COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 
Brussels, 14.11.1997 _ 
COM(97) 524 final 
COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION 
TO THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, 
THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE 
AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS 
The New Regional programmes 1997-1999 
under Objective 2 of the Community's Structural Policies -focusing on 
job-creation 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 
I INTRODUCTION 
Purpose of the Communication 
Two separate programming periods 
II THE CONTEXT OF THE NEW PROGRAMMES 
The informal meeting of Ministers in Madrid 
The eligible regions 
Financing 
The Objective 2 guidelines 
III THE CONTENT AND QUALITY OF THE PROGRAMMES 
The frame of reference 
The added value from the negotiation 
Analysis of the development priorities 
IV CONCLUSIONS 
ANNEX 1 Distribution of resources by Fund 
ANNEX 2 Breakdown by expenditure category 
ANNEX 3 Fiches by Member State 
ANNEX 4 Expected Impact on Employment 
ANNEX 5 Territorial and Local Employment Pacts Projects 
£ 
L INTRODUCTION 
Purpose of the Communication - an overview of the new Objective 2 programmes 
During the first half of 1997, the Commission approved the 65 new Single 
Programming Documents (SPDs) and, in the case of Spain, a Community Support 
Framework (CSF) for the industrial regions in decline (Objective 2). This 
(Communication encompasses the principal elements of Community assistance 
programmed in favour of the Objective 2 regions for this second programming period 
1997-1999. It complements a similar document covering both the Objective 1 and 2 
programmes approved in 1994(1). The SPDs for Austria and Sweden have not, 
however, been included in this paper since these two Member States opted for a 5-year 
Objective 2 programming period 1994-1999 and summaries of their Objective 2 
programmes may also be found within a separate Commission Communication (2) 
covering all the new Member States. 
From a cross-reading of the texts, the Communication summarises the expected impact 
of this assistance on the economic development of the beneficiary regions, especially in 
terms of employment and, inter-alia, the extent to which the policy priorities for 
Objective 2 outlined in guidance provided by the Commission to Member States (3) 
have been taken into account. The guidelines for Objective 2 actions reflect the 
Union's general strategy for employment as, for example, in the Commission's 
Confidence Pact for Employment, or more recently, in the Amsterdam Resolution of 
June 1997 which enshrined the priority to be given to fighting unemployment. 
The distribution of resources between the Funds (ERDF and ESF) by region is shown 
at Annex 1 and a breakdown by expenditure category is provided at Annex 2. 
Summaries of the key elements of the Programming Documents by Member State are 
given at Annex 3, in particular their Regional Development Strategies, Priorities and 
Expected Impacts. Annex 4 provides an overall assessment of expected results in 
terms of job-creation and maintenance (the new programmes forecast the creation or 
maintenance of 880,000 gross jobs), with Annex 5 listing the Territorial and Local 
Employment Pacts being pursued in the Objective 2 regions. 
(1) COM(95) 111 final of 29 March 1995, The new regional programmes under Objectives 1 and 2 of 
the Community's structural policies. 
(2) Communication of the Commission on the implementation of E.U. Regional Policies in Austria, 
Finland and Sweden. COM(96)316 final of 3 July 1996. 
(3) C(96)952 final of 29 April 1996, Note for Guidance concerning operations in the declining 
industrial areas (Objective 2) for the second programming period 1997-1999. 
3 
Two separate programming periods - taking account of new priorities 
In the interests of making the decision-making procedure as straightforward as possible 
for the new Objective 2 programming period, the Commission considered the 
possibility of expanding the 1994-1996 Programming Documents to the end of 1999. 
This took account, in particular, of views expressed at the Informal Meeting of 
Ministers in Venice on 3-4 May 1996 regarding the desirability of continuity in 
Objective 2 interventions. However, it was decided to proceed on the basis of two 
separate Objective 2 programming periods in conformity with Article 9(6) of the 
Framework Regulation.^ This approach was also considered by the Commission to be 
the most acceptable in terms of effective financial management whilst also providing 
greatest opportunity for increasing the quality and effectiveness of programmes in the 
light of the Objective 2 guidelines (see below), especially in terms of job-creation. 
H. THE CONTEXT OF THE NEW PROGRAMMES 
The informal meeting of Ministers in Madrid - a preliminary debate 
Changes made as part of the revision of the Structural Funds regulations in 1993 had 
established an approach to the selection of Objective 2 regions based primarily on the 
need for close cooperation between the Member States and the Commission. In these 
circumstances, lengthy negotiations were required to reach agreement on the list of 
eligible regions and, subsequently, to agree the Objective 2 Programming Documents 
for the period 1994-1996. This meant that final discussions could only take place 
during the second half of 1994 with the delays having also been exacerbated, in the 
view of some Member States, by a lack of clarity regarding the Commission's priorities 
under Objective 2. 
In this regard, the Informal Meeting of Ministers responsible for regional policy and 
spatial planning which took place in Madrid towards the end of 1995 provided an 
opportunity for a preliminary debate on the second Objective 2 programming period 
1997-1999. Whereas Member States supported, in principle, the increased 
concentration of Structural Funds resources on the worst affected areas, it was agreed 
that a complementary thematic concentration was the prime requirement at that time, 
particularly concerning measures with a short to medium-term impact on job-creation. 
The Commission was asked to make its priorities known as soon as possible in order to 
assist the programming work that the Member States needed to do. 
U 
The eligible regions - continuity with the previous period 
Compared to the previous period 1994-1996, the list of regions eligible under 
Objective 2 for the new period therefore remained largely unaltered apart from some 
minor changes within certain Member States(4). The percentage of population eligible 
for Objective 2 however remained unchanged at the level of each Member State and 
overall Objective 2 coverage, amounting to 16.4 % of the total population of the 
European Union, also therefore stayed the same as in 1994-1996. 
Financing - increased resources 
The funding available for 1997-1999, in line with the Structural Funds budget profile 
agreed at the 1992 Edinburgh European Council, amounted to some ECU 8.2 billion 
(at 1997 prices). This comprised a real increase of 13.8 % compared to the previous 
programming period 1994-1996. On the basis of preliminary estimates, an amount of 
around ECU 859 million of unutilised resources will be transferred from the previous 
period and this has also been added to the total. As shown in the table below, the 
proportion of 1994-1996 funding to be transferred varies from 23 to 26% for Finland 
(1995-96), Italy, Luxemburg and Netherlands to between 5 and 7 %, for Denmark, 
Germany and U.K., representing an average carry-over of resources unused from 
1994-1996 of about 12 %. The overall resources available for the second Objective 2 
programming period therefore amount to ECU 9.148 billion. 
Ecu millions 
MEMBER STATES 
BELGIUM 
DENMARK 
GERMANY 
SPAIN 
FRANCE 
ITALY 
LUXEMBURG 
NETHERLANDS 
FINLAND 
UNITED KINGDOM 
TOTAL 1997-1999 
187.398 
65.539 
861.077 
1328.923 
2037.721 
798.000 
8.066 
361.975 
119.148 
2520,718 
8288.565 Carried-over 
from 1994-6 
28.749 
2.693 
40.056 
156.123 
208.556 
169.745 
1.771 
80.144 
16.145 
155.059 
859.041 % 
Carry­
over 
18% 
5% 
5% 
14% 
12 % 
24% 
25% 
26% 
23% 
7% 
12% TOTAL 
1997-1999 
(inc. carry-over) 
216.147 
68.232 
901.133 
1485.046 
2246.280 
967.745 
9.837 
442.119 
135.293 
2675.777 
9147.609 
(4) OJ N° L 193/54 of 3 August 1996 refers. 
5~ 
The Objective 2 guidelines - the paramount priority for jobs 
The Note for Guidance transmitted by the Commission to the Member States on 
30 April 1996 established job-creation as the paramount priority for the new 
Objective 2 programmes 1997-1999, especially by improving production structures and 
raising qualification levels in the work force. The guidelines similarly emphasised that 
a concentration on productive investment to improve the growth and competitiveness 
of industry required any proposed financing of basic infrastructure to be specifically 
justified in terms of regional development needs. Such investments also had to be 
integrated within and directly contribute to the synergy and objectives of the overall 
programme, in particular to the safeguarding of existing and the creation of new jobs. 
The overall aim of safeguarding and promoting employment was underpinned by four 
specific priorities: 
- Competitiveness and Development of SMEs. 
This implied a fools on indigenous potential and better analysis of local business 
needs as well as meeting the challenges posed, for example, by the emergence of 
the Information Society and the need for total quality management. In 
complementary fashion to the focus on indigenous potential, attention needed to 
be paid, by means of local development and employment initiatives, to 
developing new sources of employment to meet new needs not yet having found 
an adequate response. In this context, specific training adapted to owners and 
managers, as well as adaptation of the workers' skills, would contribute to the 
stability and growth of SMEs. 
Research and Development, Innovation and a Labour-force qualified in 
future technology 
With research and development facilities generally already in place in higher and 
further educational institutions, the use of existing assets needed to be optimised 
and improvements made in industrial cooperation and joint ventures. The 
practical application of research results and technology transfer to local business 
and industry was also a key aim of R&D investment financed by the Structural 
Funds in Objective 2 regions. The new programmes should increasingly provide 
for training linked to the job opportunities afforded by technological innovation 
in order to ensure a supply of qualified workers. 
- Environment and Sustainable Development 
In recognising the complementary nature of the environment and regional 
development, measures might be pursued under two main themes. Firstly, 
tackling past industrial damage and improving the physical environment as a 
factor for increasing the attractiveness of the region for business development. 
Secondly, exploiting eco-products, environmental services and technologies as a 
potential source of future competitive advantage. Appropriate provision for 
promoting environmental training and awareness also needed to be included in 
programmes. 
- Equal opportunities 
The promotion of equality of opportunity between men and women in the new 
Objective 2 programmes might include measures aimed at reconciling family and 
professional life, increasing employment opportunities for women and the 
provision of facilities for distance learning and other training. 
Apart from the programme priorities outlined above, evaluation of the 1994-1996 
Objective 2 programmes had also indicated a number of ways in which the content and 
quality of conversion plans and Programming Documents might be improved for the 
1997-1999 period. The guidelines therefore included a reminder of the need for 
improvements in the application of the principles of partnership and additionality and 
for the inclusion of quantified indicators of impact, especially as regards job-creation. 
m. THE CONTENT AND QUALITY OF THE PROGRAMMES 
With the Objective 2 list of eligible regions for 1997-1999 having been established on 8 
May 1996, the large majority of Member States' conversion plans were submitted to 
the Commission by the end of August-September of that year in accordance with the 
regulatory provisions in this regard. 
i) The frame of reference. 
a) Lessons of the past 
Although not all evaluations of the 1994-1996 programmes had been completed when 
the programmes were being prepared, a number of the new SPDs demonstrated that 
lessons had been learnt from the previous programming period and incorporated into 
their preparation phase. This related in particular to the context, analysis and design of 
the strategy. A good example related to the plan for Aquitaine (F), where the 
evaluators played an important role in re-designing the strategy along clear and well-
argued objectives, as well as reinforcing synergies within the programme. In general, 
plans based partly or wholly on evaluations or lessons learnt from previous 
programmes appear to have benefited from clearer and better focused strategies as a 
result. 
* 
b) Ex-ante appraisal 
Likewise, in conformity with Article 9(9) of the Framework Regulation, and in the 
interests of increasing their overall quality and effectiveness, all the plans were 
subsequently the subject of ex-ante appraisal, particular attention being paid by the 
assessors to the following elements: 
- the extent to which the priorities outlined in the Commission guidelines had 
been taken into account in the plans, and the degree to which they had been 
integrated within the proposed measures; 
- the quality of analysis of the area concerned, including the identification of the 
principal barriers to sustained growth and the identification of development 
potential; 
- an appreciation of the strategy presented in each SPD, especially the coherence 
between the declared objectives and the resources devoted to their 
-achievement; 
- the appropriateness of quantified indicators and targets, particularly with regard 
to key impacts on regional GDP, employment and the environment. As regards 
job-creation, a particular issue was the degree to which the Commission's 
guidelines on the evaluation of employment effects(5). had been pursued 
especially in relation to the clarity and transparency of the supporting 
calculations. 
-With regard to the environment, the key issues concerned the quality of the 
environmental assessment of the area concerned and the environmental impact 
of the strategy and related actions presented by the Member States. 
Where the evaluators identified shortcomings in the plans initially submitted, (see 
below) joint efforts were, of course, made to improve their content and quality during 
negotiation of the Programming Documents. Key issues were as follows: 
i) Respect of the Objective 2 guidelines 
In general, the proposed programmes included the policy areas emphasized in the 
guidelines although the content and quality of their integration into the proposed plans 
varied considerably between the regions. Employment remained the main focus of all 
the programmes, although the effects of certain of the proposed measures on job 
creation were sometimes regarded by the evaluators as being too limited or indirect. As 
a result, in a number of instances, e.g. U.K., the negotiations resulted in an increased 
allocation to measures better able to create quality jobs in the regions. 
151 Technical Noie on Ex-ante estimation of employment effects from Structural Funds interventions 
(mailable as •"Counting ihe jobs - How to evaluate the employment elTecls of Structural Fund 
interventions" - DG XVI Series : EVALUATION and Documents No 1. January 1097). 
Most plans also favoured the promotion of SMEs and indigenous potential as a 
driving force of regional economies. A number of measures related to the 
environment but some were initially too focused on support for activities such as 
environmental and operational improvements to general infrastructure and services 
rather than on business opportunities arising from environmental technologies. Even 
so, it is evident that the latter activities are also being carried out to some degree 
through generic R&D and sectoral development measures. Indeed, R&D and 
innovation - related actions were recognized in many programmes as an important 
element in a strategic approach which sought to develop competitive and sustainable 
local businesses. 
The principle of Equality of Opportunities between men and women had not always 
been fully addressed in the plans at the outset although this aspect had been 
strengthened in the SPDs finally agreed, especially in relation to the previous 
programming period. 
(ii) SWOT analyses 
The plans were generally well presented and their strategies were consistent with the 
economic development context. SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and 
Threats) analyses were used in a more systematic way, although there was still scope 
for improvement, including linking this methodology to the translation of strategies 
into priorities and measures. Negotiation of the Danish SPD, for example, resulted in 
the analysis of the socio-economic situation being significantly expanded and updated 
with the latest figures on the regions' conditions, needs and opportunities. 
(Hi) Strategic aims and objectives 
The strategic approaches varied widely in terms of structure and contained differing 
degrees of geographical and sectoral orientation. In most cases, there was a strong 
degree of continuity of strategy between the new programmes and the previous 
period. Strategic aims were expressed in many forms, with job-creation the most 
frequently mentioned aspect in the plans. Within the global aim of achieving economic 
development, some programmes focused on absolute (or relative) improvements in 
certain socio-economic criteria such as employment, population and income. Other 
strategic statements gave prominence to the conversion processes, e.g. diversification, 
modernisation or the target priorities of the strategy, e.g. SMEs. 
S 
Almost all plans had clearly presented, explicit strategic objectives, contributing to a 
further development of the strategic statement. In general, the plans contained four or 
five strategic objectives although these did not necessarily relate to the size of a 
programme, being more usually a measure of its complexity or number of development 
aspects. Examples of aims embodied in strategic objectives included the growth of 
specific sectors such as tourism and transport, the exploitation of assets such as 
location and RTD facilities, start-ups of small businesses and promoting diversification 
of industrial activities, strengthening competitiveness or greater entrepreneurial 
activity. Some also highlighted horizontal aspects of economic development, such as 
environmental sustainability and equal opportunities. In particular, many plans 
contained some sectoral targeting (e.g. the French and Italian Plans) or "drivers for 
change" (U.K.) or in the Dutch strategies, where there was an emphasis on the 
potential of knowledge-based approaches to develop new forms of economic activity. 
(iv) Targeting of measures 
In general, measures were consistent with the strategic objectives and the priorities of 
the plans. The focus of strategies was often over a broad range of interventions, rather 
than on a few crucial aspects of economic reconversion, although this made 
complementarities and synergies more difficult to achieve. SMEs and indigenous 
potential were the main target in almost all plans, in particular in Italy where the 
proportion of resources devoted to these actions represented more than 50% of total 
funding. Although the accuracy of targeting of training actions was not always 
satisfactory, this may partly be due to the horizontal nature of human resources 
measures - some improvement can, however, be seen in the U.K., for example, where 
"labour market strategic groups" will provide information in order to adapt ESF 
priorities to the local labour market specificities. Environment was one of the key 
priorities in regional development strategies although its overall role in resource terms 
remained relatively small with 5.2% of total Objective 2 funding directly related to 
environmental measures. It should be stressed, however, that special attention was paid 
in certain plans to particular environmental aspects. For example, in Zuid Limburg 
(NL), the focus was on the relationship between jobs and environment; in the Finnish 
plan important innovative environmental measures were presented while in Denmark 
environmental actions were fully integrated within other programme measures. 
The integration of ERDF and ESF measures was relatively improved compared to the 
previous period 1994-1996. Examples of good practice could be identified in a number 
of regions (Bremen, Tuscany, some Dutch regions) where management and 
coordination of training actions have been enhanced at local level. 
<Ao 
(v) Quantification of objectives and impacts 
An initial lack of quantification of objectives and outputs including employment effects 
and absence of baseline data was one the most disappointing features of the plans 
originally submitted although substantial progress was made subsequently in this 
regard. A particular example in this respect related to the SPDs for France where 
elements missing from the initial proposals were established in the course of the 
negotiations relating, for example, to socio-economic analysis, base indicators and 
environmental information. 
Concerning the impact on employment, the methodological framework on Ex-ante 
Quantification of Employment Effects transmitted to the Member States (see earlier) 
was generally little used. A notable exception, among others, was the Aquitaine (F) 
SPD, where the Commission's methodology had been widely followed and proved to 
be effective for monitoring and evaluation purposes. Nonetheless, as shown later in this 
Communication, significant overall progress was achieved compared to 1994-1996 in 
the assessment of the number of jobs created or maintained as a result of interventions 
under Objective 2. 
(vi) Environment appraisals 
The majority of plans provided a strategic environmental assessment and addressed a 
number of environmental issues. Whereas the provision of quantitative indicators 
generally required further attention, some plans presented detailed information 
following a standard matrix format detailing the possible environmental impacts of 
measures. Moreover, the links between measure and programme level also generally 
needed improving and there was rarely mention in plans of the "polluter pays" principle 
or information on its concrete application. In this regard, however, a good example 
was the Finnish plan which was not only exemplary for innovative environmental 
measures, but also for the proposed ex-ante evaluation of environmental impacts as 
well as the association of environmental authorities in decision making, monitoring and 
evaluation. 
Indeed, the association of the environmental authorities had generally improved 
although any deficiencies such as the above also serve to highlight the crucial 
importance of their participation in the programming phase in order to achieve a 
balanced and successful plan in terms of sustainable development. 
c) Respect of the principles of partnership and additionality 
Partnership 
Most plans included a commitment to ensure the full involvement and ownership of the 
programme by the partners, as well as integrating the Objective 2 programmes with the 
other regeneration initiatives operating in the area concerned. Although the 
participation of the economic and social partners was not always well defined, the 
types of consultation undertaken with partner organizations included, for example, 
those in Western Scotland (U.K.) in the form of workshops, seminars and written 
questionnaires. 
/H. 
Additionality 
Under the principle of additionality each Member State has to maintain, in the whole of 
its territory concerned by a given Objective, its eligible public structural or comparable 
expenditure at least at the same level as in the previous programming period. In the 
case of Objective 2 for the period 1997-1999 this meant that each Member State 
concerned had to ensure globally, for all of its Objective 2 regions taken together, the 
same level of expenditure as in 1994-1996. 
Establishing additionality again, however, proved difficult, either because of problems 
in gathering the required information or in verifying the data received. Indeed, for the 
majority of the new Objective 2 Programming Documents, it was necessary to 
introduce a clause into the Decisions suspending Community payments after the first 
advance pending ex-ante verification of the additionality principle. Nonetheless, the 
Programming Documents for Germany and Finland, having provided satisfactory ex-
ante demonstrations of additionality, were able to be approved without the 
introduction of such a clause. In the case of the U.K. and Denmark, the clause was 
able to be withdrawn from the final Decisions after the requirements had been met 
subsequent to the Commission's initial approval in principle. 
ii) The added-value from the negotiations 
Negotiation of the new Programming Documents mostly took place from 
October/November 1996 onwards and, as indicated above, provided an opportunity to 
increase the quality and effectiveness of programmes in various ways, particularly in 
the light of the results of evaluation, including the Objective 2 guidelines and the 
paramount priority of job creation. In a number of instances, for example, the 
negotiations resulted in increased importance being given to measures which promised 
most job-creation. The negotiations sometimes also provided an opportunity to rethink 
programmes from the bottom-up. More detailed information on the key elements of 
added value from the negotiations is provided at the end of each of the summary fiches 
by Member State at Annex 3. 
d/L 
iii) Analysis of the development priorities 
Expenditure categories 
The following provides an overall analysis of agreed Objective 2 financing on the basis 
of the four main expenditure categories (plus Technical Assistance) contained in the 
table at Annex 2 attached. In line with the integrated approach, both ERDF and ESF 
financing is included within each category. It should also be borne in mind that the 
expenditure breakdown encompasses certain differences of classification or 
interpretation, for example in the definition of * environmental' as opposed to 
'regeneration' measures. A degree of overlap between such sectors is also inevitable. 
The analysis incorporates illustrations from the Programming Documents, especially 
where examination of the financial annexes indicates that significant expenditure has 
been devoted to a type of action in a region, as well as other noteworthy or innovative 
examples. In this regard, particular attention has also been given, again with 
appropriate examples, to assessing the extent to which the Objective 2 guidelines have 
been taken into account in the priorities and measures. 
The global distribution between expenditure categories was as follows: 
• Productive Environment - includes all types of measures to improve the growth and 
competitiveness of industry and businesses, especially SMEs, as well as 
diversification from declining industry, for example into tourism, and supporting 
infrastructure where this is justified by development needs: 47.4% (45.2% in 1994-
1996); 
• Human Resources - primarily training measures and employment aids with 
particular emphasis given to the need for continuing training focused on those 
integrated into the world of work but who need further training, experience and 
reskilling to ensure they can meet the existing or anticipated demand of the region. 
This also encompasses R&D particularly where linked to training in the jobs of the 
future. 33.8% (34.1% in 1994-1996); 
• Planning and Regeneration - the improvement and laying out of run-down industrial 
and urban areas including the reclamation of contaminated land, any necessary on-
site infrastructure as well as certain directly linked environmental measures: 12.3% 
(13.7% in 1994-1996); 
• Environment - measures linked to the protection of the environment, for example to 
promote "green" tourism, promoting clean technologies, new methods of 
production, the treatment and recycling of industrial waste and water, etc: 5.2% 
(5.7% in 1994-1996). 
• Technical Assistance 1.3% 
A3 
Distribution of credits by Fund 
As indicated earlier, the new programmes have been established on the basis of the 
Plans proposed by the régions and Member States. The interventions described are 
therefore the result of the definition of regional needs in the light of the diversity and 
differing requirements of the regions concerned. Similarly, the. respective, shares of the 
Funds are not the result of pre-determined "quotas" but the reflection of needs and 
priorities agreed in partnership. Overall, the distribution of credits between the Funds 
resulting from the different priorities selected in the SPDs (and CSF) for 1997-99 ( see 
Annex 1) has remained the same as for the previous period: 
ERDF : 77% and ESF : 23% 
This ranged from the lowest average proportion of ERDF (66%) and consequently 
highest ESF (34%) in NL to the highest ERDF (82%) and lowest ESF (18%) in F. 
Expected impact on employment 
Substantial progress has been made in the quantification of employment effects in the 
1997 - 1999 SPDs. In 55 SPDs, detailed estimates were provided at measure level 
corresponding to around 66% of total EU funding. Most of these programmes focus 
on jobs created or safeguarded as a result of the interventions. They generally refer to 
gross jobs, and do not take account of dead-weight, displacement or other indirect 
effects. Notable exceptions providing specific estimates of net job creation are some 
UK and French SPDs. 
Data on gross job maintenance have been collected from agreed SPDs, excluding those 
containing only global estimates. The overall results are at Annex 4. A reclassification 
of the data has been made according to the main areas of intervention in order to 
compare their relative efficiency in terms of average cost per job. The interpretation of 
these figures is, however, subject to caution given the non-use of a standard 
methodology (see earlier) in the various regions for estimating employment effects. 
On the basis of these data, which would require further refinement, it is estimated that 
almost 880.000 gross jobs are expected to be either created, saved or redistributed as a 
result of Objective 2 interventions over the 1997-99 period. This order of magnitude is, 
according to recent evaluations, around the same as for the programmes carried out 
over the 1989-93 period. Temporary jobs represented a relatively small proportion of 
the overall employment effects, i.e. over 100,000 jobs for seven Member States. The 
three main recipient Member States, France, Spain and the U.K. which account for 
around 70% of total EU Objective 2 funding, contribute to more than two-thirds of the 
gross jobs. 
^ 
The average public funding per job is estimated at over ECU 13,800. Taking only EU 
cost, i.e. ERDF and ESF funding, the equivalent figure corresponds to around ECU 
6,100. Considerable variation exists in the EU cost per job, ranging from an average of 
around ECU 4,400 in Spain to an average of around ECU 24,000 in Denmark. One 
explanation for this lies in the choice of priorities pursued in the various Objective 2 
strategies. Where, for instance, infrastructure investment is a priority, the job creation 
effects appear to take longer to become apparent than elsewhere and this will be 
reflected in a higher cost per job than in other regions where the emphasis is on for 
example, SME support which has more immediate impacts. 
Productive Environment 
The Objective 2 guidelines emphasised the need to continue efforts towards improving 
the regional competitiveness of the productive sector. Conversely, expenditure on any 
supporting infrastructure (see below) required specific justification in terms of its role 
in the development of the productive sector and its contribution to the safeguarding 
and creation of jobs. Financing of MECU 4,337 has been allocated to the productive 
sector in the new programmes, comprising 47.4% of total Objective 2 expenditure 
1997-1999 (compared to 45.2% in the previous period). 
Industry and services - all types 
Around 25% of total funding for the productive environment (MECU 1088) has been 
devoted to general investments for the benefit of industry and services. The largest 
expenditure in this area has been in the U.K. (MECU 564) representing 40% of that 
country's finance for the productive environment sector. France (MECU 252) 
accounts for the other main expenditure by Member States on industry and services. 
A^ 
Spatial Development Priorities 
1st North East England (ILK) such investments (amounting to MECU 138*7 or 36% 
of its total Objective 2 allocation} are focused on measures within Priority 3 for 
Strategic Regional Developments as well as Priority 4 concerning Community 
Economic Development - for an explanation of the latter» see below* Actions under ihe 
former Priority are aimed both at the physical regeneration of strategic areas; and the 
development of specified sectors with significant job* creation potential, Activities 
include cultural and tourism development packages and support for the co-ordination 
of the activities of economic development and employment agencies. Human resource 
development is also included - both training actions and non-training actions such as 
skills audits and labour market research. 
Supporting existing industry as well as developing new activities 
Although the region of Rhône-Alpes (F) is also seeking to develop other activities arid 
attract inward investment* the maintenance of existing industry still underpins: its main 
economic strategy* This U reflected in the SPD's First Priority for the Support and 
Conversion of Existing Activities financed with MECU 50, or 33% of total programme 
resources. The four measures within this Priority include ffirecfr support lof business 
(improving production techniques through new technology» quality niatœgement, non-
material investment in commercial strategy, human resources.management eta); 
developing new businesses (provision of common services, technology transfer, 
incubating new enterprises); developing the services sector (acquisition of new skills, 
needs analysis, provision of research and higher education iacihties) and eflco^ra&ng 
investment in human resources development (skills audits, targeted training etc*). 
SMEs 
In overall terms 16% of total Objective 2 resources have been specifically allocated to 
the SME sector. A priority was given in the Objective 2 Guidelines to strengthening 
the competitiveness and internationalisation of SMEs, including through improving 
SME management, access to financial services and industrial cooperation. This was 
complemented by the need for total quality management and the role of modern 
Information and Communications Technology (ICT) in the context of the Information 
Society. 
ÀÇ> 
Strengthening SME competitiveness 
major programme specifically aimed at SMEs in the German SPDs concerns 
Nord^ein-Westfalen with expenditure of MECU 47.7. It includes; amongst its 
^^^^^^ th^ number of SMEs as well as preparing them for global 
jS$i^es& 'Aétiofts^for achieving the latter are centred around aspects such as 
ïx'#l $bi««pM finding of businesses (including the provision of interest rebates}* 
ibtf&flCation of workers and the introduction of new technology. 
Advising SMÈs ÛH the Information Society 
tn Pîèmonte ($*. MECU 71*2, comprising almost a quarter of total programme 
resources* h being provided under Priority 3<for the Dissemination of Technological 
Innovation and Information Society: This primarily concerns the incubation of new 
businesses, particularly within Technology Parks. It also includes a new measure to 
gjve information and advice to SMEs concerning the Information Society. ' 
Local Development and Employment Initiatives fLDEIs) 
The Commission's Communication to the Council(6) on developing new sources of 
employment to meet unmet local needs was highlighted in the Objective 2 guidelines. 
In the case of the U.K. this aspect, which takes the form of a more specific 
geographically targeted approach, features in almost all its SPDs within priorities for 
Community Economic Development. The aim is to concentrate resources on the 
worst-off and socially marginalised communities within eligible areas. For 1997-1999 
this represents a new priority for Thanet while in Industrial South Wales the existing 
actions have been strengthened and now comprise a dedicated priority. 
(6) COM (95) 273 of 13 June 1995 on a strategy for encouraging local development and employment 
and job creation initiatives 
A4-
Community Economic Development 
Priority ,5 for Community Economic Development in Yorkshire & Humberside 
QjM) comprises: 25% (MECU 99.7) of the region's total Objective 2 budget. The 
Pnoriry aims to^evelop the skills of targeted communities in contributing to economic 
regeneration and combat the exclusion of residents from economic opportunity» 
Actions will be carried out under three main measures: Helping Communities to help 
themselves: Access to Work and Getting Communities into Work. They include the 
preparation of community audits (including human resources) and area needs 
assessments, the provision of community facilities delivering training, employment and 
enterprise development services, improved public transport for deprived communities 
Uptown and city centres and industrial development sites. ESF support will be made 
available for actions which include the promotion of entrepreneurship, re-skilling and 
skill extension to national standards and support for childcare or other dependants 
linked to training or employment. 
In Belgium a new Priority for the Local Economy has been introduced into the 
programme for Turnhout. Local Development and Employment Initiatives will 
include actions to meet local needs in the field of culture, environment and energy 
Sources. Similar approaches in Li in burg are aimed at creating 100 new jobs, of which 
at least half would be for women. 
Territorial and Local Employment Pacts 
At their meeting in Florence in June 1996, the Community's Heads of State and 
government approved the Commission's guidelines(7) for increasing the impact of 
Community structural measures on employment. In particular, and as advocated by the 
Commission in its Confidence Pact for Employment, they recognized the advantages of 
broader and deeper application of the partnership principle at the appropriate territorial 
level when implementing such measures. The Dublin European Council in December 
1996 reaffirmed these guidelines in its Declaration on Employment and called for rapid 
implementation of about sixty innovative pilot projects to be turned into Territorial and 
Local Employment Pacts, with the national authorities in each Member State selecting 
the candidate regions or cities. Following the Commission's Interim Progress Report 
on the Implementation of Territorial Pacts for Employment^ to the Amsterdam 
European Council of June 1997, some 90 pact proposals were reported to be in the 
course of development. The Council particularly welcomed the positive response of 
Member States to its invitation to propose candidates for pilot projects. 
(7) COM(96) 109 final of 20 March 1996 on Comiminily Structural Assistance and Employment 
(8) CSE(97) 3 final of 10.06.1997. Commission Communication on the Interim Progress Report on the 
Implementation of Territorial Pacts for Employment. 
Annex 5 lists the 12 projects for Employment Pacts eligible within Objective 2 regions 
including details of the main partners involved and the provisional action plan 
priorities. The table also indicates where Pacts principally comprise ESF measures 
under Objective 3 (Champagne-Ardenne, Nord-Pas de Calais, Pays de la Loire, F) 
or Objective 4 (Bremen, D). The classification of the Pact for Abruzzi (I) reflects that 
region's transition from Objective 1 to Objective 2 status. 
Employment Pacts 
The aim of the Territorial Employment Pact for Saint-Herblain, a suburb of Nantes 
(Pays de la Loire, F) is to build on previous successful initiatives and create a similar 
dynamic for the creation of jobs. The local plan for economic integration was aimed at 
tackling an unemployment level which had reached 17% mainly as a result of a decline 
in local industries (shipbuilding, agri-food). Previously unemployed people.were 
engaged by the Town Hall to manage cultural or sporting events, Other jobs were 
created in the private sector to provide local services for families or old people and 
also» for example, in waste recycling. A total of 552 unemployed people had benefited 
by the end of 1996 ( 3Q4 with jobs; 48 with a professional qualification), The new Pact 
will similarly involve local authorities, training bodies, associations and firms and seek 
to develop further new sources of employment. 
In Nordrhein Westfalen (D) the three coal-mining areas, which are covered almost 
entirely by Objective 2 programmes, will be linked by a network of three Pacts aimed 
at developing new services to replace jobs lost in declining industry. The Action Plan 
for the Pact includes the promotion of innovation and technology as well as improving 
the location factors of the region as a whole The Pact partnership includes the 
Government of the Land, towns, businesses, Chambers of Commerce, representatives 
of trade and industry, university and research institutes and the trade unions. 
Tourism 
As in 1994-1996, the U.K., France and Italy have devoted the most significant 
resources to tourism with an average of 17% ( MECU 211, MECU 178 and MECU 
105 respectively) of productive sector resources allocated to the sector. However, 
although total resources for the sector have increased, there has been a small reduction 
in the overall percentage allocated to tourism compared to the previous period. 
A°) 
promoting the region as an international tourist destination* 
Expenditure of MECU 18.288 in Nord-Pas-De-Calais (F) continues with measures 
for the construction of recreational, cultural or sports tourist facilities and the creation 
of conditions for private investment in this sector. The overall aim is to position the 
région as an international destination, especially for short-stay visitors within short 
travelling distance (TGV, Channel tunnel, motorways, airports). Key targets include 
increasing the number of visitors by 1 million and overnight stays by 150,000. 
The SPD for Industrial South Wales (U.K.) will be seeking to develop the tourism 
potential of Cardiff as an international city from which the region as a whole would 
benefit. On the basis of a tourism strategy for the region, expenditure of MECU 23.094 
(19% of total productive sector resources) will finance the upgrading of existing 
tourist facilities and attractions, develop a limited number of strategic flagship projects 
and implement marketing initiatives. 
Support infrastructure 
As indicated earlier, the approach sought with regard to the provision of supporting 
infrastructure has been to try to ensure that it indeed supported the development of the 
productive sector and would require specific justification in this respect. Total 
expenditure in this area amounts to MECU 1,210 or around 28% of total productive 
sector (13% of total Objective 2). Indeed, in some Member States infrastructure 
provision was reduced during negotiation of the programme, for example in Finland 
where this was reduced from 13% to 10% of the budget with an agreement to explore 
the possibilities of loan finance from the EIB. 
Human Resources 
Just over one third (MECU 3092) of the total Objective 2 budget has been devoted to 
the development of Human Resources as a whole (including RTD aspects) with the 
major expenditure in U.K. and France. Amongst the priorities of the Objective 2 
Guidelines in this area was to target training in an SME context towards owners and 
managers and adapt vocational qualifications to the process of technological and 
organisational innovation. Again, it is important to appreciate that human resources 
development is a horizontal aspect which constitutes a fundamental element for 
strengthening all priorities. 
9L& 
Management development 
A measure for Competitiveness Through People development and integration within 
the largest UK programme (West Midlands) encompasses actions for management 
development and the upskilimgeof ^ vo^ttonai 
training and customized triinmjr/^ any perception 
by SMEs that employee ^*4>Gm^ * -
Trainingforjobs , _ "*' - .K'/ > < ^ ^ >* , * , 
Of the smaller programmes, MBÇl|||,$ (3t$fS'-of etjr^^%|%0^^yeireso^»^) 
is being provided m Zuidoost*Bimbant p^^mr m^^^'^pi' timmgiwfià 
education of the employed% imd#«?bnplbyed, jbicia^bi^lfi^^^dblte» ^À»$''in^^ 
environment projects. Labour market activities will provide labour pools to provide 
opportunities for the unemployed to^pm working experience, ^cultate the transfer of 
technical knowledge and presenMlte expertise of older (unemployed) workers, the 
ESF will also support ERDF measures by professionalizing voluntary occupations and 
new local employment initiatives (see above) in social care in deprived 
neighbourhoods. 
Training facilities 
Overall financing of training facilities and related equipment, at MECU 120^ comprises 
less than 1% of the global Objective 2 budget Such expenditure appears primarily in 
eight of the SPDs for France, of which the largest project (MECU 13.8) includes the 
construction or renovation of existing facilities and the provision of training material in 
Nord-Pas de Calais. 
Equal Opportunities 
Compared to the previous programming period, the aspect of equal opportunities has 
been strengthened in all the Objective 2 programmes for the period 1997-1999, 
although this priority generally appears as a horizontal objective and not at the measure 
level. In the actions funded by the ESF, equal opportunities for women and men is 
more often taken into account than in those funded by the ERDF which are usually 
gender neutral. Gender specific background statistics concerning unemployment are 
usually provided in the programmes. 
S.A 
Increasing employment opportunities for women 
In Germany, several programmes refer to the promotion of equal opportunities w 
their ESF measures. Women are often included in these measures as & target group ht 
strengthening human resources through education, further prp&sstor^^^ 
education. Nordrhein^Westfalen also includes, howeve&fe'flpi^ 
women as a part of Promotion of Technology and Inrtovàtlo^^^al^^^fife 
measure *Frau und Beruf {Women and Work) aims a|r%çi?à^gli^i^niï^ 
opportunities for women and the creation of female enterprises: Assistance is gjven for 
the establishment of regional centres which» for example/ offer education for women m 
co-operation with SMEs, especially Jn the field of roftnageni^i^ 
enter the labour market and improve their working coholliohs -m$.*1ft$fti& 
reintegration following maternity leave. Women are also ehcbUraged to Seek 
occupations in fields traditionally dominated by men, such as new technology. 
Research and Technological Development 
The Objective 2 Guidelines likewise suggested that the new programmes should 
increasingly provide for training linked to the job opportunities afforded by 
technological innovation in order to ensure a supply of worker qualified for the jobs of 
the future. Technical advances (especially in R&D) were not themselves sufficient to 
ensure successful innovation. Human and organisational factors, especially a lack of 
expertise and qualified workers, had proven to be the major sources of weakness in 
innovation systems in Europe. This was in the context of the need to make the most of 
existing R&D assets and improve the practical application of research results and 
technology transfer. As illustrated in the example below, a number of the new SPDs 
indicate that local actors are becoming mor familiar with the factors required for an 
effective Research, Technology and Innovation (RTDI) system. These include: 
measures to improve RTD capabilities in fields important for the regions and 
which had the potential to develop them; 
measures to improve strategic policy planning capabilities to better identify 
potential and assess and meet regional demand; 
measures to develop inter-firm and firm-to-research centre relationships and 
networks of various types; 
measures to develop strategic management capabilities to promote better 
absorption of technologies and techniques within firms and sectors; 
measures to promote mobility of research and technological staff and managers 
to increase learning, application and implementation of best practice. 
SUL 
In overall terms, expenditure on RTD and innovation increased by 77% from MECU 
691 in 1994-96 to MECU 1226 in 1997-99 (from 10% to 13% of total Objective 2 
financing). The major investors in this area were the U.K. and France (with relatively 
high investment also in Finland) with MECU 327 and MECU 322 respectively 
representing 12% and 14% of these countries* total Objective 2 funding. 
Encouraging SMEs to invest in innovation and RTD 
In West Midlands (U.K.) expenditure of MECU S5.6 (19% of total Objective 2) is 
financing a Priority for Innovation, Technology and R&D development in the region 
which is designed to encourage SMEs to become more involved in the development 
and take-up of new technologies* The priority is being implemented in the context of a 
Regional Innovation Strategy through three main measures : Helping People to Create 
and, Sustain Innovative, Organisations (including training actions for innovation and 
R&D, actions aimed at improving awareness of the business potential of telematics, 
increasing 'benchmarking' expertise to facilitate development of best practices.); 
Market and Technology Vision (to encourage SMEs to make long-term investment in 
innovation, R&D and Technology transfer through a process of strategy and vision 
development); Exploitation and Development of Regional Intellectual Capital (to 
provide the infrastructure, information and support base necessary to engage SMEs in 
Innovation, R&D and Technology Transfer. 
Planning and Regeneration 
Expenditure on the planning and regeneration of both industrial sites and urban areas in 
the Objective 2 regions amounts to MECU 1,121 or around 12% of Objective 2 as a 
whole. 
«3 
Industrial sites 
The larger Member States are spending between 8 and 10% of their Objective 2 
allocations in this area but with Germany at 15%, primarily through expenditure of 
MECU 112J in Nordrheîn-Westfalén. A quarter of this region's Objective 2 
resources continues be devoted to this aspect where the regeneration of industrial 
wasteland and the renovation of buildings, mainly for use by SMEs, are amongst the 
most important measures. The creation of more than 24,000 jobs is expected from 
these activities. 
Urban areas 
France remains the biggest investor of Objective 2 resources in the urban sector with 
expenditure of MECU 107 or 9 % of its total funding. In Haute-Normandie MECU 
14.8 is, for example, being provided under a Priority for Improving the Urban 
Environment. Measures include restructuring of urban areas, the provision of public 
transport and cycle zones as well actions targeted on the most run-down areas aimed at 
improving the quality of life and the establishment of local businesses and services (see 
LDEIs). + ; * ' 
Environment 
The Objective 2 Guidelines considered the pursuit of sustainable development under 
two main themes: firstly, by increasing the attractiveness of the region by tackling past 
industrial damage and improving the physical environment (see Planning and 
Regeneration above) and secondly by exploiting eco-products, environmental services 
and technologies. The latter included the promotion of environmental training as a 
factor for economic advantage. 
An overall sum of MECU 479 (MECU 397 in 1994-96) is being provided for measures 
in the environmental field during 1997-99 although other expenditure, notably for the 
regeneration of industrial and urban sites will also have an environmental impact. 
Indeed, one of the features of the new programmes has been the way in which the 
environment has been horizontally integrated within other programme priorities. 
*v 
Integrating the Environment 
One; example of the horizontal integration of environmental aspects is the SPD for 
Finland which contains new proposals for expert assessment groups to establish the 
impact of projects on the environment before funding decisions are taken. In Denmark 
envtbnmental actions are fully integrated within other programme measures. 
Investing in environmental technology 
Excluding expenditure on urban regeneration measures, MECU 28, comprising 18% of 
Tuscany's (I) total Objective 2 expenditure is providing financial incentives to firms 
investing in clean technology. This includes recycling and energy saving and innovative! 
production techniques to reduce CFCs and CO2. Infrastructures for the treatment and| 
recycling of industrial waste and also for the monitoring and control of areas at risk are 
also being given support. Aims include the involvement of 30'firms and to improve the] 
treatment capacity of industrial waste by 12,000,000m1 per year. i 
In Berlin' (D), MECU 333 will be spent on measures for business and industry within 
the Environmental Programme and the 'Initiative for a friture Ecological Economy'., 
These will lead to benefits estimated to reduce the consumption of drinking water by! 
54,000 m3 per annum and the quantity of waste water by 45,000 m* Less primary 
energy consumption (85^000 Mwh) will lead to savings in raw materials of 6,0001 
tonnes a year. 
During negotiation of the Programming Documents, the Commission insisted on the 
application of 'Environmental Profiles' whereby all plans had to include: an appraisal 
of the environmental situation in the region concerned; an evaluation of the impact of 
the strategies and operations contained in the plan in terms of sustainable development 
and the arrangements made to associate the competent environmental authorities 
designated by the Member States in the preparation and implementation of the 
Programming Documents. 
^<T 
IV. CONCLUSIONS 
The Commission's Cohesion report(9) recognized that the Objective 2 regions faced 
particular difficulties in meeting the challenges of international competition and in 
sharing in the Union's general prosperity including the opportunities created by the 
Single Market. The immediate priority for Community assistance had been in reducing 
dependence on outmoded activities through a process of restructuring and 
diversification, especially by developing an indigenous business culture. 
In the new Objective 2 programmes for 1997-1999 more incentives have been 
provided, for example, for investments which promote employment-intensive growth 
and sustainable development. The importance of Human Resources Development 
implies ensuring a better skilled workforce through improved access to adapted and 
quality training, the promotion of entrepreneurship and increased links between 
training and employment systems, companies and research structures. In order to 
improve innovative skills, it has also been important to adopt a more targeted approach 
to schemes for encouraging Research and Technological Development, technology 
transfers and the development of research results into marketable products. Such 
schemes need to be fully integrated with the economic and Research, Technology and 
Innovation (RTDI) system in the region or locality. Stepping up local production and 
services, including in the cultural and social fields, also represents a considerable 
reservoir of new jobs. 
Similarly, in recasting its structural policies for the next programming period, the 
Union recognises the continuing problems of economic and social conversion, 
especially in the most prosperous Member States. And this not only in regions of 
industrial decline, but also in rural zones lacking economic diversification and suffering 
depopulation, in urban areas with little economic activity and high pockets of 
unemployment as well as in fisheries zones in difficulty. An integrated approach, 
accompanied by local efforts to develop synergies between the various EU 
programmes and initiatives, will therefore be essential in future, taking account in 
particular of levels of unemployment as well as the degree of industrial or agricultural 
activity and social exclusion. 
The new Objective 2 programmes for 1997-1999 already reflect significant progress in 
many of the areas outlined above. Whilst summarising the key elements and expected 
impacts of the current programmes, this Communication, in highlighting areas where 
more still needs to be done, may also contribute to the approach to economic and 
social conversion after 1999. 
(9) COM(96) 542 final of 6 November 1996 : Firsl Repon on Economic suit! Social Cohesion. 
U 
ANNEX 1 
ANNEXE 1 
ANLAGE 1 
Breakdown by Funds and by regions of the Objective 2 CSFs and SPDs 1997-1999 
Répartition par Fonds et par régions des Docup et CCA objectif 2 1997-1999 
Aufgliederung nach Fonds und Ziel-2-Regionen der GFK und EPD 1997-1999 
Millions d'écus 
FEDER FSE TOTAL 
Belgique 
Aubange 
Limburg 
Meuse-Vesdre 
Turnhout 173,1 
1.0 
51,0 
95,1 
26,0 43,1 
0,0 
16,9 
19,3 
6,8 216,1 
1.0 
67,8 
114,4 
32,9 
Allemagne 
Bay em 
Bremen 
Hessen 
Niedersachsen 
Nordrh ein - Wes tfalen 
Rheinland-Pfalz 
Saarland 
Schles wig-HoIs tein 
West-Berlin 639,9 
13,7 
35.8 
26,5 
33,3 
336,0 
17,9 
41,6 
11,8 
123,3 261,2 
6,0 
19,3 
3,5 
16,6 
114,6 
9,6 
17,3 
6,3 
67,9 901,1 
19,8 
55,1 
30,0 
49,9 
450,6 
27,6 
58,9 
18,1 
191,2 
Danemark 
Loi I and 
Nordjylland 52,7 
9,3 
43,4 15,5 
4,5 
11,0 68,2 
13,8 
54,4 
Espagne 
Aragon 
Baléares 
Ça ta/un a 
La Rioja 
Madrid 
Navarra 
Pais Vasco 1132,4 
78,8 
12,6 
559,6 
15,7 
153,5 
20,4 
291,9 352,6 
29,7 
2,6 
150,1 
2,6 
58,8 
7.2 
101,7 1485,0 
108,4 
15,2 
709,7 
18,4 
212,2 
27,6 
393,5 
France 
Alsace 
Aquitaine 
Auvergne 
Basse-Norman die 
Bretagne 
Bourgogne 
Centre 
Champagne-Ardennes 
Franche-Comté 
Haute-Normandie 
Languedoc-Ro us sillon 
Lorraine 
Midi-Pyrénées 
Nord-Pas-de-Calais 
Pays de la Loire 
Picardie 
Poito u-Charentes 
ProvenceAlpes-Côte d'Azur 
Rhône-Alpes 1852,1 
17,2 
108,5 
69,4 
66,0 
101,6 
58,8 
32,1 
97,1 
47,7 
127,8 
85,1 
143,5 
43,0 
309,0 
130,5 
108,0 
51,4 
131.4 
124.0 394,2 
4,8 
24,0 
12,9 
14,3 
16,7 
10,9 
5,9 
16,7 
8,5 
36,4 
13,8 
30,1 
10,0 
66,4 
32.0 
31.6 
11.4 
23.0 
24.9 2246,3 
21,9 
132,5 
82,3 
80,3 
118,3 
69,7 
38,0 
113.8 
56,2 
164,2 
98,9 
173.6 
53,0 
375,4 
162,5 
139.6 
62.9 
154.4 
148.9 
Q^ 
Breakdown by Funds and by regions of the Objective 2 CSFs and SPDs 1997-1999 
Répartition par Fonds et par régions des Docup et CCA objectif 2 1997-1999 
Aufgliederung naçh Fonds und Ziel-2-Regionen der GFK und EPD 1997-1999 
(suite) 
___ Millions d'écus 
Italie 
Emilia-Romagna 
Friu/i-Venezia Giu/ia 
Lazio 
Liguria 
Lombardia 
Marche 
Piemonte 
Toscana 
Umbria 
Valle d'Aosta 
Veneto FEDER 
782,7 
11,3 
28,0 
62,4 
92,5 
26,2 
27,7 
259,9 
128,9 
42,1 
13,2 
90,5 FSE 
185,1 
2,8 
11.2 
14,6 
37,0 
7.8 
3,3 
49,6 
30,0 
11.0 
0.3 
17,3 TOTAL 
967,7 
14,2 
39,2 
76,9 
129,5 
34.0 
31,0 
309,5 
158,9 
53,1 
13,5 
107,8 
Luxembourg 8,0 1,8 9,8 
Pays-Bas 
Arnhem-Nijmegen 
Groningen-Zuidoost Drenthe 
Twen te 
Zuid Limburg 
Zuidoost-Brabant 292,3 
51,9 
75,0 
50,8 
' 42,0 
72,5 149,9 
24,9 
38,0 
28,6 
23,6 
34,8 442,1 
76,8 
113,1 
79,4 
65,5 
107,3 
Finlande 105,528 29,765 135,293 
Royaume-Uni 
Eastern Scotland 
East Midlands 
Gibraltar 
Greater London (East London and the Lee Valley) 
Industrial South Wales ' 
North East England 
North West England (Greater Manchester, Lancashire and Cheshire) 
Plymouth 
Thanet 
West Cumbria and Furness 
West Midlands 
Western Scot/and 
Yorkshire and Humberside 2014,2 
110,7 
- 84,9 
4,8 
76,4 
200,8 
282,2 
289,8 
31,3 
18,5 
24,0 
333,5 
263,6 
293,5 661,6 
29,2 
28,8 
1.2 
25,2 
53,6 
96,2 
115.0 
7.2 
3,9 
8,4 
114.7 
70,9 
107,2 2675,8 
139,9 
113,7 
6,1 
101,7 
254,4 
378,4 
404,9 
38,6 
22,4 
32,4 
448,2 
334,5 
400,7 
TOTAL 7053,0 2094,6 9147,6 
Ventilation par Fonds 77,1% 22,9% 100,0% 
n 
Contribution of the Structural Funds to Objective 2 development expenditure for the period 1997-1999 
Contribution des Fonds structurels aux dépenses de développement objectif 2 pour la période 1997-1999 
Beitrag der Struckturfonds am den Entwicklungsausgaben in Ziel 2 fur die Période 1997-1999 ANNEX 2 
ANNEXE 2 
ANLAGE 2 
Mecu 
te Environnement productif 
Industries et services 
- Tous types d'industries et services 
-PME 
Tourisme 
Infrastructures de soutien 
Ressources humaines 
Formation, emploi 
Centres de formation, équipements 
Recherche & Développement 
Aménagement et réhabilitation 
Sites industriels 
Zones urbaines 
Protection de l'environnement 
Assistance technique 
TOTAL Belgique 
114 
66 
44 
22 
15 
34 
69 
30 
0 
38 
19 
19 
0 
8 
6 
216 Danemark 
37 
12 
12 
0 
9 
17 
30 
15 
0 
15 
0 
0 
0 
0 
1 
68 Allemagne 
327 
113 
54 
59 
13 
201 
378 
242 
2 
134 
142 
142 
0 
45 
10 
901 Espagne 
699 
494 
0 
494 
0 
205 
518 
260 
0 
258 
89 
0 
89 
167 
12 
1485 France 
955 
428 
252 
176 
178 
349 
729 
351 
56 
322 
396 
189 
207 
131 
35 
2246 Italie 
508 
309 
77 
233 
105 
94 
241 
171 
. 9 
61 
135 
98 
37 
70 
14 
968 Luxem­
bourg 
2 
2 
2 
0 
0 
0 
4 
2 
0 
2 
1 
1 
0 
4 
0 
J° Pays-Bas 
214 
100 
57 
43 
43 
71 
177 
143 
0 
34 
41 
35 
6 
0 
10 
442 Royaume-
Uni 
1404 
966 
564 
402 
211 
227 
897 
570 
0 
327 
298 
273 
25 
45 
32 
2676 Finlande 
70 
46 
26 
20 
11 
13 
49 
14 
O 
35 
5 
O 
5 
5 
3 
133 TOTAL 
4330 
2535 
1088 
1447 
586 
1210 
3092 
1799 
67 
1226 
1126 
757 
370 
474 
122 
9145 % 
47,4% 
27.7% 
11.9% 
15.8% 
6.4% 
13.2% 
33,8% 
19.7% 
0.7% 
13.4% 
12,3% 
8.3% 
4.0% 
5,2% 
1,3% 
100,0% 
ANNEX 3 
BELGIUM 
Background 
Between 15 April 1997 and 24 July 1997, the Commission adopted the four Single 
Programming Documents (SPDs) for the Belgian regions of Limburg, Turnhout, 
Aubange and Liège eligible for assistance from the Structural Funds under Objective 
2. 
The total contribution of the Funds (including unused resources amounting to 
MECU 26 transferred from the previous programming period 1994-1996) amounts to 
MECU 216 (ERDF 80 %, ESF 20 %) distributed as follows : 
MECU M*™ 
Limburg 67.8 Liège 114.4 
Turnhout 32.8 Aubange 1.0 
Regional Development Strategies 
The strategic aim of the SPDs for both Limburg and Turnhout is for the creation of 
jobs through socio-economic development without harming the environment. The 
strategy for Aubange seeks to integrate recently introduced large businesses into the 
economic fabric of the area, in particular by stimulating links between businesses 
through sub-contracting, R&D, logistics and external services. The SPD for Liège 
continues the 1994-1996 strategy of structural conversion of the metal industry whilst 
supporting sectors with growth potential through stimulating investment, R&D and 
training. 
Development Priorities 
Limburg and Turnhout share three development priorities, whilst Turnhout also 
includes Local Development Employment Initiatives in a priority for the local 
economy : 
Industry 
Service sector 
Environment 
Local economy (Turnhout) 
2><o 
The following development priorities were agreed for Liège 
• Dynamism and economic diversification 
• Technological innovation 
• Attractiveness of the region 
• Dynamising employment through the social market economy 
In Aubange, measures for promoting the integration of SMEs into the region 
concerned are being undertaken within one priority for : 
Support for business and employment through increased awareness of the 
information society. 
Impacts 
In Limburg Local employment initiatives are aimed at creating 100 new jobs, half of 
which would be for women. Other targets include training for 13,625 people, the 
creation of 35 new businesses each year and the use of 40 hectares of regenerated land 
for economic activity. The SPD for Turnhout anticipates 5,800 new jobs, 
5000 people trained, 250 SMEs engaged in technological and innovative projects, 
16 000 m2 of new SMEs and 130 hectares of industrial/commercial sites. 
Aubange expects 50 new direct jobs and Liège 5,000 by the end of 1999 whilst 
achieving national average unemployment levels. 
Value added from the negotiations 
During negotiation between the Commission, the Flemish authorities and the two 
regions concerned, Turnhout and Limburg, saw the strengthening of their SPDs 
under certain themes : 
- Actions promoting equal opportunities were made more concrete, as was the 
emphasis on the information society. Concentration on the worst affected areas within 
the regions was guaranteed; 
- The overall share of basic infrastructure was reduced in favour of business (SME) 
measures, e.g. the budget of the "Fenix" project was decreased and new jobs were to 
be reserved for people from the region. The remaining infrastructural measures also 
had to show a direct connection to economic activities and the creation of 
employment; 
- The importance of actions favouring employment creation was emphasized by the 
inclusion of physical indicators in every measure and the stipulation that the 
employment effect should be demonstrated for every project. The priority "Local 
Economy" focuses on projects with a local impact in contrast to the other priorities 
where the impact was at regional level; 
3-4 
- Stricter conditions were included on environmental reporting such as an 
environmental profile of the region and an annual report on the effects of the projects 
on the environment. The programme has a priority specifically dealing with 
environmental aspects; 
- The programming approach was also refined, i.e. a greater coherence between the 
socio-economic analysis and the various priorities and measures was achieved, but also 
between the Funds. 
The latter aspect was also a key element in the negotiation of the SPDs for Liège and 
Aubange obtained mostly by : 
- a significant reduction in the number of measures in order to ensure greater 
coherence between the measures and the overall strategy of the SPD; 
- definition of selection criteria taking account of the employment aspect; 
- amendment of the implementation arrangements of certain measures in order to 
increase their impact on local SMEs; 
- a reorientation of measures related to RTD by placing emphasis on analysis of 
business needs, exploitation of research and dissemination of innovation to SMEs. 
- a refusal to accept certain proposed investments in basic infrastructure. 
?*. 
DENMARK 
Background 
On 22 April 1997, the Commission adopted the two Single Programming Documents 
(SPDs) for the Danish regions of North Jutland and Lolland eligible for assistance 
from the Structural Funds under Objective 2. The total contribution of the Structural 
Funds, including unused resources amounting to MECU 2.7 transferred from the 
previous programming period, amounts to MECU-68.23 (ERDF 77 %; ESF 23 %) 
distributed as follows : 
MECU 
North Jutland 54.40 
Lolland 13.83 
Regional Development Strategies 
The overall strategic aim of the North Jutland SPD is to strengthen the conditions for 
increased growth in the region's businesses and thereby increase the number of jobs in 
the Objective 2 area in general. The strategy for reaching this objective is 
"globalisation" : a strengthening of the ability of firms to compere internationally 
through innovation, diversification, increased competence and by strengthening 
training and infrastructural frameworks. The strategy for Lolland is to develop and 
utilise the region's potential and to develop interaction between the region and national 
and economic environment. 
Development Priorities 
In North Jutland the strategy is addressed by two development priorities 
• Globalisation of the manufacturing industry and the service industry 
• Globalisation of the tourism sector 
The main priority for Lolland is for : 
Business development through the region's potential 
—-JO 
Impacts 
In addition to quantified targets for the number of jobs to be created or maintained (see 
main text) other aims of the programmes include: 
North Jutland : 
- creation of 17 businesses; 
- increase in SME turnover of ECU 313 million; 
- introduction of new technologies or production processes by 50% of 
articipating SPDs; 
- development of new markets in 55% of projects; 
- training of around 4,800 people. 
Lolland : 
- 600 people trained; 
- other impact indicators, such as level of technology in SMEs, number of 
R&D contacts established, SMEs establishing new markets. 
Value added from the negotiations 
The two Danish 1997-1999 Objective 2 SPDs were the result of detailed work at all 
levels in the partnership between the regions, the Member States and the Commission 
services. A negotiation meeting took place in Copenhagen in November 1996 with 
representatives from both regions, the Member States and thé Commission. The work 
had the advantage 6f having the mid term-evaluation of the 1994-1996 almost finalized 
at that time, giving the possibility of using the recommendations from the report. 
The following particular aspects may be highlighted : 
The analysis of the socio-economic situation of the regions was significantly 
expanded and updated with the latest available figures on the regions' 
conditions, needs and opportunities. In Lolland this resulted in a new scheme 
to tackle the individual training needs of the various groups at risk of 
unemployment. 
There were small adjustments in the programme for Lolland, whereas the 
overall strategy for Nordjylland was changed even before the negotiations 
from "Industrialisation" to "Globalisation"; 
The structure of the programme for Nordjylland was changed to simplify the 
management of the programme; 
Less weight will be put on direct investment aid to enterprises, and more 
weight will be put on improving framework-conditions for the enterprises in the 
programmes; 
Support will be given to vocational training, planning, flexible vocational 
training offers, job-rotation projects, adult apprenticeship; 
Investments in basic infrastructure have been excluded in the new programmes 
and replaced by investments in "Strategic Infrastructure" (e.g. support for R&D 
infrastructure and infrastructure supporting communication and information 
systems; 
Although equality between men and women is embedded in the legal system in 
enmark, and equality of opportunity is an implicit horizontal objective to which 
the Danish authorities are committed, the programmes contain measures where 
special attention is paid to the qualification of women; 
Quantification of indicators was given particular attention, and the system to 
supply the "PHYSIN" database with updated figures was improved; 
The Monitoring Committees now include a representative from the 
Environmental Authorities. 
5^ 
GERMANY 
Background 
On 7 May 1997, the Commission adopted the 9 Single Programming Documents 
(SPDs) for the German regions of Bayern, Berlin, Bremen, Hessen, Niedersachsen, 
Nordrhein-Westfalen, Rheinland-Pfalz, Saarland and Schleswig Holstein eligible 
under Objective 2 of the Structural Funds. The total contribution of the Funds 
(including unused resources amounting to MECU 40 transferred from the previous 
programming period 1994-1996) amounts to MECU 901 (ERDF 71 %; ESF 29 % 
distributed as follows : 
Bayern 
Berlin 
Bremen 
Hessen 
Niedersachsen MECU 
19.8 
191.2 
55.1 
29.9 
49.9 Nordrhein-Westfalen 
Rheinland-Pfalz 
Saarland 
Schleswig Holstein MECU 
450.6 
27.6 
58.9 
18.0 
Regional Development Strategies 
The key strategic aim in Bayern remains reducing dependency on traditional industry 
through diversification into growth-sectors and making the regional economy less 
vulnerable to economic crises. 
Berlin's strategy aims to stop the process of the de-industrialisation and disparities 
between East and West Berlin, the latter assuming a locomotive function for East 
Berlin and the surrounding area. 
Bremen's strategy integrates all structural development actions, aiming in particular to 
diversify the regional economic structure, strengthen the service sector and tourism 
and improve location factors, including protection and improvement of the 
environment. A feature of Hessen's approach is the support of business and SMEs 
which exceed the legal obligations in terms of environmental investment. 
In continuity with the 1994-1996 programme, the strategy for Niedersachsen is aimed 
at tackling job-bosses from industrial change. The strategic aims for Nordrhein-
Westfalen include linking economy and ecology and becoming a leading player in the 
media industry. 
u 
In Rheinland-Pfalz, the aim is to strengthen growth and the employment situation 
whilst improving the competitiveness of business in general, and SMEs in particular. 
Saarland's development objectives include improving transport and communication 
and better exploitation of cross-border cooperation (Saarland-Lorraine-Luxembourg). 
Following on from its previous priority, the strategy for Schleswig Holstein includes 
the aim of reducing the structural problems of Kiel resulting from the crisis in naval 
construction and reconversion of the armaments industry. 
Development Priorities 
In addressing the above strategic aims, the SPDs encompass the following 
development priorities : 
• Diversification and modernisation of industry (inc. crafts) (e.g. Bremen and 
Niedersachsen) 
• Infrastructure linked to economic activity (e.g. Bayern, Berlin, Rheinland-Pfalz, 
Schleswig Holstein) 
• Technological development and innovation (e.g. Berlin, Nordrhein-Westfalen, 
Rheinland-Pfalz, Saarland) 
• Human Resources development, training and qualification (all SPDs) 
• Protection of the environment, site regeneration etc. (e.g. Berlin, Bremen, 
Nordrhein-Westfalen, Saarland) 
Impact 
All the SPDs contain ex-ante evaluations of the programmes' impacts, including an 
estimate of the number of net additional jobs in the programme area (see main text) as 
well as a range of other quantified physical and economic outputs. For example, 
200 hectares of regenerated sites in Bremen; the qualification of 100-200 unemployed 
people in Hessen; the recycling of 6,000 tonnes of raw material per annum in Berlin; 
the switching of 100,000 road transports a year to rail (Nordrhein-Westfalen) and 
3,000 consultations and 50 seminars per annum in technology transfer (Saarland). 
3? 
Value added from the negotiations 
Discussion on format and content of the 1997-1999 Regional Development Plans 
started at a rather early stage. On the occasion of an Objective 2 Monitoring 
Committee held on 14/15 May 1996, important aspects of the new programming such 
as the policy priorities for Objective 2, the allocation of funding to the individual 
Lander concerned and evaluation requirements were addressed so as to ensure their 
observation in the programming exercise. The Regional Development Plans submitted 
in August 1996 followed an agreed and harmonized schema and structure which 
facilitated the ensuing detailed discussion on each of the nine individual plans. As a 
result the overall strategic objectives, priorities and measures are consistent with each 
other and in most new SPDs concrete actions are proposed at the project level. 
Whilst there is a high degree of continuity with the previous SPDs, the focus on the 
priorities of the Commission guidelines is present in all new SPDs. During the 
negotiation, the following main results were achieved, representing improvements in 
relation to the previous planning period : 
There is an emphasis on employment-related objectives in all SPDs. Thus in 
several programmes (Berlin, Nordrhein-Westfalen), the element of 
employment aids has been considerably increased compared to training 
measures. Measures which had proved to be of a poor job-creating potential in 
the previous period were not carried on. 
Environmental actions and equal opportunities were incorporated within 
priorities as horizontal goals and, where appropriate, as specific measures. 
Measures to support SMEs were increased and targeted more specifically to 
their needs (e.g. in the field of R&D and risk capital financing). 
Synergies between ERDF and ESF actions were enhanced. 
Consistency and complementarity has been sought between Objective 2 
measures and measures implemented under Objectives 3 and 4. 
Existing and new measures in the framework of Employment Pacts were 
included. 
The quantification of objectives has largely been improved as far as expected 
outputs are concerned. 
The priority "local development" (new sources of employment) has been 
translated mainly into training measures for service jobs of various kinds (from 
enterprise-related services to social or neighbourhood services and 
environment). 
ÎR 
SPAIN 
Background 
On 12 June 1997, the Commission adopted the Community Support Framework (CSF) 
1997-1999 for the regions of Spain eligible under Objective 2. The CSF is being 
implemented through seven regional Operational Programmes and one multiregional 
ESF Operational Programme. 
The total contribution of the Structural Funds including unused resources amounting 
to MECU 156 transferred from the previous programming period 1994-96, amounts to 
MECU 1,485 (ERDF 76 %, ESF 24 %) distributed as follows : 
MECU MECU 
Aragon 108.44 Madrid 212.23 
Baléares 15.19 Navarra 27.63 
Cataluna 709.69 LaRioja 18.35 
PaisVasco 393.51 
Regional Development Strategies 
The Strategy of the Community Support Framework reflects continuity with the 
previous CSF 1994-1996 being centred on the creation of employment and the 
increased competitiveness of business. 
Development Priorities 
Pursuit of the regional development strategy is underpinned by the following 
development priorities: 
Support for employment and business competitiveness 
Protection and improvement of the environment 
R&D, technology and innovation 
Development of transport linked to economic activity 
Local and urban development 
Impacts 
For each of the above priorities, a number of quantified indicators has been established 
relating, for example, to the number of new businesses per 10,000 inhabitants 
(Priority 1); percentage of waste treated by new equipment (Priority 2); employment in 
RTD as a percentage of total employment (Priority 3); road or rail density (Priority 4); 
average duration of unemployment (Priority 5). 
i^ 
Value added from the negotiations 
In accordance with the Commission's Note for Guidance and as a result of the 
partnership negotiations to establish the CSF, the following main adjustments to the 
original plan were made : 
Compared with the conversion plan, the CSF shows an increased financial 
support for SMEs in the fields of productive investment, soft measures and 
vocational training. 
The ERDF participation in favour of priority 3 (research, technology and 
innovation) has been financially increased. 
A better integration of actions co-financed by the ERDF and ESF has been 
achieved, as well as a clear differentiation of ESF Objective 2 actions 
compared with interventions in Objectives 3 and 4 ; 
The rate of EU co-financing in priority 4 (transport linked to economic 
activity) has been reduced compared to the level initially proposed. 
ESF actions in priority 2 (environment protection) will be specifically 
identified, which will increase visibility of ESF interventions in this field. 
Ho 
FRANCE 
Background 
With the exception of Lorraine, the Commission adopted the 19 Single Programming 
Documents (SPDs) for the French regions eligible under Objective 2 of the Structural 
Funds between 24 March 1997 and 4 August 1997. 
The total contribution of the Funds (including unused resources amounting to 
MECU 208.6 transferred from the previous programming period 1994-1996 but 
excluding MECU 39.4 still to be allocated for a multiregional programme for the 
defence industry plus technical assistance funding) amounts to MECU 2,246 (ERDF 
82 %; ESF 18 %) distributed as follows : 
MECU 
Alsace ,21.9 
Auvergne 82.3 
Bretagne 118.3 
Centre 37.9 
Franche-Comté 56.2 
Languedoc-Roussillon 98.9 
Midi-Pyrénées 52.9 
Pays de la Loire 162.5 
Poitou-Charentes 62.9 
Provence-Alpes Côte d'Azur 154.4 Aquitaine 132.5 
Basse-Normandie 80.3 
Bourgogne 69.7 
Champagne-Ardenne 113.8 
Haute-Normandie 164.2 
Lorraine 173.6 
Nord-Pas-de-Calais 375.4 
Picardie 139.6 
Rhône-Alpes 148.9 
Regional Development Strategies 
In broad continuity with the previous programming period 1994-1996, the global 
strategy of these regions is the creation and maintenance of employment.. Although 
there is sometimes a degree of overlap, regional approaches may be grouped around 
the following main strategic aims. 
- support for business creation and development including the provision of services to 
SMEs in respect of Information and Communications Technologies, financial 
engineering, increasing export capacity (Basse-Normandie, Languedoc-
Roussillon, Nord-Pas-de-Calais). 
- diversification from traditional industry into new economic activities includes 
research and technology transfer and local development (Champagne-Ardenne), 
high-level services and the development of tourism (Provence-Alpes-Côte 
d'Azur). 
- In some areas, the approach is to consolidate or restart industrial employment 
(Midi-Pyrénées) or maintain a strong industrial presence whilst diversifying into 
new areas (Rhône-Alpes) and anchoring businesses in the area. 
k-i 
- the importance of endogenous development is stressed in the SPDs for Bourgogne 
and Centre and similarly, 
- increasing the attractivenesi of the area and improving the businesses and economic 
environment is highlighted in Auvergne and Aquitaine. 
Priorities 
The SPDs likewise encompass the following main development priorities 
• Support to business development 
• Upgrading and restructuring the area and environment 
• Research and technological development and innovation 
• Valorisation of human resources 
• Improving the attractiveness of the area 
Impact 
The SPDs contain estimates of the number of jobs to be created in the programme area 
(see text) as well as performance indicators and quantified objectives for each of the 
measures concerned. 
Value added from the negotiations 
This concerned in particular : 
- the establishment of elements missing from some of the initial proposals relating, for 
example, to socio-economic analysis, base indicators, environmental evaluation, 
needs analysis, especially in terms of urban issues and the defence industry; 
- strengthening of measures for assessing training needs; 
- the promotion of R&D, which was already present in the previous phase, has been 
maintained or strengthened in both qualitative and financial terms. 
- adjustment of resources towards assisting SMEs to counter negative effects arising 
from sectors in difficulty such as the defence industry; 
- agreement in partnership to remove infrastructure proposals which did not 
correspond to the Commission's guidelines in this area; 
<4<L 
- inclusion of Territorial and Local Employment Pacts (for example Pays de la Loire 
and Nord-Pas-de-Calais) and agreement with French authorities to pursue the Pact 
methodology for other proposals (e.g. Picardie and Haute-Normandie) for 
presentation in the course of implementation of the SPDs; 
- increase in specific actions for urban problems; 
- additional information relating to the environmental impact of measures especially, 
for example, relating to compatibility between economic and port development 
(Haute-Normandie, Pays de la Loire) and the preservation of habitats (notably 
Birds and Habitat Directives). 
43 
ITALY 
Background 
Between 7 May 1997 and 24 July 1997 the Commission adopted 9 of the 11 Single 
Programming Documents (SPDs) for the regions of Italy eligible under Objective 2. 
The SPDs for Friuli and Lazio were due to be adopted by the beginning of October 
1997. 
The total contribution of the Structural Funds (including unused resources amounting 
to MECU 170 transferred from the previous programming period 1994-1996) amounts 
to MECU 968 (ERDF 80; ESF 20 %) distributed as follows: 
Emilia-Romagna 
Friuli-Venezia-Giulia 
Lazio 
Liguria 
Lombardia 
Marche MECU 
14.2 
39.3 
76.9 
129.5 
34.0 
31.0 Piemonte 
Toscana 
Umbria 
Vallée d'Aosta 
Veneto 309.5 
159.0 
53.2 
13.5 
107.9 
Regional Development Strategies 
Strategies have generally provided continuity with the previous programming period 
1994-1996. Sometimes strategic aims have been better defined than before 
(eg.: Marche) or are more geographically focused (Lazio). 
Examples of common strategic aims include : 
- Strengthening and modernising SMEs and the creation of new businesses 
(eg.Fruili-Venezia-Giulia, Lazio, Liguria, Veneto, Marche, Piemonte, Toscana) 
- Diversification into high technology research and innovative sectors (eg.Fruili-
Venezia, Giulia, Liguria, Emilia-Romagna, Toscana) 
- Environment improvement and increasing the attractiveness of the region 
(all regions except Vallée d'Aosta) 
- Human Resources development and qualification (all regions) 
A specific strategic aim of Emilia Romagna is to promote links between the new 
Objective 2 area of Ferrara and Reggio/Modena. 
U*f 
Development Priorities 
The SPDs for Italy accordingly encompass the following range of main development 
priorities : 
Strengthening of existing SMEs and promotion of new businesses 
Upgrading and development of the local area 
Human resources development and qualification 
Environmental protection and regeneration 
Tourism and cultural heritage 
Research and Technology and Information Society 
Territorial Employment Pact (Emilia Romagna) 
Equal Opportunities 
Impacts 
In addition to the ex-ante estimates of the number of jobs to be created or maintained 
(see main text) examples of other expected impacts include : 
- assistance to 1,700 SMEs (Toscana) 
- increasing hotel take-up by tourists by 200,000 (Umbria) 
- regeneration of 450,000 m2 of waste land (Piemonte) 
- treatment of additional 50,000-100,000 tons of waste (Lombardia) 
- training of 120 graduates as Innovation Information Officers (Lazio) 
Value added from the negotiations 
Following an initial round of negotiations with the Italian authorities in Rome from 4th 
to 8th November 1996 on all 11 Programming Documents, separate discussions were 
undertaken with each region. The following main results were achieved: 
- the Programming Documents were better defined in order to improve the 
targeting of the strategy and objectives of each programme; 
- a revision of the financial allocations by measure. In particular, a general 
underestimation of human resources needs and technological innovation was 
ascertained. An increase in ESF assistance was therefore agreed for most of the 
SPDs in order to at least maintain the same level as in the previous period (i.e. 
around 20% on average). Additional support was also given to research and 
technological innovation; 
- a reorganisation of priorities for each SPD. In particular, in terms of the 
introduction of innovatory elements (inc. information society, Employment 
Pacts) in line with the Commission guidelines; 
- a detailed examination was undertaken of the different measures proposed for 
cofinancing, especially as regards their eligibility and suitability. The 
Commission's observations were generally welcomed by the Italian authorities; 
ks 
- environmental aspects were given particular attention in order to improve the 
environmental profiles, the quantification of indicators and impact as well as the 
association of the environmental authorities in the preparation and 
implementation of the SPDs; 
- the probem of additionality was addressed and representivès of the Treasury 
undertook to transmit provisional data for 1997-1999 calculated on the basis of 
the same methodology used in the past, as well as definitive data for the years 
1994-1995. 
- following the guidelines proposed by the Commission, particular attention 
was given in the programming of all the Italian SPDs to integrated approaches 
which were likely to create new jobs, especially with regard to new sources of 
employment. Furthermore, aids to employment are included in the majority of 
the SPDs. 
kh 
LUXEMBOURG 
Background 
On 15 April 1997, the Commission adopted the Single Programming Document (SPD) 
for the region of Esch-sur Alzette and Capellen concerned by Objective 2 in the 
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. The total contribution of the Funds (including unused 
resources amounting to MECU 1.771 transferred from the previous programming 
period 1994-1996) amounts to MECU 9.837 (ERDF 81 %, ESF 19 %). 
Regional Development Strategy 
The Strategy proposed for the new programming period is aimed at continuing efforts 
at diversification from the region's traditional heavy dependence on the steel industry: 
attraction of new businesses including support infrastructures, productive investment, 
vocational training, research and development and technology transfer. Particular 
emphasis is being placed on improving the quality of the environment. 
Development Priorities 
In pursuing the above strategy, five development priorities were adopted for 
Community financing 
Innovation in Enterprises 
Stimulating development and the diversification of economic structures and 
activities 
Protection and improvement of the environment 
Support for the stability and growth of regional employment by measures for human 
resources development 
Technical assistance 
Impacts 
Amongst the expected impacts the SPD anticipates the creation or maintenance of 
700-900 direct jobs. Quantified environmental objectives have also, for example, been 
provided under Priority 3: Protection and improvement of the Environment. 
^ 
Value added from the negotiations 
The proposals presented by the Luxemburg authorities already took account of the 
Commission's guidelines for Objective 2. In addition, negotiation with the Luxemburg 
authorities led to the following changes compared to the original proposals : 
The number of proposed measures was reduced in order to ensure greater 
coherence of the strategy. 
Project selection criteria (taking account of employment) and 
quantified objectives were devised for each measure and for the programme as 
a whole : this quantification concerned the number of jobs created, direct and 
indirect. It is thus anticipated that between 700 and 900 direct jobs could be 
created or maintained in the eligible regions as a result of the measures in the 
SPD. 
Implementation provisions were devised in order to increase the impact of 
measures for local businesses. 
Environmental indicators were provided under Priority 3 "Protection and 
Improvement of the Environment". Certain preventive measures were 
supported (e.g. recycling of cars). 
Priority 4 "Support for the stability and growth of regional employment 
through the development of human resources" was amended and makes 
explicit reference to actions aimed at equal opportunities, the implementation of 
Employment Pacts and the promoting of local services. 
Proposals for investment in certain "heavy" infrastructures were not accepted. 
U3 
NETHERLANDS 
Background 
On 26 May 1997, the Commission adopted the five Single Programming Document 
(SPDs) for the Dutch region of Arnhem-Nijmegen, Zuidoost Brabant, Zuid 
Limburg, Twente and Groningen-Drenthe. 
The Total contribution of the Structural Funds (including unused resources amounting 
to MECU 80 transferred from the previous programming period 1994-1996) amounts 
to MECU 442 (ERDF 66 %, ESF 34 %) distributed as follows : 
__ MECU " 
Arnhem-Nijmegen 77 Zuidoost Brabant 107 
Zuid-Limburg 66 Twente 79 
Groningen-Drenthe 113 
Regional Development Strategy 
The general strategic aim of all the Dutch SPDs is sustainable economic development, 
with the creation of new jobs and improvement of the quality of life without harming 
the environment. 
The SPD for Arnhem-Nijmegen also builds on its strategic location on important 
transport arteries. The strategy for Zuidoost-Brabant emphasises the role of SME 
clusters and new technologies. 
Development Priorities 
In addressing the strategic aims, the SPDs encompass the following priorities 
^i 
Arnhem-Nij megan 
• "Euro Trade Port" (expansion of transport and distribution function 
and commercial services) 
• Industry and Innovation 
• Tourism and Urban (economic) climate. 
Zuid-Limburg 
• Industry and related services 
• Transport and logistics 
• Knowledge development and transfer 
• Tourism and living environment. 
Groningen-Drenthe 
• Industry, business services and tourism 
• Productive environment and urban economy. 
Zuidoost-Brabant 
• Strengthening of industrial structure 
• Tourism, living and business environment. 
Twente 
• Transport and distribution 
• Industry 
• Tourism 
Impacts 
Amongst the key expected impacts are increases in Gross Regional Product'in Twente, 
Zuidoost-Brabant and Groningen-Drenthe and a positive migration of enterprises to 
the region (Twente and Groningen-Drenthe). The number of estimated new jobs 
ranges from 11,400 (permanent and temporary) in Groningen-Drenthe to 2,000 
permanent jobs in Zuidoost-Brabant. All the SPDs have training targets ranging from 
17,500 employees and 9,500 unemployed people to be trained in Groningen-Drenthe 
to 3,330 and 2220 in Arnhem-Nijmegen. 
Value added from the negotiations 
In June 1996 DG XVI presented the Commission's guidelines with regard to the 
second programming period 1997-1999 to a joint meeting of DG XVI, the national 
authorities and the repesentatives of the five Objective 2 regions in the Netherlands. 
When the Dutch authorities presented the five Single Programming Documents to the 
Commission on 23 September 1996 many of the Commission's priorities had been 
taken into account, especially with regard to employment, business-oriented measures 
and productive investments. 
5"o 
In the negotiations which followed, emphasis was placed by the Commission on 
reflecting the new guidelines as concretely as possible. The share of basic infrastructure 
was reduced considerably and only allowed if of a productive nature and where a clear 
and direct link to economic activities and employment could be demonstrated. The 
smaller share for infrastructure benefited the business-oriented measures (mainly 
SMEs) as well as actions aimed at R&D whose share was increased. 
greater emphasis was given to improving skills and adapting vocational 
qualifications of the labour force which has led to an increase of human 
resource activities in the new programmes and the fostering of local 
employment initiatives for the worst affected groups. 
the importance of actions favouring employment creation was emphasized by 
the inclusion of physical indicators for every measure and the stipulation that 
every project had to demonstrate its employment effect. A further positive 
change compared to the first programming period was the introduction of 
measures containing actions with regard to local employment initiatives. 
strict conditions were included on environmental reporting such as an 
environmental profile of the region and an annual report on the effects of the 
projects on the environment. 
during the negotiations of 1994-1996, the Commission encouraged the drafting 
of Regional Technology Plans, the implementation of which will take place 
during the second Objective 2 programming period 1997-1999. 
the programming approach was refined, i.e. a greater coherence was sought 
between the socio-economic analysis and the various priorities and measures, 
but also between the Funds as the Commission encouraged the initiation of 
combined ERDF and ESF projects. An example with regard to the latter : in 
the Groningen-Drenthe programme the project concerning the zoo in Emmen 
was approved on condition that ESF-training projects were included. The 
programme for both Limburg and Zuidoost Brabant have integrated specific 
human resources measures into their priorities for local development and new 
sources of employment. 
sw 
FINLAND 
Background 
On 24 April 1997 the Commission adopted the Single Programming Document (SPD) 
for Finland under Objective 2 of the Structural Funds for the period 1997-1999. The 
total contribution of the Structural Funds (including unused resources amounting to 
MECU 16.145 transferred from the previous programming period 1995-1996) 
amounts to MECU 135.293 (ERDF 78 %; ESF 22 %) distributed as follows: 
Varsinais Suomi 
Satakunta 
Pâijât-Hame 
Keski-Suomi 6.782 
30.250 
27.473 
24.758 MECU 
Kymenlaasko 
Ita-Uusimaa 
Etelâ-Karjala 
Keski-Pohjanmaa 14.465 
1.579 
17.146 
8.654 
Regional Development Strategy 
In the 1997-1999 programming period, the development strategy for the Objective 2 
areas is to: 
create and upgrade jobs and diversify the structure of the economy; 
improve the competitiveness of businesses and the skills of the labour force; 
and to increase international cooperation. 
To emphasise the employment aspect, the effect on job-creation will also be a core 
criterion for selecting projects. 
Development Priorities 
The programme comprises three main development priorities: 
• Increasing, developing and internationalising business activity. 
• Raising levels of skills and technology. 
• Infrastructure, environment and tourism. 
^"1, 
Impacts 
In addition to quantified targets for the number of jobs to be created or maintained (see 
main text) the other aims of the programme include: 
- 2,900 new SMEs; 
- 1,020 new businesses run by women; 
- 400 agreements for sub-contracting, cooperation or networks; 
- improving employability through the training of 8,300 people. 
Value added from the negotiation of the programme 
The renegotiation of the programme (in Finland's case after only two years) brought a 
number of benefits; As regards the priorities for Objective 2, these included: 
-job-creation raised to first place in the list of priorities in selecting projects 
and a greater attempt made to operationalise this criterion; 
- other Objective 2 priorities (innovation, equality of opportunity and 
environment made more explicit and given status of'core criteria' for the 
selection of projects; 
- infrastructure provision reduced from 13% to 10% of the budget with an 
agreement to explore the possibilities of loan finance from the EIB. 
Other aspects included: 
- a rethink of the programme from the bottom up; 
- an opportunity to simplify the structure of the programme; 
- clarification of the rules of partnership in decision-making; 
- the contribution of additional ex-ante evaluation and ex-post evaluation; 
- the consideration of 'taboo' subjects (such as the possibility of transferring 
funding from poorly performing regions to better performing ones); 
- the need for simplification of the budget arrangements for national funding 
and to create scope for innovative financial packages for business projects 
such as combinations of grant and loan finance and for EIB loans for 
infrastructure; 
- demonstration of the inadequacies of the monitoring system when the old 
programme had to be closed; 
- provision for interregional projects 
Q> 
UNITED KINGDOM 
Background 
Between 3 April 1997 and 11 July 1997, the Commission adopted the thirteen Single 
Programming Documents (SPDs) for the regions of the U.K. eligible under Objective 
2. The total contribution of the Funds (including unused resources amounting to 
MECU 155 transferred from the previous programming period 1994-1996) amounts to 
MECU 2,676 (ERDF 75 %; ESF 25 %) distributed as follows : 
MECU 
East London and the Lee Valley 101.7 
East Midlands 113.7 
Eastern Scotland 139.9 
Gibraltar 6.0 
Great Manchester, Lancashire, Cheshire 404.8 
Industrial South Wales 254.4 
North East England 378.4 Plymouth 38.6 
Thanet 22.4 
West Midlands 448.2 
West Cumbria and Furness 32.4 
Western Scotland 334.5 
Yorkshire and Humberside 400.7 
Regional Development Strategies 
In many cases the socio-economic situation of the region had not significantly changed 
and the strategic aims and underlying vision of the programmes therefore remained the 
same as in the previous period. Nonetheless, certain changes in strategic priorities 
have been made compared to 1994-1996 as follows : 
- Strategic Spatial Development comprises a new priority for most Objective 2 
regions, recognising the need for an integrated area-based approach focused on 
areas of opportunity to substantial physical investment in order to maximise its job-
creating potential. N.E. England's 1994-1996 priority for business development 
and inward investment was also been transformed into a priority for strategic area-
based regeneration. This new priority provides a direct link to Community 
Economic Development by encouraging the planning of major physical devlopments 
in such a way as to optimise job creation and training opportunities for residents of 
the regions' most deprived communities. 
- Community Economic Development 
A new priority for Community Economic Development (inc. building local capacity 
to develop and deliver local regeneration projects) has been introduced in Thanet 
while in Industrial South Wales the existing local development actions have been 
strengthened and now comprise a dedicated priority. 
51/ 
- Other strategic changes include less focus on infrastructure and more on job 
creation, perhaps most notably in Gibraltar where the programe will no longer be 
dedicated entirely to infrastructure; more precision in SME measures in West 
Cumbria and Furness; a new Priority for tourism in E. Scotland and the 
adjustment of strategic objectives to maximise job-creation in E. London ; a new 
Priority for applied research, technological development and innovation in Western 
Scotland ; a review of the quality, impact and focus of tourism training in Eastern 
and Western Scotland ; and the introduction of local job brokerage facilities under 
several programmes. 
Development Priorities 
Including the above, the U.K. SPDs encompass the following range of main 
development priorities : 
• Actions to support SMEs, inc. start-up, development of SME growth competitiveness 
and indigenous potential 
• Knowledge-based industries, advanced technologies, R&D and innovation 
• Tourism and cultural industries 
• Strategic spatial development 
• Community economic development 
Expected Impacts 
All the SPDs contain ex-ante evaluation of the programmes impact; including an 
estimate of the number of net additional jobs in the programme area, as well as a range 
of quantified physical and economic outputs. 
Value added from the negotiations 
The 1997-1999 U.K. Objective 2 SPDs were the result of detailed negotiations which 
took place in the framework of the partnership in each eligible region, sometimes with 
more than 200 people attending meetings. As a result, all the new SPDs now contain a 
significantly improved analysis of the traditional industrial regions' particular socio­
economic conditions, needs and opportunities. The regions were encouraged to focus 
their development strategies on their real priorities, some of the SPDs containing fewer 
priorities compared to 1994-1996 in order achieve greater concentration on the main 
regional 'drivers for change'. The following particular aspects may be highlighted: 
- an improved definition of the economic development measures to be 
implemented through each priority, better clarifying the scope of each measure 
and the outputs to be achieved; 
- an integration within each development priority of'hard' and 'soft' measures 
(ERDF) with appropriate provision for human resources development (ESF). 
In all the new SPDs, each priority now combines measures financed by each 
Structural Fund; 
5T" 
- clarification of responsibilities within the regional partnerships in terms of the 
strategic delivery of each priority; 
- an increased allocation to measures better able to create quality jobs in the 
regions with a reduction in ERDF support for 'hard' infrastructure, from 65% 
in the 1994-1996 pfograrnmes to an estimated 52% for 1997-1999. 
- an explicit requirement on partners to improve labour market information, to 
allow greater labour market responsiveness in ESF project and programme 
development, and consequently improve the chances of a positive employment 
outcome. This work will be overseen by a new Labour Market Strategy Group 
in each region, which will advise on key issues and trends in the local labour 
market and establish specific sectoral, thematic and quality priorities for ESF 
spending. They will also foster better integration between ESF under 
Objectives 2 and 3, and between ESF and ERDF within each region. 
As regards the more specific European Regional Policy orientations, programming 
improvements were obtained in the U.K. Objective 2 SPDs in the following ways: 
- specific priority for the development of SMEs, including a better defined 
range of actions to assist all phases of start-up, development, growth and 
improved access to risk capital on a regional basis, has been developed for 
each SPD, giving a stronger focus than the more general "business 
development" priority from earlier programming phases. Overall, the 
development of SMEs now accounts for some 30% of the total Structural 
Funds allocation to the Objective 2 regions in the U.K. 
- particular attention has been paid to providing the optimum delivery 
mechanism for the priority of Research and Technological development, 
bringing into mainstream programmes the principal lessons learned from the 
Regional Technology Plan exercise piloted in certain regions during the 
previous period. Each programme includes new actions to help realise the 
economic development potential of the information society in the regions 
concerned; 
- with encouragement from the Commission, the regions have significantly 
improved the environmental profile contained in each Objective 2 SPD and 
have further clarified the ways in which the environmental impact of the 
programmes will be measured; 
- the regions have responded to the Commission's priority orientation for Equal 
Opportunities in a number of ways. Common to all SPDs is an improved 
analysis of the regions' labour market conditions with a far higher degree of 
gender- specificity than in 1994-1996. Some SPDs contain specific quantified 
targets in certain measures (e.g. 'percentage of new SMEs created with female 
managers'). Others propose the establishment of an Equal Opportunities 
Advisory Group as part of their administrative arrangements. 
SA 
X w z z. 
< Expected impact on employment in Member States 
Objective 2 SPDs (1997-99) -
^ ^ Member States 
Temporary jobs1 
Created or maintained jobs 
Average public (Community+Nationar 
cost per gross job (ECU) 
Average EU cost per 
gross job (ECU) 
Average public cost per gross job (EC 
for measures estimating job creation 
Average EU cost per gross job (ECU) 
for measures estimating job creation B 
120 
14,457 
23.172 
10,259 
U) 
16,177 
7,226 DK 
— 
2,348 
59,454 
29.060 
51,006 
24,251 D 
4,100 
114,224 
15,865 
7,640 
11.181 
5,466 E 
13.986 
93.500 
22.450 
11.116 
9.159 
4,475 FIN* 
— 
15.780 
22.669 
8.510 
-F 
14,049 
147.459 
30.567 
13.244 
16.811 
7,196 I 
; 6.255 
116.359 
18.646 
7.318 
15.698 
6.065 LUX 
_ 
570 
41.111 
17.258 
21.842 
7.107 NL 
: 20.193 
43.762 
25.932 
10.103 
17.484 
6.521 UK 
40.350 
341.873 
15.096 
6.992 
13.305 
6.219 EU 
106,115 
874.552 
20.558 
9.158 
13.847 
6.154 
NOTES. 
1 Data on temporary jobs are not estimated for Denmark. Finland and Luxemburg. 
** Jobs data for Finland are not related to measures or priorities and are therefore not included in overall totals or further analysis Source: SPDs 1997-99. 
Annex 5 
TERRITORIAL AND LOCAL EMPLOYMENT PACTS PROJECTS (OBJECTIVE 2 REGIONS) 
Country Region/Area Objective Population Unemploy­
ment rate [^Mm^àmèm Action plan priorities (provisional) 
Germany Bremen 4 + 2 679.900 15,6 % Government of the Land, civil 
service departments, chamber of 
commerce and industry, firms, trade 
unions, labour associations, bank, 
SMEs, citizens' associations, 
educational,, research and scientific 
institutions Improving intangible growth factors 
such as skills, support for the 
creation of new types of activities and 
jobs, especially in SMEs. 
Organization of working hours, 
improved opportunities for jobseekers 
to get back to work 
Deutschland Nordrhein Westfalen 
network of three pacts for 
Ruhrgebiet 3.376.000 
a 15,70 % Government of the Land, towns, 
businesses, chambers of commerce, 
industry and trade, universities and 
research institutes, trade unions. Innovation and technology for 
industrial areas, model project for the 
development of new services, 
improving the presentation of the 
Niederrhein region specialized in 
logistics. 
Representatives of the region, trade 
unions, companies, universities, 
chambers of commerce and industry. 
Spain Cataluna : Vallès 
occidental 680.000 13,70 % To fix quantified impact and activity 
objectives for employment; to 
determine the appropriate level for 
action on each type of problem, from 
municipal to regional level; to ensure 
close cooperation with the Structural 
Funds Monitoring Committee. 
France Champagne-Ardenne: 
Pointe des Ardennes 2 + 3 35.000 21% Employment area committee, 
intermunicipal structures "locality" To develop new sources of 
employment in the sectors of tourism 
and leisure, personal services and up­
grading of heritage 
Country 
France 
France 
Italy 
) 
Italy Region/Area 
> 
Nord-Pas de Calais: 
Roubaix 
Pays de Loire : Saint-
Herblain 
Abruzzi : Sangro 
Aventino 
Emilia/Toscana/Umbria: 
Apennino centrale Objective 
2 + 3 
2 + 3 
1 and 2 
2 Population 
418.975 
64.000 
132.000 
335.000 tînempîoy- \ 
men! rate 
17,7 % 
16,5 % 
10% 
11% Main partners 
< 
t ' 
4 
Employment area committee and 
local authorities 
Local authorities, training bodies, 
associations, firms 
Provinces, municipalities mountain 
communities, chambers of 
commerce, trade unions, business 
association, cultural association. ' 
Representatives of local authorities 
(mountain communities, provinces), 
chambers of commerce, associations 
(agriculture, tourism, industry), trade 
unions. Actionp&n priorities (provisional) 1 
to develop new sources of 
employment with the support of large 
companies to improve skills and 
reorganize work. 
Development of personalized services 
for everyday life, environment-
related jobs, job-sharing, micro-
companies and "new occupations" : 
at least ten significant experiments 
for each theme 
Increase the production capacity of 
SMEs; especially in mechanical 
engineering, broaden the range of 
services to firms, develop .tourist 
potential, expand activity in the 
personal services sector. 
Development of business, integrated 
tourism development project, 
training, technology transfer, 
enhancement of historical and artistic 
heritage, improving production 
processes in the primary sector. 
Country 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Netherlands 
Finland Region/Area 
Dudelange : CLE 
* 
Limburg 
Noord-Brabant 
Lahti Objective 
2 
2 (wider than 
Objective 
region) 
2 (wider than 
Objective 
region) 
2 Population 
16.500 
1.130.000 
2.290.424 
197.707 TJnemploy- ; 
ment rate 
4,00 % 
12,5 % 
5,6, % 
21,6% Main Partners 
Municipality, town social services 
office, Ministries of labour, 
employment, economics, Ministry of 
Education vocational training 
service, employment department, 
local industry, traders' and 
craftsmen's federation 
Employment exchange, trade unions, 
employers' organizations, 
municipalities, education services. 
Representatives of the region, two 
sides of industry. 
Town of Lahti, local authorities, 
association Action plan priorities (provisional) 
Setting up an employment initiative 
guidance and aid facility, ministry of 
education training courses, measures 
to enable women to return to work, 
organization of an employment week, 
sandwich training. 
To create an integrated approach 
through cooperation, to create jobs 
and reduce unemployment. 
To create new jobs for long-term 
jobseekers 
To use schools' facilities and 
resources to increase employment 
and extend the network of 
businessmen develop jobs in 
domestic help services, develop 
cooperation activity, set up a 
partnership and the development of 
businesses. 


ISSN 0254-1475 
COM(97) 524 final 
DOCUMENTS 
EN 04 05 10 13 
Catalogue number : CB-CO-97-539-EN-C 
ISBN 92-78-25966-7 
Office for Official Publications of the European Communities 
L-2985 Luxembourg 
6-1