No C 337/44 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 88 
Opinion on the proposal for a Council Regulation laying down provisions for implementing 
Council Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the European Regional Development Fund 
(88/C 337/14) 
On 8 August 1988, the Council decided to consult the Economic and Social Committee, 
under Articles 123, 130 E and 198 of the Treaty establishing the European Economic 
Community, on the abovementioned proposal. 
The section for regional development and town and country planning, which was responsible 
for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 18 October 1988 
(rapporteur: Mr Amato; co-rapporteur: Mr Serra-Caracciolo). 
At its 259th plenary session (meeting of 27 October 1988), the Economic and Social Committee 
unanimously adopted the following Opinion. 
1. Foreword 2. General comments 
The proposed Regulation contains no reference to the 
role to be played by regional policy in consolidating 
economic and social cohesion to comply with guidelines 
laid down in Article 130 A of the European Single Act. 
The Committee's Opinion (J) on the framework Regu­
lation confirmed that the Community's regional policy 
should cover: 
— the running of structural activities in the above-
mentioned regions, 
— the coordination of all Community policies with a 
regional impact [beginning with the common agri­
cultural policy (CAP) and the policy for completion 
of the internal market], 
— the coordination of Member States' regional poli­
cies, 
— the coordination of national aids. 
The above Opinion therefore called on the Commission 
to propose the legislation and procedures needed to 
enable Community regional policy to carry out this 
task. The European Parliament had made a similar 
request. 
The Committee considers that such legislation should 
have been adopted in conjunction with the reform of 
the structural funds to make this reform more complete. 
Such provisions should be urgently proposed by the 
Commission, which is falling behind in the implemen­
tation of Article BOA of the Single Act (economic and 
social cohesion). 
(') OJ No C 356, 31. 12. 1987, p. 13. 2.1. The Committee endorses the Commission's pro­
posals for boosting the effectiveness and efficiency of aid 
from the European Regional Development Fund 
(ERDF). These proposals also seem consistent both with 
the aims specified in Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 and 
the desired complementarity and coordination of aid. 
2.2. However, the Committee observes that a num­
ber of changes need to be made to the proposed Regu­
lation to bring it closer into line with the Fund's aims 
and role. 
2.3. The broadest possible consensus and the active 
support of key social and economic groups are a sine 
qua non for the success of operations, and not merely 
a procedural complication. Provision should therefore 
be made for the participation and regular consultation 
of these groups at the various levels and at all stages 
(planning, implementation, assessment). At Com­
munity level, the socio-economic groups should be 
representred on the advisory committee for objectives 
1 and 2 to be set up under Article 17 of Regulation 
(EEC) No 2052/88. 
3. Scope of assistance and priorities (Article 1) 
3.1. The criteria governing ERDF aid should be spel­
led out in greater detail. Absolute priority should be 
given to the intensive, rapid creation of new jobs, 
particularly in areas of high unemployment. Specifi­
cations to this effect should be included in points a, b 
and c of Article 1 (2). 
3.2. Investment in firms should give priority to 
schemes which have the greatest impact on employ­
ment, and which aim to modernize production. 
31. 12. 88 Official Journal of the European Communities No C 337/45 
3.3. Infrastructure financing in regions designated 
under objective 1, should place emphasis on activities 
designed to create 'external economies' (telematics and 
telecommunications networks, research centres, re­
gional planning, etc.). However, it should not rule out 
projects which further social development, the quality 
of life, environmental conservation, or the enhancement 
of sites of historic, artistic or cultural interest. In certain 
circumstances, these are pre-requisites for economic 
development. As a general rule, infrastructure financing 
should create enough jobs, in the short term, to produce 
a significant drop in unemployment in the regions 
covered by objective 1. 
3.4. It should be specified that infrastructure for 
areas in industrial decline (objective 2) can be built in 
order to create new economic activities outside the 
'derelict industrial sites' themselves, provided that they 
are within the areas covered by objective 2. 
3.5. As regards the development of indigenous poten­
tial, further clarification is needed of ERDF assistance 
in the setting-up and operation of organizations and 
corporations to stimulate economic development, pro­
mote business and innovation, and make economic use 
(in particular by means of tourism) of historic, artistic 
or cultural assets. 
4. Regional plans (Article 2) 
4.1. The regional plans covering objective 1 should, 
as a rule, relate to a single region at NUTS level II. 
Provision should also be made for plans encompassing 
regions in different Member States. These plans could 
be promoted via a joint initiative from the regional 
authorities concerned (or other bodies designated by 
the Member States) or via a Commission initiative, 
drawing on the pilot schemes mentioned in Article 10 
of the proposed Regulation. 
4.2. Plans relating to objective 2 should specify the 
link between operations planned in the zone in indus­
trial decline (NUTS III) and overall development of 
the region (NUTS II). Consequently, a plan should be 
drawn up for each region (NUTS II), possibly grouping 
together the various zones concerned. 
4.3. The plans (in the case of both objectives 1 and 
2) should cover a period ranging from 3 to 5 years. 
5. Operational programmes (Article 3) 
5.1. This Article should specify that ERDF aid 
should give priority to integrated programmes. By its very nature, the ERDF can achieve optimum impact 
with an integrated approach. 
5.2. All operational programmes should be run on 
the basis of programme contracts. 
5.3. The European Parliament and the Economic and 
Social Committee should be consulted on. programmes 
carried out on the Commission's initiative to comply 
with existing practice and thereby facilitate broader 
consultation of key socio-economic groups. 
5.4. The Committee repeats its recommendation that 
the operational programmes carried out on the Com­
mission's initiative should include a specific programme 
for upland areas. 
6. Part-financing of aid schemes (Article 4) 
6.1. National aid arrangements often fail to give 
sufficiently clear definitions of objectives and priorities 
regarding sectors, employment potential or the quality 
of investment. The Commission should require the 
definition of such objectives and priorities, of which 
Article 4 makes no mention. 
6.2. The Committee agrees that decisions on how 
incentives are to be apportioned must take account of 
firms' locational disadvantages. For this reason, priority 
should be given to less-favoured upland and island 
areas. 
7. Major projects (Article 5) 
7.1. Applications for assistance to major projects 
should include information and data to help assess the 
'social profitability' of the actual investment (also in 
the case of investment in firms), starting with its impact 
on employment and innovation. The implementing 
arrangements should (as in the case of operational 
programmes) take the form of a 'programme contract' 
(between the Commission, the Member State, the 
regional and local authorities, and the public organiz­
ations or enterprises concerned). 
8. Global grants (Article 6) 
8.1. The term 'organizations' should be understood 
in the widest sense, including bodies of differing legal 
status—such as semi-public companies. At all events, 
these organizations must be recognized by the relevant 
regional autorithies (or other autorithies designated by 
the Member States). 
8.2. The involvement of key socio-economic groups 
in local development programmes funded by global 
grants is a sine qua non at all levels (planning, 
No C 337/46 Official Journal of the European Communities 31. 12. 88 
implementation and assessment). These groups should 
therefore be consulted on the procedures referred to in 
Article 6(2). Such procedures should also be agreed to 
by the regions concerned. 
9. Technical assistance and preparatory measures 
(Article 7) 
9.1. Technical assistance activities relating to the 
formulation and implementation of programmes should 
receive 100% funding, when the Commission receives 
applications from a national, regional or local auth­
ority, especially if particularly disadvantaged areas are 
involved. 
10. Regional policy guidelines (Article 8) 
10.1. More attention should be paid to the import­
ance and role of the regional policy guidelines which 
should govern the choices to be made in the Community 
support frameworks, and guide the coordination of all 
policies which have a regional impact (see Foreword). 
Done at Brussels, 27 October 1988. 10.2. Such guidelines should therefore be referred to 
the European Parliament and the Economic and Social 
Committee for an Opinion. 
10.3. As regards the development strategies referred 
to in Article 8(3), the Committee would stress the 
importance of upland areas, not least in order to re­
establish a territorial balance within individual regions. 
11. Reports and statistics (Article 8) 
11.1. The Commission's commitment to base the 
Report on updated and comparable statistics should be 
supported by an effort to ensure that all the statistics 
used to establish socio-economic indicators are com­
pletely reliable. 
12. Regional partnership (Article 9) 
12.1. Procedures should be laid down for close col­
laboration between the Commission, the Member State 
concerned and the regional authorities (or other auth­
orities designated by the Member State), both at the 
preparatory stage and when measures are implemented 
and assessed. Among other things, this is requiered by 
Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88. 
The Chairman 
of the Economic and Social Committee 
Alberto MASPRONE