Position of the Italy – Slovenia Programme and the Cluster in the Overall Distribution
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Ex-Post Evaluation of INTERREG 2000-2006 Initiative financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) TASK 5: IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS OF A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE OF PROGRAMMES PROGRAMME: INTERREG IIIA Italy - Slovenia EVALUATION REPORT elaborated by Mojca Hrabar, OIKOS, svetovanje za razvoj d.o.o, Slovenia Panteia and Partners: • EureConsult S.A. (Luxemburg) • Policy Research and Consultancy (Frankfurt / Germany) • GÉPHYRES EURL (Roubaix / France) • The Radboud University (Nijmegen / The Netherlands) This study has been financed by European Commission Directorate General for Regional Policy, Evaluation Unit. Reference R20090134/30922000/LTR/LJO Reference R20090288/30922000/LTR/CWI January 2010 Quoting of numbers and/or text is permitted only if the source is clearly mentioned. INTERREG III ex-post evaluation. In-depth evaluation of the PROGRAMME: INTERREG IIIA Italy - Slovenia Table of contents Executive Summary......................................................................................................................... 3 Part I ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Foreword ............................................................................................................................................. 6 Part II: MAIN REPORT................................................................................................................ 7 1 Introduction..................................................................................................................... 7 2 Research interest and methodology ...................................................................... 8 3 In-depth analysis of the results and impacts in terms of effectiveness & the socio-economic effects........................................................................................ 9 3.1 The financial implementation of the programme................................................ 9 3.1.1 Financial analysis across the intervention codes ....................................... 9 3.1.2 Dynamic financial analysis................................................................................ 16 3.1.3 Intermediate conclusions .................................................................................. 18 3.2. The effectiveness of the programme..................................................................... 19 3.2.1 Planned results, achievement rates at measure level and trend patterns .................................................................................................................... 19 3.2.2 Reviewing the programming quality and the programme relevance on the basis of the results achieved ............................................................. 26 3.2.3 The level of complexity and experimentation achieved by co- operation.................................................................................................................. 33 3.2.4 Intermediate conclusions .................................................................................. 36 3.3. Project-level co-operation under the programme ............................................ 37 3.3.1 Selection of the project sample ...................................................................... 37 3.3.2 In-depth evaluation of projects realised under the priority topics of the Community Initiative................................................................................... 37 3.3.3 Good practice projects with particularly strong territorial cooperation demonstrating the Community added value of INTERREG programmes ........................................................................................................... 49 3.4 Analysis of factors that determine the character of the programme........ 57 3.4.1 Important contextual factors characterising the INTERREG IIIA Italy-Slovenia programme ................................................................................ 57 3.4.2 Historic factors determining the character of cross-border co- operation.................................................................................................................. 59 3.4.3 Intermediate conclusions .................................................................................. 60 3.5 Re-considering the “depth & intensity of territorial co-operation” ............ 63 R20090288.doc 1 January 2010 INTERREG III ex-post evaluation. In-depth evaluation of the PROGRAMME: INTERREG IIIA Italy - Slovenia 3.6 Main factors fostering (or hampering) integration and means to promote positive factors or to overcome persisting obstacles ...................................... 68 3.7 Extrapolating results on effectiveness and impacts to all INTERREG programmes .................................................................................................................... 71 4 In-depth analysis of results and impacts in terms of utility and efficiency......................................................................................................................... 73 4.1 The external coherence of the programme......................................................... 73 4.1.1 Regulatory compliance and interaction / co-ordination with other Structural Funds programmes......................................................................... 73 4.1.2 Intermediate conclusions .................................................................................. 76 4.2 The intrinsic performance of the programme .................................................... 77 4.2.1 The overall governance and management system of the programme ..................................................................................................................................... 77 4.2.2 The Community added value and the sustainability / durability of the programme...................................................................................................... 85 4.2.3 Intermediate conclusions .................................................................................. 88 5 Overall final conclusions and policy recommendations................................ 90 5.1 Overall final conclusions on the impact of the INTERREG III programme ............................................................................................................................................. 90 5.2 Short- and medium-term policy recommendations......................................... 91 5.3 Long-term policy recommendations ...................................................................... 92 ANNEX 1 The Real Rate: position of the Italy – Slovenia Programme and the cluster in the overall distribution .......................................................................... 94 ANNEX 2 Project background information ............................................................................ 95 R20090288.doc 2 January 2010 INTERREG III ex-post evaluation. In-depth evaluation of the PROGRAMME: INTERREG IIIA Italy - Slovenia Executive Summary The programme evaluated in this report is the INTRERREG IIIA programme Italy – Slovenia. In the period of 2000 – 2004 this programme was run between an EU Member State and a Candidate Country, so ERDF funds were used on the Italian side and PHARE funds on the Slovenian side. In the period 2004 – 2006, both countries used ERDF funds, but the procedures were still completely separated, being run in 2 different ways based on 2 different sets of legislative frameworks. On the Italian side, the funds were mainly distributed through a “regia regionale” system on the basis of regional priorities, i.e. without public calls for proposals; public calls for proposals were published only since 2004, while on the Slovenian side there were public calls for proposals for Small Project Funds in the PHARE period and ERDF funding. At the end of 2004, after the mid-term evaluation and reprogramming, a new Programme Complement was prepared and projects on both sides of the border were funded from ERDF through calls for proposals. Three new implementation types of projects: joint projects, mirror projects and cooperation projects were introduced, bringing higher complexity of programme and more cooperation. The final beneficiaries did not act fully according to the Lead Partner principle; instead, they were only “functional Lead Partners” of the projects as the authorities from both sides of the border insisted on completely unilateral and separate processes of project implementation. JTS was formed quite late, in late 2003. The inter-institutional coordination was poor at the beginning, but has gradually improved over time, especially after significant changes in the programme in 2004 which were done jointly. Local authorities, sectoral organisations, academic networks were consulted on the programme, but not systematically. However, they participate in the Monitoring Committee. The differences that hamper closer cooperation and joint implementation of the programme are: differences in capacity of the administration; lack of administrative/legal provisions for cross-border contracts, employment (hampering also JTS staffing), payments and control of implementation. Introduction of the Euro in Slovenia in January, 2007 made financial management of the programme easier. Since 2004, calls for proposals were harmonised in terms of provisions, content and schedule and the authorities held regular meetings to select projects and exchange the experience