operation Office: Aid Delivery Methods - Project cycle management Guidelines,
March 2004.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
81

82
Stakeholder analysis and problem analysis
are closely connected. Therefore, when drawing
up a problem tree it is recommended to
proceed as follows:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Organise a workshop with the core
stakeholders. Start with a brainstorming
exercise to decide what the central point or
the overall problem is. The brainstorming
can either be:
• Completely open with no pre-conceived
notions as to what stakeholders’ priority
concerns might be, or
• More directed, through specifying a well
known high order problem (e.g. highly
polluted water of a river) based on preliminary
analysis of existing information
and initial stakeholder consultations.
Ask the workshop participants to write
down individual problems on individual
pieces of paper or cards, which can then
be sorted into cause and effect relationships
for a visual display.
From the problems identified through the
brainstorming exercise, select an individual
starter problem. Look for related problems
to the starter problem. Establish a hierarchy
of cause and effects:
• Problems which are directly causing the
starter problem are put below the starter
problem.
• Problems which are direct effects of the
starter problem are put above the starter
problem.
All other problems are then sorted in the
same way – the guiding question being
what causes that problem?
If there are two or more causes combining
to produce an effect, place them at the
same level.
Connect the problems with cause-effect
arrows – clearly showing key links.
Review the structure and verify its validity
and completeness. Are there important
problems that have not been mentioned
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
7.
yet? If so, specify the problems and
include them at an appropriate place in the
diagram.
Copy the structure onto a sheet of paper
to keep as a record, and distribute
(as appropriate) for further comment/
information.
As the process is as important as the product,
the creation of a problem tree should ideally be
a team effort involving key stakeholders and
treated as a learning exercise.
A good problem tree provides a clear and convincing
analysis even of a complex situation. It
demonstrates that complicated issues can be
divided into smaller problems, which are easier
to tackle.
Going through the process step by step and
discussing all possible solutions to each subproblem
will help the group find a clear solution
to the overall problem more easily.
5.2.4 Analysing Objectives
The next step in the project development process
will be to convert the negative situation
summarised in the problem tree into a positive
one. This way, the problem tree will be transformed
into an objective tree. All negative
statements from the problem analysis will be
reformulated into objectives that are desirable
and realistic. The objective tree is thus a visualisation
of the desired future situation including
the indicative means by which objectives can
be achieved.
At a planning workshop, the recommended approach
is to take the problem statement cards
one after the other, turn them around, and write
on the other side of the paper the opposite of
the problem statement, formulated as an action,
or as the desired result of the action.
The figure below shows an objective tree 19 that
uses the analysis of the river clean-up problem
for its point of departure
19 Source: European Commission, Directorate General Development; EuropeAid Co-operation Office: Aid Delivery Methods - Project cycle management Guide-
lines, March 2004.

Source: European Commission, Directorate General Development; EuropeAid Co-operation
Office: Aid Delivery Methods - Project cycle management Guidelines, March 2004.
Reading the tree from the main objectives at
the top down to the bottom, complex development
objectives can be broken down into goals
and results that are achievable through specific
activities. Read in the opposite direction, it
becomes clear what must be accomplished to
reach the overall goals.
This is often the point where bad project plans
are easiest to identify. In a badly prepared
project plan problems, objectives, means and
activities are confused. The rationale behind
the individual solutions and the connection between
the problems and the proposed solutions
is then difficult to understand.
As with the problem tree, it is important to check
the logic of the means-end relationships in the
objective tree. When necessary, objectives
must be added, changed or deleted.
If the problem tree recorded problems outside
the scope of the project, there must also be
statements of objectives which are beyond the
reach of those who will carry out the project. As
no project is isolated from its environment, fac-
tors outside the control of the project are to be
expected anyway. In a good project plan, they
must be systematically treated as well.
In IPA Logframe methodology, factors outside
the control of the projects are called risks and
assumptions. Risks are factors which will have
a negative effect on the project when they occur.
Assumptions are factors that must materialise
if the project is to succeed.
5.2.5 Analysing Strategies
After having analysed stakeholders, problems
and objectives, strategies must be identified.
Which problem needs to be tackled first?
Which set of objectives and activities are best
to achieve solutions?
The following questions should be asked and
answered at this stage:
� Should all the identified problems and
objectives be tackled, or is it better to
select only a few?
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
83

84
KeY MeSSAGe:
� What is the combination of activities that
will bring the desired results and promote
�
sustainable benefits?
What resources does the project require?
� Which strategy will have the most positive
impact in addressing the needs of the
beneficiaries?
Answers to these questions are determined
by an agreed set of criteria (such as expected
contribution to key policy objectives, benefits
to target groups, reciprocity with other ongoing
or planned programmes projects, financial and
economic cost-benefit, technical feasibility or
environmental impact).
Using these key criteria will help to decide what
should be included in the scope of the project
and what, in contrast, cannot be included.
Although the use of key criteria facilitates the
task, this analytical stage includes some of the
more difficult and challenging work, as one
must synthesize large amounts of data and
information and choose the best implementation
strategies to pursue. Those involved in this
work will realise that compromises often have
to be made in order to find a balance between
the stakeholders’ interests and needs, political
demands and practical constraints.
The selected strategy is finally used to help formulate
the first column of the Logical Framework
Matrix, and in particular helps identify the
projects’ objective, purpose and potential results
(see 5.3: The planning phase). With the
choice of a strategy, the analytical phase is
concluded and the planning phase starts.
The Analysis Phase consists of four main elements:
• Stakeholder Analysis - identifying and characterizing potential major
stakeholders; assessing their capacity;
• Problem Analysis - identifying key problems, constraints and opportunities;
determining cause and effect relationships;
• Objective Analysis - developing solutions from the identified problems;
identifying means to end relationships;
• Strategy Analysis - identifying different strategies to achieve solutions;
selecting the most appropriate strategy.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
5.3 The Planning Phase
When the preparatory and analytical work is
complete, the drafting of the project plan can
begin. The Commission recommends starting
the planning work by inserting the results of the
analysis stage into a 16-box matrix like the one
presented below. The matrix is called the logical
framework matrix or Logframe matrix
for short.
The process of drawing up a Logframe matrix
is as important as the content of the matrix. Ideally,
the matrix should be drafted with the participation
of core stakeholders and especially
the institutions that will implement the project.
The table below shows the type of information
to be inserted into the respective matrix cells. 20
When drafting a logframe matrix, it is recommended
to start with the first column. The project
description must be inserted top down,
followed by the assumptions (bottom-up), the
objectively verifiable indicators and finally the
source of verification (working across). The
numbers in the cells indicate the recommended
sequence for inserting information. Care
should be taken that the text in the matrix cells
remains easily readable. If it is properly filled
with information, the matrix still should fit on
one A4 page.
20 Adapted from: European Commission, Directorate General Development; EuropeAid Co-operation Office: Aid Delivery Methods - Project cycle management
Guidelines, March 2004.

Project Description Indicators Source of Verification Assumption
1
Overall Objective:
The broad development
impact to which
the project contributes
2
Purpose: The development
outcome at
the end of the project
– more specifically,
the expected benefits
for the target group(s)
3
results: Direct results
that the project
delivers, and which
are largely under
project managements’
control
4
Activities: Tasks that
need to be carried out
to deliver the planned
results
8
Measures the extent
to which a contribution
to the overall
objective has been
made. Used during
evaluation. However,
it is often not appropriate
for the project
itself to try and collect
this information
10
Helps answer the
question: ‘How will we
know if the purpose
has been achieved?’
Should include
appropriate details of
quantity, quality and
time
12
Helps answer the
question: ‘How will
we know if the results
have been delivered?’
Should include
appropriate details of
quantity, quality and
time
14
Means, resources:
What are the means
required to implement
these activities (personnel,
equipment,
studies, etc.)
9
Sources of information
and methods used
to collect and report it
11
Sources of information
and methods used
to collect and report it
13
Sources of information
and methods used
to collect and report it
15
budget: What are the
action costs? How
are they classified?
7
Assumptions (factors
outside project
managements’ control)
that may impact
on the purpose-objective
linkage
6
Assumptions (factors
outside project managements’
control)
that may impact on
the result-purpose
linkage
5
Assumptions
(factors outside project
managements’
control) that may
impact on the activityresult
linkage
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
85

86
5.3.1 First Column: Defining The Project
The first column describes the causal logic of
the project’s objectives. It separates:
� The wider objective (for instance,
contributing to the preparation of a
candidate country for accession),
�
�
�
The expected project impact,
The deliverables expected, and the
Key project activities.
The project activities defined in the Logframe
matrix provide the basis for operational plans
including timetables for implementation or project
budgets.
The overall objective
Looking more closely at the cells in the left
column, the upper left cell is reserved for the
overall objective towards which the proposed
project works. The overall objective is at the
highest hierarchy level, describing the future
situation that the project is to achieve. The overall
objective should be consistent with IPA
objectives.
In principle there can only be one overall objective
per project. However, the achievement of
the overall objective normally requires the impact
of several programmes and projects. Stated
differently, a single project cannot achieve
the overall objective by itself, it can only complete
one part. It is normal for the overall objective
to appear in the Logframes of a number
of different projects. Nevertheless, there should
be in each case a clear relationship between
the project and the wider objective.
The overall objective of an IPA project will often
reflect the priorities of the Accession Partnership,
the National Plan for Approximation
with the Acquis, the European Partnership, the
Stabilisation and Association Agreement, the
Multi-annual Indicative Planning Document,
the National Development Plan as well as the
national/sectoral investment plans. Hence, it is
recommended to consult these documents in
order to select a convincing statement of the
overall objective.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
The project purpose
The second cell from the top of the first column
contains a statement of the central objectives of
the project in terms of sustainable benefits for
the project’s beneficiaries. The project purpose
can be derived from the core problem that the
project is trying to address. Project purpose(s)
must always be seen in a broader context:
They should contribute to the overall objective
as well as to the donor’s framework.
A Logframe matrix should not contain more than
three project purposes. If the project is trying to
address too many problems at once, it would
be best to split it into two projects. Otherwise,
the Logframe will become too complex to be a
useful management tool.
To enhance clarity, it is often advisable to number
the project purposes (1. 2. 3.).
The European Commission requires that the project
purpose(s) should:
• indicate the immediate reason for the project;
• identify target groups and reflect their needs;
• contribute to the achievement of the overall objective
of the project;
• be realistic in the sense that they should be achieved
in the time indicated.
The results
Stating the expected results of the project is
next. Results are tangible outputs that are delivered
as a consequence of carrying out the
project. Results are what the project managers
must achieve by the project’s completion date.
To enhance clarity, it is advisable to number the
project results.
Activities
Activities are defined in the bottom left corner
of the matrix. They answer the question “How
are we going to achieve the change required
and reach our objectives?”. Activities have to

e implemented in order to achieve the expected
outcomes of the project. Activities should
indicate what the person or organisation should
do, and how the project’s goods and services
will be delivered.
In addition, project activities should:
� directly contribute to the expected results
of the project. The connection between the
activities and the project results should be
clearly indicated. Numbering the activities
can help achieve this goal;
be adequate for the form and dimension of
� the project;
�
be expressed as a process.
If-then causality
The project description in the first column
follows a clear if-then causality (also known as
intervention logic). Read from the bottom up,
one can say that:
� IF the activities are undertaken THEN
results can be produced;
� IF results are produced, THEN the
purpose(s) will be achieved; and
� IF the purpose(s) is/are achieved, THEN
this will contribute towards the overall
objective.
when it is read from the top to the bottom, it
can be expressed in terms of:
� IF we want to contribute to the overall
objective, THEN we must achieve the
purpose;
IF we want to achieve the purpose, THEN
� we have to produce the results; and
IF we wish to produce the results, THEN the
� specified activities must be implemented.
5.3.2 Fourth Column: Defining The
Project Assumption
The fourth column describes the conditions
upon which, in addition to the succesful
completion of the planned measures, the
project depends for its success. Assumptions
are external factors that have the potential
to affect or even determine the success of a
project. They lie outside the direct control of
project managers. Those involved in the project
planning must show in the Logframe matrix that
they have considered such factors.
Assumptions come with different degrees of
risk. Their analysis tests and refines the vertical
logic in the Logframe. This works as follows:
� Once the project results and the related
assumptions are fulfilled, the project
purpose(s) will be achieved; and
� Once the purpose(s) and the related
assumptions are fulfilled, a contribution to
the achievement of the overall objective
will be made.
Usually assumptions will show up during the
analysis phase. The analysis of stakeholders,
problems, objectives and strategies will
highlight issues of a technical, institutional,
social, or economic nature that may influence
the project but cannot be directly controlled by
the project manager. For example, in the case
of the river pollution project (see problem tree
and objective tree), the stakeholder analysis
as well as the problem, objective and strategy
analyses treated the work of the Environmental
Protection Agency as an external factor. Yet, in
order to attain the project purpose, assumptions
need to be made about the Agency’s capacity to
regulate solid waste disposal. Other important
assumptions might include the expected
introduction of favourable policy initiatives, or
decisions at national, regional and local levels
or the additional support and assistance from
other stakeholder groups.
After the identification of assumptions, the
probability that they will materialise must be
further analysed to help assess the project’s
feasibility. There are three possible answers:
� If an assumption will “almost certainly” hold
true, then it needs not to be included into
the Logframe.
� If the answer is “yes, possibly” it will hold
true, then it should be included into the
Logframe.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
87

88
� If the answer is “very unlikely” then it
should be asked whether the project can
be redesigned to reduce the influence of
the external factors. If this is impossible,
the project might not be feasible.
Once the analysis of the assumptions has
shown that the project is feasible, the only
assumptions that should remain in the Logframe
matrix are those which are likely to hold true
but which nevertheless need to be carefully
monitored during project implementation. Then
they become part of the project’s monitoring
and risk management plan.
5.3.3 Second Column: Defining Objectively
Verifiable Indicators (OVIs) Of
Achievement
The second column identifies the performance
indicators for each level of objectives and sets
detailed measurable targets for each. Indicators
give an answer to the question: How do we
know whether or not what has been planned
is actually happening or has happened? One
should not be satisfied with a generalised
declaration concerning the project outcome. If
no precise indicators are set, misunderstandings
and conflicts are likely to occur during project
implementation.
Indicators have to be objectively verifiable. This
means that observers or groups of observers
applying the same measuring methods would
inevitably come to the same conclusions
concerning the project’s achievements.
Indicators describe the project’s objectives in
measurable terms such as quantity, quality, and
time. To find good indicators, participants in a
project should have a common understanding
of the project goals.
There are two distinguishable types of
indicators:
� Quantitative indicators measure things
that can be counted and are tangible. They
are formulated as absolute numbers e.g.
number of people involved, number of jobs
created, etc.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
� Qualitative indicators are not tangible and
cannot be counted. They can be formulated
as a change relative to a previous level
(increase, decrease) or as a change in the
dynamics of a development (acceleration,
deceleration). The opinion of target groups
is one example of a qualitative indicator.
Indicators must be independent of each other,
and each indicator should relate to only one
objective in the intervention logic. In other
words, each indicator should refer to either the
project objective, the project purpose or to a
specific result. For the presentation of indicators
in the Logframe matrix, it is important to show
which indicator belongs to which objective.
Again, the easiest solution is to number each
indicator according to the objective numbers to
which they are connected.
TO KnOw MOre:
Good objectively verifiable indicators should be
S.M.A.R.T. That means that they should be:
• Specific to the objective they are supposed to measure
• Measurable
quantitatively or qualitatively
• Available at an acceptable cost
• relevant to the information needs of managers
• Time-bound so that people involved in the project
know when they can expect the objective to be
achieved.
Objectively Verifiable Indicators are usually
defined in the formulation stage and sometimes
in a preliminary way during the identification
stage. 21 However, they often have to be further
specified during the implementation of the
project when the managers’ needs for practical
information and the importance of collecting
information becomes more apparent.
In summary, for each objective it is necessary to define what
concrete level of development is to be achieved. If any of the
objectives selected cannot be paired with a SMART indicator,
the objective must be changed. Otherwise, there will be
no basis for monitoring the achievement of the objective, no
means to control the efficiency of the project work, and no
way to ensure that project funds are spent effectively.
21 The Commission has published suggestions for core indicators which have been identified in relation to different Community priorities at http://ec.europa.eu/
regional_policy/sources/docoffic/working/doc/indic_en.pdf.

5.3.4 Third Column: Defining Sources
Of Verification
While defining the indicators the following
questions should be considered:
� What type of data is needed (surveys,
reports, special studies, official statistics)?
� Who can provide the data (e.g. a public
agency such as a statistical office, the
project management team etc.)?
� When and how regularly should data be
collected (monthly, quarterly, annually,
etc.)?
It might be necessary to arrange for projectspecific
measurements to produce the
actual value of an indicator. For instance, an
environmental project might require physical
measurements. For another project it could be
necessary to undertake statistical surveys, e.g.
regional opinion polls. Cost for such activities
might have to be built into the project budget.
More often, it is practical to use documentation
resulting from the project for defining indicators.
For example, in a staff-training project trainees
could take an exam at the end of their studies.
Exam results could be used as an indicator
of the project’s performance. In the case of a
procurement contract, the official statement
on the delivery or the acceptance of the
products could be utilised. For construction
projects, where the indicator is the completion
of a building or facility, one obvious source
of verification is the authorities’ permit for the
facility to go into service.
There is often a clear interrelation between
the cost and the complexity of the source of
verification. If OVI data is too expensive and/
or complicated to collect, other cheaper and
simpler methods should be used.
To summarize: there should be an easy answer
to the questions of when, how, and by whom
indicators can be measured. It is advisable to
define an easily accessible but slightly less
accurate indicator system, than a marvellously
complex and accurate one. Otherwise, you
will deprive yourself of the means to follow the
implementation of the project, produce clear
evidence of your results, or realise when you
have to intervene, and turn an ailing project
around.
After identifying the objective, the project
purpose, project results and activities,
assumptions, indicators and sources of
verification, the Logframe draft is almost
finished. However, further work will need to
be done such as analysing the indicative
activities and assessing the resource and cost
implications.
5.3.5 finalising The draft logframe
Matrix: The logic Check
To repeat, the logical connection between the
different cells of the matrix is twofold as there
is a vertical logic and a horizontal logic. The
vertical logic tests the connection of the project
description and the project assumption whereas
the horizontal logic tests the connection of the
project description, the set of indicators and its
sources of verification.
In order to design a convincing and consistent
Logframe each level must be directly related to
and achieve the higher level. If higher objectives
are too ambitious or if the links between results
and the project purpose are not realistic then the
links between levels should be strengthened.
Discussion and review can help to gradually
improve the project design.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
89

90
TO KnOw MOre:
The Logical Framework Approach is an essential
management tool in each phase of the project cycle.
It should be used for the preparation, implementation
and evaluation of a project.
During the identification stage the Logical Framework
Approach helps analyse the existing situation,
investigate the relevance of the proposed project and
identify potential objectives and strategies.
In the formulation phase the Logframe matrix
provides a summary of key project elements in a
standard format, so as to assist in the evaluation of
the scope and logic of proposed investments.
The objectives identified in the Logframe, together
with the activity, resource and cost schedules,
provide the necessary information for a cost-benefit
analysis.
During project implementation the Logframe lays
the basis for the preparation of contracts – clearly
stating anticipated objectives, as well as the level of
responsibility and accountability of project managers
and other stakeholders.
In addition, more detailed operational work plans can
be formulated on the basis of the Logframe and the
associated schedules. The indicators and Means of
Verification provide the framework for a more detailed
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan to be designed and
implemented by project managers. On the basis of
the Assumptions, an operational risk management
plan can be designed. Finally, through analysis of the
results, indicators and means of verification a project
progress report can be established in order to compare
what was planned with what has been achieved.
In the evaluation and Audit phase, the Logframe
provides a basis for evaluation, given that it clearly
specifies what was to be achieved, how these
achievements were to be verified (indicators and
means of verification) and what the key assumptions
were.
Finally, the Logframe provides a structure for preparing
terms of reference (TOR) for Evaluation studies
and for performance audits.
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
5.3.6 Activity, resource And Cost
Schedules
After having completed the Logframe and
checked its logic, the activity, resource and cost
schedules should be prepared.
The activity plan
Defining an activity schedule helps identify the
logical sequence and expected duration of the
project’s activities, as well as the dependencies
that exist between activities. The preparation
of an activity schedule usually includes the
breaking down of activities into manageable
tasks. A specification of resources (technical
and human) and scheduling of costs can be
undertaken. Moreover, activity schedules allow a
clear allocation of management responsibilities.
Thus, the following questions can be answered:
�
�
Who will do what?
When will this happen?
What types of inputs will be needed
� (besides people)?
Activities should be clearly linked to the
achievement of project results. By putting
the project activities from the Logframe into
a detailed activity schedule, the relationship
between activities and results should be
maintained.
resource and cost planning
After the preparation of the activity schedule,
the resources necessary to undertake these
activities must be specified in a budget table.
The budget table provides a summary of the
envisaged expenses for all project activities
and related management tasks.
For the proper planning of all necessary
resources, a detailed plan for each activity must
be established. Cost estimates should be based
on careful and thorough budgeting, as they
have a significant influence on the investment
decision at project appraisal and subsequently
on the implementation of the project. The
preparation of the budget is based on allocating
resources to agreed cost categories (unit,
number of unit, unit rate, costs).

5.4 Completing An Application for IPA
funding - The Project fiche
Preparing a Logframe matrix is an important
step in the process of developing a project
proposal. Yet, in order to apply for a grant there
is still work to do. For a project seeking funding
under IPA component I, the main element of
the project application is the IPA Project fiche.
According to the European Commission, an
IPA project fiche is the key implementation
document for the national programmes: 21 It
defines the priority axes (objective and purpose)
of a project, the envisaged operations and their
implementing methods.
Thus, an IPA project fiche sets the overall cost of
the project and the Community contribution, the
links with the political and financial framework
as well as with the national strategies and the
activities from other donors. Finally, it indicates
the budget and the necessary indicators for the
monitoring and evaluation of implementation.
The following points will help to develop a
convincing project fiche.
CHeCKlIST fOr THe PrePArATIOn Of IPA
PrOJeCT fICHeS
• Try to clearly establish the need for the proposed project.
• Highlight and repeat the most important ideas of the
project.
• Make sure that the collaboration with all interested
groups in the planning of your project is evident.
• Note that according to the European Commission, the
project fiche should not be longer than 15 pages without
annexes.
• The project fiche must be written in english. Make
sure that the text is linguistically correct and avoid
grammar mistakes.
• Keep it simple! Your project fiche should not contain
difficult phrases and pompous words but be concise,
clear and easy to understand.
• Note that format, layout and presentation of your
project fiche are as important as its content.
•
•
All sections of the project fiches are closely interrelated.
Making a change in a section will, in most cases, have
consequences for another section. Please make sure
that the final project fiche is consistent and credible.
Before presenting the fiche, ask a person that is totally
unfamiliar with your project to read through your project
fiche. Ask him/her to make suggestions for improvement
and rework your text if necessary.
fOr THe CurrenT PrOGrAMMInG YeAr, An IPA PrOJeCT
fICHe SHOuld fOllOw THe fOllOwInG fOrMAT:
1. Basic information
1.1 CRIS Number:
1.2 Title:
1.3 ELARG Statistical code:
1.4 Location:
Implementing arrangements:
1.5 Contracting Authority:
1.6 Implementing Agency:
1.7 Beneficiary (including details of project manager):
Financing:
1.8 Overall cost (VAT excluded):
1.9 EU contribution:
1.10 Final date for contracting:
1.11 Final date for execution of contracts:
1.12 Final date for disbursements:
2. Overall Objective and Project Purpose
2.1 Overall Objective:
2.2 Project purpose:
2.3 Link with Accession Partnership / National Plan for Approximation
with the acquis / European Partnership / Stabilisation and Association
Agreement:
2.4 Link with Multi-annual Indicative Planning Document:
2.5 Link with National Development Plan (where applicable):
2.6 Link with national/ sectoral investment plans (where applicable):
3. Description of project
3.1 Background and justification:
3.2 Assessment of project impact, catalytic effect, sustainability and
cross-border impact (where applicable)
3.3 Results and measurable indicators:
Results and measurable indicators in relation with activity 1
Results and measurable indicators in relation with activity 2
3.4 Activities:
Activity 1 (including inputs = precise list of contracts to be deployed
in relation to it / including where applicable national funded contracts
concurring to the activity as well as identification of source of co
financing funding and its availability)
Activity 2
….
3.5 Conditionality and sequencing:
3.6 Linked activities:
3.7 Lessons learned:
4. Indicative Budget (amounts in €)
Amounts net of VAT
5. Indicative Implementation Schedule (periods broken down per
quarter)
6. Cross Cutting Issues (where applicable)
6.1 Equal opportunities:
6.2 Environment:
6.3 Minorities:
ANNEXES
1. Logframe in standard format
2. Amounts contracted and Disbursed per Quarter over the full duration
of Programme
3. Description of Institutional Framework
4. Reference to laws, regulations and strategic documents
5. Details per EU funded contract where applicable
22 Information on the national programmes for Albania and Serbia for TAIB 2007 and 2008 are available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/potential-candidate-countries/albania/financial_en.htm
and http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/potential-candidate-countries/serbia/financial_en.htm
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal
91

92
nOTeS fOr THe TrAIner
Possible activities:
In a simulation game, you can simulate a project planning workshop with core stakeholders
as described in subchapter 5.2 (The Analysis Phase). The issue you discuss
could be a practical example from a recent IPA project in Serbia (e.g. fight against corruption,
support for refugees). Each course participant is assigned a specific role. His/
her task will be to analyse the problems, objectives and strategies together with the
other ‘stakeholders’.
Your task as a trainer will be to analyse and discuss the results of the planning workshop
together with the course participants.
Suggested readings:
• European Commission, Directorate General Enlargement: IPA Programming Guide
for components I (Transitional Assistance and Institution Building) and II (Cross-
Border Co-operation), 31 March 2008, available at: http://www.strategija.hr/Default.
aspx?art=679&sec=2
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
European Commission: Practical Guide to Contract Procedures for EC external actions
(PRAG), 2008, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/implementation/practical_guide/index_en.htm
European Commission: Institution Building in the Framework of European Union Poli-
cies - Common Twinning Manual, 2007, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/
financial_assistance/institution_building/twinning_en.htm
European Commission, Directorate General Development; EuropeAid Co-operation Of-
fice: Aid Delivery Methods - Project cycle management Guidelines, March 2004, available
at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/multimedia/publications/index_en.htm
European Commission, Directorate General Development: EC Guidelines for the use
of indicators in country performance assessment, December 2002, available at: http://
ec.europa.eu/development/icenter/repository/guidelines_indicators_cpa_en.pdf
Government of the Republic of Serbia, Ministry of Finance, Sector for programming and
management of EU funds and Development Assistance: Operational Manual for IPA
Programming, 2008, available at: http://www.dial-serbia.com/pages/documents_en.htm
Government of the Republic of Serbia, Ministry of Finance, Sector for programming and
management of EU funds and Development Assistance: The Logical Framework Approach:
a key tool to project cycle management, June 2007, available at: http://www.
dial-serbia.com/pages/documents_en.htm
Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic, Department of Foreign Assistance
Phare, bilateral and multilateral co-operation: Getting it Right 2003 – Programming Phare
Projects, November 2002, available at: http://www.phare.vlada.gov.sk/data/files/475.doc
(last accessed: 15 December 2008).
IPA Trainer Handbook - From An Idea To A Convincing Project Proposal

IPA Trainer Handbook
6 Managing
5
IPA – The New Pre-Accession
Financial Instrument
IPA Projects Successfully

6. MAnAGInG IPA PrOJeCTS SuCCeSSfullY
In this chapter you will find:
� an overview of different management types and management structure requirements under IPA
� general information on how to start implementing a project
� principles of project evaluation and links between key evaluation criteria and Logframe matrix
6.1 Introduction
After the approval of the project proposal and the conclusion of the Financing Agreement, the next
step is the implementation of the project: the set activities have to be implemented and the results
and specific objectives have to be achieved within a concrete timeframe and an allocated budget.
Implementation will be monitored, and project results will be evaluated. Everything planned during
the programming, identification and formulation phases can now commence.
6.2 How Is IPA Assistance Managed?
In principle, there are centralised and
decentralised management modes or methods
of implementation of IPA projects. 23 The
management modes are further subdivided as
follows: 24
� Centralised
• Direct centralised
• Indirect centralised
• Deconcentrated
� Decentralised
• Decentralised ex-ante
• Decentralised ex-post
In the case of direct centralised management,
contracts are concluded directly by the European
Commission acting for the beneficiary country.
The Commission draws up shortlists and is
responsible for issuing invitations to tender,
receiving tenders, chairing tender evaluation
committees, deciding on the results of tender
procedures and signing the contracts.
If indirect centralised management is used,
contracts are concluded by a delegate body
which is entrusted to carry out implementation
tasks. These tasks may include preparation,
implementation and finalisation of contract
procedures, as well as management of
corresponding expenditures.
The European Commission can also
deconcentrate contract management from
Commission Headquarters to the Commission
Delegation in a beneficiary country. Under a
deconcentrated management format, the EC
Delegation is the Contracting Authority during
implementation.
Under centralised and deconcentrated
management, the beneficiary’s administration
takes no responsibility over the project cycle.
It interacts with the Commission in negotiations
and discussions, but it has no final responsibility
for the actions performed by the European
Commission or the Commission Delegation.
If implementation is managed on the basis
of decentralisation with ex-ante controls,
contracts are concluded by a Contracting
Authority designated in the Financing
Agreement. Normally, this will be the
government or an entity of the beneficiary
country with legal personality with which
the European Commission establishes the
Financing Agreement. If a Central Finance
and Contracting Unit is established, it will be
in charge of the overall tendering, contracting,
payment, accounting and financial reporting
aspects of all procurements in the context of
European external aid programmes.
23 Occasionally, there is also joint management and shared management. In the event of joint management, the European Commission is the Contracting
Authority managing funds jointly with an international organisation. Under shared management, assistance is managed by the authorities of one of the member
states participating in cross-border programmes.
24 For details see: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/implementation/practical_guide/documents/2008new_prag_final_en.pdf
IPA Trainer Handbook - Managing IPA Projects Successfully
95

96
The Contracting Authority will draw up shortlists
(restricted procedures). Before the procedure is
launched, the Contracting Authority must submit
tender dossiers to the European Commission.
Upon approval, the Contracting Authority is then
responsible for issuing invitations to tender,
receiving tenders, chairing tender Evaluation
Committees and deciding on the results of
tender procedures.
The Contracting Authority then submits the
result of the evaluation for approval. After
having notified the contractor and received
and analysed the proofs regarding exclusion
and selection criteria, it submits the contract
award proposal to the European Commission
for endorsement. Once it has received
this endorsement, it signs and awards the
contract.
A phased waiver of different types of ex-ante
control may apply. Yet, as a general rule, the
European Commission will be represented
when tenders are opened and evaluated
and must always be invited to such events.
The Contracting Authority must also submit
procurement notices and award notices to the
European Commission for publication.
In the case of decentralised management
with ex-post controls, contracts are
concluded directly by the Contracting Authority
designated in the Financing Agreement. The
Contracting Authority will draw up shortlists and
is responsible for issuing invitations to tender,
receiving tenders, chairing tender Evaluation
Committees, deciding on the results of tender
procedures and signing contracts without the
prior approval of the European Commission.
The Contracting Authority must submit
procurement notices and award notices to the
European Commission for publication.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Managing IPA Projects Successfully
6.3 who Is responsible for Managing
IPA Assistance In The decentralised
Management System?
Decentralised management with ex-post
control over procurement and grant project
selection, contracting and payments, should be
considered the desirable management mode
for both candidate and potential candidate
countries.
For this management mode, Article 21 of
Commission Regulation (EC) 718/2007
requires that the beneficiary has appointed the
following bodies and authorities:
�
�
�
�
�
�
A National IPA Co-ordinator (NIPAC),
A Competent Accrediting Officer (CAO),
A National Authorising Officer (NAO),
A National Fund (NF),
An Operating Structure (OS),
An Audit Authority (AA).
The formal conferral of management
responsibilities to the beneficiary country
must be preceded by an assessment by the
European Commission confirming that all these
bodies and authorities are fully operational, and
that the beneficiary country is in a position to
implement assistance.
responsibilities of the national IPA Coordinator
(nIPAC)
The NIPAC ensures a close link between the
Commission and the beneficiary country with
regard to both the general accession process
and the use of assistance under the IPA
Regulation. The NIPAC is responsible for the
coherence and co-ordination of programmes
under IPA. In particular, the NIPAC must
complete the following tasks:
� Organizing the preparation
of project
proposals,
Elaborating project fiches and presenting
� them to the Commission,
Monitoring the technical execution of the
� national programmes,

Preparing and presenting an annual and
� final report to the Commission.
responsibilities of the Competent
Accrediting Officer (CAO)
The Competent Accrediting Officer (CAO)
is responsible for issuing, monitoring and
suspending or withdrawing the accreditation of
the National Authorising Officer (NAO) and the
National Fund.
responsibilities of the national Authorising
Officer (NAO)
As the head of the National Fund, the National
Authorising Officer (NAO) bears responsibility
for:
The financial management of EU funds in
� the beneficiary country,
The legality and regularity of the underlying
� transactions,
The effective functioning of management
� and control systems under IPA regulation.
The national fund (nf)
The National Fund (NF) is a structure with
central budgetary competence located within a
state level ministry of the beneficiary country.
The National Fund acts as a central treasury.
Headed by the National Authorising Officer,
the National Fund is in charge of managing
financial assistance under the IPA Regulation.
In particular, the National Fund:
�
�
�
Organises the bank accounts,
Requests funds from the commission,
Authorises the transfer of funds received
from the commission to the operating
structures or to the final beneficiaries,
Is in charge of the financial reporting to the
� Commission.
The Operating Structure (OS)
An Operating Structure must be established
for each IPA component or programme so as
to deal with management and implementation
of assistance under IPA. Under component
I, the Operating Structure is composed
of one or more Implementing Agencies.
Each Implementing Agency is headed by a
Programme Authorizing Officer who is in
charge of the overall tendering, contracting,
payment, accounting and financial reporting
aspects of all procurement in the context of the
IPA component I programmes in a beneficiary
country.
Usually working with the final beneficiary, the
Senior Programme Officer is responsible
for the implementation of IPA projects at
the technical level. According to the IPA
Implementing Guide of the Commission, the
responsibilities of the SPO include:
Technical implementation and follow-up of
� IPA-funded projects,
� Planning and reporting to the responsible
authority and maintaining contact on
technical issues with the Commission,
Input into the preparation of financial and
� reporting documents,
Preparation of Terms of Reference /
� Technical Specifications,
�
Submitting requests to launch tenders,
Requests to negotiate and conclude
� contracts,
Providing assistance for the contract
� negotiations,
Endorsement of payments against
� invoices.
The Implementing Agencies may also be
consolidated in the form of a Central Finance and
Contracting Unit (CFCU) in charge of financial
procurement, contracting and payment. In such
a case, the PAO is head of the CFCU, and the
SPO:
is responsible for the technical aspect of
� the operations within line ministries,
assists the PAO in the apt and timely
� preparation and implementation of
operations at the technical level,
IPA Trainer Handbook - Managing IPA Projects Successfully
97

98
� is in charge of the co-ordination within each
priority axis set down in the beneficiary
country’s project proposal.
responsibilities of the Audit Authority (AA)
The beneficiary country shall designate an Audit
Authority (AA). Being functionally independent
from all actors in the management and control
systems and complying with internationally
accepted audit standards, the AA is responsible
for verifying the effective functioning of the
management and control systems.
The Audit Authority shall be set up with the
concrete responsibilities provided for in Article
29 of the IPA Implementing Regulation.
In addition to these bodies and authorities, a
Strategic Co-ordinator is to be appointed for the
regional development and human resources
component. The strategic co-ordinator is
responsible for the co-ordination of assistance
and drafting the assistance framework.
6.4 Implementing a project
The Commission’s external aid policy aims
at fostering ownership and strengthening
institutional capacity. Thus, whenever
practical, project implementation should be
the responsibility of institutions of candidate
countries or potential candidate countries.
Particularly in the case of decentralised
management, the Commission’s main
responsibility is to:
provide timely finance as well as
� management and technical support,
� monitor project implementation and ensure
an appropriate level of accountability for
resources used and results achieved, and
capture and act on lessons learned during
� implementation.
According to the Commission, there are three
implementation periods:
�
�
The Inception period,
The Main implementation period, and
IPA Trainer Handbook - Managing IPA Projects Successfully
�
The Phase-out period.
During the inception period, contracting
arrangements are concluded, resources
are mobilized, working relationship with
stakeholders are established and the project
plan is reviewed and revised. More specifically,
the following tasks must be fulfilled:
� Setting up the project team
• Appoint a team leader (it is often helpful
to have identified candidates well before
the project gets the green light!)
• Let the team leader draw up job profiles
for the project team (knowledge of relevant
subject areas, delivery experience
etc.)
• When choosing team members, let the
team leader have the final decision
• Consider whether stakeholder interests
should be represented in the team (this sometimes
can lead to more inclusive work)
� Establish working relationships with
stakeholders
� Review and revise the project plan
�
Mobilise resources
� Conclude contracting arrangements
� Possibly hold inception workshop(s)
� Establish the monitoring and evaluation
systems for the project.
In the main implementation period, the
following key tasks are carried out on an
ongoing basis:
� Procure and deploy resources,
including
personnel
�
�
Implement activities and deliver results
Monitor and review progress
� revise operational plans in light of
experience
�
report on progress
Finally, in the phase-out period, responsibilities
are handed over to local partners and

A ClOSer lOOK AT THe rOle Of THe PrOJeCT
MAnAGer
A good IPA project manager will:
• Through effective project management, keep the project’s
actions and objectives meaningful.
• Lead and inspire the project team; monitor the performance
of the team.
• Manage the public face of the project.
• Establish and maintain constructive links with other
units of the implementing organisation and with external
stakeholders.
• Take on overall responsibility for the outcome of the
project
maintenance plans are put in place. At the
same time, efforts are undertaken to ensure that
relevant skills have been effectively transferred,
and that recurrent cost requirements will be met
after project completion.
Implementation should be understood as a
continuous learning process within which
gained experiences are revised and fed back
into the ongoing implementation process. This
is achieved by:
�
�
�
Monitoring and regular review
Planning and re-planning
Reporting
Monitoring is the systematic and continuous
collection, analysis and use of management
information to support decision-making. The
project manager must keep an eye on the
progress of the project in terms of expenditure,
resource use, implementation of activities,
delivery of results and management of risks.
Regular reviews enable to reflect on progress
and agree on its content and on follow-up actions
if necessary.
Experiences gained this way often necessitate
the adjustment of the project plan. Important
documents such as the Logframe matrix or the
activity and budget schedules must be periodically
reviewed and updated. Sometimes, changes
even to the scope of Financing Agreements and
associated contractual documents need to be
made.
Reports on physical and financial progress aim
to keep stakeholders informed. This applies, in
particular, to those providing financial resources
to the project. In the reports, project progress
should be compared to what was planned.
Constraints encountered and any important
remedial or supportive actions required should
be outlined. In addition, the purpose of a report
is to provide a formally documented record of the
attained project achievements and to facilitate
future reviews and evaluations. By documenting
any changes in forward plans, a report promotes
transparency and accountability. A good report
ultimately provides the basis for evaluation and
audit, the next steps in the project cycle.
Some decisions during project implementation
cannot and should not be taken at the project
level by project managers themselves. Therefore,
monitoring is also carried out at programme
level. The European Commission supervises the
implementation of pre-accession programmes
through its services in DG Enlargement, DG
Regional Policy, DG Employment, Social
Affairs and Equal Opportunities, DG Agriculture
and Rural Development and the European
Commission‘s Delegations in the beneficiary
countries. For this, a monitoring system has
been established including joint monitoring
committees between the Commission and the
beneficiary countries (Operating Structure). By
means of monitoring and evaluation reports,
these committees discuss the implementation of
financial assistance programmes and agree on
necessary corrective actions to keep a project
on track.
TO KnOw MOre:
As a result of monitoring and review one of the following options may
be taken during the implementation stage:
• The implementation of the project can continue as planned.
• In light of experiences gained through the process of monitoring and
review, plans (resources, activities, budget, etc.) have to be revised.
•
In extreme cases, the project must be discontinued.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Managing IPA Projects Successfully
99

100
6.5 evaluating A Project
The main purpose of the evaluation phase is
to assess the efficiency, effectiveness, impact,
relevance and sustainability of an ongoing
or completed project, programme or policy.
An evaluation should follow four guiding
principles:
� Evaluations should be impartial and
independent from the programming and
implementation functions.
� They should be carried out by appropriately
skilled and independent experts who
must ensure transparency of the evaluation
process, including wide dissemination of
results.
�
Evaluations should take into account
different perspectives and views;
stakeholders should therefore participate
in the evaluation process.
� Evaluations should lead to the timely
presentation of relevant, clear and concise
information to decision makers.
The European Commission uses a set of five
key criteria to evaluate a project as follows:
� relevance: The evaluation should determine
if the socio economic objectives of
the project are appropriate to the problems
it was supposed to address and to the wider
societal context within which it operates.
Assessing the relevance of a project
should also include an assessment of the
quality of the project planning process and
the project design.
� Efficiency: This addresses the question of
whether the project results were achieved
at a reasonable cost. One of the guiding
questions is: How well have inputs/means
been converted into activities (in terms
of quality, quantity and time, and the
quality of the results achieved). In order
to see whether the a project maximized
its efficiency, comparisons must be made
of alternative approaches striving for the
same results.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Managing IPA Projects Successfully
� effectiveness: The key question here is
how much the project results contributed
to the achievement of the project purpose.
Another question could be how much
the assumptions and risks affected the
achievement of project results.
� Impact: The impact assessment should
evaluate the effect of the project on its
wider surroundings and its contribution
to the wider policy or sector objectives
as summarised in the project’s overall
objective. Since the achievement of the
overall objective normally requires the
implementation of multiple programmes
and projects, the impact assessment
should not be done directly following
project completion, but rather after a
certain amount of time has elapsed.
� Sustainability: Here, the assessment
focuses on the likelihood that benefits
produced by the project will continue to
function after funding has been completed.
Knowing how much the local community
has gained ownership of the project results
is one of the key questions in this context.
There is a common link between the five evaluation
criteria and the Logframe’s objective hierarchy which
is shown in the figure below. 25
Evaluations can differ in terms of timing and
in terms of focus. There are three types of
evaluation:
Ex-ante evaluation (Will we do the right
� project?)
Mid-term evaluation (Are we doing the right
� project and are we doing it correctly?)
25 European Commission, Directorate General Development; EuropeAid Co-operation Office: Aid Delivery Methods - Project cycle management Guidelines,
March 2004.

Ex-post evaluation (Have we done the right
� project? Have we done it correctly?)
Ex-ante evaluations can be seen as an
aid in improving project design as well
as future monitoring and evaluation. Midterm
evaluations emphasise questions of
continued relevance, efficiency and preliminary
indications of effectiveness. Yet, this form of
evaluation only offers limited possibilities for
impact assessment as the projects are not yet
finished. Ex-post evaluations, in contrast, focus
on questions of impact and sustainability.
Source: IEP/ InWEnt.
KeY MeSSAGe:
Monitoring and Evaluation are key elements of project management.
They are both based on the collection, analysis and use of information
to support decision-making. They differ however in terms of
purpose and stage in the project cycle.
Monitoring is the analysis of a project’s progress towards achieving
planned results. Consideration of operational changes to the
project work plan and deciding upon remedial actions are important
elements of the monitoring process. Monitoring is undertaken regularly
during the implementation phase with the intention of improving
management decision making.
evaluation is an assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness, impact,
relevance and sustainability of aid policies and actions. Evaluations
can be carried out after project identification (ex-ante evaluation),
in the middle of the implementation phase (mid-term evaluation) or
some time after project implementation has been completed (expost
evaluation).
Another assessment apart from monitoring and evaluation is the audit.
The purpose of an audit is to provide assurance and accountability
to stakeholders and to recommend improvements for current
and future projects. Audits are undertaken in the form of systems
reviews (ex-ante) or upon the completion of a project.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Managing IPA Projects Successfully
101

102
nOTeS fOr THe TrAIner:
Possible activities:
IPA Trainer Handbook - Managing IPA Projects Successfully
The following questions can be discussed with the course participants:
• What are the objectives and key principles of Project Cycle
Management? What are its benefits?
• What are the differences between monitoring, evaluation and
audit in terms of both purpose and project cycle stage?
Suggested readings:
• European Commission, Directorate General Enlargement: IPA Programming
Guide for components I (Transitional Assistance and Institution
Building) and II (Cross-border Co-operation), 31 March 2008,
available at: http://www.strategija.hr/Default.aspx?art=679&sec=2
•
•
European Commission: Practical Guide to Contract Procedures for
EC external actions (PRAG), 2008, available at: http://ec.europa.
eu/europeaid/work/procedures/implementation/practical_guide/index_en.htm
European Commission, Directorate General Development; Europe-
Aid Co-operation Office: Aid Delivery Methods - Project cycle management
Guidelines, March 2004, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/
europeaid/multimedia/publications/index_en.htm

IPA Trainer Handbook
5
IPA – The New Pre-Accession
Financial Instrument
Conclusions

COnCluSIOnS
Between 1991 and 1999, the EU’s financial support for the Western Balkans was principally
provided in the form of ad hoc actions and measures reacting to urgent needs during and after
war. There was no coherent and structured relationship between the EU and the newly emerging
countries of the Western Balkans. 26
Between 2000 and 2006, the EU approach became much more structured, with the EU perspective
being given to all countries participating in the Stabilisation and Association Process (at the
Feira European Council in 2000) and the setting up of various pre-accession programmes (such
as ISPA, SAPARD or CARDS).
With the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) set up for the 2007-2013 period, the EU
has strengthened its pre-accession activities. Although there are no major changes in the areas
and priorities of assistance compared to previous programmes, IPA shows some significant innovations:
� A single framework: IPA provides a single legal basis for European pre-accession assistance.
Merging all pre-accession activities into a single instrument, IPA puts an end to a multitude of
programmes with different scopes and focuses. Moreover, the single implementing regulation
aims at the harmonization of implementing procedures.
� Targeted and more efficient assistance: Due to its different components, IPA seeks to
guarantee more coherent, coordinated and effective assistance. The distinction between the
two categories of countries (candidate countries and potential candidate countries) takes
into account the differences between them concerning administrative, programming and
management capacity and helps to adequately meet the specific needs of each beneficiary
country.
But to benefit from IPA assistance, beneficiary countries must undergo certain endeavours: For
example, actors must identify project ideas that are consistent with partner priorities and those of
the European Commission. They have to apply complex proceedings and management tools and
need to know how to write a convincing IPA Project Fiche.
To do so, a good understanding of the basic principles of IPA as well as a basic knowledge of how
the EU operates is of utmost importance. This requires competent trainers who are familiarised
with the EU and its pre-accession strategy and can share their knowledge with a target group.
We hope that this Trainer Handbook will prove useful in your future training activities and contribute
positively to our common efforts in promoting a united, peaceful and prosperous Europe.
26 Cf. Szemlér, Tamás: EU Financial Support for the Western-Balkans: Well-suited to Real Needs?, in: Center for EU Enlargement Studies: Using IPA and other
EU funds to accelerate convergence and integration in the Western Balkans, Budapest 2008, S. 9-22, available at: http://web.ceu.hu/cens/assets/files/IPA.pdf
(last accessed: 15 December 2008).
IPA Trainer Handbook - Conclusions
105

Annex

Annex 1. SOurCeS Of InfOrMATIOn
• Central Office for Development Strategy and Coordination of EU Funds: European
Funds for Croatian Projects. A Handbook on financial cooperation and European
Union supported programmes in Croatia, 2009, available at: http://www.strategija.hr/
Default.aspx?sec=2 (last accessed: 10 January 2009).
• European Commission: Practical Guide to Contract Procedures for EC external
actions, 2008, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/work/procedures/
implementation/practical_guide/index_en.htm (last accessed: 15 December 2008).
• European Commission: Communication from the Commission to the Council
and the Parliament, Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA), Multi-Annual
Indicative Financial Framework for 2010-2012, 5 November 2008, available at: http://
ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/press_corner/key-documents/reports_nov_2008/
miff_2010_2012_en.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
• European Commission, Directorate General Enlargement: IPA Programming Guide
for components I (Transitional Assistance and Institution Building) and II (Crossborder
Co-operation), 31 March 2008.
• European Commission: Albania 2008 Progress Report, 5 November 2008, available
at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/press_corner/key-documents/reports_
nov_2008/albania_progress_report_en.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
• European Commission: Serbia 2008 Progress Report, 5 November 2008, available
at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/press_corner/key-documents/reports_
nov_2008/serbia_progress_report_en.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
• European Commission, Directorate General Enlargement: National programmes
for Albania for TAIB 2007 and 2008, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/
potential-candidate-countries/albania/financial_en.htm (last accessed: 10 June
2009).
• European Commission, Directorate General Enlargement: National programmes
for Serbia for TAIB 2007 and 2008, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/
potential-candidate-countries/serbia/financial_en.htm (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
• European Commission, Directorate General Regional Policy: Cohesion Policy 2007-
2013, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/atlas2007/index_en.htm (last
accessed: 9 June 2009).
• European Commission: Institution Building in the Framework of European Union
Policies - Common Twinning Manual, 2007, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/
enlargement/financial_assistance/institution_building/twinning_en.htm (last
accessed: 15 December 2008).
• European Commission, Directorate General Development: EuropeAid Co-operation
Office: Aid Delivery Methods – Project Cycle Management Guidelines, March 2004,
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
109

110
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
available at: http://ec.europa.eu/europeaid/multimedia/publications/documents/tools/
europeaid_adm_pcm_guidelines_2004_en.pdf (last accessed: 15 December 2008).
• European Commission: Annual Report of the Instrument for Structural Policy for Preaccession
(ISPA), 2003, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/
docoffic/official/reports/pdf/ispa2003/com_2004_735_en.pdf (last accessed: 9 June
2009).
•
•
European Commission: Co-decision step by step, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/
codecision/stepbystep/diagram_en.htm (last accessed: 9 June 2009).
European Commission, Directorate General Enlargement: http://ec.europa.eu/
enlargement/index_en.htm (last accessed: 15 December 2008).
• European Council: Presidency Conclusions, Copenhagen European Council, 21-22
June 1993, available at: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/enlargement/ec/pdf/cop_
en.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
•
European Parliament: Results of 2009 European Elections, available at: http://www.
elections2009-results.eu/en/index_en.html (last accessed: 09 June 2009).
• Gjorgjievski, Mate: EU Instrument for Pre-accession assistance: The path to a
successful start, in: Center for EU Enlargement Studies: Using IPA and other EU
funds to accelerate convergence and integration in the Western Balkans, Budapest
2008, pp. 69-88, available at: http://web.ceu.hu/cens/assets/files/IPA.pdf (last
accessed: 15 December 2008).
• Government of the Republic of Serbia, Ministry of Finance, Sector for programming
and management of EU funds and Development Assistance: Operational Manual for
IPA Programming, 2008, available at: http://www.dial-serbia.com/pages/documents_
en.htm (last accessed: 15 December 2008).
• Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic, Department of Foreign Assistance
Phare, bilateral and multilateral cooperation: Getting it Right 2003 – Programming
Phare Projects, November 2002, available at: http://www.phare.vlada.gov.sk/data/
files/475.doc (last accessed: 15 December 2008).
• Official Journal of the European Union: Commission Regulation 718/2007,
available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2007/l_170/
l_17020070629en00010066.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
•
Official Journal of the European Union: Regulation (EC) 1638/2006 available at:
http://ec.europa.eu/world/enp/pdf/oj_l310_en.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
• Official Journal of the European Union: Council Regulation 1085/2006,
available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/site/en/oj/2006/l_210/
l_21020060731en00820093.pdf (last accessed: 10 June 2009).
•
Offical Journal of the European Union: Court of Auditors, Special Report No 2/2004

concerning pre-accession aid, Has SAPARD been well managed?, 2004/C295/01,
2004, available at: http://eca.europa.eu/portal/pls/portal/docs/1/173316.PDF (last
accessed: 10 June 2009).
• Szemlér, Tamás: EU Financial Support for the Western-Balkans: Well-suited to Real
Needs?, in: Center for EU Enlargement Studies: Using IPA and other EU funds to
accelerate convergence and integration in the Western Balkans, Budapest 2008,
pp. 9-22, available at: http://web.ceu.hu/cens/assets/files/IPA.pdf (last accessed: 15
December 2008).
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
111

112
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
Annex 2. AbbrevIATIOnS
AA Audit Authority
Art. article
Benelux Economic union between Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg
CAP Common Agricultural Policy
CAO Competent Accrediting Officer
CARDS Community Assistance for Reconstruction, Development and
Stabilisation
CBA Cost-benefit analysis
CBC Cross-border Cooperation
CEECs Central and Eastern European Countries
CF Cohesion Fund
CFCA Central Finance and Contracting Agency
CFCU Central Finance and Contracting Unit
CFSP Common Foreign and Security Policy
CJHA Cooperation in Justice and Home Affairs
COR Committee of the Regions
DG Directorate-General
EAGGF European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund
EC European Community
ECB European Central Bank
ECJ European Court of Justice
ECSC European Coal and Steel Community
ECOFIN The Economic and Financial Affairs Council
EDC European Defence Community
eds. editors
EEC European Economic Community
EFTA European Free Trade Association
EGTC European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation
EIB European Investment Bank
EIF European Investment Fund
EMU Economic and Monetary Union
ENPI European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument
EP European Parliament
EPC European Political Community
ERDF European Regional Development Fund
ESC Economic and Social Committee
ESF European Social Fund
ESDP European Security and Defence Policy
EU European Union
Euratom European Atomic Energy Community
Europol European police agency

Eurostat European Statistical Office
EUSF European Union Solidarity Fund
FIFG Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance
GATT General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
GDP gross domestic product
GNP gross national product
IA Implementing Agency
IGC Intergovernmental Conference
IPA Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance
IR Implementing Regulation
ISPA Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession
JHA Justice and Home Affairs
JMC Joint Monitoring Committee
LFA Logical Framework Approach
Logframe Logical Framework matrix
MEP Member of the European Parliament
MIFF Multi-annual Indicative Financial Framework
MIPD Multi-annual Indicative Planning Document
NAO National Authorising Officer
NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organisation
NF National Fund
NIPAC National IPA Coordinator
NPA National Action Plan
NPAA National Programme for the Adoption of the Acquis
NUTS Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics
OECD Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development
OJ Official Journal of the European Union
OSCE Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe
OVI Objective Verifiable Indicator
OP Operational Programme
OS Operating Structure
PAO Programme Authorising Officer
PCM Project Cycle Management
PHARE Poland-Hungary: Actions for Economic Reconstruction
PRAG Practical Guide to EC External Aid Contract Procedures
QMV qualified majority voting
SAA Stabilisation and Association Agreement
SAP Stabilisation and Association Process
SEA Single European Act
SEIO Serbian European Integration Office
SMEs Small and Medium-sized Enterprises
SPO Senior Programming Officer
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
113

114
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
SVO Sources of Verification
SAPARD Special Accession Programme for Agricultural and Rural
Development
TAIB Transition Assistance and Institution Building
TCE Treaty establishing a Constitution for the European Union
TEC Treaty establishing the European Community
TECSC Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community
TEEC Treaty establishing the European Economic Community
TEU Treaty on European Union
TOR Terms of Reference
UN United Nations
VAT Value-added Tax
WEU Western European Union
WTO World Trade Organization

Annex 3. GlOSSArY Of TerMS
Term Definition
Accession Partnerships An instrument of the Community’s pre-accession strategy.
The Accession Partnerships are designed to guide and
assist the candidate countries in their efforts to achieve
the accession criteria, and in particular to implement the
Community acquis. Each country’s short and mediumterm
priorities are determined in one document.
Acquis communautaire Set of common rights and obligations that bind all the
member states together within the EU. It includes all
the treaties, regulations and directives passed by the
European institutions as well as judgements laid down
by the European Court of Justice. In order to become
a member state, applicant countries have to accept the
acquis, transpose it into their national legislation and
implement it upon accession.
Activities Actions or measures that have to be implemented in order
to achieve the expected outcome of a project.
Activity Schedule A schedule setting out the timing, sequence and duration of
project activities. It can also be used to identify milestones
for monitoring progress and assigning management
responsibility for the achievement of these milestones.
Analysis of Objectives Identification and verification of future benefits to which the
beneficiaries attach priority. An objective tree (also known
as hierarchy of objectives) is the product of the analysis of
objectives.
Analysis of Strategies Critical assessment of the alternative ways of
achieving objectives, and selection of a set of objective
clusters that will be included in the proposed project.
Appraisal Analysis of a proposed project to determine its merit and
acceptability in accordance with established criteria. In
the context of the project cycle used by the European
Commission, an appraisal is carried out before the project
is approved for financing, during project identification and
formulation. The term appraisal is used synonymously for
ex-ante evaluation.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
115

116
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
Assumptions External factors that have the potential to affect or even
determine the success of a project. They lie outside the
direct control of the project manager. Assumptions form
the fourth column of the Logframe matrix and should be
formulated positively.
Beneficiaries Persons who benefit from the implementation of a
project. They can be either the target group or the final
beneficiaries. Whereas target groups are immediately and
positively affected by the project at the project purpose
level, final beneficiaries benefit from the project in the long
term at the level of the community, society or sector at
large. Children who benefit from increased spending on
education can be considered final beneficiaries.
Candidate country The candidate country status is granted to applicant
countries for European membership on the day the
European Council officially accepts the application. At
present, these are: Turkey, Croatia and the former Yugoslav
Republic of Macedonia. Candidate countries receive preaccession
assistance through all components of the IPA.
CArdS The programme of Community Assistance for
Reconstruction, Development and Stabilisation (CARDS)
aimes at supporting the participation of the Western Balkan
countries in the Stabilisation and Association Process
(SAP). In 2007, CARDS was replaced by the Instrument
for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA).
Central finance and
Contracting unit (CfCu)
A body established in a beneficiary country that is
responsible for the overall tendering, contracting,
payments, accounting and financial reporting aspects of
all procurements in the context of European external aid
programmes.
Centralised management In the event of centralised management, programmes
funded by the European Commission are managed by the
Commission’s Headquarters in Brussels on behalf of the
government of the beneficiary country.
Co-financing A principle of IPA assistance according to which
complementary financial contribution from national public
funds are required for the implementation of projects.

Cohesion fund (Cf) Set up in 1994 in order to provide financial assistance to
the least prosperous countries of the EU, the Cohesion
Fund supports projects in the fields of environment and
transport infrastructure. It is made available to member
states where the Gross National Product (GNP) is less
than 90 percent of the Community average.
Competent Accrediting
Officer (CAO)
A high-ranking official appointed by the government of
the beneficiary country who is responsible for issuing,
monitoring and suspending or withdrawing the accreditation
of the National Authorising Officer.
Contracting Authority The Contracting Authority is responsible for awarding
grants, tendering, contracting and payments. Whereas this
may be the Operating Structure in the event of decentralised
management, it is the European Commission in the event
of centralised management.
Copenhagen Criteria Accession criteria decided at the Copenhagen European
Council in 1993. To join the EU, an applicant country must
have stable institutions to guarantee democracy, the rule
of law and respect for human rights, including the rights
of minorities. Moreover, it must have a functioning market
economy as well as the capacity to cope with competition
and market forces. Finally, it must have adopted common
rules, standards and policies that form the Community
acquis.
Cost-benefit analysis (CBA) A cost-benefit analysis involves the valuation of the flow
of a project’s costs and benefits over time to determine
the project’s return on investment. A comparison is made
between the situation ‘with’ and ‘without’ the project to
determine the net benefit of the project.
Council of the european
union
One of the Union’s central decision-making institutions.
The Council meetings are attended by one minister from
each of the member states’ governments.
decentralised management Management arrangements under which the Commission
confers certain management responsibilities to the
beneficiary country. The Commission retains the final
responsibility for general budget execution.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
117

118
deconcentrated
management
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
Management arrangements under which management
responsibilities are transferred from the Commission’s
Headquarters to the Commission Delegation in the
beneficiary country.
effectiveness Contribution made by a project’s results to the achievement
of the project purpose.
Efficiency A comparison of the quality of a project’s results with the
time, money, and amount of effort put into it.
enlargement Package A set of key documents adopted by the European
Commission and presented annually to the European
Parliament and the Council. It contains the Commission’s
annual strategy document, annual progress reports for the
candidate and potential candidate countries, and a Multiannual
Indicative Financial Framework (MIFF).
european Atomic energy
Community (euratom)
european Coal and Steel
Community (eCSC)
Founded on 1 January 1958. Its aim is to conduct research
and develop nuclear energy, create a common market
for nuclear fuels and to supervise the nuclear industry
to protect health and prevent abuse. The institutions of
the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the
European Economic Community (EEC) and Euratom were
amalgamated under the Merger Treaty, signed in Brussels
on 8 April 1965 and in force since 1 July 1967.
Founded in 1951 by France, West Germany, Italy and the
Benelux States. One of the functions of the creation of
a common market for coal and steel products was to tie
West Germany into the post-war Western European order
and guarantee peace in Western Europe. Since 1967
the institutions of Euratom, the European Coal and Steal
Community and the European Economic Community have
been merged.
european Commission The European Commission is the quintessential
supranational actor and the executive arm of the EU. Its
main tasks consist of initiating legislation and implementing
EU policies and the EU budget.

european Council The European Council brings together the heads of state
and government of the European Union and the president of
the Commission. It defines the general political guidelines
of the European Union.
european Court of Auditors
(eCA)
european Court of Justice
(eCJ)
The Court of Auditors ensures that EU funds coming from
taxpayers are properly collected and legally spent. Its task
is to ensure that the taxpayers receive maximum value for
their money.
The Court of Justice of the European Communities ensures
that EU legislation is interpreted and applied the same way
in all EU member states. Moreover, the Court makes sure
that EU institutions and member states do what the law
requires.
european Parliament (eP) The European Parliament is directly elected by the
European citizens in order to represent their interests, and
acts as a supranational institution. Its main tasks consist
of enacting legislation together with the Council of the
European Union and exercising budgetary power.
european Partnerships An instrument of the Community’s pre-accession strategy.
The European Partnerships have been set up for the
potential candidate countries within the framework of the
Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP). They define
priority actions and a financial structure needed to improve
stability and prosperity in the Western Balkans with a view
to the eventual EU membership of the potential candidate
countries.
european regional
development fund (erdf)
The ERDF aims to foster economic and social cohesion in
the European Union by correcting imbalances between its
regions. The ERDF is active in the areas of investment in
small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), investment in
infrastructure and development of endogenous potential by
measures which support regional and local development.
It intervenes in the three objectives of Regional Policy:
Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment
as well as European Territorial Cooperation.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
119

120
european Social fund
(eSf)
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
The European Social Fund (ESF) is one of the EU‘s
structural funds. By promoting employment it aims at
reducing differences in prosperity and living standards
across the member states and regions of the EU.
evaluation A periodic assessment of the efficiency, effectiveness,
impact, relevance and sustainability of aid policies and
actions. Lessons of the evaluation are used to influence
future projects and programmes. The evaluation phase is
the final phase of the project cycle.
feasibility study A study, usually carried out during the formulation
phase. It verifies whether the proposed project is wellfounded,
and is likely to meet the needs of its intended
target groups/beneficiaries. The study should design the
project in full operational detail and takes into account all
policy, economic, financial, institutional, management and
environmental aspects. Due to the study, the Commission
and partner governments will have sufficient information
to justify acceptance, modification or rejection of the
proposed project for financing.
financing Agreement Document signed by the European Commission and the
respective partner country/countries subsequent to a
financing decision. It is a formal commitment to finance a
programme or project.
financing Proposal Draft document describing the general background, nature,
scope and objectives of measures proposed as well as
indicating the necessary funding. Following the favourable
opinion of the Financing Committee, the financing proposal
is subject to the Commission’s financing decision.
formulation Phase Third stage of the project cycle. The purpose of this stage is
to confirm the relevance and feasibility of the project ideas
as proposed in the project fiche. In addition, a detailed
project design (including the management arrangements,
financing plan, cost-benefit analysis, monitoring, evaluation
and audit arrangements) and a financing proposal must be
prepared in this phase of the cycle.

Identification phase Second phase of the project cycle. This phase includes
the identification of project ideas that are consistent with
partner priorities and those of the Commission. In addition,
the relevance and feasibility of these project ideas are
assessed.
Impact The effect of a project on its wider surroundings and its
contribution to the wider sector objectives (as summarised
in the project’s overall objective) and to the achievement
of the Commission’s overarching policy objectives.
Implementing Agency (IA) In accordance to Article 139(5) (a) of the Commission
Regulation (EC) No 718/2007, the Operating Structures
in each beneficiary country shall be composed of one
Implementing Agency (IA) established in the national
administration or under its direct control. The IA shall be
headed by a Programme Authorising Officer (PAO).
Implementation Phase In this phase (fifth phase of the project cycle) results have
to be delivered, the project purpose must be achieved and
progress has to be monitored.
Inception Phase First period of the implementing phase, from project start
until the writing of the inception report. During the inception
phase, contracting arrangements are concluded, resources
are mobilized, working relationships with stakeholders are
established and the project plan has to be reviewed and
revised.
Instrument for Preaccession
Assistance (IPA)
Pre-accession instrument for the period 2007-2013 setting a
single framework for all European pre-accession activities.
The IPA supersedes the five previously existing preaccession
instruments (PHARE, ISPA, SAPARD, Turkey
pre-accession aid and CARDS) and assists candidate and
potential candidate countries in their preparations for EU
accession.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
121

122
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
Instrument for Structural
Policies for Pre-accession
(ISPA)
The Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-accession
(ISPA) was a Community framework for the candidate
countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the period
2000-2006. It provided financial support in the areas of
economic and social cohesion. In 2007, the ISPA was
replaced by the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance
(IPA).
Intervention logic Intervention logic is the strategy underlying the project. It
contains the steps to be realised by the project and the
overall objective to which it contributes. Intervention logic
forms the first column of the Logframe matrix.
Joint Monitoring
Committee (JMC)
logical framework
Approach (lfA)
logical framework matrix
(logframe)
A committee between the beneficiary country and
representatives of the European Commission in charge
of reviewing the implementation of IPA programmes. If
necessary, Joint Monitoring Committees can agree on
corrective actions.
An analytical process used to support project planning,
management and evaluation, including stakeholder
analysis, problem analysis, analysis of objectives, analysis
of strategies, preparation of a Logframe matrix and Activity
and Resource Schedules.
The documented product of an analytical process (including
stakeholder analysis, problem analysis, analysis of
objectives, analysis of strategies). In the Logframe matrix
the project’s intervention logic, Assumptions, Objectively
Verifiable Indicators and Sources of Verification are
presented.
Means Means (or inputs) are physical or non-physical resources
that are necessary to carry out planned activities and
manage a project.
Monitoring An analysis of project progress towards achieving planned
results with the purpose of improving management
decision-making. Consideration of any operational
changes that need to be made to the project work plan
and deciding remedial actions are important elements of
the monitoring process. Monitoring is undertaken regularly
during the implementation phase.

Multi-annual Indicative
financial framework
(MIff)
Multi-annual Indicative
Planning document (MIPd)
Multi-annual operational
programmes
Multi-beneficiary
programmes
national Authorising
Officer (NAO)
The Multi-annual Indicative Financial Framework (MIFF)
translates the priorities defined within the political
framework into data on financial distribution across
beneficiary countries and the five components. It forms
the link between the political framework of pre-accession
activities and the budgetary process.
The Multi-annual Indicative Planning Document (MIPD)
is established for each beneficiary country and translates
orientations set out in strategic documents (such as the
Accession Partnerships, the European Partnerships, the
National Programme for the Adoption of the Acquis (NPAA),
the enlargement package, the conclusions of the European
Council and strategic papers of the Commission) into
specific priorities and areas of intervention for all relevant
components. The MIPD ensures the necessary coherence
and complementation between the IPA components.
Three year programmes developing in detail the main
priority axes of the MIPD under the Regional Development
Component, the Human Resources Development
Component and the Rural Development Component.
Programmes designed to assist a group of beneficiary
countries and to complement the support given under
National Programmes. Multi-beneficiary actions require
cooperation between the participating countries and
encourage the establishment of regional structures,
networks (of experts or civil servants), etc.
The NAO heads the National Fund and bears responsibility
for the financial management of EU funds in the beneficiary
country, both for the legality and regularity of the
underlying transactions and for the effective functioning of
management and control systems under IPA regulation.
national fund (nf) Structure located in a state level Ministry of the beneficiary
country with central budgetary competence. The National
Fund is headed by the National Authorising Officer.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
123

124
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
national IPA Coordinator
(nIPAC)
The NIPAC shall ensure a close link between the
Commission and the beneficiary country with regards both
to the general accession process and the use of assistance
under the IPA Regulation. He is responsible for coherence
and coordination of programmes under the IPA.
nuTS The Nomenclature of Territorial Units for Statistics (NUTS)
provides a single uniform breakdown of territorial units for
the collection, production and harmonisation of regional
statistics for the European Union. It also serves as a
reference for socio-economic analyses of the regions and
for the framing of Community regional policy.
Objective Tree Diagrammatic visualisation of a desired future situation
once problems have been remedied following a problem
analysis, and showing a means to end relationship.
Objective Verifiable
Indicators (OvIs)
Measurable indicators showing whether or not objectives
have been achieved. OVIs lay down the basis for designing
an appropriate monitoring system.
Operating Structure Entity or collection of entities established within the
administration of the beneficiary country for each IPA
component or programme to deal with management and
implementation of assistance under the IPA.
Operational Programme
(OP)
Annual programme established for each beneficiary
country in which the main priorities of the MIPD under
each IPA component are developed in detail.
Overall objective Description of a changed situation in the future that
a project strives to accomplish. The overall objective
explains why the project is important for society in terms
of long-term benefits for the beneficiaries. It also shows
how the programme or project is consistent with regional/
sectoral policies as well as the Commission’s overarching
policy objectives.

Poland and Hungary:
Aid for restructuring of
the economies (PHAre
programme)
Potential candidate
countries
Main financial tool of the Community’s pre-accession
activities until 2006. Assistance focused on two priorities:
institution-building and investment financing. Originally
designed for the support of Central and Eastern European
countries (CEECs), the PHARE programme has over the
years been expanded to the Western Balkan candidate
countries.
Countries that may apply for EU membership. As defined
at the Santa Maria da Feira European Council of 20
June 2000 these are: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina,
Montenegro and Serbia, including Kosovo as defined in
UNSCR 1244. Potential candidate countries receive preaccession
assistance through components I and II of the
IPA.
Problem Analysis A structured investigation of the negative aspects of a
situation in order to establish causes and their effects.
Problem Tree Diagrammatic visualisation of a negative situation,
showing a cause-effect relationship. The problem tree is
the documented output of a problem analysis.
Programme A set of projects with a common overall objective.
Programme Authorising
Officer (PAO)
Official within the state administration responsible for the
activities carried out by the Implementing Agencies.
Programming Phase First phase of the project cycle during which priorities of
cooperation are identified by the European Commission
and the partner country governments. The output is
a national indicative programme that defines general
guidelines for cooperation with the EU and specifies focal
sectors and themes within a country or a region.
Project A series of activities aimed at bringing about clearly
specified objectives within a defined time-period and with
a defined budget.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
125

126
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
Project cycle Life-cycle of a project leading from the initial idea to its
completion. The project cycle defines decision options,
key documents, key tasks, roles and responsibilities so
that informed decisions can be made at each phase in the
life of a project.
Project Cycle Management
(PCM)
Methodology for the preparation, implementation and
evaluation of projects and programmes based on the
Logical Framework Approach. In 1992, the European
Commission adopted PCM as its primary set of project
design and management tools.
Project fiche Document prepared by the national authorities setting
out priority axes, envisaged activities, overall cost and
Community contribution, links to the political and financial
framework, activities from other donors as well as budget
and duration of the proposed project. Project fiches are
the key implementation documents for the National
Programmes under the IPA.
Project purpose Central objective of a project in terms of sustainable
benefits to be delivered to the project’s beneficiaries.
regional Policy Based on the concepts of solidarity and economic and social
cohesion the European Union‘s Regional Policy aims at
reducing structural disparities between EU member states
and regions. Different financial instruments, principally the
structural funds and the Cohesion Fund, have been set
up to achieve these objectives. In the period 2007-2013
Regional Policy is the second largest item of the EU budget
with an allocation of €348 billion.
regulation A legislative act of the European Union which is binding
in its entirety and directly applicable to all member states.
The Council Regulation 1085/2006, adopted on 17 July
2006 (Framework Regulation) and the Commission
Regulation 718/2007 of 12 June 2007 (Implementing
Regulation) are the principle legal acts on the IPA.
relevance The appropriateness of project objectives to real problems,
needs and priorities of the intended target groups and
beneficiaries as well as the physical and policy environment
within which it operates.

esults Tangible products or services that are delivered as a
consequence of the implementation of a set of activities.
Results are what the project managers are responsible for
achieving by the project’s completion date.
risks External factors that have the potential to affect the success
of a project but are not very likely to hold true.
Senior Programming
Officer (SPO)
A person usually working with the final beneficiary.
The Senior Programming Officer is responsible for the
implementation of IPA projects at the technical level.
Shared management Shared management assistance is managed by the
authorities of one of the member states participating in
cross-border programmes.
Sources of Verification
(SvO)
Special Accession
Programme for Agricultural
and rural development
(SAPArd)
Stabilisation and
Association Agreement
(SAA)
Sources of verification describe the sources of information
that should be used to measure the achievement of
indicators. They form the third column of the Logframe
matrix.
Through SAPARD the EU provides financial assistance
to the alignment of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP)
and related policies. The programme is targeted towards
a sustainable development in the rural and agricultural
sector of the Central and Eastern European Countries in
the period 2000-2006.
Main element of the Stabilisation and Association
Process (SAP). The SAA provides a framework of mutual
commitments on a wide range of political, trade and
economic issues between the EU and each Western
Balkan country.
Stakeholder Analysis Identification of all stakeholder groups that will be affected
by the proposed intervention, as well as the analysis of
their interests, problems and potentials. The results of this
analysis are to be integrated into the project design.
Stakeholders Individuals, societal groups or institutions that may directly
or indirectly, positively or negatively affect or be affected
by the project.
IPA Trainer Handbook - Annex
127

Sustainability The likelihood of benefits produced by the project to
remain after funding has been completed. Key factors
that impact the sustainability of a project include
ownership by beneficiaries, policy support, institutional
management capacity, etc.
Target group The group that will be directly and positively affected by
the project.
© InWEnt gGmbH, 2009