Categorisation of EU interventions Cohesion policy 2014 2020

Categorisation of EU interventions Cohesion policy 2014 -2020 John Walsh, DG REGIO Laurent SENS, DG EMPL 1

The categorisation system … • An information system (not priority or eligibility list)… to increase quality of information, transparency and policy accountability on the use of cohesion policy resources across Europe. • It tracks the financial inputs and monitors programming and progress in the implementation of the cohesion programmes 2007 -2013 • across thematic sectors • across Objectives • across Member States 2

Structure of categorisation system 2007 -13 - 5 dimensions Ex-ante + “Priority Themes” - 86 codes + Form of Finance - 4 codes + Territorial dimension - 11 codes Ex-post only – reported according to the combination of codes + Above three dimensions and + Economic Dimension - 23 Codes + Location Dimension – N° of Nuts II/III codes varies by MS (ESF also has participant data. . . not ERDF/CF) 3

Measuring Progress … in a simplified project pipeline 2007 -13 Programmes => EU Financial allocations (Ex-ante) • Project preparation, calls …. • Project selection (at OP level – Ex-Post) => data by 'priority theme' (including earmarking) + 4 other dimensions • • Contracting, procurement by project promoter Spending => expenditure declarations (at OP/ priority axis level – not reported by 'priority themes') • Indicators / Completion => outputs / results (at OP level – not reported by 'priority themes') 4

Categorisation System for 2014 -2020 5

Categorisation : 2007 -13 vs 2014 -2020 2007 -2013 2014 -2020 N° Dimensions 5 5+3 Frequency of data Once per year 30/06 Once per year 31/1 Coverage Decided – selection + spending Level of reporting OP Priority axis /Inv. priority Concentration on EU priorities Through Lisbon Earmarking Through thematic objectives for ERDF or "Intervention fields" for ESF Climate tracking Informal Formalised with defined weightings 6

Dimensions : 2007 -13 vs 2014 -2020 2007 -2013 2014 -2020 1. "Priority theme" => "Intervention Field" 86 104 – with amendments 2. Form of Finance 4 codes – with amendment 3. Territorial dimension 11 codes 8 codes – with amendments 4. Territorial delivery mech NEW 4 codes 5. Thematic Objective (ERDF) NEW 11 codes 6. ESF Secondary Theme NEW 6 codes Ex-ante and ex-post 7

Dimensions : 2007 -13 vs 2014 -2020 2007 -2013 2014 -2020 Ex post selection / spending only 7. Economic Dimension 23 codes 8. Location National NUTS codes 24 + changes No change 8

Programme structure / reporting level q Thematic Objectives => Policy purpose, the “why” § 100+ Intervention Fields => “what” investments System offers flexibility in use of “Intervention fields” against the different “Thematic Objectives” 9

Improved ventilation of "intervention fields" Key Changes I • Innovation & R&D and SME distinguish … a. Support to public vs private R&D efforts b. Clarify SME supports – Services to SMEs vs investments by SMEs c. Ventilation of e-services • • E-Gov E-health E-Inclusion, etc [E-commerce in SMEs] pre-existing d. Social entrepreneurship 10

Improved ventilation of "intervention fields" Key Changes II • Improved ventilation of certain categories a. TEN-T priorities – core vs comprehensive – New build vs reconstructed b. Energy efficiency – ventilate buildings vs homes vs SMEs c. Distinguish risk prevention Climate /Env vs human activities d. Distinguish public vs private culture and tourism investments e. Water supply vs conservation 11

Improved ventilation of inteventions Energy efficiency, cogeneration, energy management … to become … Energy efficiency renovation of public infrastructure Energy efficiency renovation of existing housing stock and demonstration projects Energy efficiency in SMEs Intelligent Energy Distribution Systems at low voltage levels (smart grids) High efficiency co-generation and district heating 12

Changes to existing dimensions Principal reasons for changes to the existing dimensions is that these dimension should have added value. • Form of finance: clarify and Introduce "repayable grants"; eliminate "other forms" • Territorial dimension: clarify "Rural codes" [introduce "Macro regional dimension" delete different forms of ETC] • Economic dimension: Essentially keep list with small adjustments. Very important for RTDI / Business support, labour market (green jobs) • Location: No change 13

Changes to existing dimensions Principal reasons for changes to the existing dimensions is that these dimension should have added value. • Form of finance: clarify and Introduce "repayable grants"; eliminate "other forms" • Territorial dimension: clarify "Rural codes" [introduce "Macro regional dimension" delete different forms of ETC] • Economic dimension: Essentially keep list with small adjustments. Very important for RTDI / Business support, labour market (green jobs) • Location: No change 14

Tracking climate change – ERDF-CF COMMISSION has made a political commitment that 20% of EU budget will contribute to climate mitigation / adaptation. We need to track the contribution: • Use of Rio markers – 100% - 40% - 0% linked to 'intervention fields' to calculate climate contribution • integrated no additional burden on MAs • Can be tracked ex-ante and ex-post • Also we propose 4 new specific new codes - 08 -45 -53 -81 (NB: No formal biodiversity tracking) 15

Why 3 new dimensions? Principal reasons for the three new dimensions is that these dimension are needed for 2014 -2020 programming and would have clear added value. • ITI/CLLD are modalities not objectives in themselves … • ERDF OPs may have multi-thematic objective priority axes. All investments must be related to TOs. • ESF – Secondary theme dimension is linked, in major part, to the need to identify contribution of the ESF to other thematic objectives (including climate change tracking) or cross cutting objectives 16

Main characteristics … in a nutshell • Value for Ex-ante negotiation and annual ex-post monitoring • Better, more timely information on stages of project pipeline – decided, selected, [not contracted] and expenditure declared • More refined “intervention fields” learning from experience • Climate tracking will be integrated • New dimensions necessary for next programming period 17

Differences between the Funds (1) • Most of the elements are common but there are some differences between ERDF and ESF. • - ESF Intervention Fields = ESF investment priorities (not a “what” investments as for ERDF) • => automatically includes the tracking by thematic objective • - the level of ESF reporting is at investment priority level (YEI) as all the other elements of reporting 18

Differences between the Funds (2) ESF secondary theme dimension • Why? Result of the choice to build ESF around 4 thematic objectives • Capture ESF contribution to climate change and to other thematic objectives • Capture ESF contribution to social innovation (NB: transnationality moved to territory type 3. 07, CLLD under territorial development mechanisms 4. 01) 19

ESF – Secondary Theme dimension (ex-ante & ex-post reporting) To be reported ex-ante and ex-post: 1. Supporting the shift to a low-carbon, resource efficient economy (100% climate weighting) 2. Enhancing the accessibility, use and quality of information and communication technologies 3. Enhancing the competitiveness of SMEs 4. Strengthening research, technological development and innovation 5. Social innovation 6. Not Applicable 20

• THANK YOU … • QUESTIONS? 21