Click to edit Master text styles LEADER Axis implementation State...

Click to edit Master title style

• Click to edit Master text styles

– Second level

• Third level – Fourth level

» Fifth level

LEADER Axis implementation State of play, as of October 2013

Pedro Barbosa, DG AGRI and Marina Brakalova, ENRD CP

11th LEADER Sub-Committee

11/11/2013



– Second level


» Fifth level

Total number of selected LAGs per MS (LAG database, DG AGRI – G.3)

336

264 244

221 192

163

112 108 92 86 63 56 53 51 51 43 40 36 35 33 31 29 26 25

5 4 3

PL ES DE FR IT RO CZ UK HU АТ SE FI PT DK LT GR LV IE BG SI NL SK EE BE LU CY MT

2



– Second level


» Fifth level

Selected LAGs vs Targets per MS (LAG database, DG AGRI – G.3 and monitoring data, 2012)

АТ BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK UK

LAGs in 2013: 2402 Targets 2007-2013: 2302

3



– Second level


» Fifth level

Progress on LAG selection in the EU

651

1458

2182 2239 2287 2402

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013

4



– Second level


» Fifth level

Total area covered by LAGs compared to Total MS area (LAG database, DG AGRI – G.3)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

AT

BE

BG CY

CZ

DE

DK EE EL ES FI FR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT

NL

PL

PT

RO SE SI SK UK

EU-2

7

5



– Second level


» Fifth level

Average LAG area (km2) (Annual Progress Reports, 2012)

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

8,000

АТ

BE

BG

n/a CY

CZ

DE

DK EE ES FI FR GR

HU IE IT LT LU LV MT

NL

PL

PT

RO SE SI SK UK

EU

6

Average LAG area in EU: 1 663 km2



– Second level


» Fifth level

Average population covered by selected LAGs (Annual Progress Reports, 2012)

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

АТ

BE

BG

n/a CY

CZ

DE

DK EE ES FI FR GR

HU IE IT LT LU LV MT

NL

PL

PT

RO SE SI SK UK

EU

7

Average population in LAG area in EU: 59 447



– Second level


» Fifth level

Share of Axis 4 in RDP total budget 2007-2013

(Financial data 2012)

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

АТ BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK UK EU

EAFRD (%) Total Public (%)

8



– Second level


» Fifth level

Total EAFRD expenditure of Axis 4 vs. Total programmed EAFRD expenditure

(Financial Data, June 2013)

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

NL EE AT CZ BE FI UK DK IE SI DE LV SE PT LU LT SK PL ES FR HU IT MT BG CY GR RO EU

9



– Second level


» Fifth level

Progression in EAFRD declared expenditure for Axis 4 at EU level (millions €) June, 2013

0 0 0 0 0 6 2 18 11 20

38

65 44

57

104

136

111 117

160

190

146

181 197

269

170 190

383

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

10



– Second level


» Fifth level

Information on committed LEADER funding (through the opENRD survey, Nov, 2013 based on received responses)

11

90%

105%

90%

29%

100% 94%

80%

54%

100%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

CZ EE CY FR LU HU DE IT FI

411

411

103% 105%

56% 54%

99%

21%

60%

34%

77%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

CZ EE CY FR LU HU DE IT FI

412

412



– Second level


» Fifth level


12

92%

105%

93% 89% 87%

63%

94%

53%

80%

56%

90%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

CZ EE CY LT PT FR LU HU DE IT FI

413

413

86%

105%

92%

67%

100%

28%

96%

12% 10%

91%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

CZ EE CY LT PT FR LU HU IT FI

421

421



– Second level


» Fifth level


13

102%

90%

59% 58%

92% 100% 100% 97%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

Axis 4

Axis 4

100%

91% 90%

100% 100%

64%

100%

88%

100% 94%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

CZ EE CY LT PT FR LU IT FI LV

431

431



– Second level


» Fifth level

Initial RDPs approved in 2007 & 2008

Latest RDPs modifications approved up until July 2013

+/- %

€8.9 billion €9.2 billion +3%

€810 million €808 million -0.3%

€312 million €269 million -14%


€444 million €423 million -5%


LEADER Axis budget modifications: beginning of the programming period up until June 2013

(Preliminary findings)

14



– Second level


» Fifth level

On average Axis 4 budget increased by 16% in 13 Member States.

In 7 Member States Axis 4 budget decreased by 7% on average.

In 26 RDPs the initial measure budget decreased by 34% on average.

34 RDPs increased their initial measure budget by 43% on average.

Reduction of most Axis 4 measures: M411 (-4%), M412 (-3.5%), M421 (-1.9%) and M431 (-1.3%).

Measure 413 budget increased by 8.5% in comparison to 2012.

Budget modifications screening exercise : initial findings for LEADER Axis

15



– Second level


» Fifth level

LEADER Axis budget modifications: beginning of the programming period up until June 2013

-40%

-20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

AT BE BG CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GR HU IE IT LT LU LV MT NL PL PT RO SE SI SK UK EU

16



– Second level


» Fifth level

State of play of LEADER in Croatia (IPARD)

• LEADER measure accredited – 30.04.2013

• Allocated budget for 2007-2013 period

– Total allocated budget : 5.073.000€

– Total contracted budget : 3.600.000€

• Number of contracted LAGs:

– 30 LAGs have been contracted by the PA – in March 2013

– 12 LAGs are expected to be contracted by the PA – end of 2013

17



– Second level


» Fifth level

• Area covered by LEADER

– Total area eligible for financing under LEADER in Croatia – 50.000 km² (88% of total area of Croatia); eligible area is rural area excluded towns above 25.000 inhabitants and capital Zagreb

– Total area covered by 30 LAGs – 26.200 km²

• Population covered by LEADER

– Total population eligible for financing under LEADER in Croatia – 2.660.000 (62% of total population in Croatia);

– Total population covered by 30 LAGs – 1.055.000

18

State of play of LEADER in Croatia (IPARD)



– Second level


» Fifth level

Transnational cooperation

19



– Second level


» Fifth level

Projects with LAGs as LEAD partner (SFC, Oct, 2013)

381 projects 66

58

44

36

22

18 15

13 13 12 11 10 9 8 8 8 8 6

4 4 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70



– Second level


» Fifth level

N of TNC projects (SFC, Oct 2013)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

PartnerLEAD

21



– Second level


» Fifth level

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

N. of projects started

N. of projects approved

N. of TNC projects started and approved per year (SFC, Oct. 2013)

22



– Second level


» Fifth level

General features of the TNC projects (SFC, Oct. 2013)

• Average duration: approximately 2 years

• Max: 6 years

• Average number of partners: 2,6

• Maximum number of partners: 16

23



– Second level


» Fifth level 2 partners

67%

3-4 partners 19%

5-6 partners 7%

7-16 partners 7%

N. of partners per TNC project (SFC, Oct. 2013)

24



– Second level


» Fifth level

Budget range of the TNC projects (SFC, Oct. 2013)

2.000-50.000 33%

50.000-100.000 18%

100.000-500.000 31%

>500.000 7%

No data available 11%

25



– Second level


» Fifth level

N of TNC projects (indicated through opENRD forum 11.2013)

26

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

CY DE EE FR LU LV PT SK UK

SFC

opENRD



– Second level


» Fifth level

Still available budget and possibility to apply for TNC

(opENRD survey, Nov, 2013- 16 responses)

27

6

8

2

Yes

No

N/A

FR LT EE DE FI IT



– Second level


» Fifth level

Main challenges with completing LEADER 2007-2013 (opENRD survey, Nov, 2013: 16 responses)

• Completing LDS while planning next one

• Ensure 20%/80% rule at every LAG level

• Still 30% to be paid in 2014-2015

• Liquidity and needs for upfront funding for project implementers

28



– Second level


» Fifth level

Main challenges with completing LEADER 2007-2013 (opENRD survey, Nov, 2013: 16 responses)

• The conflict between the decision making and the paying processes: “Who decides after all what is eligible”

• No possibility to use resources of the current programming period when preparing the next on

• Limited national funding

29



– Second level


» Fifth level

Main challenges with transition to LEADER 2014-2020 (opENRD survey, Nov, 2013- 16 responses)

• CLLD planning - Administrative system to coordinate and define roles MAs and PA without overly burden of LAGs

• Selection of LAGs in a period of programmes overlap

• Turnover with LAG staff

• Changing the areas

• LAGs survival: a gap between last and first payment for LAGs

30



– Second level


» Fifth level

Thank you!

31

Click to edit Master text styles LEADER Axis implementation State...

Documents

Transcript of Click to edit Master text styles LEADER Axis implementation State...