# C_2007197EN.01005701.xml

| 24.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 197/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 197/57

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on regions for economic change

(2007/C 197/10)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

| — | points out that, despite the fact that since the Communication was issued on 8 November 2006 the Regions For Economic Change initiative has changed its approach, i.e. the Commission has abandoned the top-down approach in favour of the bottom-up principle applied by regional and local authorities, there has never been official notification of this from the Commission. In any case, this opinion takes the development into due account. |
| --- | --- |

—

points out that, despite the fact that since the Communication was issued on 8 November 2006 the Regions For Economic Change initiative has changed its approach, i.e. the Commission has abandoned the top-down approach in favour of the bottom-up principle applied by regional and local authorities, there has never been official notification of this from the Commission. In any case, this opinion takes the development into due account.

| — | stresses that the Committee of the Regions could contribute actively to monitoring operational programmes in the context of Interreg IV and Urbact II, playing a consultative role in the respective Monitoring Committees. |
| --- | --- |

—

stresses that the Committee of the Regions could contribute actively to monitoring operational programmes in the context of Interreg IV and Urbact II, playing a consultative role in the respective Monitoring Committees.

| — | calls for synergy to be achieved between the Lisbon Monitoring Platform and the Regions For Economic Change initiative, while preserving the specific qualities of each. The Lisbon Monitoring Platform is an opportunity to pass on expertise with a view to helping to strengthen cohesion policy and promoting the Lisbon agenda. |
| --- | --- |

—

calls for synergy to be achieved between the Lisbon Monitoring Platform and the Regions For Economic Change initiative, while preserving the specific qualities of each. The Lisbon Monitoring Platform is an opportunity to pass on expertise with a view to helping to strengthen cohesion policy and promoting the Lisbon agenda.

| — | focuses on communication and provision of information at European level, which are the key to the success of the Regions For Economic Change initiative. In this connection, the Committee of the Regions has a major role to play, working together with the Commission. |
| --- | --- |

—

focuses on communication and provision of information at European level, which are the key to the success of the Regions For Economic Change initiative. In this connection, the Committee of the Regions has a major role to play, working together with the Commission.

| — | calls for the initiative to be organised in such a way as to help identify the best practices in use in regions and create simple mechanisms for passing them on to other EU regions. The Regions For Economic Change initiative must serve as a stimulus, a catalyst for good ideas and initiatives, as a number of Community initiatives have in the past. |
| --- | --- |

—

calls for the initiative to be organised in such a way as to help identify the best practices in use in regions and create simple mechanisms for passing them on to other EU regions. The Regions For Economic Change initiative must serve as a stimulus, a catalyst for good ideas and initiatives, as a number of Community initiatives have in the past.

I.   Policy recommendations

Communication from the Commission: Regions For Economic Change

Regions For Economic Change

(COM(2006) 675 final)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

General comments

| 1. | welcomes the Commission's intention to make regional and local development measures more effective through the Regions For Economic Change initiative, harnessing local and regional best practices and promoting their dissemination, exchange and customisation for other contexts through networking actions; these should be given fresh impetus as Community policy instruments for economic modernisation and greater competitiveness; |
| --- | --- |

1.

welcomes the Commission's intention to make regional and local development measures more effective through the Regions For Economic Change initiative, harnessing local and regional best practices and promoting their dissemination, exchange and customisation for other contexts through networking actions; these should be given fresh impetus as Community policy instruments for economic modernisation and greater competitiveness;

| 2. | recognises that the initiative ties in closely with the Committee of the Regions' institutional role; therefore, feels that the CoR's potential for action and participation should be brought into play and calls for its role providing unified representation of the EU's regional and local systems to be exploited; |
| --- | --- |

2.

recognises that the initiative ties in closely with the Committee of the Regions' institutional role; therefore, feels that the CoR's potential for action and participation should be brought into play and calls for its role providing unified representation of the EU's regional and local systems to be exploited;

| 3. | emphasises that the Committee of the Regions has launched the Lisbon Monitoring Platform, made up of local and regional authorities, which are monitoring and highlighting the implementation of the strategy at local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

3.

emphasises that the Committee of the Regions has launched the Lisbon Monitoring Platform, made up of local and regional authorities, which are monitoring and highlighting the implementation of the strategy at local and regional level;

| 4. | points out that this is the only programme expressly devoted to promoting thematic cooperation between local and regional stakeholders which sets no geographical requirements, there being no need for them to belong to the same border or transnational area. It is potentially the most flexible instrument for European integration available to regions, and it should also help to strengthen regional policy, which is increasingly efficient, comprehensive and ambitious; |
| --- | --- |

4.

points out that this is the only programme expressly devoted to promoting thematic cooperation between local and regional stakeholders which sets no geographical requirements, there being no need for them to belong to the same border or transnational area. It is potentially the most flexible instrument for European integration available to regions, and it should also help to strengthen regional policy, which is increasingly efficient, comprehensive and ambitious;

| 5. | supports the Commission's intention to use the Regions For Economic Change initiative to promote a real exchange and dissemination of experience and best practice in development and cohesion among European local and regional authorities in order to achieve the Lisbon strategy. The Committee therefore highlights the importance of involving the operational programmes' regional managing authorities effectively and directly in the networks promoted by the initiative; |
| --- | --- |

5.

supports the Commission's intention to use the Regions For Economic Change initiative to promote a real exchange and dissemination of experience and best practice in development and cohesion among European local and regional authorities in order to achieve the Lisbon strategy. The Committee therefore highlights the importance of involving the operational programmes' regional managing authorities effectively and directly in the networks promoted by the initiative;

| 6. | notes that the Commission initiative respects the subsidiarity principle and represents a process of learning, networking and taking the best of local and regional achievements towards the Lisbon and Gothenburg objectives. However, it feels that successful European regional policy requires political reinforcement of the local and regional dimension; |
| --- | --- |

6.

notes that the Commission initiative respects the subsidiarity principle and represents a process of learning, networking and taking the best of local and regional achievements towards the Lisbon and Gothenburg objectives. However, it feels that successful European regional policy requires political reinforcement of the local and regional dimension;

| 7. | therefore proposes that the European Commission discuss the progress and subject matter of the initiative at a joint annual conference with the Committee of the Regions; |
| --- | --- |

7.

therefore proposes that the European Commission discuss the progress and subject matter of the initiative at a joint annual conference with the Committee of the Regions;

The role of regions and cities

| 8. | points out that the Regions For Economic Change initiative should be seen as complementary to the existing forms of interregional cooperation, especially since it has been strengthened by the new regional policy goal of European territorial cooperation. It is thus important to ensure that the support for cooperation between regions, cities and other local authorities in Europe, which was launched under Interreg III C, continues at a sufficient level in the future; |
| --- | --- |

8.

points out that the Regions For Economic Change initiative should be seen as complementary to the existing forms of interregional cooperation, especially since it has been strengthened by the new regional policy goal of European territorial cooperation. It is thus important to ensure that the support for cooperation between regions, cities and other local authorities in Europe, which was launched under Interreg III C, continues at a sufficient level in the future;

| 9. | considers it necessary to clarify arrangements for cooperation between regions and cities, since although both institutional levels are mentioned and taken into account in the Commission documents available, networks of regions are referred to primarily. In this connection, it should be stressed that regions and cities are both eligible for both the Interreg IV C programme and for the Urbact 2007-2013 programme, although regions will have to be treated as a driving force under the former and this role will be accorded to cities under the latter; also believes that it would be very useful and constructive to encourage the involvement of major bodies and institutions which are active in regions and cities as partners; |
| --- | --- |

9.

considers it necessary to clarify arrangements for cooperation between regions and cities, since although both institutional levels are mentioned and taken into account in the Commission documents available, networks of regions are referred to primarily. In this connection, it should be stressed that regions and cities are both eligible for both the Interreg IV C programme and for the Urbact 2007-2013 programme, although regions will have to be treated as a driving force under the former and this role will be accorded to cities under the latter; also believes that it would be very useful and constructive to encourage the involvement of major bodies and institutions which are active in regions and cities as partners;

| 10. | calls for more transparency from the Commission than it has displayed in the past. The work programmes of networks which have already been launched should at least be published on the Internet, as should summaries of the various meetings held, as well as the results, current best practice and contact details of the lead partner of the network, so that those interested parties have access to and can make use of the results. It would also be helpful for the Commission to consider setting up a website where anyone who is interested can search for partners and other relevant information; |
| --- | --- |

10.

calls for more transparency from the Commission than it has displayed in the past. The work programmes of networks which have already been launched should at least be published on the Internet, as should summaries of the various meetings held, as well as the results, current best practice and contact details of the lead partner of the network, so that those interested parties have access to and can make use of the results. It would also be helpful for the Commission to consider setting up a website where anyone who is interested can search for partners and other relevant information;

The fast track option

| 11. | notes that, following the COTER Commission meetings and discussions held on 31 January and 16 March 2007 and the adoption of the draft opinion at the last meeting, the Commission has updated and clarified its stance on the Regions For Economic Change initiative; stresses, in particular, that although this has not yet been officially formalised in any official EC document, a bottom-up approach will clearly be used to select operations for the fast-track scheme. Moreover, the operations will be implemented in line with the OPs Interreg IV C and Urbact II and their respective implementing regulations. This should in effect ensure equal access to the initiative for all European regions and cities and the hoped-for transparency of the initiative as a whole. |
| --- | --- |

11.

notes that, following the COTER Commission meetings and discussions held on 31 January and 16 March 2007 and the adoption of the draft opinion at the last meeting, the Commission has updated and clarified its stance on the Regions For Economic Change initiative; stresses, in particular, that although this has not yet been officially formalised in any official EC document, a bottom-up approach will clearly be used to select operations for the fast-track scheme. Moreover, the operations will be implemented in line with the OPs Interreg IV C and Urbact II and their respective implementing regulations. This should in effect ensure equal access to the initiative for all European regions and cities and the hoped-for transparency of the initiative as a whole.

| 12. | also recommends that notices of interest be published on the websites of the Commission and the Committee of the Regions, and that a letter be sent to the offices of the regions in Brussels or to desk officers for regional affairs at the Member States' permanent representations to the EU, so as to disseminate information and ensure that it reaches the regions and municipalities promptly. Finally, the INFO RELAYS network operated by the Commission in almost all the regions of the EU is available, as well as the promotion and PR network that was set up to support the Community Support Frameworks in the Member States. |
| --- | --- |

12.

also recommends that notices of interest be published on the websites of the Commission and the Committee of the Regions, and that a letter be sent to the offices of the regions in Brussels or to desk officers for regional affairs at the Member States' permanent representations to the EU, so as to disseminate information and ensure that it reaches the regions and municipalities promptly. Finally, the INFO RELAYS network operated by the Commission in almost all the regions of the EU is available, as well as the promotion and PR network that was set up to support the Community Support Frameworks in the Member States.

a letter be sent

Community Support Frameworks

| 13. | proposes, moreover, to define a procedure for active participation (consultation upon invitation/proposal from the Commission?) by the Committee of the Regions in the drawing-up of operational programmes, or — alternatively — to set up a communication channel to convey the CoR's recommendations to the bodies responsible for drawing them up; |
| --- | --- |

13.

proposes, moreover, to define a procedure for active participation (consultation upon invitation/proposal from the Commission?) by the Committee of the Regions in the drawing-up of operational programmes, or — alternatively — to set up a communication channel to convey the CoR's recommendations to the bodies responsible for drawing them up;

The networks' contribution to the initiative

| 14. | understands why the Commission feels the need to make existing networks larger and more general, and why the thematic approach is taking precedence over the geographical approach, but believes that these two approaches can actually be usefully dovetailed: since there is a recognised need to safeguard and reflect diversity, the regional and local patterns of diversity must be taken into account when deciding on themes; synergy between the various networks is also essential, reflecting their complementary features in both thematic and geographical terms. In this context, it also calls for due attention to be given to less prosperous and marginal areas; |
| --- | --- |

14.

understands why the Commission feels the need to make existing networks larger and more general, and why the thematic approach is taking precedence over the geographical approach, but believes that these two approaches can actually be usefully dovetailed: since there is a recognised need to safeguard and reflect diversity, the regional and local patterns of diversity must be taken into account when deciding on themes; synergy between the various networks is also essential, reflecting their complementary features in both thematic and geographical terms. In this context, it also calls for due attention to be given to less prosperous and marginal areas;

| 15. | stresses the need to leave more scope for grass-roots initiatives. As representatives of local and regional authorities, the CoR's members welcome such measures and will strive to ensure that this ‘open approach’ does not result in a ‘closed approach’ at national level. The CoR will work to ensure that the initiative truly supports and recognises networks maintained by regions and cities that are keen to work together, in order to encourage the best innovations for economic, social and environmental development; |
| --- | --- |

15.

stresses the need to leave more scope for grass-roots initiatives. As representatives of local and regional authorities, the CoR's members welcome such measures and will strive to ensure that this ‘open approach’ does not result in a ‘closed approach’ at national level. The CoR will work to ensure that the initiative truly supports and recognises networks maintained by regions and cities that are keen to work together, in order to encourage the best innovations for economic, social and environmental development;

| 16. | stresses the fact that the networks should be sustainable, i.e. it must be possible to sustain the exchanges launched for long enough periods (which poses a problem of resources), and they must be able to facilitate involvement of and interaction between institutions (genuine involvement of institutional stakeholders) and between regions (involvement of the various regions and districts of the EU and of their respective stakeholders, who can indeed benefit from shared expertise); |
| --- | --- |

16.

stresses the fact that the networks should be sustainable, i.e. it must be possible to sustain the exchanges launched for long enough periods (which poses a problem of resources), and they must be able to facilitate involvement of and interaction between institutions (genuine involvement of institutional stakeholders) and between regions (involvement of the various regions and districts of the EU and of their respective stakeholders, who can indeed benefit from shared expertise);

Selection of priority themes

| 17. | urges the Commission to ensure involvement of the different kinds of regional and local authorities so as to reflect the diversity, originality and value of the different development solutions adopted. The initiatives carried out as part of Regions For Economic Change and fast-track actions should draw on these different experiences, and take account of the interplay between the regional and local dimensions in terms of the selected themes. The Committee of the Regions could play an effective role representing integration of the two dimensions, as regards both the definition of the initiative's general thematic guidelines and implementing arrangements, and the framing and implementation of the direct financing programmes (Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013); |
| --- | --- |

17.

urges the Commission to ensure involvement of the different kinds of regional and local authorities so as to reflect the diversity, originality and value of the different development solutions adopted. The initiatives carried out as part of Regions For Economic Change and fast-track actions should draw on these different experiences, and take account of the interplay between the regional and local dimensions in terms of the selected themes. The Committee of the Regions could play an effective role representing integration of the two dimensions, as regards both the definition of the initiative's general thematic guidelines and implementing arrangements, and the framing and implementation of the direct financing programmes (Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013);

| 18. | fears that although the priority themes may be sufficiently broad and clearly in line with the renewed Lisbon agenda, the way they are defined might be too rigid (1); for example, the role of industry in regional development is not referred to in the themes currently proposed. A process for supplementing or reviewing these themes should therefore be specified and drawn up, ensuring the greatest possible transparency in the decision-making process, in synergy and cooperation with the regions and local authorities. Moreover, regions and local authorities' autonomy in managing their networks should be fully preserved, even though the networks will be focusing on themes selected by the Commission. The Committee also questions the consistency of some of the themes mentioned with the priorities of the European Regional Development Fund (2). For this reason, the admissibility of themes directly relating to the European Social Fund should be specifically spelt out. |
| --- | --- |

18.

fears that although the priority themes may be sufficiently broad and clearly in line with the renewed Lisbon agenda, the way they are defined might be too rigid (1); for example, the role of industry in regional development is not referred to in the themes currently proposed. A process for supplementing or reviewing these themes should therefore be specified and drawn up, ensuring the greatest possible transparency in the decision-making process, in synergy and cooperation with the regions and local authorities. Moreover, regions and local authorities' autonomy in managing their networks should be fully preserved, even though the networks will be focusing on themes selected by the Commission. The Committee also questions the consistency of some of the themes mentioned with the priorities of the European Regional Development Fund (2). For this reason, the admissibility of themes directly relating to the European Social Fund should be specifically spelt out.

1

2

Financial framework for the initiative

| 19. | recognises that, in order to achieve more efficient and effective use of the financial resources earmarked for cohesion policy, both commitment from national and regional authorities and a more direct role for the Commission are essential, with voluntary definition of new ways in which regions, local authorities and the Commission can network, exchange best practices and work together; |
| --- | --- |

19.

recognises that, in order to achieve more efficient and effective use of the financial resources earmarked for cohesion policy, both commitment from national and regional authorities and a more direct role for the Commission are essential, with voluntary definition of new ways in which regions, local authorities and the Commission can network, exchange best practices and work together;

| 20. | moreover, considers that more precise definition of the financial reference framework for the initiative would be useful, not least because the resources have to come from different sources: any remaining resources available from the 2000-2006 programmes, the two new operational programmes (a particular percentage which has yet to be defined in the respective draft budgets), the regional mainstream programmes, and directly-available resources from Commission technical assistance. In this context, the funding from Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013 can serve only as a catalyst for implementation in the mainstream programmes. The main source of funding for the initiatives must be the mainstream programmes. Moreover, the level of national co-financing needs to be defined, taking into account the limits imposed by the need to maintain budget stability in the Member States; |
| --- | --- |

20.

moreover, considers that more precise definition of the financial reference framework for the initiative would be useful, not least because the resources have to come from different sources: any remaining resources available from the 2000-2006 programmes, the two new operational programmes (a particular percentage which has yet to be defined in the respective draft budgets), the regional mainstream programmes, and directly-available resources from Commission technical assistance. In this context, the funding from Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013 can serve only as a catalyst for implementation in the mainstream programmes. The main source of funding for the initiatives must be the mainstream programmes. Moreover, the level of national co-financing needs to be defined, taking into account the limits imposed by the need to maintain budget stability in the Member States;

Implementing and participation procedures for the initiative

| 21. | believes that the initiative must be organised so as to make it easy to identify best practices at regional level, and create simple systems for sharing these with other regions in the EU. In short, the Regions For Economic Change initiative must serve to leverage and catalyse good ideas and initiatives, as other Community initiatives have done in the past; |
| --- | --- |

21.

believes that the initiative must be organised so as to make it easy to identify best practices at regional level, and create simple systems for sharing these with other regions in the EU. In short, the Regions For Economic Change initiative must serve to leverage and catalyse good ideas and initiatives, as other Community initiatives have done in the past;

| 22. | stresses the importance of demonstration and dissemination to ensure that the initiative is viable. To secure funding, Regions For Economic Change must prove its worth by being dynamic, showing that it will genuinely result in the best projects being included in mainstream cohesion policy programming; |
| --- | --- |

22.

stresses the importance of demonstration and dissemination to ensure that the initiative is viable. To secure funding, Regions For Economic Change must prove its worth by being dynamic, showing that it will genuinely result in the best projects being included in mainstream cohesion policy programming;

| 23. | welcomes, in the context of the initiative's communication policy, the information provided by DG Regional Policy during the COTER meeting of 31 January 2006 to the effect that a member of the Committee of the Regions would sit on the annual innovation awards adjudication committee provided for under Regions For Economic Change; |
| --- | --- |

23.

welcomes, in the context of the initiative's communication policy, the information provided by DG Regional Policy during the COTER meeting of 31 January 2006 to the effect that a member of the Committee of the Regions would sit on the annual innovation awards adjudication committee provided for under Regions For Economic Change;

| 24. | stresses that communication and dissemination are essential to publicise the initiative. The annual conferences planned should focus on presentation of best practices and on the possibility of replicating them in Europe's regions and cities. The Committee of the Regions is ready to work together with the Commission on this point, particularly as regards exchange of information with the Lisbon Monitoring Platform. More information on the initiative should be disseminated during the preparation phase. Some of the reference documents — such as the Staff Working Paper setting forth the proposed themes (3) — are currently only available in English: the CoR proposes that they be issued in the other Community languages as well; |
| --- | --- |

24.

stresses that communication and dissemination are essential to publicise the initiative. The annual conferences planned should focus on presentation of best practices and on the possibility of replicating them in Europe's regions and cities. The Committee of the Regions is ready to work together with the Commission on this point, particularly as regards exchange of information with the Lisbon Monitoring Platform. More information on the initiative should be disseminated during the preparation phase. Some of the reference documents — such as the Staff Working Paper setting forth the proposed themes (3) — are currently only available in English: the CoR proposes that they be issued in the other Community languages as well;

3

| 25. | welcomes the three conferences organised by the Commission in connection with the Regions For Economic Change initiative, and recommends that additional communication and dialogue initiatives to those already mentioned be launched (real or virtual meeting points, conferences and forums etc.), and, in particular, that communication, promotion and dissemination measures be made part of a coordinated communication plan which — projecting the measures over a timespan of several years — will enable a coordination framework to be established, to include the endeavours expected from the Commission information units and other stakeholders, with a special role for the Committee of the Regions, which will be happy to provide the necessary details in this regard; |
| --- | --- |

25.

welcomes the three conferences organised by the Commission in connection with the Regions For Economic Change initiative, and recommends that additional communication and dialogue initiatives to those already mentioned be launched (real or virtual meeting points, conferences and forums etc.), and, in particular, that communication, promotion and dissemination measures be made part of a coordinated communication plan which — projecting the measures over a timespan of several years — will enable a coordination framework to be established, to include the endeavours expected from the Commission information units and other stakeholders, with a special role for the Committee of the Regions, which will be happy to provide the necessary details in this regard;

coordinated communication plan

| 26. | suggests that additional funds be made available to the managing authorities of Objective 3 programmes in order to ensure that the initiative can enhance the territorial cooperation networks' contribution to implementing the Lisbon strategy for the benefit of the public, in the framework of the European Commission's Plan D (4); |
| --- | --- |

26.

suggests that additional funds be made available to the managing authorities of Objective 3 programmes in order to ensure that the initiative can enhance the territorial cooperation networks' contribution to implementing the Lisbon strategy for the benefit of the public, in the framework of the European Commission's Plan D (4);

4

| 27. | supports the European Commission's proposal to organise regular thematic conferences under this initiative and to integrate particularly useful ideas for structural policy into the main programmes under the fast-track scheme; |
| --- | --- |

27.

supports the European Commission's proposal to organise regular thematic conferences under this initiative and to integrate particularly useful ideas for structural policy into the main programmes under the fast-track scheme;

| 28. | is concerned about the timeframes necessary to launch the initiative, which will only become fully operational in the second half of 2007. The Commission does state its intention to launch a number of fast-track actions now, using any resources available under the programmes still being implemented (Interreg III C and the current ‘Urbact’ programme), so as to make the new programmes operational sooner. In the light of this, clarification of the overall timeframes laid down would be useful; |
| --- | --- |

28.

is concerned about the timeframes necessary to launch the initiative, which will only become fully operational in the second half of 2007. The Commission does state its intention to launch a number of fast-track actions now, using any resources available under the programmes still being implemented (Interreg III C and the current ‘Urbact’ programme), so as to make the new programmes operational sooner. In the light of this, clarification of the overall timeframes laid down would be useful;

| 29. | suggests that a member of the Committee of the Regions should sit on the Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013 programmes' Monitoring Committees with consultative status, to ensure proper, ongoing interaction and cooperation in the operation of Regions For Economic Change and to acknowledge that it is the Committee of the Regions' prerogative to represent local and regional authorities at EU level; |
| --- | --- |

29.

suggests that a member of the Committee of the Regions should sit on the Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013 programmes' Monitoring Committees with consultative status, to ensure proper, ongoing interaction and cooperation in the operation of Regions For Economic Change and to acknowledge that it is the Committee of the Regions' prerogative to represent local and regional authorities at EU level;

| 30. | suggests that the institutions maintain regular dialogue with the associations in which citizens are involved and with civil society, thus boosting participatory democracy; |
| --- | --- |

30.

suggests that the institutions maintain regular dialogue with the associations in which citizens are involved and with civil society, thus boosting participatory democracy;

| 31. | calls on the Commission to issue more information on the initiative's management procedures. It is important to specify the procedures for cooperation between Commission DGs and regions and cities, and between the Commission and the Committee of the Regions; |
| --- | --- |

31.

calls on the Commission to issue more information on the initiative's management procedures. It is important to specify the procedures for cooperation between Commission DGs and regions and cities, and between the Commission and the Committee of the Regions;

| 32. | calls for the Monitoring Committee to take the decisions on the adoption of innovative operations under an operational programme conducted in the context of a network involving the region; |
| --- | --- |

32.

calls for the Monitoring Committee to take the decisions on the adoption of innovative operations under an operational programme conducted in the context of a network involving the region;

| 33. | stresses that the aim of the initiative is to feed mainstream programming with the best of the ideas emanating from networks; calls, therefore, for clarification of the process for selecting the best practices and then monitoring them at the review stage; proposes that, rather than the regions, cities and other local authorities just volunteering contributions for selection, codified, simple, flexible procedures should be introduced to enable them to submit suggestions to the Commission on best practices of particular interest and potential value for the setting-up or expansion of networks, within the themes established in the initiative; |
| --- | --- |

33.

stresses that the aim of the initiative is to feed mainstream programming with the best of the ideas emanating from networks; calls, therefore, for clarification of the process for selecting the best practices and then monitoring them at the review stage; proposes that, rather than the regions, cities and other local authorities just volunteering contributions for selection, codified, simple, flexible procedures should be introduced to enable them to submit suggestions to the Commission on best practices of particular interest and potential value for the setting-up or expansion of networks, within the themes established in the initiative;

| 34. | asks the Commission to provide clarification regarding the organisation and funding of technical assistance for the initiative too, as this is crucial for ensuring that best practices are harnessed effectively; in particular, there is a need for methodological support, in order to evaluate significant innovations and identify those which can be transferred or developed; it therefore proposes that the Commission should assume this role in cooperation with external evaluators for each thematic measure, subject to the decisions of the Monitoring Committee; |
| --- | --- |

34.

asks the Commission to provide clarification regarding the organisation and funding of technical assistance for the initiative too, as this is crucial for ensuring that best practices are harnessed effectively; in particular, there is a need for methodological support, in order to evaluate significant innovations and identify those which can be transferred or developed; it therefore proposes that the Commission should assume this role in cooperation with external evaluators for each thematic measure, subject to the decisions of the Monitoring Committee;

| 35. | is concerned that the title given to the initiative might not be wholly accurate and comprehensive. The CoR wonders whether the title Regions For Economic Change is really the most suitable, or whether it might create confusion with other initiatives (such as Regions of Knowledge or the Lisbon Group). While recognising that the umbrella term ‘regions’ has been preferred to refer collectively to all local and regional levels, the Committee believes that, for the purposes of communicative impact, ‘Regions and Cities for Economic Change’ would have been a better title for the initiative; |
| --- | --- |

35.

is concerned that the title given to the initiative might not be wholly accurate and comprehensive. The CoR wonders whether the title Regions For Economic Change is really the most suitable, or whether it might create confusion with other initiatives (such as Regions of Knowledge or the Lisbon Group). While recognising that the umbrella term ‘regions’ has been preferred to refer collectively to all local and regional levels, the Committee believes that, for the purposes of communicative impact, ‘Regions and Cities for Economic Change’ would have been a better title for the initiative;

The Lisbon Monitoring Platform

| 36. | points out that the Committee of the Regions launched the Lisbon Monitoring Platform, which it regards as an operating tool for local and regional authorities in order to give prominence to their contribution to the Lisbon strategy and increase ownership of the strategy locally. An interactive platform has been operational since 2006. For the moment, 100 regions and cities are taking part. The principal aim of the platform is to help regions to keep pace with modernisation trends in Europe and to move beyond a purely national mindset. The platform is based on monitoring (assessment of needs), comparative analysis (transparency at European level), exchanges within working groups and interactive forums (on-line exchange); |
| --- | --- |

36.

points out that the Committee of the Regions launched the Lisbon Monitoring Platform, which it regards as an operating tool for local and regional authorities in order to give prominence to their contribution to the Lisbon strategy and increase ownership of the strategy locally. An interactive platform has been operational since 2006. For the moment, 100 regions and cities are taking part. The principal aim of the platform is to help regions to keep pace with modernisation trends in Europe and to move beyond a purely national mindset. The platform is based on monitoring (assessment of needs), comparative analysis (transparency at European level), exchanges within working groups and interactive forums (on-line exchange);

| 37. | calls on the Commission to ensure that proceedings are guided by the need for maximum streamlining, given the potential for complicating matters; recommends that synergy and compatibility with regional policy be pursued. To this end, it would be useful to find common ground between Regions For Economic Change and the Committee of the Regions' Lisbon Monitoring Platform; |
| --- | --- |

37.

calls on the Commission to ensure that proceedings are guided by the need for maximum streamlining, given the potential for complicating matters; recommends that synergy and compatibility with regional policy be pursued. To this end, it would be useful to find common ground between Regions For Economic Change and the Committee of the Regions' Lisbon Monitoring Platform;

| 38. | suggests, in particular, simplifying, through more appropriate and efficient arrangements, interactions between the initiative and the Lisbon Monitoring Platform, given the latter's role as a forum for discussing and comparing the experiences of European regions and cities. This would facilitate and fuel, in terms of ideas and proposals, the selection process for the interregional networks of the Regions For Economic Change initiative, especially with regard to the fast track option. At the same time, the platform should maintain and make the most of its own role in monitoring governance and policy orientation in the planning and implementation of the Lisbon strategy. To this end, the Committee of the Regions is prepared to develop any necessary institutional and operational synergies with the Commission and the Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013 programmes; |
| --- | --- |

38.

suggests, in particular, simplifying, through more appropriate and efficient arrangements, interactions between the initiative and the Lisbon Monitoring Platform, given the latter's role as a forum for discussing and comparing the experiences of European regions and cities. This would facilitate and fuel, in terms of ideas and proposals, the selection process for the interregional networks of the Regions For Economic Change initiative, especially with regard to the fast track option. At the same time, the platform should maintain and make the most of its own role in monitoring governance and policy orientation in the planning and implementation of the Lisbon strategy. To this end, the Committee of the Regions is prepared to develop any necessary institutional and operational synergies with the Commission and the Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013 programmes;

The Committee of the Regions' role of representation, cooperation and support

| 39. | proposes, on the basis of the above considerations and in view of the role and significance of Regions For Economic Change, that, in line with its institutional responsibilities, the Committee of the Regions take on a role of representation, cooperation and support which could prove decisive. In particular, the following elements (mentioned above) will enable it to perform that role:






  a) | involvement in the drawing-up of the new operational programmes Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013, using appropriate arrangements for consultation and/or participation; |
| --- | --- | --- |

39.

proposes, on the basis of the above considerations and in view of the role and significance of Regions For Economic Change, that, in line with its institutional responsibilities, the Committee of the Regions take on a role of representation, cooperation and support which could prove decisive. In particular, the following elements (mentioned above) will enable it to perform that role:

a)

involvement in the drawing-up of the new operational programmes Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013, using appropriate arrangements for consultation and/or participation;

| b) | a genuine role in integrating the regional and local dimensions with regard to the themes chosen when the general thematic guidelines, implementing procedures and direct financing programmes (Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013) are defined; to this end, a constant exchange of information with the programmes' managing authorities, where appropriate inviting these authorities to regular hearings at the Committee of the Regions; they could also be asked to submit a report to the Committee at regular intervals; |
| --- | --- |

b)

a genuine role in integrating the regional and local dimensions with regard to the themes chosen when the general thematic guidelines, implementing procedures and direct financing programmes (Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013) are defined; to this end, a constant exchange of information with the programmes' managing authorities, where appropriate inviting these authorities to regular hearings at the Committee of the Regions; they could also be asked to submit a report to the Committee at regular intervals;

| c) | mutual involvement of representatives of the Commission and the Committee of the Regions respectively in events they organise, for the purposes of sharing and exchanging information on expertise gained in the context of Regions For Economic Change; |
| --- | --- |

c)

mutual involvement of representatives of the Commission and the Committee of the Regions respectively in events they organise, for the purposes of sharing and exchanging information on expertise gained in the context of Regions For Economic Change;

| d) | participation, in a consultative capacity, in the implementation of the Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013 programmes, through the appointment of a member proposed by the Committee of the Regions to each programme's Monitoring Committee; |
| --- | --- |

d)

participation, in a consultative capacity, in the implementation of the Interreg IV C and Urbact 2007-2013 programmes, through the appointment of a member proposed by the Committee of the Regions to each programme's Monitoring Committee;

| e) | cooperation to promote in the future networks, possibly by means of a preliminary study, the use of European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs), a new legal instrument established to facilitate and give direction to territorial cooperation; |
| --- | --- |

e)

cooperation to promote in the future networks, possibly by means of a preliminary study, the use of European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs), a new legal instrument established to facilitate and give direction to territorial cooperation;

| f) | active participation in demonstration and dissemination activities, as part of a coordinated communication plan, in accordance with procedures to be agreed when the Plan is defined; |
| --- | --- |

f)

active participation in demonstration and dissemination activities, as part of a coordinated communication plan, in accordance with procedures to be agreed when the Plan is defined;

| g) | establishment of synergy and compatibility between the Regions For Economic Change initiative and the CoR's Lisbon Monitoring Platform; |
| --- | --- |

g)

establishment of synergy and compatibility between the Regions For Economic Change initiative and the CoR's Lisbon Monitoring Platform;

| 40. | recommends discussing and evaluating the progress and subject matter of the initiative at a joint annual conference. |
| --- | --- |

40.

recommends discussing and evaluating the progress and subject matter of the initiative at a joint annual conference.

Brussels, 7 June 2007.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE

III.   Procedure

| Title | Communication from the Commission: Regions For Economic Change |
| --- | --- |
| Reference(s) | COM(2006) 675 final |
| Legal basis | Optional referral, Article 265(1) |
| Procedural basis | |
| Date of Council referral/Date of Commission letter | 8.11.2006 |
| Date of Bureau/President's decision | 9.1.2007 |
| Commission responsible | Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy |
| Rapporteur | Alvaro Ancisi, Member of the Municipal Council of Ravenna (IT/EPP) |
| Analysis | 16.1.2007 |
| Discussed in commission | 16.3.2007 |
| Date adopted by commission | 16.3.2007 |
| Result of the vote in commission | Unanimously adopted |
| Date adopted in plenary | 6-7.6.2007 |
| Previous Committee opinions | |

Title

Title

Communication from the Commission: Regions For Economic Change

Regions For Economic Change

Reference(s)

Reference(s)

COM(2006) 675 final

Legal basis

Legal basis

Optional referral, Article 265(1)

Procedural basis

Procedural basis

Date of Council referral/Date of Commission letter

Date of Council referral/Date of Commission letter

8.11.2006

Date of Bureau/President's decision

Date of Bureau/President's decision

9.1.2007

Commission responsible

Commission responsible

Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy

Rapporteur

Rapporteur

Alvaro Ancisi, Member of the Municipal Council of Ravenna (IT/EPP)

Analysis

Analysis

16.1.2007

Discussed in commission

Discussed in commission

16.3.2007

Date adopted by commission

Date adopted by commission

16.3.2007

Result of the vote in commission

Result of the vote in commission

Unanimously adopted

Date adopted in plenary

Date adopted in plenary

6-7.6.2007

Previous Committee opinions

Previous Committee opinions

---

(1)  Cf. Commission Staff Working Document — SEC(2006) 1432 of 8.11.2006.

1

(2)  See Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on the European Regional Development Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1783/1999, Articles 4, 5 and 6.

2

(3)  Ibid.

3

(4)  This is a reference to the plan launched by the European Commission in 2005 — Debate Europe, Democracy-Dialogue-Debate: The future of Europe.

4

Debate Europe

---