31. 12. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 337/47 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation laying down provisions for implementing 
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the European Agricultural Guidance and 
Guarantee Fund (EAGGF), Guidance Section 
(88/C 337/15) 
On 8 August 1988, the Council, acting in pursuance of Article 198 of the EEC Treaty, asked 
the Economic and Social Committee for an Opinion on the abovementioned proposal. 
The section for agriculture and fisheries, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's 
work on the subject, adopted its Opinion on 6 October 1988 (oral report of Mr Strauss). 
At its 259th plenary session (sitting of 27 October 1988), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion with no votes against and one abstention. 
On 28 April 1988 the Committee adopted an Opinion 
welcoming proposals for a comprehensive Regulation 
on the reform of the three structural funds (1). 
This Opinion covers the more detailed proposals which 
lay down provisions for implementing Council Regu­
lation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the EAGGF, Guid­
ance Section. 
General 
1. The Committee broadly supports the Com­
mission's proposal which redefines the role of the 
EAGGF, Guidance Fund, (hereafter called the Fund) 
and the activities which the Fund may finance. How­
ever, the Committee has certain reservations about the 
priorities and proposed operation which will be set out 
below. 
2. The Committee believes that the Fund must be 
closely coordinated with other EC structural funds. But 
the Fund is an integral part of the mechanisms of the 
common agricultural policy (CAP) and must therefore 
be operated in conformity with the overall policy objec­
tives of the CAP. The Committee notes that there could 
be conflicts between the need to improve the structures 
and incomes of farmers and certain regions, and the 
need to ensure that this does not aggravate the market 
imbalances for agricultural products. But within these 
constraints priority should be given to farmers in the 
most disfavoured regions. 
3. To minimize this potential difficulty, integrated 
operational programmes, global grants and individual 
grant aid should be directed to measures which reduce 
production costs by improving sectoral and individual 
farm infrastructures, improve processing and market­
ing, diversify agricultural production, encourage quality 
production where specific markets exist, reduce pro-
(l) OJ NoC 175,4.7. 1988, p. 47. duction potential, improve the environment and 
encourage non-agricultural rural pursuits. In view of 
the great regional diversity of European agriculture the 
application of EAGGF measures must be sufficiently 
flexible to allow actions appropriate to specific regional 
circumstances. 
4. The Committee supports the increased concen­
tration on operational programmes, including inte­
grated operational programmes, in promoting structur­
al development and assistance in all regions of the 
Community. 
5. The Committee also welcomes the operational 
changes proposed under which there will be a closer 
partnership between the Commission, national govern­
ments and regional authorities. But the Committee is 
seriously concerned that not all regions may have the 
necessary administrative resources and expertize to 
draw up adequate plans in the required time to benefit 
from the facilities which will become available. It is 
therefore suggested that Community funds should be 
made available to enable regional authorities where 
necessary to employ experts who can assist and if 
required train local people, in drawing up the plans 
which will be required. In addition the Commission 
should state that it is willing to respond positively to 
all requests for information and technical help. 
6. The Committee doubts whether it will be possible 
for the authorities in all cases to submit development 
plans by 31 March 1989 as required in Article 6 in the 
proposed horizontal regulation. The Commission must 
be prepared to give national governments some latitude. 
7. It is important to recognize that the Fund has a 
double role: first, it is an integral policy instrument of 
the common agricultural policy; secondly it is a vehicle, 
with the other structural funds, for redistributing 
No C 337/48 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 88 
resources within the Community. The Committee 
accepts that in future more emphasis will be placed on 
redistribution, but the other role is important and 
should be maintained. The other structural funds will 
play the greater role in achieving better regional bal­
ance. 
8. The Committee recognizes that in future measures 
in the less developed regions and other specific areas 
will become increasingly important, but wishes to 
emphasize that general measures applicable throughout 
the Community, such as less favoured areas (LFA) 
assistance, which are funded by EAGGF, must be able 
to continue at an adequate level. Indeed, there is nothing 
in the proposal that conflicts with the traditional func­
tions of the Fund. The Committee also draws attention 
to the fact that the progressive adaptation of the CAP 
could affect all regions of the Community. 
Financial provisions 
9. The apportionment of the increased resources 
between the three structural funds has yet to be made. 
At present the fund accounts for only about 16 per 
cent of the total. The Committee would not like this 
proportion to be reduced in future. 
10. Indeed, the proportion should be raised, in view 
of the importance of agriculture and forestry for 
improving the balance between the less developed and 
other regions. New measures, notably for woodlands 
and the future of the rural world must be financed 
through additional appropriations, entered under a suit­
able heading. 
Title I 
11. The Committee has reservations about possible 
applications of the procedure laid down in Article 2 (1) 
of the Commission proposal. It feels that the general 
procedure should also be followed for the measures 
under Title I: regional plan, Community support frame­
work, forms of assistance envisaged by Article 5 of the 
Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 (operational pro­
grammes, system of national aids, etc.). 
12. The Committee approves the suggested common 
measures listed in Article 2 (2) of the proposed regu­
lation. The Committee particularly supports the wider 
use of financial assistance for less intensive farming 
methods, encouragement of traditional farming prac­
tices and measures to protect the environment and 
safeguard the landscape. These actions could help to 
reduce production surpluses while at the same time 
improving farm income; they also link in well with 
farm tourism and other non-agricultural rural pursuits. 13. Naturally, any actions will have to be tailored 
to the specific circumstances, ecology and demography 
of the regions concerned, while also conforming with 
the overall policy objectives of the CAP. 
Title II 
14. The Committee supports the implementation of 
operational programmes and, in particular, integrated 
operational programmes. While the experience so far 
has been generally encouraging, there have been diffi­
culties in implementing integrated mediterranean pro­
grammes (IMP), for example, and this again points to 
the need for the administration to be sufficiently flexible 
and adapted to regional needs. 
15. As far as the specific measures in Article 5 are 
concerned, the Committee recognizes the benefits which 
would accrue to producers from land or pasture 
improvement and small irrigation schemes, but insists 
that such actions be handled with extreme prudence so 
that they are coherent with the CAP and that the 
environment is safeguarded. 
16. The Committee approves a proposal for action 
for restoring agricultural production potential after 
natural disasters. Such disasters are infrequent and are 
not confined to the less developed regions. This help 
should therefore be available throughout the Com­
munity. 
Title IV 
17. The Committee welcomes the proposal for the 
Fund to assist in carrying out pilot projects, technical 
assistance and preparatory studies and demonstration 
projects. The Committee urges that the results of such 
studies and projects be widely disseminated. 
18. The Committee notes that Regulation (EEC) 
No 355/77 will expire on 31 December 1989. It lays 
great emphasis on the need for Community assistance 
for the processing and marketing of agricultural, for­
estry and fishery products. Such action would give 
producers a greater opportunity to participate in food 
processing and distribution. The Commission's pro­
posals suggest that in future such assistance will be 
more limited in scope in areas other than less developed 
regions and designated rural zones. The Committee 
stresses that the action in question should relate to the 
whole of the Community. 
19. The Committee further notes that, while some 
regional targeting will be necessary, it is the intention 
of the Commission to propose modifications to other 
31. 12. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 337/49 
existing structural measures in due course. It insists that 
all the structural measures operated by the Community must be coherent with each other and that they must 
contribute to the general reform of the CAP. 
Done at Brussels, 27 October 1988. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation laying down provisions for implementing 
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the European Social Fund (ESF) (J) 
(88/C 337/16) 
On 8 August 1988, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee under 
Article 130 E and 123 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community on the 
abovementioned proposal. 
The section for social, family, educational and cultural affairs, which was responsible for 
preparing the Committee's work on the subject, drew up its Opinion on 13 October 1988. 
The rapporteur was Mr Beretta. 
At its 259th plenary session (meeting of 27 October 1988), the Economic and Social Committee 
adopted the following Opinion unanimously. 
1. General comments 
1.1. The Committee broadly endorses the Com­
mission proposals for implementing the Regulation on 
the European Social Fund, regarding them as consistent 
with the aims of the reform of the Structural Funds. 
1.2. Indeed, these proposals, 
— by providing for aid to horizontal and multi-annual 
programmes, encourage the coordination and con­
centration of Community contributions, 
— by retaining for the transitional period the flexibility 
which makes it possible to finance individual pro­
jects where these are necessary and when they corre­
spond to Community aims, are consistent with the 
intentions behind the increase in the resources avail­
able to the Fund, 
— by confirming the priorities and the detailed 
measures laid down for the most disadvantaged 
regions, contribute to the development of initiatives 
to restore balance in the context of efforts to estab­
lish the single internal market. 
(') OJ No C 256, 3. 10. 1988, p. 16. 1.3. The Committee therefore thinks that, as a who­
le, the Communities' action should contribute to achiev­
ing the five priorities, and in particular should help 
to combat long-term unemployment and help young 
people to find their first jobs. 
1.4. However, the role of the socio-economic groups 
does not seem sufficiently well-defined or appreciated. 
1.4.1. The drawing-up of integrated programmes for 
specific regions, mobilizing local, regional, national and 
Community resources and intended to modify the socio­
economic structure of the regions concerned, cannot 
and must not take place without the participation of 
the social forces which will later be involved in their 
implementaiton. 
1.4.2. Moreover, given the importance of the contri­
bution of ESF resources to activities coordinated with 
the other Community instruments, the Committee 
maintains that: 
— the powers of the consultative committee of the ESF 
should be safeguarded and strengthened,