EX-POST EVALUATION OF OBJECTIVE 1, 1994-1999 National Report Austria The Objective 1 Programme in Burgenland 1995-1999 Author: Dr. Thomas Stumm (EureConsult S.A., Luxembourg) Date: November 2002 - 2 - TABLE OF CONTENTS I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 II. MAIN REPORT 17 1. INTRODUCTION 17 2. METHODOLOGY 20 3. THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE STRATEGY ADOPTED AND PURSUED IN THE OBJECTIVE 1-PROGRAMME 22 3.1. Key Issues in 1994 and their evolution until the end of the programming period 22 3.2. A Description of the Austrian Objective 1 SPD strategy and its implementation (1995-1999) 27 4. THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE AUSTRIAN OBJECTIVE 1-PROGRAMME 43 4.1. Programme outputs and results 43 4.1.1. An assessment of programme effectiveness by Funds 44 4.1.2. An assessment of effectiveness by thematic priorities of the programme 58 4.1.3. A summary assessment of wider matters related to effectiveness 74 4.2. Programme effects 80 4.2.1 Programme effects on overall social and economic changes (thematic priorities) and on “horizontal issues” 80 (equal opportunities, environment) 4.2.2. Key influences on the effectiveness of the programmes and main factors causing this 86 4.3. An assessment of the “Community Added Value” 88 4.4. An assessment of changes to policy and practice 90 5. AN ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF OBJECTIVE 1 INTERVENTIONS 91 - 3 - 6. THE MANAGEMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION SYSTEMS ESTABLISHED FOR OBJECTIVE 1-INTERVENTIONS 102 6.1. Institutional Arrangements 102 6.1.1. An overview on programme management structures 102 6.1.2. Other groups involved in the management of the programme 114 6.1.3. The vertical partnership 115 6.1.4. The horizontal partnership 116 6.1.5. An assessment of the capacity to manage the Objective 1 Programme 117 6.2. The project selection process 117 6.3. The financial management systems 120 6.4. The monitoring structures 123 6.5. Programme evaluation 125 6.6. Synergy effects 127 6.7. Equal opportunities and the environment 127 6.7.1. Equal Opportunities 127 6.7.2. Environmental priorities within the programmes 127 6.8. Conclusions: Achievements and improvements of the management, implementation and evaluation system between 1995-1999 128 6.9. Differences of the 1995-99 process to the current practice (2000-2006) 130 7. STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES OF THE OBJECTIVE 1 INTERVENTIONS 1994-99 133 7.1. Process related issues 133 7.2. Main achievements 133 8. CONCLUSIONS 134 9. RECOMMENDATIONS 141 9.1. Short-term recommendations for the current programming period (2000-2006) 141 9.2. Longer-term recommendations for the post 2006-period 142 10. BIBLIOGRAPHY 143 11. INTERVIEWEE LIST 145 12. STATISTICAL ANNEX 146 - 4 - I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Objective 1 programme for Burgenland of the previous programming period (1995-1999) could generally achieve positive and valuable results both with regard to financial execution of the programme and with regard to the actual outputs achieved by the different types of interventions. Appropriateness Considering the implementation progress made during the lifetime of the programme, one can say that the individual measures of the Objective 1 programme had generally been appropriate instruments for tackling the initial needs identified. Both the main strategic orientations and the basic priorities of the Objective 1 programme 1995-1999 have remained the same over time. Especially the initial evaluation of the development potentials of tourism has proved to be valid. Although the Commission had initially wished more ambitious targets with regard to the number of new jobs created, the Burgenland government was largely confirmed in its more realistic position. A more critical assessment has to be made for the "Fund-specific mix of interventions" within the Objective 1 programme. The financial balance was certainly the major critical issue for many actors involved in the programme implementation, as the initial budgeting of interventions was not fully consistent with the regional needs that had been identified in the programming document. According to the combination of funding under the various priorities of the Objective 1 programme, Funds-specific synergy effects were initially intended to take place mainly between the ERDF and the ESF. However, due to a lacking integration structure within the programme, synergy effects were mainly achieved at the level of individual projects. Effectiveness of Funds interventions The ERDF-funded interventions in the field of productive investment or basic infrastructure could achieve important results that were needed on the background of the initial problem constellation in Burgenland. Productive investment support provided for especially for industry and crafts and for the tourism sector significantly contributed to support enterprises and especially small and medium-sized enterprises. It also helped to create the most important share of new jobs and assured the preservation of existing jobs. The annual financial impulses that result from the eligible cost of investment support to industry, crafts and tourism have contributed to significantly raise the annual gross fixed capital formation of Burgenland’s entire secondary sector (especially the sub-sector “production of goods”) and of the “hotel and restaurant sector” during the years 1995-1999. In the context of these two ERDF-measures, also major „lead projects“ had been implemented that were intended to function as development poles in the field of - 5 - business development or tourism development. Although certainly necessary if one considers the initially prevailing weaknesses in Burgenland, these "lead projects" have absorbed a large majority of public funding available under the measures. Their dominant position within the measures has therefore to be questioned not only with regard to the overall effectiveness of the programme, but also in some cases as regards their efficiency (financial means used to achieve material outputs). Basic infrastructure investments supported by various ERDF-funded measures have significantly contributed to generally improve the basic framework conditions in Burgenland. The water infrastructure facilities were necessary to accompany the economic development process in the field of industry, crafts and tourism, whereas support to other basic infrastructure (telecommunication infrastructure, Institute for higher education, technology centres, professional training) have certainly increased the Land's research and development and educational capacity. An important other „lead project“ in the field of infrastructure investment was the establishment of a major business park in southern Burgenland. Although necessary, this activity has to be considered less efficient with regard to what was initially expected by the public authorities and what had actually been achieved by the end of the programming period. There is still the necessity to accompany this particular project in order to strengthen further its overall role as a development pole in the southern part of the Land. Enterprise based research and development support under was rather weak, which was mainly due to the relatively small amount of public funding available for these interventions and partly also a consequence of a lacking response from the enterprise level (especially as regards the SMEs). Compared to the generally small share of public financial support available for ESF- funded interventions in the programme, their result-achievement can be judged generally positive. Especially if one compares the initial targets set for the most important measures implemented by the AMS as main end-beneficiary with what has been achieved, one can say that these traditional labour market interventions had been very effective. Training and counselling measures provided for under these measures were largely oriented towards the needs of the regional economy. They have achieved high participation and good integration rates and contributed to relieve pressure from the Burgenland labour market. The overall share of women that participated in qualification and employment activities carried out by the AMS was 47.5%, but the most important share of female participants can be observed in the framework of training, counselling and guidance of the labour force in SMEs and of those threatened by unemployment (measure 5.1: 53%). These overall results are clearly above the share of female employment that was registered in 1993. The financial amount of public support attributed to ESF-funded measures for which the Land Burgenland had been the main end-beneficiary was comparatively small. These interventions had been distributed among different programme priorities and experienced significant delays in their implementation during the first years of the programme. Only by the end of the programme, one could observe a slow improvement of this negative situation. In addition, some of these measures were complemented by new interventions (start up of enterprise initiative) or had been fused under one common heading (initial ESF-measures 2.4 and 2.5 2.4) in order to assure their full implementability. Once the implementation process has begun, most of the measures have however produced relatively good results. A good example is the Burgenland "start-up of enterprise initiative" launched by the Land government, which could support a considerable number of new start-ups between - 6 - 1998/1999. Compared to the weak share of public financial support available for EAGGF-funded interventions in the field of agriculture, forestry and rural development (measures