ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(77)260
Vol.1977/0091

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement (CEE,Euratom) n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernant l'ouverture aupublicdesarchiveshistoriques delaCommunauté économique
européenne etdelaCommunauté européenne del'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement (CE,Euratom) n°1700/2003 du22septembre 2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003, p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiés conformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
Inaccordance withCouncilRegulation (EEC,Euratom) No354/83of1February 1983
concerning theopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropean Economic
Community andtheEuropean AtomicEnergyCommunity (OJL43,15.2.1983, p.1),as
amended byRegulation (EC,Euratom) No1700/2003 of22September 2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003, p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary, classifieddocuments inthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformity withArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung (EWG,Euratom) Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar 1983überdieFreigabe derhistorischen Archive derEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung (EG,Euratom) Nr.1700/2003 vom22.September 2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003, S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit
erforderlich, wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenannten Verordnung freigegeben.

COMMISSION OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
COM(77)260 final
Brussels,17June1977
EUROPEAN REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT FUND
SecondAnnualReport(1976)
C0M(77)260final

Contents
points page
Chapter I:INTRODUCTION 1-7 4
Chapter II :THEECONOMIC SITUATION AND
THE FUTURE OUTLOOK 7
–General economie situation in1976 &-13 7
-Effects ontheregions 14-17 8
-Outlook for1977 18-21 11
Chapter III :THE FUND*s ACTIVITY IN1976 13
–Budget aspects 22 13
–Applications forgrant 23-27 13
–Grant decisions 28-30 16
–Impact ofRind assistance on
employment 31-33 19
–Studies financed 34 21
–Balances outstanding end1976 35 21
–Complementary character ofFUnd
activity andnational measures 36-40 22
Chapter IV :REGIONAL ANALYSIS OFFUND ACTIVITY 25
–Geographical concentration of
assistance 41-43 25
-Analysis ofrecipient regions by
Member State 44-46 26
-The sixprincipal recipient
regions 47-52 30
Chapter V:PAYMENTS ANDCONTROLS 37
-Payments 53-58 37
-Controls 59–63 39
Chapter VI:PROGRAMMES ANDCOORDINATION 4!
–Regional development programmes 64-65 41
–Annual information statements 66-68 42
–Annual statistical summaries 69-70 42
–Coordination :general considerati ons 71 43
–Coordination ofCommuni Vpolicies 72-75 44
-Coordination offinancial
instruments 76-79 45

-2-
points page
ChapterVII:INFORMATION ONFUNDACTIVITY 80 47
–Pressinformation 81 47
-Hoardings 82 48
-Publication mtheOfficiai
Journal 83 48
-Information toinvestors 84 48
ChapterVIII:CONCLUSIONS 85-92 49
ANNEX 52
LISTOFKAPS
1.Unemployment byregionsin1975 10
2.Assistance fromtheRegional Rindin1976 28

-3-
ANNEX
page
A.SOCIO-ECONOMIC INDICATORS
Table1.Trendsinmacro–economicaggregates 1975–1976 53
Table2.Forecasts for1977 53
Table3«Trendsininvestment 1975-1977 54
Graph.I:Trendsingrossdomesticproductperhead1976–1977 55
Graph.II:Weighted appreciation ordepreciation ofcurrencies
ofMemberStates1973-1976 56
Graph.Ill:Trendsinregionalunemployment as$oftotal
population 1970-1976 57
B.REGIONAL FUNDACTIVITY IN1976
Table4*Summaiyofaiddecisions 58
Table5*Typesofinvestment financed intheindustrial and
servicesectors 59
Table6.T^pesofinfrastructure investment financed 60
Table7*Regionalstatistics onRindaddgranted 61
Table8.Payments made 65
Table9.Visitsofinspection carriedout 66

-4-
ChapterI:INTRODUCTION
1.TheEuropeanRegional Development Pondwa3established inMarch1975(l)-
It"becameoperational duringthesameyear;thefirstdecisions on
contributions wereadoptedinOctoberandthefirstpayments weremade
inDecember .
ThefirstannualreportonRindactivities ,for1975»waspresented by
theCommission totheParliament andtotheCouncilinJune1976#Since
thisreportonlydealtwithafewmonthsofRindactivity ,itcouldnot
containdetailed assessments norconclusions ontheearlyassistance
grantedfromtheRuid.HowevertheCommission didgiveacertainnumber
ofguidelines forthefuture.
2.ThisreportcoversRindactivityin1976.Althoughthetimeelapsedsince
theestablishment oftheRindisstillrelatively short,itisalready
possible todrawcertainconclusions fromacquired experience ,especially
astowhethertheguidelines advanced bytheCommission inthefirst
reporthavebeenrespected .
3.ThebudgetoftheRindfor1976amountedto500millionu.a..TheCommission
adopted307grantdecisions inrespectof1545investment projects ,
representing atotalvolumeofinvestment of4»732millionu.a.
Asin1975,allappropriations available werecommitted.25$of
commitments wereforprojects intheindustry andservicessectors
creatingormaintaining 55»000jobs,and75%wereforinfrastructure
projects .
(1)157CouncilRegulation (EEC)n°724/75of18March1975establishing
aEuropeanRegionalDevelopment Rind(OJn°L73of21.3«1975 )>
hereinafter calledtheRindregulation .
/

-5-
Payments "bytheCommission in1976amounted to277millionu.a.,raising
to368millionu.a.totalpayments madesincetheestablishment ofthe
Rind.Thisfigurerepresents 46$oftotalcommitments made.The
Commission considers thatthispercentage issatisfactory ,sincepayments
fromtheRindaremadeonlyafterpaymentofthenational aidsonthe
basisofwhichRindcontributions arecalculated ;andthetimingofthese
national paymentsisrelated totherateofprogress oftheprojectin
question .
4*Although therehasbeensomeimprovement bycomparison with1975»the
generaleconomicsituation oftheCommunity remainedseriousin1976and
Rindoperations wereconducted againstadifficult economiobackground .
Indeed,althoughincreases wererecorded ingrossdomestic product,
industrial production andthevolumeofexports,thesituation worsened
withregardtothebalance odpayments andunemployment *ratesof
inflation andthevolumeofinvestment improved onlyslightly .
Thelowlevelofproductive investment iscertainly theprincipal reason
whyonlyonequarterofRindgrantsin1976wereallocated inrespectof
industrial orserviceactivities .
5*ThisoveralltrendoftheCommunity wasaccompanied byanincreasing
tendency oftheeconomies ofMemberStatetodiverge.Thepersistence of
thistrendisamajor obstacletotheprogressofeconomicintegration .
Theextentofthisdivergence issuchthatanimprovement intheeconomic
climatewillbeunablealonetocorrectit.AnactiveCommunity regional '
andstructural polipyistherefore necessary ,inwhichtheRindwillbe
onlyoneelement.
6.TheimpactoftheRmdcannottherefore beassessedinisolation .Indeed,
itmustcontribute totheachievement ofawholerangeofobjectives
definedatCommunity leveltoremedyimbalances betweentheregionsby
improving thesituation ofthelessfavoured.
•/-

Theachievement oftheseobjectives impliesanincreased coordination :
–oftheCommunity'sfinancial instruments ,whichalreadyhavearegional
andstructural impact:theEuropeanInvestment Bank,thefinancialfacilities
oftheEuropean GoalandSteelCommunity ,theSocialRind,the
Guidance SectionoftheEuropeanAgricultural Guidance andGuarantee
FundandtheRegional Pond;
–ofallCommunity policies whichhaveregional implications ;
–ofnational regional development policies.
TheCommission tookin1975afirstseriesofactions aimedatthisoverall
approach toCommunity regional policywhenitsetupaninterdepartmental
workingpartyoncoordination .Thesemeasures werecontinued andreinforced
in1976,inparticular bythestudiesundertaken ontheregionalimpactofvariaas
otherCommunity policies andofthestructural changesaffecting certain
economic sectors.ThenewCommission hasforthefirsttimegiventoone
ofitsKembers-whoisalsoresponsible forregional policy-thespecial
taskofcoordinating allCommunity financial instruments withastructural
role,thusdemonstrating itsdetermination tomakerealprogressinthis
field.

-7-
ChapterII:THEECONOMIC SITUATION IN1976ANDTHEFUTURE OUTLOOK
Generalsituation in1976
8.E|ycomparison with1975»whichwasanespecially difficult year
economically andsocially ,certainpositivetrendsdeveloped in1976#
ThevolumeofGDPincreased "by4»3%comparedwithadecline
of2,2%in1975»andindustrial production increased by7*6%as
againstadeclineof6.2%in1975*Exportsroseinvalue "byalmost
20%comparedwithadeclineofnearly4%in1975*Conversely however,
thetrendinotherfactors waslessfavourable .
9.Thetrendofinvestment ,particularly important forregional developement ,
wasscarcelyencouraging ;indeed,investment volumeroseonly "by2.0%
afterwithareduction of5%in1975*DenmarkandtheFederalRepublic
ofGermanyrecorded howeverincreases inthevolumeofinvestment of
morethan10fcandnearly4*5%respectively in1976;intheother
countries ,ontheotherhand,investments hardlyincreased oreven
decreased .
10.Thecurrentbalanceofpayments ,whichwasvirtually inbalancein1975*
wasagainindeficitbysome9t000milliondollars.Therateof
inflation ,althoughitslowedinthesecondhalf-year ,wasroughly
thesameforthewholeyear1976asfor1975:consumerpricesroseby
morethan10%onaveragecomparedwithnearly12%in1975«Finally,
thenumberoftotalunemployed remainedhighthroughout 1976andthe
easinginpart-time unemployment wasreversed intheautumn.Onaverage
fortheyear,theleveloftotalunemployment wassome4*6%in1976
comparedwith4%in1975•
Divergence ofnational^économies
11.Thecrisiswhichbeganin1973affectedallCommunity countries although
nottothesamedegree.Indeed,theeconomiccrisisaggravated the
tendencyfortheeconomies ofMemberStatestodiverge,thereby
revealing thestructural strengths andweaknesses ofeach.(l).
(l)Seetablesandgraphsannexed.

12.Thisphenomenon iswellillustrated bythetrendinGDPperemployed
person ■andinratesofexchange.ItemergesclearlythatKemberStates
alreadywiththelowestproductivity recorded theleastincreaseinthis
fieldandhavehadtocopewithfrequentdevaluations .Ireland,Italy
andtheUnitedKingdomdivergeinthiswayfromtheCommunity average.
13.Thesesamecountries haveexperienced thehighestratesofinflation and
themostdifficult budgetary problems inrecentyears.Theindexof
consumerpricesincreased by65%ormorefrom1974to1976inIreland,
ItalyandtheUnitedKingdom ;by30fointheBeneluxcountries andby
some20%intheFederalRepublicofGermany (l).Budgetdeficitswere
largeinallMembercountries butwereveryhighin1976inIreland(12%
ofGDP),inItaly(7»5%)andintheUnitedKingdom(5*5%)icompared
with2.7%intheNetherlands ,4?»intheFederalRepublicandsome5f°
inBelgium.
Effeots ontheregions
R^^ional product_
14.Theresultofthesedivergent trendsatregional levelhasbeenthat
since1974productperheadfailedtoriseabovetheCommunity average
inanyregionoftheUnitedKingdom ,IrelandandItaly.Thesituation has
notimproved ,anditmaybepresumedthattheeconomictrendin1976in
theKezzogiorno ,inIrelandandinthelessfavoured regionsoftheUnited
KingdomandtheotherCommunity countries hasnotsignificantly altered
theextentoftheregional imbalances whichexist.
(l)Basedonnationalaccounting systems.
/

-9-
Unemoloyment
15.Thetrendinunemployment followsinlargemeasurethatofthenational
andregional economies ,whichinturnreflects acomplexofstructural
andeconomic factors.Itisdifficult toassesstheirrelative importance
atthepresenttime.Unemployment statistics aretheonlyrecentdata
available indicating economic trendsatregional level.
16.Since1974unemployment hasgenerally risenmoresharplyindeveloped
thaninotherregionswhereindustry andwage-earning employment are
relatively lessimportant .Howeverunemployment levelsineconomically
weakcountries andregionsarestillthehighestintheCommunity ."By
1975»f°rwhichyearaCommunity comparison canbemadeonthebasisof
uniformdata,theonlyregionoftheliiitedKingdomwhereunemployment
wasbelowtheCommunity averagewastheSouthEast.Irelandandthe
Mezzogiorno continued toexperience veryhighlevelsofunemployement well
abovetheCommunity average.Unemployment wasalsoabovetheCommunity
averageinDenmarkasawholeandincertainregionsofotherCommunity
countries (l).
17.Unemployment trendsin1976inthedifferent MemberStatesofthe
Community wereasfollows (2):
–Belgium :unemployment increased greatlyinallregionsbutespecially
inHainautandLimbourg ,whichrecorded thehighestlevelsafterLiege;
–Denmark :alreadyveryhighin1975»unemployment roselittle;it
remainshighestinJutlandandaboveallinNorthJutlandwhereits
levelisdoublethatofCopenhagen ;
–FederalRepublic ofGermany :unemployment fellslightly inmost
regions.Increases occuredonlyinBremen,theUpperPalatinate (Bavaria)
andSaarlandbutthelevelremainsrelatively highincertainother
partsofBavariaandinsomeareasofLowerSaxony ;
(1)Seemappage10andgraphn°3annexed.
(2)Conclusions basedonfigureswhicharenotuniformnorfully
comparable between MemberStates.
•/•

-1CL
tfeemployment byregioninIQtrwiththeCommunityaverage(2°°mpared
■^r-iËsll85»–1114,»|2n^115
(*)Basedontheuniformdefinitions
usedintheCommunity -labourforcesurvey
-975*OnthisbasisaverageCommunity
unemployment in1975amountedto3.66^oftheworkforce.

-11-
–Prance:onlyLorraine experienced amajorincrease inunemployment ,
butnoregionrecordedadecrease ;
–Ireland :thereappearstohaveteenaslightfallinunemployment
compared with1975»"butthelevelremainshigheverywhere ;
–Italy:allregionssuffer^,aslightincreaseinunemployement ,andsome
continue torecordveryhighlevels,especially Campania ,Basilicata ,
Calabria andSicily;
–Luxembourg :unemployment remainslow;
-Netherlands :therewasaslightincrease ,withthelargestriserecorded
inLimburg,whereunemployment wasalreadythehighest'in1975?
-UnitedKingdom :allregionsexperienced asharpriseinunemployment ,
especially Northern Irelandwherethelevelwasalreadyhigherthanin
anyotherregion.
Theoutlookfar1977
18.Thegeneraleconomicoutlookfor1977isuncertain .Alongside the
generalimbalances between MemberStates,otheisbetweenregionsand
industrial sectorsarelikelytobeadded.However,insofarasthe
economicstabilisation policies putinhandbyMemberStateswithdeficit
balances achievepositiveresults ,andtheeconomicsituation doesnot
fluctuate exceptionally incountries withsurplusbalances ,bothwithin
andoutsidetheCommunity ,theratecfgrowth,inrealterms^ofgross
domesticproductwithintheCommunity shouldreachsome3%•
Thislowrateofgrowthwillaffecttheemployment marketallthemore
becauseitwillsteminmostMemberStatesfrominsufficient investment
andprivateconsumption .Aslightriseinunemployment compared with
1976cannottherefore beexcluded.
(l)Table2annexed
•/.

-12-
19*Concerning investment ,aslightriseofaround1.5%isexpectedin
1977»exceptfortheUnitedKingdom,Italy2ndFrance.Thislowrate
ofincrease hastobecompared withannualaverageincreases ofnearly
5^between1965and1970*
20Inaddition someslowingdounintherateofinflation -can"beexpected ,
abovealliftheworst–hitcountries managetoachievesubstantial progress
duringthecourseoftheyearinspiteofthenewoilpriceincreases ,
nevertheless theriseofconsumerpriceswillnotslowdovjnsufficiently ,
andimbalances "betweenrespective T'emberStateswillremainhigh.Atthe
externallevel,despite anestimated deterioration ofexchangerates,
the "balanceofpaymentssituation shouldimprove :fortheCommunity as
awholethecurrentbalanceofpayments shouldshowanetrevival.
21.Asregardsunemployment ,structural andshort-term economicdifficulties will
continue toappear,principally indeclining industries suchastextiles ,
clothing andleather.Inotherindustries suchasshipbuilding ,steel,
coalandfishing,enployaent willtendtofallforstructural reasons.The
complexcharacter ofthesetrendsmakesitdifficult toascertain precisely
whichregionswillbemostaffected bythesedifficulties .Theslight
increaseinunemployment estimated in1977for"thewholeCommunity will
nethoweverbeapparent inallMembercountries .Areduction inthelevel
of-unemployment isindeedanticipated intheFederalRepublicofGermany
andtheITetherlrnds ;Irelandwillremainunchanged ;inothercountries
unemployment willrise.
y

-13-
ChapterIII:THEFUND'SACTIVITY -IN1976
Budgetaspects
22.The1976commitment appropriation forthePond,includedinChapter
55ofthegeneralbudgetoftheEuropean Communities ,amounted to
500millionu.a.,asprovided intheFluidregulation .Payment
appropriations inthe"budgetfor1976were300m.u.a.,towhichwere
added59*3m.u.a."broughtforwardfrom1975*
Applications
23.Thefirstseriesofgrantdecisions adopted "bytheCommission inJanuary
1976concerned applications introduced in1975 "butwhichcouldnot"be
approvedwithinthe1976 "budget.Applications for1976reachedthe
Commission overtheperiodfromtheendofJanuarytothe "beginning of
October.Inall341applications werepresented duringtheyear,
concerning 1,774investment projects.Tothisfiguremust "beadded48
applications for338projectscarriedoverfrom1975*During1976the
Commission therefore considered 389applications inall,concerning
2,112projects .
24«307outofthe389applications wereapproved ,relatingto1,545invest­
mentprojects.Ofthe567projects onwhichnodecision wastaken,304
werepresented in1976and263dated "backto1975*Thedetailedfigures
onapplications presented will "befoundinthefollowing tables :
./•

-14-
Tablen°1:Analysis bycategory ofinvestment ofapplication submitted in1976
Investment category Amountofinvestment
–Industry andservices
(projectsofmorethan10m.u.a.)m»U#
1,496.34*
28
–Industry andservices
(projectsoflessthan10m.u.a.)
–Infrastructure
(projectsofmorethan10m.u.a.
–Infrastructure
(projectsoflessthan10m.u.A.
–Infrastructure inmountain andhill
farmingareas(l)Subtotal
Subtotal
TOTAL913.14
2,409.48
2,023.61
767.17
142.19
2,932.97
5,342.45
(l)AsdefinedinDirective n°75/268/EECof28April1975on
mountain andhillfarmingandcertainlessfavoured areas.17
45
38
14
3
55
100
Tablen°2:Projects approved andprojects onwhichnodecision wastaken
MemberState Numberofpro.iects presented NumberofNumberofpro Numberofprojects presented
in1976orbroughtforward
from1975Numberof
projects
financed
in1976Numberofprojects
presented in1976
onwhichnodecision
taken(l)
0102030406Total
Belgium 28 28
Denmark 47 42 1 2 3
Germany 228 196 1 8 9
France 365 209 31817516113
Ireland 116 89 2 169
Italy 449 282 26011637116
Luxembourg
Netherland 9 8 1 1
UnitedKingdom 870 691 416132 53
TOTAL 2,112 1,545 1196413459304
(l)01:industrial projectsofmorethan10m.u.a.
02:industrial projects oflessthan10m.u.a.
03:infrastructure projects ofmorethan10m.u.a.
04infrastructure projects oflessthan10m.u.a.
06:infrastructure projectsinmountain andhillfarmingareas
/

-15-
Thereasons whynodecision wastakenon567projects wereasfollows :
-someprojects didnotcomplywiththeformalprovisions oftheRmd
regulation (creatingatleast10jobs,volumeofinvestment ofmore
than50,000u.a.,etc);
-otherprojects werenotacceptedforsectoralreasons (structural over­
capacity);
–theCommission wasobligedtodeferdecisions incertaincaseswhile
awaiting theoutcomeofdiscussion intheFundCommittee ontheeligibility
oftouristprojects ;
–lastlyinsufficient commitment appropriations prevented decisions insome
cases *
Someoftheprojects notapproved havenothoweverbeenformallyrejected
andmaybeapproved in1977;thisisparticularly thecaseforprojects which
couldnotbeapproved duetolackofavailable resources ;theseprojects may
befinanced under1977appropriations .
26.CertainHeiaberStatesdidnotuseupthefullamounttheoretically available
tothemin1976forthefollowing rea,sons :
–someprojects gaverisetoproblems whichprevented adecision bythe
Commission particularly inthetouristsector ;
–grantapplications submitted byMemberStateswereinsomecaseslessthan
theamountsforwhichtheycouldapplyintheoryunderthePondregulation .
Conversely ,asshowninTable3,several MemberStatesappliedformore
thantheirentitlements therebymakingeasiertheCommission 'schoiceof
projects .

-16-
Tablen°3:1976applications as7oofsharesaccording totheRmd
regulation
Denmark
BelgiumGeraanyNetherlands
Italy
UnitedKingdomIreland
France143
143
124
118
112
105
n
Luxembourg madenoapplication in1976,fortheprojectassistedinthat
MemberStatein1975aloneabsorbedvirtually alltheresources available
in1975and1976.
27.Itshouldberemembered thatthedistribution ratiolaiddownintheP\ind
regulation doesnotrefertoamountsavailable foreachofthethree
yearsbutthesumtotalavailable forthethreeyearsasawhole.The
Commission wastherefore notobligedtoobservethatratiostrictly in
1976;variation waspossible,thoughofcoursethekeyhastoberespected
overthethreeyears.
Grantdecisions
28.In1976theCommission adoptedfourseries6fgrantdecisions imn
January,April,JulyandDecember ,afterreceiving thenecessary opinions
fromtheRindCommittee andtheRegional PolicyCommittee .Tablen°4or
theAnnexgives,foreachMemberStateandforeachmajorinvestment
category ,thenumberofgrantdecisions ,thenumberofprojects aided,
thevolumeofinvestments concerned andofgrantsmadefromthePluid.The
distribution ofgrantswasasfollows :
•/

-17-
Tablen°4:Distribution ofassistance grantedbycategory ofproject
(inbrackets :totalinvestment concerned )
Industry and
services 25$(45$)
Infrastructure 75$(55$)[–projects of10m.u.a.or more
-projects under10m.u.a.
–projects of10m.u.a.ormore
-projects under10m.u.a.
-infrastructure in
mountain .hillareas11.0/o(27.27;)
13.9^(17.4$ )
41.9^(38.9 ^)
28.3$(14.4$ )
4«9^(1.9/0
Total 100$(100$ ) 100^(1oofO
Thistablecallsforthreecomments :
-thereasonwhyindustrial andserviceprojectsaccountfor45$ofinvestment
financedbutonly25$ofgrantsisthatgrantstoindustrial investments may
notexceed20$ofinvestment cost(comparedwith30$"orinfrastructure )
and50$ofnationalaidaccordedtotheinvestment .Theyarealsosubjectto
aceilinglinkedtothenumberofjobscreatedormaintained .
-theimportance ofinfrastructure increased inrelation to1975»risingfrom
42to55$oftotalinvestment andfrom60to75$ofgrantsmade.Thistrend,
probably duetotheeffectsoftheeconomiccrisis,which,in1976asin
1975led"tolessinvestment inindustry,isnotwithoutinfluence onthe
creationofjobs(l).
-theproportion ofgrantstoprojectsof10millionu»a,»0rmorehasequally
growninrelationto1975»risingfrom43.4"to52.9$•TheCommission
considers that,inthisrespect,thepriorityreferred tointheFund
regulation (2)hasbeensatisfactorily observed.
Principal typesofProjectassisted
29.Tablesn°5snd.6intheAnnexanalysethecategories ofinvestment forwhich
Ruidgrantsweremade.Thesetablesrevealthefollowing facts:
(l)seepoints31to33
(2)article7(5) ./.

-18-
Industr^æid^servine sjctpr_investmen+s
-Theaveragevolumeofinvestment perproject was49*4millionu.a.for
projectsof10millionu.a.ormore,and1.7millionu.a.forprojects
oflessthan10millionu.a.ThelevelofPUndassistance forlarge
projectsamountedto28.3%ofnationalaidand4.3%oftotalinvestment ,
andforsmallprojects 41*8and8.4%respectively .
–Astotheeconomicsectorsconcerned ,electrical andelectronic engineering
topthelistforthenumberoflargeprojects aided,followed bythe
chemicalindustry andmetalproduction andprocessing .Finished metal
goodsledforsmallprojects ,followed byelectrical andelectronic
engineering andthenmechanical engineering .Thenumberofservicesector
projects involved wasverylow.
Infrastructure
–Ingeneral,industrial estatedevelopment wasthemostimportant typeof
investment assisted,accounting for83%oflargeprojectsand57%of
smallprojects.
–Categories ofinfrastructure varyhoweverasbetween MemberStates,
inthelightofregionalpriorities andnationalpolicies.IntheFederal
Republic ,Belgium,theNetherlands andItalyemphasis hasbeenputonthe
development ofindustrial estates,inFranceonroadinfrastructure
designed toserviceindustrial estates.InIreland,apartfromindustrial
estates,therehavebeenmeasures toimprovethetelephone network.An
important numberofprojectsassisted intheUnitedKingdomwere,asin
1975,forbuilding "advancefactories "(factoriesbuiltinadvanceby
publicauthorities andletorsoldlatertoprivatefirms).Thegreater
numberofDanishinfrastructure projects wereinGreenland andwere
concerned mainlywithportdevelopments andtheproduction anddistribution
ofelectricity .
–ThelevelofFundassistance averaged27»4%ofeligiblepublicexpenditure
forsmallprojects and17*7%formajorprojects.Thisisbeca.usesome
applications wereforgrantsatlessthanthemaximumrateof30fo,and
insomecasestheCommission itself,inagreement withtheRegionalPolicy
Committee andtheJVmdCommittee ,variedthelevelofgrant.
/

-19-
Formajorprojects ,whereassistance may,according totheFUndregulation ,
varybetween10and30%ofinvestment cost,lowerrateshavemoreoften
"beenappliedtoinfrastructure servingboththeeconomic development of
theregionandthegeneralpublic.Forsmallerprojects ,attherequest
oftheMemberStateconcerned ,theCommission appliedalowerrateof
grantinmanycases.
Thenumberofapplications forassistance fortouristinfrastructure has
beensmall;thereasonhereisthatdiscussions intheRindCommittee
havenotyetledtoanagreeddefinition ofeligibleprojects inthis
sector.
Pro.jects_onwhich_work__hasalread£_beencarried _ou+•
30.TheFjjidregulation providesthattheCommission shouldconsider as
eligible forFondassistance allexpenditure incurred by"emberStates
after1January 1975»oveniftheprojects concerned havealreadybeen
started orevenfinished atthatdate.TheCommission hashowever stressed
withMemberStatesthatpriority mustbegiventoprojects wherethebulk
oftheworkstartsduringtheyearinquestion sothatFundassistance
maybeanincentive fornewprojects .Inthisconnection ,1976showeda
clearimprovement bycomparison with1975*Thesituation canbeconsidered
relatively satisfactory sinceonly20^onaverageofnationalpublic
expenditure eligible forFundassistance hadbeenpaidpriorto1January
1976.
Th3Commission considers thatdespitethisimprovement ,moreemphasis should
stillbeputonfinmcing newprojects.Thisisindeedindispensable if
Fluidassistance istohavearealinfluence onsolvingregional problems .
ImpactofFondassistance oncmp?oyment
31.OneofthemainaimsoftheFondisthecreation andmaintainance ofjobs
inpredominantly agricultural regionsandthosesubjecttoindustrial
changeorstructural under-employment .

-20-
Inthiscontextthefactthatthelargestnumberofprojectsassisted fromthe
Fundin1976wereinfrastructure projects (l),forwhichprecisestatistical
dataonjobcreationisnotavailable ,hasitsnegative consequences onthe
achievement ofFundaimsinthisfield.Indeedevenifinfrastructure projects
docreatesomejobsintheshortterm,andcangenerate employement inthe
longterm,itistheindustrial andaboveall,servicesectorwhichdirectly
createthenewjobsrequired .
HowevertheCommission ,thoughitattachesthegreatest importance tocreating
andsafeguarding jobsintheshortterm,inparticular inthecurrentperiod
ofhighunemployment withintheCommunity ,doesnotunderestimate thefunda ^-
mentalroleofinfrastructure indevelopping lessfavoured regions.Indeed
regional policymust,ofitsveiynature,concentrate principally onmedium
andlongtermstructural measures ,suchasimproving infrastructure ,which
areessential tocreating permanent jobsinthefuture.
32.According totheinformation suppliedwiththegrantapplications ^projects
whichreceived Rindassistance in1976intheindustrial andservicesectors
shouldcreateormaintainnearly55tOOOjobscomparedwith60,000in1975«
Jobcreation shouldbehighestinthoseMemberStateswhichreceived most
assistance forindustrial projects,namelyPranceandtheUnitedKingdom.
33.Thesmallreduction inthenumberofjobscreatedbycomparison withthe
previous year,despiteatotalincrease inaidtoindustrial andservice
projects (124.6comparedwith119.8millionu.a.)isduemainlytothefact
thatalargerproportion ofgrantswenttolargeprojectsin1976(2).Indeed,
fewerjobsarecreated,proportional tothevolumeofFundassistance and/or
investments ,bylargethanbysmallprojects.
Thisisbecausethevolumeofcapitalinvested perjobisgenerally morefor
largeprojects thanforsmallones,thelatteroftenbeingstronglylabour
intensive .However,oneshouldnotconclude fromthisthatFundaidshouldbe
usedexclusively forsmallormedium–sizedprojects.Abalancedregional
development mustbebasedbothonanadequate networkofinfrastructure and
onadiversified fabricofindustrial andserviceinvestment .Inthisconnec­
tionlargeprojects canstimulate furtherdevelopment bycreatingancilliary
activities andbytheircontribution toimproving thegeneralscientific and
technological level.Thefindingsofnumerousexpertsagreealsothatthe
greatestimpactonregionaldevelopment isobtainable bydecentralised and
diversified developements intheindustrial andservicesectorsinvolving
investments varinginbothsizeandnature.
(l)Table4above
(2)Seepoint28

-21-
Financing studies
34.Within theframework ofArticle 10oftheRind regulation ,theCommission
decided on22September 1976 tofinance across-border study oftheproblems
oftransport andcommunications between theregions ofLondonderry (Northern
Ireland )andDonegal (Ireland ).TheCommunity provided 50%ofthefinance
forthestudy ,that isO.O84 million u.a.outofatotal cost of0.168 million
u.a .TheCommunity contribution wasdistributed equally between theUnited
Kingdom andIreland .
Balance ofcommitment appropriations atthe endof1976
35.Attheendofthesecond year ofRind activity thesituation perMember
State with regard tocommitment appropriations was asfollows :
Table 5:Total Rind commitments in1975 and1976
Million u.a .
»
»
jMember State
t
t
τιt
jAppropri atiora
►- ~T--U1~ •l'U»XJ.J»\Jii U.•P.•
Appropriations committed1t
\.
'%use of !
ClVcU-XcAUXC
1975 +1976
(1)1
I
j
t1
;1975
11976 Total,tions
javailable
!(Eover B)
! A 1
■ 11 Β !
II I
C
i ii iD
ι 1I IE
i iι ι
Ρ
t
X
!Belgium !! 11,90!
4,04 !! 6,67 !1 10,71 !! 90,0 !
!Denmark !! 10,311f 3,88 !! 6,42 !r 10,29 !! 99,8 !
!Germany !! 50,76119,47 !!19,88 ! 29,35 !! 57,8 !
!Prance !!118,97 46,01 !!76,46 !
!34,54 (2)!122,47 '!102,9 !
!Ireland !! 51,691 19,93 ! 54,47 !!105,4 !
'Italy !!320,001123,99 !!204,23 !328,17 !!102,6 !
!Luxembourg !! 0,791r0,75 !ι – ι 0,75 !! 94,9 !
!Netherlands !! 13,4811 5,59 '[10,00 !
/.\15,59 !!115,6 !
!United Kingdom !!222,09
11r 86,18 !
ι!141,92 ^'!
L II228,09 !
_ I!102,7 '
! »
,TOTAL ,800,00 ,,299,83 ,,500,12 ,f799,90 ,,100,0 ,
(1)Article 2oftheFund regulation
(2)Including thestudy referred inpoint 34 •/•

-22-
Thepreceding tableshows,asalreadystressed (l),thatsomeMemberStates
didnotusethecommitment appropriations towhichintheorytheyare
entitled .OtherMemberStateshaveonthecontrary exceededtheirentitle­
ment.Thissituation shouldnormally beregularised bytheendof1977
insofarasMemberStateswithoutstanding balances submitasufficient
numberofeligibleprojects .
Complementary character ofFundactivity andnational measures
36.Theproblemoftheadditional character ofFundactivitytonational
measures wasdiscussed atlengthintheFirstAnnualReport(2).Itis
usefulhowevertorecallthedistinction betweenindividual additionality
("toppingup")ontheonehandandoveralladditionality ontheother.
37*Toppingup(thatisthepaymentofCommunity assistance ontopofnational
aidtoagiveninvestment )islimitedbytheFUndregulation toinvestments
intheindustrial ,handicraft andservicesectors.TheMemberStatemay
chooseeithertouseFundassistance tosupplement aidgrantedtothe
particular investment bypublicauthorities ,ortoretainitasapartial
repayment ofsuchaid.TodateMemberStateshavealwayschosenthesecond
alternative .Howeveritshouldbenotedthatintheinfrastructure fieldRind
assistance isinmostcasespaidover,inwholeorinpa.rt,tothelocalor
regionalauthorities concerned therebyshowingclearlythedirectroleof
theFundinthedevelopment ofthoseregions.
38.Howeveritistooveralladditionality (theadditionoftotalnational and
Communityresourcesavailableforregionaldevelopment )thattheCommission
attaches thegreaterimportance .Thisisnecessary inordertohastenthe
restructuring anddevelopment oftheeconomies ofMemberStates,soasto
correctthemainstructural andregional imbalances withintheCommunity
andtherebytopromotetheprocessofintegration byamoreconvergent
development ofnational economies .ThismeansthatCommunity resources
mustbeaddedtotheMemberStates 1ownregional development effortsand
mustnotreplacethemeitherwhollyorinpart.
(1)Points26and27,FirstAnnualReportontheRegional Fond.
(2)FirstAnnualReportontheRegionalRind,points52to67*
/•/

-23-
39.Thepreviousreportcontained adetailed description ofthewayinwhich
I'emberStatesappliedtheprinciple ofadditionality .Therehavebeen
fewsignificant changessincethenandthesituation maybesummarised as
followsforeachcountry :
–in3el_giumthelawsestablishing thebudgetofwaysandmeansfor1976
and1977providethattheresources derived fromtheFundshallbe
allocated toexpenditure incurred bytheEconomic Expansion and
Conversion Finds,whichareresponsible forimplementing theprogrammes
assisted bytheRegional Rind;
–inDenmark aspecialheadinginwhichlUndreceipts appearhasbeen
writtenintothebudgetoftheIlinistry forGreenland .Fortherestof
thecountryFondreceiptsalsohaveaspecialheadinginthenational
budgetandaccountofthisistakenindeciding "theoverallsizeof
theregional development budget;
–theFederalRejrablic_ofGermanyhasstatedundertheheading "Improvement
ofregional economicstructure "ofthe1976and1977budgetsthatthis
itemispartlyfinanced fromFondresources ;
–France_ha3notitemisedin1976,asitdidin1975,"thebudgetheadings
concerned withnewreceipts fromtheFond;howevertheGovernment has
implicitly takenaccountoftheseresources inpreparing thebudget ;
–_Ir£landincludedinthePublicCapitalProgramme for1976and1977»
aspecialbudgetheadingforincomefromtheFund;thewayinwhich
theseresources wereusedwasindicated intheannualinformation
statements ;
–in.Ital^alawprovidesfortheinclusion intheTreasurybudgetofa
specialheadingforbothreceipts andexpenditure ("moniescreditedto
theCassaperilliezzogiorno ").For1976,thelistofprojects which
haveinpractice beenmadepossible bytheseadditional resources from
theFundwaspublished bytheItalianauthorities .
./•

-24-
-inLuxembourg thelocalauthorities benefitting forRindassistance have
receivedthisbywayofdirecttransfer ;
-injth£Netherlands resources fromtheFundareshownassupplementary
appropriations allocated forthedevelopment ofpriority regionsfollowing
anagreement betweentheMinistries offinanceandEconomicAffairs.This
factisalsomentioned inthebudgetstatement }
-in^the^United Kingdomresources fromtheFluidareshowninthebudget
estimates forthedifferent government departments ;concerning theiruse,
theadditional resources haveenabledanextension oftheadvancefactory
programme .Inaddition ,Fundassistance forinfrastructure projectsis
transferred tothelocalauthorities concerned enabling themtoreducethe
loanchargesincurredintheircurrentinvestment programmes .
40.Theproblemofadditionality wasexamined bytheRegional PolicyCommittee
whichrecommended thatgovernments shouldintroduce aspecialheadingin
theirbudgets,atleastunderincome,itemising Fundresources received,so
thatnational parliaments maycheckhowtheprinciple ofoveralladditionality
isbeingimplemented .
•/

Chapter IV:REGIONAL ANALYSIS OFFUNDACTIVITY
Geographical concentration ofFluidactivity
41.Tablen°7oftheAnnexshowstheregionaldistribution ofFluidassistance
in1975and1976.
42.TheRindregulation statesthatregionsandareaseligibleforFluidassistance
shallbelimitedtothoseareasaidedbyMemberStatesundertheirown
systemsofregionalaid.TogivemaximumimpacttoFluidassistance ,priority
musthoweverbegiventoinvestments locatedinnationalpriority areas,
takingaccountoftheprinciple forCommunity levelcoordination ofregional
aids.In1976thesituation wasasfollowsforthevarious MemberStates :
–Belgium :Fluidassistance waslocatedinareascoveredbytheCommission
decisionof26April1972(l)onaidsgrantedundertheBelgianlawon
economic expansion of30December 1970
–Denmark :JOfoofFluidassistance wenttoGreenland ,theremainder to
specialpriority areas.
–FederalRe£ublic_:68%ofassistance wenttoBerlin,totheZonenrand-
gebietandtofirstprioritydevelopment polesqualifying for20$aid.
–France__s87$cfassistance wenttoregionsoftheWestandSouth-West ,
toCorsicaandtotheoverseas departments .
–_Ireland:60$oftheprojectsaidedwereinthe"designated areas"inthe
westofthecountiy.
–Ptal^:Fluidassistance wentsolelytotheKezzogiorno .
–Nejth£rland_s :Fluidassistance waslimitedtothetwopriorityareasinthe
NorthandSouthofthecountry.
(l)OfficialJournaln°L105of4.5.1972
•/

-26-
–^^t^d__Kin£dom _:some84pofRindassistance wenttoprojectslocatedin
priority areas:Northern IrelandandtheSpecialDevelopment Areasand
Development Areas.
43.Thesituation haschangedlittlefrom1975 "to1976concerning thegeographical
concentration ofFundassistance .Atmostonecandetectaslighttendencyto
concentrate lessinsomeMemberStates.Inthesecircumstances ,andalthough
thechoiceofregionalpriorities maysometimes facethenational
authorities withdelicate problemsofbalancebetweenregions,theCommission
takestheviewthateffortstoconcentrate Rindassistance mustbecontinued ,
giventhelimitedresources available .
Analysis ofrecipient regions byMemberJState.,
44.Theeconomic development ofaregionisbynaturealong-term matter,and
neithertheimpactofRindassistance inaregionnorthedistribution of
grantsbetweendifferent regionsshouldbejudgedonthebasisofasingle
year.Tablen°7oftheAnnexalsoshowsclearlythatsomeimbalances ,which
mayhaveappearedindistributing Rindassistance betifeenregionsin1975/
havebeencorrected in1976.
45.Itisnotpossible inthisreporttoanalyseindetailtheimpactofthe
Rindonallregionswhichreceivedgrantsin1976.However,theCommission
considersitusefultogiveageneralviewoftheregionaldistribution of
Ruidassistance foreachmembercountry,andsomestatistical dataforcertain
regionswithespecially difficult problems andwhichreceived themost
assistance perheadofpopulation in1976.
46.Belgium :Applications forassistance concerned thetwomajorregionsof
Flanders andWallonia ,although withinthoseregionsonlysomeareasare
eligibleforRindcontributions (l).Thedistribution ofRuidassistance
betweenthetworegionsreflectsthatofnationalaidallocated toregional
development .In1976Flandersreceived 58$oftotalassistance toBelgium
(56ioin1975)Wallonia 42%•Onlyinfrastructure projectswerefinanced
inFlanders,whileassistance inWalloniewentinalmostequalproportion to
infrastructure andtoinvestment intheindustrial andservicesectors.
(1)Point42 •/

-27-
Denmark :JOfoofassistance went toGreenland and ,asin1975 »wasonly
concerned with infrastructure .Greenland received more assistance per
head ofpopulation than anyother Community region (l).Within therest
ofthecountry thehighest contribution went toaninfrastructure project
tosupply electricity totheisland ofBornholm .
Federal RejDublic _:Saarland received most aidfrom theFund in1975 >for
twoimportant industrial projects .In1976 infirst place were the
priority areas ofBavaria ,where twothirds ofassistance went toinvest­
ment ininfrastructure ;Schleswig Holstein wasinsecond place .
Prance _:in1975 and1976 theprincipal recipient region wasBrittany ,
although Auvergne ledin1976 onapercapita basis (2).95%ofprojects
aided inBrittany in1976 concerned infrastructure ,mainly road infrastruc­
ture within theframework oftheBreton road plan .Road projects also held an
important place intheother principal beneficiary regions ,Auvergne ,
Aiuitaine andPays delaLoire .Theoverseas departments also received a
relatively large share ofassistance toFrance (8fo),mainly forindustrial
andservice projects .Theonly region ofmetropolitan France toreceive a
high level ofassistance forindustrial andservice activities in1976 ,as
in1975 ,wasLorraine .
^reland :Thewhole ofthenation :1territory istreated asasingle develop­
ment region bytheCommunity -Rrnd assistance inthepriority areas ofthe
west ofIreland isanalysed inpoint 52*
(1)Point 47
(2)Point 51 /

-28-
Regional Rindaid
ifl1977
! J*enchMas Departments
mua5la*]j*j.x. &" ;^3«idb '&0Kminfrastructure /lc$3g ■Kg
I il
I "C
»
X

-29-
Ital^r :Allregions oftheMezzogiorno received Rind aid.in1975 Campania
topped thelist;in1976 Sardinia ,with infrastructure projects alone
assisted (l).Thereafter came Campania ,Sicily andCalabria (2).Also of
major importance wasalarge inter –regional project forwater supply in
Apulia andBasilicata .Thegreater part ofRind contribution inallthese
regions went toinfrastructure projects ,including ,but forrelatively
small sums ,infrastructure inrural areas within thescope oftheDirective
onmountain andhill farming .(3)
Netherlands :Ruid assistance went solely toinfrastructure projects :a
particularly important oneintheGroningen region ,four inFriesland and
three inSouth Limburg .
lto^tcd_Kingd iom_:theNorthern Region ofQigland received most from Rind
assistance in1976 (4);52$ofgrants inthat region went forindustrial
and service projects .In1975 "theNorth was inthird place .Intheother
main recipient regions in1976 infrastructure projects accounted forrather
more aidthan industrial andservice projects .Scotland wasinsecond place
followed byWales .InNorthern Ireland twothirds oftheaidwent to
infrastructure .Scotland andNorthern Ireland were theonly regions to
receive aidforrural infrastructure .These four regions alone received 83^
oftotal Rind grants totheUnited Kingdom .
(1)Point 48
(2)Point 50
(3)Itshould also benoted that theCommunity provided grants under
thespecial operation tohelp the area.s which suffered from the
earthquake disaster inFriuli on6Kay1976 .Inaddition tothe
Regional Rind assistance toItaly ,theCommission provided 15
million u.a .,under proceedures based onthose oftheRegional
Rind ,forrecostructing andimproving regional infrastructure in
Friuli .
(4)Point 49

-30-
Fund assistance inthe sixmain beneficiary regions in1976
In1976 .theBizfollowing regions received thehighest levels ofaidper
head ofpopulation .They arelisted here indeoreasing order ofthevolume
ofaidgranted perhead *
Greenland
47•TheGreenland region faces problems ofavery special kind due tosevere
climate ,itsvery size ,theextremely lowpopulation density (0,1persons
perkm2),anditsdistance from theCommunity .Danish government measures
areconcentrated ondeveloping aninfrastructure adapted toclimatic condi­
tions ,mainly inthecommunications andelectricity supply fields .
PUnd assistance toGreenland in1976 wastherefore concerned solely with
infrastructure ,namely :
N°projects Type Investment
(I.IUA)
14 Port installations 10.3
4 Airports 0.6
11 Production and distribution
ofenergy 15«9
2 Pipe-line sandtelecommuni -
_____ cations 9.6
31 36.4
Thetotal volume ofFUnd assistance was4*52 million u.a .or70 ofallDanish
grants .Total investment bytheDanish government inGreenland in1976 was
some 60million u.a .
./•

-31-
Sardinia
48.Themain characteristics ofSardinia ,with apopulation of1,5million ,are
itsmountainous terrain ,andalowpopulation density (64persons perkm2)«
Although gross domestic product perhead isrelatively high inrelation
totherest oftheKezzogiorno ,itisstill substantially below thenational
andCommunity averages .Despite considerable industrialisation inthe
sixties ,above allinthesouth oftheisland ,accompanied byasharp
decline inagriculture ,this last sector still involved 17$oftheworking
population in1976 .Thelevel ofunemployment remains high (8.7%in1976 ),
themore sobecause Sardinia ,after anetpopulation loss of250,000 over
twenty years ,hashad apositive migration balance since 1972 .
Themain priority ofthepublic authorities hasbeen todevelop the
infrastructure indispensable forindustrial development ,inparticular port
infrastructure andwater supply .
TheaimofFluid assistance in1976 was tofacilitate theimprovement
JO£this infrastructure . Infact only projects within this
category received Fluid aid :
N°projects Type Investment
(KUA )
8 Development ofindustrial estates 7?8
1 Port development 258 .0
4 Infrastructure inmountain areas 3,8
13 269.6
Total Fluid assistance was49»8 million u.a .ofwhich 36.6 forthenew
industrial canal-port ofCagliari alone .This development will assist in
establishing -amajor industrial development pole' linked with -anoverall and
very important infrastructure programme .
./

-32-
Korth ofEngland
49.TheNorthern Region ofEhgland ,with apopulation of3.12 million and
apopulation density of203persons perkm2 fhashigh andpersistent
unemployment (6.8%in .197*0 andagross domestic product perhead "below
thenational average .The1975 crisis aggravated thedecline inemployment
andinvestment .Theregion isasawhole classified asapriority area
(part Development Area ,part Special Development Area ) is
faced with thebasic problem ofconverting declining industries .Tothis
endthepublic authorities arecarrying outaninfrastructure develpment
programme involving port installations ,water supply anddrainage ,advance
factories andthedevelopment ofindustrial estates ,inorder toencourage
new investments .
TheNorth ofEhgland region received most Rind assistance ofallUnited
Kingdom regions in1976 .Theprojects financed were :
–Infrastructure
N°pro.jects Type Investment
62 Development ofindustrial estates 50*5
33 Advance factories 10.9
8 Port installations 17»4
9 Riergy distribution 9»7
2 Reservoirs /industrial water supply 196.7
2 Road andtelephone infrastructure 4«5
113 289.7
Fund assistance amounted to21.5 million u.a .ofwhich 2,5million u.a .
fordeveloping theport ofTees-Eston (Cleveland )and7*3million u.a.
forareservoir andwater mains tosupply industrial estates onthe
East coast oftheregion .
–Industry and service activity
46projects ,with atotal investment of6l5«5 million u.a.were approved for
grant *They should create more than 5000 jobs .Rind aidwas23.8 million
u.a.Theprojects areconcerned with avariety ofindustrial sectors ^the
biggest projects concerned theconstruction ofblast furnaces atRedcar
(Cleveland )andafloor -coverings factory atStockton *on-Tees (Cleveland ).
/

-33-
Calabria
50.Calabria ,with2millioninhabitants ,isastriking exampleofalittle
developed agricultural region,located ontheperiphery ofthenational
territory andtheCommunity .Alargepartoftheregionismountainous ,
33%ofitspopulation livingininaccessible areas,andithasnoport
ofgreatimportance andverylittleindustry.In197524%oftheworking
population wereemployedinagriculture .Inthesameyeartheregion
haulalevelofunemployment of10.3%fthehighestinItaly.Thegross
incomeperheadwasonly56%ofthenationalaveragein1974andthe
lowestinthecountry.
Calabria ,likeotherregionsoftheMezzogiorno ,hassuffered intwoways
fromtheeconomiccrisis:firstbecauseofthedeclineininvestment ,here
aselsewhere ;secondly becauseofthereturntotheirhomeregionof
workers whohadmovedtoNorthernItalyortoothermembercountries and
whohavenowbecomeunemployed .
Themountainous character ofCalabria ,itsdistance frommajorconsumer
centresandthelackofrawmaterials aremajorbarriers toindustriali­
sation.Thepublicauthorities aretherefore givingpriority todeveloping
theinfrastructure neededforindustrial andabovealltouristdevelopment ,
inparticular watersupplyandroadsandothercommunications with
adjoining regions.
Rindassistance in1976wasdirected mainlyathelpinginthesefields.
Rindgrantsweremadeforthreemajorinfrastructure projects andtwo
ofsmallersize,muchofwhichinvolves watersupplyandroads.These
projects accounted foratotalinvestment of83millionu.a.and22.7millio
u.a.ofFluidgrants.Grantswerealsomadefor60infrastructure projects
inmountainareas,nearlyallroadworks (9*9millionu.a.ofinvestment ;
2.9millionu.a.ofRindaid).Pourindustrial projects werealsofinanced
creating 335newjobs(11.9millionu.a.ofinvestment ;1.8millionu.a.
ofRindaid).
TotalRindassistance was27*4millionu.a.
/•

-34-
Auvergne
51•Auvergneisamountainous regionwithalowpopulation density(51
personsperkm2;1.3millioninhabitants inall)andwithstructural
problems connected withtraditional typesofagriculture .Thislast
sectorinvolvednearly20$ofworkingpopulation in1975*Industrial
activityissmallandnotverycompetitive .Theregionisfacedwith
threeseriousproblems :theneedtocreatenewjobsforthoseleaving
agriculture ,theneedtorestrain depopulation incertainareas,and
poorcommunications ,especially roadsandtelephones ,makinganyattempt
atindustrial development particularly difficult .
Plindassistance in1976wa-sdirected mainlytoimproving infrastructure .
Assistance wasgrantedforimproving theroadnetworkinthefourdepart­
mentsoftheregion,withintheframeworkoftheMassifCentralroadplan,
andformodernising andextending thetelephone network.Thesetwo
majorcategories ofinfrastructure assisted accounted foraninvestment
of42millionu.a.andRandgrantsof12.6millionu.a.
Rindaidwasalsograntedforoneindustrial project(extending afactory
makingwoodenfurniture),involving aninvestment of4*2millionu.a.
andthecreation of250newjobs.

-35-
West ofIreland
52.Thewhole ofIreland isconsidered asasingle development region at
Community level .AsfarasEUnd grants areconcerned ,theIrish Government
hashowever decided togive priority tothe "designated areas "intheWest
ofIreland (Donegal ,North West ,West ,MidWest andSouth West regions )
which have apopulation of900,000 (30%ofthenational population ).These
regions arestill essentially agricultural with practically half the
working population employed infarming andwith thehighest levels of
unemployment inthecountry .
TheIrish Government hasgiven absolute priority todeveloping theindustrial
andservice sectors ,with theaimofcreating 19,000 jobs inthe counl^ry
asawhole in1976 ,together with thebasic infrastructure tosupport this
development .
2
2
2
1
2
2Rind assistance in197° intheregions oftheWest was distributed as
follows :
pro.iects Investment
Infrastructure (MUA)
7 Advance factories 1.5
7 Telephones 4.1
3(1) Industrial estates 68.7
3 Roads 1.3
4 Port installations ;energy 2.6
18 Mountain andhill farming
infrastructure 17.0
40 95.2
Industry and services
Metal goods
Mineral products
Electrical andelectronic industxy
Woodwork andtimber industry
Chemical industry
Mechanical engineering4.4
1.6
3.5
0.1
182.9
10.2
11 202.7
(l)including water supply fortheindustrial port atCork
(investment :65.1m.u.a .:Rind assistance :5*3m.u.a .)

-36-
Theseinvestments shouldcreatemorethan2,000jobs.
Ofspecialnoteamongtheinfrastructure projectsisthedevelopment of
theportatCork,designed tobecomeanessential development polefor
thesouthwestofIreland.Amongindustrial projects thepredominance of
thechemicals sectorshouldbenoted;thisaloneshouldcreate800newjobs.
/

-37
Chapter V:Payments andcontrols
Payments
53.Totalpaymentsin1976amountedto277*33millionu.a.concerning 390aid-
decisions oftheCommission ,outofatotalof488adoptedin1975and
1976.
EbrthetwoinitialyearsofFUndactivitytotalpayments were368millior
u.a.,or46foof799*90millionu.a.committed.
54.Payments compared withcommitments foreachMemberStatewereasfollows :
TableN°6 Payments fromtheFund(m.u.a.)
t
Commitments ,
11975&1976 *Payments
1975 ?1976total
!Belgium
Denmark
»
Germany
»'France
1
"Ireland
'Italy
*Luxembourg
"Netherlands
1
"United
!Kingdom10.71
10.29
29.35
122.47
54.48
328.17
0.75
15.591.56
mm
16.12
7.00
44.30
0.22
2.85
228.09 !18.626.11
3.98
13.35
28.87
18.03
112.86
Ο.41
5.456.11
5.54
13.35
44.99
25.03
157.16
0.63
8.30Paymentsas%of
commitments
88.27!106.89 !57.0
53.8
45.5
36.7
45.9
47.9
84.Ο
53.2
46.9
Total 799.90 90.67 277.33 368.00 46.0

-38-
Table N°8oftheAnnex gives details ofpayments made from the
Jlind in1976 .
55»Payments in1976 (277*33 million u.a.)were made partly from unused
1975 payment appropriations carried forward to1976 (59.33 million u.a.),
andpartly from payment appropriations inthe1976 budget (218,00 million
u.a.).
Applications forpayment were more than theamount of277*33 million u.a .
actually paid out .Acertain number ofapplications were carried forward
to1977 fortechnical reasons .This explains inparticular whythelevel
ofpayments toPrance islow ,where additional information wasrequested
buthadnotreached theCommission bytheendoftheyear .
56.Total payments in1975 and -1976 areless than theappropriations written
into thebudget forthis purpose :150million u.a .for1975 and -300
million u.a .for1976 oratotal of450million u.a .The 82million u.a .
notused in1976 have been added to400million u.a .ofpayment appro­
priations forwhich there isprovision inthe1977 budget .
57*Thevolume ofpayments made in1976 appears satisfactory .Itmust be
stressed that therate ofpayment depends largely onthespeed with which
Member States paytheir regional aids related totheinvestments concerned ,
which inturn isclosely linked with therate ofprogress oftheproject
itself .Only then cantheMember States make application forpayment from
theCommission .Some delay istherefore inevitable between commitment
andpayment andabove allwhen project take several years tocomplete .The
delay isthat much longer still where theprojects financed arenewones .
58.TheCommission canalso state that payment applications have been dealt
with expeditiously .Save inexceptional cases where supplementary inform ac­
tion required wasnotsupplied rapidly ,payment applications have generally
been settled within twoweeks ofreceipt .Itmaybenoted forexample that
60 "joofapplications in1976 arrived inNovember andDecember *
TheCommission also wishes tostress that thelarge number ofpayments
made in1976 istheresult oftheclose collaboration established with
the national authorities .

-39-
Controls
59.In1976asin1975»"theCommission ,incollaboration withMemberStates,
undertook acertainnumberofcontrol measures asprovided forbythe
Fondregulation ,including onthespotinspections ,designed tocheok
whetherinvestments inreceiptofRindassistance werebeingproperly
implemented .
Inthisconnection ,87inspection visitsweremadeduringtheyear;added
tovisitsundertakaiin 1975,"thenumberofon-the-spotcheckssincetheFund
wasestablished hasbeen131.
TableN°7showsthenumberofvisitsmade,byMemberStateandbycategory
ofinvestment .Aclassification byregionappearsinTable9oftheAnnex.
TableN°7:N°projects inspected sincetheestablishment
oftheFund
Numberofpro.iects
Industry Infrastructure
Belgium 2 8
Denmark 6 17
France 6 7
Germany 1 5
Ireland 9 14
Italy 7 12
Luxembourg – 1
Netherlands - 3
UnitedKingdom 1 32
32 99
TOTAL131
60.Theseon-the-spotcheckswerecarriedout,attherequestoftheCommission ,
bytheresponsible authorities oftheMemberStatesandwithofficials of
theCommission participating (Directorate GeneralforRegionalPolicyand
Financial Control).Theresponsible departments oftheCommission havekept
theBoardofAuditors informedofallon–the–spotchecksandtheBoardhas
takenpartinthesechecksitselfonseveraloccasions .
/•

-40-
61.Experience acquired during thefirst inspection visits in1975 and
early 1976 led toimprovements intheohecking procedures inorder to
meet with theaims laid down intheRind regulation ,namely to
ensure
–that local administrative practice conformed toCommunity rules ;
–theexistence ofdocumentary evidence anditsconformity with the
data submitted tojustify Rind assistance atthetime ofthe
application ;
–thewayinwhich projects financed "bythe Fluid areimplemented
andchecked ;
–whether implementation isconsistent with projects asapproved
for Rind assistance .
Noirregularity wasascertained ,inthis respect ,inthecourse of
inspection andchecking in1976 .
62.Aproblem arose insome Member States concerning theinspection of
industrial projects ,where Rind assistance wasconsidered asapartial
repayment ofnational regional aids andnotpassed ontotheinvestor
concerned .Moreover ,some Member States donot themselves possess
thenecessary powers tocarry outdetailed checks onindustrial projects
inreceipt ofaids .These countries rely oncertificates drawn upby
independent auditors when work hasbeen completed inorder toauthorize
payment oftheir national aids .TheCommission considers that amethod
ofthis kind could possibly beuseful forchecking industrial projects .
63.Some administrative difficulties occurred asaresult oftheinevitable
problems involved intheinitial establishment ofnew administrative
channels between the authorities ofMember States and the Rind .One
Member State ,inparticular ,submitted payment applications based on
estimates ofnational aidpayments instead ofactual payments aslaid
down intheRind regulation .Inaddition avisit ofinspection in
another Member State revealed that some projects hadbeen completed well
before 1January 1975 »detailed examination showed that theRind grants
inquestion were legally inorder since they related tonational public
expenditure after 1.1.1975 *However thesums involved were very small
andtheMember State inquestion withdrew theprojects .
•/

-41-
Chapter VI:REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES ANDCOORDINATION WITHOTHER
COMMUNITY POLICIES ANDFINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
Regional development programmes
64.AsstressedalreadyinthereportonRindactivityfor1975»"theCommission
attachesgreatimportance totheregional development programmes required
bytheRindregulation (l).
Indeed,theseprogrammes ,prepared according toacommonoutlineapproved
bytheRegionalPolicyCommittee (2),shouldimproveknowledge of
regional problems ,growthprospects andneeds,andspelloutclearly
thedevelopment aimsandmeasures andthefinancial resources whichMember
Statesfortheirimplementation .TheCommunity willthenbebetterable
todecideitsownfinancial assistance forregional policypurposes so
thatitsresources axeusedinasrational amanneraspossible .
65.TheRindregulation requiresthatprogrammes mustbesenttotheCommission
bytheendof1977*
In1976programmes fortwelveregionsweresubmitted totheCommission
bytheFederalRepublic ofGermany.Theseprogrammes vrerepreparedjointly
bytheFederal Economic Ministry ^andbytheMinistries forEconomics and
Transport oftheLandsconcerned.Theycoverfouryears(1976-1979 )and-
followcloselythecommonoutline.Thechapters oneconomic andsocial
analysis anddevelopment aimsarerelatively detailed ,asarethose
describing regional measures.Reference isalsomadetostructural policies ,
butthispartoftheprogramme couldbemoredetailed soastoshowmore
clearlytheimpactofthesedifferent policies onregional development .
TheCommission received theprogrammes fortheUnitedKingdomandfor
Greenland atthebeginning of1977*Theseprogrammes arecurrently being
examinedindetailbytheCommission andwillthenbeconsidered bythe
Regional PolicyCommittee .
(1)Article6
(2)OJN°C69of24.3.1976
./•

-42-
Annualinformation
66.Untiltheregional development programmes becomeavailable theFluid
regulation providesfortheassessment ofapplications forFluidgrant
inthelightofannualinformation statements .Thesestatements must
includefortheyearinquestionallappropriate information concerning
theeconomic andsocialsituation ofregionseligibleforPlrndassistance ,
thefinancial resources allocated tothoseregions,theregional develop -^
mentmeasures envisaged andnational aidceilings.
67.Theannualinformation statements for1976weresubmitted totheRegional
PolicyCommittee forconsideration .Theywerethensentinsummaryform
totheEuropean Parliament andtotheEconomic andSocialCommittee ,where
theywereconsidered atthesametimeasthefirstannualreportonthe
Rand.
68.Thestatements supplied bytheMemberStatesareimportant inmanaging
theFluidnotonlybecausetheyprovidetheCommission withuptodata
information ontheeconomic andsocialsituation ofregionsandwiththe
regionalpolicies ofMemberStates,butalsobecausethelatterhaveto
indicate thegenerallinesofhowtheyproposetousePlrndresources during
theyearinquestion andthepriorities theyhaveestablished .
Statistical summaries
69.Whenpreparing in1976thefirstPlrndreporttheCommission hadnotyet
receivedallthestatistical summaries for1975»whichshouldhavebeen
communicated before1April1976.Thesummaries werereceivedlaterbut
despitetheeffortmadebytheMemberStates,somearestillincomplete
andstatistics areoftenlackinginuniformity .Theyneedtherefore tobe
supplemented beforetheCommission canassess,asrequired bytheFluid
regulation ,theresultsofthemeasures takenineachregionduringthe
previousyearandespecially theresultsofPlmd–aidedmeasures.This
problemiscurrently beingconsidered bytheRegionalPolicyCommittee .
/

-43-
70.TheCommission ,although awareofthedifficulties involved ,insists
thattheMemberStatesshouldindicate ,eachyearandforeachregion,
thevolumeofinvestment specifically aided "byeconomicsector,the
numberofjobscreatedormaintained inconsequence andthepublic
expenditure involved (includingthatonregionalinfrastructure )
indicating thoseinvestments ,havingreceived Rindgrantsandthose
whichhaveonlyreceivednational aid.Indeed,thisdataisessential
totheassessment oftheimpactoftheFundonthedevelopement of
theregionsconcerned .
Coordination withotherCommunity policies andfinancial instruments
General considerations
71.Thecoordination ofpolicies andfinancial instruments advanced in
variouswaysin1976andearly1977*firstlytheEuropean Council
meetingattheHagueinNovember 1976tooknoteoftheinternal
measures adoptedbytheCommission toensurebettercoordination
betweenthevariousCommunity funds(SocialRind,Regional Fundand
Agricultural Rind).TheCommission alsostatedthatitwouldbemaking
proposals totheCouncilin1977aimedatthegreatercoherent ofthe
activities oftheseRinds.
Secondly thenewCommission stressedatthebeginning of1977 "the
importance whichitattaches tothequestion ofcoordination by
settingupaspecialtaskforceforcoordinating financial instruments .
TheCommissioner responsible forregional policywasputinchargeof
thiscoordination whichinvolves proposing andimplementing ,within
theframework oftheCommission 'sgeneralguidelines foreconomic
policy,measures toensurethecoherence ofassistance fromallthe
different Community financial instruments .
Λ

-44-
Coordination ofjComm^ity .policies
72.Themeasures ofcoordination applied "before 1976 were concerned principally
with thefinancial instruments andwere designed essentially toavoid
grant decisions which ,while complying with theaims ofoneCommunity
policy ,might have harmful results onother Community policies (environment
ment ofseveral Community policies nowrequires more detailed coordination
oft>oth policies and financial instruments .Moreover this coordination
isalso made essential "bytheincreasingly serious problems created by
theeconomic crisis ,themore sobecause theCommunity ^financial resources
andtherefore itscapacity tohelp inasignificant manner ,have remained
relatively limited .
Coordination should therefore aim toensure that financial assistance and
particular policies should notonly not "becontradictory ,"butasfaraspossible
contribute toimplementing thesame purposes .Such anapproach hasbeen
gradually developed ,starting with thework undertaken byanumber of
inter-departmental Commission working parties onvarious Community policies .
73.Attheendof1976 "theCommission putinhand studies onhow toimplement
themain conclusions ofareport ontheregional aspects ofstrucutral:'
policy foragriculture .This document ,prepared bytheinter-departmental
working party created bytheCommission attheendof1975 "tocoordinate
Community financial instruments ,confirms that theless favoured regions
with inadequate agriculture structures have not ,bycomparison with other
regions ,received Community financial aidinproportion tothegravity of
their structural problems .Thereport proposes therefore anumber of
measures designed toincrease theimpact oftheGuidance Section ofthe
EAGGP inregions ingreatest need .These could involve inparticular
varying thelevels ofCommunity financial assistance ,adapting existing
"common actions "more specifically totheneed ofless favoured regions and
undertaking specific measures designed todeal with their problems .policf-føf competition policy ,sectoral policies ^etc.). Thedevelop­

-45-
74*Attheendof1975 1theCommission hadalready given aninter­
departmental working party thetask ofanalysing theimpact on
theagricultural situation oftheMediterranean regions ofagricultural
marketing ,pricing andstructural policies and theeffect onthose
regions ofCommunity policy towards non-member countries around the
Mediterranean .This led toareport ontheproblems ofMediterranean
agriculture analysing theconsequences oftheCommunity 'sexternal
policy onasector ofparticular importance andsensitivity forcertain
regions .Thereport concluded that acertain number ofspecific measures
areneeded tosustain thedevelopment potential oftheMediterranean
regions while atthesame time safeguarding thefuture oftheCommunity 's
external policy .
75*Thedifficulties now facing certain economic sectors have led the
Commission toundertake detailed analyses ofeach sector under their
different aspects .These analyses ,inparticular -those ofthetextile
andmotor-vehicle industries ,areessential iftheCommission isto
beable tojudge therelative importance oftheaims ofdifferent
policies andfinancial instruments and ,where itthink itisnecessary ,
tointervene directly bywayofthose policies andinstruments .
Coordination offinanci alinstruments
76.Thereinforcement ofCommunity measures ofastructural nature which
have aregional impact may insome cases require simultaneous or
coordinated action byseveral Community financial instruments tohelp
either thesame project orprojects indifferent butinterdependent
fields .Coordination aims therefore onthe one hand toestablish
Commission policy towards projects where theachievement ofCommunity
priority aims ,especially intheregional field ,requires that several
instruments should provide assistance toagiven project ;and on
theother toensure coordinated action bythevarious financial
•/

-46-
instruments tohelpseparate "butinterdependent projectsfalling,for
example,withintheframework ofaredevelopment planofagivenarea
orregion.
Inthiscontextregional development programmes will "beavaluable
instrument ofcoordination toensurecoherent useofthevarious Community
instruments .
77.TheCommission noteswithsatisfaction thattheEuropean Investment
Bankfollowedin1976apolicyofconcentrating itsactivities inthe
lessfavouredregionsoftheCommunity.75$ofloansissuedwithinthe
Community wenttoprojects ofregionalinterest.However,theCommission
noteswithregretthatnoMemberStatemadeuseofthefacility provided
for"bytheFluidregulation tograntinterest rebates onloansfromthe
Bankforinfrastructure projects.
78.Whiletakingfullaccountofitownspecific aimsandrequirements in
thefieldofindustrial training andretraining ,theSocialFundtoohas
increaseditsefforttohelpthelessfavouredregions.In197682%
ofgrantsmadeunderArticle5(l)»andover50$ofallaid-,wentto
helptheseregions.Inaddition ,theregional impactoftheSocialFluid
wasaccentuated intheproposals forrevising theFluidsadoptedbythe
Commission atthebeginning of1977*
79*Theeconomiccrisishasbeenfeltparticularly bythesteelindustry ,
especially insomeregions,withtheconsequence thattheavailable ECSC
conversion fundsarelikelytoproveinsufficient .TheCommission is
therefore studying howtoestablish anoverallreconversion policyin
thissectorandhasproposedthattheMemberStates prepareregional
conversion programmes forwhichCommunity financecouldbeavailable .
Theseprogrammes aredesigned toextendtheavailability ofreconversion
loanstoprojectsforthereemployment ofworkers maderedundant by
technological changeandcouldfacilitate thegrantingofcoordinated
assistance fromseveral Community instruments ,inparticular theSocial
andRegional Fluids.
(1)CouncilDecisiónn0V-/66/EECof1.2.1971

-47-
Chapter VII:INFORMATION ONFUNDACTIVITY
80.TheCommission believesthatinformation onFundactivity shouldbewidely -
available forthereasonsalreadymentioned intheAnnualReportfor1975*
Firstlypublicopinionhasarighttobeinformed ontheusetowhich
Community moneyisput.Secondly Regional Elindgrantsinparticular are
perhapsmoresuitedthanotherstobringCommunity activities tothe
noticeofpublicopinion.Thislastconsideration isincreasingly important
withtheprospect ofdirectelections totheEuropean Parliament inmind.
TheCommission confirmed thisbeliefinitsdecision of9June1976on
regionalised information byintructing itsdepartments togiveimmediate
publicity inasdetailed aformaspossible,tofinancial assistance from
allCommunity instruments .
Tobeeffective ,information mustbesystematic andpermanent .Inthis
contexttheCommission feelsthattheoperations undertaken in1976involving
presscontacts ,information hoardings ,publication ofprojectsinthe
Official Journalanddirectinformation toinvestors ,isbeginning tohave
positiveresults,especially inItaly,theUnitedKingdomandIreland,
whicharetheprincipal beneficiaries fromtheRind.Itisclearlypress
information andpublicity hoardings whichhavethemostimpactonpublic
opinion.
Pressinformation
81.Asin1975,'theCommission published aftereachseriesoffluidgrantdecisions
apressreleaseandtablesshowingthenational andregionaldistribution
ofaid.In1976itwasalsopossibletopublish,withthepressrelease,
fulllistsoftheprojects concerned .Thelistsareofspecialinterest
totheregional andlocalpressinsofarastheycanshowinpreciseand
concrete termswhattheCommunity hasdoneforagivenregionorlocality.
Sincetheseactivities concernthelocalandregionalpressaswellasthe
national press,theroleoftheCommission 'sPressandInformation Offices
intheMemberStatesisessential inthisfield.
/

-48-
Information hoardings
82.Asalready indicated inthefirst annual report ontheRind ,all
Member States have agreed toerect onthesite ofmajor infrastructure
projects information hoardings stating that theproject ispartly -
financed from thePond ;acertain number ofhoardings have already "been
erected ,inparticular inItaly andtheUnited Kingdom .TheCommission
hasinsisted that hoardings areereoted systematically inallMember
States during 1977 *
Publication inthe Officiai Journal
83.Asrequired byArticle 14ofthe Fluid regulation ,afirst list of
projects financed from the PVuid was published intheOfficial
Journal inNovember 1976 (l).This list covered grants approved in1975
andinJanuary andApril 1976 .Thelist concerning theJuly andDecember
1976 decisions iscurrently with theprinter .
Information toinvestors
84.Aslaid down intheFund regulation ,andfollowing agreements with each
Member State take account ofitsdecision onthequestion of
"topping up"(2),allinvestors concerned were informed byletter from
theCommission ,sent either directly orvia therelevant national
authorities ,that their project wasapproved forRind assistance .
(l)Official Journal N°C267of12.11.1976
(2)Point 37
/

-49-
Chapter VIII :CONCLUSION
85.TheRand regulation hasto "bere-examined bytheCouncil ,onthe "basis
ofaproposal from theCommission ,"before 1January 1978 .Itisnotfor
this report ,dealing with Fluid activity in1976 ,"tosuggest measures
forthefuture .Nevertheless ,since account must "betaken ofpast
experience inpreparing future decisions ,acertain number oflessons
mayappropriately "bedrawn from the Fluid operations inthepast ,inthe
administrative ,economic andpolitical fields .
86.Administratively ,theprocedures established "bytheFluid regulation have
worked satisfactorily ,thanks inlarge measure toclose collaboration
with national government departments .Grant decisions have been adopted
within reasonable time limits ,varying between twoandthree months .The
Commission ishowever considering whether theproceedures canbeimproved .
87.TheRegional Fluid budget wasfixed bytheConference odHeads ofState
andofGovernment inDecember 1974 .Theexceptionally high rates of
inflation experienced bytheCommunity in1975 and1976 ,especially in
themain beneficiary countries ,hashowever hadunfavourable consequences
forthereal value oftheresources andhasseriously reduced
thepossibilities ofFluid assistance .
/•

-50-
88.Theimpact ofthePond ontheeconomic developement oftheregions
also depends largely onMember States respecting theprinciple of
additionality upon which theCommission cannot insist enough .
Moreover theconcentration ofFund aidonpriority areas andon
projects which have areal impact onregional development must
continue .
89.TheCommission notes "that noMember State made useofthe
possibility provided forbytheRind regulation togrant interest
rebates onloans from theEuropean Investment Bank .This facility
could have increased theimpact ofmeasures of "both financial instru­
ments .Itwould make loans more attractive for anumber ofinvestments
whose short –term profitability isuncertain and ,via theFund ,make
npre resources available forregional development .
90.Thefavourable reaction ofpublic opinion toRind operations hasbecome
clear asaresult ofthe information activities undertaken insome
Member countries in1975 and1976 .This requires however that the
principle ofadditionality should beclearly respected andthat detailed
andspecific information bemade available through thepress andby
suitable information hoardingd .
91.TheCommission also stresses theimportance ofregional developement
programmes tothegranting ofRind assistance inthefuture .These will
enable priority measures which should behelped from theFund tobe
decided more easily than inthepast andwill alSo permit theproper
coordination oftheactivities ofthedifferent Community funds ,both
between themselves and with those ofthenational authorities *The
programmes will therefore beofthegreatest importance *

-51-
91.Lastlyitisincreasingly clearthatthecoordination ofallCommunity
instruments witharegional impactisurgently necessary .
itselftheRindcanonlymakearelatively modestcontribution
tosolvingregional problems .Coordination confined toCommunity
financial instruments alone,whileimproving generalefficiency ,will
notprovide anadequate answerinviewofthedifficulties faced.
Itisbytheeffective coordination ofallCommunity structural ,sec­
toralandotherpolicies ,backedupbyconvergent actionbythe
financial instruments ,thattheCommunity willbeabletomakeits
contribution tosolvingtheseriousproblems ofregional imbalance
withwhichitisfaced.TheCommission foritspartisdetermined to
proceedalongthisroadandhasmadeitapriority taskinitswork
programme for1977*

-52-
annex
A.SOSI0–3COMOKICINDICATORS
Table1.Trendsinmacro–economicaggregates 1975–1976
Table2.Forecasts for1977
Table3.Trendsininvestment 1975–1977
Graph.I:Trendsingrossdomestic productperhead1976–1977
Graph.II:Weighted appreciation ordepreciation ofcurrencies
ofKemberStates1973-1976
Graph.Ill:Trendsinregionalunemployment as$oftotal
population 1968-1976
B.RICIONAL FONDACTIVITY IN1976
Table4*Summaryofaiddecisions £8
Table5*Typesofinvestment financedintheindustrial and
servicesectors 59
Table6.Typesofinfrastructure investment financed 00
Table7*Regionalstatistics onFluidaidgranted $1
Table8.Payments made 65
Table9*Visitsofinspection carriedout 66page
53
$3
•54
55
56
57

-53-
TABLE 1.Trends inmacro –eoonomi oagregates inthe Community t
1976 compared with 1975
GDP
(volume )
*invest­
mentunemploy –
!ment rate
,1976 »▼«-
(1)Τ)Consumer
prices
(3)•Current
payments
|balanqe
(million
1*)"
IBelgiua
|Denmark
!Cermany
fPrance
!Ireland
fItaly
!Luxembourg
!Netherlands
Ithited Kingdoa
I
!Community3.0
4.8
5.7
5.2
3.5
5.6
3.0
3.5
1.8
I4.6-0.2
13.7
5.1
4.5
3.0
2.3
-4.5
-1.5
•4.3
2.86.1
5.1
4.1
.4.4
9.4
3.7
0.4
4.6
5.2
4.58.8
8.5
4.4
9.8
18.0
17.5
9.8
9.3
15.2
9.9-0.4
-1.9
3.2
-5.8
-0.3
-2.9
(4)
2.4
-2.6
-8.3
TABLE 2.Forecasts for 1977
I
!
I!
,ODP
(volume )
' *1 l)1
.Investment ,
1* 1
! !Π
.themplqyment ,
'iate (1977 )2)'
I I-m ,
iponsumer j
îpricesS(3) »
Belgium!
3.5! I
! 2'7 Ii
I 5.8 .!
7..5. i
,T>enmarkI ^ f 0.5 ,t 6,0 I 9.0 ,
Germany , 4.0 ! !! 3,8 I 4.0 ,
.France, 3'1 I°'4 i! 4.8 , 9,0 ,
.Ireland 3.7f 8'° I! 9.6 , 15.0 ,
Italy. 3'°- 2.0
f19.0
.Luxembourg 2.0I4.3 ..t <>-3 , 7.8 ,
Netherlands 4.0f 4.5 ,! 4.4 . 7.0 ,
thited Kingdom }0.8 -3'4 .! 5'9 I 15.0 .
Community!
! 3.0!
ι !! !
4.7 !-, ,f
% »
■y––■■■■■ H"–
!l)Orossfixedassetformation (volume )2)Uhemployed asi»oftotal population .Since definitions arepotf^lly onifoil ^,
unemployment levels cannot beoonpared between oountries
(3)Based onnational accounting aystema
(4)Included under Belgium (B.L.E.O. )

54
TABLE3.Trendsininvestment
Crossfixed
(%changeoverpreviousyear)
,1975 1976 !1977(1)
volumeιvalue
■volume
jvalue
_iI
"volume
–1 ι
1Denmarki
!-10.71 ■––
!-0,5l
!+10,1I
!+17,3I
!+2,5
Germany -4,1
91-1,3
i1+
I4,4"+7,0
t!+3,5
f
Prance 4,3 ,+6,9i
.+0,8,+11,0,-1,2
Ireland !-5,5!+11,9 I+2,0!+20,4!+3,0
Italy -12,7
I"+4,3»
+
i1!+22'-2
t
Netherlands ,"3,8.+6,1 3.+5,5,+3
Belgium !-3,3 !+7,4 -0,8!+9,4!+1,5
Luxembourg 1-10,1
t1+1,6
II
f4'+4,3
i+6,9
i' i
UnitedKingdom i-1-2
a,+23,3
II
f
Λ1,7,+15,0
_a!-!,3
_J i
Community:
1-5,0
»Γ
1+5,8
t1
!♦
f1,6Τ–
!+11,7
!!+1,4 !
! !
» t!
agaaggasagagsaaBgauaL.ua3saaw8aaaaaaaa8ggaBagaeaaaaaggBaaaaaBaaag8gaBggaggwiaaa
(l)Forecast "byCommission services

-55-
GRAPHI.INDICES OPG.D.P.PERPERSONATCURRENTPRICES*'
(inEUR)(ESC=100)
!τ150ΤΓ :ΐ:;:ίί!!/!:::Μί!::ΐ:.ί !;ι,ίΜ!,ι;ί:νΓΓΓ-ί
"·"·"·II!**:·'!·ί I I··!···!·· ■ί! ! : ! :·'I; ■; :'I:■: ■■ ;! ! ■' ! I:iIII • • : I : •:'
.Μ . Iί -ί·I·: ■··'.\·; ; I
• I!; ί .ι..·:...ι....ί;5 ..ι. : : / :κιν
..fi..,...;., .,..|:. • •: •i i /...» • :.! I'VI:! s :' ! ! /
iW0ir*–-f• |V"/S>0" wii • >i..i.. ; . •. i g QTj::11• •'-::' I • • ^....., ................. i;-;--:•
:I•;:: ;iy.*yT^s/..../ 'ft..;r...;..■;« .y :/^.\>/.<.• I. ,. I w •• M . w\: :A Z: :.. :j... i-^ i I
■i ■• !••iftl/:i: /X.V*.V/
:■£··: ::: .■:Ι/Γ» \/.:Γ»»"Γ;ΛΓ'",~7--Ι-Τ-Τ-Τ-Τ Ί/Τ><:/;*|·.τ~-/Ύ^τ··
iMI"V. ; /i i:!Vi//
β ··■· ι,τι·^μμ Α.
x •*•./ =■'cs\/ \/\.**\ - :.•'Xi...,:YS^/ \\i-,.
•-rr .•/\ y■y.^ ,//.//V :
i \ •v*^/
*| ^"'''"^^
•^ M j... rX \
« .tf ... Alt "W • .•a • ■ K7■ l t.... ....t...J..:.........:..|::,,,.J.: ..^"ij"=■|;| -|
•""90TT ;" v •>»»»^\ "'i' .~r.r*r.•:r
» II .. p.. (., I....|...( i.......II ■... r ■ ..,i... . . i.... ,..., ,'II •••..... «... .t....| |....i.,.•. .....,. ......j............... ...
..... II | •t •iI • •
T:;: :ï'::i""."r:j \7i V i:n-IJ ..1 :: i::... ..-,-:.X:
«ι ί" ί ·· ; ; :.:-νi.•a 1 . •.1 ■■.
ψ1 'Γ::! !
....... |...I...
*? ! !
p-S<?..■:~:p...– p............... ..............|;-•■;\–• ;'
•I.:0!..! l:/:'i LI]'I! \a\.:
!3 :::': i
* :': : : ■
*1111 1» >11 > 1 >>■>** > ■>
:Ll....._ .i«...,c2...bi ..O)hi.)<...11...li..iu.K
«
, *)19*T6testimate 1977*forecast(EURexchangeratesasat16*5977)
» **

-56-
FRGERMANY
FRANCE
TALY
NETHERLANDS
B.L.E.U.
UNITED KINGDOM
IRELAND
DENMARKGRAPHII
Weightedappreciation ordepreciation
ofthecurrencies ofMemberStatesin%
(Referenceperiod:'Smithsonian Agreement' ,December
1971;weightingaccordingtothestructureofforeigntrade)
30* 30.
25. 25.
20. /\ /X o 20.
15. /y ^f 15.
/A U"*-. X/\N _ -V.
\ V
–N =•
-
-15.V\^\ ~"v -15.
«S.-««5 V
• \ -80·
-23a ^*~><V-^11^ N'-25.
-30. \\ -30.
-35. \ -M-
-iO. VV>*-<0.
-«. -«•
_5Q_I■■I1■I'■I■■I■'I'■I■■I''I11J11I''I11I'1I11I'1I''Iffi
1913 1914 1915 1916

Cr*pkUI
UNEMPLOyMeNTAS */OFLABOURFORCE.PERIODfltS-tffe *
i
/.
<+ïï
I
(2-1
"ι
<°1\ Ά
^J^ ■ ■'/jffi^**WU8*""*
«M»»»HM*»\m<Stses^4 :I
fM«DANHARKWtMWSfflUlllft^FMNCEH:^RELWiDMOMTHLy AVEÇAG8S
SOUKCfc:SJD.€.C

TABLE4-Summaryofaiddecisionsin1976,analysedbyMemberStateandbymaincategoryof
Key;
A;industrial andserviceinvestments of10millionu.a.ormore
B:industrial andserviceinvestments under10millionu.a.
C:infrastructure investments of10millionu.a.ormore
D:infrastructure investments under10millionu.a.
E:infrastructure investments inhill-farming areas
hemoer
StateNumberofaiddecisions 1
(inbrackets snumberof
investments projects)(l)Investment involved
(millionu.a.)Aidgranted
(millionu.a.)
LaJΒI
» ETotal A8 C D CITotal Γ·!TotalI
IBelgium 1
(6)2
(22)3
(28)25,68*ir,*6 43,14 1,43»3'
5,24Γ16,6/1
IDenmark2
(10)1
(1)*
I(31)7
(42)6,0210,87134,69 51,58 0,570,145,71 6,42
IGermany 2
(2)32
(117)1
(1)26
(76)61
(196)23,71160,08 38,53«,72M255,04 0,917,171,W 19.891
IPrance8
(8)28
(115)5
(5)11
(81)52
(209)162,91282,49125,9575,18 646,53 7,9417,2635,4115,85 76,461
IIreland2
(2)2
(15)1
(1)5
(53)2
(18)12
(89)183,0428,7765,1641,4216,99335,38I
7,81I 5,2211,475,0734,50
Italy 1
(1)4
(45)16
(16)9
(33)8
(187)38
(282)92,9684,321205,1891,5453,241527,244,3914,12144,9325,2915,50204,23
ILuxembourg
INetherlands 1
(D2
(7)3
(8)27,1333,66 <0,79 5,9516,05 10,001
IUnitedKingdom 13
(13)29
(168)10
(10)72
(453)7
(47)131
(6911824,63238,95372,2»354,3221,911812,0334,1123,9218,1061,893,«5141,871
Totals26
(26)98•
(476)35
(35)131
(7S6)17
(252)307
(1545)I
1287,25 I826,311845,04680,9992,14^731,7355,1669,40I209,74141,3212M2500,04]
307
(1545) *731,73 sa1,04 I
(1)Fbrtheprojectsof10millionu.a.ormoreincolumnsAandCeachdecisionrelatestoasingleproject.

C\ÀC -59-
«
TABLE5*–typesofinvestment financed bytheRegional F\indin1975
(industryandservices)
Category asdefinedinthe
RuidregulationTotal
amountof
investment
(m.u.a.)JAmountof
Jnational
jaidsconcerned
'(m.u.a.)Numberofprojects andmainsectors
concerned
projects of
10million
u.a.
Industry
and
services11.287,25 195,16
projects
under10
millionu.a.!826.31 166.185metalproduction andprocessing
5chemical
1metalgoods
1mechanical engineering
6electrical andelectronic
engineering
3motormanufacture andaccessories
1textiles
1rubber
26
59metalgoods
49electrical andelectronic engineering
47mechanical engineering
46food,drinkandtobacco
28paper
30rubber
38hotelsandrestaurants
179miscellanious industries and
services
476
TOTALS !2«113f5o361,34 502projects

-60-
TABLE6.–^irpesofinvestment financed bytheRegional
Rindin1975(infrastructure )
Category asdefinedin
theRandregulationTotal
amountof
investment
million
u.a.Totalof
national
aid
concerned
millionu.a.Numberofprojects andmaintypes
ofinfrastructure concerned
Infrastruc­
ture
TOTALprojects of
10millionu.a.
ormore
projects under
10million u#a.1,845.04 1,184.24
680.99 523.59
projectsinhill
farmingareas!
ι
Τ
ι
92.14 81.19
2,618.171,789.0229generalservices toindustrial
estates(roads,raillinks,
watersupplyandpurification ,
sewers,etc.)
4portdevelopment
1diesel-poweredelectricity
production
1wastedisposal
35
73sitepreparation forindustrial
estates
358generalservicestoindustrial
estates(roads,watersupply,
sewers,etc.)
116advancefactories
13touristinfrastructure
73roads
42portdevelopment
6airportdevelopment
75miscellaneous infrastructure
(erergyproduction ,tele–
communications ,etc.)
756
252generalservices (roads,watersupply,etc)
1,043projects

TABLE7»–Eliropean Development Rind,1976
Regionalstatistics :Aidgranted(roundedfigures;inbrackets:number^ofinvestmentprojects
(millionu«a#)
!•Industriali
i
handicraft and
serviceactivitiesIIInfrastructure IIIRuralinfrastructure IVTotals
1975 1976 I
I75♦76
I1975 1976 75♦76 1975 1976 75♦76 -1975 197675♦7»I
BELGIUM% V
FuandersI• I2,28(19)3,90(19)6,18(38) 2,28(19»3,90(19)■6,18(38)I
Kallonia 0,89(5)1,43(6)2,32(11)0,87(12)1,34(3)2,21(15)I•I 1,76(17)2,77(9)4,53(26)I
0,89(5?RsnnssssJI1,43(6)J2,32(11)
KMasxMiaa !3,15(31)5,24(22)I8,39(53)Jm4,04(36)6,67(28)10,71(64)
DSNMAHK 1ΓΊ
Greenland 3,25(25)1 4,.:2(31)7,77(56) 3,25(25)4,52(31)7>77(56)I
Otherregions 0,62(9)0,57(10)*1,19(19) 1,33(1)1,33(1) 0,62(9)1,90(11)2,52(20)I
0,62(9)
■aaaausui0,57(10)
iaBJUSSSS«81,19(19)
iMiiaaiwii3,25(25)
ΙΜ8388Ι3ΙΒ5/85(32)
«Mttssstsa9/10(57)
aaassusin ;m
:a»s«as«stsm3,87(34)6,42(42)
ηηιιιιιιι10,29(76)I
GERMANY
Schieswig-Hol stein 0,01(1)0,89(14)0,90(15)1,02(4)1,26(8)2,28(12)l
I 1,03(5)2,15(22)3,18(27)1
Bremen 0,11(1)0,11(1)0,05(1)«0,05(1) 0,05(1)0,11(1)0,16(2)!
LowerSaxony 0,53(6)0,78(7)1,31(13)0,97(8)0,70(7)1,67(15) 1,50(14)1,48(14)2,98(28)I
North-Rhine Westohl0,24(3)0,12(7)0,36(10) m0,24(3)0,12(7)0,36(10)I
Hesse 0,35(8)0,35(13)0,70(21)0,38(4)0,38(4)0,76(8)«• 0,73(12)0,73(17)1,46(29)I
Rhineland –Pal• 0,46(9)1,20(37)1,66(46)0,37(3)0>55(8)0,92(11) 0,83(12)1,75(45)2,58(57)I
Saarland 1,83(2)0,97(2)2,80(4) 0,75(4)0,75(4)m 1,83(2)1,72(6)3,55(8)I
Bavaria 3,27(34)3,27(34)1,66(11)6,0S(42)7,71(53) I1,66(11)9,32(76)10,98(87)I
3aden–Wurtemb. 0,38(4)0,38(4)0,64(3)0,12(3)0,76(6) 0,64(3)0,50(7)1,14(10)I
Berlin- 11,00(1)1,99(1)2,99(2)Lz I•- 1,00(1)1,99(1)2,99(2)I
•Total I3,42(29 ]8,07(119 )
Bssssnsaastn,49me >
issssssaasss6,09(35)
laaassasasas11/80(77)
Btaaaaccaaai17/89(112)
saaaaasaaaa :xstastnBts :9/51(64)kssasssssssd19/87(196)
aasaaaaaaas29/38(260)1
*«asaaaaau

TABLE7(contd)
I.Industrial ,handicraftII.Infrastructure III»RuralInfrastruc–IIV.Totals
kanas<jrvxceactivity ture
1975 1976 75♦76 19751
1976 !
175♦76
11975
1–1976 75♦76 1975 197675♦76I
FRANCE
■Alsace0,51(6)0,58(2)1,09(8)Im I 0,51(6)0,58(2)1,09(8)I
Aquitain* 1,51(8)1,51(3)2,82(11) 6,42(17)6,42(17)m1,51(8)7,73(20)9,24(28)I
Auvergne 0,17(4)0,15(1)0,32(5)2,18(4)12,60(2)14,78(6)0,74(1) 0,74(1)3,09(9)12,75(3)15,84(12)I
Basse-Noraandle1,38(7)0,44(3)1,82(10)0,54(2)M 0,54(2) 1,92(9)0,44(3)2,36(12)[
Burgundy 0,31(5)0,22(3)0,S3(8) 0,31(5)0,22(3)0,53(8)I
Brittany 1,13(11)1,76(9)2,89(20)9,60(8)18,96(2)28,56(10) 10,73(19)20,72(11)31,45(30)I
Champagne 0,59(4)0,09(1)0,68(5) m 0,59(4)0,09(1)0,68(5)I
Corsica M «4,69(12)1,37(8)6,06(20) 4,69(12)1,37(8)6,06(20)I
tranche-Cant *0,01(1) 0,01(1) «0,01(1) 0,01(1)I
Maute-ttoroandfa0,23(1)0,05(1)0,28(2) 0,23(1)0,05(1)0,28(2)I
Languedoc-Roussi lton0,76(9)1,26(3)2,02(12)0,56(1) •*0,56(1)0,32(1) 0,32(1)1,64(11)1,26(3)2,90(14)I
Limousin0,66(6)0,72(4)1,38(10)1,94(3)3,86(1)S,80(4)1,33(1) 1,33(1)3,93(10)4,58(5)8;-51(1S>I
Lorraine 3,09(19)5,56(19)8,65(38) «3,09(19)5,56(19)8,65(38)I
Midi-Pyrénées 1,17(9)1,58(9)2,75(18)0,72(2)0,97(7)1,69(9)1,49(3) 1,49(3)3,38(14)2,55(16)5,93(30)I
Nord-Par*de*Cat«1s 0,97(12)2,57(7)3,54(19) 0,97(12)2,57(7)3,54(19)I
PaysdelaLoire 1,74(16)2,89(12)4,63(28)1,70(3)4,17(28)5,87(31) 3,44(19)7,06(40)10,50(59)I
Picardy 0,01(1)0,42(3)0,43(4) «B 0,01(1)0,42(3)0,43(4)I
Poitou-Charente 0,25(4)1,28(6)1,53(10)« 0,25(4)1,28(6)1,53(10)I
Provence-Cftte d'AzurI0,05(2) 0,05(2) 0,05(2) 0,05(2)I
Rhone-Alpes 1,54(10)0,70(4)2,24(14) 1,54(10)0,70(4)2,24(14)I
buadeloice 0,85(19)1,70(16)2,55(35)1,22(11)0,09(2)1,31(13) m2,07(30)1,79(18)3,86(48)I
Guyane 0,12(1)0,31(3)0,43(4)0,22(1)0,23(2)0,45(3) «• 0,34(2)0,54(5)0,88(7)I
MartiniqueI0,97(8)I1,13(7)2,10(15) 1,23(12)1,23(12) 0,97(8)2,36(19)3,33(27)|
■Réunion0,75(16)0,48(7)1,23(23) -1,37(5)1,37(5) 0,75(16)I1,85(12)2,60(28)I
T0WL .18,77(179)1[25,20(123)43,97(302 )
nraesarsssas23,37(47)|
Bnmmni151,27(86 )knmsnnr74,64(133 )3,88(6)J 3,88(6)46,02(232 )
innasnan76,47(209 )122,49(441J

TABLE7(contd.)
(1)IRELAWP x
Donagal
NorthWest
West
HidWest
;SouthMatt
SouthEast
Midlands
East
NorthEaat
Multi–régional
TOTAL
ITALT
Abruzzi
Basilicata
Calabria
Caapanla
Lazio
March*.
Molla».
Puglia
Sardinia
Sioily
multi–regional
(Baslllcata-Puglla )
TOTALI*Indu
crai
actiistrial,handi-'tawl.-service
vitiesII•Infrastructure III«Ruralinfrastruc –
ture iIV«Totals
I19751976 75♦76 1975I
1976'I75♦76 1975 1976 75♦76 1975 197675♦76I
(4) (4) (11) (5) <16) (2) (2) (15) <7)(22)!
(1) (1) (2) (5) (1) (6) m (1) (1)(6) (3> <9>I
<9» (5) (14) (9) (4) (14) (9) (9) (18) (18)(37)
(S) (2) (7) (5) (11) m(12)•(7)(18)
(8) (11) (4) (7) (11) (6) (6) (12) (16)(28)I
(5) (2) (7) (3) (11) (14)(8) (13)(21)
(7) (8) (8) (10)(18) m (15) (11)(26)
(4) (3) (7) (S) (7) (10) (7) (10)(17>
(9) (9) (3) (2) (5) (12) (14)
- (2)Γ·«) - m (2)(2)
I13,23(52)Iri12,73(17)
lannsnsn25,96(69)
Bsomisua6,68(53)
SBSHsasatn16,69(54)
znasnanz23,37(107 ) m5,07(18)5,07(18)
•"TfltfWWI19,91(105 )34,49(89)54,40(194 )
i1,33(6) 1,33(6)4,18(6)m4,18(6)0,18(5)0,54(9)0,72(14)5,69(17)0,54(9)6,23(26)1
2,20(5)2,20(5) 2,61(4)2,61(4)1,66(26)2,18(29)3,84(55)1,66(26)6,99(38)8,65(64)I
1,83(4)1,83(4) m22,71(5)22,71(5)2,15(27)2,96(60)5,11(87)2,15(27)27,50(69)29,65(96)I
I16,82(25)7,36(23)24,18(48)12,64(4)28,63(12)41,27(16)0,44(13)3,2S(54)3,69(67)29,90(42)39,24(89)69,14(131)1
I19,12(7) 19,12(7)2,80(19 13,57(3)16,37(4)0,20(2)2,21(1S)2,41(17)22,12(10)15,78(18)37,90(28)I
I1,16(1) 1,16(1)0,S1(1)m 0,51(1) m1,67(2) 1,67(2)I
0,61(2)m 0,61(2)0,34(3)1,56(7)1,90(10)0,95(5)1,56(7)2,51(12)I
12,13(18) 12,13(18)14,40(3)5,14(8)19,54(11) 126-53(21)5,14(8)31,67(29)
I3,08(3) 3,08(3)10,87(6)155,28(9)66,15(15)1,30(8)1,14(4)2,44(12)I15,25(17)56,42(13)71,67(30)I
7,11(14)7,11(14)17,80(2)126,10(7)43,90(9)0,31(15)1,66(9)1,97(14)18,11(7)34,87(30)52,98(37)I
jl6,18(1)16,18(1) "H 16,18(1)16,18(1)«
53,64(60)18,50(46)IX3S»2lsnsi72,14(106 )wtssanassJ63,81(25)
Bnssssssssa170,22(49 )SKsasxsassJ234,03(74 )
«ssxsasaamsa6,58(89)15,50(187 )22,08(276 )124,03(174 )204,22(282 )328,25«S61uiaam»al
(1)AsIrelandisconsideredasasingleregion,thegroupedapplications submittedmakeitimpossibletogivearegionalbreakdown oftheaidgranted.

TABLE7(contd.)
I*Indu :
crafacti -3trial,handi–tandservicevitiesII•Infrastructure III.Ruralinfrastruc­tureIV.Totals
1975 1976 75♦76 1975,
1976 "I75♦76 1975 1976 75*76 1975 197675♦76I
LUXEMBOURG m ■0,75(1) 0,75(1)m 0,75(1) 0,75(1)(
METEERLANDStumm nuntaniH
I
Gronlnaen »3,48(2)3,95(1>7,43(3) 3.48(2)3,95(1)7,43(3»1
LiaburgM2,10(1)3,56(4)5,66(5) I2,10(1)3,56(4)5,66(5)I
FriesLand -2,49(3)2,49(5)Im I 2,49(3)2,49(3)
TOTAL L_U5,58(3)
inasassss »10,00<S >
ssasMtnsBi15,58(1ΐ >lisnaïasan [HZ 5,58(3)10,00(8)15,58(11)
UNITED KIMGMM ri
*•England 3,95(34)23,762(46 )27,712(80 )13,26(70)21,516(113 )34,776(183 )m 117,21(104 )<45,278(159 )62,488(2631
NJI.England 1,04(15)3,969(17)7,009(32)6,24(49)10,467(85 )16,707(134 )m 7,28(64)16,436(102 »23,716(1661
Torkihlr»andHuflbvraltf » 2,974(24 ).2,974(24)2,38(43)2,050(36)4,430(79) 2,38(43)5,024(60)7,404(1031
E.Midland* 0,430(8)0,430(8)0,27(8)0,504(10)0,774(18) '-0,27(8)0,934(18)1,204(26)1
$•(!•England 0,85(9)0,372(9)1,222(18)1,02(34)1,403(13)2,423(47) 1,87(43)1,775(22)3,645(65)1
Scotlaod I9,16(45)10,264(12 )19,424(57)10,24(77)122,004(90)32,244(167 )4,24(11)2,778(30)7,018(41)23,64(133 )35,046(132 )158,686(2651
Ualts 0,96(7)9,413(40)10,373(47 )13,91(115 )ho,664(77)24,574(192 ) 14,87(122 )20,077(117 )34,94*2391
Ν»ΙηΙ«4 13,36(1)4,870(25)18,230(26 )5,24(15)B1,354(38)16,594(53) 1,065(17)1,065(17)18,60(16)17,289(80 )35,889(96)I
W.Midlands j- 0,03(1)0,008(1)0,038(2) 0,03(1)0,008(1)0,0382)|
TOTAL29,32(111)^I58,054(181)87,374(292 )
IWTtllM »!52,5»(412)
mniania179,970(463)132;560(87si
uniimn )4,24(11)3,843(47)I8,083(58)86,15(534 )R41,867(691 :22QD1X1229J

TABLE8.Commitments andpaymentsbyMemberStateandbybudgetyear
COMMITMENTS PAYMENTS I
1975 1976 Total 19751976iITotal1975♦76I
)B*U•X*
IRallaa.XIm.u»a.Xii
t»U*£L*XIr - 1
Icommitted7575'committed Ia.u.a.XIA.a.a.X[commit^!
l-hftAI
Im.u.a.%m.u.a.% Ί75+76I
Belgium 4.044 16.667 110.7Î1 1 3.49232.622 26.114 26.114 2η
Denmark 3.877 16.416 110.293 11.55621.97222.011 23.983 15.539 254
.Germany 9.467 319.882 429.349 4 6.14357.205 513.348 513.348 445
France 46.006 1576.46415122.470 1516.1261815.6331313.234 828.867 1044.993 1237
Ireland 19.928 734.546 754.474 76.99685.223412.809 818.032 725.028 746
Italy–– L123.942 42204v230 42328.172 4244.296*841.1903571.675 45112.865 41157.161 4248
Luxembourg 0.750- 0.750-0.227-0.406- 0.406-0.633-84
Netherlands 5.586 210.002 215.588 22.84932.62922.819 2S.44828.297 253
UnitedKingdom 86.178 29141.915 28228.093 2818.6182143.2123645.057 2»88.269 32106-,88729I47J
Community 299.778 100500.122 100799.900 10090.668100119.900 100157.432 100277.332 100368.000 10046

66
TABLE 9.Inspection visitscarried outinIQ75andlQJfi
Country andregion Number of
Industry Infrastraoture
Belgium
-Wallonia
«-FLanders
Puglia A
Sicify J
Lazio
Campania
TOTAL8
17■>North Jutland e
-Viborg 1
–Greenland
France
–Basse Honaandie 2–Britanny _
–PaysdelaLoire 3–Lorraine 5
Germany
4•Lower –Saxony j .-Schleswig-Holstein ?
Ireland 9 14
Italy
–Sardinia 2 3
Luxembourg ^
Netherlands
-Groningen 2»Limburg .
United Kingdom
-Scotland
–Northern Region -., Q•Wales . 1 I18
9
5
32 99 131