Section 1: Overview of evaluations completed in 2011. 3

Section 2: Retrospective evaluations. 25

01 – Economic and Financial Affairs. 26

02 – Enterprise. 30

04 – Employment and social affairs. 38

05 – Agriculture and Rural Development 50

06 – Mobility and Transport 61

07 – Environment 68

08 – Research. 70

09 – Information Society and Media. 87

11 – Maritime Affairs and Fisheries. 90

12 – Internal Market 90

13 – Regional Policy. 90

14 – Taxation and Customs Union. 90

15 – Education and Culture. 90

16 – Communication. 90

17 – Health and Consumer Protection. 90

18 – Home affairs. 90

19 - External Relations. 90

20 – Trade. 90

21 – Development and Relations with African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States. 90

22 – Enlargement 90

23 – Humanitarian Aid. 90

26 – Commission's administration. 90

29 – Statistics. 90

32 – Energy. 90

33 – Justice. 90

Section 3: Prospective evaluations. 90

04 – Employment and social affairs. 90

08 – Research. 90

11 – Maritime Affairs and Fisheries. 90

16 – Communication. 90

20 – Trade. 90

22 – Enlargement 90

32 – Energy. 90

Section 4: References to reporting on performance in the Activity Statements (AS) to the Draft Budget 2013. 90

Section 1: Overview of evaluations completed in 2011

This overview lists the titles of the available evaluations in order of Activity Based Budgeting Activity within each Policy Area.

The different types of studies are indicated as follows: retrospective evaluations are in plain script, prospective evaluations are indicated by italic script and evaluation-related studies are flagged by an asterisk.

Of all evaluations, 62% concerned expenditure programmes; 14% covered regulatory activities, linked to regulations, directives, regulatory policy communications and 'soft law'; 13% concerned communication, information and coordination activities; 3% internal administrative processes of the EU Institutions with the remaining 8% in other categories.

01 – Economic and Financial Affairs

ABB-activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

01 02 || Economic and monetary union || Evaluation of the Joint Harmonised EU Programme of Business and Consumer Surveys

01 03 || International economic and financial affairs ||

01 04 || Financial operations and instruments || Ex-post evaluation of the Euratom Loan Facility

02 – Enterprise

ABB-activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

02 02 || Competitiveness, industrial policy, innovation and entrepreneurship || Final Evaluation of the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme Final evaluation of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme Evaluation of the Executive Agency for Competitiveness and Innovation (EACI) Final Evaluation of the Lead Market Initiative Interim evaluation of Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs

02 03 || Internal market for goods and sectoral policies || Evaluation of the Directive 2009/142/EC on appliances burning gaseous fuels Ex-Post Evaluation on Enhancing the Implementation of the Internal Market Legislation Relating to Motor Vehicles

02 04 || Cooperation — Space and security ||

02 05 || European satellite navigation programmes (EGNOS and Galileo) ||

03 – Competition

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

03 03 || Cartels, anti-trust and liberalisation ||

03 AWBL-03 || Control of State aid ||

03 AWBL-04 || Merger control ||

04 – Employment and social affairs

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

04 02 || European Social Fund || · Evaluation of ESF support to gender equality · Evaluation of ESF Support for Enhancing Access to the Labour Market and the Social Inclusion of Migrants and Ethnic Minorities · Evaluation of the capacity of the ESF delivery systems to attract and support OP target groups

04 03 || Working in Europe - Social dialogue and mobility ||

04 04 || Employment, social solidarity and gender equality || · Assessing the effectiveness and the impact of the Social OMC in preparation of the new cycle · European Year 2010 for combating poverty and social exclusion- Ex-post evaluation · Support for carrying out ex-ante evaluation for the new PROGRESS Programme post-2013* · Impact of enlargement and the functioning of transitional arrangements on labour mobility within the EU*

04 05 || European Globalisation Adjustment Fund (EGF) ||

04 06 || Instrument for Preaccession (IPA) - Human resources development ||

05 – Agriculture and Rural Development

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

05 02 || Interventions in agricultural markets || · Evaluation of income effects of direct support (also covered by 05 03) · Evaluation of CAP measures applied to the sugar sector (also covered by 05 03) · Evaluation of CAP measures applied to the dairy sector (also covered by 05 03) · Evaluation of CAP measures applied to the sheep and goat sector (also covered by 05 03) · Evaluation of promotion and information actions for products · Evaluation of the exceptional market support measures in the poultry and egg sector

05 03 || Direct aids ||

05 04 || Rural development ||

05 05 || Pre-accession measures in the field of agriculture and rural development ||

05 06 || International aspects of "Agriculture and rural development" policy area ||

05 07 || Audit of agricultural expenditure ||

05 08 || Policy strategy and coordination of "Agriculture and Rural Development" policy area ||

06 – Mobility and Transport

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

06 02 || Inland, air and maritime transport || Evaluation of Regulation 881/2004 establishing the European Railway Agency Evaluation of the Marco Polo Programme Ex post evaluation on EU Passenger Ship Safety Legislation

06 03 || Trans-European networks || Mid-term evaluation of TEN-T programme

06 06 || Research related to transport ||

07 – Environment

ABB Activity || evaluation projects

n° || Heading

07 02 || Global environmental and Climate Action affairs ||

07 03 || Development and implementation of Union environmental policy and legislation || Mid-term Evaluation of the Sustainable Consumption and Production and Sustainable Industrial Policy Action Plan

07 12 || Implementation of Union policy and legislation on climate action ||

07 13 || Climate mainstreaming and innovation ||

08 – Research

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

08 02 || Cooperation — Health || · Interim Evaluation of the Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking

08 03 || Cooperation — Food, agriculture and fisheries, and biotechnology || · Meta-analysis of "Bio-Technology", "Agriculture", "Food", "Marine and Maritime", and Horizontal themes

08 04 || Cooperation — Nanosciences, nanotechnologies, materials and new production technologies || · Interim Assessment of the Research Public Private Partnerships in the European Economic Recovery Plan: Energy-efficient Buildings, Factories of the Future, and European Green Cars Initiative

08 05 || Cooperation — Energy || · First Interim Evaluation of the Fuel Cells and Hydrogen Joint Undertaking (FCH JU)

08 06 || Cooperation — Environment (including climate change) || · Stock-Taking of Results and Impacts of EU-Funded Environmental Research* · State of the Art and Forward-Looking Analysis of Environmental Research and Innovation*

08 07 || Cooperation — Transport (including aeronautics) || · Interim Evaluation of EU FP7 Transport Research, notably within Theme 7 of the Cooperation Programme "Transport (including Aeronautics)"

08 08 || Cooperation — Socioeconomic sciences and the humanities ||

08 09 || Cooperation — Risk-sharing finance facility (RSFF) ||

08 10 || Ideas ||

08 12 || Capacities — Research infrastructures ||

08 13 || Capacities — Research for the benefit of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) ||

08 14 || Capacities — Regions of knowledge || · Impact Assessment of the Regions of Knowledge Programme

08 15 || Capacities — Research potential || · Impact Assessment of the Research Potential Programme

08 16 || Capacities — Science in society ||

08 17 || Capacities — International cooperation activities ||

08 18 || Capacities — Risk-sharing finance facility (RSFF) ||

08 19 || Capacities — Support for coherent development of research policies ||

08 20 || Euratom — Fusion energy || · Fusion Energy – State of Development and Future Role*

08 21 || Euratom — Nuclear fission and radiation protection ||

08 22 || Completion of previous framework programmes and other activities || · Ex Post Evaluation of NMP FP6 - Project Level

08 23 || Research programme of the research fund for coal and steel ||

08 AWBL 02 || Policy strategy and coordination || · Assessing the Effectiveness of Simplification Measures under FP7* · Long-Term Impact of the Framework Programmes* · Review of S&T Cooperation between the European Union and the Republic of Argentina (2006-2010)* · Review of S&T Cooperation between the European Union and the Republic of Chile (2007-2011)*

09 – Information Society and Media

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

09 02 || Regulatory framework for the Digital Agenda || · Safer Internet Evaluation

09 03 || Information and communication technologies take-up || · CIP ICT PSP Final (Second Interim) Evaluation · eContent Plus Final Evaluation

09 04 || Cooperation - Information and communication technologies (ICTs) ||

09 05 || Capacities — Research infrastructures ||

10 – Direct Research

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

10 02 || Directly financed research operational appropriations — Seventh framework programme (2007 to 2013) — EU ||

10 03 || Directly financed research operational appropriations — Seventh framework programme (2007 to 2011 and 2012 to 2013) — Euratom ||

10 04 || Completion of previous framework programmes and other activities ||

10 05 || Historical liabilities resulting from nuclear activities carried out by the Joint Research Centre pursuant to the Euratom Treaty ||

11 – Maritime Affairs and Fisheries

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

11 02 || Fisheries markets ||

11 03 || International fisheries and law of the sea || · Mission d’évaluation à mi-parcours du Plan Régional de Surveillance des Pêches dans le Sud-Ouest de l’Océan Indien · An ex-post evaluation of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) between the European Union and Madagascar (2007-2012) · An ex-post evaluation of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) between the European Union and Cape Verde (2007-2011) · An ex-post evaluation of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) between the European Union and Guinea Bissau (2007-2011) · An ex-ante evaluation for the conclusion of a new Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) and Protocol between the European Union and Mauritius · An ex-post evaluation of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) between the European Union and Mauritania, and an ex-ante evaluation and analysis of impacts of a potential future Protocol on sustainability · An ex-post evaluation of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) between the European Union and Gabon, and an ex-ante evaluation and analysis of impacts of a potential future Protocol on sustainability · An ex-post evaluation of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) between the European Union and Mozambique (2007-2011) · An ex-post evaluation of the current Protocol to the Fisheries Partnership Agreement (FPA) between the European Union and Greenland

11 04 || Governance of the Common Fisheries Policy || · Interim evaluation of DG MARE external communication activities

11 06 || European Fisheries Fund (EFF) || · Interim evaluation (study) of the European Fisheries Fund (2007-2013) · Interim evaluation of the European Fisheries Fund (2007-2013) (Synthesis of the 26 national evaluation reports)

11 07 || Conservation, management and exploitation of living aquatic resources ||

11 08 || Control and enforcement of the Common Fisheries Policy ||

11 09 || Maritime policy ||

12 – Internal Market

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

12 02 || Single Market Policy || · Evaluation of the Professional Qualifications Directive · Impact and Effectiveness of EU Public Procurement Legislation

12 04 || Free movement of capital, company law and corporate governance ||

13 – Regional Policy

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

13 03 || European Regional Development Fund and other regional operations || · Enterprise support: support to SMEs and large enterprises in Italy, including a comparison of grants and other financial instruments* · Data-Linking and Impact Evaluation in Northern Ireland* · Study on the contribution of local development in delivering interventions co-financed by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) in the periods 2000-06 and 2007-13*

13 04 || Cohesion Fund || · Policy analysis on the performance of cohesion policy 2007 – 2013 Task 1: Policy Paper on Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency of Residential Housing Task 2: Country reports on achievements of cohesion policy · Counterfactual impact evaluation of cohesion policy Work package 2: Examples from Support to Innovation and Research · Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy interventions 2000-2006 financed by the Cohesion Fund Work Package B: Cost-benefit analysis of selected transport projects · Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy interventions 2000-2006 financed by the Cohesion Fund (including former ISPA) Work Package C – Cost benefit analysis of environment projects · Ex post evaluation of cohesion policy interventions 2000-2006 financed by the Cohesion Fund (including former ISPA) Work Package D – Management and Implementation · Study on the relevance and effectiveness of ERDF and Cohesion Fund support to regions with specific geographical features – islands, mountainous and sparsely populated areas*

13 05 || Pre-accession operations related to the structural policies ||

13 06 || Solidarity Fund ||

14 – Taxation and Customs Union

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

14 02 || Policy strategy and coordination for the Directorate-General for Taxation and Customs Union ||

14 03 || International aspects of taxation and customs ||

14 04 || Customs policy || · Mid-term Evaluation of Customs 2013

14 05 || Taxation policy || · Mid-term Evaluation of Fiscalis 2013 · A retrospective evaluation of the elements of the VAT system

15 – Education and Culture

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

15 02 || Lifelong learning, including multilingualism || · External Evaluation of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology · Interim Evaluation of External Cooperation Agreements in Higher Education, Training and Youth with the US and Canada · Interim Evaluation of the Lifelong Learning Programme (LLP) 2007-2013

15 04 || Developing cultural and audiovisual cooperation in Europe || · Ex-post evaluation of 2010 European Capitals of Culture and Interim evaluation of selection and monitoring procedures of ECOC 2010-2016

15 05 || Encouraging and promoting cooperation in the field of youth and sports || · Evaluation of Preparatory Actions and special events in the field of sport · Youth in Action – Interim evaluation

15 07 || People — Programme for the mobility of researchers ||

16 – Communication

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

16 02 || Communication and the media || · Interim evaluation of Euranet – The European Radio Network

16 03 || "Going Local" communication || · Evaluation of the Management Partnership’s Actions within the scope of the 2008-2010 Communication Plans in Portugal · Ex-post Evaluation of the Management Partnership concluded between the Republic of Austria and the European Commission for the period of 2008-2010

16 04 || Analysis and communication tools ||

16 05 || Fostering European citizenship || · Ex-Ante Evaluation of the European Year of Citizens 2013

17 – Health and Consumer Protection

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

17 02 || Consumer policy || · Evaluation of the European Consumer Centres' Network (ECC-Net) · Evaluation of Consumer Education, Information and Capacity building actions

17 03 || Public health || · 1st interim evaluation of the Public Health Executive Agency (Executive Agency) (EAHC since July 2008) · Ex-post evaluation of the Public Health Programme (PHP) 2003-2008 · Mid-Term Evaluation of the EU Health Strategy 2008-2013 · Mid-Term Evaluation of the Health Programme (2008-2013)

17 04 || Food and feed safety, animal health, animal welfare and plant health || · Evaluation of the EU policy on animal welfare (EUPAW) · Evaluation of the EU-Reference Laboratories in the field of food and feed safety and animal health and live animals · Evaluation of the Community Plant Variety Right Acquis · Evaluation of the EU legislative framework in the field of cultivation of GMOs under Directive 2001/18/EC and Regulation (EC) No 1829/2003, and the placing on the market of GMOs as or in products under Directive 2001/18/EC

18 – Home affairs

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

18 02 || Solidarity — External borders, return, visa policy and free movement of people || · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of Directive 2003/109/EC concerning the status of third-country nationals who are long-term residents* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the application of Directive 2005/71/EC on a specific procedure for admitting third country nationals for the purposes of scientific research* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the Application of Directive 2004/114/EC on the conditions of admission of third country nationals for the purposes of studies, pupil exchange, unremunerated training or voluntary service* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the results achieved and on the quantitative and qualitative aspects of implementation of the European Return Fund for the period 2008-2009 (report submitted in accordance with Article 50(3)(b) of Council Decision 575/2007/EV of 23 May 2007)* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, The European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the results achieved and on the quantitative and qualitative aspects of implementation of the External Borders Fund for the period 2007-2009 (report submitted in accordance with Article 52(3)(b) of Council Decision 574/2007/EV of 23 May 2007)*

18 03 || Migration flows - Common immigration and asylum policies || · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on the results achieved and on qualitative and quantitative aspects of implementation of the European Refugee Fund for the period 2005-2007 (COM(2011)2)* · External Evaluation of the European Migration Network

18 05 || Security and safeguarding liberties || · Mid-term evaluation of the Framework Programme “Security and Safeguarding Liberties (2007-2013) (SSL)”

18 08 || Policy strategy and coordination ||

19 – External Relations

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

19 02 || Cooperation with third countries in the area of migration and asylum ||

19 03 || Common foreign and security policy (CFSP) ||

19 04 || European Instrument for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) ||

19 05 || Relations and cooperation with industrialised third countries ||

19 06 || Crisis response and global threats to security || · Evaluation of the crisis response and preparedness components of the European Union’s Instrument for Stability (IfS)

19 08 || European Neighbourhood Policy and relations with Russia || · Evaluation des opérations d'aide budgétaire de la Commission Européenne à la Tunisie entre 1996 et 2008 · Evaluation de la coopération de l'UE avec la Tunisie de 1995 à 2008

19 09 || Relations with Latin America ||

19 10 || Relations with Asia, Central Asia and Middle East (Iraq, Iran, Yemen) || · Evaluation of the European Commission's co-operation with the Philippines

19 11 || Policy strategy and coordination for ‘External relations’ policy area || · Evaluation of the European Commission's co-operation with overseas countries and territories · Thematic evaluation of European Commission support to conflict prevention and peace building (CPPB) · Thematic evaluation of the EC Support in Employment and Social Inclusion sectors in partner countries 1999-2009 · Thematic evaluation of the European Commission support to Justice and Security System Reform (JSSR) · Study on legal instrument and lessons learned from the evaluations managed by the joint evaluation unit

20 – Trade

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

20 02 || Trade policy || · Evaluation of the Commission's Market Access Database (MADB) · Trade SIA relating to the negotiation of a comprehensive economic and trade agreement between the EU and Canada

21 – Development and Relations with African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

21 02 || Food security ||

21 03 || Non-State actors in development ||

21 04 || Environment and sustainable management of natural resources, including energy ||

21 05 || Human and social development ||

21 06 || Geographical cooperation with African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) States || · Evaluation of the European Commission's co-operation with the Dominican Republic · Evaluation of the European Commission's co-operation with the Republic of Malawi · Evaluation conjointe des opérations d'aide budgétaire au Mali entre 2003 et 2009

21 07 || Development cooperation actions and ad hoc programmes ||

21 08 || Policy strategy and coordination for "Development and relations with ACP States" policy area ||

22 – Enlargement

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

22 02 || Enlargement process and strategy || · Interim Evaluation of Cross-Border Programmes between Candidate/Potential Candidate Countries (Intra-Western Balkan Borders) under the Cross-Border Cooperation Component of IPA; Report II – Performance of assistance · Retrospective evaluation of EU pre-accession assistance to CBC programmes in Bulgaria and Romania · Thematic evaluation of EU's support to civil society in the Western Balkans and Turkey · Thematic Evaluation of IPA-Funded Information and Communication Activities · Thematic evaluation of EU pre-accession multi-beneficiary assistance to Western Balkans and Turkey in the fields of environment and disaster risk reduction · Review of Twinning in Turkey* · Evaluation of Twinning versus Technical Assistance

22 AWBL-03 || Enlargement pre-accession negotiations || · Strategic/Interim Evaluation of EU IPA Pre-Accession Assistance to Albania · (Ex-ante) Evaluation to support the preparation of pre-accession financial instruments beyond 2013 · Strategic/Interim Evaluation of EU IPA Pre-Accession Assistance to Kosovo* (under UNSCR 1244/1999) · Strategic/Interim evaluation of IPA pre-accession assistance to Serbia · Evaluation on stakeholder participation in programming and implementation of pre-accession assistance to Turkey

23 – Humanitarian Aid

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

23 02 || Humanitarian aid including aid to uprooted people, food aid and disaster preparedness || · Evaluation and Strategy Orientation of DG ECHO-Funded Health Sector Activities in Burmese Refugee Camps in Thailand (2004-2009) · Evaluation of DG ECHO's Actions in the Water Sanitation/Public Health Sector in Zimbabwe · Evaluation of the DG ECHO action in Uganda · Real-time evaluation of humanitarian action supported by DG ECHO in Haiti 2009-2011

23 03 || Civil Protection Financial Instrument || · Commission evaluation of the Civil Protection Mechanism and the CP Financial Instrument 2007-2009

26 – Commission's administration

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

26 01 || Administrative expenditure of ‘Commission’s administration’ policy area || · Evaluation of internal communication and staff engagement strategy of the European Commission

26 02 || Multimedia production || · Ex-ante evaluation of the contract "Processing of public procurement notices for publication in the Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, hereafter OJ S"* · Ex-ante evaluation of the contract "Performance of publication services"*

26 03 || Services to public administrations, businesses and citizens ||

26 AWBL -27 || Policy strategy and coordination for 'Personnel and Administration' Directorate-General ||

29 – Statistics

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

29 02 || Production of statistical information || · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the quality of fiscal data reported by Member States in 2010* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of Regulation (EC) No 450/2003 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the labour cost index (LCI)* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of Decision (EC) No 1297/2008/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2008 on a Programme for the Modernisation of European Enterprise and Trade Statistics (MEETS)* · Rolling review of the Education Statistics* · Rolling review of the Information Society (IS) Statistics* · Rolling Review on Inland Waterways Transport Statistics* · Rolling Review - Labour Force Survey Statistics* · Rolling Review - Maritime Transport Statistics* · Rolling Review - EU National Accounts* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of Decision No 1608/2003/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on science and technology statistics* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council concerning short-term statistics as required by Council Regulation (EC) No 1165/1998 of 19 May 1998* · Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council on the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 58/97 and of the Regulation (EC) No 295/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning structural business statistics (recast) which repealed and replaced Regulation No 58/97*

31 – Language Services

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

31 AWBL -02 || Interpreting and linked activities ||

31 AWBL -03 || Logistic assistance for Commission events (LACE) ||

31 AWBL -04 || Conference organisation and advice ||

31 AWBL- 11 || Translations ||

32 – Energy

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

32 03 || Trans-European networks ||

32 04 || Conventional and renewable energies || · Mid-term evaluation on the European Energy Programme for Recovery (EERP) · Mid–term evaluation on horizontal issues concerning energy savings in the EU · Report of the Mid-term Evaluation on the Background study for energy supply side efficiency framework · Report on the final evaluation of the Intelligent Energy Europe II · Report on Ex-ante Evaluation/impact assessment of a possible successor to the intelligent Energy II Programme

32 05 || Nuclear energy || · Ex-Ante Evaluation preparing a Euratom Council Regulation on Union support for the nuclear decommissioning assistance programmes in Bulgaria, Lithuania and Slovakia

32 06 || Research related to energy ||

33 – Justice

ABB Activity || Title of Evaluation

n° || Heading

33 02 || Fundamental rights and citizenship || · Report on the interim evaluation of the "DAPHNE III Programme 2007-2013" · Report on the interim evaluation of the "Fundamental Rights and Citizenship Programme 2007-2013" · Evaluation of the impact of the EU instruments affecting children’s rights with a view to assessing the level of protection and promotion of children’s rights in the EU · Communication from the COM to the EP and the Council Consular Protection for EU citizens in third countries: state of play and way forward*

33 03 || Justice in criminal and civil matters || · Report from the COM to the EP and the Council on the implementation since 2007 of the Council Framework decision of 13 June 2002 on the European arrest warrant and the surrender procedures between Member States (COM(2011) 175 final)* · Report on the interim evaluation of the specific Programme "CIVIL Justice"; (JCIV) 2007-2013 · Interim evaluation report on the Criminal Justice Programme

33 04 || Drugs prevention and information || · Study for an external, independent assessment of the European Action on Drugs* · Report from the COM on the functioning of Council Decision 2005/387/JHA on the information exchange, risk assessment and control of new psychoactive substances (COM(2011) 430 final)* · Report on the interim evaluation of the specific Programme "Drug prevention and information"; (DPIP) 2007-2013

33 05 || Policy strategy and coordination ||

33 06 || Equality || · The Mid-term Evaluation of PROGRESS - Final Report

Section 2: Retrospective evaluations

This section provides fact sheets for 118 retrospective evaluations (i.e. interim and ex post evaluations) and 39 evaluation-related studies (e.g. focusing on monitoring or implementation), with information on their findings and conclusions.

01 – Economic and Financial Affairs

Evaluation of the Joint Harmonised EU Programme of Business and Consumer Surveys

ABB activities: || 01 02 Economic and monetary union

Timing: || 27/02/2012

Background, scope and focus

ECFIN’s business and consumer surveys summarise the attitudes and judgement of a large number of business managers and consumers, with harmonised and comparable results being published on a monthly basis The emphasis of this evaluation is on improving the functioning of the BCS with a view to better meeting users' needs and to raising the efficiency of DG ECFIN's management of the Programme. The evaluation concerns the implementation and use of the BCS in the Member States. The main evaluation issues to be covered in the exercise are the effectiveness, efficiency and utility of the instrument. In particular, the exercise should include an analysis of user needs and their appreciation of the surveys.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The main findings and conclusions of this evaluation are as follows: Meeting users’ needs and expectations Overall, the BCS Programme is well aligned with users’ needs and expectations. However, there are some issues requiring attention. These are as follows: Relevance: the programme is not considered relevant by users who are specifically interested in data for Ireland (due to lack of data for the period 2008 to 2011). The relevance of some components of the programme is greatly reduced by their limited sectoral coverage (Flash Indicator is only available for the consumer sector) or non-availability of country level data (Flash Indicator and the Financial Services Survey). Timeliness: a number of users expressed frustration that the BCS data are released later than the Flash PMI and the national surveys (in some cases). Comparability: the two main concerns expressed by the users are (a) a relatively short time series for the Services and the Financial Services survey; and, (b) non-homogeneity of approach across partner institutes e.g. the reference period for the questions being different across countries (six months instead of three months). Methodology: some methodological approaches were criticised by the users notably, the use of DAINTES for seasonal adjustment; the practice of assigning equal weights to all questions in the construction of indices; and the phrasing of survey questions which in their present form, seek to elicit information regarding intended behaviour as opposed to the actual behaviour of economic agents. Interpretability: users have expressed demands for more guidance on how to interpret survey questions as well as survey answers. Transparency: BCS surveys are quite transparent in terms of the information available on DG ECFIN’s website notably, comprehensive metadata by sector and country; a methodological user guide; press releases; list of partner institutes; and, contact details. However, users are often not aware of the existence of this information and, in some cases, have requested for further information. Accessibility: a number of external users and even some internal users consider that the visibility and accessibility of the survey products could be greatly improved. Some users expressed a preference for data to be made available in alternative formats (.CSV or access database). Frequency: some users would like the European Business Cycle Indicators (EBCI) and Investment Survey to be produced on a monthly basis, and the question on capacity utilisation to be asked on a monthly basis New needs arising from the financial and economic crisis The financial and economic crisis has reinforced the importance of early warning signals. Due to greater economic uncertainty and instability, there is a greater urgency to access data in a timely manner. For many users, the crisis has shifted emphasis from EU or Euro-area level to a country level analysis. Assessment of EU added value of the programme The main added value of the programme is that it generates harmonized data which enables cross-country comparisons and the construction of EU/ Euro-area indicators. Furthermore, the programme promotes capacity building and knowledge sharing among partner institutes. Comparison with alternative survey products notably, the PMI The relative strengths of BCS products as compared to the PMI are: its wider sectoral and geographical coverage; availability of data for sub-sectors; longer time series; larger sample sizes; and, methodological transparency. The scope for cost savings The evaluation did not find any compelling reasons for discontinuing survey products that are less used. On the other hand, there is a case to be made for improving the usability of the surveys that are relatively less used by improving their visibility, expanding their coverage and/or improving the survey questionnaires.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/evaluation/completed/index_en.htm

Ex-post evaluation of the Euratom Loan Facility

ABB activities: || 01 04 Financial operations and instruments

Timing: || 13/06/2011

Background, scope and focus

The Facility was created by Council Decision 77/270/Euratom of 29 March 1977 and Council Decision 94/179/Euratom of 21 March 1994 extended the Facility to some non-member countries. Considering the current policy context of the drive to develop low carbon technologies, the fight against climate change and the EU2020 targets, it is considered opportune to evaluate whether the scope, objectives and the limits fixed by the current Council Decisions remain appropriate and effective. The scope of the evaluation concerns mainly: The relevance and EU added value of the Facility; The functioning of the Facility; The assessment of the parameters of the Facility; The main criteria for the evaluation of the Facility are the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and coherence of the instrument so as to fulfil its legal and institutional mandate.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The main findings and conclusions of the evaluation are as follows: – The underlying intervention logic of the Euratom Loan Facility remains valid in the context of the EU’s increasing dependence on energy imports; high and volatile oil prices; projected growth in electricity consumption within the EU; and, the need to cut greenhouse gas emissions to mitigate the impact of climate change. – The overall objectives of the Euratom Loan Facility are strongly aligned with the EU’s policy objectives relating to secure and affordable energy supply; climate change; job creation and economic growth; and, promotion of nuclear safety and security in third countries. – The Euratom Loan Facility has promoted and accelerated the development of the EU’s nuclear energy sector through direct financing of economically viable and environment friendly projects. It is estimated that Euratom loans co-financed 21 per cent of the total investment in new builds in the EU over the period 1977 to 2003. – By enabling investment in the nuclear sector, the Euratom Loan Facility has contributed to the decarbonisation and diversification of the EU’s sources of energy supply. – A majority of the plants co-financed by Euratom loans are still in operation, generating 114,142 GWh of low carbon electricity annually (representing circa 6 per cent of the EU’s gross electricity generation and 12 per cent of nuclear electricity generation). In the absence of this indigenous production capacity, the EU would be importing an additional 10Mtoe of energy on an annual basis. Secondary benefits of the Facility include the creation of 6,000 highly skilled jobs at the plants under operation plus jobs and output creation in the wider economy through backward and forward linkages. – The expansion of the geographic scope of the Euratom Facility in 1994 to CEEC and CIS was relevant and appropriate. Loans approved under the 1994 Decision directly contributed to safety enhancements and promoted greater transparency of nuclear operations in Bulgaria, Romania and Ukraine. Safety improvements financed by Euratom loans have helped bring the nuclear installations in these countries in line with internationally recognised nuclear safety principles and standards. Euratom lending was also crucial in achieving wider reform in these countries such as the creation and funding of decommissioning funds; reform of electricity tariffs; and, increase in the scale of nuclear insurance. – The Facility has an important ‘signalling’ effect i.e. an EU endorsement of the project which provides a positive message to the market, Governments and the public about the project’s economic and technological viability; and, a ‘catalytic’ effect i.e. Euratom lending helps leverage financing from other sources. – The Euratom Loan Facility provides loans on attractive terms to borrowers. The European Commission operates on a non-profit basis and passes on the benefits of its AAA/Aaa rating to its borrowers. The difference between the cost of capital raised on the market and the cost of the Euratom loan represents the financial added value of the Facility in the case of each project. – As regards the financing needs of the nuclear sector, the evaluation identifies a financing gap for new builds and large scale infrastructure for demonstration of next generation technologies. Additional, exceptional financing needs (as yet hard to quantify) might also arise from safety improvements/ upgrades required as a result of the EU ‘stress tests’. – The amount available for new loans within the current ceiling is EUR 626 million. The present resources and borrowing ceilings for the Facility would not be adequate to meet the expected future demand for loans. – The financial management and implementation arrangements for the Euratom Loan Facility have worked extremely well and there is evidence of them being effective: all loans within the EU have been fully repaid; there has been no recourse to the EU budget guarantee during the lifetime of the Facility; and, the Euratom Loan Facility has delivered its stated objectives. – However, some operational aspects of the Facility could be improved. There is scope to enhance the visibility of the Facility and the processes relating to the procurement of external expertise could be streamlined.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/evaluation/completed/index_en.htm#loan_facility

02 – Enterprise

Final Evaluation of the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme

ABB activities: || 02 02 Competitiveness, industrial policy, innovation and entrepreneurship

Timing: || December 2011

Background, scope and focus

The Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) aims to foster the competitiveness of enterprises, in particular of SMEs; to promote innovation, including eco-innovation; to develop a sustainable, competitive, innovative and inclusive information society and to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy. The CIP was established by Decision No 1639/2006/EC which included specific provisions relating to the evaluation of the Programme. The final evaluation of the CIP provided an overall assessment of the CIP by analysing the existing evaluations of each of the three component programmes (EIP, ICT-PSP and IEE), with a special emphasis on tracing cross-cutting issues and themes.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The evaluation concludes that the framework programme as a whole and its specific programmes individually are all performing well, in line with expectations at the launch of the programme. The CIP has become a major vehicle for promoting innovation. Innovation in this case is viewed as a relatively open process going beyond the simple focus on technological development. It is a broader activity that encompasses developments in the service sector as much as in manufacturing and relates to processes and business models as much as products, which in turn makes a major contribution to the competitiveness of the European economy. The evaluation reports that major measures such as Financial Instruments, Enterprise Europe Network, innovation and eco-innovation are on track to achieve the targets set. The evaluation also draws attention to small budget items which are far from negligible in their effects. For example, the action programme for reducing administrative burdens and its follow-on measures are estimated to be delivering savings for enterprises valued at over €40 billion. The evaluation concludes that the current economic and financial crisis has underlined the significance of many of the issues that the CIP was designed to address, while the urgency of measures to meet the 2020 climate targets continues to increase. The utility of the CIP is thus higher than ever, especially since, notwithstanding the scope for further improvements, the effectiveness of the instruments used has increased over time. The results of the evaluation were presented to the CIP joint committee meeting as well as at the expert workshop on the effectiveness of the CIP which was organised by the Policy Department of the European Parliament.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/dg/files/evaluation/cip_final_report_cses_300112_en.pdf

Final evaluation of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme

ABB activities: || 02 02 Competitiveness, industrial policy, innovation and entrepreneurship

Timing: || April 2011

Background, scope and focus

The Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme (EIP) aims to support entrepreneurship and innovation and to promote the development and growth of SMEs across the EU. The programme (2007-2013) was established as one of the three ‘pillars’ of the CIP by Decision No 1639/2006/EC which included specific provisions relating to the evaluation of the Programme. The final evaluation of the Programme was designed to address the relevance, coherence and synergies, effectiveness, efficiency, sustainability, and utility of the EIP, and where possible the distribution of funding with regard to sectors.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The final evaluation of the EIP concluded that the programme is on track to achieve the anticipated impacts. It is effectively benefitting end-users, in particular SMEs, and its major strength is that it is able to concentrate on core issues for SMEs in a direct and practical way. The measures under the EIP, notably the financial instruments and eco-innovation, have effectively created conditions for real replication in the market. The eco-innovation first application and market replication funding scheme is successfully addressing an important market failure in the implementation of new ideas and approaches in products and services that benefit the environment. Innovation actions, with their focus on clusters, innovation in services and eco-innovation, are regarded as successful and appropriate, especially by those who have participated in them. The actions have been characterised by easier procedures and shorter time to contract than comparable award and management processes in the research and development area. The Enterprise Europe Network is a major policy asset for the EU’s relationship with enterprises. It has considerable further potential in terms of the engagement of SMEs, with its integration into the business support system across Europe, and the strength of the personal links between its members. Financial Instruments are achieving their objectives of facilitating access to finance for the start-up and growth of SMEs. The GIF facility and SMEG loan and micro credit windows are relevant to the needs of European SMEs; they fulfil a demand for finance which otherwise would not have been met. The findings and recommendations of this evaluation have guided the preparation of the follow-up programmes, COSME and Horizon 2020.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/dg/files/evaluation/110426_final_report_en.pdf

Evaluation of the Executive Agency for Competitiveness and Innovation (EACI)

ABB activities: || 02 02 Competitiveness, industrial policy, innovation and entrepreneurship

Timing: || May 2011

Background, scope and focus

Art. 25 under Council Regulation (EC) No 58/2003 requires an external evaluation of executive agencies on a three year basis. This evaluation covers the second three years of operation of EACI, between 1 July 2008 and 31 December 2010 focusing on the implementation of the Intelligent Energy Europe Programmes (IEE I and IEE II) as well as part of the Entrepreneurship and Innovation Programme (EIP) in particular the Enterprise Europe Network, Eco-innovation and IPeuropeAware initiative and Marco Polo I and II programmes. The purpose of this evaluation was to examine how the EACI has handled specific project management tasks (project application and award procedures, monitoring, financial aspects, etc.).

Summary of findings and conclusions

The evaluation confirmed that, overall, the EACI is performing well and is an efficient and effective delivery mechanism for the initiatives for which it has operational responsibility. The main recommendations addressed improvements needed to the EACI staff retention rate; the short average period of staff remaining at the Agency and the relatively high costs arising from the staff turnover rate, should be avoided in order to increase operational effectiveness. It may be necessary to tackle this issue jointly with other Executive Agencies as it could involve changes in current regulations. The evaluation also recommended further IT improvements throughout the Agency’s systems to enhance its performance. This was judged as particularly necessary in the case of the Enterprise Europe Network where an effective, reliable IT backbone for delivery of services and support for administrative functions is needed. Finally, the evaluation called for further development of the operational indicators used by the EACI: in order to provide on-going updates and feedback on the effectiveness of programmes and initiatives, the EACI should develop operational indicators, in collaboration with parent DGs, rather than doing so at longer intervals of 2-3 years.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/dg/files/evaluation/110512__evaluation_eaci_en.pdf

Final Evaluation of the Lead Market Initiative

ABB activities: || 02 02 Competitiveness, industrial policy, innovation and entrepreneurship

Timing: || July 2011

Background, scope and focus

The Lead Market Initiative (LMI) aims to promote greater innovation in Europe and is now a central feature of Europe 2020. It promotes the development of 6 specific lead markets: bio-based products, eHealth, protective textiles, sustainable construction, recycling and renewable energies (corresponding action plans operational for 3-5 years). The Commission Communication that launched LMI envisaged that a final evaluation report on the first cycle of the LMI would be presented in 2011. The purpose of this evaluation is to prepare the report.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The evaluation report of the first cycle of the LMI concludes that the major strength of the initiative was targeting interrelated policy areas for promising markets that would not be picked up by other policy frameworks. LMI has promoted the use of demand-side policy tools (e.g. public procurement, standardisation, regulation and complementary actions) as an important new element in innovation policy. The six markets initially chosen as targets continue to show a marked potential for further growth. In four sectors (i.e. bio-based products, e-Health, protective textiles, and sustainable construction) the LMI has showed clearly that co-ordinated demand–side initiatives at European level are valuable instruments for promoting market uptake of innovative products. It is important that there should be follow-up to the results achieved under the Action Plans. In particular the full impact of the work of the procurement networks will only be felt if there is effective dissemination and take-up of the initial results.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/dg/files/evaluation/final-eval-lmi_en.pdf

Interim evaluation of Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs

ABB activities: || 02 02 Competitiveness, industrial policy, innovation and entrepreneurship

Timing: || May 2011

Background, scope and focus

Under Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs, new entrepreneurs can acquire the skills necessary to manage an enterprise by working with an experienced entrepreneur in another EU member State for between 1 to 6 months. The rational for the Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs is provided by the Small Business Act for Europe. The objective of the interim evaluation of Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs was to evaluate the relevance, effectiveness and efficiency of the actions implemented in the framework of the Pilot Project and the Preparatory Action.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The evaluation showed that there is a strong rationale for the Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs scheme. There is positive feedback from new entrepreneurs on the contribution of stays to their business ideas. The mobility scheme is likely to increase the quality of start-ups, SME innovation as well as the SMEs’ internationalisation. The research suggests it has the potential to help create a significant number of jobs if it is expanded. Some shortcomings (e.g. a backlog of unmatched new and host entrepreneurs) are due to teething problems rather than to fundamental design faults. The evaluation gave a number of recommendations how to tackle these issues and improve the scheme. The participation in the programme has been intensifying since last year. Whereas it took 16 months to organise 400 exchanges in 2010, the last 400 exchanges have been organised in 11 months. This partially results from the implementation of evaluation recommendations in relation to the IT matching tool, the increased management of the “dormant” entrepreneurs’ applications, the increased number of available host entrepreneurs in countries in high demand and the better EU coverage of the network of Erasmus for Entrepreneurs local contact points.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/dg/files/evaluation/eye_final_report_en.pdf

Evaluation of the Directive 2009/142/EC on appliances burning gaseous fuels

ABB activities: || 02 03 Internal market for goods and sectoral policies

Timing: || March 2011

Background, scope and focus

Directive 2009/142/EC on Appliances Burning Gaseous Fuels (GAD) came into force on 1 January 1996 and aims to promote free circulation of gas appliances within the internal market and achieve a high standard of consumer protection. The purpose of the evaluation is to assess its relevance, utility, effectiveness and efficiency in order to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the Directive and assess the potential for its future improvement.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The evaluation concluded on the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the implementation and functioning of the gas appliance directive in meeting its main objectives of ensuring free movement of products and protecting against risks to safety and health. The issues identified relate to necessary clarifications and technical updates of its current provisions and to the scope of the directive. These issues are being further analysed in the context of the alignment of the directive with the new legislative framework, scheduled for 2013: a public consultation took place between December 2011 and March 2012, and an impact assessment study is being carried-out (due to be completed in September 2012).

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/dg/files/evaluation/03_2011_finalreport_gas_en.pdf

Ex-Post Evaluation on Enhancing the Implementation of the Internal Market Legislation Relating to Motor Vehicles

ABB activities: || 02 03 Internal market for goods and sectoral policies

Timing: || June 2011

Background, scope and focus

Directive 2007/46/EC establishes a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles. The Directive was subject to a combined ex-post evaluation and impact assessment study aiming at supporting the preparation of a new legislative proposal for the directive. The process was in line with the new requirement in the Commission's Working Methods (reiterated in the Smart Regulation Communication of October 2010) to base all significant proposals for a revision or a new legislative measure on an evaluation of policy framework already in place.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The evaluation concluded that the Directive has proven its relevance, although the scope may not be sufficient to address future market changes. Additionally, there are still problems with unsafe and/or non-compliant automotive products being placed on the EU market. Finally, the effectiveness of Directive 2007/46/EC relies significantly on the quality and performance of technical services and also on the ability to ensure conformity of production. Actions which undermine the effectiveness of technical services (such as type approval hopping) also undermine the Directive's effectiveness. Therefore, the revision of the directive should consider proposing specific measures to address the stated problems.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/dg/files/evaluation/report_internal_market_legislation_en.pdf

04 – Employment and social affairs

Assessing the effectiveness and the impact of the Social OMC in preparation of the new cycle

ABB activities: || 04 04 Employment, social solidarity and gender equality

Timing: || May 2011

Background, scope and focus

This is the first comprehensive, external evaluation of the Social OMC, with a twofold purpose: 1. To develop a reference methodology for evaluation of the effectiveness and the impact of the Social OMC which can be used by the SPC and the European Commission and 2. To apply this methodology in an assessment of the Social OMC 2006-2010 which can inform decisions about its role and shape after 2010. The evaluation was carried out by a consortium led by PPMI, in association with AEIDL, the Austrian Institute for SME research, CSES and Tarki social research institute, between November 2009 and May 2011.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The first part of the evaluation provided an overview of existing evaluation methodology and results since the start of the OMC's in the social field around 2000, and included the development of a draft framework of analysis. The second part applied this framework of analysis to the evaluation of the effectiveness and impact of the social OMC since 2006 (till 2009). Effectiveness is defined as the extent to which the complex institutional mechanism of the OMC (agreeing on common objectives, regular reporting at the EU and national level, evidence-based mutual learning, monitoring of progress based on a set of commonly agreed indicators) functioned successfully; whereas impact is the extent to which the Social OMC has actually influenced policies and policy-making processes at the domestic level. Main evaluation findings Effectiveness of the institutional framework – Several changes in the political environment contributed positively to the effectiveness of the social OMC: the continuous improvement of the set of common indicators, including the extension into the fields of pensions and health/long-term care after the streamlining decision in 2006; the extension of the reporting cycle (decreasing the administrative burden)and the introduction of thematic focus years (deemed as a success by most stakeholders); improvements in the format of various mutual learning processes (notably by linking them better to the preparation of the Joint Report). – Paradoxically, the social OMC is still seen as a process by and for "insiders", with low public visibility, and limited awareness among some of the key stakeholders. Likeliness of impacts on policy decisions – The social OMC lacks binding targets, does not lead to compulsory recommendations and does not provide for legal sanctions in case of non-compliance. – However, it is and important and innovative component of EU governance which accepts normative and institutional differences among Member States and provides a framework for coordination based on comparison and mutual learning. It works in combination with other frameworks of cooperation (initiated by OECD, World Bank, ILO etc.) and influences polices by drawing attention to particular issues, at a particular moment in time (such as child poverty), by offering formats for discussion, procedural templates and concepts for reflection. Very often, actors use concepts and themes with clear linkages to the social OMC (such as active ageing), but often without recognising such linkages. Substantive impacts of the social OMC – The cognitive and discursive impacts may lead to impacts on decisions, depending on whether they already pre-existed, were made available for mutual learning and used in the way which was politically and economically feasible in their contexts. The eleven in-depth country studies provided a wide range examples where the social OMC has influenced policy thinking which led in turn to policy decisions (e.g. in Denmark, where it triggered the formulation of a national homelessness strategy for 2008-2011). – Overall, the social OMC can be credited with developing a conceptual and procedural toolbox that helped the social policy actors (especially in inclusion) to assert a more balance position with regards to policies which have been traditionally viewed as growth-oriented and thus more important (e.g. linking the struggle against poverty to the wider debate on social protection, and providing a reference point for the discourse on adequacy as well as financial sustainability of pensions). Procedural impacts of the social OMC – The social OMC clearly defines a concept of good governance which is a combination of a genuine involvement of all actors at all levels and across the policy spectrum and decision-making based on data and evidence which is comparable across Member States. – The social OMC has the clearest procedural impacts on the involvement of non-state actors (in particular at the EU level) during the National Strategy Report process and on strengthening statistical capacities. The actual evidence on the success of such interaction with non-state actors is mixed, even if it had a positive influence in building their capacity. The collection, availability and usage of data has especially improved in countries with less developed national (or sub-national structures for data collection. – The impact on vertical co-ordination across all levels of government has been limited, as in most countries the social OMC remains very much a central government process, even if there are some countervailing examples of good practices. – The impact on horizontal coordination was probably greater than on vertical coordination, as it was normal practice to ask non-social ministries to provide their inputs into the National Strategy Report, mostly as a formality, but in some cases providing opportunities for interaction that would otherwise not have taken place. Streamlining between the three strands – The social inclusion strand has been the most advanced in terms of stakeholder activism and development of common indicators. During 2006-2010, the two strands (pensions and health/LT care) caught up, by developing common indicators, integrating into the mutual learning programme, creating the ASIP network and building a stronger stakeholder basis, but much still remains to be done in all these fields. There have been important developments in the pension strand during this period, while the health/LTC strand remains the weakest, not least because the policy field is institutionally more fragmented and consequently more heterogeneous. – The policy rationale for putting together the three strands in 2006 has been contested by many policy actors, and as a result there is little evidence that streamlining has led to joined-up approaches and synergies between the three strands at domestic level. – However, some evidence of positive effects starts to materialise, notably through the awareness of actors of the possible connections and aims of the other policies.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?catId=701&langId=en

Evaluation of ESF support to gender equality

ABB activities: || 04 02 European Social Fund

Timing: || January 2011

Background, scope and focus

The aim of the study was to provide an assessment of the ESF's (2007-2013) support to gender-equality policy by examining the gender sensitivity of ESF programmes, on the basis of available evidence on the programming process and initial implementation. Specific findings on each Member State are presented in 27 country reports and focused thematic analysis is presented in 6 thematic reports on "Enhancing women’s access to employment", "Vertical segregation", "Horizontal segregation", "Reconciliation", "Participation of women in enterprise creation and growth", "Education and training". The synthesis report highlights similarities and differences in Member States' approaches and concludes on the main ways in which the ESF intervention generates or is expected to generate European added value. The study was carried out by consortium GHK Consulting Ltd and Fondazione G. Brodolini.

Summary of findings and conclusions

There is undisputed European Added Value in the ESF's support to the gender equality policy, mostly acknowledged as support for the creation of a recognized and autonomous policy space for gender equality (e.g. the ESF has 'pushed' gender equality on the policy agenda in most Member States) and capacity building. For some Member States, the ESF contribution has been very important also from a budgetary point of view, as it has allowed implementing actions for which funds would otherwise not be available. The gender equality theme has been considered by all Member States in ESF Operational Programmes but with important differences in the level of consideration. A comprehensive policy effort analysis (using a composite index developed specifically for this evaluation) shows unsatisfactory levels of consideration of gender issues, especially in the Member States with more severe gender gaps. The dual approach requirement was in practice translated into a significant decrease of gender-specific actions (comparing to the previous period) and over-dependence on gender mainstreaming, which is however not appropriately/effectively applied; alarmingly, there is not yet a common clear understanding of its theoretical underpinnings and operational implications. Member States are still not investing sufficiently to increase their internal capacity in this field. This is a serious matter of concern as the contribution of the ESF to gender equality in the current cycle will be crucially dependent on how well the gender mainstreaming principle is applied. ESF impact in this field will also be determined by how the relatively limited resources for gender equality specific actions are focussed on critical issues. Worryingly, the actions devised remain overly geared to the supply side (e.g. helping women to access jobs) while many crucial aspects and causes of gender inequality are not sufficiently addressed (e.g. educational segregation, cultural and social stereotypes) limiting the ESF's potential to contribute to the objective of better employment for women by influencing critical issues such as the way jobs are created (which and where) and the way work is organised. Progress of implementation has been slower for the gender equality specific actions (than for other types of actions) and in some cases resources have been diverted towards other objectives as a response to the economic crisis. This indicates a relatively weak status of the gender equality objectives which, in the absence of a formally funded priority, are easily overcome by other policy objectives or weakened by administrative difficulties. Whilst the ESF is still able to produce added value in relation to this policy field, there are some signals of diminishing returns or steps backward. In addition to what has been mentioned above, in most Member States the ESF is reinforcing already funded strategies instead of complementing and innovating. Innovative and effective approaches previously encouraged through the ESF funded EQUAL, have been abandoned in this period (e.g. partnership among women’s organizations and institutions) and this is openly regretted by stakeholders. On the basis of these findings the evaluation addressed a number of recommendations to Member States and to the European Commission. Most of the recommendations to the European Commission have already been adopted and have influenced the Commission's proposal for the new regulations on the Structural Funds and the ESF.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/social/keyDocuments.jsp?type=0&policyArea=0&subCategory=0&country=0&year=0&advSearchKey=evaluationesf&mode=advancedSubmit&langId=en

Evaluation of ESF Support for Enhancing Access to the Labour Market and the Social Inclusion of Migrants and Ethnic Minorities

ABB activities: || 04 02 European Social Fund

Timing: || May 2011

Background, scope and focus

The Europe2020 Strategy gives priority to ‘empowering people in inclusive societies’ and sets a headline target of increasing overall employment rates to at least 75%. This will require a substantial increase in labour participation rates and the better integration of migrants and minorities in the workforce, which is especially crucial in the context of demographic ageing. The Europe2020 target of reducing poverty and social exclusion by 25% is also pertinent for migrants and minorities, and especially the Roma, Europe’s largest minority and most disadvantaged social group. The evaluation aims were: 1. Assess the European Social Fund's contribution to enhancing access to the labour market and the social inclusion of migrants and ethnic minorities; 2. Identify the most effective means of tackling barriers to the social and labour market integration of migrants and ethnic minorities; 3. Provide guidelines for the Member States on the implementation of ESF Operational Programmes (OPs) in the 2007-2013 programming period in order to target beneficiaries from these target groups more effectively; 4. Make recommendations looking ahead to the role of the ESF in promoting access to the labour market for migrants and ethnic minorities post-2013. The evaluation scope included core ESF in the 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 programming periods respectively, and the ESF-financed EQUAL Community Initiative 2000-2006. The evaluation was carried out by the Centre for Strategy & Evaluation Services (CSES).

Summary of findings and conclusions

EU Added Value: The ESF has addressed an important funding gap by providing resources to promote access to the labour market and the social inclusion of migrants and minorities (‘volume effects’). The ESF has brought additional targeted funding support to these groups that would not otherwise have been available through national support. The ESF in general (and EQUAL in particular) have had important ‘scope effects’ by extending coverage to wider target groups that had not previously been addressed through national programmes, or had only received limited attention. – There is increased attention promoting the labour market and social inclusion of migrants and minorities in ESF in the 2007-2013 period compared with 2000-2006. This is reflected in higher levels of expenditure on these groups and in further attention to these groups in ESF OP strategies: Participation by migrants and minorities in ESF appears to be significantly higher in the 2007-2013 period. In total, 1.19 m people with a migrant or minority background have taken part. This equates to approximately 8.7% of all ESF beneficiaries. – Achievements regarding ESF support to Individuals: the ESF made a positive contribution in helping people with a migrant and minority background to overcome barriers to labour market access, to improving language skills and strengthening basic skills for employability such as ICT skills, basic literacy and communication skills. Moreover, the ESF has promoted workforce adaptability for migrants through activities to strengthen their professional qualifications and in industrial areas undergoing restructuring. Migrants and minorities have been encouraged through the ESF to take the ‘first steps’ into further education and training through non-formal learning. ESF has also addressed an important gap in vocational training and apprenticeship provision in some EU countries for migrant youth. ESF has strengthened the recognition of qualifications from third countries. Entrepreneurship has been promoted among migrants and minorities. ESF also promoted the social inclusion of individuals with a migrant and minority background, for example, by fostering pathways to employment and promoting a reduction in the numbers of early school leavers among young people with a migrant and Roma background. – Regarding systems and structures, the capacity of public institutions to promote the integration of people with a minority background has been strengthened as a result of both core ESF and EQUAL. Knowledge has been gained and experiences shared between public institutions and migrant and minority NGOs. The ESF has helped to improve the quality of initial integration services, such as the reception of migrants from third countries (e.g. development of online information portals about relevant services in the most common immigrant languages). The ESF has promoted the modernisation of public employment services (PES), developing intercultural competences among staff working there and increasing awareness about the specific needs of job-seekers with a migrant and minority background and how to tailor support services accordingly. Moreover, the ESF has promoted the creation of new networks and organisational structures to promote the integration of migrants and minorities, as well as the establishment of vertical coordination mechanisms to strengthen joint working on Roma inclusion between the national, regional and local levels. – Migrants and minorities in the ESF Programme lifecycle: Through multiannual programming, the ESF has encouraged the development of a long-term approach to promoting the integration of migrants and minorities, and in tackling the multifaceted barriers to their inclusion. While the ESF strengthened the capacity of migrant and minority representative NGOs and self-organised associations to design and implement projects, their ability to take part in national programming processes was often limited. More positively, in project delivery, migrant and minority NGOs often played a key role, sometimes working to implement packages of support; The direct participation of migrants and minorities in ESF project implementation was found to be effective in reaching groups at a distance from the labour market. The ESF has also strengthened horizontal coordination mechanisms to promote greater cooperation in Structural Funds management and implementation structures. The ESF has promoted an ‘integrated approach’ to the social and labour market integration of migrants and minorities that links employment with education, and housing with health. This was more evident in 2007-2013 than 2000-2006, suggesting EQUAL played a positive role in this regard. With regard to financial implementation, there do not appear to have been absorption problems in relation to ESF support to migrants and minorities in 2000-2006, although some problems were identified in 2007-2013. Monitoring and evaluation: In 2000-2006, there was a lack of participation data on migrants and minorities. In 2007-2013, following the introduction of Annex XXIII of the Implementing Regulations, there have been improvements in data availability, however, the quality of data still varies for ethnic minorities, with evidence of under-estimates due to data protection issues and a reluctance to self-ascribe ethnicity (especially among the Roma). There was insufficient emphasis at Member State level on assessing the real achievements of ESF support to migrants and minorities. In particular, there was too great a focus on outputs and a lack of attention to results indicators.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/social/keyDocuments.jsp?type=0&policyArea=0&subCategory=0&country=0&year=0&advSearchKey=evaluationsocialinclusion&mode=advancedSubmit&langId=en&orderBy=docOrder

European Year 2010 for combating poverty and social exclusion - Ex-post evaluation

ABB activities: || 04 04 Employment, social solidarity and gender equality

Timing: || November 2011

Background, scope and focus

In recent years the European Union has organised a series of 'European Years', designed to draw attention to a particular theme of interest to people and organisations at large, as well as to policy makers and professionals. 2010 was designated the European Year Against Poverty and Social Exclusion. The goal was to raise awareness, build new partnerships, create a momentum and get a strong political commitment to fighting poverty in Europe. An evaluation was carried out by ECORYS and assessed how the EY2010 played out and what impacts it has had and may have in future. The research included review of background documentation and data; surveys and individual consultations as well as in-depth studies of the results of the Year in Bulgaria, Italy, Lithuania, Sweden and the UK; and attendance at events and several activities.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The Year proved highly relevant and topical to a wide audience, notably as it took place against the background of persisting economic and financial crisis. This meant added impact but at the same time posed challenges in terms of communicating messages on what can sometimes be a sensitive topic. The Year complemented existing EU initiatives in the field and increased the visibility of people experiencing poverty and social inclusion. By involving NGOs, social partners and other stakeholders, the Year addressed the need to expand participation in the design and implementation of social inclusion policies. In individual countries, EY2010 funding allowed a range of small-scale activities to take place, which could not otherwise have been implemented. In most countries activities to address the needs of all the main groups at risk were organised (children, youth, women, elderly, homeless people, migrants and ethnic minorities). In terms of the effectiveness and impact of the EY2010, progress was made on all four of the EY2010 objectives. At EU level in particular commitment and concrete actions featured high in the evaluator's assessment of achievements (also because of a final Declaration of the Council on the Year). Key players at national level however remain cautious about the extent to which similar commitments and concrete actions will take root, especially given current constraints on public spending. EY2010 activities in the majority of countries attracted strong participation by stakeholders, particularly NGOs and associations. At EU level too, the Year afforded valuable opportunities for stakeholders to come together, make connections and identify areas of common interest. In terms of the impact on the general public, evidence suggests that information on the Year may have reached about one tenth of Europeans through the broadcast media. One of the goals of the EY2010 was to involve actors that are not traditionally involved in social inclusion policies, and this was achieved to a certain extent at national level; perhaps less so at EU level. Notably, a number of innovative approaches were tested during the Year: using social media for communication, engaging with journalists and participatory approaches to events. Examples of policy innovation were identified in a few countries: advanced participatory approaches to policy planning, evidence-based social policy, social entrepreneurship. Links with other policy themes were made by some initiatives, notably in relation to health, justice and finance. The Year should have lasting effects at national level in terms of visibility and capacity of the participating stakeholders and the development of fresh approaches to communicating and promoting social inclusion. At EU level there is cautious optimism about high-level developments in EU policy (specifically the headline targets on reducing poverty), which were helped by the momentum and interest in poverty and social exclusion created by the Year. In addition, the final Declaration of the Council represented a firm commitment of the EU and Member States to go beyond awareness-raising and give the Year ‘a strong political legacy that delivers concrete results. It took some time to set up the system at EU and national level, largely because of the decision to use administrative structures that were already accredited by the EC for managing EU funding. However, on the whole, the management of the Year by the European Commission was judged satisfactory by National Implementation Bodies (NIBs) and stakeholders. The Consultative Committee supporting the NIBs and the EU expert stakeholders group were considered both valuable instruments. Procedures were judged clear, although there were requests for more guidance at an earlier stage. Cooperation between NIBs and the EY2010 task force worked satisfactorily, although for communication activities the division of tasks between EU and national levels was not always clear and smooth. Cooperation with the national correspondents of the communication contractor was satisfactory in most countries, despite some initial uncertainty on their roles. EC representations were involved and in certain countries also active in organising their own events. Although the EY2010 is now over, it succeeded in injecting new momentum into the fight against poverty and social exclusion in Europe. As a result, those involved in the field have been energised and inspired to step up their efforts, collaborate across themes and look at new ways to tackle the challenges ahead. This mobilisation has increased the capacity of a range of key players to make a difference and a very strong policy lead from the EU has re-focused the future agenda. At an especially challenging time for the economy and society, the EY2010 opened many people’s eyes to the reality of poverty and social exclusion in Europe; recognised the current and potential contributions of stakeholders and policy-makers, and reinforced the importance of listening to the voices of those experiencing poverty and social exclusion themselves. Maintaining the momentum started by the Year must now become the focus of attention.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=22

Evaluation of the capacity of the ESF delivery systems to attract and support OP target groups

ABB activities: || 04 02 European Social Fund

Timing: || March 2011

Background, scope and focus The purpose of the evaluation was to analyse the capacity of the delivery systems put in place in the Member States to attract and support OP target groups as foreseen by the ESF Regulation Articles 2, 3 and 10 (including the target groups that are difficult to reach). The attraction and support of target groups requires a diversity of implementing bodies (IBs) and/or beneficiaries with sufficient knowledge of the needs of target groups, as well as appropriate powers and capacity. The evaluation covered EU27 in the programming period 2007-13, elaborating 18 case studies from 14 MS. The following methods were used: desk research, interviews with Member States representatives of ESF Managing Authorities, case studies and group discussions with stakeholders and experts. The evaluation was carried out by Eureval in consortium with Rambøll and Ecorys between December 2009 and March 2011.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The main findings of the evaluation are: 1. The definition of clearly-identified, simply-defined and easily-monitored target groups within the OP, accompanied by appropriate indicators for those groups is a key factor of success. 2. Existing national or local policies for supporting target groups significantly reinforce the capacity of ESF delivery systems to reach those groups. Moreover, attracting and supporting target groups requires interventions on different levels. 3. Genuine representation of or dialogue with the target groups in the design and implementation of the OP can be a key success factor in attracting and supporting such groups. 4. Flexibility in the formal management arrangements can assist the attraction and support of target groups. 5. The attraction and support of target groups requires a diversity of IBs and/or beneficiaries with sufficient knowledge of the needs of target groups, as well as appropriate powers and capacity. 6. Some MAs have not taken sufficient steps to simplify or reduce the administrative burden, creating the risk that some small organisations or NGOs are unable to participate in an activity, but there exist ways to better adapt application and payment procedures to those organisations. The report contains a set of 10 recommendations and a policy proposal based on these recommendations and also taking into account the on-going policy discussion: 1. A clear statement is needed that a main objective of the ESF is to contribute to the European Employment Strategy (EES) in a strategic way. For the EES to be a strategic European document, guiding the spending of the European Social Fund will require some changes. Those changes need to keep in mind that national priorities and the link between the OP, the NSRF and the NRP are taken into account. The required changes are addressed by the following recommendations. 2. The Integrated Guidelines have a catch-all nature that makes them less appropriate for ensuring strategic contribution. It is therefore recommended that the OPs should be based on the NRP. Furthermore the ESF should contribute to specific measures of the NRP (and not to the overall priorities or objectives). 3. One of the main reasons for lack of strategic linkage was that processes around the NRP and the OP are coordinated, but in various MS only to a small extent integrated. It is therefore recommended that a country specific procedure or structure is designed for coordination and communication purposes, linking the NRP and the OP processes. 4. Member States should be encouraged to use the ESF to fund the implementation of country specific recommendations when relevant. 5. It should be assessed whether the NSRF becomes unnecessary as a strategic document for the OP if the OP is to contribute strategically to the NRP. In general it will be necessary to choose whether the OP should strategically be linked with the NSRF or the NRP. 6. and 7. The different cycles of the EES and the ESF make a strategic linkage difficult. It is therefore recommended, that: – The policy cycles of the NRP and the OP are synchronised; – The OP and the NRP are more directly linked, to avoid unnecessary bureaucracy. 8. ESF should mainly contribute to the EES through the results of activities and less through the transfer of ideas. 9. The transfer of innovative ideas from EES and ESF is especially weak when it comes to ensuring that new ideas from EES are integrated in and funded by the ESF. It can therefore be recommended that clear strategies for and systems to support a transfer of ideas are designed. Specific procedures can be designed at MS level, in order to identify ESF relevant EES ideas, transfer these to the ESF and ensure implementation with or integration into ESF activities. 10. It is quite unlikely that “bottom up” transfer of ideas and innovations from ESF to EES are easily organised and it is therefore recommended not to invest too much energy and effort into it.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/social/keyDocuments.jsp?type=0&policyArea=0&subCategory=0&country=0&year=0&advSearchKey=evaluationesf&mode=advancedSubmit&langId=en

Impact of enlargement and the functioning of transitional arrangements on labour mobility within the EU

Evaluation related study

ABB activities: || 04 04 Employment, social solidarity and gender equality

Timing: || July 2011

Background, scope and focus

The overall objective of the study was to firstly, assess the functioning of the transitional arrangements, the impact of enlargement and effects of workers' mobility on the economy, labour markets and social situation in the EU; secondly, prepare country-specific assessments in order to provide in-depth information on the impact of enlargement and mobility from Bulgaria and Romania; thirdly, estimate the mobility potential from the candidate and potential candidate countries. The study was carried out by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research (NIESR).

Summary of findings and conclusions

The main focus of this study is an assessment of the macro-economic impact on both host and home countries of the increased labour mobility that has resulted from the two recent EU enlargements. The estimates to end-2009 suggest that: – Since the 2004 enlargement, about 1.8 per cent of the EU-8 population has moved to the EU-15, raising the host country population by 0.3 per cent. Of this, approximately 75 per cent can be attributed to the enlargement process itself. – Since 2007, about 4.1 per cent of the EU-2 population has moved to the EU-15, raising the host country population by a further 0.3 per cent. Of this, just over 50 per cent can be attributed to the enlargement process itself. – The potential level of output in Bulgaria, Romania and Lithuania may be permanently reduced by 5-10 per cent as a result of the population shifts towards the EU-15 since 2004. Latvia and Estonia can also expect a permanent scar of at least 3 per cent on the potential level of output in their economies. While remittances can partially offset the negative effects on growth in sending countries in the short- to medium-term, they cannot fully address the loss of labour input on capacity output in the longer-term. – The impact on GDP per capita is much smaller than the impact on total GDP, but also tends to be negative in the sending countries, especially given the age structure of migrants, who are predominantly of working age. – As for the receiving countries, the macro-economic impact of the population shifts from the EU-8 and EU-2 to the EU-15 since 2004 is expected to be small, possibly raising the long-run level of potential output by about ½ per cent. The impact on Ireland is expected to be more significant, perhaps raising the potential level of GDP by 3 per cent in the long-run. The UK may also benefit from a rise in potential output of just over 1 per cent. – The long-run impact on GDP per capita is expected to be negligible in the EU-15, but may be slightly positive, depending on the productive capacity of inward migrants. Outflows of remittances are expected to have only a marginal negative effect on host countries. – There is clear evidence that the pattern of transitional restrictions in place at the beginning of the 2004 enlargement diverted mobile workers away from traditional destinations – namely Germany – and towards the more easily accessed labour markets in the UK and Ireland. However, we should not over-emphasize the magnitude of this impact, as macro-economic developments and demographics have also played a role in the location decision, and in many cases appear to have played the dominant role. Transitional restrictions may have also played a certain role for the EU-2 economies, although the rise in the unemployment rate in Spain can explain about half of the nearly 10 percentage point loss of EU-2 migrant stock share between 2006 and 2009. – As of June 2011, workers from the EU-2 still faced some restrictions on access to labour markets in Belgium, Germany, Ireland, France, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Austria, the UK and Malta. The second phase of the transitional arrangements for the 2007 enlargement came to an end on 31 December 2011, at which point the governments in these countries decide on whether or not to extend the restrictions for a further two years. – The findings suggest that, due to network effects, transitional arrangements can have permanent effects on the pattern of migration. This may be of particular importance in host countries where the working age share of the population is in decline. Countries that retain restrictions are expected to have a lower level of potential output in the long-run as a result. Allowing full labour market access has not been found to have significant adverse effects on the host economy.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/social/main.jsp?langId=en&catId=89&newsId=1108&furtherNews=yes Direct access to main report: http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=7120&langId=en Direct access to country case studies: http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=7191&langId=en Direct access to executive summary: http://ec.europa.eu/social/BlobServlet?docId=7193&langId=en

05 – Agriculture and Rural Development

Evaluation of income effects of direct support

ABB activities: || 05 02 Interventions in agricultural markets 05 03 Direct aids

Timing: || May 2011

Background, scope and focus

The evaluation analysed the effects of the direct support schemes laid down in Council Regulation (EC) 1782/2003 (later Council Regulation (EC) 73/2009) on the income of farmers. The effectiveness and efficiency of the implementation of direct support with respect to achieving the objective of ensuring a fair standard of living for the agricultural community was also analysed, as was the coherence of direct payments with measures under the Single Market Organisation and rural development measures. The evaluation covered the EU-27 over the period 2005-2008. The analysis distinguished between seven agricultural sectors (field crops, dairy, grazing livestock, granivores, horticulture, permanent crops, mixed farms), the choices of implementation of the direct payment schemes in different Member States/regions, different farm size classes and the types of farm organisation, and the geographical location.

Summary of findings and conclusions

The evaluation concluded that direct payments have contributed to enhancing the income of farmers and have played an important role in generating farm income. This is particularly true for grazing livestock farms (beef, sheep and goats), field crops, mixed farms and dairy farms. The study underlined the role of direct payments in strengthening the cohesion between regions, in particular in the sectors of field crops, milk, grazing livestock (other than dairy farms) and mixed farms. It also showed that direct payments have contributed to reducing the existing gap between the average farm income per labour unit of small and large farms. The evaluation indicates that direct payments have made a positive and robust contribution to the stability of the income of farmers, in particular on field crop, grazing livestock and mixed farms. The stability of farmers' income was fostered by direct payments to a larger extent on smaller farms in comparison to medium and large farms. For the purpose of the evaluation, the regional GDP/employee was used as benchmark for a fair standard of living of the agricultural community. The analysis showed that direct payments have helped reduce the existing gap between farmers' income and the regional GDP/employee. The conclusions indicated that direct payments have been crucial in ensuring the economic viability of farms, in particular those specialised in field crops, grazing livestock, mixed farming and, partly, dairy farming. The evaluation showed that in the years analysed (2004, 2006 and 2007) the efficiency of direct payments in terms of providing income support to farmers was quite high. Yet, notable differences across regions were also indicated. The results of the statistical analysis pointed out that direct payments have been coherent with the measures under the single Common Market Organisation (CMO) and rural development measures in relation to the objective of enhancing farmers' income and also in terms of stabilising farmers' income.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/reports/income/index_en.htm

Evaluation of CAP measures applied to the sugar sector

ABB activities: || 05 02 Interventions in agricultural markets 05 03 Direct aids

Timing: || December 2011

Background, scope and focus

The evaluation examined the effects of the 2006 sugar reform (Council Regulations 318/2006[1], 320/2006 and 1782/2003[2]) on the sugar supply chain, including the farm sector and sugar producers, refiners and isoglucose producers. The evaluation covered the period from 2006 until the present time. The period between 2001 and 2005 served as a reference. In principle, all EU Member States were covered with a focus on six Member States that were analysed in more detail: Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Poland and UK.

Summary of findings and conclusions

Impacts on production and geographical distribution of the sugar beet sector. As a direct impact of sugar quota renunciations, the average volume of beet produced in the EU-27 in 2008-10 was 19% lower than in 2003-05. After the reform the trend of improvements in yields accelerated as did the concentration of production in larger farms. These changes were different among Member States and led to a further geographical concentration of production in the beet belt[3]. Impacts on market orientation and competitiveness of sugar beet producing farmers. Due to the reduction in the beet minimum price, the distortive effect of CAP support greatly decreased. The evaluation confirmed that farmers' production choices were more linked to the beet price level. The competitiveness of beet production improved, mainly because the reform led the least efficient growers to give up beet production. Impacts on sugar producers· The sugar quota renunciations reached 5.8 million tonnes, which is almost the initially established target for the EU quota reduction. The quotas were largely reduced in Member States outside the beet belt, and sugar production was abandoned in five Member States. The reform directly contributed to a decrease of quota sugar prices as a result of the reduction of the sugar reference price. However, since the end of 2009, the EU price level remained well above the reference price because of exceptionally high world market sugar prices. The reform significantly accelerated the restructuring process of the sector with altogether 41% of the 179 factories operating in 2005/06 closing down, mostly those with low and medium capacity. The evaluation concluded that on average, the competitiveness of sugar producers improved, although this improvement was not equal among Member States. Impacts on isoglucose producers. Since isoglucose is made from cereals, the reform had an indirect negative effect on its relative profitability compared to the beet sugar (due to the reduction of sugar beet minimum prices). The reform therefore increased isoglucose quotas as compensation, whilst maintaining the possibility for isoglucose producers to renounce quotas[4]. As a result of the reform, the isoglucose quota increased from 0.5 to 0.6 million tones in the EU-25. Half of the existing isoglucose production units were dismantled within the restructuring scheme. Isoglucose production is now concentrated in five Member States (instead of fifteen before the reform). Impacts on sugar refiners. The removal of the strong protection, which used to benefit the traditional full-time refiners, together with the decrease in EU sugar production and the expected increase in raw sugar imports, led to an increase in the number of full-time refiners, with new refineries in Member States that had no such activity before. However, after the transitional period, supplies of raw cane sugar to the EU market decreased. Indeed, the attractiveness of the EU market for raw sugar exports depends on the price gap between the EU and other markets. Social aspects. The closure of 41% of the sugar factories inevitably led to job losses. However, the evaluation underlined that a significant proportion of these jobs would have been lost even without the reform, as the restructuring was an ongoing process in the sector. The evaluation concluded that although the sugar restructuring scheme intended to limit negative social impacts, the requirements imposed by EU legislation did not go beyond national labour market legislation. Yet, the existence of restructuring aid received by the companies weighed in the negotiations between the companies and employees, in favour of the employees.

Availability of the report on Europa

http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/eval/reports/sugar-2011/index_en.htm

Evaluation of CAP measures applied to the dairy sector

ABB activities: || 05 02 Interventions in agricultural markets 05 03 Direct aids

Timing: || November 2011

Background, scope and focus

The evaluation of CAP measures applied to the dairy sector covered the measures of the CMO for dairy (later integrated into the Single CMO) and direct payment schemes as far as these schemes are used by beneficiaries in the dairy sector. The evaluation addressed the effect of these measures on the prices and the production of milk and the impact on dairy farmers. It also looked further downstream on the consequences for the price of dairy