EN    EN EN 
EN    EN  EUROPEAN COMMISSION 
Brussels, 26.1.2011 
SEC(2011) 92 final 
  
COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
of 
Regional Policy contributing to sustainable growth in Europe 2020 
COM(2011) 17 
EN 2  EN COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENT 
of 
Regional Policy contributing to sustainable growth in Europe 2020 
1. INTRODUCTION 
This Staff Working Document (SWD) provides a detailed complement to the narrative and 
proposals made in the Communication on "Regional Policy contributing to  sustainable growth 
in Europe 2020"1. It is intended to support the authori ties and any practiti oner involved in 
Regional Policy (RP) with additional analysis and practical ways forward as well as a range of 
good practice examples along the priorities hi ghlighted in the Communication. It will 
concretely help regional actors to deliver on  sustainable growth for regional development 
through the current RP while setting the region s on track towards the objectives of the new 
"Europe 2020" strategy2. 
The sustainable growth priority of Europe 2020 underlines the impera tive need to act on: 
– combating climate change, strengthening our economies' resilience to climate risks and our 
capacity for disaster pr evention and response;  
– clean and efficient energy, reminding that meeting the EU objective of 20% of renewable 
energies sourcing could create more than 600.000 jobs and adding the 20% target on 
energy efficiency could mean well over one million new jobs in the EU.  
– competitiveness, calling on the EU  to maintain its lead in th e market for green technologies 
while removing bottlenecks in key network infrastructures 
Sustainable growth is both a major challenge and an opportunity for all Member States and 
regions3 in the EU. A more competitive and sustainable economy, based on combating 
climate change, clean energy and resource effici ency, is a way of boosting jobs and market 
opportunities which can help the EU economies out of the financ ial crisis, while preventing 
environmental degradation and protecting biodi versity. This should underpin all economic, 
social and territorial cohesion efforts. 
This Working Document stresses the role of RP, as an essential part of Cohesion Policy (CP), 
in delivering the second pillar of the "Europe  2020" strategy on "sustainable growth ", 
especially in its contribution to the flagship in itiative on a "resource efficient Europe". It also 
draws on the recently adopted Fifth Report on Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion4, in 
particular its section on 'enhanci ng environmental sustainability'. 
                                                 
1 COM(2011) 17 
2 COM(2010)2020 
3 The Committee of Regions has adopted a number of Opinions related to sustainable growth, underlining 
the role of local and regional authorities in this ag enda, as well as the challenges and opportunities: 
http://portal.cor.europa.eu/europe2020/Pages/CoREurope2020RelatedOpinions.aspx  
4 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/doc offic/official/reports/cohesion5/index_en.cfm  
EN 3  EN It underlines the opportunity to further mainstre am the principles of sustainable development 
(SD) in the day-to-day operation of the RP programmes to maximise their impact on the 
sustainability of the EU regions. The EU Su stainable Development Strategy progress review5 
underlines the fact that SD goals and principl es should be further integrated into regional 
development. Local and regional authorities (LRA s) are often the centre of actions to support 
sustainability embracing their role in land us e planning, public transport, environmental 
infrastructure, education, health, training and so cial services. Hence, RP has a responsibility 
to engage with the LRAs in fostering the sustaina bility of their territories and societies in the 
context of the strategies and programmes of RP. The Green Paper on  Territorial Cohesion6 
further underlines the importan ce of SD to strengthen territo rial cohesion. These activities 
underline the environmental a nd economic pillars of SD7 while highlighting the essential links 
to the social dimension. 
In the next financial period, 2014-2020, the Co mmission will propose a closer alignment of 
regional funds with the priorities of the Eur ope 2020 strategy than is required by the current 
regulations, as underlined in the EU Budget review8 and the Conclusions9 of the Fifth Report 
on Economic, Social and Territorial Cohesion. Ho wever, in the current period there is still 
room for LRAs to deploy existing resources  more effectively. While the Operational 
Programmes (OPs) for the current financial period are already set, there is scope to reconsider 
project priorities and launch new projects within the OPs. 
2. CHALLENGES AND OPPORTUNITIES 
The 'Europe 2020' strategy has set a new overarc hing focus on 'resource efficiency' including 
the preservation of natural resour ces and biodiversity. The role of  the Structural and Cohesion 
Funds is particularly underlined in this flag ship initiative on a 'Res ource efficient Europe'10.  
In addition, since 2006 with the adoption of the Regulati ons on CP and the related 
Community Strategic Guidelines, a number of  other key policy developments and socio-
economic evolutions, not least the economic crises, have profoundly changed the regional 
development framework. 
                                                 
5 COM(2009) 400 final 
6 COM(2008) 616 final 
7 The Brundtland Commission (World Commission Declaration on Environment and Development, 
1987) defined SD as meeting the needs of current generations without compromising the ability of 
future generations to meet their own needs. This entails preserving enough economic, human, social and natural capital for production and direct consumption to ensure that future generations can meet their 
own needs 
8 COM(2010) 700 final 
9 COM(2010) 642 final; page 3: "The EU budget re view outlined a new strategic programming approach 
for cohesion policy with a view to closer integratio n of EU policies to deliver the Europe 2020 Strategy 
and the Integrat ed Guidelines" 
10 In this respect, see the 'Opinion of the committee of the regions on the contribution of cohesion policy 
to the Europe 2020 strategy', CdR 223/2010: "52.in respect of the "resource-efficient Europe" flagship 
initiative, welcomes the objective of decoupling econom ic growth from the use of resources in future, 
and feels that greater use should be made of Structur al Fund resources, not leas t in relation to energy 
efficiency measures, alternative energy sources, the promotion of a recycling-based economy and the 
development of sustainable transport plans". 
EN 4  EN As highlighted in the Commissi on's working document 'Regions 2020'11 and the fifth 
Cohesion report12, EU regions face a number of key challenges such as globalisation, 
demographic change, energy security and climat e change. On energy and climate change the 
EU has committed itself to the 20/20/20 objectiv es by 2020. Meeting such  targets will have 
significant but variable effect s on EU regions as some need to achieve much greater 
reductions than others. Beyond the efforts to mitigate climate change by tackling greenhouse 
gas (GHG) emissions regions also need to impl ement measures to adapt to climate change.  It 
is anticipated that most European regions wi ll be negatively affect ed by climate change13, 
posing challenges to the environment and econom ic development as well as creating social 
fall-out (damage to homes from  increased flooding, increased morbidity due to extreme heat 
waves, etc.). Those impacts will be asymmetric  across European regions as it is outlined in a 
number of developments14 including the recent White Paper on adaptation to climate 
change15. 
All those recent developments need to be quickly taken into account  if the EU is to deliver on 
its 2020 targets. In particular th e contribution of RP has to be aligned with the "Europe 2020" 
strategy. 
Climate change, sustainable ener gy or protection of ecosystems and biodiversity have a strong 
regional dimension, including for instance the ge ographically diverse pot ential of renewable 
energy sources or the potential number of jobs li nked with those investments. Hence, there is 
a need for public policy solutions to be designe d and implemented at regional and local levels 
in partnership with the business and not-for-profi t sectors. This also means that the success of 
EU policies in these fields will depend on the capacity to mobilise and empower regions and 
cities to implement and deliver on this vision of a low-carbon and re source efficient economy. 
The aim should be to reduce threats to long- term social well-being and build on opportunities 
to develop the innovations needed to de liver new sources of sustainable economic 
development. 
A comparative analysis of the relative position of Member States on the sustainable use of 
resources16 (see following Map1) with the planned inve stments into this area at regional level 
(see following Map 2) highlights a certain corr elation between the potential needs and the 
geographic repartition of the investments. The details on th e indicators and categories of 
investments which underpin those maps  are available in the Annex II. 
.. . . . 
                                                
 
11 SEC(2008) Regions 2020-an assessment of future challenges for EU Regions 
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/working/regions2020/index_en.htm  
12 "Protecting the environment and improving its quality , together with the effect of adapting to climate 
change and mitigating its consequences, are crucial issues for EU regions. However, their importance differs substantially across regions" p.143 
13 Annex 1: map on the climate vulnerability index 
14 "Regions 2020 - the climate change challenge for European regions", March 2009, directorate general 
for RP, background document to commission staff working document sec(2008),2868 final 
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/working/regions2020/pdf/regions2020_climat.pdf  
15 COM(2009) 147 final 
16 For the methodological background see the following article:  
http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2010/ecp401_en.htm  
EN 5  EN MAP 1: Relative position of Member Stat es on 'sustainable use of resources' 
 
Scores in 'sustainable use of resources' 
Relative positions of MS: the higher the score, the better the situation 
. 
Source: European Commission, DG ECFIN 
. 
. . . . 
EN 6  EN MAP 2: Planned investments of Cohesion Polic y into 'sustainable use of resource' in 
2007-13 
.  
 
Source: European Commission, DG REGIO 
 
Over 2007-2013, about € 105 billion of RP f unds will co-finance projects supporting 
sustainable growth, all across th e regions as highlighted in A nnex I, map 1. Data from the 
Member State 2010 strategic reports17 highlights that there is st ill a lot of potential to use 
funds allocated to sustainable developmen t of the regions. By end of September 200918 about 
22% of available CP funding had been allocated to  specific operations in  favour of sustainable 
growth in comparison to approxi mately 27% on average for the overall CP in the MS. Across 
the main intervention categories and s ub-categories progress varies markedly19. Results show 
                                                 
17 COM(2010)110 
18 Six MS (DE, EE, EL, ES, FR, SI) have provided their data on allocation to selected projects at dates 
other than 30/09/09. This should be carefully taken into consideration when making comparative analysis of the graphics. It is recommended to co mpare MS progress to the EU average rather than 
making direct comparison between MS 
19 Details in Annex III 
EN 7  EN that current investment of available funds fo r energy-related and environmental programmes 
is below average. At the star t of this programming period, sustainable energy and climate 
change were not the priorities they are toda y limiting the development of projects. Other 
factors impacting on util isation of funds are the financial crisis and restricted public budgets 
and insufficient technical expertise and admini strative bottlenecks in what are sometimes 
relatively new areas of activity  for managing authorities. 
The still available funding in the different categories repres ents genuine opportunities to 
bolster sustainable growth at lo cal and regional level. Policy-makers at all levels in the MS 
need to act without delay, inve st more in sustainable growth, and more effectively mobilise 
funds in line with original programme objec tives. Beyond the EU funding perspective, some 
regions are already actively engage d in the critical paradigm shift towards sustainable growth. 
Quite a number of regions have started implemen ting or are designing SD strategies such as 
the local or regional "Agenda 21"20, as well as local or regional strategies on climate change. 
Regions are organising themselves in networks to exchange good practice and represent their 
interests in relation to these challenges not only at EU but also at UN level. In this perspective 
the urgency for RP to actively support and bolst er such action should not be postponed until 
after 2013. 
EU RP has now to flexibly adjust prior ities to the emerging challenges and policy 
developments, be responsive to socio-econom ic needs and complement pro-active actions 
already taken at regional level. Accordingly, this SWD sets ou t a number of options still open 
to MS to seize the enormous potential to use the significant av ailable funds to boost 
sustainable growth.  
3. POLICY FRAMEWORK: THE UNIQUEN ESS OF RP FOR DELIVERING 
SUSTAINABLE GROWTH 
Several attributes of RP make it particularly well-suited to address su stainable growth. As a 
place-based policy, it takes territorial characteri stics into consideration, such as geographic, 
administrative, socio-economic aspects. Furt hermore, it provides op portunities to forge 
public-private partnerships which represent an  important tool for improved governance and 
sustainability. 
The multi-level governance which is a cornerstone of RP also has the pot ential to reconcile 
various administrative levels dealing with sust ainability topics. It provides a framework for 
integrating interventions within coherent EU , national, regional and local strategies, 
exploiting synergies between different inve stment decisions and controlling possible 
conflicting objectives and outcomes. In addition  RP can be complemented by investments of 
the European Social Fund (ESF) in capacity  building, training and new skills which are 
crucial for sustainable growth. Another unique feature of RP is its focus on cross-border, 
transnational and inter-regional co operation. It is particularly we ll adapted to assist regions in 
solving environmental issues which often have wide geographic spill-over effects21. In this 
respect 35% of the funding available in the 2007-2013 period under the European Territorial 
Cooperation objective is already a llocated to projects for sustai nable growth. In addition the 
                                                 
20 Agenda 21 is a programme run by the United Nations (UN) on SD 
http://www.un.org/esa/dsd/agenda21/  
21 Major river basins, trans-boundary pollution or cross-border/transnational climate change adaptation 
measures 
EN 8  EN macro-regional strategies on the Baltic Sea22 and on the Danube23 are also strongly built 
around the reinforcement of the sustainability dime nsion in this broader territorial cooperation 
initiative. 
Evidence from the ex-post  evaluation of Cohesion Policy in 2000-200624 on environment, 
underlines the importance of funding for the environment: the ERDF invested 21% or €25.5 
billion of its total a llocation in this area while anot her €15.8 billion was allocated to 
environment from the Cohesion Fund. The main areas of environment-related measures were 
environment infrastructure and rehabilita tion measures. For example, the additional 
population connected to wastewater collection and treatment in the EU is estimated to be around 40 million (12% of the population) in th e period 2000-2006, RP contributed to half of 
it. Data for the other sectors are more modera te but still very impressive: 14 million people 
are served by improved water supply, and wast e treatment capacity increased by more than 
230 000 m
3/day. 
The ex-post  evaluation further concludes that alt hough very good environmental results were 
delivered, difficulties limited the effectiveness of the measures. For example, while the co-financed environmental investments have greatly  contributed to meeting the requirements laid 
down in the environmental acquis , they were often not meant to deliver direct economic 
impacts. The evaluation concluded that, in ma ny cases, environmental investments were not 
part of the general socio- economic development strategies or when environmental 
investments were intended for economic impact, the accompanying measures were not apparent and their coordination with other ac tivities for regional economic development was 
limited. Most notably, problems with determini ng the appropriate treatment capacity and the 
trade-offs between the application of the po lluter-pays-principle and what people in poorer 
regions could afford to pay for the services. In addition, environmental infrastructure does not 
have a sufficient short-term impact on the eco nomic development of th e region (apart from 
the demand side effect from the construction activities). To enhance its economic impact, 
there is need to ensure sufficient institutiona l capacity for the development of integrated 
strategies and a volume of good-quality projects, as well as to ensure  that the measures 
adopted are specifically designed to corresp ond to region characteri stics by integrating 
economic measures within the overall development strategy and exploiting synergies rather 
than in the special design of isolated environmental measures. 
SD already constitutes a priority in the Regulation
25 and in the Community Strategic 
Guidelines on cohesion. Short after the mid- point of this programming period, this SWD 
provides policy practitioners with practical guidance for the current  period and assists them to 
prepare the post-2013 programmes.  
In order to increase the contribution of RP to  sustainable growth this paper proposes a two 
pillar-approach: 
Pillar I: investing more in sustainable growth : encouraging greater strategic focus in 
investments on sustainable growth with  an emphasis on resource efficiency; 
Pillar II: investing better in sustainable growth : improving policy delivery mechanisms by 
                                                 
22 COM(2009)248 final 
23 COM(2010) 715 
24 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/expost2006/wp5b_en.htm  
25 Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 of 11 July 2006, Article 16 
EN 9  EN reinforcing the application of sustainable development principles in the operational 
programmes.  
It has to be a priority of all stakeholders  in regional development to focus on opportunities 
that maximise economic, environmental and soci al benefits simultaneously. This necessitates 
identifying and making explicit the trade-offs be tween the two pillars during the early stages 
of the programme and project design phases in  a much more systematic way. Subsequent 
investment decisions that fail to take into account the signifi cance of these trade-offs should 
be given a low priority when selecting pr ojects for funding under the RP funding. For the 
current and future programming periods, the integrated, multi-level governance and inter-
regional co-operation approach privileged by RP needs to be maintained  and reinforced across 
the board, with a view to strengthening the measurable outcomes26 in terms of SD in the EU’s 
regions and cities.  
4. PROPOSED ACTIONS 
Pillar I: Investing more in sustainable growth 
This paper calls for greater focus of the inve stments targeting sustainable growth with an 
emphasis on three priorities:  
(i) a low carbon economy (LCE),  (ii) ecosystem servi ces and biodiversity,  
(iii) eco-innovations.  In each of these areas the potential for secu ring jobs and improved economic competitiveness 
at local and regional level represents a genui ne opportunity for development. The focus of 
investments should be towards win-win projects which benef it both the environment and 
socio-economic dimensions. 
Furthermore, an evaluation
27 of the exit strategies from th e economic crisis in a number of 
MS showed that the adopted stimulus packages  were limited to short-term effects and they 
most often did not intend to resolve underlying structural issues in SD and social cohesion. 
Many structures of the economy - such as on tr ansport and energy - are path-dependent and 
changes can involve high costs. Such changes can be easier to implement in times of economic crisis. The time is now ripe for shifting from short-term stimulus to mid-term policy 
frameworks.  
The recent crisis has highlighted the need to in crease efforts to decouple growth from energy 
use and become a more resource efficient economy, which will not only give Europe a competitive advantage, but also reduce its de pendency on foreign sources of raw materials 
and commodities
28. RP strategies and programmes need to  dedicate greater effort to ensure a 
more comprehensive approach to sectoral inve stments and make them more effective. They 
need to cover both the development and wide utilisation of the green technologies of the 
                                                 
26 COM(2010) 642 final, p.4 chapter on 'Strengtheni ng performance through conditionality and incentives' 
27 Taking advantage of the crisis: synergies between environmental policies and social inclusion, 
www.ecologic.eu 
28 COM(2010) 2020 
EN 10  EN future, as well as the ones improving today's re source efficiency. There is a need to ensure 
that the appropriate accompanyi ng policies in areas such as  promoting entrepreneurship, 
upgrading the workforce skills and making appropr iate financing availa ble are strengthened 
and factored in.  
The substantial financial support provided by RP for investments in research, technological 
development and innovation must be closely ali gned with the growth s ectors of the future, 
helping regions to transform their challenges into opportunities, built on the basis of their 
indigenous resources.  
1) Transition to a low carbon economy: fo cus on investments in energy efficiency, 
buildings, renewables and clean transport  
Energy investments in buildings, renewable energi es and clean transport are at the centre of 
the changes needed for transition to a lo w-carbon and resource efficient economy. Energy 
plays a crucial role in the cost basis and comp etitiveness of enterprises in general and of the 
energy intensive industries, in pa rticular. Provided w ith the right conditions , enterprises will 
be able to adapt and seize the benefits of LCE, an e ssential condition to achieving a 
sustainable future and minimising the risk of carbon leakage29. 
A number of studies from pub lic and private organisations30 have identified possible 
roadmaps to meet a zero-carbon EU by 2050. Th e EU energy system needs to undergo a 
radical restructuring to meet the long-ter m objective of reducing GHG emissions by 80% by 
2050 compared to the 1990 levels with the curre ntly identified technol ogies. This effort 
cannot be achieved through only the energy sect or becoming a low-carbon system but major 
contributions are needed from agriculture a nd land use, households, and the industrial and 
transport sectors31.  
The EU is at a strategic junctu re in the coming five to ten ye ars. The choices being made now 
and in the near future will ultimately be de cisive in achieving the long-term vision. For 
example, over the next ten year s, energy investments in the or der of € 1 tril lion are needed, 
both to diversify existing resources and repla ce equipment and to cater for challenging and 
changing energy requirements32. This is both a challenge and an opportunity: it can move the 
EU towards its goal in climate change mitigation or lock it in to an unsustainable energy mix. 
It urges the EU to start investing substa ntially in the power grid of 2050 and boosting 
investment in energy research and innovation to accelerate the deployment of the low carbon 
technologies in the period 2020-30.  
In relation to the present programming period, Managing Authorities (MAs) need to take 
greater advantage and accelerate i nvestment of the already substa ntial support in RP to energy 
efficiency (EE) and renewable energy sources (RES). Secondly, whenever possible the total 
                                                 
29 Commission Decision of 24 Decembe r 2009 determining, pursuant to Directive 2003/87/EC of the 
European Parliament and of the Council, a list of  sectors and subsectors which are deemed to be 
exposed to a significant risk of carbon leakage 
30 European Climate Foundation, "Roadmap 2050 - A Practical Guide to a Prosperous, Low-carbon 
Europe"; http://www.roadmap2050.eu/ 
31 Getting into the right lane for 2050, A primer for EU debate, by Netherlands Environmental Assessment 
Agency 
32 Energy 2020: A strategy for competitive, sustaina ble and secure energy; COM(2010)639, 10 November 
2010 
EN 11  EN level of investment to those pr iorities should be increased, given the key role they play in the 
sustainable development of the regions.  
Energy investments in buildings 
Over the recent years a number of major new EU policy measures  as well as legislation have 
been adopted, including the climate and en ergy package 2008 and the recasting of the 
Directive on Energy Performance of Building33 which is expected to create between 280,000 
and 450,000 new jobs by 2020.  
Buildings account for 41% of energy consum ption, making this a key area for investment34 to 
achieve EU 2020 targets, both in enhancing re source efficiency and creating local jobs.  
Studies being undertaken to assess the impact  of the present Energy Efficiency Action Plan35 
indicate that with th e present and planned measures, the EU will fall (about 10%) short of 
fulfilling its commitment to reduce its en ergy consumption by 20% by 2020. The studies 
stress unsurprisingly the key role that increased  energy efficiency in the building sector can 
play to meet the target, lead ing to a significant reduction in energy consumption. They also 
highlight the role that cities can play, partic ularly in the encouragement of new technologies 
and their diffusion.  
Following the adoption of an amendmen t to the ERDF Regulation in May 200936, RP can 
now further (in addition to the existing cont ribution to sustainable energies in public, 
commercial and industrial buildings) assist investments in EE and RES in residential 
buildings that support social cohesion in the EU 27, with up to 4% of the national ERDF 
allocation available for this purpose. It represen ts a potential of € 8 bi llion of investments in 
this area through the 2007-2013 CP. 
In addition an amendment to the same Regulation37 extends the use of financial engineering 
instruments to investments in EE and RE S in buildings, including existing housing.  
RP encourages public-private partnerships ba sed on a combination of  grants and various 
forms of revolving funds that can be developed in collaboration w ith financial institutions and 
tailored to meet specific market needs. Ther e are, for example, specific experiences with 
JASPERS38 providing technical assistance to elaborat e an energy efficiency scheme for public 
buildings in Warsaw, as well as with JESSICA39, for example, in Lithuania and Estonia 
establishing holding funds to promote sustai nable energies in the housing sector. Other 
interesting experiences exist with third priv ate parties, known as ESCOs (Energy Service 
Companies) that may provide the financing for the energy investment and recover the 
incurred costs through the obtained energy savi ngs. This approach has been followed by the 
                                                 
33 Directive 2010/31/EU of 19 May 2010 
34 SEC(2008) 2865, impact assessmen t for the recast of the buildings performance Directive 2002/91/EC 
35 COM(2006)545 final 
36 Regulation (EC) No 397/2009 of the European Parliament and the Council of 6 May 2009 amending 
Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 on the European Regional Development Fund as regards the eligibility 
of energy efficiency and renewable energy investments in housing 
37 OJ L158/1, 24.6.2010 
38 JASPERS stands for Joint Assistance to Support Projects in European Regions. http://www.jaspers-
europa-info.org/   
39 JESSICA stands for Joint European Support for Sustainable Investment in City Areas. 
http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/funds/2007/jjj/jessica_en.htm  
EN 12  EN city of Berlin where about 1,300 public buildings  have been refurbished through collaboration 
with ESCOs. 
A number of EU cities have committed themse lves to move beyond the EU 2020 targets on 
climate change and energy by joining the Covenant of Majors40 which offers a further 
opportunity to achieve the EU goals with th e support of the funds available under RP. 
Building on the Covenant of Mayors approach 
Within the 'Covenant of Mayors', the Province of Barcelona (ES) launched an ambitious 
sustainable energy plan in 140 municipalities  covering 4.5 million people. The Province has 
promoted the participation of municipalities to the Covenant  and is providing technical 
assistance to help prepare the Action Plans a nd providing coordination to  ensure availability 
of public and private financial s upport as well as technical suppor t for joint calls for tender for 
small municipalities. Further technical assistance is planned to assist in the preparation of 
concrete investment projects at municipal level partially funded by an EU ELENA grant. 
Based on preliminary studies CO 2 emissions reductions over 4 million tonnes/year are 
expected. The provincial plan focuses mainly on energy efficiency in public lighting and 
buildings and production of renewable energies  such as solar roofs. The potential of 
investments in the next 3 years amount to € 500 million, to come partially from the EIB. The 
ERDF is considered to be used as a possible lever to enable housing providers and their local 
partners to make the investments. 
A recent survey and report41 by the Committee of the Regions with the support of the 
Covenant of Mayors initiative gathered furthe r examples of good practices from EU regions 
and cities in the area of sustainable energy. 
. 
Investments in renewable energies 
Achieving the EU target of 20% RES in fi nal energy consumption in 2020 could provide 
about 410,000 additional jobs42. Furthermore, the deployment of  RES can be an especially 
important driver of local economic development su ch as in rural areas as  well as in peripheral 
regions or on islands. In this framework LRAs  need to see RES as strategic investments 
securing employment and regional development. To  reap the full benefits of the local RES 
potential (see map 3, Annex I for the example of  solar energy), LRAs should address RES in a 
full life-cycle approach to develop an integrat ed regional supply chain on renewables, based 
on the local potentials. It will ha ve cross-sectoral be nefits at local and regional level from 
agriculture and forestry (bioma ss for energy) to SMEs, industry or the construction sectors. 
In this encouraging framework, RP funding can  currently assist in boosting RES in the 
heating and cooling sector, including efficient solutions such as district heating and co-
                                                 
40 The Covenant of Mayors consists of the formal commitment by City Councils to go beyond the EU 
objectives in terms of CO2 reduction (more than 20 %) through the pr eparation and implementation of 
Sustainable Energy Action Plans. To date over 2000 EU cities are comm itted members, see at 
http://www.eumayors.eu/  
41 http://portal.cor.europa.eu/europe2020/n ews/Pages/SustainableEnergySurvey.aspx  
42 The impact of renewable energy policy on economi c growth and employment in  the European Union; 
http://ec.europa.eu/energy/renewables/studies/doc/renewables/2009_employ_res_summary.pdf 
EN 13  EN generation or co-generation of heat and power from RES, and fostering renewable electricity 
from wind, biomass, solar, ge othermal or marine energy.  
MAs should also support investments in the local 'smart grids', as part of the wider TEN-E 
network, to effectively enable the exploitatio n of the decentralised RES potential. Further 
ways for LRAs to push forward the deployment of  sustainable energy is to develop territorial 
energy agencies, possibly supported by RP funding43, which provide the know-how, 
capacities and experience on integrated developm ent of EE and RES. For instance MAs are 
encouraged to tap into the results of th e Intelligent Energy Europe (IEE) programme44 that has 
created 80 new local and regional energy agenci es, adding to the 200 new energy agencies 
which were created during th e 1990's by the SAVE programme45. It could be relevant to make 
use of these agencies in initiatives supported by RP. 
Comprehensive development of rene wable energy in Güssing, Austria 
In a period of 15 years the town of Güssing46 has been transformed from a state of economic 
decline to a thriving, forward-looking town, base d on renewable energy. It used the targets in 
terms of renewable energy sources as a genuine  opportunity for strong local development, 
rather than a constraint. Through the comprehe nsive use of renewable energies, especially 
biomass, it has created 50 new companies and 1 000 jobs in 15 years. The total reliance on 
local raw materials ensures a high level of value added for local producers, as well as 
sustainable woodland management. The town becam e self sufficient in th e field of heat and 
electricity and can earn additiona l revenue by selling any surplu s. During the 2000-06 period 
the ERDF supported those developments with  € 15.8 million of investments. Cutting edge 
technology, and the commitment of the local aut horities have driven the pace of change and 
now made a name for Güssing around the world. 
Recovering from economic downturn with renewables: Bremerhaven, Germany 
The economy of the city of Bremerhaven, base d on shipping, shipbuild ing and a commercial 
fishery faced a strong economic downturn in the 1990s forcing the lo cal authorities to 
urgently look to economically diversify. Offsho re wind energy was chosen as an alternative 
development since the region’s historical strengths included comprehensive maritime 
technology know-how and an existing skilled workfo rce in this area. To date Bremerhaven 
has attracted four major manufacturers of wind turbines as well as companies specialised in 
offshore wind energy construction. Half of th e €500 million invested in offshore wind power 
development along the German North Sea coastal region during the past years went to this 
city alone. The success of Bremerhaven is especi ally due to a clear an d integrated industrial 
strategy, public ownershi p of land, and signific ant clustering of competencies. Bremerhaven’s 
companies have already created some 700 new j obs and it is expected  to rise to 1,000–1,200. 
To continue this growth, dedicated training schemes were put in place in the companies 
themselves, with the support of schools and uni versities in the region. Since summer 2008, the 
ERDF supports the 'POWER Cluster'47 project, an Interreg IV B project which aims at 
                                                 
43 RegioStar project NRW Energy Agentur 
44 http://ec.europa.eu/energy/intelligent/  
45 http://www.managenergy.net/indexes/I30.htm  
46 An extensive case study "ERDF – promotion of renewable energy sources in Burgenland: a model for 
other European regions" is available at:
 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/newsroom/pdf/200912_burgenland.pdf   
47 http://www.power-cluster.net/  
EN 14  EN building a northern European competence centre on offshore wind energy based on the 
learning and experience of 18 partners, espe cially those involved in Bremerhaven. 
Finally , RP allocations to sustainable energy can be  reinforced by working closely together 
with other EU policies. The objective is to develop synergies with the other EU funding 
instruments targeting energy efficiency and rene wables. Hence, MAs are encouraged to draw 
on the assistance offered by the IEE programme as well as possibly by the LIFE+ programme
48 or FP749. For the Covenant of Mayors initiati ve, RP could provide the technical 
assistance to assist the cities in preparing a pipeline of quality projects as well as financial 
engineering schemes to support the proposed inve stments. The aim should be to mainstream 
at regional level the successful small-scale pr ojects on sustainable en ergy supported by other 
EU instruments and therefore ensure an efficient pipeline of projects. 
Clean transport 
The background for the RP intervention in this s ector lies in the 2006 mid-term review of the 
White Paper on Transport Policy50 that proposed a number of me asures to overhaul the policy. 
Its objective is to make transport more sust ainable and avoid the economic losses due to 
congestion, pollution and accidents. The mid-te rm review proposed a range of actions: 
• the promotion of co-modality;  
• an increased energy efficiency;  
• the development of new technologies (i.e.: Inte lligent Transport Systems) in all transport 
modes in order to cut costs and improve security; and  
• the promotion of clean ur ban transport systems.  
The 2009 Communication on the future of Transport Policy51 underlines the need for an 
increased focus on environmental sustainability , shifting to more efficient transport modes 
and the introduction of innovativ e solutions. A new White Paper on Transport should be 
adopted soon for the period 2011-2020.  
RP programmes for 2007-13 are already making a si gnificant contribution to these sustainable 
objectives and in particular to the decarbonisation of transport52. However project delivery 
needs to be boosted. LRAs should build on th e many opportunities offered by sustainable 
transport to create local employment, improve accessibility and reach a balanced territorial 
development while reducing their emissions and preserving resources. For example, during 
the present programming period further suppor t can be provided, when appropriate, to 
sustainable transport projects that may be quickly implemen ted such as in urban public 
transport, intelligent transport systems or clean  and energy efficient ve hicle technologies or 
non-motorised transport. Priority should be given to projects that enhance sustainability and 
                                                 
48 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/  
49 For instance 'The practical guide to EU funding opportunities for Research and Innovation' provides 
helpful support: http://cordis.europa.eu/eu-funding-guide/home_en.html  
50 "European transport policy for 2010 : time to decide" (2001) 
51 A sustainable future for transport: Towards an in tegrated, technology-led and user-friendly system’ 
(COM(2009)279 final – 17 June 2009) 
52 CP allocations for sustainable transport in the 207-13 period are of € 38 B and provide support for TEN 
and national/regional objectives investment in railw ays, mobile rail assets; cycle tracks, multimodal 
transports, intelligent transport syst ems, ports, clean urban transport 
EN 15  EN that are part of existing integrated EU/nationa l/regional/urban transpor t strategies. The Irish 
example below illustrates an integrated approach to sustainable transport. 
Sustainable transport scheme in Ireland 
Ireland set up a new transport policy for 20 09-2020 ("smarter travel – A Sustainable 
Transport Future") in which the Irish Governme nt affirms its vision for sustainability in 
transport with an Action Plan, suppor ted by the ERDF that includes:  
(1) actions to reduce distance travelled by private car and encourage smarter travel, 
including pricing mechanisms or fiscal m easures to encourage behavioural change, 
(2) actions aimed at ensuring that alternatives to the car are more widely available, mainly 
through a radically improved public transpor t service and investment in clean and 
energy efficient vehicle technologies, 
(3) actions aimed at improving the fuel effi ciency of motorise d transport through 
improved fleet structure, energy efficien t driving and alternative technologies. 
Concerning the 2014-2020 period RP programmes will have to build on the conclusions of the 
new White Paper on transport. Priority shoul d be given to a radi cal renovation of road 
transport by decarbonising road vehicles and usin g the most appropriate transport type for the 
specific need. If road transport has a 70% share of the inland freight and passenger transport, 
and urban transport accounts for 40% of the CO 2 emissions from road transport, it seems clear 
that particular attention is needed for an integrated sustainable urban mobility. Moreover 
particular attention should be given to sp eeding up the implementation the € 19 billion 
indicative allocation from RP to TEN-T. 
Further efforts are needed in technological de velopment to accelerate the decarbonisation, 
such as RTD efforts with more focus on pr ojects of a European dimension, boosting the 
development of alternative fuels from renewabl e energies and supporting intelligent transport 
systems and other related areas. Further, a hi gh level of decarbonisatio n cannot be achieved 
by technological advances alone, and will need th e contribution from a change in modal split 
too, as well as other behavioural ch anges as regards personal mobility. 
. 
2) Ecosystem services: focus on preserving a nd maximising the potential of the natural 
environment 
The EU has missed its 2010 target of halting biodiversity decline53. One of the ten priority 
goals in the 2006-2010 Biodiversity Action Plan (B AP) was to ensure that EU funds for the 
regions benefit biodiversity and minimise and offset possible negative impacts of regional 
development. The final report of the BAP hi ghlights the need for additional measures 
regarding RP such as careful infrastructure plan ning to ensure that development is compatible 
with and contributes to  biodiversity protection. 
To reinforce efforts the Member States54 agreed on a new target for 2020 which will underpin 
the forthcoming new EU biodive rsity strategy: to halt the loss of biodiversity and the 
                                                 
53 COM(2010) 548 final 
54 Environment Council Conclusions 7536/10, 15 March 2010 
EN 16  EN degradation of ecosystem services in the EU by  2020, restore them in so far as feasible, while 
stepping up the EU contribution to averting gl obal biodiversity loss. In this framework the 
Committee of the Regions recently underlined the role of local and re gional authorities in 
halting the loss of biodiversity55.  
At international level, the EU has committed to the results of CBD COP 1056, where one of 
strategic goals aims to enhancin g the benefits from biodiversity  and ecosystem services (and 
related targets) as pa rt of the Strategic Plan for Biodi versity 2011-2020. To implement this 
Strategic Plan, all parties, including the EU , agreed to start working on a resources 
mobilisation process. Furthermore the interna tional study on 'The Economics of Ecosystems 
and Biodiversity'57 (TEEB study) co-driven by the Comm ission provides key inputs on where 
biodiversity strategies an d policies should focus attention, in particular to deploy the approach 
in terms of ecosystem services. The TEEB report for Local and RP Makers58 develops 
practical ways forward, underpinned by concrete  examples, on how to protect and make a 
sustainable use of local/regi onal ecosystems. Along with other reports it shows the added 
value and efficiency from a comprehensive a pproach incorporating the conservation and 
sustainable use of ecosystems.  
Investing in natural capital as a source of economic development 
The way ahead for further protection of biodive rsity and nature in the EU regions is to 
develop an integrated approach in terms of 'ecosystem services' , the term used in the United 
Nations 2004 Millennium Ecosyste m Assessment referring to natu rally occurring benefits and 
the losses that can be suffered if they are not preserved . Such an approach requires a holistic 
view on the environment as a key overarching el ement of regional SD. Concretely any project 
touching mainly upon one dimension of the eco system should also take into account the 
relations and impacts on the other dimensions . The active protecti on of the different 
components of ecosystems such as its  water resources, forests, soils59, or arable land will 
ensure sustained basic services such as fres hwater, food and biomass production, natural risk 
prevention, etc. The marine environment has also to  be taken into account in this perspective, 
building on the objectives of the Ma rine Strategy Framework Directive60. It is therefore 
crucial at the local and regional level to promote the implementation of "win-win-win" 
measures, i.e. projects that benefit the economy, conserve biodi versity while actively 
contributing to climate mitigation and adaptation and ensuring further ecosystem services. 
Biodiversity and ecosystem serv ices constitute the underlying basis for all social and 
economic activities and provide ample opportuni ties for employment within SMEs and 
cultural activities. Ec onomies and businesses depend dire ctly (e.g. water supply and the 
tourism sector) or indirect ly (e.g. pharmaceuticals, food a nd drink), on biodiversity and 
ecosystem services even where those services  do not have market values. About 16.8% of 
                                                 
55 CdR 112/2010 fin, Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on EU and international biodiversity 
policy beyond 2010 
56 Tenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD 
COP10), Nagoya, Japan 18-29 October 2010 
57 More information available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environmen t/nature/biodiversity/economics/  
58 http://www.teebweb.org/ForLocalandReg ionalPolicy/tabid/1020/Default.aspx  
59 Soil biodiversity represents a quarter of the global biodiversity and is directly involved in vital services 
such as mitigating climate change, storing and purifying water, providing antibiotics…To continue 
benefiting from theses services further effo rts to value soil biodiversity are needed 
60 Directive 2008/56/EC of the European parliament and of the Council of 17 June 2008 
EN 17  EN European jobs are indirectly linked to natural assets61 while the estimated value of insect 
pollination for European agriculture is € 22 billion per year62.There is growing attention given 
to the valuation of biodiversity and ecosystem  services. Such investments can preserve 
biodiversity, strengthen adaptati on to climate change, and indeed  be financially profitable. 
Green infrastructure could also lead to new pa rtnerships of biodivers ity and CP funding with 
banks and financial operators, as they might realis e that investing in green infrastructure could 
bring benefits in medium and long-term perspectives. 
Investing in natural disaster prevention 
In the last decade the EU has witnessed a significant increase in the number and severity of 
natural disasters such as flooding, forest fire s or storms. Regions had to cope with the 
resulting major damage in terms of destruction of economic and so cial infrastructure as well 
as the degradation of often al ready fragile ecosystems. These catastrophes are expected to 
worsen as climate change increases the fre quency and magnitude of extreme meteorological 
events. The recent Commission Communicat ion on natural disaster prevention63 further 
recognised natural disasters as an element wh ich may adversely affect the economic growth 
and competitiveness of EU regions. 
In this context, disaster prevention requires re inforced attention as a necessary objective in 
itself but also as a transversal issue to be in tegrated into regional development at large, 
beyond the sectoral approaches. Firstly, disaster  prevention projects can have wide-spread and 
long-lasting co-benefits in terms of ecosy stem services. Indeed well designed and 
implemented disaster prevention projects, such  as the following Hungarian example on flood 
prevention, can also benefit biodiversity and pr eserve water quantity and quality, agriculture 
and eco-tourism. Secondly, disast er prevention needs to be viewed as a very sensible and 
effective investment since the costs of preven tative measures are usually many times less than 
the potential costs of rehabilitation. 
Concerning flood protection it might  be for instance more effective to conserve or restore 
natural floodplains than to only construct artificial  dikes that will increase the risk of flooding 
downstream (mal-adaptation). This is also unde rlined in the Commission's Directive on Flood 
Risks64 which requires MS to carry out preliminary flood risk assessment by 2011. 
Flood management along the Tisza River in Hungary 
The Tisza River in eastern Hungary is flood prone.  To tackle this threat a decision was made 
to create reservoirs on some of the original flood plains of th e river which were curtailed by 
dikes over the centuries. It will also help to cope with climate change impacts. For the 
construction of six reservoirs and the relocation of some dikes, the ERDF and Cohesion Fund 
will invest € 290 million of a total of € 400 m illion. Those investments started in 2000-2006 
and will continue over 2007-2013 which underlines the long planning and implementation 
time. A broad cross-sectoral approach was need ed, involving several Mi nistries, the research 
and scientific community as well as local au thorities and general publ ic. The first reservoir 
was completed in 2008. In addition to helping to adapt to climate change, natural flood 
                                                 
61 TEEB – The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodivers ity for National and International Policy Makers – 
Summary: Responding to the Value of Nature 2009.  
62 Gallai et al. 2009 
63 Communication on 'A Community approach on the prevention of natural and man-made disasters' 
adopted in February 2009 
64 Directive 2007/60/EC on the assessment and management of flood risks 
EN 18  EN reservoirs have several co-b enefits and are the typical wi n-win investments on ecosystem 
services: 
- it is an efficient solution to significantly  reduce flooding risks (bu ffer role of nature); 
- it provides a storage of wate r for irrigation, thus offeri ng a solution to ease droughts; 
- it restores space to the river and nature thus  protecting biodiversity (creation of wetlands); 
- it addresses the problem of d ecreasing groundwater level (regular  flooding of the reservoirs); 
- it offers a new potential for eco-friendly agri culture, nature tourism and leisure activities. 
. 
Investing in "green infrastructure" and ecological networks  
Green infrastructure65 consists of spatially or functionally connected natural, semi-natural and 
man-made rural and urban elements such as fore sts, lakes, rivers, coastal zones, grassland, 
parks, green bridges... It can help to adapt to  climate change and provi des essential features 
for the maintenance of ecosystem services and is therefore key to maintaining a sustainable 
environment in which economies66 can prosper.  
In this respect managing authorities should furthe r invest in the mainte nance, creation or re-
development of ecological networks and co rridors such as Natura 2000 which already 
represents an essential building block (see ma p 4, Annex I) of an EU-wide nature network. 
The aim is to avoid fragmentation of landscapes  and ensure connectivity  to allow the free 
movement of wildlife. Ecologi cal networks are an importa nt feature of contemporary 
conservation of habitats and species. 
ERDF funding for ecological corridors in Poland  
Within Operational Programme “Infra structure and Environment”, the 5th priority is focused 
on environmental protection and the promotion of ecological habits with a budget of € 89 
million for 2007-13. In this framework, project s on green infrastructure are currently 
implemented. The Coordination Centre for Envi ronmental Projects (CKPS) coordinates in 
Poland the implementation of nature projects co-financed by the ERDF and supports projects 
such as construction of animal passages, elimin ation of barriers for animal migration as well 
as small 'promotion' infrastructures (educational paths, touristic trail infrastructure). Natura 
2000 is given priority since projects that focus on  facilitating the integrity of Natura 2000 sites 
and the overall coherence of the network in Poland get higher scores during the selection 
process. Today CKPS supports acti ons related with green infrastr ucture in ca. 100 projects 
with overall budget of about € 50 million. One key role of those projects is about 
demonstration and feasibility, making the case for integrated approaches on gray 
infrastructure, nature conservation and water management. 
                                                 
65 Green infrastructure encompasses elements such as reforestation zones, green bridges and green roofs, 
green urban areas, fish migration channels, high nature value farmland or forest areas, which maintain ecological coherence as essential condition for healthy ecosystems. The added value of Green 
Infrastructure comes through its multifunctional use for greening transport, strengthening the 
functionality of ecosystems for delivering goods and services and for mitigating and adapting to climate 
change effects, for acting as barriers against eros ion, and for enhancing the quality of life (health, 
tourism, conserving historic and cultural heritage). 
66 The European Economic and So cial Committee underlines that 'The concept of "green infrastructure" 
put forward in the Commission communication should be vigorously developed'  ; NAT/471 - CESE 
1178/2010 
EN 19  EN One of the most effective ways of building green infrastructure is to adopt a more integrated 
approach to land management. This is usually best achieved through stra tegic spatial planning 
enabling spatial interactions between different la nd uses. It is therefore crucial that elements 
such as spatial planning, land use or forest and wetland management are taken into account 
when projects co-financed by RP have an impact  on natural areas. This is especially the case 
for heavy and long-lasting infrastructures such  as roads, motorways, railway lines, new 
business parks or waste water treatment plants. In addition, the construction of infrastructures 
leads to soil sealing as a result of covering of  the soil surface with impervious materials. The 
sealed areas are lost to uses such as agricultu re or forestry while th e ecological soil functions 
are severely impaired or even prevented. Natura l disaster prevention a nd adaptation to climate 
change actually starts at the very early stages  of project development.  Co-financed operations 
need to be undertaken respecting the relevant environmental legislation, in particular related 
to EIA, SEA and nature (appropriate assessm ent according to Article 6 of the Habitats 
Directive). Experience suggests that such asse ssments can bring economic and social benefits 
to project design through presen ting different options at an ea rly stage, thus avoid later 
problems. This should go hand and hand with an  integrated planning approach, not only to 
minimise or avoid potential damage to the envi ronment but rather to integrate environmental 
concerns in the planning stage. 
Green Infrastructure can be more cost-effic ient than technical solutions, Ireland67 
In Anne Valley, Ireland, an integrated cons tructed wetland (ICW) was created instead of 
installing a traditional water treatment plant. Not only is the wetland is more efficient in 
clearing mostly livestock wastewater than a compar able traditional sewage plant, it also offers 
multiple benefits for the ecosystem services the wetland provides: water purification, fresh 
water, climate regulation and car bon sequestration, flood control,  recreational aspects (it has 
been amended with hiking, pedestrian and cyclin g paths), soil formation and nutrient cycling - 
and it provides a suitable habitat for wetland flora and fauna (snipes and otters as example). 
Some economic benefits are hard to measure: for example, farmers are quoted that they only 
continue in farming due to the installation of th is wetland, and the aestheti cal value of the area 
has considerably increased. Capital costs for 1,750 population equivalents were € 770,000 
plus € 165,000 for scientific monitoring of the pr oject over three years.  This sum includes 
costs for tourism facilities of € 220,000, meaning that the construction of the wetland was 
even cheaper, and maintenance costs are lower th an for a traditional plant. This favourably 
compares to estimated costs of € 1,530,000 for an  equivalent traditi onal plant. Financing 
stems from the EU LIFE programme and th e ERDF through an INTERREG III A project and 
local funding sources. 
As a further example, the management and/or  development of protec ted areas in regions 
needs to be placed within the context of 'ecosy stem services'. For example, nature parks are 
instruments and motors of regional sustainable growth in two ways. Firstly, they can provide 
important impulses for regional development through tourism, conservation activities, 
marketing of high quality regional goods and de velopment of regional value-added chains. 
They also reinforce regional identity, improve  the image of the regi on and contribute to 
education. Secondly, they conserve regional bi odiversity and secure the crucial ecosystem 
services such as carbon seque stration, biomass production and climate change adaptation. 
                                                 
67 Sources: Doody et al. (2009): Sewage treatment in an integrated constructed wetland. Municipal 
engineer 162 Issue ME4, p. 199-205. Harrington and McInnes (2009): Integrated constructed wetland 
(ICW) for livestock wastewater treatment. Biosource Technology 100 5498-5505 
EN 20  EN Investing in protected areas and parks is a sm art investment in the regional environmental, 
social and economic assets. 
Finally, MAs can seize the opportu nities of developing synergie s with other EU polices and 
funding instruments.  Using RP the aim should be to mainst ream at regional level successful 
small-scale projects supported by other EU instruments and th erefore ensure an efficient 
pipeline of projects. MAs are especially en couraged to draw on the support offered by the 
LIFE programme68 for nature and biodiversity protecti on, the European Agricultural Fund for 
Rural Development69 and possibly also the European Fisheries Fund70 and the research 
dimension through FP771. 
3) Eco-innovations: focus on mobilising innovation partnerships and information 
technology 
Eco-innovations are a natural junction of the pursuit towards resource efficiency, 
competitiveness and job creation as highlighted in several EU action plans72. The "Europe 
2020" strategy stresses the need to drive investments towards a knowledge-based and 
resource-efficient economy. Within this framew ork a new EU Eco-Innovation Action Plan is 
currently underway. It will propose reinforced a nd new actions in order to deliver cleaner, 
resource-efficient and low-car bon economic growth, while help ing to create new and better 
jobs in the EU. The aim is to harness the pot ential of eco-innovations to better protect the 
environment, significantly increase competitiven ess and contribute to jo b creation in the long-
term. Recent studies on the market for environmental technology73 underscore the growing 
socio-economic potential of this sector. The eco-i ndustry is one of Europe's biggest industrial 
sectors with around 3.4 million people directly empl oyed in this sector in the EU. In recent 
years the eco-industry has grown by around 8%  annually and 600,000 additional jobs were 
created between 2004 and 2008. Regions need to seize quickly the opport unities of investing 
in eco-innovations and Innovati on in general as underlined in the recent Communication74 on 
‘RP supporting smart growth in  Europe 2020’ such as th rough ‘smart specialisation 
strategies’. 
Greater support to eco-innovations 
Public interventions such as RP are well placed to address some of the key hurdles to the 
deployment of eco-innovations. It can help to overcome the weak linkages between research 
and market, the skills gap as well as the problem of access to finance, especially in the area of 
ICT and for SMEs and clusters. The strategy to  bolster environmental technologies and eco-
innovations in general is already enshrined in a number of OPs of the current RP. The short-
term challenge for each region is to develop strategies and projects tapping into their own eco-innovation potential. The specificities and conditions  of each territory are paramount in this 
                                                
 
68 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/life/  
69 Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005 of 20 September 2005 
70 Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 of 27 July 2006 on the European Fisheries Fund 
71 For instance 'The practical guide to EU funding opportunities for Research and Innovation' provides 
helpful support: http://cordis.europa.eu/eu-funding-guide/home_en.html  
72 COM(2004) 38 final, 'Environmental Technologies Action Plan (ETAP)' or COM(2008) 397 final 
'Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan' 
73 The most competitive industries are the most resource efficient and the other way round Study 'The 
links between the environment and compe titiveness', Project ENV.G.1/ETU/2007/0041, 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/economics_policy/pdf/exec_summary_comp.pdf  
74 COM(2010) 553 on RP and smart growth develops the concept of 'smart specialisation strategies' 
EN 21  EN respect. Successful eco-innovations for regional SD need also to factor in the relevant local 
actors (SMEs, universities, public authorities, etc). 
In this respect SMEs have a central role. En terprises are the corner stone of socio-economic 
development in most of the regions. Therefor e, to implement eco-innovative solutions, they 
should be fully integrated into the deve lopment and dissemination of environmental 
technologies and eco-innovations. Public investments are well placed to support those SMEs 
that bring about the necessary technical and ma nagerial changes to save energy, resources and 
reduce pollution. It is a direct investment to su stainable growth as those SMEs will be more 
competitive, create jobs and help to better pr otect the environment. Programmes, as in the 
example below, can play an active role in br inging a well targeted business support and 
facilitating the exchange of good practices. 
The 'Enworks' programme of North-West England (UK)75  
'Enworks' is a business support programme, co -financed by the ERDF and established in 
2001. It co-ordinates environmental advice, tr aining and support to businesses and ensures 
that high quality environmental business suppor t is available to all enterprises (especially 
SMEs) and is delivered in a co-ordinated way, increasing synergy and allowing good practice 
to be shared. Through 'Enworks' companies can access on-site support and an online toolkit to 
implement opportunities for improved resource effi ciency. One 'Enworks' project specifically 
helped companies to improve resource effi ciency and reduce waste thus increasing 
productivity and profitability. As a re sult since 2001 'Enworks' has helped: 
- Over 3,600 businesses with £75 million cost savings; 
- Save 190,000 tonnes of CO2 and 3,000,000 m3 of water;  
- Save 180,000 tonnes of raw materials per annum; 
- To provide more than 700 people with skills development. 
Given its success 'Enworks' just received £9.9 million new investment (including £3.5 million 
ERDF) to extend its existing servi ce with the following objectives, inter alia : 
- Deliver 255,000 tonnes of CO2 savings;  
- Create an additional 240 jobs in the region and safeguard a further 500. 
Eventually the potential of eco-innovations for improved re source efficiency should be 
foreseen in a whole life cycle approach, inte grating the production ph ase, the final product 
and the re-use or recycl ing. The ERDF already supports project  related to the concepts of the 
‘closed-loop economy’ or ‘waste  = food’ such as th e Interreg IVC Fast-T rack project ‘C2C 
Network’76 or regional programmes77 of the national industrial symbiosis programme in the 
UK. Those examples show that regions can alrea dy invest in regional strategies and projects 
to improve resource efficien cy through eco-innovations.  
Boosting eco-innovation through green technology clusters  
RP can especially support eco-innovation pr ojects such as through cluster development78. As 
shown in the following Austrian exampl e MAs can use RP funding to develop a 
comprehensive strategy and related projects on eco-innovation clusters. Clusters and possibly 
also networks are concrete so lutions that open up new opportuni ties to many companies while 
                                                 
75 http://www.enworks.com/  
76 http://www.c2cn.eu/  
77 Such as in the West Midlands, North East UK or Northern Ireland; http://www.nisp.org.uk/region.aspx  
78 The geographical concentration of interdependent groups of firms, research institutions and other 
innovation stakeholders is often referred to as "clusters" 
EN 22  EN decisively strengthening their competitiveness. The Regions for Economic Change79 initiative 
is an opportunity for further reinforcement of networking of eco -innovation and green 
technologies. Managing author ities are strongly encouraged to support environmental and 
energy clusters based on public-private partners hips as a means to fu rther invest in eco-
innovations. 
Eco Innovation Support through Clusters in Lower Austria80  
The region of Lower Austria developed a 'Networks & Cluste rs' programme co-financed by 
the ERDF. This initiative is managed under one umbrella by the regional Business Agency 
Ecoplus. It enables cross- cluster fertilisation, as well as im plementing cross-cutting strategies 
such as fostering eco-innovation in  all clusters. The cluster initia tives are part of the Regional 
Innovation System. The Green Build ing Cluster of Lower Austria bringing together expertise 
in energy efficient construction and rehabilitation  of old buildings helped  public authorities to 
define new technical standards and requirements. As a result the annual refurbishment rate 
has increased to about 2%. Within two years, it  should be increase furt her to around 3%. This 
acts as a catalyst for technology, job creation and added value fo r Lower Austrian companies, 
with an estimated 6,000-9,000 new or safeguarded  permanent jobs and a volume of building 
output of approx. €750m to €1b per year. The Plastics Cluster focuses on renewable 
resources. Results are now being turned into  new products, e.g. PLA packaging films for food 
in cooperation with the Food Clus ter. These successes are also linked to the close cooperation 
between the Lower Austrian companies, R&D and public authorities in combining ecologic 
challenges and business opportunities.  
Promote Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) 
Investments in the ICT sector represent an important step forward. It has been recently 
underlined in a Communication and Recomm endations from the European Commission81 
which, like the Committee of the Regions82, stress the role of regional and local authorities. 
Adequate ICT infrastructure has to be viewed  as a key enabler for the deployment of green 
technologies and eco-innovations . It represents a sensible solution with potentially high return 
on investment. ICT is a powerful driver to maximi se the results of investments in sectors like 
natural resource management, natural risk prevention, renewable energies or energy 
efficiency. The management of natural resource s (water, biodiversity…) and natural risks can 
be improved through the implementation of IC T tools such as electronic maps, remote 
sensing, GIS (Geographic Information System ) or EWS (Early Warning Systems). In the 
energy sector, the future lies in smart energy systems with a broad ne twork of decentralised 
renewable energy production. Support to smart metering can lead to significant reduction in 
energy consumption and help tackle ‘energy poverty’. Moving towards low-carbon transport 
will also require the deployment of intelligent transport systems. Overall the rapid deployment 
of broadband networks and access to modern ICT, even in remote areas such as on islands or 
mountains, is central to the implementation a nd reinforcement of eco- innovative solutions. In 
addition, it fosters reinforced soci al inclusion. An integrated appr oach to the use of RP funds 
                                                 
79 COM(2006) 675 final 
80 www.ecoplus.at  
81 COM(2009) 111 final and C(2009) 7604 final,  on mobilising Information and Communication 
Technologies to facilitate the transition to  an energy-efficient, low-carbon economy 
82 CdR 254/2008 fin, opinion of the committee of the regions on addressing the challenge of energy 
efficiency through information and communication technologies 
EN 23  EN in this area will enable EU regions to maximise  their investments in ICT through synergies in 
the environmental, energy, transport and social areas. 
. 
Regional Early Warning System (EWS ) on water scarcity in the Alps 
'Alp-Water-Scarce'83 (Water Management Strategies agains t Water Scarcity in the Alps) is a 
three year project funded by the "Alpine Sp ace programme" under the European Territorial 
Cooperation 2007-2013. The project commenced in  October 2008, involves 17 partners from 
five countries in the Alps and is coordinated by the Mountain Institute , University of Savoy, 
France. It deals with developing water manageme nt strategies and espe cially the deployment 
of an early warning system (based on mobile phone supported hydro-climatological 
monitoring, hydrological models and GIS) to pr edict water scarcity at the seasonal and multi-
annual level in the Eastern Alps (Regions of Ve neto and Styria). Several universities, federal 
research institutes, regional provinces, loca l governments, regional agencies, alpine 
economical societies, geological surveys as we ll as chambers of agri culture and forestry 
participate in the project. It benefits from  more than 20 observers  including the Alpine 
Convention. The project strongl y emphasises stakeholder partic ipation within a Stakeholder 
Interaction Forum which is essential for exchange  of experience, collection of information on 
water scarcity (which is often not yet available electronically) and distribution of information 
and knowledge. On the basis of questionnaires and with the support of a variety of ICT, 
qualitative information on problems and causes of water scarcity as well as possible solution 
strategies are transformed into quantitative information.  
Last but not least, ensuring that people have the right skills for the jobs of today and 
tomorrow will be key to building resource efficien cy. Investment in human capital to build the 
relevant skills-sets is a prer equisite. The European Social Fund can provide support to unlock 
the skills, creativity, entreprene urialism and capacity of the wo rkforce to innovate, in line 
with the Europe 2020 flagship initiative "An Agenda for new skills and jobs". 
Furthermore it is essential that RP actions be designed in syner gy with other EU polices in all 
the above fields. Hence, MAs should also us e the support offered by other EU policies and 
instruments such as the Competitiveness a nd Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) and 
the 7th research Framework Programme, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural 
Development (EAFRD) and the LIFE+ progra mme. The practical guide to EU funding 
opportunities for Research and Innovation84 provides helpful support in this respect. 
Linking research and SD, the FP7-4-SD.EU website 
A monitoring system "FP7-4-SD"  was launched on April 2010 at: https://www.fp7-4-sd.eu . 
This web-based tool can help to identify at regional (and national) le vel the different FP7 
research projects and participants, including SM Es and CSOs and measure their contribution 
to the operational objectives outlined in the Renewed EU Sustainable Development Strategy 
(Renewed EU SDS). Although the system had been  developed on the basis of the content of 
the EU renewed SDS, it can be used for EU2020, to  the extent that the flagship initiatives can 
be estimated by a set of operational objective s included in the EU renewed SDS. The 
                                                 
83 http://www.alpwaterscarce.eu/  
84 http://cordis.europa.eu/eu-funding-guide/home_en.html  
EN 24  EN interactive database of FP7-4-SD.EU allows generating different analyses including the 
impact at regional level. For example, the Ge ographical View enables to zoom into a region 
and view the full list of projec ts and project partners relate d with the operational objective 
"Raising the level of Green Public Procurement". Information is available at regional level, 
which in principle corresponds to NUTS level 2, except for Belgium, Germany and the UK, 
where NUTS level 1 is used instead.  
Pillar II: Investing better in sustainabl e growth for improving policy delivery  
Achieving further integration of SD principles into regional development requires the 
adoption of a comprehensive approach that checks at every step in the decision-making process for opportunities to enhance the impact of investments on the sustainability of the 
region. Opportunities to foster SD exist from strategy preparation to project implementation 
and evaluation of its impact. 
At project level, the basic approach consists of  taking a holistic perspective that considers its 
whole life-cycle. The goal is to get the best possible added value in terms of SD out of each 
particular investment, taking in to account all the opportunities  for synergies.  The project 
scope needs to be expanded in order not only to ta rget the very part of the project which gets 
the co-financing but also the ups tream and downstream parts in a fully integrated and cross-
cutting attitude. In the context of the presen t RP procedures, it is  proposed to enhance 
sustainability in each phase of the project cycle.  It can be achieved by increasing the greening 
of public procurement and strengthening the climate resilience of investments to exploit every opportunity to develop a resour ce efficient economy and to deepen and apply a number of 
good practices in the area of good governance, an  essential component of a successful SD 
strategy. 
.1) Integrating sustainability throughout the project life-cycle 
Sustainable Development as an integral pa rt from project design to delivery and 
monitoring 
Project implementation can benefit from a broa dened project cycle management approach. At 
the different stages of the project life-cycle opportunities exist to improve the sustainability performance of investments, requiring a consid eration of the impacts of RP investments over 
appropriate timeframes.  
The objective is to go beyond the sole 'delivery' perspectiv e and to shift towards a long-term 
'performance' perspective. This evolution is also  needed to respond to the reinforced attention 
by the Court of Auditors on 'performance audits'. The recent Special Report
85 on waste water 
treatment measures in RP has to be placed into this context. It will increase the pressure on 
both the MS and the European Commission to de liver projects not only compliant with the 
relevant EU legislation but also  performing adequately. Last year the Court of Auditors has 
also put "Climate change and sustainabl e Europe" in its new audit priorities86; it further 
                                                 
85 Special Report No 3/2009, "The effectiveness of Structural Meas ures spending on waste water 
treatment for the 1994-1999 and 2000-2006 programme periods"; 
http://eca.europa.eu/portal/pls /portal/docs/1/2588293.PDF  
86 ECA/10/08; Presentation of the 2010 work progra mme of the European court of auditors to the 
committee on budgetary control of the European parliament; 
http://eca.europa.eu/portal/pls /portal/docs/1/3680724.PDF  
EN 25  EN underlines the necessity for RP to look specifica lly at the effectivene ss of funding in the SD 
area. 
As a promoter of public investment RP bears a responsibility in the process leading to the 
execution of the co-financed project as well as its aftermath. Some instruments, such as the 
SEA and EIA procedures, already provide a tool for verifying a number of key elements for 
ensuring the sustainability at the upstream pha ses for certain types of  programme and project 
development. However, as sustainability is about a long-term commitm ent, the follow-up of 
co-financed projects and their impact also ha ve to be considered. Over a reasonable 
timeframe, public investment should not only rema in at the very least neutral in terms of 
impact on the sustainability of the territory, but  lead to an improved situation in the region 
where the investment has taken pl ace. This kind of approach requires project developers to 
look at the medium and long-term impacts of th eir developments and possibly integrate in the 
design, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the project any corrective measure to 
avoid future imbalances.  
Concretely, from the implementatio n perspective, a first step can  take place at the ‘project 
selection’ phase that offers a clear way to reinforce the sustainability of the project. The procedure itself, the assessment cr iteria and the evaluation play a key role in ensuring that the 
projects adequately address SD  considerations. MAs could consider the following ways to 
enhance inclusion of SD considerations:  
(i) include SD aspects in calls for proposals,  (ii) tailor evaluation systems so that projec t proposals integrati ng SD are rewarded,  
(iii) introduce checklists with  stringent conditions to ensure that SD is included,  
(iv) develop tender specifications for separate pr ojects that are linked to the regional strategy 
in order to facilitate synergies between differe nt sectors and individual  projects, building on 
each other’s strengths and w eaknesses in terms of SD, 
(v) develop a guide on how to enhance SD  project identificat ion and preparation. 
. 
The checklist for environmental impact asse ssment of project proposals in Finland
87 
To increase the commitment of the implementing authorities to undertake environmental 
impact assessment (EIA) of project proposals elig ible to ERDF support, six regions in Finland 
have formed EIA panels. The role of the pane l is to participate in and develop the EIA 
processes at authority level through dissemi nation of information and capacity building 
activities. By appointing EIA ma nagers the task of developing the assessment procedure in 
the organization and the quality assurance is enforced. One practical way forward has been a 
standardised checklist for assessment of project proposals for the 2007-2013 period. 
Assessment concerns all projects and should i ndicate whether a project is environmentally 
neutral, beneficial or harmful. The main  headlines of the assessment table are: 
1. Impact on Climate change 
2. Impacts on emissions 
                                                 
87 This project example and others are taken from the report by the European Network of Environmental 
Authorities (ENEA) on " Improving the Climate Resilience of Cohesion Policy Funding Programmes " 
available at: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/integration/pdf/enea/climate_resiliance_cfr_pr.pdf  
EN 26  EN 3. Impacts on production and consumption 
4. Impacts on the natural and built environment  
5. Impacts on people 
6. Impacts on traffic 
7. Impacts on research and training 
; 
Guide for ensuring the integr ation of the horizontal En vironment priority (Sweden)  
A guide assisting supporting proj ect promoters and desk officers in selecting and enhancing 
environmental aspects of the ERDF supported projects has been developed by the Swedish 
Environmental Protection Agency. The guide represents an awaren ess raising effort aimed at 
stimulating greater environmental awarenes s among both project a pplicants, managing 
authorities and selection committees. It has b een widely accepted and is now used by the 
majority of project applicants to the ERDF. Th ey are obliged to describe the impact of the 
project on the horizontal priori ty/criteria in the application form, responding to four 
compulsory questions:  
- What are the environmental objectives of the project?  
- What activities are planned in order to achieve the environmenta l objectives of the project?  
- What effect does the result and impacts of  the project have on the environment?  
- Does the project have any impact on Natura 2000 areas? 
The information provided in the application is followed up in progress reports during the 
implementation of the project. 
Another way to implement a 'whole life-cycle' a pproach on projects is to move towards the 
internalisation of externaliti es. Environmental and social costs of projects, i.e. the 
externalities, need to be taken into acc ount when assessing investments and possible 
alternative options. 
A concrete way forward to be further explored is to adapt the 'Cost-Benefit Analysis' (CBA)88 
of projects. The aim is to consider the key su stainable factors for the projects, and integrate 
their long-term costs such as carbon, water use,  land use, social inclus ion, etc. In the short-
term the focus on crucial factors such as car bon content or greenhouse ga s emissions and their 
related costs represent a way to be further explored. The integrat ion of the carbon factor into 
project development can be highlighted as a concrete procedure to significantly foster 
sustainability of the investment co-funded by RP. Future innovations might enlarge this 
approach to other important vari ables such as ‘land use’ or ‘w ater consumption’. This would 
also impact on the terms of the financ ial profitability of investments.  
These various approaches and instruments are rele vant to RP as they directly influence the 
decision procedure on co-financed projects and subs equently the quality of project delivery in 
terms of SD. 
Reinforced use of Green Public Procurement (GPP) 
A crucial stage of the project life cycle in terms of SD is linked to the procurement process. In 
this respect the potential of GPP as a policy in strument in addressing climate change and SD 
related issues is being increas ingly recognised. Over recent y ears there has been a growing 
political commitment at the internationa l, EU and national levels. In a recent 
                                                 
88 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docoffic/2007/working/wd4_cost_en.pdf  
EN 27  EN Communication89, the Commission presented a proposal to  set ambitious targets for green 
public procurement (GPP) linked to specific crit eria. Public authorities  in Europe spend €1.5 
trillion a year on goods and services equivalent to 16 % of EU GDP. Hence, public 
procurement is a key driver to strengthen SD in various sectors. From constructing transport 
infrastructures to renovating public buildin gs, and purchasing IT equipment to the 
rehabilitation of brown-fiel d sites, public procurement has a huge impact in driving the 
market towards sustainable development. It is also crucial in the development of eco-
innovation.  
GPP represents a genuine opportunity and key in strument in projects co-financed by RP to 
foster SD. It needs to be factored in at a very early stage in pr oject identification and 
preparation in order to get to a tendering proc edure which fully integrates GPP requirements. 
In this respect, the Commission’s tool kit to GPP90 can be a helpful support for MAs and other 
local and regional authorities to overcome the challenges and barriers to the inclusion and 
deployment of GPP. There are a numb er of other suppo rtive initiatives91 in order to help 
authorities to implement GPP in the short- term. Spain provides a good practice regional 
example as outlined below. 
The Green Public Procurem ent action plan of the Basque Country, Spain 
. 
The regional government of the Basque Count ry initiated a GPP Re gional Action Plan (GPP 
RAP) in April 2008. In addition to boosting GPP the aim is also to show with real results how 
to fight climate change and promote local ec onomy competitiveness,  thus, helping other 
regions, provinces or supra-m unicipal organisation set their own strategies. The plan is 
developed and implemented through Ihobe92, the Publicly Owned Environmental 
Management Company. The GPP RAP is especially  innovative as it contributes, for instance: 
- To highlight the role and importance of  Regional Governments in promoting GPP; 
- To develop a coordinated strategy with the demand and supply side of the market; 
- To show the relation between procurement activities and climate change;  
- To present real resu lts/indicators (in CO2 and Euros) of  environmental relief through GPP. 
The successful elements of the GPP RAP are: 
- Central coordination of the pr ogramme and one message from a ll regional public authorities; 
- Best practices within the region and direct  exchange in working groups, training sessions… 
- Training courses and support in greening tender documents; 
- Communication of experiences to gain internal support and political commitment; 
- Support and preparation of the regi on's producer companies (supply side); 
While regional action plans can represent a prac tical way forward to foster GPP, initiatives 
can also be taken at the local municipal level.  The most common entry into GPP is then often 
through the procurement of office equipment which can be quickly extended to other 
categories of products such as energy or cl eaning related products. The following example 
shows the room for initiative to support GPP both at regional and local level: a soft incentive in the form of an open competition at regional level can trigger practical implementation at 
municipal level. 
. 
                                                
 
89 COM(2008)400 
90 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/toolkit_en.htm  
91 The initiative ‘Procura+’ from ICLEI is designed to help support public authorities in implementing 
Sustainable Procurement – and help promote their achievements: http://www.procuraplus.org/  
92 www.ihobe.net  
EN 28  EN Deploying GPP in municipal of fices in the Czech Republic 
A competition was organised in 2008 by the Hradec Králové region for environmentally-
friendly operation of administrative offices  and organisations. Around 350 entities from 
towns, municipalities and institutions in th e region were invited to take part in the 
competition. With a questionnaire they were given an opportunity during three months to 
answer questions concerning the implementa tion of environmentally friendly operations 
within their organisations. A to tal of 62 institutions took part in the competition, of which 34 
were municipal and city offi ces. Completed questionnaires were evaluated, and physical 
inspections of the actual situation were also  carried out on the premises of the 20 best 
institutions. Assessments were conducted on th e use of ecological resources which was the 
basis for purchasing and installing new, efficient lamps and for adopting other 
environmentally friendly measures. For instan ce products with ecolabels are purchased for 
running the office, specifically office items made from recycled materials, cleaning 
detergents, energy-saving fluores cent lamps, and recycled toners for printers. Those 
achievements are part of the project "Buy Smart"93, funded by the European programme 
"Intelligent Energy Europe", which provides free consultation and information material on 
green procurement.  
Overall, the integration of GP P stimulates local and regional economic actors to invest in 
more environmentally friendly processes, servic es and products. It also sends a clear message 
to all local and regional stakeholders as to wher e priorities are and the direction in which they 
should lead their company, SME, university, resear ch centre, etc., in order to win tenders. In 
addition it will trigger a gra dual adaptation of the skills, knowledge and capacities towards 
‘green skills’ and suppor t innovation towards SD.  
Establishing proper indicators for monitoring and evaluation 
Monitoring helps set the basis for informed  policy making and reinforced SD. Designing 
appropriate indicators and colle cting data on a set of economic, social and environmentally 
related criteria provides public authorities and project promoters with the necessary data and 
information to assess programme and project SD impact.  
A first step is the setting up at national and re gional level of a set of indicators informing on 
SD in general, even though not exclusively linked to RP programmes. A number of efforts are 
being made by MS and international organisa tions to develop representative headline 
indicators that can assist in measuri ng progress in SD. For example, Eurostat94 has developed 
a number of such indicators that reflect the pr iority areas identified in the EU sustainable 
development strategies. In addition, th e Communication 'GDP and beyond-Measuring 
progress in a changing world'95, suggests the development of a SD scoreboard w ith up-to-date 
data that better reflects the concerns of citizens and recent developments such as governance 
and sustainable production and consumption. 
Against this background, the contribution of RP supported investments could be traced 
through specific indicators at th e appropriate level. For exampl e, regarding the reduction of 
greenhouse gas emissions, 54 programmes out of  410 in the current programming period 
make provision for such indicators . This is a right step that n eeds to be replicated across all 
                                                 
93 http://www.buy-smart.info  
94 Measuring progress towards a more sustainable Europe: SD indicators for the EU, data 1990-2005 
95 COM(2009) 433 final of 20.08.2009 
EN 29  EN relevant programmes. Nevertheless, GHG emissions are only one element, of the 
environmental pillar of SD. Ot her indicators (such as waste pe r inhabitant, energy intensity, 
water consumption per inhabitant) should comple ment an SD monitoring framework that can 
be consolidated for regional SD scoreboards. The same a pplies to poverty and social 
exclusion, ageing society, public health or good governance themes that are also part of the 
SD strategy. 
Even if such indicators have not been defi ned in current programmes, identifying and 
establishing them now will provide a baseline for future programmes. MA and regional authorities could also start to build on existi ng forms of monitoring with a view to develop a 
comprehensive monitoring framework such as  in the following Bulgarian example. 
Monitoring and evaluation of environmen tal issues in regional development: the 
example of Bulgaria 
The project ' Integrating Global Environmental Issues into Bulgaria’s Regional Development 
Process'  (Rio Conventions Project)96 is a joint initiative of the United Nations Development 
Program (UNDP), the Bulgarian Ministry of  Regional Development and Public Works 
(MRDPW) and the Ministry of Environment and Water (MoEW), financed by the Global 
Environmental Facility (GEF). The project supports the integration of three UN conventions 
(on biodiversity, climate change and combating de sertification) into regional development and 
spatial planning processes in Bulgaria. The ob jective is to strengthen the capacities of 
MRDPW and MoEW for mainstreaming global environment into the formulation and 
implementation of regional and local development, as well as spatial planning policies. 
Specific indicators, training courses and a prot otype application for a geographic information 
system (GIS) were developed. Seven specific st rategic indicators were proposed to MoEW to 
be approved as part of the MRDPW monitoring system to assess the impact of regional 
development plans on climate change, biodivers ity and land desertification. Those indicators 
were also officially included by MRDPW in guid elines to be used by district and municipal 
administrations.  
Monitoring such SD indicators will provide helpful information for decision makers at 
regional or local level regarding key sustainabi lity criteria. Nevertheless, the Strategic Report 
2010 on the implementation of the 2007-13 pr ogrammes indicates clear scope for 
improvement in this area, with insufficient progress at this stage in data collection.  
Another approach is the development of mode lling systems which assess carbon emissions of 
certain type of investments, based on the information collected  from selected indicators. 
These models support decision-making either on  the proposed investments themselves to 
avoid CO 2 emissions or on palliative investments to compensate the emissions of other 
projects. The aim is to help reduce the CO2 emissions at programme level. The example 
below illustrates the use of a simula tion tool to achieve these objectives97.  
The example of the French software as a carbon management tool 
The National Strategic Reference Framewor k (NSRF) provided by France for the 2007-2013 
operational programmes of Cohesion Policy states that “ all State-region pr oject contracts and 
                                                 
96 http://www.rioconventions.org/  
97 http://www.datar .gouv.fr/IMG/Fichiers/DEVELOPPEMENT _DURABLE/Necater_presentation.pdf  
EN 30  EN operational programmes should aim to be carbon ne utral. A monitoring system will be put in 
place to ensure this. " A private company was commissioned  to provide an IT system which 
enables regional authorities to make ex-ante assessment of th e carbon impact of the regional 
development plans as well as monitoring th e carbon impact (ex- post evaluations) at 
programme level. Based on the available national and regional statistics, the system turns the 
planned investments in Euros into CO2 quantitie s thus playing decision support tool role of. 
The CO2 emissions are calculate d not only during the duration of  the operational programme 
but also during and following project implem entation. Once projects are implemented, the 
values or parameters can repl ace the funding amounts to refine  the monitoring. In addition the 
use of this tool has a broad pedagogic aspect since it develops a "carbon culture" within the 
public planning authorities. The majority of th e regions now have a good or very good track 
record in using this instrument and the prov ider has developed a new system which works 
also at project level. 
2) Checking investments against clim ate resilience and resource efficiency 
To deliver more qualitative projects in term s of SD, two methods of  addressing programme 
and project development and implementati on need to be considered by MAs:  
(i) the climate resilien ce of their undertakings, 
(ii) their resource efficiency.  Taking them into account will provide enhanced  sustainability and a competitive advantage 
for their economies. 
Screening operational programmes a nd projects for climate resilience 
The impacts of climate change pose an unprecedented challenge to public policies and 
investments. While the current understanding of c limate impact is still imperfect, policies and 
projects which risk to be direc tly or indirectly influenced by w eather patterns can no longer be 
defined only according to past data and statisti cs but need to include the predicted changed 
conditions of the future. In this light the cu rrent policy choices rega rding sensitive sectors 
such as agriculture, energy or water resources , and investment choices, for example, in 
infrastructure projects, will greatly influence the ability of regions to react to future climate 
change impacts. Since RP s upports investments which will have a influence on local and 
regional development for decades to come, thei r climate resilience needs to be looked at.   
Therefore, there is a need for decision-making on policy and investment c hoices to ensure that 
climate resilience is built in.  
To achieve this goal, the outlined measures and strategies in this working document will 
contribute to building adaptive capacity and avoi ding the potential advers e consequences that 
new investments may have on the vulnerability of existing ecosystems. It means that EU 
regions and cities need adequate informa tion on climate change, the supportive social 
structure and the adequate governance mechanis ms as a foundation in a first instance for 
delivering adaptation actions that directly help to reduce vulnerability to climate risks or exploit opportunities. 
EN 31  EN All those options can be enshrined in ‘Regio nal Climate Adaptation Strategies'. The White 
Paper98 on adaptation to climate change encourages EU regions to design such strategies by 
2012. Those strategies are by natu re ‘place-based’ and predomin antly built around the local 
and regional socio-economic and environmental conditions. However, RP can provide support 
for the development of those strategies for which regions can make use of the recently developed guidelines
99. In coastal areas, LRAs are encouraged to build on the developments 
of Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM)100 .  
In practical terms a range of potential options s hould be evaluated in order to select the best 
possible measures to build climat e resilience at local and regional level. The focus in the short 
term has to be on options often referred to as  'no-regrets', 'low-regrets' and 'win-win-win' 
options. 
"No-regret" options  are adaptive projects whose socio-economic benefits exceed their costs 
whatever the magnitude of future climate cha nge. It includes actions that are already cost-
effective under the current c limate conditions and would be further justified under the 
increased risks of projected climate change. In short 'no-regret measur es' are the guarantee of 
the best possible return on inve stments in terms of SD. Theref ore a public investment policy 
such as RP is well placed to yield further su pport to those types of  preventive measures. 
Avoiding building in flood plains  or reducing leakage from dri nking water pipes are examples 
of "no-regret" options to build climate resilience. 
"Low-regret" options  include adaptive measures with re latively low associated costs and 
potentially large benefits under the future cl imate conditions. Investments in preserving 
natural areas in support of biodiversity goals, creating green urban areas or the development 
of green roofs as shown in the Greek example below can be part of those options. Planning for future retro-fitting of investments, especially for certain type of infrastructure, is also in certain cases a low-regret measure. Both no a nd low-regret options will maximise the return 
on investment as the associated risk is low. 
Green roofs for improved climate resilient building and cities 
The Greek Ministry of Finance inaugurated in September 2008 a green roof on the building of 
its Treasury in Athens. The green roof covers 650m², equalling 52% of the roof space and 8% 
of the total floor space. Studies of the therm odynamics of the roof concluded that the thermal 
performance of the building wa s positively affected  by the installation. In August 2009 energy 
savings of 50% were observed for air conditioning in the floor directly below the installation. 
Energy savings totalling €5,630 per annum were reco rded, which translates to a 9% saving in 
air conditioning and a 4% savi ng in heating bills for the whole building. Beyond the energy 
aspect, green roofs have many potential benefits including: 
- Controlling storm-water runoff, thus reducing urban flooding after heavy rain 
- Providing green space in cities 
- Creating wildlife habitat 
- Improving water quality  
- Mitigating urban he at-island effects  
- Prolonging the service life  of roofing materials  
- Reducing sound reflection and transmission  
- Conserving energy (less energy for heating and cooling) 
                                                 
98 COM(2009) 147 
99 http://ec.europa.eu/environment/climat/ad aptation/pdf/RAS%20Final%20Report.pdf  
100 COM(2007)308 
EN 32  EN With limited additional investment, the co-ben efits are therefore numerous and long lasting. 
A 'win-win' option  stands for measures which minimise the climate risks but have also other 
social, environmental or economic advantages. Relevant projects address climate impacts but 
can also contribute for instance to mitigation of climate change: increasing energy efficiency 
in buildings proves to be an investment w ith high return in any event: better insulated 
buildings offer improved protection against current and future heat and cold waves and also in 
the meantime reduces demand for heating an d cooling, thus cuttin g energy bills and CO 2 
emissions. An integrated approach to the development or re-development of a threatened area can also be build around win-win options su ch as in the following example on climate 
resilience of a coastal zone. .. 
Adaptation of an infrastructure to clim ate impacts in coastal areas, France  
On the French Mediterranean coast the "lido de Sète"101 is a 12 km long coastal zone with 
high environmental value, several key socio- economic activities and important transport 
infrastructures (rail and road). It has to cope with severe coastal erosion and high tourism 
pressure threatening the sustainability of the whole area, including the coastal road which was 
regularly damaged. The decision was made by th e competent national an d regional authorities 
to invest € 60 million with the support of the ER DF for a major shift in the management of 
this area, taking into account adap tation to climate change and SD: 
- the existing road will be destroyed and reconstructed further away from the beach; 
- the beach and existing natural areas will be restored and ne wly protected (dunes, dikes); 
- park places for cars will be regulated and made impossible close to the beach; 
- soft transport modes to the beach will be de veloped (bus shuttles to the cities, bicycle 
lanes…);  
- three type of beaches (all accessible to disabl ed people) will be created: a central "natural 
beach", two "semi-natural beaches" with ba sic facilities and two "urban beaches"; 
- economic activities (a research laborator y, one SME, wine-growing, a camping) are 
maintained in the new architecture of the coast; 
This integrated redevelopment of the coast fu lfils social, economic and environmental goals. 
EU regions should take account of the 'climate dimension' of their development programmes 
and projects in order to improve their climate resilience. In addi tion it can be turned from a 
defensive approach into new opportuniti es for socio-economic development. 
Investing in the most re source efficient options 
The flagship initiative of "Europe 2020" on a "resource efficient Europe" has put resource 
efficiency under the spotlight in the context of a "resource constrained world". A number of other recent policy developments in the EU such as the Action Plan on "sustainable 
production and consumption"
102, the EU "Raw material initiative"103 or the "Lead Market 
Initiative for Europe"104 have also underlined the increasi ng pressure on resources. In this 
framework the policies aiming at SD, such as RP, need to reinforce the focus of programmes and measures on enhancing resource efficienc y. The message of "Europe 2020" is a bold one 
in this perspective: the crucial role of structural funds to support this shift towards a resource 
efficient and low-carbon econom y is clearly underlined.  
                                                
 
101 http://www.pole-lagunes.org/ftp/dossi er%20de%20presse%20lido%20sete.pdf  
102 COM(2008) 397 final 
103 COM(2008) 699 
104 COM(2007) 860 final 
EN 33  EN Two key areas for the improvement of resource efficiency and of direct concern for RP are 
waste and water management. RP has provided significant investments in those areas over 
several programming periods. Nowa days they also represent an important economic sector in 
the EU under the headin g of "eco-industry"105, provide jobs and basic environmental services. 
Therefore EU co-funded projects on waste and wate r play an important role in SD at regional 
level. Indeed, a significant share of the Major Projects106 actually concern water supply, waste 
water treatment or waste management. The EU has set a stringent legislative framework in 
both sectors with mandatory targets107. The deadlines to meet the requirements of those 
Directives can be addressed as true oppor tunities for the regions to improve their 
competitiveness, the state of the environment, tackle health issues and create jobs. 
A fundamental element of the recen tly revised directive on Waste108 is the legally binding 
new five step 'waste hierarchy'. It highlights the preferred options to be considered when 
designing waste management projects, i.e. waste prevention first, then preparing for reuse, 
followed by recycling, other recovery such as  energy recovery and finally disposal. Any 
investment supported by RP in  waste management projects should therefore be assessed 
against this framework to avoid a narrow approa ch only focused on the sp ecific project itself. 
The revised Waste Directive also strengthens  the existing provisions on waste management 
plans and introduces waste prev ention programmes. But with th e revised directive, waste 
management plans will now have to give a cl ear priority to waste prevention and recycling 
over other options. Regions can address this deve lopment as a true opportunity to create green 
jobs and capitalise on waste prevention and recyclin g projects to develop co-benefits as in the 
example below. In addition waste prevention and recycling make an important contribution to 
cutting GHG emissions from waste and therefore help meeting the EU 2020 climate targets.  
Integrated recycling, composting and biogas plant in Sant'Antnin, Malta 
The waste treatment plant of Sant'Antnin recei ved €16.7 million EU in co-financing from the 
Cohesion Fund in support of upgrading the plant and acquiring modern technology as follows:  
- Material Recovery Facility for the manual sorting of dry recyclable waste recovered by 
separation at source, including products received from the Bring-in Sites; 
- Mechanical Treatment Plant (MTP) to mechan ically separate the municipal waste received 
to prepare the organic fraction for further processing; 
- Composting Plant, treating the source-separa ted biodegradable wast e and mechanically 
sorted biodegradable waste from the MTP in or der to produce biogas and digested material to 
be used as compost; 
- Combined Heat and Power Plant (CHP), which will run on the produced biogas and return 
electrical power enough for 1,400 households of 4 persons each, besides the heat required to 
run the plant; 
                                                 
105 Ernst & Young, Eco-industry, its size, employment, pe rspectives and barriers to  growth in an enlarged 
EU, August 2006; "The estimated total turnover of ec o-industries in the EU-25 is €227 billion, of which 
€214,000 million corresponds to the EU-15 area. In constant prices, the turnover of the eco industries 
grew around 7% between 1999 and 2004 (for the EU-15 area)"[…] "The total direct and indirect 
employment due to eco-industries represent approximately 3.4 million full-time job equivalents, of which 2.3 million jobs are from pollution management activities. Resource management activities 
represent approximately 1 million full-time job equiva lents. The majority (77%) of the jobs in the 
pollution management activities are in the waste water treatment and solid waste management sectors" 
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/enveco/eco_industry/pdf/ecoindustry2006_summary.pdf
 
106 Projects worth more than € 50 million 
107 Directive 2008/98/EC on waste (Waste Framework Directive) and EU Water Framework Directive 
(Directive 2000/60/EC) 
108 Directive 2008/98/EC of 19 November 2008 on waste and repealing certain Directives 
EN 34  EN With this upgrade, the plant annually proces ses and treats 36,000 tonnes of dry recyclables 
and 35,000 tonnes of organic waste mainly resulti ng from the municipal waster produced by 
residents in the vicinity. 
. 
Building on the EU Water Framework Directive, RP invests massively into the water sector 
such as in the management of drinking water. As for waste, investments in drinking water can 
be placed into a hierarchy of options base d on the water hierarchy laid down in the 
Commission's Communication on water scarcity and droughts109. Water savings, increased 
efficiency in water utilisation, water prici ng policy or cost-effective measures on demand 
management should be undertaken first. Other alternatives such as planning for additional 
water supply infrastructure should only be co nsidered when those first options have been 
exhausted. At project level, local solutions such  as reducing leakage in pipes, installing rain-
water collectors or re-use of recycled water are practical ways forwar d. In addition, in water 
scarce regions it is paramount to engage in  a wider systemic reflexion on the overall 
sustainability of regional water systems.  
In the medium-term, RP could build further on th e principle of recovery of the costs of water 
services, which are mandatory to MS since the end of 2010, and align funding for water 
projects with an effective impl ementation of this principle.  
Eventually, the approach of investments in te rms of a preference of options enables co-funded 
projects to maximise their added-value as it lo oks for the most efficient balance between the 
economic, social and environmental objectives. Furthermore, it is a good example for national, regional and local aut horities as well as projects appl icants to engage in SD for 
projects which do not get EU funding. 
3) Better Governance 
Europe 2020's objectives will be achieved more eff ectively if use of structural and cohesion 
funds is part of a broader policy framewor k providing the necessary legal certainty and 
appropriate incentives. In practice this means that regional policy programmes and projects 
should be accompanied by changes in the regulatory and administrative framework. 
Broaden partnerships and reinforce the stra tegic content of Monitoring Committees 
As underlined in a resolution of the European Parliament
110 regarding governance and 
partnership for projects in the sphere of RP, governance is a cr ucial building block to achieve 
SD. They are interconnected because they transcend the competencies of individual line ministries as well as the vertical tiers of jurisdictions, from supranational institutions to municipal authorities. In addition, successf ul experiences in policy delivery have 
demonstrated that a proper representation of socio-economic partners (for example, the 
business community, trade unions, consumer associ ations, universities a nd the training sector, 
NGOs…) has to be taken into account when designing and implementing SD.  
The ex-post  evaluation
111 of the governance systems for Cohesion Policy during the 2000-
2006 period confirms that these systems are fi t-for-purpose to deliver SD. The evaluation 
                                                 
109 COM(2007) 414 final 
110 Own-initiative report by the European Parliament, 2008/2064(INI), Governance and partnership at a 
national, regional and project basis in the field of Regional Policy; 
111 http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/sources/docgener/evaluation/rado2_en.htm  
EN 35  EN noted that across the EU initiatives were being taken to incorporate SD concerns into 
programme design and management.  It facilitated the balanced  consideration of economic, 
social and environmental factors.  Rather than treating the differe nt dimensions of sustainable 
development in a separate manner, some MS c onsidered how they interact and benefit and 
potentially compromise each another so that  programme and project activities integrate 
economic growth, employment generation, social  cohesion and environmental improvement. 
Particularly important was a cross-sectoral approach in partnershi p-building, bringing 
together an appropriate range of  expertise with horiz ontal and vertical interaction and shared 
decision-making that facilitated institutional le arning and associated or ganisational change.  
One of the most significant challenges of SD gove rnance is to establish mechanisms to ensure 
effective horizontal policy integration, i.e. across sectors, at the different administrative levels 
(national/regional/local: verti cal policy integration) whic h means developing a kind of 
"diagonal policy integration"112. 
SD design and implementation ca n benefit from an inter-ministerial structure instead of 
depending on one sectoral minist ry or department. The followi ng example illustrates the SD 
governance approach followed in France. 
Inclusion of territorial authorities and so cio-economic partners to strengthen SD 
In June 2003 a new sustainable development gove rnance structure was established in France 
with the creation of an "Inter-ministerial Comm ittee for SD". It manages the SD policy of the 
French Government and looks also at the cohe rence of the actions of the different line 
ministries. This Committee is managed by an 'int er-ministerial delegate' who reports directly 
to the Prime Minister. It adopt ed the national strategy on SD in June 2003 (updated in 2007) 
which was developed in coordination with the "national council on SD" bringing together 90 
representatives of the socio-econom ic area, civil society and the te rritorial authori ties. In order 
to further engage regional and local authorities on SD, the Mini stry in charge of SD launched 
in 2006 "calls for acknowledgment of  territorial SD strategies": local and regional authorities 
are encouraged to submit their SD strategies or 'Agenda 21'113 to the Ministry to get an official 
acknowledgment of their quality. In order to boost SD in Fr ance a vast national initiative114 
was launched in July 2007. Five categories of stakeholders incl uding territorial authorities 
were involved in an extens ive consultation process around si x thematic working groups. The 
conclusions of those working groups were ta ken over by "operational committees", including 
one on the territorial aspect of  SD. They came up with concrete  proposals that were turned 
into a new law adopted by the French Parliament in August 2009.  
The partnership principle underpins RP and c onstitutes an essentia l tool for improved 
governance. The RP regulations leave room for national practices in the application of the 
principle. It is important to underline the bene fit that partnership adds to the sustainable 
development of programmes and projects. The i nvolvement of civil society in public policies 
works best when it starts from the beginning (design stage) and lasts throughout the whole 
programme cycle. It is essent ial for creating ownership and c onsensus among the stakeholders 
that drive project implementation and the wi der public thus fostering public acceptance. 
Mobilisation of civil societ y goes hand in hand with a bottom-up approach to project 
                                                 
112 European Sustainable Development Network (ESDN), Quarterly Report June 2009, http://www.sd-
network.eu/?k=quarterly%20reports&report_id=13  
113 http://www.agenda21france.org/  
114 "Grenelle de l'Environnement" http://www.legrenelle-environnement.gouv.fr/  
EN 36  EN development strongly encouraging the populati on to participate from the beginning. Civil 
society inclusion is also key driver for social  inclusion. In addition, co-financed projects may 
require mandatory environmental assessments. It  implies a mandatory public consultation on 
project developments. In this aspect, fo llowing the spirit of the Aarhus Convention115, 
national and regional authorities have further room of manoeuvre to build on the richness and 
diversity of civil society bodies when dealing with SD topics. 
To enhance partnership, MAs can take a number of initiatives to further involve and commit 
the civil society. In particul ar, Monitoring Committees could benefit from a more active 
involvement of the socio-economic partners. They  could be involved in the establishment of 
the meetings' agenda and in discussions reques ting clarifications on i ssues of their direct 
interest. The Committees need to review periodica lly progress in meeting the stated objectives 
for the strategy and operational programmes, as well as the po ssible need to revise them, 
agreeing on the corrective measures needed. Activ e participation of pr ogrammes stakeholders 
will contribute to more effective exchanges and provide feedback for fine-tuning the programmes' orientations. RP can contribute to reinforce the capacity building of these 
partners, such as in the example below. 
Increasing capacity building of so cio-economic partners in Slovenia 
Lack of capacity amongst NGOs in Slovenia was seen as a barrier  to the effective 
implementation of the partnership principle in the 2004-2006 period. As a consequence, a 
specific priority to develop NGOs was esta blished in the ESF Operational Programme 
'Human Resource Development' in Slovenia.  Around € 13 million has been allocated to 
improving the management, organisation and de velopment capacities of NGOs working with 
vulnerable groups. This led to the Centre for Information Service, Cooperation and 
Development of NGOs, (CNVOS) being selected after a public call to  support NGOs in the 
Structural Funds programmes. CNVOS was esta blished in 2001. The aim of its 27 founding 
organisations is to empower NGOs in Slovenia a nd to promote their role as an important part 
of civil society. Over 200 organisations ha ve now joined CNVOS which supports NGOs in 
their engagement in the CP and selects NGO repr esentatives to particip ate in the Monitoring 
Committees of the Structural and Cohesion Funds. 
The following good practice example from Germa ny illustrates an interesting approach to 
further engage local administ rative levels in the implement ation of regional strategies. 
Engaging local authorities in regional strategies  
The regional government of North-Rhine-Westpha lia (NRW), Germany adopted in early 2009 
a regional strategy on adaptation to climate ch ange. In order to get broad involvement at 
municipal level of the regional auth orities organised an open competition "Aktion Klimaplus – 
NRW-Klimakommune der Zukunft " for local municipalities who were encouraged to develop 
their own strategy and measures in the frame of the wider regional st rategy. The two winners 
were rewarded with significant regional funding in order to implement their projects. The 
competition was an innovative way to publicise the strategy and stimulate creativity and new 
ideas on adaptation to climate ch ange as well as ownership of the strategy at local level. In 
addition, as an un-planned consequence of the competition and a positive side effect, a 
                                                 
115 UN Economic Commission for Europe, "Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in 
Decision-making and Access to Justice in Enviro nmental Matters, known as 'Aarhus Convention', 
25/06/98 
EN 37  EN network of more than 20 cities and municipa lities emerged after the competition. It has been 
officially structured by the municipalities them selves to accompany the uptake of the regional 
strategy at local level. In an  upcoming development it is pla nned to work with schools to 
further publicise the strategy and ra ise awareness among the population. 
Another approach improving governance is the use of networks or platforms. The creation of 
cross-cutting networks to promote environm ental policy integration and more largely 
sustainability is an efficient way to engage with  a broad range of stakeh olders in a structured 
manner. It also gives the possibility to addr ess the issue of vertic al integration. National 
strategies on adaptation to climate change or on SD can be reinforced through better involvement of sub-national authorities. For in stance, many MS have es tablished sub-national 
level ‘councils’, ‘committees’, ‘commissions’ or ‘working groups’ on SD. Local ‘Agenda 21’ 
initiatives represent also a concrete and power ful way forward to use platforms as building 
block for improved governance.  
Networking of environmental authorities in Italy 
For the period 2000-06 the Italian Network (R ete) gathered representatives from the 
environmental sector as well as  from MAs. The network was in tended to be a place for public 
sector experts to work together. These public sector experts were the national environmental 
authority (Ministry of Environment), the nati onal managing authorities (Ministry of Economic 
Development, current Ministry of Economy and Finance), other central and regional 
Managing Authorities, environm ental authorities, the statistical agency and the two main 
environmental agencies (A pat and ARPA). Regarding the involvement of NGOs, 
environmental NGOs were present in all Steering  Committees of the OPs, as well as in the 
Monitoring Committee of the NSRF, having a cons ultative role. In the present period (2007-
2013) NGOs are within the socio-economic partne rship and explicitly mentioned together 
with other stakeholders (enter prise associations, trade unions , third sector associations, 
charities and not-for-profit orga nisations, and equal opportunities organisations). The role of 
this economic-social partnership is defined as im portant as regards the NSRF, and therefore to 
be applied in programming, implementation, monitoring and evaluation. Spain, Poland, 
United Kingdom, Germany, Greece are some of the Member States that have also developed a 
national network with the Managing Authoritie s in order to deal with the environmental 
sector. 
Encouraging more public-private partnerships and exploring innovative approaches to 
financing 
Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) offer anothe r opportunity to explore for further ways to 
improve governance. Under RP, most experiences with PPPs are in the field of public service 
infrastructures. Nevertheless PPPs are due to be come more numerous and diverse, not least 
because of the economic and financial crisis . Each PPP project offers an opportunity to 
integrate governance for SD and enlarge the part nership to other stakeh olders such as NGOs 
who are often keen to participate. In this  framework an efficient way to enhance the 
sustainability of projects can be to commit fo rmal cross-sectoral bodi es, such as Steering 
Groups, to ensure that projects  are linked to the SD  objectives of core planning documents 
such as master plans or development stra tegies. Those bodies imposed on the project 
promoters may be accountable to the MA. They  are also an opportun ity to improve the 
governance of the project as socio-economic a nd civil society partners, along with civil 
servants and experts representing authorities an d the project promoters can be included. The 
following example illustrates the point.  
EN 38  EN . 
Promoting SD through partnership , Newquay Cornwall Airport, UK 
In order to ensure that envi ronmental sustainability remain s core to the development of 
Newquay Cornwall airport, co-funded by the ERDF, the Cornwall Council has prepared a 
variety of master planning documents. These documents have helped shape the airport's 
commitment to carbon neutrality: they aim to deliv er carbon neutrality fo r its entire terminal 
and ground operations by 2015 and be carbon neut ral in terms of avia tion and surface access 
by 2030. It includes initiatives such as converti ng all ground vehicles to run on electricity, 
installation of wind turbines, ener gy saving initiatives and enhan ced recycling, bio-diesel taxi 
fleet and enhanced public transport, etc. The MA felt it best to work  with the Cornwall 
Council in establishing  a 'World-Class Newquay Cornwall Airport Environmental Steering 
Group', which would provide expertise and help sh ape the concrete delivery of the airport’s 
strategic environmental goals. This Steering Group, imposed on the Airport Delivery Team, 
as part of a contract condition of ERDF invest ment will ensure that there is on-going input 
and challenge from the environmental sector (v ia the Steering Group) in ensuring and helping 
Newquay Cornwall Airport deliver the highe st possible standards of environmental 
sustainability. Thus, the decisions to deliver a 'whole-project' approach to environmental 
sustainability is core to the airport’s deve lopment objectives and helps develop and embed 
environmental sustainability into non-ERDF funded investments. 
Further PPPs can be a solution to trigger i nvestments into cutting-edge technologies, 
leveraging public funds such as the ERDF. It may be especially fruitful in the case of pilot 
projects to demonstrate the feasibility of new developments. 
Public private partnership for th e fuel cell hub in West Denmark 
'Hydrogen Link West Denmark'116 is a public private partnershi p project between more than 
20 various actors on development and pilot tes ting of hydrogen filling st ations and fuel cell 
hybrid vehicles in a number of West Danish  cities with a total budget of more than €1.8 
million. The project was initiated in April 2006.The aim of the project is to develop and test 
fuel cell hybrid vehicles. As part of the proj ect, research, development and pilot testing of 
smaller fuel cell hybrid vehicles and hydrogen f illing stations will be implemented in several 
cities. The hydrogen for the project is based on inexpensive wind power electricity from an 
electrolytic hydrogen generator at a local energy company and distributed to a number of 
hydrogen filling stations. Seven various fuel ce ll hybrid vehicles will be  put in operation in 
the cities at the various end-users. Th is project is co-f inanced by the ERDF 
As a further step, financial engineering instruments should  be considered to achieve  better 
leverage of the limited resources available. Mu ch greater use should be  made within regional 
policy of JEREMIE or JESSICA117 as well as learning from othe r instruments such as Risk-
Sharing Finance Facility used in the EU  framework research programmes. 
. . 
                                                
 
116 http://www.hydrogenlink.net/vestjylland/H ydrogenLink_West-Denmark_Brochure.pdf  
117 Article 44 of Regulation 1083/2006 
EN 39  EN Reaping the full benefits of actions across borders 
Regions should invest in sustainable growth th rough the integration of policies affecting EU 
territories and seas, especially coastal zones an d river basins with high biodiversity potential. 
Co-operation between Member States and regi ons on coherent sets of actions and within 
specific territorial or maritime areas, such as sea basins, would bring additional value added.  
In particular, MAs should take full advantag e of the opportunities offered by cross-border, 
interregional and transnational co-operation in line with the new territorial cohesion objective 
introduced by the Lisbon Treaty. The Baltic Sea and the Danube Strategies  illustrate the value 
of action at macro regional level.  
. 
Conclusions 
The Communication "Regional Policy contributi ng to sustainable growth in Europe 2020" 
together with this Staff Work ing Document sets out some of  the principles underpinning a 
realignment of current RP programmes in supp ort of the "Europe 2020" sustainable growth 
objectives. The resource efficient Europe of th e future requires all decision makers to take 
action now, and many of these decisions w ill fall at local and regional level.  
It is therefore a call to action by EU, national, regional and local authorities to use available 
funds to promote sustainable grow th in every European region.  
The aim is twofold: Firstly, to encourage an optimal use of and, if justified, a reallocation of  regional funds with a 
view to meeting the resource e fficiency objectives of the Eu rope 2020 strategy. This will 
require a concerted effort by all stakeholders  to accelerate the pace of implementation of 
planned actions and a debate on realigning deve lopmental priorities, as well as to step up 
efforts to mainstream the SD principles into day-to-day operation of programmes and 
projects. 
Secondly, the Commission strongly encourages Ma naging Authorities to use the remaining 
years of the current programming period to pr epare the ground for EU RP funds to play a 
major role in sustainable growth and resource e fficiency in the future. This may require new 
or adjusted instruments, management  methods and governance structures: 
Here further consideration shal l be given to establ ishing a stronger c onditionality to the 
allocation and use of CP funds linked to objective s and targets set in pr iority EU policy areas. 
At national level, Member States are encouraged:  
• To realign expenditure within  existing programmes prioritie s to boost the transition to 
resource efficient and low-carbon econom y and examine the need for programme 
modifications, drawing on complementary s upport offered by Rural Development Policy, 
the LIFE+ programme, 7
th R&D Framework Programme and the Competitiveness and 
Innovation Programme as regards: 
• Energy efficiency, renewable ener gy and de-carbonising transport; 
EN 40  EN • Ecosystem services, in particular protect ion of biodiversity, ad aptation to climate 
change and natural disaster prevention; 
• Eco-innovation support through clusters a nd ICT services and applications.  
• To ensure the systemic integration of the sust ainability principles in each step of the 
project life-cycle with particular atte ntion to increase resource efficiency; 
• To address climate change in their territorial planning, incl uding local, regional and macro-
regional strategies involving supr anational areas linked to sea or river basins in particular. 
• To carry out specific evaluations and to in clude a dedicated sec tion within the Annual 
Implementation Reports of their Operational Programmes to assess the extent to which 
Regional Policy supported pr ogrammes match the guidelines set out in this 
Communication; 
• To consider, in the context of the National Reform Programmes, the flexibility being 
offered within the Operational Programmes to reorient regional policy funding towards 
Europe 2020 priorities; 
• To begin preparation for the next ge neration of programmes in terms of: 
• A greater thematic focus on green invest ment and a shift to a low carbon and 
climate resilient economy while ensuring an integrated approach to sustainable urban and/or rural development, and fu lly taking into acc ount the territorial 
context and opportunities; 
• Capacity building, using technical assist ance budgets, to involve local, regional 
and NGO actors in regional climate cha nge adaptation and mitigation strategies. 
At EU level, The Commission commits to swift consideration and support to any request for 
reprogramming for funding towards Eu rope 2020 priorities and will work : 
• With International and national financial institutions to leverage resources and, as 
appropriate, maximise the use of financial in struments, including a more intensive use of 
JEREMIE and JESSICA. There will be a part icular focus on sustainable energy in 
residential buildings to build on the recent am endments to Structural Funds regulations; 
• With the relevant authorities in the Member States and regions to develop targeted pilot 
initiatives and seminars to deploy pr oposals outlined in this Communication; 
• To assist national and regional authorities with thematic ex pertise in the implementation 
and monitoring of programmes; 
• To mobilise the available resources in existing Operational programmes to build up 
institutional capacity in order to ensure th e application of the sustainable development 
principles, and unblock bottlenecks,  especially with JASPERS;  
• To further assist Member States in mobilisi ng the available Technica l Assistance of their 
programmes for boosting regional sustainable growth  and to facilitate at all administrative 
levels the preparation of the pipeline of projects; 
EN 41  EN • To identify and encourage further exchange  of good practice betwee n Member States in 
areas related to sustainable growth through initiatives such  as Regions for Economic 
Change or ESPON. 
. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 
EN 42  EN ANNEX I  
Map 1: Cohesion Policy funding for environment 2007-2013 
 
 
. 
.. .. 
EN 43  EN Map 2: climate change vulnerability index118 
. 
. . .. . 
                                                
 
118 Source: Regions2020 - An assessment of future challenges for EU Regions; SEC(2008) 
EN 44  EN ...Map 3: solar energy resources 
 
. 
. 
EN 45  EN ..Map 4: Natura 2000 area 
 
.. 
. 
EN 46  EN ANNEX II  
A) Indicators for Map 1 
Domestic material consumption per GDP 
Total waste per capita 
Municipal waste recycled (kg per capita) total - landfilled - incinerated 
Collected Waste electr(on)i c equipment per total waste electr(on)ic equipment 
Recycling of packaging waste (as % total packaging waste) 
Ground water extraction as percentage of total available water resources 
Surface water extraction as percentage of total available water resources 
Surface + ground water extraction as percen tage of total available water resources 
GHG Emissions from transport / GDP 
Final energy consumption of transport / GDP 
. 
B) Categories of expenditure taking into account for Map 2 
06Assistance to SMEs for the prom otion of environmentall y-friendly products an d production processes  
16 Railways  
17 Railways (TEN-T)  
18 Mobile rail assets  
19 Mobile rail assets (TEN-T)  
24 Cycle tracks  
26 Multimodal transport  
27 Multimodal transport (TEN-T)  
28 Intelligent transport systems  
30 Ports  
31 Inland waterways (regional and local)  
32 Inland waterways (TEN-T)  
33 Electricity  
34 Electricity (TEN-E)  
35 Natural gas  
36 Natural gas (TEN-E)  
39 Renewable energy: wind  
40 Renewable energy: solar  
41 Renewable energy: biomass  
42 Renewable energy: hydroelectric, geothermal and other  
43 Energy efficiency , co-generation, energy management  
44 Management of household and industrial waste  
45 Management and distribution of water (drink water)  
46 Water treatment (waste water)  
52 Promotion of clean urban transport  
. 
EN 47  EN ANNEX III  
. 
Allocations to selected operations119 in current RP 2007-2013 
. 
Sustainable energy & sustainable transport 
Sustainable Energy & Sustainable  Transport related categories 
 
 
. 
                                                 
119 Six MS (DE, EE, EL, ES, FR, SI) have provided their data on allocation to selected projects at dates 
other than 30/09/09. This should be carefully taken into consideration when making comparative 
analysis of the graphics. It is recommended to co mpare MS progress to the EU average rather than 
making direct comparison between MS 
EN 48  EN Sustainable Energy & Sustainable  Transport related categories 
 
. 
. . 
EN 49  EN .Ecosystem services 
Ecosystem services related categories 
 
. 
 
. 
. . . . . . . . 
EN 50  EN . 
Ecosystem services related categories 
. 
 
. 
. . . 
EN 51  EN . 
.Eco-innovation & resource efficiency 
Eco-innovation & resource effi ciency related categories 
 
 
. 
. . . . . . . . . . . . 
EN 52  EN . 
Eco-innovation & resource effi ciency related categories 
 
. 
. . . . 
EN 53  EN .GLOSSARY:  
. 
CP: Cohesion Policy EC: European Commission EE: Energy Efficiency  ERDF: European Regional Development Fund ESF: European Social Fund GHG: Greenhouse Gases GPP: Green Public Procurement LCE: Low Carbon Economy LRAs: Local and Regional Authorities MA: Managing Authority MS: Member States OP: Operational Programme RES: Renewable Energy Sources RP: Regional Policy  SD: Sustainable Development SG: Sustainable Growth