Analysis of the impact of Community Policies on Regional Cohesion Contract Number: 2002 CE 16 0 AT 171 ) FINAL REPORT ANNEX I REGIONAL CASE STUDIES Sociedad Limitada Laboral ( VOLUME 3 EUROPEAN COMMISSION DG Regional Policy October, 2003 LABOUR ASOCIADOS FINAL REPORT (ANNEX I) INDEX VOLUMEN III NL – NEDERLAND / NETHERLANDS 564 Flevoland 564 AT – ÖSTERREICH / AUSTRIA 606 Steiermark 606 PT – PORTUGAL 626 Algarve 626 Açores 642 FI – SUOMI / FINLAND 659 Itä-Suomi 659 Etelä-Suomi 705 SE – SVERIGE / SWEDEN 753 Norra Mellansverige and Övre Norrland 753 UK – UNITED KINGDOM 789 West Midlands 789 Highlands & Islands 809 Northern Ireland 832 Analysis of the impact of community policies on regional cohesion 563 Final Report. DG REGIO EC. REGIONAL CASE STUDIES FINAL REPORT (ANNEX I) THE NETHERLANDS: REGION: FLEVOLAND ELABORATION: Author: H. Katteler and M. Eppink From: ITS. NIJMEGEN. THE NETHERLANDS Analysis of the impact of community policies on regional cohesion 564 Final Report. DG REGIO EC. REGIONAL CASE STUDIES FINAL REPORT (ANNEX I) ANALYSIS OF THE IMPACT OF COMMUNITY POLICIES ON REGIONAL COHESION: THE CASE STUDY OF FLEVOLAND. THE NETHERLANDS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Background of the study This report analyses the impact of Community policies on cohesion in Flevoland. Flevoland is one of the regions in Europe that are receiving Community support as a so-called Objective 1 region given that the income per head was below the 75 percent level of the average for the member states of the European Union in 1993. The support of Flevoland as a less developed region started 1994 and will continue until 2006. The region Flevoland (341.700 inhabitants) coincides with the province of Flevoland. The region consists of land that was reclaimed from the sea in the last century. Flevoland compensated for the housing needs in the surrounding overcrowded regions in large, new urban settlements and had a strong population growth. Residential areas were planned and realised, however, without a sufficient level of employment and social structure. Since a large part of the employees in Flevoland had a job outside the region in 1993, the region had a high negative commuting balance. The additional number of jobs to be created by the Objective 1 programme was estimated at roughly 10.000 jobs additional to the autonomous growth. The working population in Flevoland grew from 115.000 in 1995 to 158.000 in 2001. The education level in Flevoland stayed behind the national average and the region had low qualification levels of the unemployed. Flevoland had a low GDP rather than a high unemployment rate. Development problems were, among others, weaknesses in the productive environment, poor living environment in terms of urban facilities, weak intermediary organisations and over-representation of small and medium sized enterprises. Community policies The following European funds have a high relevancy to the development of Flevoland: ERDF, EAGGF, FIFG and ESF. The 1st programme period (1994-1999) brought in 150 million Euros Community resources. The 2nd programme period 2000-2006 has a Community contribution of 126 million Euros. Flevoland participates in communitarian initiatives such as Leader+, Interreg III and Equal. The regional policy identified a clear set of policy priorities using the European resources. The 1st programme period had 8 priorities whereas the 2nd period has 4 priority areas. The priority areas in this current period are development of the urban area, development of the rural area, improvement of the production structure and social cohesion and labour market. The state played a substantial role in the 1st period but this role is less conspicuous in the 2nd period. The way the programmes Analysis of the impact of community policies on regional cohesion 565 Final Report. DG REGIO EC. REGIONAL CASE STUDIES FINAL REPORT (ANNEX I) are managed is different across the two programme periods. The 2nd programme period has an integrated programme management (PME). Economic impact of the Community policies Cohesion is assumed to increase when regional differences are actually mitigated. In the case of Flevoland Community expenditures correlate with decreased regional differences. Economic growth figures at the macro level indicate a relatively good performance of the Flevoland region. The economic growth in Flevoland (gross added value against basic process) appeared to be substantially higher compared to all other Dutch regions in the period 1995-2001. The yearly growth in Flevoland was 6,0% whereas the average yearly growth in other regions was 2,9%. Flevoland had still a 2,4% growth figure in the in the year 2002 when the economic growth severely decreased to 0,15% nationwide. All in all, it seems plausible to infer that Community policies have substantially contributed to the economic growth figure that was realised. The objective to increase the GDP per capita up to 85% of the EU average was not reached yet (was: 75% in 1993; is 80% in 1999). The increase in employment opportunities was not sufficient to counteract the high population growth (in-migration) that is typical for Flevoland. A total investment impulse of about 1,0 billion Euros was realised. This investment scale substantially exceeded the original aim of 0,5 billion Euro. Compared to the European support - in the order of magnitude of 0,15 billion Euros - a large multiplier effect of about 1 to 6 was realised. Effects on social cohesion and quality of life Community policies (CPs) have induced a number of relevant non-financial impacts. Generally, these effects have a positive impact on the quality of life. The following impacts could be observed. Stimulating integrated regional policy development The CPs enabled the Flevoland authorities to develop a regional policy. Since the regional development of Flevoland was not a priority within national policies, the development of a regional policy did set a robust framework for the development of the region. This allowed taking initiatives and initiate projects more than could happen before. An additional substantial advantage of the Community support was that the CPs evoked an integrated approach. A further result is that the region will have a regional policy framework even without Community support after the year 2006. Analysis of the impact of community policies on regional cohesion 566 Final Report. DG REGIO EC. REGIONAL CASE STUDIES FINAL REPORT (ANNEX I) Social integration The Community policies attracted many actors and organisations. The European programme worked out as a binding agent and strengthened societal structure by creating liaison between companies and organisations also resulting in a more robust infrastructure of intermediate organisations. Mitigating weak points Specific quality aspects of regional development that were identified as weak points prior to the start of the programme did not recur as such prior to the 2nd programme period. The following weak points were mitigated judging by a SWOT analysis made prior to both the 1st and the 2nd programme period: under- representation of large enterprises; low qualification level of the unemployed; underdeveloped higher education and knowledge infrastructure; high congestion on the transport infrastructure. Other weak points remained. Programme effects, however, cannot always be identified, as they are invisible or not measurable. In case effects were measured indeed, these effects cannot necessarily be ascribed to the European programme. Such a situation is felt to exist particularly in the area of social cohesion and labour market. Coordination of Community policies The CPs in Flevoland are managed by the programme management (PME). PME has clear steering mechanisms and decision power. The PME is responsible for programme implementation. The integrated management structure that was chosen for the 2nd programme period enables the systematic management of regional development. The programme management is endorsed by the existing provincial organisation that operates at the same regional scale. The integrated management has enabled projects to come alive that would not have been realised without such management structure. Also an integrated way of communication towards actors in the field is an exponent of the integrated management structure. Governance The Community policies have brought about two essential features of governance: CPs stimulated to work systematically according to plans; CPs allowed working with a long-term perspective. These features increased the quality of planning and the quality of regional development. However, discrepancies caused delay or project failures. Discrepancies of the following types could be identified: Analysis of the impact of community policies on regional cohesion 567 Final Report. DG REGIO EC. REGIONAL CASE STUDIES FINAL REPORT (ANNEX I) The use of different sets of criteria by different public authorities. The different appraisal of a criterion by different authorities; The different time horizon of business and European procedures. Incongruent scopes at different authority levels working out as obstacles to project realisation in practice. A real risk is that the national authorities will not adopt the role of ‘Europe’ to enhance the regional development of Flevoland after 2006 when the Community support to Flevoland will end. This could severely threaten the future implementation of regional development policy. Analysis of the impact of community policies on regional cohesion 568 Final Report. DG REGIO EC. REGIONAL CASE STUDIES