8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds - 1996 - (ERDF, - ESF, - EAGGF, - FFIG)
Date: 1997-10-30
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: Structural Funds, activity report, economic and social cohesion, implementation of the budget, regional development

* 

it 

COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES 

Brussels, 30.10.1997 
COM(97)  526  final 

8  th  ANNUAL 
on  the  STRUCTURAL 

REPORT 

FUNDS 

1996 

* 

* 

^ 

* 

^ 

(PRESENTED BY THE COMMISSION) 

100 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

The  implementation  of  available  payment  appropriations  reached  95%,  i.e.. 95%  for  the  CSFs  and 
92%  for  the  Community  Initiatives.  In  the  case  of  the  CSFs/SPDs  in  particular,  the  available 
appropriations  were fully  used  only for  Objectives  1 and 6. The underutilisation  of appropriations  for 
Objective  5(a)  (91%)  is  mainly  due  to  a  lack  of  applications  for  advances  for  assistance  under 
Regulation  (EEC)  No  2328/91.  The  level  of  utilisation  of  Objective  5(b)  budget  (79%)  was  lower 
because of delays in applying for payment. 

FIFG 

Table 11-13:  FIFG  implementation  in  1996 for  the period  1994-99  (including  decommitments,  carry-overs 

and appropriations  made available again  - ECU  million) 

Ohi.  1 

222,16 

Available 
1?°6f1) 
291,60 
156,00 
2,80 
52,00 
502.40 

Objective 1 
Obj.  5(a) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Total 

COMMITMEMIS. 
csr 

Ohi. 5fa> 

pbi.6 

Total 

112.27 

0,00 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
Comrn. 

0.00 

27.50 
0,00 
158.32 
0,00 
8.21 
0,00 

0.00 

20,15 

7,97 

20,42 
23.28 
12,77 

19,89' 
0.00 

0.00 
0,00 
6,36 
0,00 

0,00 
0,00 
29.55 

0,00 
0,00 

222,16 
112,27 
0,00 

334.43 
20,42 
23,28 
40,27 
0,00 
178,21 
0.001 
8,21 
0,00 
0,00 
6.36 
0,00 
20.15 
0,00 
0,00 
37,52 

Community 
Initiatives 

47,83 

1,67 
4,54 

4,03 

0,80 
3.21 

J2M2L 

76% 
72% 
0% 
92% 
76% 

TOTAL 
(21 
222,16 
112,27 

47,83 
•222*26. 
22.09 
27,82 
40,27 
4,03 
178,21 
0,80 
11,42 

4,57 

10,93 

17,10 
2,05 
2.18 
7,22 
JLâfi 

37,25 
2,05 
2,18 
44,74 
0.46 

Total 
impL (1) 
335,76 
86,03 
0,00 
17,40 
439.18 

Objective 1 
Obj.  5(a) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Total 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
Comrn. 

% 
ravm 

93% 
94% 

98% 
93% 

PAYMENTS 

CSF 

Ohi. 1  Ohi. 5(aï  Obj, 6 

Total 

Community 
Initiatives 

311,46 

0.00 

15. 
9, 
229. 
0, 
8, 
19 

0. 

25, 

4,45 

80.58 

16,50 
0,00 
3,88 

32,74 
0,00 

11,93 

6,46 
0,80 

0,00 
0,00 
8,27 

311,46 
80.58 
0.00 

??2,Q4 
16,50 
0,00 
19.03 
9,65 
262,21 
0.00 
.8,43 
31.16 
0,00 
6,46 
0,80 
25.08 
0.00 
0.00 
12,72 

0,00 

0,00 
o.oq 

17,09 
17.09 
0,44 
0,82 

0.31 

5.93 
0,84 

1.14 

4,28 
0,62 
0,66 
2,08 

TOTAL 
m 
311,46 
80,58 
0,00 
17,09 
4P°,13 
16.93 
0,82 
19,03 
9,96 
262.21 
5,93 
9,26 
31,16 

7,60 
0,80 
29,36 
0,62 
0.66 
14.80 

In  1996, ECU  113 million,  i.e. 25% of the FIFG budget, could not be committed  because of delays in 
implementing  certain  programmes  (notably 
in  Italy  and  France).  In  the  case  of  payments, 
ECU  123 million  (23% of the budget) could not be implemented  for the same reason. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

101 

2. 

Implementation of programming for 1994-99 

2.1.  Implementation 1994-96 

Table 11-14:  Implementation in 1994-96 for  the period 1994-99 (including decommitments, carry-overs and 

appropriations made available again • ECU million) 

Available 
mfttlUa) 

Obi  1 
71.577,00  42.637,67 

Ohi  7 
6.465,19 

Obi  3 
6.151,03 

COMMITMENTS 
SSL. 

Ohi  4  Obi  SialA  S(aF+180f>  Obi  Vh) 
2.152^4 
635,13 

2.189,75 

425,72 

229.69 

5.933,05 
6.162,23 
12.932.25 
794.62 
2.891.00 
5.063.50 

42.00 
33.76 
7.517,36 

1.038.20 

J i_ 
140.60 
53,07 
665.91 

19235 
127,00 
820,40 

16.38 
13,00 
56.22 

79.83 
60,75 
514,56 

1.03639 
1.560,16 

666.50 
199.99 

1 

167,64 
187,07 

102.41 
739,38 

S13.97 
6.50 
204.16 
65.55 

350.34 
9.86 
434,50 
129,75 

52.42 
105.78 
2.060.67 

9532 
73.00 
051.81 

2 

98.89 
0,90 
22.23 
11,70 

23.60 
3730 

249,16 
16.53 
34,32 
137.44 

114.74 
40.22 
100,39 

24.5 
69,87 
37,64 

59,72 
63.27 

44,77 
1,10 
1532 
2,00 

23.00 
40,00 
4433 

16.02 
13.52 
449,45 

334.39 
709,08 

14039 
0,84 
41,17 
129,95 

49.08 
64,91 
203.63 

Total 
ft  am) 
B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
RN 
S 
UK 
Cpnun. 

Total 

imuL 
53.99930 

Obi 1 
31.425,80 

-2bL 
338835 

JttL 
4397,97 

Tout 

f2Vm 

PAYMENTS 
SSL 

Ohi  4  Ohi  S ^A  Obi. SfalF  Ohi  S/M 
1.48738 
317,76 

1.426,60 

229,87 

17134 

4.564.47 
4.437,74 
9366.71 
530.87 
2.299.92 
3.48139 

31,47 
27,01 
5.698,62 

815.86 

50,00 
23,66 
339,69 

156.42 
115.20 
521,76 

60722 
835,45 

516.66 
90636 

245.05 
4.28 
91,80 
33,01 

202.67 
8.94 
377.94 
103,80 

29,79 
38.06 
1.09034 

5137 
3630 
1.40036 

833 
10,68 
2331 

75,84 
9732 

49,45 
039 
11.12 
9,36 

12,92 
18.75 

59,10 
41,26 
387.16 

8435 
449.86 

99.81 
10.58 
18.64 
107,88 

5731 
34,72 
75,74 

19.8 
30.29 
20,01 

42,71 
41,13 

23.13 
0.11 
12,67 
1,00 

6.90 
12.00 
20,09 

8,05 
5.80 
346,77 

242.84 
508,13 

84,66 
0,42 
2536 
78.50 

23,61 
22,64 
140,89 

Ohi .*  Total (hi 
214,57 
60.871,69 
S52L 
699,58 
337,21 
8.477,24 
6.16233 
15.299,32 
5.25338 
2.891,00 
6.461,23 
35.74 
793.90 
510,15 
7.51736 
51635 
417.79 
5.499,03 

158.18 
56,39 

Community 
Initiatives,, 
5.71238 
sa 
159.04 
69.80 
1010.98 
205.14 
55737 
627.12 
91.95 
438.84 
2.73 
85.00 
90.05 
354.35 
9336 
72.22 
563.26 
1290.77 

TOTAL 
•  (2) 
66384,07 

858,62 
407,01 
9.488.21 
6.36737 
15.856.88 
5.880.70 
2.982.95 
6.900.07 
38,47 
878,89 
600 30 
7.871.71 
609.91 
490.02 
6.06239 
, 1.290,77 

Ohi  6  Total fH> 
114,10 
42.788,01 
_ Z 2£ 

473,18 
226,88 
6.203.37 
4.437.74 
10.93633 
3.36932 
2399.92 
4.18635 
24,92 
568,88 
36036 
5.698,62 
264,41 
194,15 
3343,18 

82,62 
31,48 

Community 
Initiatives 
2.67558 
5£ 
70,16 
19.95 
461,67 
86,72 
306,69 
253.03 
42,00 
21733 
1,09 
30.80 
40.54 
182.14 
3536 
27,74 
25633 
644.02 

TOTAL 

45.463,99 

543.34 
246,84 
6.665.04 
4324.45 
11.24332 
3.62235 
2.341.92 
4.403.69 
26.00 
599.69 
401.10 
5.880.76 
299.97 
221.89 
3.799.71 
frH.Q2 

ECU 44.232 million under beading B2-1000 (Structural actions directly linked to markets policy) which were 
, for Objective 5(a) agriculture. ECU 43.65 million under heading B2-1000 and ECU 356.6 million in  refunds 

not allocated by Objective in 1994. 
under Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91 

ECU 61  million under heading B2-1000 not allocated by Objective in  1994 and a reserve of ECU  522 million for earlier measures. 
, for Objective 5(a) agriculture. ECU 43.65 million under heading B2-1000 and ECU 417.02 million in refunds  under Régulation (EEC) No 2328/91 

B 
OK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
1 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
RN 
S 
UK 
Comm 
(a) Not including 
(b) Not including, 
(in  1994 only) 
(c) Not including 
(d) Not including, 
(in  1994 only) 

Budget  implementation  of  the  commitment  appropriations  for  all  the  Funds  in  the  1994-99 
programming period improved in  1996 compared to the two previous years:  90% implementation in 
1994,  91%  in  1995  and  98%  in  1996.  If  these  three  years  are  compared  with  the  1989-93 
programming period, the results for  1996 are comparable with the results at the half way stage in that 
preceding  period. The  improvement in  the  implementation rate  of  payment  appropriations is  even 
greater: 88% of the appropriations were implemented in  1996 (leaving ECU  1 233 million unused), as 
against  75% in  1994 (ECU 4  800 million unused) and  82% in  1995 (ECU 3 759 million unused). It 
should be remembered that the Community payments depend on implementation of the programmes at 
national level since once the programme is adopted, the corresponding annual instalment is committed 
and  a first advance is paid, the Commission can make a second payment only when the Member State 
can  certify that the final beneficiaries have actually undertaken expenditure amounting to at least half 
of  the first  advance. This explains the accelerated rate of payments for many programmes adopted in 
1995. 

102 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

22.  Implementation  of each  Fund  in 1994-96 in the context of  1994-99 

ERDF 

Table  II-15: 

implementation 

ERDF 
carry-overs  and  appropriations  made  available  again  - ECU  million) 

the  period  1994-99 

in  1994-96 

for 

(including 

decommitments, 

% 

99% 
99% 
89% 
100% 
76% 
96% 

% 
(2)/n 

88% 
74% 
81% 
100% 
65% 
84%.. 

Available 
m 
2631834 
5.099,76 
948,04 
74,76 
4.945,01 
37385.91 

Objective  1 
Objective 2 
Obj. 5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
I&UI 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
RN 
S 
UK 
Ç°nnn, 

Total 
imp). (I) 
2130834 
3395,06 
730,74 
2835 
2.689,77 
2*352.76 

Objective  1 
Objective 2 
Obj. 5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
IfllaJ 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 

UK 

Ç9TÏ1ÏÏ1, 

Ohi.l 
26.036.65 
0.00 

COMMITMENTS 
SSL. 
Obi. 2  Ohi. 5(b)  Obi,  ft 

5.034.30 

84638 

74,76 

-IstaL 
26.036.65 
5.03430 
84638 
74.76 

31.992.28 

Community 
Initiatives 

3.745.84 
3.745.84 
66,24 
13.78 
662,93 
126.77 
29037 
352.17 
43.00 
164,10 
1.17 
5334 
34,21 
291.42 
22.63 
27.67 
.67 
3053 
J22& 

L3JJ 

Community 
Initiatives, 

Total 
18.897.19B 
2.431.361 
59335 
28.85 

JLL2&22 
15036 
23,62 
2.610,82 
3.090,88 
5.893,32 
1.09436 
90434 
2.942.62 
332 
86,37 
65.08 
3.73037 
56.80 
49.42 
1.248,75 

1.757,75 
'-757.75 
31,08 
2.96 
281,04 
55,06 
172,41 
141.161 
14.21 
81.21 
034) 
17.71 
13.03 
156.97 
7,42 
830 
130.62 

S44.Q2 

TOTAL 
(2) 
26.036,65 
5.03430 
84638 
74,76 
3.74534 
35.738.12 
323.86 
64.25 
4059.83 
4435.33 
9286.88 
2345,41 
1383.47 
4282,73 
6.16 
237.72 
14237 
5050.07 
152,84 
16633 
2510,07 
J22ML 

TOTAL 
(2) 
18397,19 
2.43136 
59335 
2835 
1.757,75 
23.7ft8.7Qi 
181.65 
26.57 
2891.86 
3145.94 
6065.73 
1235,73 
918.75 
3023.84 
3.76 
104.08 
78.11 
3887.34 
64.22 
57,72 
1379,37 
_ 6 4 4 £2 

142.18 

2.742,32 
4.30836 
8.123.91 
36931 
1.340,46 
3.658.36 

24,30 
19.96 
4.758,64 

548.45 

110.62 
44.54 
482.89 

4.82 
5.93 
171.69 

790.42 
1339,46 

81.98 
284.27 

416.41 
436 
143.97 
4633 

46.12 
8332 
1325,56 

43.86 
0.43 
16.11 
41.67 

31.19 
34.09 
13034 

52.90 
21,86 

Obi. I 
18.897.19 

PAYMENTS 

JCSJL 
QbU  Obi. SO»  QbUL 

2.43136 

59335 

2.41 
3.74 
13932 

69.21 
201,44 

21.93 
0.21 
12,44 
27.84 

12.24 
11.71 
90.84 

28.85 

17.92 
10.93 

113,74 

2.240.46 
3.090,88 
5.381,87 
221.33 
90434 
2.731.71 

19.44 
15.97 
3.730.37 , 

446.88 

34.41 
19,88 
230,83 

442.24 
671,80 

188.98 
3,01 
54.49 
21.27 

26.64 

26,78 
711.03 

Compared  to  the  initial  programming  for  the  CSFs  and  SPDs,  overall  implementation  of  ERDF 
appropriations  amounts  to  99%, equal  to  a  shortfall  of  ECU 360 million  on  the  amount  programmed 
for  the  1994-96  period  of ECU 32 390 million.  However,  progress  varies  depending  on Objective  and 
Member  State. Thus, for ERDF  Objective  1, commitments  are running  ahead  of the financing  plans by 
ECU  670  million  (2.6%)  (in  1995  there  was  a  shortfall  of  1.3%),  to  the  greatest  degree  in  Spain, 
Ireland  and  Portugal  where  extra  implementation  amounts  to  ECU  2 014  million.  By  contrast,  the 
significant  under-implementation  in  Austria  (49%),  Belgium  (37%),  Germany  (ECU  335  million), 
France  (ECU  167  million),  Italy  (ECU  700  million)  and  the  Netherlands  amounted  to  ECU  1 314 
million. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

103 

By contrast, Objective 2 showed ERDF commitments lagging behind the financing plans by ECU 508 
million  (9%). The lag at the end of  1995 (18% - ECU 650 million)  was shortened in part because  of 
the  need  to  commit  all  of  the  assistance  adopted  for  the  first  programming  phase  1994-96.  The 
greatest  lags  in  implementation  affected  Spain  (ECU  91  million),  France  (ECU  127  million),  Italy 
(ECU  117  million),  the  United  Kingdom  (ECU  101  million)  and  the  Netherlands  (-31%).  Only 
Austria and Sweden are running ahead of schedule,-because a single commitment for the entire  1995-
99 period was made for the operations in which they are involved. ERDF commitments for Objective 
5(b)  are also lagging behind the financing  plans by ECU 496  million  (37%). Implementation  of  this 
Objective is running into severe difficulties  in almost all Member States. The greatest lags in absolute 
terms are in  Germany  (ECU 47  million), France  (ECU  157  million),  Italy  (ECU  126 million,  74%) 
and  the  United  Kingdom  (ECU  115  million),  and  in  relative  terms  for  Belgium  (74%),  Denmark 
(40%),  Luxembourg  (71%)  and  the  Netherlands  (56%).  Lastly,  Objective  6  is  lagging  behind  the 
financing  plans  by ECU 24  million  (25%). The  lag is due entirely  to  Sweden, where  the  operations 
were late starting for administrative reasons. 

Implementation  of  the Community  Initiatives  with  a regional  bias  (Interreg, Peace,  Rechar,  Résider, 
Konver, Retex, Regis, Urban and SMEs) are lagging behind for all Funds by ECU 543 million for the 
period  1994-96  (13%). The lag  was  shortened  (it  stood  at  32% in  1995)  mainly  as  a  result  of  the 
adoption  of  new  programmes  and  for  the  three  new  Member  States  in  particular.  Budget 
implementation  of  commitments  was  also  speeded  up  by  virtue  of  the  fact  that  a.large  number  of 
programmes  involving  a Community  contribution  below  ECU 40  million  could  be  fully  committed 
upon adoption (single commitment). 

104 

ESF 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

Table 11-16:  ESF  implementation  in  1994-96 for 

the  period  1994-99  (including decommitments, 

carry-overs and appropriations made available again - ECU million) 

"»>i. l 
9.179.77 

ohi. 2 

QhL2 

1.430.89 

6.151.03 

COMMITMENTS 
_£SE_ 
Û bU  Obi. Sfh>  QfajjL 

635.13 

282.32 

45,97 

Available 
ill 
10.014.63 
1.75533 
6.62035 
906.04 
358.95 
45,97 
2.098.67 
21.fiftQ.34 

Objective 1 
Objective 2 
Objective 3 
Objective 4 
Obj. 5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
laiaJ 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
p 
RN 
S 
_LLLL_ 

65.14 

1.775.98 
801.44 
2.826.42 
268.26 
940.51 
633.82 

8.20 
5.04 
1333.39 

• 

*?1.<7 

29.98 
8.53 
183.03 

192.55 
127.00 
820.40 

16.38 
13.00 
56.22 

245.97 
220.70 

666.50 
1300.00 

167.64 
187.07 

97.56 
1.94 
60.19 
19.01 
6.30 

350.34 
9.86 
434,50 
129.75 

2236 
iWi.12 

95.32 
73.00 
2 0U81 

98.89 
0.90 
22.23 
11.70 

23.60 
37.50 

4.26 
1.30 
42.85 

2238 
93,12 

14,77 
0.11 
2.47 
2733 

6.29 
12.83 
54tn 

34.58 
11.39 

J2MXL 
92% 
82% 
93% 
70% 
79% 
100% 
71% 
88fr 

Community 
1, Initiatives 

Total 
9.179.77 
1.430.89 
6.151.03 
635,13 
282.32 
45,97 

17,mi2 
308.31 
149.83 
2.878.47 
801.44 
3.929.11 
1.969.16H 
940.51 
1.195.38 
12.81 
527.58 
193.03 
1.539.69 
159.79 
157.28 
2.962.73 

1.483.27 
1,4^.27 
82.53 
45.49 
259.03 
46.37 
198.63 
166.89 
41,99 
230.75 
1.07 
22.16 
42.57 
33.12 
53.57 
32.93 
226 16 

TOTAL 

9.179.77 
1.43039 
6.151,03 
635,13 
28232 
45,97 
1.48337 
I9.Z08.3? 
390.84 
195.32 
3.137.50 
847.81 
4.127.74 
2.136.05 
982.50 
1.426.14 
13.88 
549.75 
235.60 
1.572,81 
213.37 
190.21 
-LLSL88. 

Total 
jmjiLai 
8.179,06 
1.121,49 
5.09538 
317,76 
252,19 
24,01 
92930 
IS.919.07 

Objective 1 
Objective 2 
Objective 3 
Objective 4 
Obj. 5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Total 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
JUL 

ohi.  i 
7.108.08 

nhi.  2 

ohi.  3 

957.00 

4.397.97 

PAYMENTS 

CSF 
gfaLj 

Qbi.Sfh) 

QhLL. 

317.77 

191.15 

24.01 

48.03 

1.311.19 
531.96 
2.397.11 
208.59 
845.77 
322.61 

5.06 
4.03 
1.174.90 

258.84 

15.60 
3.80 
108,85 

164.97 
163.65 

56.08 
1.26 
37,31 
11.74. 

3.15 
11.28 
V79.31 

156.42 
115.20 
521.76 

516.66 
906.56 

202,67 
8.94 
377.94 
103.80 

51.27 
36.50 
40036 

8.23 
10.68 
23,51 

75.84 
97,32 

49.45 
0.59 
11.12 
9.36 

12,92 
18.75 

2,84 
0.78 
26.90 

13.45 
72.71 

7,45 
0.05 
1.49 
19.80 

2.67 
4.59 
?8,42 

18.31 
5.70 

JCfitaL 
7.108,08 
957.00 
4.397.97 
317.77 
191.15 
24.01 

12,9?') ,97 
231.13 
130.45 
1.99231 
531.96 
3.168.03 
1.448.82 
845.77 
638.25 
10.85 
432.92 
148.74 
1.174.90 
88.32 
76.8 
2076.821 

Community 
initiatives 

TOTAL 
fi) 

(2W1> 

87% 
85% 
86% 
100% 
76% 
100% 
79% 
fifift' 

7.108.08 
957,00 
4397,97 
317,77 
191,15 
24,01 
733,01 
13.728.98 
264.73 
144.28 
2.133.93 
549.32 
3.275.17 
1.525.63 
870,86 
753.94 
11.25 
443.16 
172.24 
1.187.43 
111.25 
93.08 
2 192.69 

733.01 
73V01 
33.60 
13,83 
141.71 
17.36 
107.15 
76,81 
25.09 
115.69 
0.40 
10.24 
23.50 
1234 
22.94 
16.27 

11** 

Good  implementation  of  the  appropriations  in  1996  ensured  a  commitment  rate  for  all  Objectives 
above 90% of the instalments initially planned for the  1994-96 period when adopting the programmes. 
However,  a  scrutiny  of  the  various  Objectives  shows  that  Objectives  1, 2  and  3  were  implemented 
relatively  well  but  that  Objectives  4,  5(b)  and  6  are  lagging  well  behind.  Divergent  trends  are  also 
visible  within  each  Objective.  In  the  case  of  Objective  1,  Greece  and  Italy  in  particular  are 
experiencing  delays.  The  delays  under  Objective  2  concern  in  particular  Denmark,  Italy  and  the 
Netherlands.  While  implementation  of  Objective  3  is  quite  good  overall,  implementation  in  Italy  is 
relatively  slow and the country  has also reworked  almost all of its programmes. Most of the  Objective 
4 and 5(b) programmes were adopted at the end of  1994 or beginning of  1995, which meant that  there 
would  be  delays  in  their  implementation.  The  results  for  Objective  6  have  been  affected  by  start-up 
difficulties  in Sweden. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

105 

The decisions  approving the Employment and Adapt Community Initiatives were taken at the end of 
December  1994 (Employment) and May  1995 (Adapt) and the Member States sought partners in other 
countries in the following months. As a result, the first contracts with the project promoters could not 
be signed until mid-1995, which explains why the appropriations were not used in 1994 and why take-
up  was just  average  in  1995.  By  contrast,  the  implementation  rate  for  1996  has  been  particularly 
satisfactory  and all the projects have received at least their first advance. 

EAGGF 

Table  11-17: 

EAGGF 
carry-overs 

implementation 

for 
and  appropriations  made  available  again  - ECU  million) 

in  1994-96 

the  period 

1994-99 

(including 

COMMITMEHIS-
CSF 

22.00 

92.41 

2.189.76 

1.023.74 

79.83 
60,75 
51436 

Community 
Initiatives 

Tola» 
6.692.25 
2.189.76 
1.023,74 
92,41 

Objective  1 
Obj. 5(a) 
Obj. 5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Total (») 

Ohi. 1  Ohi. 5(a)  Ohi. 5(h)  Qbi.v 
6.692,25 

Available 
01 
6.714,86 
2371,91 
1.02331 
92,50 
67939 
11.082.67 

TOTAL 
(2) 
6.69235 
2.189,76 
1.023,74 
92,41 
389,71 
1Q.387.87 
117.05 
7031 
2.202.92 
1.03838 
1.912,86 
1.310,09 
59530 
1.079,04 
1733 
6738 
22033 
1.161,62 
211.65 
90,06 
2?3,56 
(*) Not including ECU 43.65 million under heading B2-1000 (Structural actions directly linked to markets policy) 

?,9?8.lfl 
108,78 
67,05 
2.117,73 
1.015.12 
1.851,40 
1.221,62 
592,63 
1.035.90 
16.83 
3.61 
63.61 
5.95 
206.' 
1.153 
3.17 
19634 
80,62 
27P.4Q 

389,71 
389.71 
8,27 
3,27 
85,19 
23,47 
61,46 
88,47 
237 
43.14 
0.49 
3,77 
13.27 
8,45 
15,31 
9,44 
23.158 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 

1368.25 
1.015,12 
1319.15 
15034 
592.63 
704.79 

249,16 
1633 
34,32 
137,44 

11.60 
17,99 
_J&g6_ 

6.70 
8.76 
1.153,17 

81,95 
030 
2238 
60,75 

6,95 
6.30 
234,92 

114,74 
40,22 
100.39 

229,84 
331,69 

102,41 
73939 

70,00 
22,41 

ilLLL 

decommitments, 

am) 
100% 
85% 
100% 
100% 
57% 
?4% 

Total 
impl.fi) 

5360,19 
1.981,81 
896,61 
6033 
22832 
8.727.58 

Objective  1 
Obj. 5(a) 
Obj. 5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Total 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
J2&-

% 
(2vm 

72% 
78% 
100% 
68% 
83% 

PAYMENTS 

CSF 

Obi.Ï  Ohi.5(a)  Ohi. 5(b)  Obi.fi 
4.909,80 

1.426.60 

702,89 

60,53 

Community 
Initiatives 

Total 
4.909,80 
1.426.60 
702,89 
6033 

938 

986.08 
791,01 
1.249,04 
97,49 
535.70 
392,06 

539 
7.01 
735.11 

101.33 

59.10 
41.26 
387.16 

2,80 
1,29 
18035 

8435 
449.86 

160,19 
233.99 

99,81 
10.58 
18.64 
107.88 

57.31 
34,72 
75.73 

55,28 
0,15 
1133 
30.85 

8.69 
6.34 
11.64 

7.W.81 
71,48 
4235 
135339 
791,01 
1.493.78 
781.34 
535,70 
547,15 
10,73 
35.35 
145.74 
735,11 
112.03 
5535 
1W.7P. 

154.66 
154.66 
4.88 
0.98 
37,00 
11,73 
23.68 
29,13 
1,28 
20,00 
0,15 
1,13 
4.01 
6.23 
439 
232 
7.36 

46.04! 
14,49 

TOTAL 
(2) 
4.909,80 
1.426,60 
702,89 
6033 
154,66 
7.254,47 
76.36 
4333 
139039 
802.74 
1317,46 
810,46 
536,98 
567,15 
'  10,88 
36,49 
149.75 
74134 
116.63 
58.06 
196.05 

The  amounts  committed  lagged  slightly  behind  the  commitments  originally  decided  on  for  all 
Objectives.  Depending  on  the case,  this  was  caused  by  failing  to  add the  amount  released  through 

106 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

indexation  to the programmes  and/or reprogramming,  or in some  cases  a failure  to programme  beyond 
1996  some  of the  commitments  originally  planned  for the years  1994 to  1996. 

F I FG 

Table  11-18: 

implementation 

FIFG 
carry-overs  and appropriations  made  available  again  - ECU  million) 

the  period  1994-99 

in  1994-96  for 

(including 

decommitments, 

Available 
OL 
803,24 
473,97 
4,23 
130,15 
1.411.59 

Objective 1 
Obj. 5(a) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Iffial 

COMMITMEBaS. 
SSL. 
Qbi. 1  Ohi.  5(a)  Obi,  fi  JLalaL 
728,99 
425,72 
1.43 

425,72 

728.99 

1.43 

0.37 

46.50 
37.10 
462.78 
6.30 
17,40 
6634 

2,80 

72,16 

17,03 

2430 
69.87 
37,64 

59.72 
63,27 

44.77 
1.10 
1532 
2.00 

23.00 
40,00 
4433 

1.156.14 
24,87 
69,87 
84,14 
37,10 
52230 
6937 
17,40 
111.31 
1,10 
18.32 
2.00 
72,16 
23.70 
40,73 
6136 

0,70 
0.73 

% 
f2V(1> 

91% 
90% 
34% 
72% 
_8i 

Community 
Initiatives 

9336 
93.56 
2,00 
7.27 
3.83 
834 
6.91 
1938 
4,38 
0.85 

5.72 
-
2136 
2.05 
2,18 
8,43 
0.46 

TOTAL 
(2) 
728,99 
425,72 
1,43 
9336 
1.249.70 
26.87 
77.14 
87.97 
45.64 
529.41 
89.15 
21.79 
112.16 
1,10 
24.04 
2.00 
9332 
25.75 
42,91 
69.79 
PRE 

PAYMENTS 

-CSL. 

Ohi. 1  Ohi. 5(a)  Obi.fi 

510,74 

229,86 

0.72 

Total 
imnl.d) 

817,461 
247,741 

30371 

0,19 

26.74 
23.89 
338.68 
3,46 
13.93 
35.22 

1.58 

58,22 

8.82 

19,83 
30,29 
20,01 

42,71 
41,13 

23,13 
0.11 
12,67 
1,00 

6.90 
12.00 
20.09 

0.35 
0.37 

Total 

Community 
Initiative 

TOTAL 

% 
r2vm 

62% 
93% 
101% 
99% 

510,74 
229^6 
0,72 
3037 
771.89 
20.62 
32.47 
48.67 
26,45 
384.85 
503: 
15,35 
58,77 
0.11 
15.96 
1.00 
64,63 
7.87 
13.03 
3139 

3037 
30.57 
0.60 
2.18 
1.92 
2,56 
3.46 
5.93 
1.42 
0,42 

1.72 

6.41 
0.62 
0.66 
2.68 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
RN 
S 
UK 

Çpmm. 

Objective 1 
Obj. 5(a) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Total 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
RN 
S 
UK 
Ççnimi 

A  total  of ECU  771  9 00 0 00 had been  paid  at the end of  1996 out of ECU  1  168 million  committed  in 
1994-96  (69%). The rates  were  70% for Objective  1, 54% for Objective  5(a) and 50% for Objective  6. 
Of  the total  amount  of  assistance  for the whole  programming  period,  4 5% had been  committed  by the 
end  of  1996.  The implementation  of the  programmes  on the ground  needs  to be closely  monitored  as a 
result.  In  many  cases,  actual  implementation  (expenditure  achieved  as  a  proportion  of  total  planned 
expenditure)  fell  well  short  of budget  implementation,  especially  for those  programmes  that  were  also 
late  on  the  budget  side.  If  these  programmes  cannot  soon  make  up  for the  lag, it  will  be  difficult  to 
commit  and pay out all the assistance  granted. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

107 

B.  CHECKS AND FINANCIAL  MANAGEMENT 

Regular  and  effective  implementation  of  the  Structural  Funds  appropriations  determines  the  actual 
impact  on  the  ground.  Under  Article  205  of  the  Treaty,  the  Commission  is  responsible  for 
implementing  the  Community  budget  and  as  such  it  ensures  the  quality  of  the  management  and 
monitoring  systems  which  it  and  the  Member  States  use.  This  requirement,  shared  by  the  Member 
States and reiterated  by the Commission  on several  occasions, is particularly  topical  in the context of 
the  SEM  (sound  and  efficient  management)  2000  initiative  launched  in  1995  which  became 
operational  in  1996. This  management  exercise, which related  in particular  to the structural  policies, 
has  allowed  all  the conditions  and  measures  needed  for  the efficient  management  of  the  Community 
funds  to be examined  in partnership with the Member States. 

1.  Checks 

To  continue  the  activities  carried  out  in  previous  years  and  as  part  of  the  SEM  2000  initiative,  the 
Commission  checked that the Member States had adequate systems for the financial  management  and 
monitoring  of  the  programmes.  Under  Article  23(1)  of  Regulation  (EEC)  No 4253/88,  as  amended, 
the  Member  States  are  responsible  for  using  the  Structural  Funds  appropriations  properly  and  for 
preventing  irregularities.  The  Commission  therefore  checks  the  reliability  of  the  control  and 
management systems and the regularity of expenditure. 

1.1.  Checks carried out by the Commission's Structural Funds departments 

ERDF:  26  on-the-spot  checks  were  carried  out  in  1996  (five  in  Spain,  four  in  Germany  and  in 
Portugal,  three  in  Ireland,  two  in  Austria,  Belgium,  Finland  and  France  and  one  each  in  the 
Netherlands and Sweden). The checks, the programme for which is notified  to the Member States, are 
first  and  foremost  intended  to  verify  the  existence  and  effectiveness  of  the  systems  for  the 
management  and  control  of  operations,  and  the  reliability  of  the  information  forwarded  to  the 
Commission  (in  particular  certification  of  expenditure). They  must  also  check  that  the  ERDF  funds 
are used properly, the accounting is accurate and that the financial  management is legal, proper and of 
a  high  quality  in  the  light  of  the  goals  for  each  form  of  assistance  and  of  Community  rules  and 
policies. Each programme of checks was drawn up to take account, inter alia, of the inspections  made 
by  the  Commission's  Financial  Control  and  the Court  of Auditors  and  the  results  of  a  risk  analysis. 
The checks confirmed  that individual or systematic irregularities continued  to occur. In general  these 
relate  to  the  unreliability  of  certification  of  expenditure,  which  are  the  basis  for  the  payments  and 
advances  made by the Commission, and the weaknesses  of certain internal  checking procedures.  The 
declarations  of* expenditure  often  include  expenditure  not  eligible  for  ERDF  funding  (such  as  the 
salaries  or  operating  expenditure  of  ministries  or  other  public  bodies)  and  expenditure  declared  as 
actually  incurred  sometimes  includes  estimates of  future  expenditure. The beneficiaries'  declarations 
of  expenditure  are  in  some  cases  submitted  to  the  Commission  and  certified  by  the  authorities 
appointed  by  the  Member  States  without  sufficient  internal  checks,  which  can  lead  to  incorrect 
submissions  and  formal  irregularities.  In  addition,  in  many  regions  Community  rules  on  public 
procurement  are  not  fully  complied  with  and  the  programming  of  assistance  is  not  monitored  or 
assessed  with  sufficient  precision.  For  example,  the  legal  and  financial  commitments  and  payments 
are not made by the deadlines  laid down in the decisions to grant assistance. With the closure of many 
of  the  programmes  from  the  first  programming  period,  some  weaknesses  in  the  Member  States' 
central accounts systems have also come to the fore. 

As  a  result  of  these  checks,  the  Commission  takes  the  steps  required  to  monitor  and  correct  all 
irregularities  which  it or the Court of Auditors discovers. The correction  often  involves deducting  the 
amount deemed  ineligible from  the Member State's  subsequent declaration  of expenditure for  a given 
programme. 

ESF:  84 inspection.visits, a higher number than in  1995 (73), were carried  out to check the use made 
of  ESF  funding.  The  checks  were made  on  the  basis  of  an  annual  programme  notified  in  advance  to 

108 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

the Member States, but a certain  number of  unscheduled  visits  were  also carried out  in cooperation 
with the Unit on the Coordination of Fraud Prevention (UCLAF). In accordance with Article 23(1) of 
Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88, as amended, the checks covered the management and control  systems 
established by the Member States to ensure correct implementation of the ESF operations. This meant 
that  the  checks  also  involved  verifying  certain  operations  and  visits  to  the  final  beneficiaries. 
Improvements  were  carried  out  between  1990  and  1995  and  appropriate  corrective  measures  were 
adopted  by  the  Member  States.  Nevertheless,  weaknesses  in  the  management  systems  and 
inadequacies  in  the  control  systems  are  still  being  detected  at  various  levels  of  the  partnership. 
Inadequacies  are  still  occurring,  especially  in  the  assessment  of  projects,  the  selection  of  training 
bodies, payments in kind, the lack of transparency  and publicity  for ESF aid, disproportionate  costs, 
insufficient  spread  of  responsibilities  within  the  administrations,  etc.  The  ESF  measures  are  non-
tangible  and thus  less  easy  to check.  The  Member  States  are  thus  urged  to  comply  with  their own 
control systems and increase the number of on-site inspections they make. 

EAGGF: In  1996, 26 inspection visits were made to check the use made of EAGGF funds, a smaller 
number  than  in  1995  (35),  but  more  than  in  1994  (21).  The  checks  were  organised  mainly  by  the 
departments responsible for the EAGGF (22), but also by the Financial Control of the Commission (3) 
or the Member State concerned (1). Their main focus  was on evaluating the management and control 
systems  used,  verifying  the  conformity  of  the  financial  and  accounting  reports  and  physical 
implementation  with Community rules, the decisions granting aid and the expenditure declared to the 
EAGGF.  With  the  exception  of  the  visits  made  in  two  of  the  three  new  Member  States  and  the 
expenditure  under  Regulation  (EEC)  No  2328/91,  all  checks  involved  programmes  and  assistance 
covering the first programming period  1989-93, for which the funds had to be committed by the end of 
1993; or where an extension  was granted, in  1994 or  1995. As a general  rule, the systems  introduced 
by the majority  of  Member  States  to manage the  aid  and check  declared  expenditure  function  well. 
Nevertheless,  a number of  weaknesses  and irregularities  were  revealed  in  almost  all  of  the Member 
States and measures. Yet again mention must be made of  non-compliance  with the Community  rules 
on public procurement, the award of aid for ineligible expenditure  (by virtue of its nature or the date 
of payment), major delays in payments to the beneficiaries, a  lack of publicity and information  about 
the  Community  funding  contribution,  inadequate  control  measures,  incorrect  application  of  the 
conversion rates, a risk of duplicate Community funding from different  sources for the same measures 
and uncertainty  as to the validity  of some commitments entered into before the end of  the prescribed 
period.  In  the  case  of  two  of  the  new  Member  States,  the  checks  and  their  outcome  were  positive 
overall,  since  the two countries  in  question  had managed  to transpose  all  the Community  rules  into 
their  national  legislation  and  their  national  procedures,  at  times  complicated,  had  ensured  that  the 
Community rules were correcdy applied. 

FIFG:  The departments  responsible for the FTFG carried  out five  visits, two with Financial  Control 
participation. The construction of a school for divers at Kalimnos (Greece) was unsatisfactory  and an 
explanation  from  the  Greek  authorities  was  expected  in  early  1997.  A  visit  was  made  to  Bremen 
(Germany). No serious irregularity came to light during a visit to Portugal (Lisbon and Péniche). 

Letters were sent to the Member States in question  informing them of  the problems encountered and 
recommending the steps to the taken. As a result, in accordance with Article 23 of Regulation (EEC) 
No 4253/88,  as amended, some Member States were asked to make additional  checks  and to inform 
the  Commission  of  the  results.  In  addition,  the  Commission  suggested  a  number  of  financial 
corrections  to  the  programmes  or  projects  in  which  irregularities  had  been  detected  where,  under 
Article  24(2)  of  Regulation  (EEC) No 4253/88,  a risk of  incorrect  use  of  the Community  funds  had 
been established. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

109 

12.  Inspections carried out by Financial Control 

In  1996 Financial  Control  carried  out  its  Structural  Fund  inspections  in  line  with  the  SEM  2000 
initiative  to  improve  financial  management?.  This  was  done  on  the  one  hand  to  rationalise  and 
coordinate  the inspections  and on the other hand to emphasise further  the auditing approach  to the 
control  systems  introduced  by the Member  States. Financial  Control  carried  out  75 on-site  checks 
covering total expenditure for  the types of assistance audited amounting to ECU 4 200 million. The 
amounts likely  to be recovered  total ECU  1 152 000 for  the EAGGF and ECU 31 780 000 for  the 
ESF. 

The main aim of the programme of inspections was to check the legality, regularity and  effectiveness 
of Structural  Funds transactions and to complete the audit records for each Fund and each Member 
State available to Financial Control. In addition, in order to make better use of the resources of the 
various inspection authorities and in line with the guidelines adopted  by the Commission under the 
SEM  2000  programme,  negotiations  continued  in  1996  to  extend  to  the  new  Member  States  the 
cooperation  protocols  concluded  between  the  Commission  and  the  relevant  national  inspection 
authorities.  The  detailed  discussions  with  the  Netherlands  made  it  possible  to  adapt  the  protocol 
formula  to the decentralised  inspection  systems of those Member States with a similar structure (in 
particular  the  United  Kingdom, Sweden  and  Finland)  and  those  with  a federal  structure  (Belgium, 
Germany and Austria). In 1996, three new protocols were signed: on 2 February with the Netherlands, 
on  17 June with Portugal and on 17 October with Sweden. The coordination of inspections received a 
further  boost  and coordination  meetings were held with  seven of the eight Member States that had 
signed a protocol, and with a Member State that has not yet signed one. 

1.3.  Enquiries carried out by the anti-fraud unit 

, • 

In addition to the checks carried out under the annual programme referred to above, during 1996 some 
40 missions to investigate structural measures were carried out by the Commission's anti-fraud  unit 
(UCLAF),  acting  either  alone  or  in  association  with  the  departments  concerned.  The  number  of 
enquiries into fraud or suspected fraud carried out by the Commission with the Member States related 
to 88 cases, fewer than the 112 in 1995 but concerning a total amount almost four times greater (ECU 
88  million  instead  of  ECU  23  million). These  investigations  included  misuse  of  funds  under  the 
Renaval programme in the Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur region, where certain councillors have been 
charged  with corruption. It was also found  that there was a general failure  to monitor thè""rules on 
public  contracts.  Another  example  concerns  fisheries  policy  and  the  granting  of  Community 
assistance worth ECU 5.9 million for three projects to establish joint ventures for the priority supply 
of fisheries  products to the Community market. There were also a number of cases where costs had 
been artificially  inflated  or dummy companies established. This was particularly prevalent in the field 
of vocational training.3 

1.4.  Notification of irregularities by the Member States 

During  1996,  the  Member  States  notified  to  the  Commission,  pursuant  to  Regulation  (EC)  No 
1681/94,4 297 cases of irregularity or fraud involving some ECU 64 million. In volume terms, most 
cases concerned the ESF (129 cases as compared with  106 for the EAGGF Guidance Section, 59 for 
the ERDF and three for the FTFG) but the amount involved was largest in the case of the ERDF (about 
ECU 29.9 million, as compared with ECU 23.6 million for the ESF, ECU  10 million for the EAGGF 
Guidance Section and ECU 330 000 for the FTFG). 

See below 
See  cases  listed  in  the  1996  Annual  report  on  the  protection  of  Community  financial  interests  -  COM(97) 
200 final  of 6 May  1997. 
OJ  No  L  178,  12.7.1994.  See  Tables  3  and  9  in  the  1996  Annual  report  on  the  protection  of  Community 
financial  interests. 

8th Annual report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

j] 

This  Report  is compiled  in  accordance  with  Article  16 of  Regulation  (EEC) No 2052/88  as  amended 
and the detailed  provisions  of Article 31 of Regulation  (EEC) No 4253/88 as amended. It presents  the 
application  in  1996  of  the  Structural  Funds  regulations,  particularly  the  implementation  of  their 
Objectives  (Objectives  1 to  6). The  report  is  structured  in  accordance  with  the  requirements  of  the 
Regulations,  but  also  contains  some  changes.  The  innovation  introduced  in  the  Seventh  Annual 
Report  (1995)  of  dealing  with  a horizontal  subject  throughout  the  report  has  been  retained,  the  topic 
chosen  for  this  report  being  support  for  technology  development.  As  in  previous  years  too,  full 
treatment  has  been  given  to  the  financial  information  and  the  prospects  for  1996  in  the  context  of 
programming for  1994-99. The structure of the report continues  to evolve, however. For the first  time, 
all the information  on the various items of assistance from  the Structural  Funds in each  Member  State 
has  been  brought  together  in a single  Chapter  so as to provide  an  overall  - but  accurate  - view  of  the 
structural  programmes  implemented  in  each  country.  Similarly,  assessment  activities  have  also  been 
covered  in a single Chapter. 

The  Report  therefore  falls  into two  main  parts. The  first  - Chapters  I to  IV  - takes  a  general  look  at 
what  was  achieved  in  1996  at  Community  level.  Chapter  I  covers  the  implementation  of  structural 
assistance  in  1996 (Community  support  frameworks  and  single programming  documents,  Community 
Initiatives, innovative measures) in the context of multiannual programming. This is a presentation  for 
the  Community  as  a  whole. Chapter  II looks  at  budget  implementation  in  1996, also  in  multiannual 
terms,  and  other  financial  issues  such  as  financial  management  and  monitoring  of  utilisation.  It  also 
covers  complementarity  with  the  other  Community  policies,  a  topic  which,  as  in  previous  years, 
continues  to  receive  particular  attention.  Chapter  TU  is  devoted  to  various  institutional  matters 
concerning  the  Structural  Funds,  ranging  from  relations  between  the  Community's  different 
institutions  to  socio-economic  and  regional  partnership  and  public  information  on  the  work  of  the 
Funds. Chapter IV looks at work on assessment in general, both evaluations forming  part of  Structural 
Fund programmes  (prior appraisals  and interim and ex post  evaluations  and those carried  out  on more 
specific  topics (major projects,  subject-based  assessments, methods  of evaluation). 

The  second  part  of  the  Report  -  Chapters  V  to  X  -  looks  in  detail  at  the  implementation  of  the 
Structural  Funds, once again  from  a number of points  of view. Chapter V deals  with  programmes  and 
achievements  in  each  Member  State.  The  following  Chapters,  which  contain  only  financial  tables, 
give  details  of  financial  implementation  in  1996  (Chapter  VI),  implementation  from  1994  to  1996 
(Chapter  VU),  the  regional  breakdown  of  financial  implementation  (Chapter  VILT),  major  projects 
(Chapter IX), and ERDF and ESF pilot projects  (Chapter X). 

A.  1996 

1.  The first Cohesion Report1 

The  Commission  adopted  the  first  Report  on  Economic  and  Social  Cohesion  in  November  1996. in 
accordance  with  Article  130b  of  the  EC  Treaty,  which  requires  a  report  "on  the  progress  made 
towards  achieving  economic  and  social  cohesion  and  on  the  manner  in  which  the  various  means 
provided  for  in  this Article  have contributed  to it". The  report  analyses  progress  towards  cohesion  in 
the  Member  States,  the  regions  and  social  groups  and  the  effects  on  cohesion  of  the  policies  of  the 
Member  States and the Union. 

The  Member  States  have  demonstrated  constant  progress  towards  greater  convergence  over  the  last 
ten years. Per capita income in the four poorest Member States has risen from  66% of the  Community 
average  to 74%. Unemployment  is now the main economic challenge facing Member States. Although 
7 million  net jobs  have  been  created  over  the  last  ten  years, this  has  not  absorbed  the  increase  in  the 
labour  force  so that  the total  number unemployed  in  the Union  in  1995 was  18 million,  a rate  of just 
under  11%.  Unemployment  is particularly  high in  Spain, where it now  accounts for  one quarter  of  the 
labour force,  and in Finland, where the figure  has risen sharply  to one-sixth  of the labour  force. 

1 COM(96) 542 final  of 6 November  1996. 

HO 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

The most common  type of  irregularity  (50% of cases) concerned  expenditure for  which documents 
were irregular or missing. Of the rest,  11%  of irregularities concerned  failure  to comply with  other 
statutory  or  contractual  conditions  and  10% to  failure  to  complete  the  planned  measure;  the  rest 
related to miscellaneous irregularities. None of these irregularities should be regarded as minor, since 
they  often  conceal  more  wide-spread  phenomena.  The  ordinary  random  checks,  whether  on 
documents or on the spot carried out by the Member States are an effective  means of detecting and 
preventing irregularities (85% of the cases notified). 

2. 

Improving financial management 

In November  1995, as part of the third phase of the SEM 2000 initiative, the Commission announced 
its  intention  to  establish  a  Group  of  personal  representatives  of  the  Member  States' Finance  and 
Budget Ministers (GPR) co-chaired by Mrs Gradin and Mr Liikanen, the Members of the Commission 
respectively  responsible for  financial  control and the budget. This group has been asked to issue an 
opinion  on  the  priority  measures  for  improving  the  financial  management  of  Union  expenditure 
managed by the Member States. The group met six times in  1996 and studied various aspects of the 
financial  management of the Structural Funds, including ways to improve implementation and budget 
forecasts, eligibility rales, programme evaluation, the duties of the Member States as regards financial 
control  and  the  application  of  financial  corrections  should  irregularities  occur.  The  report  of  the 
Group was broadly welcomed by the ECOFTN Council on 11 November and 2 December 1996 and by 
the European Council in Dublin on 13-14 December 1996. 

As regards  the rules for  eligible expenditure  in particular  which  have until  now  been  a  significant 
source  of  errors  and  irregularities,  the  discussions  begun  in  September  1994  in  an  internal 
Commission  working group chaired  by the Financial  Control  resulted  in the production  of  22 data 
sheets detailing certain types of expenditure and legal concepts5. The document was first presented to 
the GPR and was then discussed in the various Structural Funds committees6. A true partnership was 
thus  established  and  many  comments  and  requests  for  clarification  from  the  Member  States  were 
analysed. This process made it possible to amend the data sheets so that they could be used to improve 
management  of  the  Structural  Funds,  thereby  reducing  irregularities  considerably.  After  these 
thorough discussion in the GPR and the committees, the Commission adopted a draft  decision on 19 
November  1996 with  a view  to including the new guidelines  on eligibility  in  all the programming 
decisions. The draft decision also contained the 22 data sheets defining expenditure eligible under the 
Structural Funds. The Commission adopted this decision on 23 April  1997 after  again consulting the 
Structural Funds committees. 

C.  COORDINATION OF THE VARIOUS FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS 

1.  Cohesion Fund 

Article  1 of  the  Regulation  establishing  the Cohesion  Fund  states  that the Fund  may contribute  to 
financing project  stages that are technically and financially  independent. Article 9 of the Regulation 
states that no item of expenditure may benefit from both the Cohesion Fund and the Structural Funds. 
The purpose is to allow the Cohesion Fund to aid two or more stages of an overall project in tandem 
with  the  ERDF* since  associating  the  available  financial  instruments  ensures  that  the  funding  has 
maximum impact and helps to speed up the completion of the trans-European networks in particular. 
This  option  of  staging  projects  requires  close  cooperation  between  the  financial  instruments. 

5  OJ No L 146, 5.6.1997. 
6  Advisory Committee on the Development and Conversion of Regions, the Committee under Article 124 of 
the Treaty (the ESF Committee), the Committee on Agricultural Structures and Rural Development (STAR 
Committee), Standing Management Committee on Fisheries Structures (See Chapter m.A.5. Opinion of the 
committees). 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

111 

Thorough physical  and financial  monitoring of the projects is a necessary precondition for achieving 
this. 

To  avoid  any  overlap  between  Community  aid from different  sources,  stages  that can  be  identified 
separately  are  defined  using  physical  indicators  and  a  specific  date  is  set  from  which  payment 
applications  and  supporting  documents  will  be  considered  for  funding.  The  Commission  usually 
accepts only the original  invoices as proof. As a result, the same invoice cannot be submitted to two 
separate financial  instruments. In addition, the Commission intensifies  its inspection visits during the 
transition  from  one  instrument  to  another.  Those  responsible  for  managing  the  Cohesion  Fund 
regularly  organise  inter-departmental  meetings  with  the  other  financial  instruments,  the  ERDF  in 
particular,  to  ensure  the  best  coordination  possible.  It  goes  without  saying  that  the  administrative 
burden  in  managing  projects  divided  into  stages  is  more complicated  than  is  the case  for  separate, 
distinct projects. 

2.  TheEIB 

The goal of economic and social cohesion was assigned to the EIB by the Treaty on European Union. 
The EIB confirms  that this goal remains its number one priority. In  1996 Bank lending  increased by 
8.4% over 1995 (as against a rate of 7.5% between  1995 and 1996 and 1.6% between  1993 and 1994). 
The  number  of  loans  contracted  in  1996  in  the  Community  amounted  to  ECU  20 946 million  as 
against  ECU  18 603 million  in  1995  (up  12.6%),  ECU 17 682  million  in  1994  and  ECU  17 724 
million  in  1993  (5.2%  in  one  year).  Loans  were  granted  for  projects  in  all  the  Member  States, 
including Austria, Sweden and Finland, where lending operations got off to a strong start. Assistance 
focused  on the trans-European networks and on Greece, Denmark and Sweden. Performance  differed 
quite markedly from one Member State to another when compared with the previous year: there was a 
strong upswing in Italy, Greece, the Netherlands and Germany, but a downswing in Spain, Denmark 
and Ireland. 

The concentration of funding in favour of investment in regional development zones, which had eased 
in  1994 (72.4% in  1994 as against 74.3% in  1993) increased again from 1995 to  1996. Concentration 
is  thus higher than the EUT s  own mid-1996 forecasts.  In the regions  where development  is  lagging 
behind  (Objective  1)  ETB  loans  reached  ECU  6 816  million,  i.e.  49%  of  the  total  for  regional 
development  (46%  in  1995,  48% in  1994  and  58% in  1993).  There  has  thus  been  an  upswing  in 
activity  in these regions compared  to  1995  although the levels  seen in  1993 have not been reached. 
Funding in the four Cohesion countries (Greece, Spain, Ireland and Portugal) amounted to ECU 4 477 
million,  similar  to  previous  years.  Loan  applications  doubled  in  Greece  and  remained  stable  in 
Portugal but less investment meant fewer applications from Spain and Ireland. 

Table11-19:  EIB • Financing for regional development (ECU million) 

Total EIB activity in the Community 
Regional development 

/ 

Objective 1 

Countries eligible under the Cohesion Fund 

1996 

1995 

,  1994 

1993 

19.810 
13;805 
70% 
6.816 
49% 
4.477 
32% 

17.782 
:  1X143 
68% 
5.620 
46% 
4.648 
38% 

16.624 

12.035 
72% 
5.748 
48% 
4.743 
39% 

16.779 
12.462 
74% 
7.228 
58% 
6.142 
34% 

( 1 ) Amount of finance granted, i.e. individual loans signed and appropriations allocated for 
current global loans 

By  sector,  assistance  for  infrastructure  continued  to  increase,  representing  77%  of  the  Bank's 
activities.  Loans  for  communications  have  stabilised  at  1995  levels,  when  growth  was  strong,  as  a 
result  of  an  upswing  in  loans  for  telecommunications  and  mobile  telephony  in  particular.  Aid  for 

112 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

environmental projects, including urban infrastructure, also increased. Projects approved in the energy 
sector, natural gas in particular, also increased  significantly. 

Table 11-20:  EIB  - Breakdown by sector of financing for regional development (ECU million) 

Regional development 

TOTAL 

Energy 
Transport 
Telecommunications 
Environment and  other infrastructure 
Industry, agriculture and screes 

4.076 
3.574 
1.066 
1.826 
3.263 
13.805 

29% 
26% 
8% 
13% 

100% 

TOTALl 

The  regional  development  objective has increased  in importance again, reversing the trend of  recent 
years. The Commission would encourage the Bank to pay special attention to its activities in the four 
Cohesion countries. 

3.  ECSC 

Under Article 56(2)(a) of  the ECSC Treaty, the Community has at its disposal, until 30 June  1997, a 
loan instrument for conversion investments to create jobs in areas affected by the reduction of activity 
and employment  in the coal  and steel  sector. These  can be accompanied  by  interest-rate  subsidies  -
calculated on the basis of the  number of jobs created - of up to 3%  for five years. In view of the expiry 
of the ECSC Treaty, the Commission has decided7 not to consider loan applications received after 31 
December 1996. 

The  total  amount of  new  ECSC conversion  loans  which received  the assent  of  the Council  in  1996 
amounted to ECU 379 600 000 with the number of jobs to be created around 27 000. ECU 37 250 000 
was  committed  under  the  ECSC  budget  for  1996  for  interest-rate  subsidies  on  current  loans.  The 
Commission made 85 conversion loans in  1996, 84 of which formed part of global loans amounting to 
ECU 152 600 000 and  1 was a direct loan for ECU 14 600 000. 

4.  European Investment Fund 

The European Investment Fund was established in  1994 as a result of  a European Council  Decision 
taken  at  Edinburgh  and  supports  medium  and  long-term  investment  in  two  essential  sectors  for 
European  economic  development:  trans-European  networks  and  small  firms.  As  a Union  institution 
specialising  in  granting  guarantees,  and  in  coordination  with  the  other  institutions  and  financial 
instruments, it facilitates  private sector participation in trans-European network projects and makes it 
easier for small firms to get investment funding. 

In  1996, the loan volume guaranteed amounted to ECU 833 million, half for trans-European networks 
and half  for  small  firms. As  an example  of  the type  of TEN funding  involved,  the EIF is  playing  a 
significant  role in funding  improvements  to the motorway  system in Catalonia.  In the area of  small 
firms, for example, the EIF is guaranteeing, through the Merseyside Special Investment Fund - MSIF, 
part of the loans granted by a commercial bank to two intermediary funds that reallocate the loans to 
such firms in this Objective  1 region. This EIF assistance is in addition to that from the ERDF so that 
the Community's contribution to the MSIF is maximised. 

In addition, a new EIF activity was launched in  1996 in favour of small firms. Called the Growth and 
Environment  pilot  project,  this European  Parliament  initiative  will  see  the Commission  and the EIF 
collaborate  to facilitate  access by small  firms to bank loans for environmental  investments. The  first 
six decisions were taken in 1996. 

7  OJ No  C  175,28.6.1994. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

113 

5.  The  financial  mechanism  of the European  Economic  Area 

The  Agreement  on  the  European  Economic  Area  provides  for  a  financial  mechanism  to  promote 
economic and social cohesion  in the Community to be funded  by the EFTA countries and managed by 
the  EIB.  Its  scope  is  defined  in  Protocol  38  to  the  Agreement:  grants  totalling  ECU  500  million 
between  1994  and  1998  and  10-year  interest-rate  subsidies  of  2%  a  year  on  a  total  loan  volume  of 
ECU  1  500 million.  The  beneficiaries  of  the  financial  mechanism  are  Greece,  Ireland,  Northern 
Ireland,  Portugal  and  the  Objective  1 regions  of  Spain  (1989-93).  As  a  result  of  the  accession  of 
Austria,  Finland  and  Sweden,  their  contributions  to  the  mechanism  have  been  taken  over  by  the 
Community  budget  and  the  Commission  is  (heading  B2-401,  ECU  108  million  a  year).  The 
Commission,  as  the  body  responsible  for  the  Community  budget,  is  thus jointly  responsible  for  the 
mechanism and is represented  on the financial  mechanism committee that approves projects. A report 
on the implementation  of the mechanism between  1 January  1995 and 30 June  19968 has been  drawn 
up. 

In  1996 the interest-rate  subsidies concerned  ECU 305 million  in loans for  five  projects  in Spain  and 
one in Greece. The Committee approved ECU  151 700 000 in grants for two projects  in Greece,  four 
in Spain, one in Ireland, one in Northern Ireland  and one in Portugal. These were in the three  eligible 
sectors: transport, environment and education and training. 

Table 11-21:  Financing  from  the  financial  mechanism  of the European  Economic Area  (ECU  million) 

Gretce  I  Ireland  1N. Ireland I  Portugal  1  Spain 

I  TOTAL 

Grants approved. 
Transport 
Environment 
Education 
J2iba 

12,1 
8,3 
1.1 
_LL 
22.6 

0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
JUL 
_0JL 

8,0 
0,0 
0,0 
JUL 
UL 

25,5 
0,0 
0,0 
0.0 
25.5 

Total 

I,oan.<;  a p p r o v ed 
Transport 
Environment 

127,7 
0.0 
0.0 
1277 
Source : Annual Commission report on the financial mechanism of the European Economic Area 

42,9 
0,0 
_JLP_ 
42.9 

0,0 
0,0 
0.0 
JUL 

0,0 
0,0 
JUL 
JLQ. 

Total 

0,0 
46,7 
45,4 

-22J 

164,1 
214,2 
-JLH 
J2U 

45,6 
55,0 
46^ 
~L1 
.1&2 

334,7 
214,2 
tt 
548.9 

(COM (96) 653 final  of  13.12.1996). 

D.  COMPLEMENTARITY  WITH THE OTHER  COMMUNITY  POLICIES 

1.  The Structural  Funds and  employment 

The Commission has adopted a wide variety of guidelines that stress the need for consistency  between 
the Community's  employment  strategy as defined  by the European  Council and the Structural  Funds' 
activities.  This  need  was  set  out  in  the  Commission  communication  on  Community  Structural 
Assistance  and  Employment9.  The  Structural  Funds  must  provide  a  lasting  contribution  to 
employment  by  creating  a  better  balance  between  tangible  and  non-tangible  investment.  Having  a 
number of strategies will  allow the Funds to improve their effectiveness  in combating  unemployment 
by using the funding  options offered  under the current rules and regulations. Appropriate weight must 
be  given  to  human  resources  so  that  the  conditions  for  long-term  growth  are  set  in  place  and  the 
capacity  to absorb  the changes  brought  about  by  technological  development  are  similarly  improved. 
The  capacity  of  economic  growth  to  create  greater  numbers  of  jobs  must  be  improved  through 
innovation  and  by using the job-creation  opportunities  offered  by new  socio-economic  needs. Lastly, 

COM(96)  653  final  of  13 December  1996. 

COM  (96)  109  final  of  20 March  1996. 

114 

. 

_ _ _ __ 

*th  Annual  R*Pon  on  the Structural Funds (1996) 

there needs to be more pro-active intervention  in the labour market to deal with the specific  problems 
of  the  most  disadvantaged  categories  (young job-seekers,  long-term  unemployed  and  women).  The 
communication  stressed  the need  to  involve all  the major  partners  in this task of assisting the  labour 
market. 

A 

The  themes  of  this  communication  were  subsequently  contained  in  the  Confidence  Pact  for 
Employment10.  On  the  Structural  Funds,  the  Commission  suggested  that  the  financial  margins  for 
manoeuvre available in the existing programmes  should be used  to create a special reserve to  support 
employment, that the new guidelines for Objective  2 (1997-99)  should  aim to create employment  and 
that  the  mid-term  review  of  Objectives  1,  3,  4  and  5(b)  should  be  an  occasion  for  fine-tuning 
operations  in support  of employment. Particular attention  should  be paid to the development  of  small 
firms,  not  only  so  that  they  might  turn  research  and  development  measures  into  new  activities  and 
jobs but also so that an appropriate framework  might be created for  local employment  initiatives. The 
Confidence  Pact  for  Employment  had  the  specific  aim  of  encouraging  territorial  pacts  for 
employment.  The  European  Council  in  Florence  gave  these  pacts  new  political  momentum,  their 
guidelines  were  set  in the  autumn  and  most  of  the Member  States  had  submitted  proposals  for  pacts 
by the end of the year.11 

The  communication  on  Community  Structural  Assistance  and  Employment  has  also  served  as  a 
framework  for drafting  the new guidelines for Objective 2 (1997-99) published by the Commission  on 
30 April  1996. The overall aim is to improve production  structures  - within  SMEs in particular - and 
workforce  skills.  The  emphasis  should  be  on  improving  management  capabilities  and  adapting 
vocational  skills  so  that  human  resources  can  contribute  to  the  process  of  technological  and 
organisational  change12. 

2.  The Structural  Funds and equal  opportunities 

A Council Resolution  of 2 December  199613 stressed the importance of including equal  opportunities 
as  a  principle  of  the  Structural  Funds.  It  should  be  remembered  that  the  Structural  Funds  must  aid 
operations  that  ensure more equal  opportunities  between  men  and  women. The resolution  invites  the 
Member States and the Commission, in particular through the Monitoring Committees, to increase the 
efforts  of the Structural Funds in this regard, to evaluate the Funds' contribution to the achievement of 
more  equal  opportunities  and  to  take  account  of  this  evaluation  in  future  proposals  to  revise  the 
Structural Funds Regulations. 

Even though some specific  measures in the programmes have differing  amounts of funding  depending 
on  the  Member  State,  most  States  chose  a  horizontal  approach  that  encourages  equal  opportunities 
across  all  priorities  and  measures.  This  makes  it  hard  to  give  an  exact  estimate  of  the  funding 
specifically  allocated to equal opportunity measures but it does not mean that there has been a backing 
away  from  promoting  this  priority.  There  is  a  general  trend  towards  assisting  more  complete  and 
integrated  operations,  due  to  the  expanded  scope  of  the  rules  and  regulations.  The  accompanying 
measures are now taken into account, althougn there is still room for  improvement  in this regard. The 
concept  of  a "route  into the jobs  market",  broadly  developed  in current  programmes, could  also take 
greater  account  of  the  specific  constraints  on  women.  The  operations  undertaken  rely  heavily, 
however,  on  the  legislative,  socio-economic  and  cultural  make-up  of  each  Member  State.  The  on 
going  assessment  reports  will  provide  more  information  since  concentration  on  the  public  and  on 
equal opportunities are specified  in the instructions for the evaluators. It will thus be possible to gauge 
better  the  first  results  of  the  integration  of  women  into  this  general  pclicy.  Some  adjustments  to 

10  C SE  (96)  1  final  of  5  June  1996. 
11  See  Introduction.  A.2.  Support  for  employment  and  Chapter  ITJ.B. Regional  Partnership. 
12  See  Chapter  A.3. Objective 2. 
»3  OJ  No  C  386,  20.12.1996 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds ( 1996)  - 

115 

programmes  may  then  be  made,  depending  on  the  recommendations  of  the  evaluators  and  the 
Commission  guidelines. 

In  preparing  the  Objective  2  programmes  for  1997-99,  the  Commission  placed  great  emphasis  on 
equal opportunities  for both ERDF and ESF funding. The concept seems to be taken into account  now 
to a greater extent than in the past. Furthermore, to improve the role and status of women  working on 
agricultural  holdings  or  in  a rural  setting,  in  1996 the Commission  launched  a call  for  pilot  projects 
under a programme for rural women. The programme has a budget of ECU 20 million over three years 
(1997-99) and the final date for applications was 20 February  1997. 

Lastly,  a  leaflet  entitled  "Women,  players  in  regional  development"  was  published  in  1996  and 
women  entrepreneurs  were  one  of  the  topics  discussed  at  the Northern  Scandinavia  Europartenariat. 
The  discussions  resulted  in  the  concept  of  "resources  centres  for  work  enhancement  and  women's 
integration  into the economy"  and the networking of these centres. This topic was selected  to be one 
of the five activities in the invitation for proposals under Recite HI published on 31 October  1996.14 

3.  The Structural Funds and the environment 

The environment continues to play an increasing role in assistance from  the Structural Funds. The 7th 
Annual  Report  (1995)  devoted  part  of  each  chapter  to a discussion  of  the environment  and  included 
numerous  examples. As  a result  of the communication  on "Cohesion  policy  and the environment"  15 
adopted  in  1995, Structural  Funds  assistance  in  1996  was  even  more  marked  by  the  environmental 
dimension.  In  accordance  with  the  principle  of  subsidiarity,  the  communication's  priorities  were 
discussed  on  several  occasions  with  the  Member  States  in  the  Monitoring  Committees  and  in  the 
Advisory Committee for the Conversion and Development of the Regions16. 

The  priorities  in  the  communication  were  implemented  in  1996  with  particular  emphasis  on 
environmental  issues  as  set  out  in  the  Commission  guidelines  to  the  Member  States  for  the 
preparation  of  the  new  Objective  2  programmes17.  Firstly,  the  Commission  stressed  the  need  for  a 
greater number of environmental  projects, especially  ones that created  "green" jobs, and  preventative 
measures  for  environmental  protection  in  environment-related  businesses,  services,  technology  and 
training. Secondly, programme approval depended on whether procedural guarantees were in place on 
the environmental  quality  of the programmes,  such  as the involvement  of the relevant  environmental 
agencies  and  improvements  in  programme/project  monitoring  and  evaluation.  In  accordance  with 
these  guidelines,  the  new  programmes  lent  much  greater  weight  to  preventive  environmental 
operations  such  as ecological  products  and environmental  research. Their most striking feature  is the 
horizontal  integration  of  the  environment  in  various  non-environmental  priorities  and  operations. 
Evaluating  the  impact  of  the  measures  on  the environment  remains  however  a weak  link,  and  while 
progress  has  been  made  in  involving  the  environmental  agencies,  the  results  have  not  been 
satisfactory  in every instance. 

Similarly, the guidelines  for  the new Interreg IIC  Initiative were adopted  by the Commission  in May 
199618  and  place  particular  weight  on  environmental  issues,  including  cross-border  cooperation  in 
land planning, combating drought and floods  and the management of waterways. 

In the case of the programmes currently under way, the Commission  organised training courses for  its 
own  staff  and  launched  environmental  training  seminars  for  Structural  Fund  administrators  in  the 

14  See Chapter I.B.2. Innovative measures and technical assistance. 
15  COM (95) 509 final of 22 November 1995. 
16 

In the case of the Cohesion Fund, the Commission has made progress towards the goal of dividing assistance 
equally  between  investments in transport  and the environment. The share of total commitments devoted to 
environmental projects increased from 48.5% to 49.9% in 1996. 

17  See Chapter I.A.3. Objective 2. 
18  See Chapter I.B. 1. Community Initiatives. 

116 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Objective  1  regions.  The  first  such  seminar  was  held  in  Ireland  in  November  1996  and  similar 
activities  were  in  preparation  for  1997.  Furthermore,  to  identify  the  prevention  measures  and  best 
practices, the  Commission  carried  out  a  study  in  1996 on  sustainable  development  and  employment 
in the Objective  2 regions. This study, which ended at the start of  1997, includes 20 examples of good 
practice  and  illustrates  for  Funds  administrations  the  possible  measures  that  might  be  taken  to 
promote  sustainable  development.  A  booklet  entitled  "The  environment  and  the  regions:  towards 
sustainable development" was also produced19. 

Finally,  in  the  longer  term,  the  preparatory  work  on  the  European  Spatial  Development  Perspective 
(ESDP)  is  looking  at  the  issue  of  prudent  management  of  the  natural  heritage  and  its  development. 
Alongside this, the Commission  has initiated a strategy study of water resources  in the  Mediterranean 
basin to be carried  out by the I.P.T.S. (Institute for  Prospective  Technological Studies),  Seville, which 
will  be  of  major  importance  when  thinking  about  the  next  programming  period  for  the  Structural 
Funds and for work on the Perspective. 

4.  The Structural  Funds, the common agricultural policy and  rural  development 

Structural  Funds  and  the common  agricultural  policy 

Since  agriculture  is  still  one  of  the  main  activities  for  many  regions  of  the  Community,  most  of  the 
programmes for  1994-99 include measures relating to the sector. It is therefore  essential to ensure that 
the  measures  proposed  by  the  Member  States  in  the  development  plans  for  rural  areas  under 
Objectives  1, 6  or 5(b) are compatible  with the guidelines  of the CAP while equally  considering  the 
contribution  which agricultural  measures make to the development of economic activity. 

In the case of  Objective  5(b), the agricultural  measures were planned  in the SPDs with  due regard  to 
the  necessary  complementarity  between  the  reform  of  the  CAP  and  rural  development.  While  the 
planned  measures  to ensure  that a  sufficient  number  of  farmers  remain  on  the  land  contribute  to  the 
socio-economic development  of the rural areas, the Commission  has also required certain  guarantees. 
In general, every time a national aid scheme is proposed, it is always examined  for compatibility  with 
current CAP rules and the rules on state aids.  The priority operations selected involve the application 
of  new  technology,  energy  savings,  quality  promotion,  etc.  In  irrigation,  for  example,  priority  has 
been  given  to  the  improvement  of  existing  structures  to  prevent  water  loss  (through  evaporation, 
leaks, etc.) without changing the area actually  irrigated. When  it became apparent  that new  irrigation 
was  involved,  the  Commission  strictly  limited  the  newly  irrigated  areas  and  asked  to be  informed  of 
the intended crops. 

The  same  approach  was  followed  under  Objective  5(a)  with  regard  to  the  structures  for  both 
production  and  marketing.  The  trends  on  agricultural  markets  require  farm  holdings  and  the 
production  and  marketing  structures  for  agricultural  products  to  make  constant  adjustments.  The 
Objective  5(a)  measures  seek  to ease  the  adjustments  so  as to  improve  agricultural  competitiveness. 
By  maintaining  jobs  in  agriculture  and  in  those  sectors  downstream  of  it,  the  measures  help  in  the 
development  of  the rural  areas. Many  procedures  have been implemented  to ensure that the  measures 
are consistent  with  the CAP guidelines. In the case of  investment  aid, restrictions  have been  imposed 
in  certain  sectors  to  avoid  creating  surpluses  (pigmeat,  eggs  and  poultrymeat,  beef  and  veal).  In  the 
case  of  processing  and  marketing,  priority  is  given  to  certain  types  of  investment:  to  protect  the 
innovation  or  improve  health  quality  and 
environment  for  example,  introduce  technological 
conditions,  and  the  Commission  has  set  selection  criteria  on  the  basis  of  Community  policy 
guidelines,  in  particular  those  of  the  CAP. In  some  sectors,  investment  aid  was  prohibited  (tobacco, 
fodder  crops)  or  authorised  subject  to  strict  limits,  sometimes  accompanied  by  a  requirement  to 
reduce capacity  (slaughter, regrouping  of enterprises in the wine and spirits sectors). 

19  EUROFFICE,  1996. CX-90-95-744-C. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

_ 

117 

The challenges facing  rural society 

More  generally,  the  Community  has  introduced  a  specific  policy  for  rural  areas.  Rural  society  is 
undergoing  far-reaching  changes  and  is  increasingly  subject  to pressures  which  threaten  an already 
delicate  balance. Predominantly  rural areas account  for more than 80% of  Community  territory and 
over a quarter of its population. The prosperity and environment of rural communities are increasingly 
threatened  while  agriculture,  the  main  activity  in  a large number of  rural  areas, is  going through a 
crisis  which  at times  calls  into  question  their  very  existence.  The Treaty  on European  Union  takes 
account of  the  problems  of  the  rural areas. Article  130a of  the Treaty  provides that the Community 
should  reduce  "disparities  between  the  levels  of  development  of  the  various  regions  and  the 
backwardness of the least-favoured  regions, including rural areas". The programmes implemented for 
the second Structural Funds programming period have enabled a strategy to be set in place to develop 
the  economy  of  the  rural  areas  through  the  diversification  of  both  agricultural  and  non-agricultural 
activities. The strategy's multi-sectoral character, its emphasis on innovation and bottom-up approach 
all contribute to maintaining or creating employment. 

To prepare for the next  Structural  Funds period,  it was thought useful  to take a detailed  look  at the 
future  of  rural  society  and the  challenges  it faces: economic  globalisation,  the continuing  reform  of 
the CAP, WTO negotiations,  the foreseeable  enlargement of the European Union, the appearance  of 
new technologies. These issues were focused on in particular at a conference in Cork (Ireland) on 7, 8 
and  9  November  1996  which  brought  together  policy  makers  and  specialists  from  the  15 Member 
States of the Union, from the countries of central Europe, the Mediterranean countries, the USA and 
Japan. The conference confirmed that agriculture and forestry represent the two most important forms 
of  land  use  in  rural  areas,  that  agriculture  remains  a  major  interface  between  people  and  the 
environment, but that the relative  importance  of  farming  and forestry  continues  to decline  and rural 
development  must  accordingly  concern  itself  with  all  socio-economic  sectors  operating  in  a rural 
environment. 

The conference  concluded  that sustainable rural development  had to be a priority for the Union and 
that  rural  development  policy  should  check  the  flight  from  the  land,  fight  poverty,  promote 
employment  and  equal  opportunities,  meet  requirements  with  regard  to  quality,  safety,  personal 
development  and  leisure,  improve  living  standards  in  rural  areas  and  preserve  the  quality  of  the 
environment. This policy,  some aspects of which it should prove possible to apply in all the Union's 
rural  areas,  should  be  based  on  an  integrated  and  multisectoral  approach  which  encourages  the 
diversification  of economic and social activities while ensuring sustainable rural development in order 
to  safeguard  the  quality  of  the  countryside.  Rural  development  policy  should  also  comply  with  the 
principle of  subsidiarity  by encouraging those  involved  at the lowest  levels and their initiatives  (the 
'bottom  up'  approach)  in  order  to  take  better  account  of  the  great  variety  of  rural  areas.  It should 
encourage synergies between public and private finance to promote productive investment, help small 
and medium-sized firms and encourage research and innovation. 

5.  The Structural  Funds and the common fisheries  policy 

Since  1994,  the  year  marking  the  incorporation  of  the  common  fisheries  policy  into  the  Structural 
Funds, the  instruments  mobilised  to  assist fisheries  structures  have had a dual  purpose. On the  one 
hand, they seek to ensure the survival and sustainable development of the common policy by helping 
the fishing  effort  to adapt to. the resources that are actually there. On the other hand, the instruments 
help to strengthen economic  and social cohesion through aid to reinforce the structures in the fishing 
industry  as  a whole: the fleet,  aquaculture, processing and marketing of  products and port facilities. 
Furthermore,  measures financed by  the  FTFG in  relation  to  the  fishing  fleet  must  comply  with  the 
objectives  of the Multiannual  Guidance Programmes (MGPs), which place restrictions on the fishing 
effort  of each Member State. In particular aid for the construction of new fishing vessels is authorised 
only where the annual  intermediate objectives of the MGP, and subsequently the final objectives, are 
observed. 

118 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

6.  The Structural Funds and SMEs 

Structural  Funds  assistance  to SMEs continued  to increase  in  1996. On the  one hand,  the  preparation 
of  the  Objective  2  programmes  for  1997-9920  made  their  development  one  of  the  priorities  in  the 
Commission's  guidelines  that  had  to  be  reflected  in  the  SPDs  submitted  by  the  Member  States.  A 
reference to the new definition  of an SME was introduced to standardise usage both at Community and 
national  level,  in  accordance  with  the  Commission  recommendation  on  the  definition  of  small  and 
medium-sized  enterprises21. On the other hand, as regards the SMEs Initiative,  1996 saw the  adoption 
of  a  large number  of  new programmes22,  and  the  ones already  adopted  were closely  monitored  in  the 
Monitoring  Committees.  The  programmes  for  the  Objective  1 regions  that  focused  most  on  SMEs, 
such  as the "Industry" OPs for  Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Greece, were monitored  in particular by the 
departments  responsible  for  enterprise  policy,  so  that  the  SMEs  would  be  considered  when 
implementing the programmes. In addition, under the reserve for the SMEs Initiative, the  Commission 
proposed  three  types  of  operation  to  encourage  cross-border  activity:  exchanges  of  experiences  and 
good working practices between the Member States in spheres of activity identified  in advance, aid  for 
buyer's exhibitions, and aid to get tourism enterprises connected to the Internet (teletourism).23 

IBEX: International Buyer's Exhibition 
The IBEX concept was launched as part of the Community's enterprise policy 
with a view to trying out a formula whereby large and small firms could meet 
to discuss the demand requirements of the former.  The concept  was adopted 
by  the  regional  policy  through  the  SMEs  Initiative  which  promotes  the 
holding of IBEX exhibitions in the regions eligible under the Structural Funds, 
and Objective  1  regions iri particular. 
IBEX exhibitions  focus  on the  needs  identified  by large enterprises  and the 
specific  capacity  of  the  SMEs  to  satisfy  those  needs. This  identification  of 
supply  and  demand  centres  on  a  particular  sector  (cars,  agri-food,  textiles, 
timber, etc) and is intended to assist large enterprises in the search for partner 
SMEs  with  a  view  to  specific  cooperation  while  at  the  same  time  offering 
SMEs an opportunity to make direct contact with large enterprises interested 
in  their  products,  services  or  know-how.  IBEX  exhibitions  optimise  these 
contacts  and  offer  the  participants  savings  of  both  time  and  money  when 
compared to traditional subcontracting exhibitions. 

As part of the enterprise policy, the Third Multiannual Programme for SMEs (1997-2000)24 adopted in 
1996  seeks  in  particular  to  simplify  and  improve  the  financial,  legislative  and  administrative 
environment  for  businesses  and  to  help  SMEs  to plan  their  business  strategies  in  international  terms, 
improve their competitiveness  and improve their access to research, innovation and training. Particular 
attention  was paid  in this regard to improving SME access to the Structural  Funds. The Council  twice 
sought25  to  improve  the  business  environment  and  stimulate  business  support  measures,  in  particular 
by  improving  SME access to the Community programmes, including the Structural  Funds. In  addition, 
where  trade  and  distribution  are  concerned,  the  importance  of  local  businesses  in  rural  areas  got  the 
Commission  thinking about ways to use the Structural Funds (the ERDF in particular)  to maintain  and 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

See Chapter I.A.3. Objective 2. 
Recommandation of the Commission to the Member States, the EIB and the EIF on 3 April  1996, OJ No  L 
107,30.4.1996. 
See Chapter I.B. 1. Community Initiatives. 
See Chapter I.B.I. Community Initiatives - SMEs. 
Council Decision of 9 December  1996 on the third multiannual programme for SMEs in the European Union 
(1997-2000), OJ No L 6, 10.1.1997. 
Council Resolution of 9 December 1996 on realizing the full potential of small and medium sized enterprises 
(SMEs), including micro-enterprises  and the craft  sector, through  an integrated  approach  to improving the 
business  environment  and  stimulating  business  support  measures  (OJ  No  C  18,  17.1.1997)  and  Council 
Resolution  of  22 April  1996 on the coordination  of Community  activities  in  favour  of  small and medium 
sized enterprises and the craft sector (OJ No C 130, 3.5.1996). 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

119 

develop  local  businesses  in  rural  areas.  A  similar  initiative  is  being  studied  for  urban  areas  and 
consultations  will  take place on the two approaches  as part  of the  Green  Paper  on  Commerce2 6. 

Information, partnership,  networking, innovation: the coordination of regional policy  and enterprise policy 
initiatives for  the benefit of SMEs 

The Structural Funds and the Euro-Info-Centres: Within  the network  of 250 Euro-Info-Centres,  a  subgroup 
of  49  ElCs  in  the  15  Member  States  specialises  in  the  Structural  Funds.  In  addition  to  meetings  providing 
information  and  an exchange  of views  on the SMEs Initiative  and  inter-regional  cooperation  under Article  10 
of the ERDF Regulation, die subgroup  made a collection  in  1996 of German  and  Italian  "success  stories"  for 
example.  The  specialist  EICs  relay  information  for  the  Commission  and  offer  technical  advice  to  the  local, 
regional  and  national  authorities  on  the  planning  and  implementation  of  programmes  aided  by  the  Structural 
Funds. 
Europartenariat, a display of enterprise partnership : 
The Europartenariat  programme was launched by the Commission in  1987 as part of its regional and  enterprise 
policies.  It  encourages  SMEs  in  the  eligible  regions  (Objectives  1, 2,  5(b)  and  6)  to  make  business  contacts 
with one another and  to cooperate with enterprises  in other Member  States or third countries. The ERDF part-
finances  the events by ECU  1  million under Article  10 of die ERDF Regulation. Since Europartenariat  was  first 
launched,  close  on  22 000  enterprises  have  been  able  to  make  contact  and  discuss  possible  cooperation 
agreements covering trade, finance, technology, franchising, joint-ventures, etc. 
Two Europartenariat  events were held in  1996 : 
•  Europartenariat Luleâ (Sweden, 13-14 June  1996): "Northern Scandinavia  1996" brought together  more 
than  1  500 SMEs from 50 countries. It was the first  Europartenariat  organised  in  one  of  the  new Member 
States. The 386 Swedish, Finnish  and Norwegian  enterprises  in the region  made some 7.500  contacts  with 
the  1 200 visiting  firms,  225  of which came from the countries  of central  and eastern  Europe  (CEEC) and 
160  from  the  newly  independent  states.  Several  seminars  took  place,  including  a  particularly  successful 
conference  on women entrepreneurs. 

•  Europartenariat  Genoa  (Italy,  27-29  November  1996):  "Italia  96,%  brought  together  406  SMEs  in  the 
Objective  2 areas  of  Italy  that  were  thus able to meet  more than  2 000 other  SMEs. Over  12 000  contacts 
were made between  the host  and  visiting  enterprises. In addition  to a  large  delegation  of enterprises  from 
the CEEC, the newly independent states and the Mediterranean  basin, Europartenariat  Genoa also included 
for  the first  time significant  numbers of enterprises from Asia, Latin  America  and  the United  States; more 
than 70 countries were represented. 

Aid for  European  SME  business  and  innovation  centres  (EC-BICs) (Business  and  Innovation  Centres  -
BICs):  This  programme  is  funded  under  Article  7  of  the  ERDF  Regulation  and  assists  die  creation  of 
innovative  enterprises  and  the  modernisation  and  development  of existing  SMEs. Twenty  two EC-BICs  were 
promoted  by  the  programme  in  1996.  Most  of  these  were  located  in  Objective  1 or  2  areas  (six  and  nine 
respectively)  but four  were  in Objective  5(b)  areas  and  three  in  Objective  6  areas. As  in  the  past,  the  ERDF 
part-financed  activities to prepare, organise and launch the new centres and provided  technical  assistance to the 
management  teams  as  they  were  set  up.  This  brings  the  total  number  of  EC-BICs  in  the  EBN  (European 
Business and Innovation Centre Network) to about  140. 
The «seed capital» pilot project,  5 years  on: This pilot plan  was adopted  by the Commission  in  1988 as part 
of its regional  and enterprise policies. In January  1996, 23 investment funds  were operating under the plan, all 
of  which  had  been created  between  1990 and  1993. The funds  qualified  for  five  years for  repayable  advances 
covering  50% of their  operating  costs. Fifteen  of these  in eligible regions  also received  an injection  of  capital 
through  die  business  and  innovation  centres  mentioned  above.  The  funds,  based  in  8  Member  States27,  are 
independent  bodies  governed  by  private  law  with  responsibility  for  their  investment  decisions.  Three  funds 
have  a  cross-border  dimension28.  They  all  now  form  the  kernel  of  the European  Seed  Capital  Fund  Network 
(ESCFN) which comprises 50 funds. 

7.  The  Structural  Funds  and  tourism 

Tourism  is  one  sector  in  which  Structural  Funds  assistance  is  of  major  importance  both  financially  in 
all  eligible  regions  and  in  terms  of  its  contribution  to  the  diversification  of  the  local  economy.  The 

26  COM(96) 530 final  of 20 November  1996. 
27  Belgium, Germany, Spain, France, Ireland, Italy, Netherlands, United  Kingdom. 
28  They cover respectively:  Benelux; France and Spain; Saarland, Lorraine and Luxembourg. 

12 

8th Annual report  on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

The regions at the centre of the Union are considerably richer than those on the periphery,  i.e. Greece, 
southern  Italy,  southern  Spain,  Portugal,  Ireland,  northern  Finland,  the  new  Lander,  the  French 
overseas  departments. The 25 richest regions have an average per  capita income two and  a half  times 
greater than the poorest regions and the situation has hardly changed  in this respect over time. In  1995 
the  unemployment  rate  in  the  25 worst  hit  regions  was  22.4%,  almost  five  times  higher  than  in  the 
25 least affected  regions  (4.6%). There is a high concentration  of unemployment  at sub-regional  level, 
particularly  in  urban  areas,  where  the  numbers  unemployed  may  account  for  between  one  third  and 
one half  of the labour  force. 

Disparities  in income are caused not only by geographical  but also by social factors. This report  looks 
at the proportion  of the population  living below.the poverty line (defined  as an income of 50% or less 
of  the  national  figure).  At  the  end  of  the 80s,  the  highest  figures  in  this  regard  were  recorded  in 
Portugal  (27%),  Italy  (22%),  Greece  (20%),  Spain  (17%)  and  the  United  Kingdom  (17%).  Poverty 
appears to be increasing slightly, although  it has fallen  in some of the poorest Member States  (Ireland, 
Spain  and  Portugal).  Poverty  is  frequently  related  to  unemployment,  which  itself  has  a  substantial 
impact  on  society:  in  the  first  half  of  1996,  the  rate  of  unemployment  among  young  people  under 
25 years  of  age was  21%,  double  the average  for  all  age groups  together  where  it  stood  at  12.5% for 
women  and 9.5% for  men. The most worrying feature  is the  "hard  core" of long-term unemployed:  in 
1995,49% of people out of work had been looking for a job for a year or more. 

The  report  also  looks  at  the  impact  of  national  policies  on  cohesion.  From  a  macroeconomic 
viewpoint,  the Member  States  have, in general,  made considerable  progress  in  bringing  inflation  and 
interest  rates  under  control  and  reducing  the  public  debt  and  deficits.  These  results  are  important, 
because  they  are  a pre-condition  for  increased  investment  and  the  success  of  cohesion  policies.  The 
regional  policies  of  the  Member  States  also  make  a  contribution,  but  expenditure  is  concentrated 
mainly  in the  richest  countries. Between  1989 and  1993, Germany  and  Italy  alone  accounted  for  two 
thirds of total expenditure  on regional development. It should also be noted  that budgetary  restrictions 
generally result in a fall  in national expenditure on regional policy. 

The  main  means  of  fighting  poverty  are national  policies on taxation  and public expenditure. Typical 
figures  for these net transfers  are 4% of GDP from  regions which are net contributors and  8% of  GDP 
to those  which  are  net beneficiaries.  These transfers  have had  a substantial  influence  on regional  and 
social cohesion  and have reduced income disparities within the Member States by an average of  23%. 

Combined  with  national  efforts,  the  Union's  cohesion  policies  have  helped  create  a new  situation  in 
Europe  which  gives  the  less-favoured  regions  and  social  groups  new  opportunities.  Assistance  from 
the  Structural  Funds  has  had  a  significant  impact  on per  capita  income,  for  example,  by  increasing 
growth  in the four  poorest countries by half  a percentage point per year. It is also estimated  that it has 
resulted  in  over  600  000 net  new  jobs  in  those  countries  and  530  000  in  the  old  industrial  areas 
eligible  under  Objective  2,  which  in  both  cases  means  a  reduction  in  unemployment  rates  of  about 
2.5%.  An  in-depth  study  of  the  rural  areas  eligible  under  Objective  5(b)  in  20 regions  shows  that  the 
population  has  stabilised  in  about  half  of  them  and  has  even  increased  in  six  others.  Income  fell  in 
only  two  of  those  regions.  By  assisting  the  poorest  regions,  Community  policies  have  increased  the 
economic  potential  of  the  whole  Union.  Estimates  suggest,  for  example,  that  for  every  ECU  100 
spent  in the Objective  1 regions, ECU 30 to 40 return  to benefit  other regions through  their exports  to 
the Objective  1  regions. 

As  for  the  Community  policies  other  than  cohesion,  it  appears  that  wherever  expenditure  is 
substantial,  some  if  not  most  of  the  poorest  countries  and  regions  have  been  among  the  main 
beneficiaries.  The  common  agricultural  policy  is  the  most  significant  example  since  it  accounted  for 
almost  half  the  Community  budget  in  1994. The  1992 CAP  reform  benefited  the  cohesion  countries 
since  three  of  these  four  countries  (Greece,  Spain  and  Ireland)  are,  alongside  France  and  Denmark, 
among  the  main  beneficiaries.  The  impact  on  regional  cohesion  is positive,  since  there  is  a  financial 
transfer  from  urban  areas  (which  are  generally  richer)  to  rural  areas  (which  are  generally  poorer). 
Nevertheless, estimates prior to the reform  suggest that these transfers  have benefited  mainly  a limited 

120 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Commission  published  in  1996  a document  entitled  "Tourism  and  the European  Union: A  Practical 
Guide"29,  which  identifies  all the Community  financial  instruments  that can  be mobilised  for  tourism 
purposes,  first  among  which  are  the  Structural  Funds.  The  document  shows  the  important  place 
occupied  by  tourism  in  Structural  Funds  spending  and  gives  an  overview  of  the  significant 
contribution  of this activity  to strengthening economic, social and regional cohesion. In this regard,  in 
addition  to  developing  the  quantitative  analysis  of  the  volume  and  structure  of  financial  assistance, 
special  attention  needs to be paid in  1997 to perfecting  the tools for evaluating the quality of  tourism's 
contribution  to achieving cohesion. 

At  the  same  time  and  with  a  view  to  improved  coordination  of  financial  assistance  to  tourism  (a 
requirement  identified  by the Court  of Auditors in its special report  on tourism policy  and  promotion) 
additional  measures  will  be taken  to evaluate in a more detailed  and  systematic  manner the  impact  of 
the  structural  policies  on  tourism  and  identify  the  main  steps  required  to  boost  the  quality  and 
competitiveness  of European  tourism30. It should be noted  that  the implementation  of  the  Community 
action  plan  for  tourism  (1993-95),  which  the  Commission  evaluated  in  a  report  in  1996,  identified 
numerous  points  of convergence  between  structural  assistance  and  specific  tourism  measures, both  in 
sectoral terms and the operating approach.31 

8.  The Structural  Funds and energy 

The availability  of adequate supplies of energy at reasonable prices is essential to the  competitiveness 
of  regions  whose  development  is  lagging  behind.  A  good  energy  balance,  the  rational  use  of  energy 
and  stress  on  the  development  of  renewable  sources  of  energy  are  also  important  considerations  for 
territorial  planning.  Almost  all  the  Objective  1 CSFs  include  a  section  oh  energy  and  of  their  total 
funding  some ECU  2.4  billion  (2.7% of  the budget  for  that Objective)  is allocated  to energy  projects 
for  the  period  1994-99.32  While  these  projects  contribute  to  the  main  aim  of  regional  development, 
they  also  comply  with  the  priorities  of  the  Community's  energy  policy:  security  of  supply,  the 
competitiveness  of  European  firms  and  the  compatibility  of  energy  and  environmental  aims.33  The 
projects  financed  are mainly  concerned  with  more efficient  energy  use, the diversification  of  sources 
of  energy,  the  development  of  renewable  sources  of  energy,  cost  reduction,  improved  transport  and 
distribution  of  energy  and  the  protection  of  the  environment  in  activities  relating  to  the  production, 
processing, transport and utilisation of energy. 

Furthermore,  some Community  Initiative  programmes  are directly  concerned  with  energy. The  Regen 
strand of Interreg II contains provision  for completing measures begun under the earlier programme on 
energy  networks  (Regen)  and  the  promotion  of  cross-border  cooperation  projects  for  the  distribution 
of  gas  and  electricity  and  the  use  of  renewable  sources  of  energy.  In  the  most  remote  regions,  the 
Regis  Initiative  covers  investment  in  energy-saving  materials  and  local  energy  production  and  the 
training of staff  in the field of energy. 

Outside the Structural  Funds, the Union  finances  specific  energy programmes  designed  to achieve  the 
goal  of cohesion. For example, one third  of  the measures under Thermie  (the demonstration  strand of 
the Joule-Thermie programme on non-nuclear research and development) and almost half the local and 

29  European Commission, 1996, OPOCE. 
30  See  the  proposal  for  a  Council  Decision  on  the  first  multiannual  programme  for  Euroepan  tourism 

"PHTLOXENIA", adopted by the Commission on 30 April 1996. 

31  See  in  particular  'Tourism  and  the  environment  in  Europe,  1995,  EUROFFICE,  and  'Transnational 

Partnerships in European Tourism", 1996, EUROFFICE. 

32  The  breakdown  of  this  amount is: Greece: ECU  865  million;  Spain  ECU  624  million;  France:  ECU  10 
million; Ireland: ECU 70 million; Italy: 312 million; Portugal: ECU 322 million; United Kingdom: ECU 182 
million. 

33  See the Commission communication  'An overall view of energy policy and actions' - COM(97) 167 final of 

23 April 1997. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

121 

regional energy-saving agencies (the Save programme for the rational use of'energy) are being carried 
out in Objective 1 regions and over 20% in areas eligible under Objectives 2 and 5(b). 

9.  The Structural Funds and trans-European Networks 

Under Title XII of the Treaty on European Union, two main aims lie behind the construction of trans-
European  transport, energy and telecommunications networks: to improve the working of the single 
market and to foster economic and social cohesion. The TENs seek to connect networks together and 
make  them  operationally  compatible,  improve  access  to  them  and  carry  out  projects  of  common 
interest, taking particular account of the need to connect the islands and isolated, peripheral regions to 
the Community's core. The TENs are implemented on the basis of Community guidelines  identifying 
projects  of  common  interest.  Based  on  the  Regulation  on  TENs  funding  adopted  in  199534, the 
Community  contributes  to work on projects  of common  interest by part-funding  feasibility  studies, 
offering  loan guarantees, interest-rate subsidies and, in duly justified  cases, direct grants. The TENs 
have a budget  line  of  ECU 2 345  million  for  the period  1995-9935. Community  funding  is mainly 
intended to overcome the financial obstacles that can occur at the start of a project. 

Significant  progress  was  made  in  1996  on  the  TENs.  The  Union's  financial  contribution  was 
appreciably  higher in  1996 than in  1995 and the role of the TENs in improving the unemployment 
situation  was acknowledged, in particular in the European  Confidence  Pact for Employment. Other 
measures  and/or  initiatives  improved  the operating climate  for  the TENs, examples  being the start 
made to liberalising the electricity  market, the reopening of negotiations to liberalise the market in 
gas, the Commission's  green  and  white papers  on  internationalisation  of  the  external  costs  of  the 
transport infrastructures,  the "citizen's network" and the relaunch of rail transport. Some  difficulties 
remain36, nevertheless, in particular with regard to the budget for  work on  14 specific  (or priority) 
transport projects identified  at the European Council in Essen in 1994. Issues are still addressed from 
a national perspective  instead  of being resolved  at Community  level  in an integrated  way and with 
networks  and  systems  in  mind.  Difficulties  have  also  arisen  over  establishing  public-private 
partnerships, transport charges, public procurement and the European Company statute. 

On TENs legislation, the guidelines on transport  and energy networks were adopted on 23 July, as 
was the Directive on the interoperability of the trans-European high-speed rail system37. The Member 
States were less inclined to proceed with environmental network projects  as part of the criteria laid 
down for water and waste. 

Since  1993, the TENs are explicitly  eligible  for  ERDF funding,  which  has now become the main 
source  of  Community  funding  (more  than  ECU 5 billion  for  1994-99),  and  for  Cohesion  funding 
(more  than  ECU  7 billion  in  the  same  period).  The  ERDF  funds  TENs  projects,  or  (secondary) 
projects providing access to TENs in eligible areas while the Cohesion Fund finances TENs transport 
projects  in  Greece,  Ireland,  Portugal  and  Spain.  A  number  of  projects  of  common  interest  in  the 
guidelines, including several projects that the European Council in Essen in December 1995 deemed a 
priority, are funded  under the Objective  1  CSFs. Attempts are made to co-ordinate the assistance as 
much as possible with the other Community financial instruments, such as the TENs budget line, EEB 
loans and EIF guarantees by setting up committees of representatives of the Member States, holding 
internal consultations or publishing a schematic plan for monitoring funding. Since 1993 the EEB and 
the  EIF  have  also  contributed  more  than  ECU  20  billion  in  loans  and  loan  guarantees  for  TENs 
funding.  The  Commission  has  stressed38  the  need  to  improve  coordination  in  the  Member  States 
between  the  national  administrations  in  charge  of  transport  and  the  national,  regional  and  local 
authorities that channel assistance from the Structural Funds. 

34  Council Regulation (EC) No 2236/95 of 18 September 1995. 
35  1995 prices. 
36  See the 1996 Annual Report on trans-European Networks, COM(96) 645 final of 6 December 1996. 
37  Directive 96/48/ECOJ No L 235, 17.9.1996. 
38  1996 Annual Report on die trans-European networks. 

f; 

122 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Trans-European  transport  networks 

The guidelines for the trans-European transport networks were adopted by the Council and Parliament 
on 23 July  199639. Their goal is to introduce by 2010 a multimodal network offering modern,  efficient 
infrastructure for economic  activity and a wide variety of rapid and reliable transport options helping 
to absorb the increasing traffic  in goods and passengers and establishing the best connections for the 
peripheral and remotest regions. In terms of the projects already under way, steady progress has been 
made by most of  the  14 specific  projects  identified  by the European Council  in Essen. In  1996,  the 
Commission  committed  ECU 280 million to the TENs budget line for transport projects of  common 
interest, 75% of which went on the specific projects in accordance with the conclusions of the Cannes 
European  Council  in June  1995.  Of the  priority  and  specific  projects,  a number receive  significant 
joint-funding  from  the  ERDF and the Cohesion  Fund: main  roads  in  Ireland, Northern  Ireland  and 
Italy,  Athens-Thessaloniki  rail  link,  the  Via  Egnatia  and  Pathe  motorways  (Patras-Athens-
Thessaloniki)  which  has  made  appreciable  progress  since  the  tender  for  two  sub-projects  was 
awarded, and the Cork-Dublm-Belfast rail link, which should be completed in 1996-97. 

Trans-European  energy  networks 

The TENs  guidelines  for gas and electricity  were adopted by the Parliament and Council  on 5 June 
199540  j0  adjust  to  the  rapid  changes  in  the  energy  sector  in  Europe  and  to  take  account  of  the 
accession  of  Austria,  Finland  and  Sweden,  in  July  1996  the  Commission  presented  a  proposal41 
supplementing  the first list  of  43  projects  of  common  interests  mentioned  in the guidelines  with  31 
new  projects.  The  proposal  was  adopted  in  June  1997.  The  Essen  European  Council  moreover 
identified  ten priority projects among the 43 in the guidelines. La the gas sector, appreciable progress 
was achieved in 1996 on the gas pipeline projects assisted by the ERDF in Greece, Spain and Portugal 
in particular, to which the EIB also granted substantial loans. The projects involve: 
•  construction of the Algeria-Morocco-Spain pipeline in Spain, with spur lines to certain towns and 

• 

• 

• 

• 

cities in Andalusia; 
the introduction  of natural gas to more Spanish towns and cities (the western gas pipeline project 
and the Valencia-Orihuela-Cartagena project); 
the  introduction  of  natural  gas  to  Portugal  and  interconnection  of  the  Portuguese  and  Spanish 
networks; 
the main pipeline  in the project to introduce natural gas to Greece, which has already been built, 
and  funding  of  the  remaining  work  to  built  the  high-pressure  gas  supply  network.  The  work  is 
being carried out with a loan from the ELB; 
the  connector  between  eastern  Germany  and western  Poland  and  the  start  of  work  on  the  other 
sections in Germany and Poland, part of the Russia-Belarus-Poland-European  Union pipeline. 

Most  of  the  electricity  projects  on  the  other  hand  have  yet  to  get  permission  or  comply  with 
environmental  standards. This is the case for the electricity  interconnection projects between France, 
Spain  and  Italy  and  between  Italy  and  Greece.  Only  the  electricity  connector  between  northern 
Portugal and Spain is partly operational and this project and is not yet complete. 

As regards financial assistance from the TENs budget line to projects of common interest identified  in 
the guidelines, in  1996 the Commission decided to grant ECU 8 900 000 to part-finance  studies, 45% 
of which went on projects in Spain, Portugal, Greece and Ireland. 

39  European Parliament and Council Decision No  1693/96 of 23 July  1996, OJ No L 228, 9.9.1996. 
40  European  Parliament and Council Decision No  1254/96 of 5 June  1996 , OJ No L  161, 29.6.1996. 
41  COM(96) 390 final  of 24 July  1996. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

123 

Tram-European  telecommunications  networks 

At  the  end  of  1996,  thé  European  Parliament  and  the  Council  were  preparing  the  conciliation 
procedure for the overall guidelines for trans-European telecommunications networks. The guidelines, 
which  supplement  the ones  already  in  force  for  the integrated  services digital network  (Euro-ISDN), 
highlight  applications  and  services  meeting  the  socio-economic  needs  of  the  users  and  focus  in 
particular  on  those  areas  of  public  interest  where  telecommunications  provide  innovative solutions: 
multimedia  for  education  and  culture, data transmission  links between  those  involved  in health  care, 
value-added  services for  transport system users and data transmission  services for  SMEs. Along  with 
Euro-ISDN, the guidelines  cover all advanced  and  mobile networks  and  the preparatory  work  on  the 
move  to  broadband  (IBC) networks. The ERDF is funding  expansion  of  the physical  networks.  It  is 
similarly  contributing  ECU  173 million  to the development  of  the  ISDN-TENs  in  Greece  under  the 
Telecommunications  OP. 

Funding of the TENs telecommunications  activities in  1996 from  the TENs budget  line was based  on 
the  1995  guidelines  and  was  aimed  at  developing  Euro-ISDN.  The  activities  funded  included  the 
selection,  after  a call  for  proposals  published  on  13 April  1996, of  11 advanced  telecommunications 
services  and  applications  projects  of  socio-economic  relevance  covering  such  aspects  as  urban 
information  networks, telemedicine, teleinformation,  teleworking, cultural services from a remote  site 
and electronic trading for  SMEs. The Community contribution to these projects was ECU  18 100 000. 
It is impossible to calculate the extent to which these funds  actually  benefited  the Cohesion  countries 
as the beneficiaries  in each  case were ad hoc consortia formed  of companies from different  Member 
States. 

10.  The Structural Funds and the transparency of public contracts 

In the Annual Report for  1995, the Commission stressed the need to be close geographically to project 
decision-makers  so  that  the  preparation  of  the  project  case  files,  their  monitoring,  the  speed  of 
implementation  and understanding  of Community  documents might  all be  improved. As  information 
on public procurement  is available at national, regional or local level, monitoring must also act as an 
aid  to  the  decision-makers  and  thus be carried  out at the appropriate  level. As previously  stated,  the 
Commission  gave  thought  to  this  issue  and  it  consequently  adopted  in  November  1996  the  Green 
Paper on Public  Procurement.42  1997 was spent collecting the comments  of the economic  actors  and 
preparing the framework for the physical implementation of the proposed approaches. 

On  monitoring  assistance  part-financed  by  the  Structural  Funds,  the  Green  Paper  has  a  number  of 
innovative  proposals  to  make.  Two  chapters  are  of  direct  relevance  to  the  contracts  receiving 
Community  assistance:  the  issue  of  "Attestation"  in  the  chapter  on  the  application  of  public 
procurement  law  and  the  issue  of  procurement  involving  Union  funds  in  the  chapter  on  public 
procurement  and other Community  policies The Commission  has suggested  creating at national  level 
independent  bodies  monitoring  public  procurement  rules,  increased  use  of  the  procedure  certifying 
compliance with Community  legislation on public procurement  (already provided  for  in the Remedies 
Directive) and making public procurement decision makers accountable. Movement in this sense does 
not  mean  that Commission  would  give up  its rights in this regard; it  will  continue  to  monitor  public 
procurement in accordance with the Treaty and the Directives. 

In the case of the checks carried  out on the award of public tenders funded  by the ERDF in the  1989-
93  period,  the  Commission  received  "public  procurement  questionnaires"  completed  by  the  bodies 
carrying  out  the  projects  and  returned  along  with  the  applications  for  the  payment  of  outstanding 
balances  as  laid  down  in  the  Structural  Funds  Regulations.  Using  these  questionnaires,  the 
Commission  knows when  a notice of public  works contract to carry  out these projects  is published  in 
the Official  Journal, thereby  allowing it to scrutinise all relevant information.  In the case of the public 

42  COM(96) 583 final of 27 November 1996. 

124 

_ 

8th Annual Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

procurement  procedures used  for  awarding contracts, the documents enabled  the Commission  to carry 
out more detailed  investigations using the records of awards. 

11.  The Structural  Funds and competition  policy 

Under Articles  92 and  93 of the Treaty, the Commission  keeps under review  public  aid  to firms in  so 
far  as  it distorts  competition  and  affects  trade  between  Member  States. When  examining  regional  aid 
for  compatibility  with  the  Single  Market,  the  Commission  pays  particular  attention  to  its  potentially 
beneficial  effects  on  the  economic  development  of  the  least-developed  regions,  provided  that  the 
terms  of  competition  and  trade  between  Member  States  are  not  affected  to  an  extent  contrary  to  the 
common  good. These principles  are applied  not only  when  specific  aid  schemes  are being  scrutinised 
but  also  to  the  horizontal  arrangements.  Thus,  in  line  with  the  guidelines  adopted  in  recent  years, 
more  favourable  treatment  is  reserved  for  this  type  of  aid  under  the  various  provisions  adopted  in 
1996.  In  particular,  both  the  Community  rules  on  State  aid  for  research  and  development43  and  for 
SMEs44 provide for  an increase  in the acceptable intensity of aid if the projects  are located  in a region 
eligible for structural  funding. 

Since  a  significant  proportion  of  the  aid  from  the  Structural  Funds  benefits  firms  directly,  it  is  also 
important  to  ensure  that  the  Community's  regional  policy  is  carried  out  in  full  conformity  with  the 
rules  on  competition.  The  Commission  must  take  account  of  the  effect  any  cumulation  of  State  aids 
and  Community  funding  will  have  on  competition  and  trade.  With  this  in  mind,  in  1996  the 
Commission  examined  the measures in the Objective  2 SPDs for the period  1997-99 for  compatibility 
with  the Treaty. 

In  addition,  the  Commission's  efforts  to  improve  consistency  and  coordination  between  Community 
and  national  regional  policies  continued  in  1996 through  the analysis  of  maps  of  regions  eligible  for 
regional  aid. New maps  were approved  for  Germany, Luxembourg  and the Netherlands. In each case, 
interest  focused  mainly  on the percentage  of the population  covered  and  the intensity  of aid. On  that 
occasion  the  Commission  made  sure that  coverage  in  terms  of  the  eligible  population  was  such  that 
greater  concentration  of  the aid  was achieved  overall  so that  its economic  impact  was  maximised,  its 
effect  on competition  was contained  and limited  budget  resources were used  more effectively.  On the 
other  hand,  the  Commission  ensured  that  the  ceilings  for  aid  were  differentiated  depending  on  the 
relative macro-economic standing of the regions concerned. 

In the First report on economic  and social cohesion45, the Commission felt that the principle of overall 
concentration  of  the  aid  in  the  least-favoured  regions  could  be  even  more  resolutely  applied,  in 
particular by improving consistency  between  the identification  of regions eligible under the Structural 
Funds  and  the  decisions  on  eligibility  for  national  aid,  and it  intends  to continue  in  this  vein.  In  this 
regard,  eligibility  under  the  Structural  Funds  (in  the  case  in  point,  the  Urban  Community  Initiative) 
has been  made an additional  criterion  for  the eligibility  of certain areas for  national  aid  falling  within 
Community  rules on State aid to firms  in disadvantaged urban areas. 

43  OJ No C 45, 17.2.1996. 
44  OJ No C 213, 23.7.1996. 
45  C O M ( 9 6)  5 42  final  of  6  N o v e m b er  1996. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

125 

Furthermore,  in the case of the new Member States, the Commission  examined  the new  schemes  and 
the amendments  which, in accordance with the Agreements on Accession,  were made to the  schemes 
existing  at  the  time  of  accession  to  bring  them  into  line  with  Community  rules  before  1997.  Most 
notably,  in  1996  the  Commission  approved  an  aid  scheme  for  transport  in  the  northern  regions  of 
Finland  to  take  account  of  the  special  regional  development  problems  resulting  from  the  area's  low 
population  density. This  is the first case applying the provisions  set  out  in  its communication  on  the 
application  of Article 92(3)(c) of the Treaty relating to State aid for regional purposes46. 

12.  The Structural Funds, education and training 

Two  main  approaches  were  followed  in  1996 to  ensure  coordination  between  the  Structural  Funds  -
the ESF in particular - and the Community's programmes  on education  and training: in the first place 
coordination  was  maintained  between  the  ESF's  activities,  in  particular  its  Employment  and  Adapt 
Community  Initiatives,  and  the  two  extensive  education  and  training  programmes  Socrates  and 
Leonardo  Da  Vinci;  secondly,  specific  initiatives  were  undertaken  to  promote  a  Community-wide 
debate  on  essential  education  and  training  policies.  The  place  of  education  and  training  in  the 
Community's  employment  strategy  has  generally  remained  a  central  concern,  as  evidenced  by  the 
various activities undertaken. 

In  terms  of  actual  programming,  the  provisions  on  coordination  in  the  Socrates  and  Leonardo  Da 
Vinci  programmes  remained  applicable  so  that  consistent  approaches  might  be  adopted  for  the 
selection  of  projects  under  the  Community  Initiatives  and  for  funding  under  Article  6  of  the  ESF 
Regulation.  More  generally,  complementarity  between  the  policy  guidelines  focused  on  four 
Commission  education  and  training  initiatives,  i.e.  The  European  Year  of  Lifelong  Training  and 
Education  (1996);  the  White  Paper  Teaching  and  Learning:  towards  the  learning  society,  which 
resulted  in proposals  on employability,  social  exclusion  and  a strengthening  of  cooperation  between 
schools  and  the world  of  work; the Commission  task force  responsible  for  educational  software  and 
multimedia  drafted  a  final  working paper  in July47  and  a joint  invitation  for  proposals  in  December 
1996;  lastly,  the  Commission  proposal  "Learning  and  the  Information  Society:  Action  Plan for  a 
European  education  initiative",  which  proposes  Structural  Fund  aid  for  the  policies  set  out  in  the 
proposal. 

13.  The Structural  Funds and culture 

Culture  is  a job-creating  sector  of  the  economy  identified  by  the  Commission  in  its  White  Paper  on 
Growth,  competitiveness  and  employment.  Having  presented  its  first  Report  on  the  consideration  of 
cultural  aspects  in European  Community  action48,  which  includes  a presentation  of  the  various  types 
of Structural Funding available, in November  1996 the Commission  adopted  a communication  entitled 
"Cohesion  Policy  and  Culture:  a contribution  to employment"49,  in which  it stressed  that  culture  was 
not only a costly public activity but also an increasing economic sector in its own right. The document 
identifies  the  interaction  between  regional  development  and  culture  and  emphasises  the  importance 
that  culture  can  have  in  creating jobs.  Culture  can  in  fact  fulfil  three  major  regional  development 
functions  since cultural activities and development  linked to the cultural heritage are a source of  direct 
and  indirect  employment,  culture  is  an  important  element  for  a  region's  image  region  and  the 
establishment  of  economic  activities  and,  lastly,  it  can  be  a factor  in  boosting  and  integrating  social 
activities. 

46  OJ No C 364, 20.12.1994. 
47  SEC (96)  1426 of  23 July  1996. 
48  COM(96)  160 final  of  17 April  1996. 
49  COM (96) 512 final  of 20 November  1996. 

726 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

While it is difficult  to provide exact figures, the Structural Funds are the most important instruments 
for funding cultural projects. The Communication concludes therefore that, in future, culture must be 
more  fully  integrated  into  the  local  and  regional  development  strategies  so  that  they  can  have 
maximum  effect  on  employment  and  innovation.  While  the  cultural  heritage  has  already  benefited 
greatly  from  the  Funds,  greater  attention  must  henceforth  be  paid  to  cultural  activities  and  their 
exploitation as a source of income. 

126 bis 

8lh annual report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

14. 

The Structural Funds and  disability 

the  Commission's  Communication 

the  Council  adopted  on 
Following 
20 December  1996  a  Resolution  on  equal  opportunities  for  the  disabled.  This 
document  drew special  attention to changing  attitudes to disabled  persons  at  both 
European and wider international  level2 and made the following  points: 

', 

•  disabled  persons 

form  a  significant  proportion 

(37  million)  of 

the 

Community's  population; 

•  social  cohesion  in  the  European  Community  implies  promotion  of  equal 

opportunities and removing any discrimination against such persons; 

•  access  to  properly-linked  education  and  training  is  a  necessary  condition  for 

successful  integration  into social and economic  life. 

in  favour  of  equal  opportunities. 

With  an  unemployment  rate  two  to  three  times  above  the  average  for  the 
population  as a whole, disabled  people  must  be the subject  of a special  effort  via 
well  thought  out  measures  for  their  social  and  professional  integration.  Since 
1989, the  Structural  Funds  have  been  working  for  economic  and  social  cohesion 
in all regions  of the Union.  The  fight  against  unemployment  and  the  creation  of 
jobs  are held  to be a special  priority.  The  Structural  Funds, and  in  particular  the 
ESF.  are  a  vital  element  of  the  Commission's  strategy  of  implementing  a 
total, 
combination  of  programmes 
5.5 thousand  million  ecus  from  the  Structural  Funds  are  targeted  against  social 
exclusion  in  the  1994-99  period  under  Objectives  1,  2  and  3.  Specifically  for 
disabled  persons, the  FSE  is contributing  some  1.3  thousand  million  ecus  (1996) 
via  its  "mainstream"  actions  (765 million  ecus)  and  via  the  Employment  / 
Horizon  Community  Initiative  (513 million  ecus).  Horizon  aims  at an  integrated 
approach 
local/regional/national 
authorities)  and  supports  four  types  of  measure:  training, job  creation,  guidance 
and  new  technologies.  Given  the  special  theme  of  the  present  report,  it  is 
interesting to note that one fifth  of the Horizon projects  concern new  technologies 
and  distance-working.  In  its  1997  mid-term  evaluation  of  the  Structural  Funds, 
the  Commission  will  seek  to  assess  the  impact  of  measures  in  favour  of  the 
disabled. 

(partnership  between 

social  actors  and 

In 

i 

2 

COM(96)406of30July  1996. 

cf. the United Nations General Assembly Resolution 48/46 of 20 December  1993 for the promotion of 
the principle of equal opportunities, and the White Paper "European social policy: a way ahead for the 
Union" COM(94)333 of 27 July 1994. 

1  z.  1-

CHAPTERm 

INTER-INSTITUITONAL DIALOGUE, REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP 

DIALOGUE WITH THEECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PARTNERS, 

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION 

St/i Annual  report  on the Structura!  Funds  (1996) 

13 

number  of  profitable  holdings.  After  the  reform,  disparities  were  reduced,  although  to a  lesser  extent 
than  if the Commission's  proposal  to cap direct aids had been  accepted. 

The  Cohesion  Report  shows  that  all  regions  and  all  sections  of  society  may  benefit  from  those 
Community  policies  where  expenditure  is lower  but which  create  a climate  for  change.  However,  the 
more  central  regions  and  the  more  advantaged  social  groups  are  often  better  placed  to  do  so.  For 
example,  the  single  market  has  had  a considerable  impact  on  competitiveness  throughout  the  Union, 
despite  unfounded  fears  that  it  would  prove  crushing  for  the  poorer  countries.  Spain,  Portugal  and 
Ireland  in  particular  have  seen  their  chances  of  finding  export  opportunities  grow.  However,  as 
regards  trade  and  investment,  the  position  of  Greece  and  southern  Italy  has  scarcely  improved. 
Turning 
to  transport  networks,  the  countries  eligible  under  the  Cohesion  Fund  have  seen 
improvements  in  passenger  transport  although  it  is  true  that  the  countries  at  the  centre  of  the 
Community,  at  the  very  heart  of  the  transport  network,  benefit  still  more  from  these  policies.  In  the 
case of telecommunications  networks, the infrastructure  required  to develop the  information  society  is 
less  advanced  in  the  poor  regions,  which  undoubtedly  threatens  to  widen  the  gap  between  rich  and 
poor regions  in this  respect2. 

The  Cohesion  Report  concludes  by  looking  at ways  of  making  the  policies  more  effective.  Here  too, 
the  watchword  is  shared  responsibilities.  The  Member  States  must  take  the  initiatives  required  to 
reduce  public  debt  while  maintaining  programmes  based  on  investment,  growth  and job  creation;  the 
Community  policies  other  than  cohesion  policy  can  in  turn  improve  synergies  and  coordination  with 
the  goals  of  cohesion.  The  Structural  Funds  should  concentrate  more  on  the  most  serious  problems 
and  the  regions  in  difficulty.  Administrative  procedures  require  simplification  and  the  system  of 
monitoring  and  evaluation  must  be  made  more  rigorous.  The  partnership  with  those  involved  at 
regional  and  local  level  and  with the  private  sector  could  be developed.  Finally,  the  Structural  Funds 
must  give  priority  to  combating  unemployment  and  creating  lasting jobs  and  the  instruments  used 
must reflect  this priority. 

2.  Support  for  employment 

the  Structural  Funds.  In 

During  1996  the  employment  situation  remained  a  major  cause  for  concern  within  the  Union.  The 
guidelines  for  macroeconomic  policy  offer  a  consistent  framework  for  a  lasting  solution  to 
employment  problems, and  the multiannual  programmes  of the  Member  States adopted  in  accordance 
with  the recommendations  of the  Essen  and  Madrid  European  Councils  are of the  utmost  importance, 
since  they  embody  strategic  commitments  to making  the  labour  market  more efficient  and  increasing 
investment  in  human  resources.  These  practical  policies  therefore  ensure  synergy  with  assistance 
from 
its  communication  on  Community  structural  assistance  and 
employment3,  the  Commission  pointed  to  the  growing  need  to  ensure  consistency  between  the 
strategy  of the  Union  and  the  measures  in  the  Member  States  part-financed  by the  Structural  Funds. 
That  communication  is part  of the Confidence  Pact for  employment4,  which  seeks  in  particular  to  use 
the  available  financial  margins  in  various  ways:  to  support  innovative  measures  for  small  firms:  to 
improve  the  dynamic  management  of  employment  and  investment  in  human  resources:  to  increase 
compatibility  between  working  life  and  family  life;  and  to  promote  local  initiatives  for  development 
and  employment.  The  Confidence  Pact  also  stresses  the  need  to  improve  the  political,  economic  and 
social  partnership  in order  to  improve the way  local  potential  is used to encourage job  creation. 

In  1996, implementation  of this  framework  for  action  took  two main  directions. On the one  hand, the 
communication  on  Community  structural  assistance  and  employment  provided  a  basis  for  the 
Commission's  guidelines  to  the  Member  States  in  preparation  for  the  second  phase  of  programming 
for  Objective  2  (\991-99Y.  On  the  other,  at  the  Florence  European  Council  in  June  1996.  the 

2  See part  B of this  chapter:  A special  focus  on technology  development. 
3  COM(96)  109 final  of 20  March  1996. See Chapter  II.D. Complementarity  with  the other  Community  policies. 
4  CSE(%)  i  final  of 5 June  1996. 
5  C(96> 952  final  of 29 April  1996. See Chapter  l.A.3.  Objective 2. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

129 

A*  INTER-INSTITUTIONAL DIALOGUE 

The  implementation  of  the  Structural  Funds  is  generating  a  steady,  varied  and  growing  flow  of 
dialogue between  the Commission  and  the other Community  institutions; this dialogue  takes many 
forms,  from  exchanges  of  information,  now  regular  and  systematic,  to  the  adoption  of 
communications  and  notices  by  the  Commission  and  opinions  and  resolutions  by  the  other 
institutions. The main channels of this dialogue are meetings, both formal  (e.g. part-sessions  of the 
European  Parliament  and  its committees  and ministerial  meetings)  and  informal  (seminars  or joint 
working  parties),  and  there  is  dialogue  at  both  policy-making  and  technical  levels  (e.g.  between 
departments and in Structural Fund committees). This wide range of contacts involves a large number 
of subjects. In 1996 those chiefly discussed by all the institutions, in response to several Commission 
communications and documents, were employment, economic and social cohesion and the key role of 
the  Structural  Funds. More  attention  was also  devoted  to  the  links  between  certain  policies  -  the 
environment,  culture,  equal  opportunities, rural  development,  fisheries  - and  the  Structural  Funds, 
action  to  assist  certain  types  of  area  (urban,  coastal,  rural  and  border)  and  spatial  development  at 
European  level. Lastly,  issues relating to the implementation  of  Structural  Fund  assistance  as such 
remained  a central theme, as in previous years, with a specific  focus  on the progress of programme 
implementation,  the  allocation  of  the Community  Initiative  reserve,  the  preparation  of  the  second 
phase of the Objective 2 programme (1997-99), ways of simplifying the administration and improving 
the  effectiveness  and  assessment  of  the  Structural  Funds,  and  how  to  involve  as  many  players  as 
possible, in particular in the context of territorial pacts for employment. 

1.  Dialogue with the European Parliament 

In  1996  dialogue  with  Parliament  covered  both  the  full  range  of  structural  policies  and  specific 
instances of Structural Fund assistance. Parliament adopted a resolution on economic and monetary 
union  and  economic  and  social  cohesion  in Europe, stating its  view  that  the nominal  convergence 
criteria for transition to a single currency were such as to create a favourable  environment  for more 
effective  regional policy, a key factor in a long-term cohesion strategy. The resolution also called on 
the  Inter-governmental  Conference  to strengthen  Title XV of  the Treaty  concerning economic and 
social  cohesion.  In  another  resolution  on  Community  structural  assistance  and  employment, 
Parliament  expressed  the  view  that  economic  and  social  cohesion  was  being  undermined  by 
excessively high unemployment rates, in particular in remote regions and those whose development is 
lagging behind. It called on the Commission and the Member States to use Structural Funds resources 
for measures that would promote long-term job creation. It also asked the Commission to develop an 
evaluation  methodology  suitable for an improved assessment of the impact of structural  policies on 
employment. 

There  was also intensive discussion  of  specific  cases of Structural  Fund  assistance. With  regard to 
regional policy, Parliament delivered opinions approving Structural Fund assistance for  Objective 1 
CSFs  in  Portugal,  Spain,  Greece  and  Ireland,  while  stressing  the  problems  requiring  particular 
attention in each case. Parliament also gave its views on the guidelines for the second programme of 
innovative  measures  under  Article  10  of  the  ERDF  Regulation.  Given  the  considerable  interest 
attracted by measures under Article  10 in the previous financing period and the remarkable results of 
measures  during  that  period,  Parliament  encouraged  the  Commission  to  promote  inter-regional 
cooperation  measures and pilot projects  as widely as possible. In another resolution  it approved the 
policy guidelines which the Commission had followed  in its allocation of the Community Initiatives 
reserve, but expressed its regret that the industrial Initiatives had received so little extra funding  and 
that the Regis Initiative had received no additional appropriations. 

Commission  Members  also  frequently  addressed  Parliament.  The  main  focus  of  Commission 
addresses  to the Committee  on Regional Policy  was employment  and cohesion. Mrs  Wulf-Mathies, 
the Member of the Commission with special responsibility for regional policy and cohesion, outlined 
the main aspects of the Confidence  Pact for Employment proposed by the Commission  in  1996 and 
stressed  the  role  of  the  Structural  Funds  in  implementing  the  resulting  territorial  pacts  for 

1^0 

^^ 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

employment.  She  also  spoke  about  the  first  approaches  to  be  explored  concerning  the  reform  of 
structural  policies  in  preparation  for  the  enlargement  of  the  Union  to  include  central  and  eastern 
European  countries.  On  other  occasions,  she  summarised  the  main  points  of  the  first  report  on 
economic  and  social  cohesion  and presented  the Commission's  work programme  for  1997. Mr  Oreja, 
the  Member  of  the  Commission  with  special  responsibility  for  cultural  matters,  attended  the  joint 
meeting of the Committee  on Regional Policy  and the Committee  on Culture, where he presented  the 
Commission's  cultural  programme,  emphasising  the  role  that  the  cultural  sector  could  play  in 
generating employment and therefore advocating that Community policies should take greater account 
of  it. The  Commission  was  also  present  at  the  conference  organised  by  Parliament  and  the  Union's 
regional  and  local  authorities.  In  his  address  to  the  conference,  President  Santer  reminded  those 
present  of  the  importance  of  the  principle  of  partnership,  which  meant  that  regional  and  municipal 
authorities  were  more  involved  in  work  towards  cohesion.  Mrs  Wulf-Mathies  also  focused  on  the 
growing  importance  of  the  regions  in  the  European  project,  while  Mr  Oreja  gave  an  account  of 
progress made at the Inter-governmental  Conference. 

The  Commission  continued  its  discussions  of  social  issues  with  Parliament  through  the  ad  hoc 
working  group,  which  continued  the  work  begun  in  1995.  At  its  meetings,  the  working  group 
examined  a variety  of ESF issues, both  horizontal  aspects, such  as assessment,  financial  equalisation 
and  relocations, and  specific  aspects  of  implementing  ESF assistance,  such  as  payments,  carryovers, 
budgets and forecasts. The working group proved very useful  as a channel for  more in-depth  dialogue 
and  explanation  of  ESF  assistance.  Its  value  was  demonstrated  by  the  fact  that  Parliament's 
Committee  on  Social  Affairs  decided  in  September  1996  to  increase  the  number  of  its  members 
participating in the group to ten. 

The  discussions  of Parliament's  Committee  on Agriculture  and  Rural  Development  culminated  in  the 
adoption,  on  25  October  1996,  of  a  Resolution  on  European  rural  policy  and  on  the  creation  of  a 
European  Rural  Charter.  Parliament  stated  that  in  the light  of  the problems  facing  rural  areas  and  in 
order  to  keep  up  employment  levels  in  the  countryside,  it  was  essential  to  establish  an  integrated 
multi-sectoral  policy  that  would  give priority  to  employment  and  foster  improvements  in  the  quality 
of  agricultural  products, the protection  of  the environment, equal  opportunities  and  the  development 
of services. The Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development  also addressed  the issue of  young 
farmers  and  the  transfer  of  farms.  Other  matters  it  discussed  were  ways  of  improving  existing 
mechanisms  and  the  distribution  of  powers  and  responsibilities  between  the  Commission  and  the 
Member States. 

*" 

The  Commission  maintained  regular  and  fruitful  dialogue  with  Parliament's  Committee  on  Fisheries. 
Several  Parliamentary  questions  were  addressed  to  the  Commission  on  the  subject  of  structural 
assistance  for  fisheries,  including  measures  eligible  for  FIFG  financing,  the  distribution  of  such 
financing  and  the  Community  Pesca  Initiative.  Mrs  Bonino,  the  Member  of  the  Commission  with 
special  responsibility  for  fisheries,  attended  several  meetings  with Parliament,  both  at the  Committee 
on  Fisheries  and  at plenary  sessions. The  Commission  also  responded  to a Parliamentary  Resolution 
on the crisis in the fisheries sector which raised several issues about structural assistance for  fisheries. 
Finally, Parliament endorsed the third and fourth  amendments to the FIFG  Regulation1. 

2.  Dialogue with the Economic and Social  Committee 

The Commission  continued  its contacts  and cooperation  with  the Economic  and  Social Committee  at 
all levels. The Committee gave its reactions and comments  in opinions which were studied  attentively 
by  the  Commission.  The  Committee  considers  that  economic  and  social  cohesion  should  be  the 
leitmotif  of all regional  assistance, and  most of  its  opinions  were formulated  with  this  in mind.  In its 
opinion  on  the  future  of  cohesion  and  the  long-term  implications  for  the  Structural  Funds,  the 
Committee  addressed  the  full  range  of  cohesion  issues  and  examined  the  challenges  facing  the 
Structural  Funds. It stressed  the importance  of European  regional policy  instruments  in the context of 

1 See Chapter I.A.I. Objective  5(a)  fisheries. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

131 

an enlarged Union in which economic and monetary union will have become à reality. Similarly, in its 
opinion  on  the  Sixth  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds  (1994),  it  stressed  the  importance  of 
economic and social cohesion and job creation, while specifying  that the latter must be pursued  with a 
view  to  long-term  economic  development  and  should  not  constitute  the  only  criterion  for  granting 
funding.  The  Committee  also  reaffirmed  the  importance  of  the  principles  of  structural  action  and 
urged effective  implementation  of the principle of partnership. 

The Committee  welcomed  the consistent  nature of the allocation  of the Community  Initiative  reserve 
proposed  in  the  Commission  decision  and  the  fact  that  more  funding  was  going  to the  Employment 
Initiative; at the same time it underlined  the need for monitoring and assessment. It also expressed  its 
support  for  a  policy  designed  to  achiever  greater  synergy  between  cohesion  and  environmental 
policies and called  on the Commission to define  specific  measures for putting the proposed  principles 
into  practice.  With  regard  to  urban  issues,  the  Committee  pointed  out  the  value  added  that 
differentiated  operations  integrating  social,  economic  and  environmental  aspects  could  contribute 
towards greater economic and social cohesion. With this in mind, it called for urban  issues to become 
one  of  the  Community's  responsibilities.  Spatial  planning  was  also  the  subject  of  discussion  within 
the Committee in connection with its work on the "Europe 2000+" planning document, with  particular 
attention  devoted  to  specific  problems  facing  the  Alpine  Arc;  the  Committee  proposed  using  the 
Structural  Funds to help deal with these problems. As regard  the integrated  development  planning of 
coastal areas, it recommended that the aims of funding  to be allocated to this objective should be more 
thoroughly  defined. 

Finally the Committee unanimously endorsed the two amendments to the FIFG Regulation2  (adapting 
the premium arrangements and concerning reference to the geographical origin of products). 

3.  Relations with the Committee of the Regions 

The dialogue between the Commission  and the Committee of the Regions was continued  and  stepped 
up following  the guidelines  adopted  by the Commission  in April  1995. At  the beginning of the  year, 
the  Commission  sent  the  Committee  a  projected  programme  of  consultations  going  beyond  those 
provided  for  in  the  Treaty.  The  Commission  actively  participated  in  the  Committee's  work  and 
regularly  informed  it of action  taken  in response to its opinions. The Committee  particularly  focused 
on employment  and the greater role which the Structural Funds should play in this area. In June  1996 
President  Santer  addressed  the  Committee,  presenting  the  Confidence  Pact  for  Employment  in 
Europe. He stressed the key role of local and regional  authorities in implementing the Pact and called 
on  the  Committee  to  make  an  active  contribution.  For  its  part,  the  Committee  adopted  a  resolution 
stating  its  intention  of participating fully  in the specific  process  of  implementing  territorial  pacts  for 
employment.  Mrs  Wulf-Mathies  also  participated  in  the  Committee's  work  on  two  occasions.  In 
January  she  spoke  on  the  interaction  between  cohesion  and  environmental  policies,  stressing  the 
growing importance of the environmental factor  in the competitiveness of regions and the contribution 
being  made  by  Structural  and  Cohesion  Fund  assistance  to  improving  the  environment  in 
disadvantaged regions. In November she presented the first Report on Economic and Social  Cohesion, 
noting  that  the  effectiveness  of  structural  policies  should  be  increased  to  deal  with  the  challenges 
lying ahead, in particular by concentrating assistance, making continuation  of programmes  conditional 
on results and improving financial management. 

The  Committee  also  stated  its  position  on  subjects  such  as  the  new  regional  programming  under 
Objectives  1 and  2, the  allocation  of  the  Community  Initiative  reserve,  the  Union's  policy  on  cross-
border  cooperation  with  the Russian  Federation  and  the region  around  the  Barents  Sea  and  regional 
cooperation  in  the  Baltic. The  Commission  organised, jointly  with  the  Committee  of  the  Regions,  a 
series of six  seminars to examine, with the representatives  of local  and regional  authorities  and  social 
and  economic  partners,  the  role  of  spatial  development  in  Europe  as  elaborated  in  the  "Europe 

See  Chapter  I.A.5. Objective  5(a)  fisheries. 

132 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

2000+"  document.  The  results  of  these  seminars  are  recorded  in  a  report  by  the  Committee  of  the 
Regions. 

The  Committee  issued  three  opinions  on  rural  development.  The  first  called  for  a rural  development 
policy based on a multi-sectoral  approach and aimed at all rural areas, but with programmes defined  at 
regional  level  to  take  account  of  each  region's  specific  characteristics.  The  second  concerned  new 
forms  of economic activity and new services in rural areas and recommended  that, since services  were 
playing  an  increasingly  important  role  in  the  economy  and  had  major  job-creation  potential,  they 
should  be  actively  fostered  in  rural  areas,  their  quality  and  conditions  of  access  should  be  improved 
and  the  use  of  telecommunication  networks  in  isolated  regions  should  be  developed.  The  third  dealt 
with  young  farmers  and  the  problems  of  the transfer  of  farms.  It  called  for  the conditions  for  young 
farmers  taking  over  farms  to  be  made  easier  by  developing  an  early  retirement  scheme,  authorising 
multiple  sources  of  income,  facilitating  access  to training  for  young  farmers,  harmonising  taxes  and 
other  charges  on  the  sale  or  inheritance  of  farms,  staggering  payments  of  setting-up  costs  and 
improving  the  provision  of  information  on  ways  of  setting up  in  farming.  In June  1996 Mr  Fischler, 
the  Member  of  the  Commission  with  special  responsibility  for  agriculture  and  rural  development, 
gave a talk on the implications  of enlargement for agricultural  policy and took the opportunity  to give 
his views on the future  of the CAP and rural development  policy. 

Finally,  the  Committee  of  the  Regions  gave  its  opinion  on  the  regional  impact  of  the  common 
fisheries policy, analysing, among other things, the role of the FIFG and Pesca on the regions. 

4. 

Informal  meetings  of the ministers responsible for  regional  policy and  spatial  planning 

The  ministers  responsible  for  regional policy  and  spatial planning  attended  two  informal  meetings  in 
1996,  one  on  3  and  4  May  in  Venice  under  the  Italian  Presidency  and  the  other  on  14  and  15 
November  in Ballyconnell  under the Irish Presidency. The second  meeting  was organised  in the  form 
of a seminar. 

The  Venice  meeting  discussed  the  effectiveness  and  monitoring  of  the  Structural  Funds  and  how  to 
simplify  their  application,  and  culture  and  regional  development.  With  regard  to  the  implementation 
of  structural  measures,  the  ministers  expressed  the  view  that  the  Funds  were  operating  properly  but 
certain  improvements  were needed  in programme  quality  and  implementation,  financial  management 
and  the  application  of  the  principle  of  partnership.  It  was  agreed  that  Structural  Fund  assistance 
procedures needed  simplifying  in order to reduce delays. In this connection, the need was pointed  out 
for  the  decision-making  procedure  for  the  new  Objective  2  programming  and  the  use  of  the 
Community  Initiative  reserve  to  be  as  simple  as  possible.  The  ministers  also  fully  endorsed  the 
objectives  of  the  SEM 2000  Initiative3.  In  addition,  they  recognised  the  role  of  culture  in  regional 
development  and job-creation in the less advantaged regions of the European  Union. They  agreed  that 
it would be desirable to develop Structural Fund assistance for various types of cultural activities  such 
as  the  protection  and  development  of  the  cultural  heritage  and  the  improvement  of  culture-related 
industries and products4. 

The  meeting  devoted  to spatial  planning constituted  an  additional  stage  in  the process  of  elaborating 
the European  Spatial  Development  Perspective  (ESDP) begun  at  the end  of  1993. The  ESDP will  be 
an  indicative  document  proposing  a  reference  framework  for  spatial  development  for  Community 
policies  which  involve  this  dimension  (the  CAP,  the  Structural  Funds,  the  environment,  major 
networks,  etc.), and  the  spatial  development  policies  of  Member  States  and  their  regional  and  local 
authorities,  as  well  as  various  cooperative  projects  in  this  area.  The  most  recent  contributions  of 
Member State administrations  on this subject  were discussed  in Venice. The analysis  of major  trends 
in European  spatial development  was continued  in greater depth. However,  the ministers  stressed  that 
studies  of  this type, which  were necessary  in the initial  stages,  should  be temporarily  suspended  and 

3  See Chapter II.B. Checks and financial  management. 
4  See also Chapter II.D. Complementarity  with other Community  policies. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

J33 

during  the next  stage  the emphasis  should  be on  defining  differentiated  policy  guidelines  adapted  to 
the  particular  characteristics  of  different  parts  of  Europe.  Some  initial  specific  suggestions  on  this 
subject  by  the  Member  States  were  presented  in  Venice. The  Italian  Presidency  also  submitted  two 
studies,  one  on  the  future  of  European  cities  and  the  other  ways  of  making  more  of  the  cultural 
heritage. The  ministers  highlighted  the  importance  that  should  be  accorded  to  these  two  subjects  in 
the  future  ESDP.  They  also  reminded  the  Spatial  Development  Committee,  which  is  in  charge  of 
drawing up the ESDP,  that they hoped that by the meeting in June  1997 under the Dutch  Presidency 
they  would  be able to give their opinions  at on a first official  outline ESDP which  could  serve as  the 
basis for broad public discussion  with the various parties concerned. 

At the Ballyconnell  seminar  on  14 and  15 November,  where spatial planning  issues as such  were  not 
on  the  agenda,  discussion  focused  on  ways  in  which  Structural  Fund  programmes  could  do  more  to 
encourage job  creation,  on  the  promotion  of  territorial  employment  pacts  and  on  the  first  Report  on 
Economic  and  Social  Cohesion.  It  was  generally  agreed  that  the  impact  of  Structural  Fund 
programmes  on  employment  should  be  made  a priority  in  the  next  mid-term  programme  reviews. It 
was  agreed  that  the  Commission  would  draw  up  guidelines  for  adjusting  current  Objective  1 and  6 
programmes, concentrating  on the development  of employment. There was also emphatic  support  for 
the  goal  of  promoting  60 employment  pacts  under  Structural  Funds  programmes.  In  discussing  the 
Report  on  Economic  and  Social  Cohesion,  ministers  expressed  the  view  that  progress  towards 
convergence  was being made and that Community  structural policies had contributed  to this progress. 
They  stressed  the  need  to  maintain  economic  competitiveness  and  reduce  economic  and  social 
disparities.  They  also  agreed  there  was  a  need  to  continue  efforts  to  improve  the  transparency  and 
effectiveness  of  structural  policies  and  to  work  for  greater  regional  and  thematic  concentration  of 
financial  resources. 

5.  Committee  opinions 

The Committee on the Development and Conversion of Regions met four times in  1996. It issued  only 
one  official  opinion,  on  the  list  of  areas  eligible  under  Objective  2  for  the  1997-99  programming 
period. At the Committee's meetings there were many discussions on subjects  of a general nature, the 
Commission  provided  information  and  exchanges  of  experience  took  place.  The  progress  of 
programming was also discussed on the occasion  of a talk by the Director-General for Regional Policy 
and  Cohesion,  on  the  presentation  of  the  Sixth  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds  (1994)  and 
when  information  was  given  on  the  preparation  of  the  new  programmes  under  the  Interreg  II  C 
Initiative and pilot projects  in spatial planning (Article  10 of the ERDF Regulation). The Commission 
the  Member  States'  representatives  about  certain  aspects  of  Structural  Fund 
also  informed 
administration  such  as  its  procedures  for  adopting  new  programmes,  the  implementation  of  interim 
assessments and irregularities  of which it had been  informed  in the context of anti-fraud  operations. It 
also presented  communications  it had adopted and initiatives it had taken  concerning  links with  other 
Community  policies  (environment,  employment  and  innovation).  Finally,  as  pan  of  the  SEM  2000 
exercise, each  Committee  meeting  addressed  the  question  of  the  eligibility  of  expenditure  under  the 
Structural  Funds. When  it had presented  its guidelines  on this  subject,  the Commission  consulted  the 
Committee, and  all  the other Structural Fund  Committees, for  an initial  examination  of  the eligibility 
criteria. The result  was a consensus  on the need for  clear and transparent  rules adopted  in  partnership 
between  the  Commission  and  the Member  States. In  parallel  with  the  work  of  the  group  of  personal 
representatives of Finance Ministers and pursuant to Council guidelines, a draft  Commission  Decision 
was presented to the Committees at the end of  1996, to be adopted at the beginning of  1997. 

The  ESF Committee  also met four  times  in  1996. Following long discussions, the Committee  created 
an ad hoc working group on the contribution  of the ESF to growth  with a higher job-creation  factor in 
the  context  of  existing  measures  to  fight  unemployment,  particularly  long-term  unemployment.  The 
group met  six  times  in  1996 and presented  its interim  report  to the Committee  in  September.  As  laid 
down  by  the  Coordination  Regulation,  the  Committee  issued  its  opinion  on  draft  Commission 
decisions  on  CSFs  and  SPDs  under  Objectives  2,  3 and 4 for  the  1997-99  programming  period.  The 
Commission  also  informed  the  Committee  about  the  implementation  of  innovative  measures  under 

134 

• 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Article  6 of  the  ESF Regulation.  Other  subjects  studied  by  the  Committee  Were equal  opportunities, 
the  Green  Paper  on  Innovation,  the  Commission's  interim  report  on  Objective  4  and  the  Adapt 
Initiative, the  implementation  of the Peace  Initiative, the annual  report  of  the Court  of  Auditors,  and 
fraud-related  irregularities  reported  by  the  Member  States.  Finally,  at  its  last  meeting  in  1996,  the 
Committee adopted its work programme for  1997. 

The Committee on agricultural  structures and rural development  (the STAR Committee)  met  11 times 
in  1996 and issued  155 favourable  opinions. These concerned principally  measures under  Regulations 
(EEC)  Nos  2328/91  on  improving  the  efficiency  of  agricultural  structures,  2078/92  on  agricultural 
production  methods  compatible  with  the  requirements  of  the  protection  of  the  environment  and  the 
maintenance  of the countryside and  866/90 on improving the processing and marketing conditions  for 
agricultural  products.  It  issued  favourable  opinions  on  all  the  Swedish  SPDs  under  Objective  5(b). 
The  Committee  also  discussed  other  subjects  such  as  compensatory  payments,  additionally  and 
assessment. 

The Management  Committee  on Fisheries  Structures  met five times  in  1996 and  was  informed  of  all 
structural  operations  relating  to  this  sector.  The  Management  Committee  for  Community  Initiatives 
met  twice  in  1996  and  endorsed  the  allocation  of  the  financial  reserve  and  the  new  guidelines  for 
certain  Initiatives. The  Committee  held  a initial  policy  debate  at  the  end  of  1995  which  enabled  the 
Commission,  after  consultation  with  the  Member  States  and  Parliament,  to  present  a  paper  taking 
account  of  the  comments  made.  Committee  meetings  also  included  exchanges  of  information  and 
experience  on  trans-national  cooperation  under  Community  Initiatives,  progress  in  implementing  the 
Initiatives and the preparation  of the Interreg IIC  programmes. 

B.  REGIONAL  PARTNERSHIP 

Following  Commission  approval,  after  consultation  with  each  Member  State,  of  the  programming 
documents,  1995 was devoted  to the gradual  establishment  of the new partnership  arrangements. The 
Seventh  Annual  Report  (1995) gave a first account  of  these activities, broken  down  by Member  State 
and  the  different  partners  concerned.  During  1996  the  partners  consolidated  and  progressively 
improved  their  practice.  Application  of  the  principle  was  complex  and  sometimes  difficult,  but  one 
year is not long enough to assess significant  advances at Community  level. The Commission's  work to 
further  application  of the partnership principle had three main strands in  1996: consideration  in greater 
depth of ways in which partnership might be reinforced,  as proposed  in the previous report; promoting 
experimentation  with  complementary  approaches,  already  recorded  in  the  implementation  of  certain 
programmes;  and  increasing  the  capacity  of  certain  partners,  continuing  to  endorse  the  approaches 
arrived at during the annual consultation  on  1995 structural  assistance. 

1.  Consideration and promotion of new forms of  partnership 

A  discussion  paper  was  drawn  up  for  the  members  of  the  'Cohesion'  group  of  the  Commission;  it 
noted  that despite a positive balance overall, partnership remained  imperfect  in a number of cases and 
there  was  therefore  room  for  improvement.  It  posed  a  number  of  questions  about  how  to  overcome 
difficulties  in  implementing  the  partnership  and  proposed  specific  guidelines  for  improvement  while 
avoiding  the  pitfalls  of  either  multiplying  partnerships  to  an  extent  that  defeats  the  purpose  of  the 
exercise  or  reducing  participation  in  the  partnership  to  that  of  national  and  regional  authorities  and 
Commission staff. The proposals were aimed in particular at: 

•  encouraging  an  immediate  start  to  discussions  in  preparation  for  the  period  after  1999  on 
reformulating  the  legal  framework  to  allow  improved  implementation  of  the  partnership,  in 
particular by clarifying  the roles and responsibilities of each  partner; 
reinforcing  the current partnership  within  the Monitoring Committees  by establishing,  if  necessary 
and  politically  acceptable,  a  differentiation  between  partners  part-financing  assistance  ("decision 

• 

8th Annual Report on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

135 

v  partnership")  and  partners  who  are  consulted  ("consultative  partnership")  or  by  exploring  other 

• 

forms of consultation, coordination and cooperation; 
improving  the  technical  and  operational  capacities  of  partners  where  necessary  by  supporting 
training, information  and technical  assistance measures. 

More  generally,  the  paper  proposes  promoting  exemplary  and  innovative  initiatives  at  Community 
level in cooperation  with national  and/or regional authorities. Such initiatives would include territorial 
pacts  for  employment  or partnerships  for  employment  that foster  a dynamic  policy  at the  appropriate 
regional  or  local  level  and  are  intended  to  enrich  the  activities  of  the  Monitoring  Committees  and 
bring together those  involved  in job creation  in informal  meetings  where discussions  can be held  and 
proposals put  forward. 

These  proposals  were  contained  in  the  Commission  communication  on  Community  structural 
assistance  and  employment5  and  consolidated  in  its  communication  "Action  for  Employment  in 
Europe - A Confidence  Pact". To take advantage of the existing room for manoeuvre, the Commission 
specified  the main priorities to be implemented and proposed establishing territorial employment  pacts 
to mobilise the public and private sectors at the appropriate regional, national or local level. It stressed 
that,  without  actually  creating  new  structures,  a  political  momentum  needed  to  be  launched  and 
promoted,  either  by  a  systematic  approach  initiated  by  the  national  authority  concerned  and  applied 
throughout  the region  or area concerned,  or by experimental  approaches  based  on each  Member  State 
selecting the areas or regions it judged most appropriate, or, again, at the initiative of local  authorities 
themselves. The Florence European Council (June  1996) subsequently called on each Member State to 
select,  where  possible,  regions  or  towns  suitable  for  participating  in  pilot  projects  concerning 
employment  pacts  so that  such  pacts could be  implemented  during  1997, partly  by using the  margins 
available under the structural polices. Technical documents were drafted  and presented to the national 
authorities,  in particular  during an  information  meeting  in November.  The  Dublin  European  Council 
(December  1996) welcomed the positive reactions to the initiatives concerning the territorial pacts  for 
employment  and  called  for  the  rapid  implementation  of  the  60  projects  proposed  by  the  Member 
States. 

The Commission  helped  the Member States  to  implement  this  strategy  by drafting  guidelines for  the 
pacts: 
• 

the  range  of  partners  should  be  as  wide  as  possible  and  include  national,  regional  and  local 
authorities,  the  private  sector,  associations  for  the  development  or  conversion  of  the  area 
concerned,  the  socio-economic  partners, representatives  of  citizens' cooperatives  and  associations, 
trade  and  professional  organisations  and  chambers  of  commerce,  institutions  providing  training, 
promoting technology  or carrying out research  and the chairpersons  of the Monitoring  Committees 
for structural  assistance; 

•  each  pact  should  produce  a  document  giving  an  account  of  analyses  carried  out,  the  precise 
commitments  of each  participant  and specific  proposals adopted. The proposals may take  different 
forms:  measures  that  promote job  creation;  measures  to  assist  specific  sections  of  the  population; 
proposals  concerning  social  and  labour  law;  suggestions  to  the  socio-economic  partners  about 
working  organisation  and  working  hours;  support  for  innovative  or  experimental  pilot  projects; 
improving  education  and  training;  improving  the  operational  and  administrative  capacity  of 
regional  or  local  authorities  and  specific  proposals  addressed  to  the  structural  policy  Monitoring 
Committees  as  to  how  to  use  available  margins  and  more  effectively  direct  structural  assistance 
towards job creation. 

5 COM(96)  109 of 20 March  1996. See Introduction and Chapter II.D. Complementarity with other Community 

policies. 

136 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Leader and the bottom-up approach. -. 
One of the fundamental  aims of Leader is to mobilise as broad a local partnership as 
possible.  It  has  been  found  mat  the  greater  the  involvement  of  local  people,  the 
greater the effort  to find  solutions appropriate to the specific  problems of each area 
concerned. The most innovative Leader groups with the greatest chance of success are 
those which involve representatives of all the local socio-economic groups. 
The  Leader  European  Observatory,  in  collaboration  with  the  Leader  "Alia  Val 
Venosta" group,  organised a seminar in Trentino Alto Adige in October 1996 on the 
subject of "Partnership for innovation". The construction, results and timespan of die 
partnership  were  discussed.  This  local  action  group  (LAG)  was  selected  as  an 
example  of  the  creation  of  a  culture  of  partnership  in  an  area  not  traditionally 
propitious to this approach. The provincial authorities showed a particular interest in 
this  project  and  provided  substantial  assistance.  There  are  four  levels  to  the 
partnership: a prefinancing  partnership (Province, State, Commission); a partnership 
responsible  for  administration  and the programme (inter-municipal  association); the 
LAG; five  informal  working  parties  (agriculture, tourism, crafts,  training  and  data 
transmission). Specific training programmes have been developed for each project 
Following  the  success  of  the  Val  Venosta  seminar,  the Austrian Leader  network 
organised a meeting on the same subject  in Schlierbach in December  1996. A study 
group  for  structural  renewal  was formed  mere made up of a  number of  concentric 
circles: the four  founders, members of the association  (about 20 people) and all the 
local  actors  from  the  different  sectors  involved  (agriculture,  alternative  energy 
sources,  education, business, etc.). This group stimulated new forms of cooperation 
and partnership. The association played a key role in forming the LAG of which it is 
one of the members. Since die area of Eisenwurzen is relatively well developed, the 
local  actors  focused  on  development  projects  to  improve  the  quality  of  life  and 
preserve the natural and cultural heritage. 
In a different  context, on the left bank of the Guadiana in the south-east Alentejo, a 
region lagging behind in development, with high unemployment, suffering  from rural 
depopulation  and  with a traditional, not very structured  society, an association  was 
established  in  1992 at the initiative of private individuals. The association gradually 
become a permanent forum  for  local development, bringing  together municipalities 
and  organisations  involved  in  the  development  of  the  area.  In  response  to  the 
difficulties  encountered  under Leader I, the association included as many players as 
possible to create a permanent forum and a large number of working parties, trying in 
this way to involve local people, including those most marginalised. 

2. 

Increasing the partners'  capacities 

Under Article 7 of the ERDF Regulation, the Commission contributes to measures to improve partners' 
capacity  to participate  actively  in the monitoring of  structural  assistance. In this context,  funding  was 
allocated  to the Council  of European Municipalities  and Regions (CEMR) to organise seminars on the 
participation  of  local  authorities  in  preparing  and  implementing  structural  assistance  in  Objective  2 
areas. A total  of nine seminars were held in various Member States, with a final session  in Brussels to 
review  the results. This enabled  the Commission  to explain  more fully  its own guidelines  for  the new 
Objective  2  programming  period,  to  become  better  acquainted  with  the  practical  operation  of 
partnership  at  local  level  and  to facilitate  the  systematic  submission  of  proposals  by  local  authorities 
concerning their participation  in structural  assistance. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

137 

3.  Opinions of the other institutions on the application of the partnership  principle 

At the joint  conference  which  they  organised  in  19966, Parliament  and the Committee  of the  Regions 
approved a final declaration  which: 
•  states  their  belief  that  "it  is  necessary  to  redefine  the  principle  of  subsidiarity  to  make  explicit 
provision  for  its application  to regional  and  local authorities  in  accordance  with  the powers  vested 
in  them  by  the  domestic  law  of  the  Member  States,  with  a  view  to  achieving  greater  efficiency 
[-]"; 

•  calls  for  "the  principle  of  local  autonomy  as  defined  in  the  Council  of  Europe's  Charter  of  Local 
Self-Govemment  to be incorporated  in the Treaty as a general principle of Community  law derived 
from  the  shared  constitutional  traditions  of  the  Member  States"  and  states  that  this  principle 
"entails both respect for  all the powers proper to the local authorities  and the granting of the means 
necessary  for  their  exercise",  also  calling  for  "due  recognition  of  the  principle  of  regional 
autonomy by analogy with its equivalent at local level"; 

•  calls  on  the  Commission  and  the  Member  States  to  ensure  "a  better  horizontal  and  vertical 
coordination  of EU policies to [...]  limit the disadvantages to regions and local authorities  [...]"; 
•  calls for  "the principle of partnership, which has been tried and tested  in the implementation  of the 
Community's  structural  policies  and  which  constitutes  a  practical  expression  of  the  subsidiarity 
principle,  to  be  more  fully  applied  and  strengthened  by  incorporating  it  in  the  EC  Treaty  and 
extending  it  to  other  policies,  particularly  those  for  which  regional  and  local  authorities  are 
responsible" and recommends that "the Member States extend this principle to the social partners"; 
•  expresses  the view that when the Structural Funds are next reformed,  "they  should be consolidated 
as 
instruments  of  economic  development,  with  the  following  priorities  [among  others]: 
simplification,  reduced  bureaucracy  and  greater  flexibility  of  procedures;  more  direct  partnership 
with regional, local and social partners, particularly in the context of .programming". 

C.  DIALOGUE WITH THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL PARTNERS 

1.  The socio-economic partnership in the implementation and monitoring of structural 

assistance 

The  participation  of  the  economic  and  social  partners  in  structural  assistance  follows  the  rules  laid 
down  in  Article 4 of  the Framework  Regulation,  which  specify  that Member  States  should  designate 
the  economic  and  social  partners  at  national,  regional,  local  or  other  level  following  the  rules  and 
practices  of  the  institutions  concerned  in  each  Member  State.  Consequently  the  composition  and 
operation  of  the  partnerships  varies  considerably  from  country  to  country  according  to  the  national 
cultural  and  political  traditions,  as  well  as  varying  from  one  Objective  to  another  within  the  same 
country.  The  Seventh  Annual  Report  (1995)  presented  the  information  available  to  the  Commission 
about  each  Member  State  as  regards  the  partners'  participation  in  preparing  and  coordinating 
assistance  for  the  new  programming  period,  1994-99,  and  their  involvement  in  the  work  of  the 
corresponding Monitoring Committees. 

1996  was  a  year  in  which  rules  and  practices  introduced  for  the  new  programming  period  were 
consolidated.  Since the Monitoring Committees  were set up in  1994 and  1995, the composition  of  the 
partnership  within  these  bodies  has  stabilised.  For  example,  the  social  partners  are  generally  now 
represented  on the Monitoring Committees for measures under Objectives  3 and 4, except  in Portugal 
and the United  Kingdom. In the latter case, representation  is slowly  being introduced  for  the  regional 
Objectives,  but is still  not  allowed  for  Objective  3. In Italy, the participation  of the  social  partners  in 
Objectives  3 and 4 has been  established, but  is applied  to the regional  Objectives  to varying degrees. 
The participation  of representatives to promote equal opportunities has been vigorously encouraged  in 
Italy.  They  are  full  members  of  decision-making  bodies  in  all  the  Member  States  except  Germany, 

' "The  European  Parliament  and  the Regional  and  Local  Authorities  of  the European  Union  for  a Europe  based 

on Democracy  and Solidarity", Brussels,  1-3 October  1996. 

14 

8th Annual report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Commission  proposed  promoting  territorial  pacts  for  employment  to  complement  existing  national 
policies.  At  the  invitation  of  the  European  Council,  the  pilot  regions  were  selected  by  the  Member 
States.  That  approach  was  confirmed  by  the  Dublin  European  Council,  which  called  for  the  swift 
implementation  of  60  pilot  projects  with  the  aim  of  promoting  broad  regional  or  local  partnerships 
demonstrating  an  exceptional  level  of  mobilisation  for  employment.  Following  assessment  of  the 
difficulties  and  prospects  by  each  of  the  local  parties  concerned,  a  joint  strategy  based  on  that 
assessment  is  devised  and  given  form  in  commitments  by  all  those  involved  in  a  territorial 
employment  pact,  with  the  aim  of  improving  the  integration  and  coordination  of  measures  for 
employment and, over time, carrying out model operations which can inspire other initiatives. 

An employment  pact may be promoted  at regional  or local  level, in  cities, rural  areas  or  employment 
areas,  provided  that  unemployment  is  a  major  problem  and  the  region  is  eligible  under  one  of  the 
Objectives  of  the  Structural  Funds. The  range  of  partners  should  be  as wide  as possible6. As  regards 
the  schedule  and  financing,  the reflection  phase  began  at the end  of  1996 and  the Member  States  are 
expected  to  make  the  final  selection  of  pact  areas  in  1997.  The  pacts  can  be  financed  in  part  by 
contributions  from  the  EIB  and  the  EIF,  and  the  Monitoring  Committees  for  the  Structural  Fund 
programmes  should  use  the  financial  margins  for  manoeuvre  available7  to  implement  them.  The 
Commission  contributes  to implementation  of  the pacts  in  three  ways: by  supporting  these  initiatives 
and  circulating  the  experience  gained  from  them;  by  providing  financial  support  for  preparatory 
technical  assistance  work  and  by  organising  a  mechanism  to  monitor  all  the  preparatory  work,  the 
final content, and the improvements made to structural  assistance. 

3.  The implementation  of assistance in 1996  : The main points in this report 

A  very busy  year 

The  implementation  of  multiannual  programming  in  1996  shows-that  the various  forms  of  assistance 
are now  being put into effect  in the Member  States and  the regions8. The  Objectives  of the  Structural 
Funds  are  being  implemented  through  almost  500  individual  operations;  of  these  only  50  for  all  the 
Objectives  taken together, representing less than  3% of total  assistance under all the Objectives,  were 
additional  to the programmes  already  adopted  in  1994 et  1995. The  Objective  2 programmes  adopted 
in  1994  for  1994-96  were  wound  up  and  there  was  active  preparation  concerning  the  areas  eligible 
and  the  main  thrust  of  those  to  continue  them  in  1997-99.  During  the  preparation  of  these 
programmes,  the  plans  for  which  were  presented  and  discussed  in  the  second  half  of  the  year,  the 
Commission  set several priorities for  assistance, all of which are concerned  with job  creation. 

Turning  to  the  Community  Initiatives,  the  new  programme  decisions  (123,  accounting  for  17%  of 
funding  under  the  Community  Initiatives,  including  the  reserve)  meant  that  almost  all  the  Initiatives 
have  been  translated  into  operational  programmes,  half  of  them  in  their  entirety;  1996  was  the  year 
when all the Initiatives began to function.  The financial  reserve of ECU  1 665 million  (at  1995 prices) 
was  allocated  by  the  Commission  on  the  basis  of  a number  of  priorities  - combating  unemployment, 
equal  opportunities  and  combating  exclusion,  the  environment  and  the  territorial  dimension  of 
structural  policies.  These  led  to  the  creation  of  new  strands:  Employment  "Integra"  (combating 
exclusion),  Adapt  "BIS"  (adaptation  to  the  information  society),  Interreg  II  C  (trans-national 
cooperation  on  spatial  development  planning). In  1996 the pilot  projects  became  active  after  a  year's 
delay: following  successful  calls for proposals, selection  by the Commission  was followed  by the  start 
of work  on the ground during the year. 

This meant that  1996 was a busy year in the  1994-99 progiamming cycle, the second  year of  effective 
implementation  since  most  of  the  programmes  had  been  adopted  at  the  end  of  1994,  or  in  1995 

6  See Chapter III.B. Regional  partnership. 
7 These  are the resources  made available  by the indexing  of amounts  of  finance,  either  from  the new Objective  2 
programmes  established  for  1997-99,  or  from  the  adjustment  of  programmes  under  Objectives  other  than 
Objective  2 following  the mid-term review. 

8  See Chapter I. The implementation  of assistance. 

138 

. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

where they do not participate, but if one considers  the degree to which  they actually make use of  this 
right,  the  situation  is  less  homogeneous.  The  social  partners  have  a  certain  influence  in  Austria, 
Denmark  and  Finland,  related  to  the  strong  tradition  of  social  dialogue  in  those  countries.  In  the 
Netherlands they play a very important role because of their experience of debate on the ground  (they 
are  often  the  channel  for  signs  of  malfunction,  in  particular  as  regards  Objective  4,  since  they  are 
involved  in  training  for  workers).  In  Belgium  and  Fiance,  although  their  contribution  is  sometimes 
very  constructive,  it is  generally  on  a fairly  small  scale  and  varies  according  to the programmes  and 
representatives  concerned. 

However,  the  participation  of  the  economic  and  social  partners  is  not  restricted  to  the  Monitoring 
Committees, and  it is strongly  influenced  by social  and political  structures, practices  and traditions  in 
each Member State. They are consulted by governments and often  participate  in defining  employment 
and  training  policy  part-financed  by  the  ESF  at  national,  local  or  regional  level.  Despite  certain 
improvements  (for  example,  in  France,  members  of  regional  joint  cornmittees  for  employment  and 
training),  their  participation  at  local  level  in  the  implementation  of  ESF  operations  still  needs  to  be 
stepped  up.  Several  innovative  measures  have  been  encouraged  by  the  Commission,  on  occasion  at 
the initiative of the social partners themselves (Finland), to organise operations to inform and train the 
social  partners,  since  their  involvement  and  influence  depends  on  their  having  learnt  how  the  ESF 
operates  (in  Finland  an  intensive  training  programme  was  drawn  up  jointly  by  employers  and 
employees  and  seminars were organised; in Italy the unions organised training and studies on the role 
of  the  unions  in  the  administration  of  the  ESF;  in  France,  agreements  were  concluded  between  the 
unions and the Ministry concerned on the training of advisors for inter-branch networks). 

The  situation  as regards  Objective  4  is more  satisfactory  in this respect,  since the  social  partners  aie 
normally  very  involved  in most of  the Member  States, where they continue  their traditional  forms  of 
participation  but are also more and more involved  in promoting,  devising and  implementing  projects. 
This  is the case in Denmark  (for  the other Objectives  too), Finland  (where a project  for  restructuring 
the  graphic  design  industries  has  been  launched  by  the  two  trade  federations  concerned),  France 
(emergence  of  collective  operations  between  the  national  authorities  and  the  economic  and  social 
partners with a view to initiating projects in small and medium-sized business and industry to improve 
quality  and  management, the  environment  and  health  and  safety;  establishment  of  a body  collecting 
funds  for  training and  also responsible  for  a multi-media  training project  in the food  industry). Their 
involvement  in this Objective  sometimes even  includes  participation  in  programme  management  and 
the  appointment  of  representatives  of the  social  partners  to  promote  Objective  4  in  SMEs  and  assist 
them with implementation, as has been the case in die Netherlands. 

It  is  very  important  for  the  quality  of  implementation  of  the  Structural  Funds  to  develop  the  active 
participation  of  the social partners  both  at local  level  and  in projects,  to provide the  partners  directly 
with  information  and  training about  the Structural  Funds  and  to improve  the match  between  the  type 
of  programmes  and/or  projects  and  the  selection  of  partners  and  operational  procedures.  All  these 
aspects therefore  need to be further  developed. 

2.  The economic and  social  partners  at Community  level 

Encouraging  participation 

Commission  operations  to promote the participation  of  the social  and economic  partners  are  focused 
around  three  types of  activity,  already referred  to  in the  context  of  regional  partnership7:  discussion, 
promotion  and  equipping  them  better  for  participation.  All  the  analyses,  discussions  and  proposals 
contained in the relevant Commission  communications, the Report on Economic  and Social  Cohesion 
and  the  conclusions  of  the  European  Councils  of  Florence  and  Dublin  cited  above  with  reference  to 
regional  partnership  apply  equally  to the economic  and  social  partners. In  terms  of  specific  action  to 
encourage  participation,  all the efforts  to mobilise those  involved, broaden  the partnership  and  create 

7  See  B. above,  Regional  partnership. 

Sth Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

139 

informal  forums  for  participation  were  equally  directed  at  the  economic  and  social  partners.  Similarly 
the  initiative  to  promote  territorial  employment  pacts  is  intended  to  facilitate  the  practical  participation 
of  the  economic  and  social  partners  in  improving  the  programming  of  structural  assistance  to  increase 
its  impact  on  employment. 

To  better  equip  the  social  and  economic  partners  for  participation,  an  ERDF  technical  assistance 
operation  for  the  European  Trade  Union  Confederation  (ETUC)  was  adopted  on  the  basis  of  the 
conclusions  of  the  annual  consultation  of  1 February  1996. During  the  consultation  it transpired  that  the 
social  partners  do  not  yet  have  the  necessary  technical  capacity  to  monitor  structural  assistance.  They 
are  not  always  able  to  prepare  specific  proposals  to  improve  the  effectiveness  of  their  partnership  at 
national  and  regional  level.  The  Community  subsidy  to  the  ETUC  is  to  be  used  to  hold  various 
seminars  and  support  a  small  network  of  experts.  The  seminars  should  enable  the  union 
leaders 
concerned  better  to  understand  and  monitor  structural  assistance  in  Objective  I  and  2  areas  and  the 
most  remote  regions.  Other  seminars  will  concern  horizontal  assistance  and  inter-regional  measures, 
and  their  content  will  be  decided  in  collaboration  with  Commission  staff  in  the  light  of  the  most 
important  developments  in  the  sphere  of  structural  policies.  The  Commission  will  assist  the  ETUC  in 
organising  a  small  Community  network  of  experts  on  regional  development 
the 
organisation  of  seminars,  ensure  the  effective  and  efficient  participation  of  the  union  leaders  concerned 
and  officially  document  the  conclusions  and  proposals  arrived  at.  In  principle,  the  network  will  be 
made  up  of  six  half-time  experts  supported  by  other  independent  experts  and  headed  by  a  coordinator 
who  will  organise  several  meetings  to  exchange  information  and  discuss  working  methods. 

to  facilitate 

As  regards  the  ESF,  following  the  pattern  of  previous  years  Commission  relations  with  the  three  major 
pan-Union  organisations  (ETUC,  UNICE  and  CEEP)  in  1996  took  the  form  of  part-financing  training 
operations  in  the  context  of  the  social  dialogue,  with  particular  emphasis  on  the  issue  of  industrial 
change.  These  operations  are  to  be  seen  as  tools  for  enhancing  social  dialogue  in  order  to  deal  better 
with  the  impact  of  industrial  and  technological  change  on  industrial  relations.  They  allow  structural 
assistance  under  Objective  4  and  the  Community  Adapt  Initiative,  which  encourage  the  active 
participation  of  the  social  partners  in  their  implementation,  to  be  more  effective.  In  the  case  of  the 
ETUC,  the  operations  part-financed  consisted  of  18 training  courses  in  which  trade  union  organisations 
from  the  fifteen  Member  States  participated.  The  courses  dealt  with  the  impact  of  new  technology  on 
employment  in  areas  such  as  the  pharmaceutical  industry,  catering,  mail-order  trade  and  the  textile  and 
clothing  industry  as  well  as  new  methods  of  organising  work  in  similar  branches.  Training  sessions 
were  also  organised  under  the  Conpri  II  project8  under  the  auspices  of  UNICE,  as  an  extension  of  the 
Conpri  programme.  The  seminars  had  three  objectives:  dealing  with  the  changes  brought  about  by 
industrial  change  in  a  manner  both  economically  efficient  and  socially  acceptable,  contributing  to 
improving 
training  policies  appropriate 
competitiveness  and  industrial  relations  through  the  implementation  of  policies  on  with  the  human, 
logistical  and  organisational  factors.  The  programme  of  operations  presented  by  the  CEEP.  called 
integrate  an 
EUREXCTER 
emphasis  on  quality  into the  social  dialogue  at  regional  and  local  levels. 

is  designed  to  promote  regional  and  local  excellence 

the  modernisation  of  production 

structures  and 

in  Europe  and 

to 

In  1996  the  ESF  also  continued  to  finance  sectoral  studies  in  partnership  with  the  social  partners 
concerned  on  the  effect  of  industrial  change  on  the  world  of  work  (qualifications,  new  skills  and  new 
trades  in  particular)  in the  footwear,  clothing  and  civil  aviation  industries  among  others. 

Consultation  of  the  economic  and  social  partners  at European 

level 

This  consultation  is  organised  on  a  sectoral  basis  as  well  as  being  a  forum  for  the  representation  of  all 
social  partner  organisations  at  European  level.  On  rural  matters  the  Advisory  Committee  on  Questions 
of  Agricultural  Structure  Policy  is  the  forum  for  consultation  with  the  socio-economic  partners  at 
level.  It  met  three  times  in  1996  and  gave  its  opinion  on  the  application  of  certain 
Community 
measures.  The  Committee  held  a  wide-ranging  debate  on  the  three  accompanying  measures  to  the 

confederations  of  employers  for  industrial  relations. 

140 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

reform  of  the  CAP (Regulations  (EEC) Nos  2078/92, 2079/92  and  2080/92). It  also  gave its view  on 
the  Commission's  report  to  the  Council  on  young  farmers  and  stressed  the  importance  of  the 
assistance  provided,  the  difficulties  involved  in  taking  over  farms  and  the  need  for  information  and 
training.  With  regard  to  Regulation  (EEC)  No  2328/91  on  improving  the  efficiency  of  agricultural 
structures, various opinions were delivered on the status of those for whom farming  is the main  source 
of  income,  hill  farming,  the possibility  of  making  the reference  income  more  flexible  and  assistance 
for  small  farms.  In  the  context  of  Regulation  (EEC)  No  866/90  on  improving  the  processing  and 
marketing  conditions  for  agricultural  products,  discussion  focused  on  the opening up of  new  sectors, 
taking  account  of  the  specific  characteristics  of  different  regions,  the  level  of  national  aid  and 
adjustment  of  the  selection  criteria.  The  Committee  was  also  kept  regularly  informed  about  the 
preparatory  work  for  the  European  Conference  on  rural  development,  to  which  the  social  and 
economic  partners were  invited. 

The  Advisory  Committee  on  Fisheries  is  the  official  body  for  dialogue  with  those  working  in  the 
fisheries  sector.  On  several  occasions 
the 
it  received 
implementation  of  the  FIFG,  innovative  measures  under  Article  4  of  the  FIFG  Regulation9  and  the 
Community  Pesca Initiative. Commission  staff  also participated  in the work of the joint committee on 
social  problems in maritime fisheries, established as part of the social dialogue. 

information  and  explanations  about 

The  Commission  also  consults  annually  all  the  social  partners  organised  at  European  level  as  laid 
down  by  the Coordination  Regulation  of the Structural  Funds  (Article  31(2)). This  consultation  took 
place  on  18 December  1996. Approximately  thirty  representatives  of  such  organisations  took part  in 
the meeting, which Mrs Wulf-Mathies  also attended. The main subjects  discussed, by agreement  with 
the  social  partners,  were  the Seventh  Annual  Report on  the  Structural  Funds  (1995),  the  first  Report 
on e. gnomic and social cohesion, work in progress and the prospects for the future. 

All  the  partners  warmly  welcomed  the  Commission's  work  on  the  Cohesion  Report. They  wished  to 
see discussion  of the analyses and questions raised by the report continued. Most partners stressed  the 
importance  of  cohesion  in  the  building  of  the  Community  and  the  need  to  find  ways  of  making 
competitiveness compatible with the objectives  of cohesion policy; they also recognised the  difficulty 
of  accurately  assessing  the  impact  of  cohesion  policy  on  other  Community  and  national  policies. 
Certain  partners emphasised: 
• 

the  need  to  improve  convergence  between  the  Union's  social  policies  and  those  of  the  Member 
States; 
the  role  the  single  market  should  play,  despite  certain  continuing  blockages,  in  increasing  the 
competitiveness of the European economy and economic and social cohesion; 
the value of carrying out specific  studies to identify  better the causes of regional disparities; 
the need to protect the European social model; 
the  value  of  improving  analysis  of  the  causes  of  unemployment  and  making  more  specific 
proposals to combat them; 
the  need  for  a  better  forecast  of  the  impact  that  economic  and  monetary  union  may  have  on 
regional  imbalances and disparities; 
the  value  of  a  policy  geared  to  specific  local  and  regional  characteristics  to  help  create  a  level 
playing field between regions; 

• 

• 
• 
• 

• 

• 

•  problems affecting  specific  sectors such as fisheries  and specific  policies such as the CAP. 

With  regard  to  the  content  and  orientation  of  future  structural  policies,  all  the  partners  stressed  the 
need  for  a  greater  concentration  of  assistance  and  better  targeting  of  Objectives  and  eligible  areas. 
Certain partners also made more specific  points concerning: 
•  seeking  greater  coherence  between  structural  assistance  and  Community  and  national  policies  for 
employment  in  order  to  build  on  the  guidelines  of  the  Essen  European  Council,  in  particular 
support for active labour market policies; 

9  See  Chapter I.C.2. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

141 

• 

the fact that current aid must not be considered as an automatic right by the beneficiaries, although 
changes in the allocation of aid should not be too abrupt or harsh; 

•  giving greater attention to job creation, in particular by developing new sources of employment, 

• 

local development and support for sectors sheltered from competition; 
the  attention  to  be  paid,  in  employment  matters,  to  the  issues  of  the  environment,  equal 
opportunities and the information society; 
the need to involve private firms more fully  in structural assistance; 

• 
•  a better balance between grants and loans by adapting instruments to the needs of small  firms; 
•  programming structural assistance by sector rather than by geographical area; 
• 

the role  of economic  services  of general  interest  and  the quality  of  their  input  in  programming 
future assistance; 

•  specific problems in the fisheries sector. 

As regards the operational side of structural assistance, all the partners agreed with the analysis of the 
Cohesion Report, namely that there is a need to simplify  assistance procedures, reduce the number of 
programmes and Community Initiatives, improve the effectiveness  of management systems, raise the 
profile  of  assistance  and  step  up  measures  to  combat  fraud.  The  partners  considered  that  the 
complexity  of the present forms  of operation  limits their ability  to participate  actively  in preparing 
and implementing assistance. They continued to ask to be more fully  involved  in both the planning 
and  actual  implementation  of  assistance  and  given  more  genuine  responsibilities.  Finally,  all  the 
partners  expressed  support  for  the  work  in  progress  on  and  prospects  for  the  employment  pacts 
initiative, qualifying their approval with the following points: if the partnership is opened to too many 
partners, this may limit its effectiveness; the social partners should be more involved in the process of 
area selection and in the preparation and implementation of the pacts; innovative projects allowing a 
greater degree of partnership work, in particular through public/private cooperation, should be sought. 

The consultation showed that: 
•  all the partners appreciate the Commission's efforts  in proposing guidelines better adapted to the 

• 
• 

• 

problems of cohesion, development and employment; 
the Commission's analyses and proposals were on the whole well-received; 
there  was  a  certain  weakness  in  the  partners'  contributions,  probably  because  their  limited 
resources, the diversity of Community Initiatives and the multiplicity of forums for dialogue and 
consultation on these subjects (Social Dialogue Committee, Standing Committee on Employment, 
ESF Committee, the annual consultation, etc.). This confirms  the need for Community technical 
assistance for the partners; 
there has been gradual progress in the partnership, although further  progress remains to be made. 
At Community  level, a better balance still needs to be found  between the plenary session  of the 
annual  consultation  and  activities  of  the  preliminary  informal  working  party  and/or  bilateral 
contacts. 

D.  INFORMATION AM) COMMUNICATION, SPREADING GOOD PRACTICE 

1. 

Information and communication 

The Member  States  have  obligations  concerning  information  and  communication  about  operations 
financed  by the Structural Funds, which are specified  in Article 32 of Regulation (EEC) No  4253/88 
and  the  implementing  Decision  adopted  by  the  Commission  on  31 May  199410.  Pursuant  to  this 
Decision,  the Commission  provided  the relevant  authorities  in  the Member States  with  a practical 
guide. In this sphere  1996 was devoted principally  to a first inventory  of operations undertaken by 
Member States, which should lead to an exchange of experiences on better practices in this field. The 

10 Commission Decision concerning information and publicity measures to be carried out by the Member States 
concerning assistance from the Structural Funds and the Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) -
OJNoL 152,  18.6.1994. 

142 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

second  meeting  of  the  Member  State  representatives  responsible  for  ESF  information  was  held  in 
Brussels  in  June  1996. Member  States  reports  on  the  implementation  of  Article  32  were  presented. 
Considerable  progress  has  been  made in this  field,  although  the  situation  is  still  very  uneven  among 
Member States. A third meeting of this informal  network is planned for  1997. 

In  the  sphere  of  regional  operations, under  Article  7 of  the  ERDF Regulation  the  Commission  part-
financed  major  events,  the  organisation  of  seminars  and  other  individual  operations.  For  example,  it 
was  represented  by  an  information  stand  at  37  events,  of  which  it  initiated  half  and  which  were 
attended  by  more than  30 000 representatives  of the political, academic  and  institutional  worlds. The 
Commission  made  contributions  through  speakers, the  organisation  of  assistance  and  documentation 
(more  than  60 000 copies  of  various  publications, plus  1 200 press releases  and  more  than  300 press 
articles).  Pilot  projects  aiming  to  develop  better  contacts  with  the  media  in  Great  Britain,  France, 
information, 
Germany  and  Spain  were  also  extended  and  the  Commission  provided  detailed 
interviews  and  answers  to  148  newspapers.  The  provision  of  rapid  responses  to  questions  from  the 
press  was  extended  and  improved.  To  inform  the  general  public,  for  the  first  time  a  brochure  was 
published  on  projects  carried  out  between  1989 and  1993. It  was  called  History  of  the  Regions  and 
gave  an  account  of  36  projects  selected  from  the  1 000  listed  with  the  assistance  of  the  Member 
States.  Other  publications  included  information  sheets  on  financing  for  regions  eligible  under 
Objective  2 and  two  brochures  on  The Environment  and  Cohesion  and  Women, Players  in  regional 
development. 

To take better advantage  of  the  opportunities  offered  by the electronic  distribution  of documents, the 
Commission  also  produced  pages  on  the ERDF on  its Internet  server  (Europa),  including  a database 
on  operational  programmes  and  invitations  for  proposals  published  in  1996  for  operations  financed 
under  Article  10 of  the  ERDF  Regulation.  In  1996  the  Commission  plans  to  make  this  information 
available  in  the  languages  of  the  countries  concerned.  A  photo  library  programme  was  extended  to 
Germany  and France, and its extension  to Italy is being planned. This enterprise  puts into practice the 
new  principle  of  giving  priority  to  publishing,  on  paper  and  in  databases,  examples  of  the  many 
successful  projects  part-financed  by the Structural Funds. 

In  the  case  of  the  ESF,  a  communications  audit  was  carried  out  on  those  responsible  for  its 
implementation.  This  made  it  possible  to  evaluate  the  Fund's  image,  the  information  available,  the 
tools  used  and  the  flow  of  communication  between  the different  parties  involved.  As  a  follow-up,  a 
set  of  measures  were  taken  to  facilitate  comprehension  of  the  ESF  and  raise  its  profile.  In  parallel 
with  the audit,  several  new  communications  aids were launched  in  1996. They  included  publications 
such  as an information  magazine on the ESF, 15 brochures designed for the general public on the ESF 
in  each  Member  State,  publications  on  the  Adapt  and  Employment  Community  Initiatives,  the 
information  society  (Green Paper on  "Living and working  in the information society",  and a brochure 
entitled  "Building  the  information  society for  us  all  in  Europe")  Other  measures  taken  to  improve 
communications  were  the  establishment  of  an  ESF  site  on  the  Europa  server,  and  raising  the  ESF 
profile  at  public  events  (creation  of  a  portable  stand  and  exhibition  material).  As  to  the  events 
themselves,  a  conference  was  held  in  Toulouse  at  the  beginning  of  the  year  to  mark  the  launch  of 
Objective  4 projects,  and the ESF took part  in several  events  on new sources  of  employment  (Rome, 
Dublin),  the  information  society  (Dublin),  exchanges  of  experience  among  trainees  benefiting  from 
ESF aid (Herbeumont) and the exchange of know-how  (Madeira). 

The  Commission  intends  to  step  up  its  activity  in  the  sphere  of  rural  development  policy  and  has 
devised  a strategy  for  publicising  its activities better. For this purpose  it will be using the  services of 
an  outside  company,  and  an  invitation  to  tender  has  been  published.  During  1996  the  Commission 
organised  the  Cork  Conference,  a broad  debate  on rural  development  policy. It was  held  from  7 to 9 
November  and  was extremely  successful,  with 500 participants engaging in very animated  debates on 
the  future  of  the  countryside.  Information  was  distributed  principally  through  the  European  rural 
development  network. The Commission  has given the European Association  for Information  on Local 
Development  (EAILD)  the  task  of  running  the  European  rural  development  network.  One  of  the 
essential  tasks  involved  is  issuing  publications.  Thus  the  EAILD  publishes  an  information  bulletin 
called Info-Leader  about the network  (10 issues a year in 7 languages) and Leader Magazine  (3 issues 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

143 

in  1996)  publicising  the  results  achieved  under  Leader  and  addressing  the  key  rural  development 
issues being debated  in Europe; other publications include methodological guides and other technical 
papers on  innovation  measures, guides  to Community  operations  and  rural  development,  innovative 
measures  for  regional  development  and  national  and  regional  Leader  programmes.  Most  of  the 
information  is also available on the Commission Internet site. An Internet site called "Rural Europe" 
has been-set up with information  in six languages, which allows exchanges between those involved in 
the rural world and participation in forums. 

In  the  fisheries  sector,  several  communications  measures  have  been  implemented,  directed  at  both 
those working in  the  sector  and the general  public.  15 brochures  were published  and  distributed  on 
European  Union Aid  to  the  Development of  the  Fishing Industry  (one  per  Member  State).  They 
summarise all the FIFG operations carried out in each Member State. The brochure on  "The European 
Community and the Fishing Industry - Practical Guide to Structural Aid" and information  pamphlets 
on  "The  Common  Fisheries  Policy"  were  produced  and  up-dated  and  translated  into  two  new 
languages  (Swedish  and Finish). An information  bulletin  on the trans-national  operations  of Pesca11 
(Pesca-Info) has  been  published  since  December  1996. This  information  sheet, published  in  all  the 
Community  languages,  covers  the  Pesca  Community  Initiative,  areas  dependent  on  fisheries  and 
issues affecting  the sector in general. In the same context, inter-regional meetings and conferences on 
particular subjects between public authorities, experts and those working in the sector were started up 
in December  1996 (the.first, on training, was held at Glyngore, Denmark), with the aim of improving 
communication and increasing exchanges of experience between different  countries and regions. The 
positions adopted  at the round table on the conversion  of areas dependent on fisheries  (organised by 
the  Commission  in  1995)  were  also  published  and  distributed.  Several  publications  can  also  be 
consulted on the Europa server. 

2.  Spreading 2ood practice and exchanges of experience 

Measures to promote good practice and exchanges of experience were also stepped up considerably in 
1996, principally because all the types of Structural Fund assistance became fully  operational, so that 
initial experience of the implementation  of assistance had been acquired. Many operations were also 
carried  out  under  certain  Objectives,  as  well  as  under  Community  Initiatives,  pilot  projects  and 
innovative measures. 

Firstly,  one of  the  aims  of  the  Community  Initiatives  is to  promote  cross-border  exchanges,  and in 
1996 the Commission implemented several operations for the present programming period to promote 
such exchanges12. Several Initiatives are based on networking to facilitate the exchange of experience 
between  regions and  those participating in the programmes. This applies to Leader in particular,  for 
which  the European  Observatory  for  innovation  and rural development  organises a number of trans 
national seminars each year on the local approach  to rural development. For instance, seminars were 
organised in Sierra de Gâta (Spain) to analyse local tourist potential, in Marina di Ascea (Italy) on the 
environment, in Vàxjô (Sweden) on new services for the public, in Bad-Windsheim (Germany) on the 
situation and prospects for rural Europe, in Alta Val Venosta (Italy) on partnership for innovation and 
in Languedoc-Roussillon  (France) on communication  and local  identity. Other seminars provided an 
opportunity  to  learn  from  the  first  programming.period  or  to  prepare  work  for  the  current  period 
through  exchanges  of  information  about  implementation  in  Bolzano  (Italy), Netze  Band  (Bavaria), 
County Kerry (Ireland), Santarém (Portugal), Dumfries  (Scodand), and Forcalquier (France)). 

Secondly, publicising experience of programmes under specific  Objectives (CSFs/SPDs) was stepped 
up considerably. In the case of the FTFG, the publications referred  to in the previous Chapter, such as 
European  Union Aid  to  the  Development  of  the  Fishing  Industry  and  Pesca-Info,  often  include 
examples of good practice. Similarly, a series of events to promote and publicise practices relevant to 
ESF  assistance  was  held  in  1996.  In  each  Member  State,  the  Commission  strongly  encouraged 

11 See Chapter I.B.I  Community Initiatives. 
12 See Chapter I.B.I  Community Initiatives. 

144 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

exchanges of experience  through  the Monitoring Committees. At these meetings one or more  projects 
are  now  presented,  by  their  promoters  themselves  or by  the  authority  in  charge  of  administering  the 
project,  and  these  accounts  give rise to discussion  of  ideas and  practices  and  future  contacts  between 
the various  players. Furthermore, Commission  publications  on the ESF give accounts  of projects  and 
thus contribute to the spread of good practice13. Such exchanges of information  on good practice  were 
also  developed  among  Member  States.  They  are  an  important  factor 
in  improving  mutual 
comprehension  and cohesion, as well as a  valuable basis for future  trans-national  operations. 

ESF and exchanges <of experience. 
The following are examples of some events which took place in 1996: 
•  a  forum  to  foster  participation  by  the  beneficiaries  of  ESF  operations 
(Herbeumont, June 1996). This exercise in citizenship was aimed mainly at those 
concerned  by  Objective  3  (job-seekers,  the  unemployed,  recipients  of  social 
security). At the forum there were many exchanges between Belgian and other 
Community policy-makers, the social  and economic  partners, institutional and 
private promoters, social workers, etc.; 

•  à  seminar  on  "a  new Structural  Funds  objective:  employment  and  industrial 
change" (Toulouse, January  1996). This seminar was intended to allow policy 
makers,, programme managers, social partners and those implementing projects 
to  meet,  gain  a  fuller  picture  of  the  economic  and  social  issues  involved  in 
industrial change and examine their experiences in implementing Objective 4; 
•  a  training  seminar  for  ESF  managers  in  the  French  in  the  French  overseas 
departments and territories was extended to the other most remote regions (the 
Azores, Madeira  and  the  Canary  Islands)  in  June  1996. The  purpose  was to 
publicise what had been achieved in each region and promote contacts for later 
cooperative operations. The discussions focused on trans-national cooperation as 
a  way  of  overcoming  isolation,  new  information  technologies  and  social 
exclusion  and  integration. Cooperation projects  between regions resulted from 
these meetings and contacts were made which led to the participation  of those 
responsible for programmes or projects in Madeira participating in the Réunion 
Monitoring Committee. 

•  a seminar on the ESF and new sources of employment (Italy, June  1996). In 
this case the main subjects of the presentation and discussion were the quality 
of  life  and  die  environment,  protection  of  die  environment,  the  cultural 
heritage  and  local  services.  The  Commission  presented  an  account  of  the 
initiatives  being  taken  in  the  Member  States,  in  particular  using  ESF 
assistance. 

The  most practical  application  of the spread  of  good  practice  and the transfer  of experience  is  taking 
place  in the context  of pilot  projects  since, during  1996, several pilot  projects  financed  under  Article 
10  of  the  ERDF  Regulation  were  finalised14.  These  are  "Regional  Technological  Plans"  (RTPs), 
which  have  focused  the  attention  of  thousands  of  participants  in  the  first  four  regions  concerned: 
Wales  (UK),  Limburg  (Netherlands),  Lorraine  (France)  and  Saxony-Anhalt  (Germany).  The 
completion  of  these  four  projects  allowed  the  Commission  to publish  the  first  results  of  this  type  of 
exercise  which  involves  the  formulation  of  a  regional  strategy  for  supporting  innovation  in  SMEs, 
based  on  an  advance  analysis  of  the  needs  of  regional  enterprises.  Their  approach  attaches  great 
importance  to  active  consultation  of  and  participation  by  business  people  and  service  suppliers 
(universities,  technology  transfer  centres,  Business  Innovation  Centres,  etc.)  in  formulating  action 
plans  and  the  new  instruments  or  projects  to  which  they  give  rise.  These  Regional  Technological 
Plans  have  had  considerable  direct  impact  on regional  operational  programmes, as may be  seen  from 
the introduction  of new instruments or sub-programmes concerning innovation. 

13 For  example:  "ESF Measures for  the Long-Term  Unemployed:  a  guide to good practice" in  the  United 
Kingdom; various publications on Objectives 3 and 4 in Sweden presenting interesting projects and giving the 
names and addresses of those running mem. 

14 For all the pilot schemes carried out under Article  10 of the ERDF Regulation, see Chapter I.B .2., Innovative 

measures and technical assistance. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

145 

The  experience  acquired  and  good  practice  learnt from these first projects  were  also  used  for  the 
selection and launching during the second half of  1996 of  19 new similar projects, renamed "Regional 
Innovation  Strategies  (RIS).  To  disseminate  the  results,  the  Commission  took  several  steps  in 
partnership  with  the regions  concerned.  Firstly,  the regions participating  in the projects constitute  a 
network whose activities essentially  concern the exchange of information  on best practices regarding 
the  analysis  of  regional  innovation  potential  and  training  methodologies,  arrived  at  by  regional 
consensus  on  the  subject  of  promoting  innovation.  Secondly,  a  conference  was  organised  by  the 
region  of  Saxony-Anhalt  with  the Commission's  support  in April  1996  on  the  subject  of  promoting 
innovation  and  the  information  society  in  Structural  Fund  programmes.  The  talks  given  at  this 
conference  were  based  on  the  experience  acquired  of  RTPs,  "Regional  Information  Society 
Initiatives" (RISIs) - pilot projects launched during the 1994-96 period - and instances of best practice 
in projects financed  by the Structural Funds in regions of Germany, France and the United Kingdom, 
so  as  to  increase  the  innovation  and  information  society-related  content  of  their  new  SPDs  under 
Objective  2.  Lastly,  a meeting  to launch  new  RIS and Ri'i'i'S  projects  was  held  in Luxembourg  in 
September.  The  meeting  was  attended  by  more  than  100 representatives  of  the  regions  involved  in 
RIS/RITTS during  1997-98, and was intended to facilitate  effective  start-up based on the experience 
of the first pilot projects. 

The  Euro-Tradelink project: Developing electronic trade methods through the exchange of experience 
In  1996  the  Commission  launched  the  Euro-Tradelink project  in  which  Irish,  Italian  and  Spanish  SMEs 
participated under the direction ofEMTel  (Ireland),  the aim being is to develop cross-frontier electronic trade in 
consumer goods. The project is based on. the transfer of the experience of  "Irish Tradelink" to other SMEs in 
Italian and Spanish regions to enable them to establish connections with each other and with other companies. 
This inter-regional cooperation is thus both a  means and an  end of the project,  whose total cost is  ECU 2.9 
million, with a Community contribution of ECU 1 million. It is being developed in three phases: 
1.  a feasibility  study and  recruitment of trade partners. The purpose  is to identify and recruit at  least twelve 

trade partners to participate in phase 2. These should be equally distributed among the three countries,  with 
preference given to SMEs located in Objective 1 regions.  This phase was completed in 1996; 

2.  experimental application of  a  service in  the target regions.  At  this stage, the projects will be finalised  to 
confirm the user community and  the operational procedures. This will involve the approval of operational 
standards and procedures, the preparation of operating specifications,  the identification and planning of the 
level of services provided for  each enterprise,  applications for  documentation, training users, promotional 
activities and accompanying measures; 

3.  extending the network to all the enterprises registered in the feasibility phase of the project, i.e. to more than 

100 SMEs in the three Member States concerned 

4^=T 

CHAPTER IV 

EVALUATION 

8th Annual report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

15 

(particularly  in the case  of  the new Member States). All the Monitoring Committees,  including those 
for the Community Initiatives, are now operational and meet once or twice a year, or sometimes more 
frequently9.  As provided for in the regulations, their work in  1996 was mainly of three types: project 
selection, the adjustment of programmes to the needs of actual implementation (particularly as regards 
the  transition  between  the first and  second  phases  of  Objective  2),  and  the  introduction  of  interim 
assessment,  comprising, for all  assistance under the various Objectives,  the selection  of  independent 
assessors,  the  adoption  of  terms  of  reference  for  the  assessment  reports  and  the  fixing  of  dates  for 
these reports to be completed (normally mid-1997). This meant that the delay in getting started which 
occurred in 1995 was made up. 

Careful  monitoring 

As  in  previous  years,  the  Commission  was  involved  in  monitoring  implementation  on  the  ground, 
which  entailed  devoting  considerable  though  to  ways  of  improving  and  simplifying  management  of 
the  Structural  Funds  in  partnership  with  the  Member  States10.  This  included  implementation  of  the 
SEM  2000  guidelines  ('sound  and efficient  management'): beginning  work  on a better  definition  of 
expenditure  eligible  for  part-financing  under  the  Structural  Funds  and  improvements  to  budget 
forecasting  and the  financial  control  system.  The  Commission  also  continued  to  improve  work  on 
assessment,  whether  carried  out  on  its  own  initiative  or that  of  the  Member  States11.  This  entailed 
support  for  the  preparation  of  interim  assessments  to  make  them  into  programme  management 
instruments,  preparation  of  a  detailed  methodology  for  evaluating  the  account  taken  of  the 
environment  and equal  opportunities, the completion of ex post  evaluations from the previous period 
as part of the work on preparing the Cohesion Report, completion  of  an evaluation  of  major projects 
and  the  launching  of  thematic  assessments  on  RTD,  the  environment,  small  firms  and  equal 
opportunities under the Structural Funds. In preparation for the new Objective 2 programmes  and the 
mid-term review of the programmes under the other Objectives, the Commission continued producing 
policy  guidelines12  designed  to  achieve  the  main goal  of  creating  new jobs,  principally  through  the 
territorial  pacts  for  employment.  The Commission  issued  communications  to  encourage  culture  and 
tourism  as  sources  of  economic  activity  to  develop  the  regions.  It  also  ensured  that  horizontal 
priorities  such  as the environment  and equal  opportunities  are taken into account  when  programmes 
are actually  implemented. 

A  close  eye  was kept on the four principles  underlying the  1988 reform of  the Funds. There  was an 
improvement  in  the  way  partnership13  took  shape  in  the  Monitoring  Committees  although  the 
situation varied depending on the assistance and the Member State. Realising that much remained to 
be done and could be done, the Commission acted in three ways: a fresh start and the  search for new 
forms  of  partnership  through  the  territorial  pacts  for  employment,  increasing  the  capacity  of  the 
partners  through  training  for  the  local-authority  partners  as  well  as  for  the  economic  and  social 
partners, and consideration  of  ways  of  strengthening  the partnership without  loss  of  effectiveness  as 
part of the broader consideration given to the shape of the Funds after  1999. 

The  principle  of  additionally  stipulates  that  Structural  Fund  resources  that  are  applied  in  all  areas 
under  a  given  Objective  in  a  Member  State  should  not  replace  public  or  comparable  expenditure 
which  would  otherwise be eligible under the Structural Funds, ensuring that the Community  funding 
has  full  economic  impact.  In  accordance  with  Article  9  of  the  Coordination  Regulation,  the 
Commission  and the Member  State  concerned  verify,  when  programmes  are established,  that  public 
structural  or  comparable  expenditure  is  maintained  at  least  at  the  same  level  as  in  the  previous 
programming  period.  Furthermore,  to  permit  the  on-going  verification  of  this  principle,  the 
Commission  and  the  Member  State  concerned  agree  the  arrangements  for  verifying  additionality  at 

9 See Chapter V. Summary by Member State. 
10 See Chapter II.B. Checks and financial management. 
11 See Chapter TV. Evaluation. 
12 See Chapter II.D. Complementary with the other Community policies. 
13 See Chapter III.B. Regional partnership and Chapter III.C. Dialogue with the economic and social partners. 

8tk Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

149 

INTRODUCTION 

Evaluation  in the context  of the programming  cycle 

The  succession  of  Structural  Fund  programming  periods  makes  it difficult  to co-ordinate  dates  when 
the  results  of  evaluations  are  available  with  those  for  programming  or  reprogramming  decisions. 
There will  inevitably  be some lack of  synchronisation  in view of the fixed  deadlines  for  programming 
decisions  and  the  time  required  for  launching  and  completing  evaluation,  especially  ex post. 
Nevertheless, it is possible to make operational  use of the results of evaluations, giving them an  active 
role  in  the  construction  or  correction  of  multi-annual  programmes.  The  principle  is  to  combine  the 
results  of  evaluations  for  earlier  periods  with  the  evaluation  work  under  way.  As  measures  are 
relatively  continuous  from  one  period  to  the  next,  the  recent  past  can  throw  light  on  programmes 
under way. This principle is applied  as follows  in the three main  stages of evaluation. 

•  Prior  appraisal:  the  purpose  of  prior  appraisal  is  to  prepare  the  adoption  of  forthcoming 
programmes.  It  is  based  mainly  on  the  examination  of  the  programme  prepared  by  the  Member 
State.  Three  series  of  results  may  be  used  to  fine-tune  prior  appraisal:  the  first  review  of  the 
achievements of measures in the preceding period; the results will be only partial, since the  figures 
were  collated  at  the  beginning  of  the  final  year  of  programming,  but  will  give  some  idea  of 
successes  and  failures  over the period; the on-going assessment  for  the preceding period,  drawing 
conclusions  from  the first years  of  activity  and  the  subsequent  reprogramming;  and  the  results  of 
thematic  evaluations  begun  during  implementation  of  the  previous  programme  along  with  any 
other  evaluation  required  by  the  special  circumstances  of  the  programme  or  of  a  particular 
measure. 

•  On-going  assessment:  the role  of  on-going  assessment  is  to  verify  whether  the  aims  identified  in 
the  programme  can  be  achieved,  and  to  specify  what  adjustments  need  to  be  made  to  the 
programme  to  ensure  that  financing  is  used  as  efficiently  as  possible.  On-going  assessment  is 
based  on  two  main  sources  of  information:  the  review  of  the  early  years  of  implementation  of 
programming,  obtained  from  the  management  reports  of  the  Monitoring  Committees;  and  the  ex 
post  evaluation  of  the previous  programme -  mainly  for  that  part  of  the  conclusions  dealing  with 
the  same  areas  of  assistance  (many  of  which  are  covered  for  more  than  one  period)  -  which  is 
usually carried  out at least two years after the end of programming. 

•  Ex post  evaluation:  ex post evaluation is completed  several years after  the end of the programming 
period. Like prior assessment,  it is based on the review drawn up before  the end  of the period,  and 
on  the  results  of  thematic  evaluations  during  the  period.  However,  field  surveys  are  the  main 
source  of  information  for  ex post  evaluation;  they  assess the  real  and  lasting impact  of  assistance. 
The  results  of  this  work  are  basic  to  reliable  on-going  assessment  in  the  following  programming 
period. 

A.  PRIOR APPRAISAL OF OBJECTIVE 2 (1997-99) 

In the context  of the preparation  of the new  Objective  2 plans, and  in conformity  with  its  obligations 
under  Article  9(9)  of  the  Framework  Regulation,  the  Commission  carried  out  prior  appraisal  of  the 
programmes  in  order  to  help  improve  their  overall  quality  and  effectiveness.  In  particular,  the 
programmes  needed  to reflect  the  priorities  identified  in the  policy  guidelines  on  Objective  2 for  the 
period  1997-99,  and  to  provide  a  sound  methodological  basis  for  the  measurement  of  employment 
effects. 

Lessons from  the past  : Although not all evaluations  of the  1994-96 programmes had been  completed 
when  the  programmes  were  being  prepared,  some  of  the  new  SPDs  demonstrated  that  lessons  had 
been  learnt from  the previous programming period  and incorporated  into their preparation  phase. This 
related  in particular  to the context,  analysis  and design  of the  strategy. A good  example  related  to the 

750 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Plan  for  Aquitaine,  where  the  evaluators  played  an  important  role  in  re-designing the  strategy  along 
clear  and  well-argued  lines,  as  well  as  reinforcing  synergies  within  the  programme. More  generally, 
Plans  based  partly  or  wholly  on  evaluations  or  lessons  learnt  from  previous  programmes  appear  to 
have benefited  from  clearer and better focused  strategies as a result. 

Content  and  quality  of the  programmes 

In the prior appraisal, particular attention  was paid by the assessors to the following  elements : 

• the  extent  to  which  the, priorities  outlined  in  the Commission  guidelines  had  been  taken  into 
account  in  the  plans,  and  the  degree  to  which  they  had  been  integrated  within  the  proposed 
measures; 

• the  quality  of  analysis  of  the  area  concerned,  including  the  identification  of  the  principal 

barriers to sustained  growth and the identification  of development potential; 

• an  appreciation  of  the  strategy  presented  in  each  SPD, especially  the  coherence  between  the 

declared  objectives  and the resources devoted to their  achievement; 

• the appropriateness  of quantified  indicators  and targets, with particular regard  to  employment 

creation; 

• with  regard  to  the  environment,  the  key  issues  concerned  the  quality  of  the  environmental 
assessment  of  the  area  concerned  and  the  environmental  impact  of  the  strategy  and  related 
actions presented by the Member States. 

Respect for  Objective 2 guidelines:  In general, the programmes  included  the policy areas  emphasised 
in  the  guidelines  although  the content  and  quality  of  their  integration  into  the proposed  plans  varied 
considerably  between  the  regions.  Employment  remained  the  main  focus  of  all  the  programmes, 
although  the effects  of  certain  of the proposed  measures  on job creation  were sometimes regarded  by 
the evaluators  as being too limited  or indirect. Most Plans  also favoured  the promotion  of  SMEs  and 
local  potential  as  a  driving  force  of  regional  economies,  often  associated,  in  the  United  Kingdom 
Plans  for  example,  with  the  promotion  of  inward  investment.  A  number  of  measures  related  to  the 
environment  but  were  focused  on  support  for  activities  such  as  environmental  and  operational 
improvements  to  transport  infrastructure  and  services  rather  than  on  business  opportunities  arising 
from  environmental  technologies.  R&D  and  innovation-related  actions  were  recognised  as  an 
important  element  in  a strategic  approach  which  sought  to develop competitive  and  sustainable  local 
businesses.  Such  actions  were,  however,  often  under-represented  in  the  financial  structure  of  the 
programmes. The principle  of equal opportunities  for  men and  women  was, however,  in general  only 
partially  addressed, and most plans failed  to integrate this issue horizontally  with other themes  within 
the overall  strategy. 

SWOT  analyses:  The  Plans  were generally  well  presented  and  their strategies are consistent  with  the 
economic  development  context.  SWOT  (Strengths, Weaknesses,  Opportunities  and  Threats)  analyses 
were used  in  a more  systematic  way, although  there  was  still  scope  for  improvements  in  linking  this 
instrument to the translation  of the strategies into priorities and measures. 

Strategic  aims  and  objectives:  The  strategic  approaches  varied  widely  in  terms  of  structure  and 
contained  differing  degrees  of geographical  and sectoral  orientation. In most cases, there was a strong 
degree of continuity  of  strategy  between  the new programmes  and the previous period. Strategic  aims 
were  expressed  in  many  forms  with job  creation  the most  frequently  mentioned  aspect  in  the  Plans. 
Within the global aim of achieving economic development,  some programmes focused  on absolute (or 
relative)  improvements  in  certain  socio-economic  criteria  such  as  employment,  population  and 
income. Other  strategic  statements  gave prominence  to the conversion  processes, e.g.  diversification, 
modernisation  or the target priorities of the strategy e.g. SMEs. 

Almost  all  Plans  had  clearly  presented,  explicit  strategic  objectives,  contributing  to  a  further 
development  of  the  strategic  statement.  Examples  of  aims  embodied  in  strategic  objectives  included 
the growth of specific  sectors such as tourism and transport, the exploitation  of assets such as location 
and  RTD  facilities,  and  the  nurturing  of  trends  such  as  diversification  of  industrial  activities, 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

151 

strengthening  competitiveness  or  greater  entrepreneurial  activity.  Some  also  highlighted  horizontal 
aspects  of  economic  development,  such  as  environmental  sustainability  and  equal  opportunities.  In 
particular, many plans contained  some sectoral targeting (e.g. the French  and Italian Plans) or  "drivers 
for  change",  in  particular  in  the  Dutch  strategies,  where  there  was  an  emphasis  on  the  potential  of 
knowledge-based  approaches to develop new forms  of economic activity. 

On average, the Plans contained  four  strategic  objectives,  although  these did  not necessarily  relate  to 
the  size  of  a programme,  being more usually  a measure  of  its complexity  or number  of  development 
aspects.  Whilst  most  Plans  had  explicit  strategic  objectives,  it  was  not  always  clear  how  these  had 
been  derived  from  the  regional  economic  analysis, or how the proposed  programme  of  priorities  and 
measures related to achieving them. 

Targeting  of  measures:  Compared  to  the  previous  period,  the  number  and  the  range  of  proposed 
measures  increased  significantly  even  for  programmes  with  relatively  limited  funding.  The  focus  of 
strategies  was  also  often  over  a  broad  range  of  assistance,  rather  than  on  few  crucial  aspects  of 
economic  conversion.  SMEs and  local potential  were the main target  in almost all Plans, in  particular 
in  Italy  where  the  proportion  of  resources  devoted  to these  measures  represented  more  than  50%  of 
total  funding.  The accuracy  of targeting of training measures was not always satisfactory,  the fact  that 
most  of  them  were  very  large  in  financial  terms  perhaps  reflecting  their  lack  of  focus.  The 
environment  is  included  in  a limited  number  of  measures, and  particular  attention  was  paid  in  some 
Plans to the relationship between jobs and environment (e.g. Zuid-Limburg). 

In general,  measures  were consistent  with  the strategic objectives  and  the priorities  of  the Plans. The 
majority  of the measures  contained  concrete and  quantified  objectives,  although  baseline  data  should 
be provided.  Specific  selection  criteria relating to the priorities  outlined  in the plans, in particular job 
creation, need  also to be reinforced.  ERDF and ESF measures were better integrated  compared  to the 
previous  period  1994-96.  ESF  measures  were  better  defined,  although  there  shortcomings  and 
unexploited  opportunities  were  still  evident  as  regards  more  innovative  actions.  Examples  of  good 
practice  can  be  identified  in  a  number  of  regions  (Bremen,  Tuscany,  some  Dutch  regions)  where 
management  and  co-ordination  of  training  actions  have  been  enhanced  at  local  level.  The  Spanish 
case  is  distinctive  in  that,  whilst  human  resources  measures  can  be  linked  in  substance  to  specific 
ERDF priorities, they are still presented  separately. 

Quantification  of  objectives  and  impacts:  Progress  has  been  made  in  quantifying  objectives  and 
impacts  although  there  is  a need  for  further  improvement  in most  Plans. Regional  authorities  should 
be  encouraged  to  develop  indicators  which  more  effectively  monitor  the  effect  of  measures  and 
priorities. More careful  consideration  is also required of the quality of certain indicators as well  as the 
accuracy  of  the  targets.  Concerning  the  impact  on  employment,  the  methodological  framework  on 
"ex-ante  quantification  of  employment  effects"  was  transmitted  to  the  Member  States.  Although 
indicators  on  measures  and  at  programme  level  were  generally  listed,  they  were  often  insufficiently 
quantified.  Where  quantification  was  available,  little  explanation  was  provided  as  to  the  basis  of 
calculation  of  these  effects.  A  notable  exception,  among  others,  was  the  Aquitaine  SPD,  where  the 
Commission's  methodology  had  been  widely  followed  and proved  to be effective  for  monitoring  and 
evaluation  purposes. 

Expected  impact  on  employment:  Substantial  progress  has  been  made  in  quantifying  employment 
effects  in  the  1997-99  SPDs.  In  55  SPDs,  detailed  estimates  have  been  provided  at  measure  level 
corresponding  to  around  66%  of  total  EU  funding.  Most  programmes  focus  on  jobs  created  or 
safeguarded  as a result of the assistance. They generally refer to gross jobs, and do not take account of 
deadweight  and  displacement  effects.  Notable  exceptions  providing  specific  estimates  of  net  job 
creation  are some UK and French  SPDs. Data on gross job maintenance  have been collected  from  the 
SPDs  agreed,  excluding  those  containing  only  global  estimates.  These  data  have  been  reclassified 
according to main  areas of  assistance  in order to compare their relative efficiency  in terms of  average 
cost  per job.  The  interpretation  of  these  figures,  is  however,  subject  to  caution  in  the  absence  of  a 
standard methodology  used  in the various regions to estimate employment  effects. 

152 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

On  the  basis  of  these  data,  which  would  require  further  refinement,  it  is  estimated  that  more  than 
870 000  gross jobs  will  be either created,  saved  or redistributed  as a result  of  Objective  2  assistance 
over the  1997-99 period. The order of magnitude  is, according to recent evaluations, around  the  same 
as the  programmes  carried  out  over the  1989-93  period.  Temporary jobs  represent  a relatively  small 
proportion  of  the  overall  employment  effects,  i.e.  over  100 000 jobs  for  seven  Member  States.  The 
three  main  recipient  Member  States  (France,  Spain  and  United  Kingdom),  which  account  for  around 
70%  of total EU funding,  contribute more than two-thirds of the gross jobs. The average cost per job -
based  on  ERDF  and  ESF funding  - is estimated  at  ECU  13 800. Considerable  variation  exists  in  the 
EU  cost  per job,  ranging  from  an  average  of  around  ECU 4  400  in  Spain  to  an  average  of  around 
ECU 24 000 in Denmark. An explanation  for this lies in the priorities pursued in the various  Objective 
2  strategies.  In  particular,  'here  infrastructure  investment  is  a  priority,  the job  creation  effects  will 
' ;h?v  elsewhere and this will be reflected  in a higher cost per job  than 
take  longer to become  ap,  ; 
v  •*  s  on.  for  example,  SME  support  which  has  more  immediate 
in  other  regions  where  tht  ; 
impacts. 

Table IV-1: 

Objective 2,1997-99  - Expected  i-^rjict on  employment 

JUL 

JQKL 

-I2£L 

Tnta! 

Temporary lobs 
Created or maintained jobs 

120 
14.457 
16.177 
7.2-« 

2.34S 
51.(X)6 
24251 

4.KX) 
114.224 

13.986 
93.5M 
9.159 
4 475 

14.049 
147.459 
16.811 
7,l?*l 

6.255 
116.359 
15.698 
6.0*5 

570 
21.842, 
7,1"7 

Average nuhlic cost ner cross 10b (ECU)* 
Av-racr El' wa\ rr  n v"  i"h fECl"' 
NB : Data have been collected from agreed SPDs with the exception of 3 SPDs which do not include any information. A reclassification  has been made. 
The interpretation is. however, subiect to caution in the absence of a standard methodology  used in the various regions. 
Dau on temporary  ions are not estimated for Denmark and Luxemburc. 
Estimation of averace cost per cross ioh relates onlv to measures for which data on employment effects  are available. Jobs data for Finland are not related to measures or 
' 
montiez  uml nrr therefore not included 

11.181 
_ 1 ±^ 

17.4841 

6.521 

10.391 
5.399! 

40.350 
341.873 
13.305 
ft.21" 

106.115 
874.552 
13.847 
MM 

Environmental  appraisals:  The  majority  of  plans  provide  a  strategic  environmental  assessment  and 
address  a  number  of  environmental  issues.  Some  plans  presented  detailed  information  following  a 
standard  format,  with  a matrix  detailing  possible  impacts  of  measures/actions  against  environmental 
concerns  and  issues.  However,  this  strategic  assessment  should  be  integrated  in  most  plans  with  the 
provision  of suitable environmental  indicators. Another notable improvement concerns the association 
of  environmental  authorities,  which  is  more  widely  accepted  as  part  of  the  plans.  As  regards  the 
inclusion  of environmental  issues, the link between measure and programme level has to be  reinforced 
as  well.  Furthermore,  environmental  measures  are  often  linked  to  the  stimulation  of  local  activity. 
They  are  rarely  preventive  in  nature  and  there  is  no  mention  in  most  plans  of  the  "polluter  pays" 
principle  or information  on  its concrete  application. An example  of good practice  is the Finnish  plan, 
whose  special  feature  is the  inclusion  of prior appraisal  of environmental  impact and the  involvement 
of  environmental  authorities  in  decision  making,  monitoring  and  evaluation  (at  programme  and 
project  level). 

B.  ON-GOING  ASSESSMENT 

The purpose  of  on-going  assessment  is to  see  how  far  the  objectives  pursued  are  being  achieved,  on 
the  evidence  of  the  implementation  of  Structural  Fund  programmes  and  the  external  environment. 
These  assessments  constitute  a  valuable  management  tool  for  the  Monitoring  Committees,  for  they 
contribute  to  decisions  on  changes  to  the  programmes.  As  a  rule,  for  programmes  lasting  for  more 
than  three  years, a mid-term assessment  is made after  the first  three years. For three-year  Objective  2 
programmes, interim assessment  of the first  stage replaces the mid-term  assessment. 

The  7th  Annual  Report  (1995)  explained  that  as  a  general  rule,  because  of  legal  requirements,  the 
interim assessment  process for  6-year programming  should comprise three  stages: a preliminary  report 
on  the  feasibility  of  the  assessment,  covering  an  analysis  of  the  quality  and  content  of  the 
programming  document  and  of  the  monitoring  system  established;  a  mid-term  assessment  report 
prepared  after  the third year of activity (i.e.  1996), followed  by additional reports; and a first  summary 
report at the end of  1999 which  would  provide the preparatory  work for the final  ex post  evaluation. In 
the case of Objective  2. the mid-term report  would be replaced  by an analysis before  the end of  1996. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fund's (1996) 

153 

During  1996,  good  progress  was  made  with  setting  up  assessment  arrangements  in  most  of  the 
Objective  1 regions. Except  in  Italy,  the  Monitoring  Committees  issued  invitations  to  tender  for  the 
selection  of  independent  assessors.  Almost  one  hundred  bodies  were  selected  to  carry  out  on-going 
assessments.  Preliminary  reports  were  drafted  in  most  of  the  regions  to  verify  the  conditions  for 
programme  evaluability,  and,  where  necessary,  to  flesh  out  the  systems  of  indicators  in  the 
programmes.  Mid-term  reports  will  be  available  in  the  course  of  1997,  so  that  where  necessary, 
assistance can be reprogrammed. 

With  specific  reference  to the programmes concerning human resources under Objective  1, which  are 
major  programmes  involving significant  volumes of financing  in both relative and absolute terms, one 
interesting  topic for  on-going assessment  is an analysis of how national  policies have been  reoriented 
as  a  result  of  the  assistance  financed.  For  example,  emphasis  in  the  period  1994-99  on  socially-
excluded  groups  was  a major  innovation  in  certain  Objective  1 countries.  Nevertheless,  the  priority 
for  assessment  is  still  the  impact  of  reinforcing  education  and  training  systems.  On  questions  of 
implementation,  the  preliminary  mid-term  assessment  reports  give  an  initial  idea  of  where  the 
bottlenecks  lie, in particular  at the  level  of  monitoring  and  information  systems,  and  the  selection  of 
to  a  formal  analysis  of  eligibility  criteria  for  expenditure.  On  the 
projects,  often 
methodological  side,  in  most  of  the  Objective  1 regions,  the  inclusion  of  a  set  of  indicators  in  the 
programmes  was  a major  innovation  of  the  1993 reform  of  the  Structural  Funds. "Evaluability"  is a 
recurring theme in the reports received so  far. 

limited 

For  rural  and  agricultural  development  programmes  under  Objective  1, with  measures  applying  on  a 
nation-wide  scale, an assessor  has been appointed. Mid-term  reports  have  already  been  presented  for 
Ireland  and  Northern  Ireland.  There  was  a  more  specific  report  for  Ireland,  relating  to  the 
establishment  of young farmers.  It highlights  the practical difficulties,  caused  chiefly  by problems  of 
succession  and the high cost of capital investment tevstart up a holding. 

For  Objective  2, assessment  has  got  under  way  in  most  regions. Altogether,  50  assessors  have  been 
selected  by  the Monitoring Committees,  with  the exception  of the United  Kingdom. In certain  cases, 
on-going assessment  was used for the preparation  of the SPDs for  1997-99, where it made possible an 
initial review of assistance  and enabled  lessons to be learned about the strategy to follow  and the type 
of  measure  to  undertake.  The  Aquitaine  region  is  a  good  example  of  this  type  of  practice,  with 
assessors  playing  an  active  role  in  the  preparation  of  the  programme,  especially  in  terms  of 
quantifying  objectives  and impacts. 

For  Objectives  3  and  4,  the  mid-term  assessment  process  has  also  begun,  with  the  appointment  of 
independent assessors, the establishment of steering groups and the submission of the first  preliminary 
report.  These  reports  contain  initial  conclusions  on  programming,  implementation  and  measurement 
of  impact.  For  Objective  3,  the  priority  of  the  mid-term  assessment  is  to  gain  an  initial  idea  of 
concentration  on  target  groups  and  of  the  nature  of  Community  value  added.  Available  assessment 
reports  show  the  different  ways  programming  is  implementation  in  the  Member  States.  In  certain 
cases,  assistance  increases  the  capacity  of  the  arrangements  part-financed  in  specific  areas,  and  in 
others  the  ESF  has  acted  as  an  incentive  to  the  creation  of  new  arrangements  (this  is  the. case,  in 
particular  for  "personalised  integration  pathways").  The  Community  value  added  associated  with 
these  modes  of assistance  is very different.  On the methodological  side, the indicators  are mainly  the 
"classic"  indicators  of  results  at the  level  of  beneficiaries  (certification,  immediate  placement  rates). 
Few indicators of specific  results at the level of measures were planned. 

Analysis  of  Objective  4  programming  shows  widely  varying  interpretations,  depending  on  the 
strategic  choices  of  the  Member  States  but  also  on  the  national  background.  Two  of  the  themes 
proposed  for  mid-term assessment  are the participation  of SMEs and the notion  of workers  threatened 
with .unemployment.  An  initial  examination  of  the  selection  criteria  provided  important  pointers  to 
policy  priorities.  In  certain  cases,  these  criteria  have  not  so  far  played  their  filtering  role,  since  the 
novelty  of  the  approach  and  the  delay  in  implementation  have  led  to  a  somewhat  limited  supply  of 
projects.  Another  reason  for  the  lack  of  projects  may  be  that  promoters  must  go  through  a  learning 
process, as they are more used  to measures  like those of Objective  3. 

154 

8ih Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Under  Objective  5(b), efforts  made in  1996 resulted  in  the  establishment  of  assessment  structures  in 
the  regions:  a  work  programme,  a  working  group  appointed  under  the  Monitoring  Committee  to 
monitor assessment, terms of reference  for  the selection  of the assessor,  and an assessor appointed  for 
each  programme.  The  procedure,  in  the  framework  of  the  Monitoring  Committees,  has  been 
completed  for  all  83 SPDs  under  Objective  5(b). The Monitoring  Committees  understand  the  special 
nature  of  this  exercise,  since  assessment  helps  improve  management  of  the  programmes  and  the 
forthcoming  changes  (1997-99).  So  far,  assessment  has  been  positive,  since,  with  a  few  exceptions, 
most  national  and  regional  authorities  represented  in the  Committees  have understood  the need  for  a 
transparent  and  professional  assessment.  The  vast  majority  of  contracts  were  awarded  following  a 
public  call  for  tenders. The other condition  for  a useful  assessment  is that it should  be ready  on time. 
The  Monitoring  Committees  therefore  all  asked  for  mid-term  reports  by  the  summer  of  1997  (with 
some  exceptions  for  the  new  Member  States).  Certain  regions  had  already  submitted  an  initial 
progress  report  before  the  final  report,  which,  in  most  cases, was  to  be  ready  for  the  end  of  the  first 
half  of  1997. A data-base  recording  all  the  indicators  in the programmes  and  their quantification  has 
been  set  up  by  the  Commission.  It  should  make  it  possible  to  monitor  the  implementation  of  each 
programme,  especially  at  the  level  of  physical  data  and  employment,  and  to  produce  national  and 
Community  aggregates. 

Similarly,  most  of  the  FIFG  Monitoring  Committees  issued  invitations  to  tender  for  the  selection  of 
independent  assessors for on-going assessment reports. These reports were expected in the first  half of 
1997.  In  Finland  and  Sweden,  Objective  6  Monitoring  Committees  set  up  on-going  assessment 
procedures.  The  invitations  to  tender  were  issued  on  time,  and  the  bodies  were  selected.  Mid-term 
reports are expected towards the end of  1997. 

On-going assessment  has also been organised  for certain Community Initiatives. For Leader II, certain 
regions have decided  to assess CIPs in the same framework  as Objective 5(b). For others, especially in 
the Member States where programmes are established  at national  level, specific  procedures have been 
introduced.  The  Irish  report  has  already  been  submitted,  and  it  shows  that  the programme  has  made 
good  progress,  with  stress  laid  on  acquisition  of  expertise  and  transmission  of  experience  for  new 
local action groups, but also that difficulties  have been encountered in the introduction  and running of 
measures. For  Employment  and  Adapt  CIPs  too, arrangements  for  assessment  on  a partnership  basis 
were  introduced  in  1996. Priorities  for  on-going  assessment  are  directly  linked  to  the  nature  of  the 
Initiatives  themselves,  which  means  assessing  how  the  principles  of  trans-nationality  and  innovation 
are  reflected  in  the  implementation  of  programmes  and  whether  the  results  of  the  measures  are 
disseminated  with a view to the "mainstreaming" of good practice. 

C.  EX POST  EVALUATION 

1.  Objective  2  1989-93 

In  the  course  of  1996,  Structural  Fund  assistance  was  evaluated  in  the  60  areas  eligible  under 
Objective  2  in  the  period  1989-93,  to  assess  the  main  results  obtained  and  to  help  improve  the 
operation  of present and future  measures. The ex post  evaluations  involved examining certain  specific 
questions,  such  as:  what  impact  did  Objective  2  assistance  have?  How  far  did  it  contribute  to 
industrial  conversion  in the  areas?  How  far  did  the  1988 reform  of  the  Structural  Funds  improve  the 
implementation  of  the  programmes,  and  their  results?  What  lessons  can  be  learned  from  the 
evaluation  of  Objective  2 programmes  for  1989-93, and incorporated  in a code of good  practice?  The 
main  obstacle  to  this  evaluation  was  that,  in  a  number  of  Objective  2  areas,  relatively  little 
information  was  available  on  the  outcome  of  the  programmes  for  1989-93. Where  information  was 
available,  performance  indicators  applied  were  not  standardised,  or  not  sufficiently  comparable. 
Consequently, the results and conclusions presented below  should be regarded as merely  indicative. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

155 

Main  conclusions 

In  general,  the  conclusion  of  ex post  evaluation  is  that  assistance  under  Objective  2 played  a  major 
role  in  the  process  of  industrial  conversion  in  the  period  1989-93.  While  global  macro-economic 
trends  were  not  favourable  for  much  of  the  period,  Objective  2  programmes  helped  to  sustain  the 
process of  structural  adjustment  in the regions affected  by the decline  of traditional  industrial  sectors. 
The  short-term  impact  on  unemployment  and  the  long-term  contribution  to  industrial  restructuring 
were  considerable.  The  evaluation  also  highlights  the  major  effects  of  the  1988  reform  of  the 
Structural Funds. 

Strategies  implemented 

The  strategies  adopted  for  CSFs and  OPs made for  coherent  regional  development  strategies  in many 
Objective  2 areas  that  did  not  have  such  strategies. The framework  defined  in  1989 by  the  European 
Commission  highlighted  the  need,  in  line  with  the  reform  of  the  Structural  Funds,  to  adopt  a  more 
integrated,  focused  and  programme-oriented  approach  to  the  process  of  industrial  conversion.  The 
results  of  research  in  certain  regions,  e.g.  in  Spain,  Italy  and  the  United  Kingdom,  suggest  that  this 
framework  forms  a  more  solid  base  for  regional  development  programming  than  before,  even  if 
certain  aspects of the regulations  governing the Structural Funds are regarded as too restrictive. In the 
regions  where  a  strategic  approach  to  regional  development  was  well-established  (France  and 
Germany), this aspect of the value added by Objective 2 was less pronounced. 

The  leverage  effect  of  the  Structural  Funds  was considerable:  for  every  million  ECU  of  Community 
money, a further  ECU 2 million was committed by the Member States. The Funds also elicited  private 
sector financing,  which  accounted  overall for about 20% of  Objective  2 programme expenditure. It is 
difficult  to assess the extent of financial  additionality, but research shows that Structural Fund aid was 
crucial  to  enabling  Objective  2  programming  to  continue,  at  least  at  the  pace  and  in  the  volume 
achieved. 

Objective  2 priorities  were broadly similar in the various regions; but major  differences  were noted in 
the breakdown  of resources between types of measure. As a rule, the breakdown of resources  between 
measures  reflected  development  priorities  in  the  regions.  For  example,  in  the  French  and  Spanish 
regions, the emphasis  was on infrastructure  investment, but elsewhere  (e.g. the Netherlands, Italy  and 
certain  regions  of  the  United  Kingdom),  support  for  the  development  of  SMEs,  tourism  and  human 
resources  was  more  important.  At  the  level  of  projects,  the  allocation  of  financing  did  not  always 
reflect  the strategic priorities, however. 

The degree of external coherence  was generally  high, despite certain  problems  in adapting to CSFs in 
the Member States with existing well-established  regional strategies. However, strategies often  lacked 
internal  coherence,  with  a  few  exceptions  (e.g.  the  Netherlands).  This  applies  in  particular  to  the 
integration  of  ERDF  and  ESF  measures.  Differences  in  administrative  procedures,  institutional 
structures  and  responsibilities  at  national  level  made  integration  difficult.  On  the  other  hand,  at  the 
level  of  projects,  the  development  of partnership  in the  Objective  2 regions  helped  to  optimise  links 
and synergies between  measures. 

Management  of  programmes 

Because of the need to commit resources rapidly at the beginning of the  1989-93 programming  period, 
the regional  authorities  in some cases  introduced  formal  procedures  for  the appraisal  and  selection  of 
projects  after  programmes had commenced. Delays in setting up CSFs and OPs mean that the regional 
authorities  were initially  under pressure to commit financing  over a relatively  short period. There  was 
therefore  a  widespread  tendency  to  take  projects  "off  the  shelf  or  to  select  projects  on  the  basis  of 
"first  come, first  served". The introduction  of official  appraisal  criteria and procedures began, in most 
regions,  when  competition  for  financing  grew  keener.  It would  seem  that  by  the  end  of  the  period, a 
much  more  rigorous  approach  was  adopted  for  the evaluation  of  projects  in  most  regions.  The  most 

156 

8th Annual Report an the Structural Funds (1996) 

sophisticated  appraisal  methods  are  probably  those  devised  in  the  Netherlands  and  the  United 
Kingdom (where scoring, weighting and ranking methods were tested). 

In  general,  programme  monitoring  and  evaluation  practices  proved  inadequate,  despite  the  measures 
adopted  at  the  end  of  the  period  to  reinforce  them.  In  most  regions,  monitoring  procedures  were 
limited  to checking  financial  indicators,  with  minor  importance  given  to  scrutiny  of physical  results. 
Research  shows  that,  in  most  regions,  the  regional  authorities  had  neither  the  expertise  nor  the 
resources  for  efficient  monitoring  of  projects.  For  example,  site  visits  do  not  appear  to  have  been 
organised  on  a large  scale. Most  regions  also encountered  technical  problems  in  analysing  and  using 
the  monitoring  data  collected.  There  were  few  global  mid-term  assessments,  although  considerable 
research  has been  done  into  specific  projects  and  specific  aspects  of programmes. In  several  regions, 
the  shortcomings  of  monitoring  and  evaluation  practices  were  one  of  the  factors  explaining  the 
general  lack  of  a  strategic  approach  to  reprogramming.  It  is  nevertheless  clear  that  measures  were 
taken at the end of the period to improve procedures. 

Approaches  to  programme  management  were  not  standardised;  they  were  strongly  influenced  by 
institutional  structures  and  national  traditions  in  the  Objective  2  regions.  Broadly  speaking,  there 
seem  to  have  been  two  types  of  approach:  highly  centralised  structures  (e.g.  in  Spain)  and  more 
decentralised  structures  (e.g.  in  the  Netherlands,  Italy  and  the  United  Kingdom).  The  Monitoring 
Committees  played  a major  role in most regions, acting as a link between  national, regional  and  local 
authorities  and  between  the  various  economic  and  social  partners  in  the  regions.  Their  capacity  to 
exercise genuine decision-making powers did vary, however: in certain  regions, it seems to have been 
quite extensive, but in others (e.g. in Germany), it was much more limited. 

With  the  1988 reform  of  the  Structural  Funds,  the  partnership  process  gained  considerable  impetus. 
Research  points  to this  as one of the major  and  most lasting benefits  of  Objective  2 assistance  in  the 
period  1989-93. It  is  also  clear  that  major  problems  arose  in  the  early  stages.  In  some  regions  -  in 
particular  those  whose  administrative  structures  are  relatively  centralised  -  tensions  arose  between 
national  and  regional  authorities  on  the  matter  of  prerogatives  for  the  setting  of  priorities  and 
decision-making.  In  certain  Member  States, it  was  difficult  to  obtain  a contribution  from  the  private 
sector. However,  it is clear that all the partners  were going through  a learning process, and  that at the 
end  of  the  period  1989-93,  generally  efficient  partnership  had  been  established  in  all  the  regions 
covered  by  Objective  2.  Several  partnership  models  have  been  developed:  where  the  number  of 
participants  is relatively  limited, the partnerships are more cohesive and easier to manage, while wider 
partnerships,  although  more  representative,  were  often  more  difficult  to  co-ordinate.  Here  again,  the 
type  of  model  adopted  tended  to  reflect  specific  features  of  the  regions,  in  particular  the  size  of 
Objective  2 areas. 

Objective  2 strategies  underwent  a major  adjustment  during the programming  period, but  its  purpose 
was to ensure maximum take-up of available financing  rather than to change the regional  development 
priorities. However, several regions adjusted  programming to take account of the lessons of the period 
1989-91.  On  the  whole,  where  the  effect  of  the  adjustment  was  to  shift  the  emphasis  from 
infrastructure  investment  to  measures  liable  to  be  of  immediate  benefit  to  employment,  this  was  a 
good thing, in view of the incipient recession  and the rise in unemployment rates. 

Gross and net  results 

It is estimated  that almost  850 000 gross jobs were created, saved  or redistributed  following  measures 
under  Objective  2  during  the  period  1989-93. After  adjustment  for  additionality,  the  displacement 
effect  and indirect effects,  it is estimated  that 450 000 to 500 000 net additional jobs altogether can be 
attributed  to Objective  2 programmes. Of the 850 000 gross jobs, some 570 000 (or 67%)  were due to 
ERDF programmes,  with  the remainder  resulting from ESF assistance. Three Member  States, France, 
Spain  and  the  United  Kingdom,  accounted  for  about  3/4  of  the  gross  jobs  created  or  maintained, 
which corresponds  broadly  to the distribution  of appropriations between  the Member States. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

157 

The  average  cost  per  job,  on  the  basis  of  ERDF  and  ESF  expenditure,  is "estimated  at  ECU 7 000 
(gross) or ECU  14 000 (net). There was wide variation  between  the Member  States  in cost  per job  for 
estimated  basic  net  job  creation  (450 000),  from  an  average  of  about  ECU 5 000  in  Belgium  to  an 
average  of  ECU 20 000  in  thé  Spanish  Objective  2 regions. The  reason  for  this  can  be  found  in  the 
priorities  pursued  in  the  different  regions  covered  by  Objective  2. In  particular,  where  infrastructure 
investment  is  a  priority,  induced  effects  on  job  creation  are  slower  to  materialise  than  in  regions 
where the emphasis  is on measures such as aid to SMEs, and this leads to a higher cost per job  during 
the  programming  period.  Taking  both  national  and  Community  expenditure  on  Objective  2 
programmes  gives  an average  or global/real  cost per net job  of ECU 40 000. This figure  is within  the 
range expected  for regional development measures. 

Results  of  Objective  2  programming  for  1989-93  also  show  an  estimated  917 000  beneficiaries  of 
training programmes  supported by the ESF, and approximately 470 000 beneficiary  SMEs. 

As  few  regional  authorities  set  targets  at  the  beginning  of  the  programming  period,  it  is not  easy  to 
assess  the degree to which  the programmes  have been successful.  Information  collected  in the  course 
of  research  shows  that  in  only  twelve  of  the  60  Objective  2  areas  did  the  regional  authorities  set 
targets  for  ERDF measures  in terms  of  employment.  The  authorities  in  20 regions  had  set  quantified 
targets  for  ESF  measures.  Where  targets  were  set,  they  seem,  in  most  cases,  to  have  been  not  only 
achieved  but  actually  exceeded.  In  certain  cases,  this  may  mean  that  performance  really  was  better 
than  expected,  but  it  may  also  be  that  the  targets  themselves  were  not  sufficiently  realistic,  or  that 
monitoring  systems were not capable of accurate measurement of programme results. 

Impact  assessment 

Structural  Fund  assistance  helped  to  ensure  economic  diversification  of  the  regions,  since  the  jobs 
created  or maintained  between  1989 and  1993 were equivalent  to an estimated  0.7%  to  1.3%  of non-
industrial  jobs.  The  impact  of  Objective  2  measures  on  employment  is  certainly  an  important 
yardstick for  measuring achievements, but the strategies adopted were essentially designed  to  address 
deep-seated  structural  weakness  over  a  longer  period.  From  this  point  of  view,  the  contribution  of 
Structural  Fund  measures  to  the  diversification  of  the  economies  of  the  Objective  2  regions,  and  to 
reducing their dependence on traditional industrial  sectors as a source of jobs and income, is a critical 
measure of success. In most of the Objective  2 regions, the conversion  process  was well under way at 
the end of the  1980s, but it is clear that Structural Fund measures played a major  role in sustaining the 
process. 

Moreover, Objective  2 programming slowed down the loss of industrial jobs: the level of employment 
was  0.9%  to  1.8%  higher  than  it  would  have  been  without  assistance.  As  the  programming  period 
1989-93  largely  coincided  with  a  deep  recession,  Structural  Fund  assistance  to  maintain  jobs  in 
declining  industrial  sectors  clearly  served  important  social  and  economic  aims.  Its  impact  is 
demonstrated  by  the  fact  that  some 0.9%  or  1.8%  of  industrial jobs  (depending  on  whether  gross  or 
net effects  are considered)  were created or maintained thanks to Objective  2 prograrriming. 

Apart from  the effects  highlighted  above, the evaluation also indicates that Objective  2 assistance had 
a  considerable  non-measurable  impact.  The  most  significant  was  probably  the  way  it  stimulated  the 
development  of  regional  partnerships  and  their  capacity  to  plan  and  manage  regional  development 
strategies.  The  1988  reform  of  the  Structural  Funds  certainly  had  a major  impact  from  this  point  of 
view. The repercussions of other changes made in  1988, especially the new emphasis on the principles 
of concentration, additionally  and programming, are more difficult  to assess. 

16 

8th Annual report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

the time when the prognunrning documents are adopted. The Member State provides the Commission 
with  relevant  financial  information  and  indications  of  the  transparency  of  the  financial  flows  in 
question. After the prograiriming period, an ex post  verification  is carried out to ascertain whether the 
Member State has complied with its undertakings to maintain the ]evel of expenditure in question. 

During  1994,  1995 and  1996, the prior appraisal of virtually all the programmes for Objectives  1, 214 
and 6  was  completed.  However,  two problems  remained  at the  end  of  1996: Objective  1 in France, 
where  the  Commission  was  still  awaiting  an update  of  the  figures  in  the  SPDs,  and  Objective  2  in 
Luxembourg  (1994-96),  where  the  lack  of  any  financial  information  on  additionality  made  it 
impossible  to  resume  suspended  payments.  In  1996,  the  first  steps  were  taken  towards  prior 
verification  of  additionality  under the  Objective  2  SPDs  for  1997-99.  Data provided  by  the  national 
authorities in Finland demonstrated compliance with this principle before the end of the year. Further 
information about all the other Member States was expected early in 1997. 

The  arrangements  for  the  on-going  assessment  of  additionality  form  part  of  the  programming 
documents  and  are  an  obligation  arising from the  partnership  agreement  with  each  Member  State. 
They entail the annual updating of  the data initially  provided in the programming documents. At the 
end of  1996, the results of the on-going assessment of additionality were mixed. A number of Member 
States (Austria, Belgium, France, Netherlands and the United  Kingdom for Objective  1 ; Finland and 
Sweden for Objective 6) had sent the Commission no up-to-date figures. Germany, Spain, Greece and 
Italy  reported  eligible  national  public  expenditure  lower  than  estimated  in  the  prior  Verification  of 
Objective  1  and,  in  accordance  with  monitoring  rules,  the  Commission  is  awaiting  explanations. 
Portugal has sent data on a number of occasions but methodological improvements are still expected. 

In  1996 the ex post  verification  of additionality covered the Objective  1 programmes for  1989-93 and 
the Objective 2 programmes for  1994-96. In the case of Objective  1, the situation was satisfactory  for 
Spain  and  Ireland  but  for  Portugal  the  data  sent  require  adjustment  and  in  the  case  of  Greece  a 
methodological  problem  had  to  be  resolved  to  compare  the  data  for  the  two  programming periods. 
France  and Italy  did not  send  the  Commission  the  information  required. In the  case  of  Objective  2, 
where the prior appraisal for  1997-99 and the ex post  assessment for  1994-96 are being carried out in 
parallel,  further information  on the period  1994-96  was expected  early  in  1997. This  also  applied  to 
the prior appraisal of the Objective 2 SPDs. 

Despite  delays  and  problems  in  the  submission  of  data,  the  implementation  of  the  principle  of 
additionality  has involved close  and intensive cooperation between  the Commission  and the Member 
States. Although much still remains to be done to ensure the systematic transmission  of uniform data 
to  the  Commission,  substantial  progress  has  already  been  made  and  this  will  facilitate  work  in  the 
future. 

Considerable  financial  activity 

The main task in  1996 consisted  of  clear progress  in making up the backlog,  where  too the  situation 
varies  depending  on  the  Objective  and  the  Member  State15.  After  the  first  three  years,  half  the 
assistance  from  the  various  Objectives  had  been  committed  by  the  Commission  and  one  third  had 
been  paid. Financial  activity  in  1996 alone accounted  for 37% of  commitments  made since  1994  (as 
against  28% for  1994  and 35% for  1995)  and 44% of  payments  for  that period  (as  against  21% for 
1994  and 35% for  1995).  Similarly,  the Community  Initiatives  took  off  dramatically,  with  over half 
the assistance  committed  (thanks to the system of  single commitments  for amounts of  less than ECU 
40  million)  and  22% paid.  For  most  of  the  Initiatives  1996  was  the  year  when  they  really  began 
operations. 

14 Programmes for 1994-96. 
15 See in particular Chapter I. The implementation of assistance. 

J58 

Rth Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

2.  Other ex post  evaluations 

In  1996, certain  Objective  5(b) areas completed  evaluations taking stock of results of the period  1989-
93.  Some  Member  States  also  decided  to  compile  summaries'  of  the  contents  of  the  various 
evaluations,  although  without  enhancing  the  precision  of  figures  for  final  results  and  impact.  The 
DATAR  (France)  undertook  a  study  into  evaluation  methods  for  Community  programmes,  and  the 
problems encountered, assessing the dynamics of approaches adopted in different  regions. 

After  a public  invitation  to tender  issued  in  1995, an assessor  was selected  for  the Leader  I  Initiative 
in  1996, and the study, which  is to cover 217 local  action groups  in the twelve Member States, began 
the  same year. The first  step was to produce a methodological  report  as a basis for  forthcoming  work 
in  the  Member  States,  with  an  original  method  for  assessing  innovation  and  the  "bottom-up" 
approach. 

D.  ASSESSMENT  OF MAJOR  PROJECTS 

1. 

Introduction 

In  1996  a  survey  of  appraisals  of  major  projects  attracting  assistance  from  the  ERDF  and  Cohesion 
Fund  was carried  out. It was an update of a survey  looking at major  projects  in the first  prograrriming 
period  (1989-93). The first.survey,  corrimissioned in  1994, examined  the cost-benefit  analyses  (CBA) 
of  200 major  projects  approved  for  ERDF part-financing  between  1989 and  1993. The  CBAs  were  a 
requirement  of  Article  5  of  the  ERDF  Regulations  for  applications  for  the  part-financing  of  major 
projects. The aims of the exercise  were to assess  the overall  quality  of  appraisal  data;  to compare  the 
different  methods  of  analysis  used;  and  to  identify  key  issues  for  the evaluation  of  major  projects  in 
1994-99.  The  survey  results  are  summarised  in  the  "Fifth  Annual  Report  on  the  Implementation  of 
Reform  of the Structural Funds  1993" published in  1995. The results were also used  in drawing up the 
Guide to  Cost Benefit Analysis  of Major  Projects,  in the context of EC Regional  Policies,  which  was 
published  in  1995. Both  the  Guide and  the results  of the survey  of  major  projects  1989 to  1993 were 
used  in the preparation  of training seminars for Commission  officials  dealing with major  projects. 

In  1996 a new  survey  of  the major  projects,  with  similar  aims  to  the  first,  was  commissioned.  Once 
again  200  project  applications  were  examined,  split  this  time  between  107  ERDF  projects  and  93 
Cohesion Fund projects. The Cohesion Fund projects  are applications for projects  agreed in the period 
1993  to  1996.  The  ERDF  projects  are  for  the  period  1994-99.  Although  this  sample  cannot  be 
considered  to be fully  representative  of the major  projects  part-financed,  it  is nonetheless  significant. 
In examining the results a number of things should be borne in mind. The information  is that  available 
at the time of the survey, June  1996 and  is principally  derived from applications. In  some cases  these 
are  different  from  the  final  outcomes.  The  quality  of  the  CBAs  was  considered  in  relation  to  best 
practice, and any criticisms  do not necessarily  imply that the applications  themselves did not meet  the 
regulator»' requirements. 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

159 

Table  IV-2:  Major  projects  • Breakdown  by Member  State 

ERDF 
1994-99 

Cohesion  Fund 
1993-96 

Number 

J2L 

Number 

_%_. 

Total  sample 
"2nd generation" 
Number 
•2L 

Total  sample 
"1st generation" 

Number 

Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Netherlands 
Portugal 
Vn.ued Kingdom 
TOTAL 

2% 
1% 
26% 
2% 
8% 
1% 
9% 
14% 
1% 
23% 
12% 
100% 

JfiZ 

13% 
55% 

9% 

24e, 

28 
14 
60 
1 
18 
15 
1 
47 

_22 

100% 

>M 

v 
i% 
14% 
7% 
30% 
1% 
9% 
8% 
1% 
24% 
7% 
100% 

2 
54 
11 
55 
52 

26 

1% 
27% 
6% 
28% 
26% 

13% 

200 

100% 

In  the  second  survey,  over  half  the  Cohesion  Fund  projects  are  in  Spain,  and  close  to  a  quarter  are  in 
Portugal.  Germany  and  Portugal  each  provide  a  quarter  of  the  ERDF  projects  looked  at.  There  are 
significant  differences  between  the  two  surveys.  In  the  original  survey,  six  Member  States  were 
covered.  In  the  second  survey,  an  additional  five  countries  are  included.  Germany,  which  was  not 
included  in  the  first  survey,  accounts  for  28  of  the  200  projects  examined.  The  contributions  from 
Italy,  Ireland  and  Portugal  are much  reduced  in the  second  survey,  although  they  are  still  significant. 

The  Cohesion  Fund  projects  are  split  between  the transport  and  environment  sectors. Two-fifths  of  the 
ERDF  projects  are  also  in  the  transport  sector,  while  relatively  few  major  ERDF  projects  are  in  the 
environment  sector.  Transport  represents  the  bulk  of  expenditure  too,  some  60%.  Environment 
projects  tend  to be  smaller  than  average, and expenditure  on  them makes up  less  than  10%  of  the  total. 
Energy  projects  by contrast  tend  to be expensive,  and the three projects  in the  sample  account  for  12% 
of  expenditure. 

Table TV-3:  Major projects  - Sectoral  breakdown 

Sector 

ERDF 

Cohesion  Fund 

Sample of  "2nd 
generation" projects 

Sample  of  "1st 
generation" projects 

Total 

Data' 

Total 

Data» 

Total 

Data" 

Total 

Data' 

Transport 
Water,  environment 
Energy-
Other  services 
Industry 
TOTAL 
*  Number  of projects  for  which  data  or. total  investment  costs are available. 

40 
5 
3 
12 
47 
JLfll 

-LOI 

_2i 

_93 

200 

194 

200 

188 

160 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

2.  Assessment  of the  appraisals 

Table IV-4: 

Major projects  - Overall assessment 

Comparison  with 
previous  ewrritf 

Economic  analysis 
Economic rate of  return 
Estimation  of  shadow  prices 
Evaluation of  externalities 
Financial analysis 
Changes  in relative  prices 
Financial  rate of  return 
Financial  planning 
Risk analysis 
Sensitivity  analysis 
Risk  analysis 
+ Improvement  from  the first  to the second  generation 
- Deterioration  from  the first to the  second  generation 

Cost-benefit  analysis  is  an  established  method  for  estimating  the  economic  benefit  of  projects.  The 
principle  behind  it is simple. The costs and benefits  are listed,  valued  in money  terms, added  up, and 
the  total  costs  subtracted  from  the  total  benefits.  In  practice,  though,  the  development  of  useful  and 
comparable results involves considerable  work. 

Accounting  for  time:  The  present  worth  of  future  costs  and  benefits  is  less  than  that  of  those 
occurring  now. Thus, it  is first  necessary  to estimate the  stream of costs and  benefits  that come  from 
the project  over time, and  second, reduce the value of those that: occur later. In practice, it is normally 
assumed  that  the  rate  at  which  value  falls  over  time  (the  discount  rate)  is  constant.  In  deciding 
whether  or not  to  invest,  private  companies  often  use  discount  rates  of  20-30%  or more.  Projections 
over time are available  in over 70% of second generation  projects. On average the projections  for  the 
transport  sector were for  20-30 years, for  the environment  and  water  sector  they  were usually  a  little 
longer,  while  the  projects  for  industrial,  service,  education  and  health  sectors  were  based  on 
projections  for  6  to  13 years. In  general,  the  different  horizons  reasonably  reflect  the  nature  of  the 
investment. 

Rate  of  return:  Once  the  costs  and  benefits  have  been  valued  and  set  out  over  time  and  a  suitable 
discount  rate  applied,  subtracting  the  total  costs  from  the  total  benefits  results  in  the  Net  Present 
Value  (NPV)  of  the  project.  An  alternative  measure  is  the  Internal  Rate  of  Return  (IRR).  In  most 
projects,  the  costs  occur  early,  and  the  benefits  arrive  later.  Thus  the  higher  the  discount  rate,  the 
lower  the NPV. The financial  IRR reflects  the actual financial  position  of the project.  The  proportion 
of  CBA  appraisals  that  have  estimated  financial  IRRs,  about  a  quarter,  has  remained  the  same. 
However,  there  has  been  a decrease  in  the  proportion  of  appraisals  which  contain  details  of  the  data 
on financial  planning used in calculating the financial  IRR. In some cases, more approximate  financial 
indicators,  such  as  the  profit/income  ratio, were  given.  In  other  cases,  the  calculation  was  not  made 
because  no  income  was  forecast.  About  70%  of  project  proposals  provided  an  assessment  of  the 
economic  IRR  (i.e. after  adjusting  the price  of  a good  or  service  artificially  inflated  by  a  monopoly) 
compared  to  50%  of  the  first  generation  projects.  The  survey  suggests  that  both  financial  and 
economic  IRRs were of a similar order of magnitude in both generations of projects. 

Sensitivity  and  risk:  Two  elements  can  be  distinguished:  an  examination  of  the  sensitivity  of  the 
forecasts  to changes in the assumptions, and an appraisal of outcomes in the light of the risks attached 
to  the  project.  In  general,  the  treatment  of  uncertainty  has  been  better  in  the  second  generation  of 
projects.  Progress  varied  across  sectors,  with  improvements  in  the  transport  and  energy  sector,  but  a 
deterioration  in the  industry  sector.  There  were no  risk  assessments  in  the  200 projects  examined  - a 
marked  deterioration  in  relation  to  the  previous  period.  However,  it  should  be  noted  that  the 
regulations  do not require the provision of sensitivity  or risk analyses. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

161 

Conclusion:  The  different  composition  of  the  two  surveys  makes  them'difficult  to  compare.  In 
general,  there  has  been  a  marked  improvement  in  the  quality  of  the  CBAs  presented  in  the 
applications  for  the  funding  of  large  projects.  However,  there  is  still  room  for  improvement.  The 
publication  of  the  Guide  to  Cost  Benefit  Analysis  of  Major  Projects  will  have  brought  about 
improvements  in  the  CBAs,  as  will  the  increased  attention  to evaluation  that  has  been  shown  in  the 
implementation  of Structural Funds. 

E.  THEMATIC  EVALUATION  AND OTHER  EVALUATION  ACTIVITIES 

In  1996, the Commission  decided to launch a series of thematic evaluations of the impact of  Structural 
Funds  in  a  number  of  key  areas,  such  as  research  and  development,  small  and  medium-sized 
enterprises,  and  the environment.  It  is expected  that  the  outcomes  of  the  evaluations  will  be  used  to 
better target expenditure on those areas that are most effective;  to improve monitoring systems  so that 
they  are  better  able  to  provide  accurate,  timely,  useful  information  for  the  better  managing  and 
evaluation  of the implementation  of the Structural Funds; and to refine evaluation tools in these areas. 
The work will be launched at the end of  1997, and will last a year to  18 months. 

Evaluation  of measures  financed  by the ESF  in the framework  of the European  Social  Dialogue 

The  1988  ESF  Regulation  was  the  first  sign  of  the  Community's  concern  to  take  account,  in  the 
context  of the social dialogue, of the massive advent  in the working environment  of new  technologies 
with a substantial  impact on the labour market, both  in quantitative and in qualitative terms. The ESF 
is  able  to  finance  "operations  directed,  within  the  framework  of  social  dialogue,  at  staff  from 
enterprises  in  two or more Member  States  and  concerning  the transfer  of  special  knowledge  relating 
to modernisation  of the production  apparatus". 

The  assessment  of  training  measures  in  the  framework  of  the  social  dialogue  has  produced 
preliminary results. The measures as such  are of good quality. The  social dialogue does not appear as 
a  theme  in the content  of  measures closely  related  to the themes  of  "industrial  change" developed  in 
the  framework  of  Objective  4  and  Adapt.  The  Commission's  guidelines  on  the  application  of  social 
dialogue measures were welcomed, since they clarified  the concepts and the procedures. Nevertheless, 
their  application  highlighted  a  number  of  shortcomings  such  as  the  lack  of  linkage  between  these 
measures  and  the  social  dialogue  at  European  level,  which  is  considered  solely  as  a  general 
framework;  the need  to  increase the  specificity  of  the measures  financed  under  Article  6 of  the  ESF 
Regulation  in  terms  of  the  other  Community  measures  involving  the  participation  of  the  social 
partners,  and  a  lack  of  suitable  ESF  selection  procedures.  Clarification  of  the  objectives  of  social 
dialogue  measures  would  seem necessary  to render  them  more  operational  and  encourage  links  with 
complementary programmes. The social dialogue dimension  should be reinforced,  which means closer 
co-ordination  between  departments  within  the  Commission  and  between  the  Commission  and  the 
social partners. 

The MEANS  programme 

1996  saw  the  second  year  of  implementation  of  the  three-year  programme  of  Methods  for  the 
Evaluation  of  Actions  of  a  Structural  Nature,  or  the  MEANS  Programme  (after  its  title  in  French). 
This  programme,  operated  by  the  Centre  Européen  d'Expertise  en  Evaluation  (CEEE),  aims  to 
strengthen  the  capacity  of the Commission  to manage  Structural  Funds  and to be accountable  for  the 
public expense involved. There were three major priorities: first,  to draw up reference  frameworks  for 
the three main types of evaluation  (prior appraisal, mid-term assessment  and ex post evaluation); next, 
to  develop  evaluation  techniques.  A  number  of  workshops  took  place  in  which  academic  experts, 
experienced  officials  from  central and regional  authorities in Member  States and various  Commission 
departments  participated.  As a result  of  these deliberations  three MEANS  Handbooks  were  published 
on  improving  the  quality  of  evaluations,  evaluating  employment  effects  of  the  Structural  Funds, and 
assessing  the synergy  effects  of the programmes. In addition, progress  was made in workshops  on the 
development  of impact  indicators. 

162 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

A conference  on evaluation techniques was held in Berlin m December  1996. It brought together over 
300 policy  makers, managers of Structural Fund programmes and projects, and evaluation  specialists. 
The  conference  focused  on  six  questions,  around  which  there  was  discussion,  the  sharing  of 
experience, and examination of evaluation techniques: how to measure the impact of the multi-annual 
programme  approach  which  covers  a wide  range  of  structural  measures  at  different  levels;  how  to 
measure  the  macroeconomic  effect  of  Structural  Fund  assistance  that  accounts  for  a  significant 
percentage  of  the  Member  State's  GDP;  the  adaptation  of  macroeconomic  and  other  methods  to 
examine  the impacts  of programmes in the small  regions in receipt  of  Objective  2 and 5(b)  funding; 
the measurement  of  the Structural Funds employment impact; the role of  thematic  evaluations  in the 
on-going  assessment  phase,  and  appropriate  methods  to  carry  them  out;  and  the  definition  of 
indicators and of quality criteria. 

G* 

•1 6  3 

PARTE 

THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS IN DETAIL 

•4 6^ 

CHAPTER V 

SUMMARY BY MEMBER STATE 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

165 

1. 

B E L G I UM 

1.1.  Implementation  of  assistance  by  Objective  in  1996 

Support  for  the  development  of  technological  potential  in the  regions  of  Belgium: 
Objective  1:  Support  for  technological  development  features 
strategy  for  Hainaut  and  involves  a full  range  of  measures: 

in  several  of  the  priorities 

in  the  development 

• 
•  development  of  human  potential 

•  development  of  centres  of  excellence  (research  centres,  institutions  and  universities), 

international  partnership  and  dissemination  of  scientific  and 

technological 
technical 
support  for  businesses, 
culture  in  educational,  scientific  and  business  circles,  development  of  communications  centres  in 
universities,  research  centres,  training  institutes  and firms  (RDT priority:  ECU  85.9  million;  total 
cost:  ECU  188.8  million); 
research  on  new  agricultural  products  and  technological  innovation  in  businesses, 

in  RTD  (ECU  13.2  million;  total  cost:  ECU  26  million)  and 
training  in  advanced  communications 
(technical  training  of  technicians  in firms  and  unemployed 
people,  communications  demonstration  and  information  measures,  utilisation  by  managers)  (sub-
priority  Communications:  ECU  1 million;  total cost:  ECU  2  million); 
under  the  Human  Resources  priority, 
million). 

innovation  awareness  (ECU  I  million;  total  cost:  ECU  2 

• 

Objective  2  (1994-96):  The four  SPDs  all  provide  assistance  for  technological  innovation,  either  as part  of 
support  for  industry  or services  (Aubange,  Limburg  and  Turnhout),  or as a priority  in  itself(Meuse-  Vesdre): 

•  Aubange: 

in-house  training 

training  for  young  people,  creation  of  inter-company 
cost:  ECU0.6  million); 
•  Limburg  and  Turnhout: 

in  businesses  concerned  with  new  technologies  and  growth  sectors, 
total 

training  schemes  (ECU  0.2 million; 

to  encourage  cooperation  and 
industry  and  the  service  sector  (ECU  0.8 million;  total  cost:  ECU 
technology 
2 million);  stimulation  of  R&D  in  the field  of the  environment  (for  both  regions:  ECU  0.3  million; 
total  cost:  ECU  8.5  million); 

thematic  workshops  and  measures 

transfer  between 

•  Meuse-Vesdre 

(ECU  16.8  million;  total  cost:  ECU  40.5  million):  development  of  R&D  centres  of 
excellence  to  help  equip firms  to participate  in Community  programmes  and  international  research 
projects;  cooperation  between  firms  and  research  centres  and  development  of  new  products  and 
production  methods;  training  in  innovation  and  the  development  of human  resources  in  universities 
and  research  centres. 

Concerning  more  specifically  data  transmission  applications 
in  connection  with  the  development  of  the 
information  society,  only  Limburg  and  Turnhout  have  planned  measures,  in  the  context  of  development  of 
business  accommodation.  Only  Limburg  has  provided  for  development  of  telecommunications 
to  maximise 
growth  of  the  service  sector  in the  region. 
Objective  5(b):  The SPDs for  Westhoek  and  Meetjesland  provide  for  technology  transfer  among  the  measures 
telematics  services  and  new  agricultural  products,  and  upgrade 
to  develop  businesses,  research  projects, 
natural  resources. 
In  total,  Structural  Fund  assistance  for  technological  development  accounts  for  13.6%  of  appropriations 
Belgium  (Objectives  I  and  2). 

in 

Financing 

directly 

linked 

to  technological  development 

in  1994-99 

(ECU 

Table  V-l: 

Belgium 
million) 

TOTAL 

Objective 1 
Objective 2 
TOTAL 
\B  The  programming  procedures  and different  approaches  taken  by the Member  Slates 

224,1 
51.5 
275,6 

Struct.  Funds 
% 
45% 
35% 
43% 

100,9 
18,1 
119,0 

Member State 
Total 
Private 
22,7 
12,7 
35,4 

123,2 
33,3 
156,6 

Public 
100,5 
20,7 
121,2 

% 
81% 
19% 
100% 

Financing bv the Structural  Funds 

° '1 2% 

11% 

% 
55% 
65% 
57% 

invite  caution  in  interpreting  the  figures,  in  particular  spending  on  information  society  projects, 

which  are often  linked  to other  fields  such  as  RTD and  industry. 

89% 

ITIC  DRDT  DTelecom. 

J 66 

OBJECTIVE l1 

Fit.  V-l: Programming 1994-96 (ECU million -  1995 prices): 
Priorities: 
Stimulation of economic activity  (a) 
Imorovine attractiveness (b) 
Transport infrastructure 
Eaual opportunities (d) 
Technical  assistance (e) 
Bv  Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

521,8 
170.3 
46,9 
1.1 
74Q.1 

71% 
23% 
6% 
0% 
100% 

1  SPD 

Main features  of  1996 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

(d)  17% 

(e)  1% 

(c) 4% 

(b) 12% 

(e) 66% 

The Monitoring Committee, which met in June and November  1996, studied  the progress of  measures 
and  the  outlook  for  the  second  phase,  i.e.  1997-99,  in  the  light  of  the  results  to  date.  So  far, 
implementation  of  measures  to  support  investment  by  businesses  has  been  brisk:  all  the  ERDF 
appropriations  for  the  'Aide'  measure,  designed  to  assist  the  development  of  SMEs  employing  less 
than  20  people,  were  used  up  within  the  year,  while  there  was  considerable  uptake  of  the 
appropriations  for  the  'Ace'  measure,  to  assist  the  creation  of  businesses  employing  more  than  20 
people, towards the end of the year as the measure picked up steam. By contrast, measures to  increase 
the  region's  attractiveness  made little progress (4.6% of  appropriations  had  been  absorbed  by the end 
of  1996). Measures under the ESF include continuing training for the work force, reintegration  of  the 
unemployed  in  the  labour  market  and  modernisation  of  vocational  training  systems.  Measures  part-
financed  by  the EAGGF account  for  approximately  7% of  total  financing  under the  SPD. More  than 
half  of  these  funds  are allocated  to horizontal  measures, the remainder concerning rural  development 
(local  products,  farm  tourism,  pony-trekking,  etc).  Management  of  these  measures  has  resulted  in 
good  utilisation  of  appropriations.  The  small  allocation  from  the  FIFG,  intended  to  increase  the 
production  of  'escabeche'  was  increased  in  1996  by  ECU  0.8  million  by  means  of  a  transfer  of 
appropriations from  the EAGGF. Measures financed  by the FIFG have made relatively  slow progress. 

1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-96 

In  view  of  the  substantial  consumption  of  appropriations  under  the  'Aide'  measure,  the  Monitoring 
Committee decided, firstly,  to increase the budget for the measure by ECU 33 million  from  the  ERDF 
by reducing the appropriations  allocated to measures deemed less pressing or making slower progress, 
secondly,  to  change  the  rate  of  ERDF  part-financing  for  the  measure,  and,  thirdly,  to  target  it  on 
manufacturing,  a priority  sector,  (except  for  sectors  assisted  by the FTFG, the EAGGF or the  ECSC) 
and  services  to  businesses  (including  distribution  centres  and  investments  in  logistic  support  to 
transport  companies,  but  not  including  investments  in  movable  transport  infrastructure  and  courier 
services).  In  addition,  negotiations  were  commenced,  but  not  completed,  in  1996  with  the  Walloon 
agencies  with  a view to improving the arrangements  for  implementing economic promotion  measures 
for  SMEs.  Lastly, the entire financing  plan  for  the SPD was amended  to take account  of the  progress 
make  by  the  different  measures  and  the  financial  adjustments  arising  from  various  transfers  or  from 
the allocation  of additional funds  resulting from  the indexing for  1994 to  1995. 

Only  eligible  region:  Hainaut. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

167 

OBJECTIVE 22 

Fie. V-2: Prorrammine 1994-96 (ECU million - 1996 prices and status): 
Breakdown  bv  sector: 
Productive environment (a) 
Human resources (b) 
Land improvement and restoration (c) 
Environmental  protection  (d) 
Technical  assistance (e) 
Bv  Fund: 

76.0 
52.8 
18.8 
8.1 
4J 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

110,6 
22.9 

4 SPDs 

Average ner SPD 

83% 
17% 
100% 

33.4 

1996 in the context  of programming for  1994-96 

(d)5% 

(e)3% 

(c) 12% 

(b)33 

(a) 47% 

The  four  SPDs  for  1994-96  were  closed.  Since  the  appropriations  initially  programmed  for  three  of 
them  (Meuse-Vesdre  (Liege), Limburg and Turnhout)  had not yet  been  fully  committed  at the end  of 
1996, some allocations  had to be transferred  to  1997-99. In total  ECU  28.7 million  were  transferred, 
i.e.  18%  of  the  appropriations  available  for  1994-96.  The  transfer  for  the  SPD  for  Meuse-Vesdre 
amounted  to  ECU  9.6  million  (11%  of  initial  assistance).  It  was  mainly  due  to under-utilisation  for 
three  measures:  "Development  of  business  facilities"  (temporary  business  premises  and  service 
parks),  "Rehabilitation  and  redevelopment  of  derelict 
industrial  sites"  and  "Environmental 
infrastructure".  In  addition,  the  financing  plan  was  adjusted  by  transferring  appropriations  between 
measures.  The  chief  transfer  concerns  a  ECU  4  million  increase  in  the  ERDF  contribution  to  the 
"Centres  of excellence" measure, the purpose of  which  is to strengthen  the ability  of research  centres 
to  help  businesses  located  in  the  eligible  area.  These  appropriations  were  taken  from  measures  to 
stimulate  innovation  in  businesses  which  could  not  be  implemented.  In  July  1996  agreement  was 
reached on the arrangements for implementing the venture capital measure, which could then  proceed. 
In  the  case  of  the  SPD  for  Turnhout, ECU  5.6  million  of unutilised  appropriations  were  transferred 
(24%  of  initial  assistance), while the annual  instalments  for  1994 and  1995 were closed  and  the  first 
instalment  for  1996 was  committed. The transfer  of  appropriations  to  1997-99 for  the Limburg  SPD 
amounted  to ECU  13.5 million  (29% of  initial  assistance)  and, as in the case of Turnhout,  the annual 
instalments for  1994 and  1995 were closed and the first instalment for  1996 was committed. 

The SPD for Aubange was closed, since all Community appropriations  had already been committed  at 
national  level  before  the  closing  date  of  31  December  1996,  once  the  Monitoring  Committee  had 
decided,  in  December  1996,  to  make  transfers  between  measures  and  allocate  the  indexing,  taking 
account  of  the  programme's  implementation. This  led  to an  increase  in  the ERDF contribution  to  the 
"Business  facilities"  measure  (temporary  business  premises  and  service parks)  and  a reduction  in  the 
ESF contribution. 

Preparation  of the 1997-99 programming  period 

Preparations  for  1997-99 were also commenced  in the second half  of  1996 for  each  of the new SPDs, 
with  no  change  in the  eligible  areas  from  one phase  to the  next. Preparations  were  still  underway  at 
the end  of  1996, and  some important  points  were  still being discussed,  for  example  in the case of  the 
SPD for  Meuse-Vesdre. In the main, the structure  of the next  wave of programmes  is similar to those 
of  the  first  phase. This  is  true, for  example,  of  the  SPDs  for  Turnhout  and Limburg, except  that,  for 
Turnhout,  a new priority  for  "Local  economy" has been  included  and the allocation  for  infrastructure 
and  premises  for  businesses  has been  reduced  while  that  for  innovation  and  technology  development 
has  been  increased.  Similarly,  in  the  case  of  Limburg,  a  new  measure  entitled  "Local  employment 
initiative"  has  been  included  in  each  priority,  while  the  overall  structure  of  the  programme  is 

Eligible  regions:  Aubange,  Meuse-Vesdre  (Liège),  Limburg,  Turnhout. 

8th Annual report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

17 

Execution of the Community budget for the Structural Funds was virtually 100% in 199616. Taking all 
the Funds, all the forms of assistance and all types of appropriations together, ECU 26.141 billion was 
committed  of  the ECU 26.587 billion  available, a rate of  98% while rates in the first  two years of 
programrning  were around  90%. Payments  totalled  ECU 22.448 billion  out of  ECU  23.678  billion 
available, a rate of 95% as compared with 81% in  1995. This very satisfactory  rate of implementation 
in  1996 and the increase in appropriations available as a result of the Edinburgh decisions meant that 
the amounts implemented in  1996 increased very sharply: by  19% (ECU 4.203 billion) over  1995 in 
the case of commitments and by 30% (ECU 5.233 billion) in the case of payments. 

Commitments under the various Objectives totalled ECU 23.117 billion (89% of total commitments), 
of which Objectivé 1  accounted for 66% (ECU 15.369 billion). Shares of total commitments by Fund 
ranged from  2% for  the FTFG (ECU 406.6 billion)  to 53% for  the ERDF (ECU  13.802 billion); all 
except the FIFG committed all the appropriations available. Payments under the Objectivés amounted 
to ECU 20.445 billion  (91% of total payments), of which Objective  1 accounted for  72%. Shares of 
total payments by Fund ranged from 2% for the FIFG (ECU 448 billion) to 53% for the ERDF (ECU 
11.901 billion). 

B.  A SPECIAL FOCUS ON RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION 

One  of  the  characteristics  of  the  current  Structural  Funds  programming  period  (1994-1999)  is  the 
Commission's desire to strengthen coherence between the Community's structural and other policies. 
While 
the  7th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds  (1995)  highlighted  the  inclusion  of 
environmental  concerns in all  structural  operations, this Report  describes the operations undertaken 
for the technological development of the regions.  Given the wide variety of measures financed by the 
Structural  Funds,  the  Report  covers  all  the  measures  and  sectors  aided  by  the  Funds  with  this 
objective in mind, notably research and development, the information  society and innovation. 

1.  The context 

The need for complimentarity between the Community's structural and other policies is laid down in 
Article  130b of the EC Treaty which states that formulation  and implementation of the Community's 
policies  and  actions  and  the  implementation  of  the  internal  market  must  take  into  account  the 
objective  of  strengthened  economic  and  social  cohesion,  and  must  in  particular  seek  to  reduce 
disparities between the levels of development of the various regions. In addition, Article 130f sets for 
the Community  the  objective  of  strengthening the  scientific  and  technological  basis  of  Community 
industry and encouraging it to become more competitive at international level while promoting all the 
research  activities  deemed  necessary  by  virtue  of  other  Chapters  of  the  Treaty.  To  effect  the 
interaction  required  by  the  Treaty,  when  preparing  the  new  programming  period  the  Commission 
adopted  guidelines  in  1993  in  a  Communication  entitled  "Cohesion  and  RTD  policy  -  synergies 
between research and technological development policy and economic and social cohesion policy"17. 
The Communication  set out the national and regional disparities in living standards, expenditure and 
staff  involved  in  RTD, the  participation  rates  of  the  least-favoured  regions  in  both  RTD  and  the 
cohesion  instruments.  It  also  highlighted  the  significant  disparities  between  the  rich  and  least-
favoured  regions in terms of RTD indicators: the disparities  between the Member States in terms of 
public expenditure on RTD, which ranged from  1 to 13 in 1993, were even greater than the disparities 
in GDP per inhabitant, which ranged from  1  to 5. The Communication also stressed the difficulty  the 
least-favoured  regions have in participating in the Community's framework  programmes on research 
and development. 

While  observing  the  primary  objectives  of  each  policy,  the  Communication  proposed  that 
complimentarity  should  be increased  with  a view to making up for  the delays in  RTD in the  least-
favoured  regions, that  account  should be taken  of  economic  and  social  cohesion  in the fourth  RTD 

16 See Chapter II.A. Budget implementation. 
17 COM(93)203 final, 12 May  1993. 

168 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

otherwise the same as for  1994-96. 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

Objectives  3  and  4  in  Belgium  are  programmed  in  CSFs,  each  of  which  is  implemented  in  five 
operational programmes. This complexity is due to the structure of the Belgian State, which consists of a 
federal  government,  three communities  and three regions, and the authority responsible for each  has  its 
own specific powers in the areas covered by Objectives 3 and 4 of the ESF. 

Fig. V-3: Objective 3 - Programming  1994-99 (ECU million • 1996 prices) 
Priorities: 
Integration of the lone-term unemp [-• 
Vocational  integration of young pec;*; 
seekine employment  (b) 
Integration of those threatened with exclusion  id 
Eaual opportunities for men and women (d) 
Aid for training and integration facilities <e> 

ESF 

A 

134.2 

1 CSF/5  OPs 

Total 
Average per SE 

86,1 
132.9 
24.4 
: 4 i 
MLS. 

80.4 

(d)7% 

(e)7% 

(a) 34% 

(c) 31% 

(b)21« 

Implementation  of  Objective  3 has  generally  been  satisfactory.  Initial  assessments  give a positive  first 
impression  of  the  measures  assisted  by  the  ESF.  Uptake  of  appropriations  is  close  to  100%  of  the 
programmed  annual  instalments,  with  the  result  that  some  projects  meeting  the  selection  criteria  have 
had  to be rejected  for  lack  of  funds.  About  70 000 people  (outside  of  Hainaut,  which  is eligible  under 
Objective  1) benefited  from  training,  guidance  or reintegration  measures  funded  by  the ESF. This  is  a 
remarkable number of beneficiaries  in view of the budgetary constraints and the fact that under measures 
part-financed  by  the  ESF  priority  is  given  to  the  most  deprived  groups  (young  people  without 
qualifications,  older unemployed  people, the very  long-term unemployed,  etc). The programmes  give  a 
key  role  to  "pathways  to  integration"  and  partnership  between  the  different  promoters.  Under  this 
approach,  a  pathway  to  integration  is  designed  for  each  unemployed  person.  Implementation  thus 
requires close cooperation between promoters (public or private) and the public authorities. 

Example of an Objective 3 project  in Belgium: "Cad Design" - an 
industrial design training project 
The originality of Cad Design is that it brings together several partners: 
the Federal Ministry of Employment, die Cefora (training  centre of the 
joint  national  auxiliary  committee  for  employees),  the  training  and 
employment fund  for employees in the metal manufacturing industry in 
Brabant,  die  IBFFP  and  a  public  vocational  training  institute.  The 
training provides a qualification and lasts for  10 months (approx. 1  600 
hours). It makes use of the most powerful  computer aids and offers  a 
real  opportunity  for  conversion  to  job  seekers  without  any  prior 
qualification  but with a personal flair  for industrial or technical design 
and  an  interest  in  creative  project  work.  The  training  is  designed  to 
enable trainees to take initiatives in a proposed  industrial project. The 
ESF is contributing ECU 120 000 per year towards an annual total cost 
of ECU 300 000. 

Fie. V-4: Objective 4 - Programming 1994-99 (ECU million • 1996 prices) 
Priorities: 
Anticipation of labour market trends (a) 
Improvements in training and guidance schemes (b) 
Development of training and guidance (c) 
Horizontal measures (d> 

12.7 
16.3 
35,0 
_A2J 

ESF 

1 CSF/5  OPs 

Tom 

(c) 50% 

Average per OPI 

J4J2 

(d) 9% 

(a)  18% 

(b)23°/ 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

169 

Difficulties  were  encountered  in  setting  up  Objective  4  because  of  the  large  number  of  competent 
authorities  resulting from  the structure of the Belgian  State.  1996 must therefore  be considered  the  first 
year of actual  implementation.  Uptake of ESF commitments to Belgium are close to one quarter of  the 
total  amount  initially  programmed. It must be recognised  that  a very  long time  is needed  to  implement 
plans under this new  Objective.  The target  of  6 000 employees  of  SMEs  (outside  Hainaut)  benefiting 
from  a training measure under Objective 4 was nevertheless reached  in  1996. Thanks to the effort  made 
by the Belgian authorities to inform  the target groups of this instrument  and the encouraging number of 
files newly submitted, the Community programmes can now be expected to reach their cruising speed. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) Agriculture 

Table V-2: programming 1994-99(ECUmillion-  1994prices) 

Total  Measures 
170.4  Production 
Marketing 

140.4 

30.0 

% 

With regard to improving the efficiency  of production  structures, assistance to young farmers  and aid for 
investment  in  farms  are  granted  by  both  the  federal  government  and  by  the  regions  of  Flanders  and 
Wallonia.  Wallonia  is,  by  contrast,  alone  in  paying  compensatory  allowances  in  less-favoured  areas. 
During  1996,  Wallonia  began  the  task-of  recasting  its  legislation  applying  Community  rules,  which 
should  be  completed  in  1997.  A  similar  operation  in  Flanders  resulted  in  Commission  approval,  in 
December  1996, of an investment and start-up aid scheme. Implementation  of aid for the processing and 
marketing  of agricultural  and forestry  products  is making good  progress  in both  regions. Most  projects 
are innovative and respect the environment. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) Fisheries 

Fig. V-S: Objective 5(a) fisheries - Programming 1994-99 (ECU million): 

Adjustment of fishinc effort (a) 
Other fishing fleet measures (b) 
Modernisation and renovation of the fishing fleet (c) 
Aauaculture (d) 
Protected marine areas (e) 
Port facilities (f) 
Processing and marketing of products (e) 
Promotion of products (h) 
Socio-economic measures (i) 
Other measures (0 

1  SPD 

Total 

FTFG 

5.2 
0.0 
7.9 
1.9 
0.7 
1.5 
5.9 
1.2 
token enrrv 
01 
24.5 

, 

(i) 0% 

(9)24% 

(h)5%»  G)1% 
• 

(a) 21% 

(d) 8% 

(c) 32*5 

Implementation  of the SDP programme  in  1996 was slow because of the caution  with which  investors 
have greeted  this new  instrument  in view of  the difficulties  faced  by the sector. Projects  commenced 
in  previous  years  have  been  implemented  and  completed,  but  there  has  been  hesitation  about 
embarking on fresh  investment projects. 

770 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)3 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Fir. V-6: Objective 5(h) >. Proetammint  1994-99: 

Population  ('000  înhab) 
Area to*) 

Bv  Fund: 

448 

ECU millinn 

(016% 

( 9 ) 1% 

(a) 35% 

EAGGF 

ERDF 

ESF 
laial 

23,8 

41.1 

13.2 

78.1 

?  SPDs 

Avcrare per SPDl 

(e)  16% 

30' 

53% 

17% 

100% 

J &Û 

(b)26% 

O Agriculture, forestry 

horticulture (a) 

•  Economic stimulation 
and diversification (b) 

'Maintenance  of sea 

fishing (c) 

Q Development of tourism 

(d) 

•  Village attractiveness 

and living standards (e) 

Q Human resources and 

training (f) 

•Technical assistance (g) 

Implementation  of the two  programmes  for Flanders  (Westhoek,  Meetjesland)  ran into  some 
difficulties,  while  that of the  SPD  for Wallonia  picked  up speed  in 1996. The  difficulties  with the 
Flemish  SPDs  were  mainly  due to technical  assistance  problems  and the search  for regional  part-
fmancing,  which  was  decided  on in May  1996 for the  agricultural  section, so that  projects  could be 
launched, but had not yet been settled by the end of the year for  the other parts, such as the economy, 
industry,  tourism  and  social  affairs.  This  explains  the delays in financial  implementation  for the  two 
Flemish  areas.  Implementation  of the programme  in Wallonia  has gained  speed  in terms  of both 
financial  implementation  and  actual  progress on the ground.  The Monitoring  Cornmittee studied  the 
overall  situation  in the  wood  industry  in order to improve  the  conditions  for granting  assistance  and 
the regional  authorities  held a seminar on integrating training measures in development  projects.  One 
of the main  subjects  which  occupied  the Monitoring Committees  was the  launch  of evaluation  for all 
programmes  (selection  of assessors,  definition  of terms of reference  for evaluation). In addition, the 
ESF  assistance  under  the SPDs  for Meetjesland  and  Wallonia  was  adjusted  (for Meetjesland 
unutilised  assistance  was carried  forward  and for Wallonia  the financing  tables  were  adjusted to 
facilitate  management). 

3 Eligible regions: Wallonia, Meetsjesland, Westhoek. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

171 

Table V-3: 

Belgium - Assistance by Objective -1996  in the context of programming for  1994-96/99  (ECU 
million) 

Programmes 
(year of adoption) 

Total cost 

SJ 
assistance 
(1) 

Commitments Commitments] 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

J2U0L 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 

. 2.356.41 

740.11 

122.71 

229.71 

31*1 

91.81 

imn 

J HZ 

J3SL 

Objective I 
SPD Hninnnt 
Objective 2* 
SPD Aubange (1994) 
SPD Liège 
SPD Limburg (1994) 
5PP Turnhout fl??4> 

Total 

Objective 3 
OP Flemish Community (1994) 
OP French Community (1994) 
OP German-speaking Community (1994) 
OP Brussels (1994) 
OP Miniffrv  of Employment ( 1994) 

Total 

Objective 4 
OP Flemish Community (1994) 
OP French Community (1994) 
OP German-speaking Community (1994) 
OP Brussels (1994) 
OP Ministry of Employment (1094) 

Total 

Objective 5(a) agriculture 
SPD Flanders Regs. 866 and 867/90 (1995) 
SPD Brussels Reg. 866/90 (1995) 

SPD Wallonia Reg. 866 et 867/90 (1995) 
Forecasts Flanders Reg. 2328/91 (1994) 
Forecasts Wallonia Reg. 2328/91 ( 1994) 
Enrfecn^ federal  level Re,  2328/91 (1004) 

Objective 5(a) fisheries 
SPPBciriumfl?W 
Objective 5(b) 
SPD Meetjesland  (1995) 
SPD Wallonia (1995) 
SPPWe^rhnAMOqM 

Total 

Total 

TOTAT^ 
* After deduction of transfers to 1997-99 

3.2 
290.8 
89.2 
44.7 
428,0 

632.0 
361.7 
12.4 
32.7 
94.3 
1133.0 

107,9 
54.8 
1.2 
7.0 
15.7 
JILL 

2273 
11.1 

45.9 
1303 
96,1 
186.4 
697.5 

1.3 
80.2 
33.9 

133,5 

188.3 
159.6 
5.5 
12.5 
36.0 
401.9 

43,7 
17,8 
03 
12 
6.1 
2SL2. 

233 
1.1 

53 
48.1 
293 
62.9 
170.4 

0.0 
58.5 
23.9 
-4.0 
78,4 

59.2 
263 
13 
2,0 

94.8 

5.4 
1,0 
0,0 
0.0 
32 
ALL 

4.1 
0,0 

0.9 
7.7 
33 
10.6 
26.8 

13 
81.0 
38.8 
19.4 
140.6 

89.6 
78.1 
2,4 
5.7 
16.8 
J22A 

16.4 

9,9 
03 

2.4 
17.9 
11.7 
37.6 
79,8 

101% 
101% 
114% 
107% 
105% 

48% 
49% 
43% 
46% 
47% 
48% 

20% 
7% 
15% 
13% 
98%l 
23% 

42% 
24% 

45% 
37% 
40% 
'*60% 
47% 

0,1 
15.9 
3.1 
1.6 
20,7 

453 
26,3 
1.4 
1.5 
7.5 
81.9 

£1 

4.9 

0,0 

1.2 
6.9 
33 
26.1 
42.6 

0.6 
27.1 
10.6 
11.7 
50,0 

69.9 
65.2 
1.9 
3.9 
15.6 
dSM. 

4.4 
0.6 
0.1 
0.1 
3.0 
_&2 

7.8 
0.1 

13 
14,1 
9.4 
26.1 
59.1 

91,91 

JZ£[ 

20.41 

2431 

IOO%1 

16.31 

19.61 

34.2 
135,4 
96.6 
266.2 
S.1S9.7I 

103 
41.4 
J26A 
78.1 
1-618.fr 

Al 
361 £ 

\2 
113 
- Là 
16.0 
699.6! 

12% 
"27% 
J2% 
21% 
43% 

0,0 
32 
0.3 
_M 
262.7 

AL 
J2M 

46% 
34% 
31% 

37% 

37% 

4 1% 
34% 
31% 
-4& 
39% 

10% 
3% 
15% 
7% 
J2£. 
12% 

33% 
12% 

29% 
29% 
32% 
J2&. 
35% 

-SÛ2: 

6% 
14% 

10% 
323s. 

1.2.  Implementation of the Community Initiatives in 1996 

Note: 
Belgium  is participating in all die Community Initiatives except Regis, resulting in 26 programmes, including 
seven Interreg programmes. At the end of  1996, the CIPs for Leader had not yet been approved. 

Support for  the development of technological potential  in Belgium: 
The Belgian  CIPs investing most in technological development are the SMEs and Interreg programmes.  Both 
the  SMEs  programmes  support  technological  innovation  as  a  key  to  improving  the  competitiveness  of 
businesses and creating jobs.  The programme for  Wallonia is investing ECU 1.3 million (total cost: ECU  1.8 
million)  in the  creation  of a  technology activity  centre  to help firms  make  best  use of  research  centres,  the 
services provided  by  universities and  regional  innovation  aid, and  to access  information and  make  contact 
with those operating in research and innovation. The programme also aims to facilitate  access to  information 
technology  and full  utilisation  of  its  potential  through  the  use  of  databases  and  shared  communications 
services.  The  Flemish  SMEs  programme  gives  pride  of  place  to  assisting  and  implementing  innovation 
projects  and coordinating and developing RTD networks. 
Under Interreg II, ECU 2.5 million (total cost: ECU 5.2 million) are provided for  RTD and  ECU 0.8  million 
for  communications  and  data  transmission  applications  (total  cost:  ECU  1.7  million).  The  CIP  for 
Hainaut/Nord  Pas-de-Calais/Picardy  supports  economic  activity  through 
the  development  of  research 
and  technology  and  communication  projects,  and  encourages  exchanges  between  scientific  centres and 
centres  of  excellence.  The  CIP for  West-Vlaanderen/Nord-Pas  de  Calais gives priority  to strengthening  and 
diversifying  training  and  research potential  in the  targeted sectors  (e.g.  technology  transfers).  The  CIP  for 
Belgium,  France  and  Luxembourg  supports  individual  and  collective  training and  technological  innovation 

; 72 

&th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

projects  (e.g. training  networks and infrastructure).  In addition,  the CIPs for  Belgium  and the  Netherlands 
and for  Belgium, the  Netherlands  and  Germany  provide for  cooperation  between businesses  and.  with 
research centres and  technology  transfer as  means of  stimulating  innovation  and  the modernisation  of 
production methods and products in firms. In the field of communications and telematics,  the programme for 
Hainaut/Nord-Pas  de  Calais/Picardy  provides for  cross-border  advanced  communications  poles and the 
creation of a vocal,  optical and data communication  network.  The Belgium/France/Luxembourg programme 
seeks to develop  teleworking  and use of data transmission for  education  and technology development  (e.g. 
databases, multimedia, distance education, etc). 
In the context of the Initiatives  concerned with  the conversion  of industry,  one of the main  measures  under 
Résider II aims at promoting technology development in Liège  with a contribution  of ECU 2.7 million  (total 
cost: ECU 5.4 million) and,  in Charleroi and Centre,  with a contribution of ECU 1.9 million (total cost: ECU 
3.7 million).  The purpose of the measure is to help research centres and universities with equipment,  to help 
businesses  analyse  their strengths and weaknesses  in terms of RTD  and acquire  advanced technology  with 
which to modernise their production systems and to encourage the spread of technology.  The Retex Initiative 
in Flanders also supports technology development and training with a view to preserving the textile industry. 
The Horizon section of the Employment initiative provides assistance  to encourage telecommuting,  distance 
training and computerised interactive learning for  the disabled and the most disadvantaged groups (ECU 1.8 
million; total cost: ECU 4 million). 
Lastly, the  Leader programme is  contributing  ECU  0.2  million (total cost: ECU  0.4  million) to the 
construction of  a  communications  centre  in  Wallonia and  the  development of  computer  facilities, 
telecommuting and communications as support infrastructure for local production centres. 

Three  new  Community  Initiative  programmes  were  adopted  in  1996, namely:  the  SMEs  programme 
for  Flanders, Retex Flanders  and Urban Brussels. In addition, allocation  of the Community  Initiatives 
reserve,  worth  an additional  ECU  55.2 million,  will  allow  all the Initiatives  (except  SMEs)  in  which 
Belgium  participates  to  be  strengthened,  with  the  lion's  share  going  to  the  new  Interreg  II  C  and 
Employment,  for  which  the  competent  Belgian  authorities  have  presented  a  draft  programme  to 
include the new section  Integra from  1997. The same applies for the new Adapt-BIS initiative and the 
strengthening of Pesca4. 

Regarding the existing programmes: 

Urban: the projects  already  approved  under the  Antwerp  programme  account  for  ECU  1.6  million  of 
the ECU  2.6 million  programmed.  A further  ECU  1.4  million  will be  allocated  from  the reserve, and 
will  be earmarked  for a new measure  ("Handelspandenbeteid"). The financial  structure of the CIP for 
Brussels  was adapted to change the contribution  of the private partners and the scope of the measures 
concerning two business centres in Brussels. The decision  will be finalised  during  1997. 

Employment: the two programmes are now well underway. In Flanders, 42 projects  were selected and 
commenced  in  1996 (19 projects under Horizon,  15 projects under Now, 8 projects  under Youthstart), 
with  a total  of  1  227  participants  (264  for  Now,  87 for  Youthstart,  876 for  Horizon). The  promoters 
are extremely varied, while the measures mostly concern training. In the French and  German-speaking 
communities,  89  projects  were  approved  and  launched  in  1996  (26  projects  under  Now,  15  under 
Youthstart,  48  under  Horizon).  The  themes  are  varied:  35  training  projects,  30  concerning  training 
schemes,  16 concerning job creation and  8 dissemination/information. 

Adapt:  under  the  programme  being  implemented  in Flanders,  23 projects  were  selected  in  1995, the 
great  majority  of  which  were  launched  in  1996  and  concern  sectors  like  textiles,  electrical 
engineering,  environment,  construction,  transport  and  tourism. The  emphasis  is  more  on  innovation, 
participation  of SMEs and increasing the requirements  as regards the qualifications  of employees, and 
less  on  technical  aspects  of  adaptation  to  change.  The  promoters  are  fairly  diverse  (Regional 
vocational  training  and  employment  office^  association  of  independent  workers,  other  training  and 
education  establishments,  chamber  of  commerce  and  provincial  government).  The  35  projects  were 
approved  in  the  French  and  German-speaking  communities  in  1996.  The  regional  priorities  are 

4 See also Chapter I.B.I. Community Initiatives. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

173 

improving  levels  of  qualification,  competitiveness  of businesses, the environment  and the creation  of 
new jobs. The measure most utilised concerns training (22 projects). 

Résider: the programme for Liège is fairly  far advanced, with all the allocated appropriations for  three 
measures under the priority concerned with promotion  of technological  innovation  already  committed 
at  national  level. The programme  for  Hainaut  provides  for  the  creation  of  a start-up  fund  for  SMEs, 
for  which  the  implementing  arrangements  had  yet  to  be  brought  into  line  with  the  Commission's 
communication  of  July  1995  on  financial  engineering.  These  arrangements  were  worked  out  by  the 
Walloon authorities and accepted by the Commission  in September 1996. 

Leader:  the  programmes  were  not  yet  ready  for  adoption  in  1996.  Both  programmes  for  Flanders 
(Meetjesland  and Westhoek) were presented in October  1994 and several amended versions have been 
submitted, but further  adjustments  were still needed before they could be adopted by the Commission, 
particularly  to  avoid  any  overlapping  with  the  SPDs  for  Objective  5(b)  and  to  reduce  the  technical 
assistance.  In  the  case  of  Wallonia,  too,  the  regional  authorities  continued  in  1996  to  prepare  their 
programme  proposal  on  the  basis  of  the  Commission's  comments.  The  Commission  is  expected  to 
approve the programmes at the beginning of  1997. 

Most  of  the Community  Initiatives  were adopted  by the  Commission  during  the  second  half  of  1995 
and  the  first  half  of  1996,  so  actual  implementation  commenced  during  1996.  In  almost  all  cases, 
Community  appropriations  were committed using the single commitment  procedure,  so commitments 
and  payments  to end  beneficiaries  began  to be booked  in  1996, but the  sums  involved  are  still  fairly 
small. 

Table  V-4: 

Belgium -  Community  Initiatives 
million) 

1996  in the context of programming for  1994-99  (ECU 

Initiative 
(Number of programmess) 

Total cost 

S J. 
assistance* 
Ml 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
(2) 

% 

(2)/M) 

Payments 
1.996.0 

Pavments 
1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/M) 

91,9 
70,7 
4.3 
22,9 
58.1 
30.4 
52.9 
9.0 
37.6 
377.7 

Adapt (2) 
Employment (2) 
Pesca (1) 
SMEs (2) 
Rechar 
Konver (3) 
Resider (2) 
Retex (2) 
Urban (3) 
Total (19) 
Inrerree/Reeen  (7\" 
CIPs adopted in  1996 
SME Flanders 
Retex Westhoek-Middenkust  (Vbanderen) 
Urban Brussels 
Total  (3) 
lnterret 
* Excluding  reserve 
••  For programme  details see Chapter VII. Table 2.2. 
• ••  For programme details see Chapter I.B. 1. Communiry Initiatives. 

8.6 
3.0 
11.1 
22 7 

(4)"* 

31.2 
32,1 
2.0 
12.1 
15.7 
113 
24.4 
4.4 
10.4 
143,8 

2,7 
1.4 
2,2 
63 

253 
10.4 
1.7 
4.6 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
1.4 
2.2 
45.8 

2.7 
1.4 
2,2 
63 

31.2 
32.1 
ZO 
12,1 
15,7 
113 
23,7 
4.4 
10.4 
143.1 

2.7 
1,4 
2.2 
63 

100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
97% 
100% 
100% 
99% 

100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 

63 
5,2 
0.4 
1,8 
0,0 
0,0 
63 
0.7 
1,1 
22.0 

0.8 
0,7 
1.1 
2,6 

9,4 
16.1 
0.6 
4,0 
7.8 
5.7 
11,8 
22 
5.2 
62,9 

0.8 
0.7 
1.1 
2,6 

30% 
50% 
30% 
33% 
50% 
50% 
48% 
50% 
50% 
44% 

30% 
50% 
50% 
41% 

174 

2.  DENMARK 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

2.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by  Objective  in  1996 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in the regions of Denmark : 
Most  of the Danish programmes form  part  of a strategy of supporting  the information society,  with the aim -
thanks  to  close  cooperation  between  public  and  private  sectors  -  to  encourage  access  to  and  exchange  of 
information,  stimulate  the democratic  process,  support  personal  development,  to  improve  transparency  and 
the  quality  of  service  in  the  public  sector,  to  integrate  groups  excludes from  society  and  to  reinforce  the 
international competitiveness  of businesses in order to consolidate the social system in Denmark. 
The  SPDs  under  Objective  2  (1994-96)  also  aim  to  support  technological  development  as  a  factor  in 
developing  businesses,  improving  competitiveness  and  reducing  the  structural  vulnerability  of  regional 
economies.  For  instance,  the  strategy for  North  Jutland  is  devoting  ECU  38.7  million  to  RDT  (21%  of 
Structural  Fund  allocations),  the  industrial  sector  (developing  new  products,  technology  transfer)  and 
services  with  high  job-intensity,  with  a  high  technology  content  and  highly  integrated  into  production 
processes.  Improving  technology  management  in firms is another  aim. Around  60% of  the  operations  being 
funded  deal  with  the  introduction  of new  technologies  and  new  types  of production,  and  between  5  and  10 
new  networks  are  being  established  to assist knowledge  transfers  between  businesses.  The SPD for  Lolland 
provides  support for  RTD and  the development  of R&D infrastructure  so as  to strengthen  the  links  between 
research-centre  activities  and  the  needs  of  businesses.  Support  for  technological  development  is  also 
integrated into the operations for  implementing other SPD priorities  (adult training, etc.). 
In  all,  in  the  two  Objective  2  areas,  almost  ECU  13  million  from  the  Structural  Funds  (23.3%  of  total 
Community funding)  are going into operations supporting  RTD. 

Table V-5: 

Denmark • Funding directly linked to technological development in 1994-99 (ECU million) 

TOTAL 
* 
IWft 

4M 

S.F. 

% 
28% 

.Public 
l?.7 

Member  State 
Total 
Private 
\u 

32,5 

Financing by the Structural Funds 

% 
72% 

100% 

Objectif 2 
NB: The programming procedures and different  approaches taken by the Member Stales 

12.fi 

invite to caution in interpreting these figures, in particular spending 
on information society projects, which are often  linked to other fields such as RTD. 

QRTD 

OBJECTIVE 25 

Fie.  V-7: Proerammine  1994-96  (ECU  million  -1996  prices  and  status): 
Bv sector: 
Production environment (a) 
Human resources (b) 
Technical assistance (c) 
Bv Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

43,7 
10,4 
J4JL 

2 SPD 

Average per SPD 

43.2 
10.1 
0.8 

81% 
19% 
100% 

27.1 

1996  in  the  context  of programming 

for1994-96 

(b)  19% 

(c)  1% 

(a) 80% 

The  two  SPDs  for  Lolland  and  North  Jutland  were  wound  up  at  the  end  of  1996.  Under  the  Lolland 
SPD  there  still  remained  ECU  2.7  million  uncommitted  (28%  of  the  original  assistance),  which  were 
transferred  to  the  envelope  for  1997-99.  Under  the  North  Jutland  SPD  all  the  allocated  funds  were 
committed  before  the  end  of  1996. 

5  Eligible  areas: Lolland,  North  Jutland. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

175 

An  assessment  of  the  two  programmes  was  made  in  1996. This  covered  both  SPDs  and  contained  a 
general  part  dealing  with  both  areas  and  a part  on  each  separately.  In  the  general  part,  the  assessors 
gave  particular  attention  to  the  correspondence  between  goals,  programmes  and  preliminary 
conditions  in order to identify  appropriate  indicators. In the part on Lolland, the assessment  looked at 
the  assistance  to  existing  small  businesses  as  a  long-term  development  strategy  and  the  need  to 
strengthen  aid towards  improving general conditions  in the region. The assessment report  shows  that, 
while it is useful  to aid existing firms, they cannot create enough new jobs to offset  the job  losses due 
to declining production  and company  closures, so that it is also important  to support  the setting-up of 
new businesses. The report  also concludes that firms  in Lolland have a much greater need  to improve 
their general operating conditions than is apparent in their take-up of current aid schemes, especially a 
need  for  training  and  in  particular  training  in  the  new  technologies.  Firms  are  having  difficulties 
recruiting  graduates  and  middle management,  which  suggests  a project  specifically  aimed  at  training 
that  will  also  encourage  innovative  people. Finally,  it was  clear  that  advisory  services  to  businesses 
could play a more active role in making firms  aware of the assistance available to them. 

The assessment  specific  to the North Jutland  SPD concentrated  on evaluating the target firms  and  the 
support given  to large and  small businesses. The assessment  report concludes that a basis exists for  a 
strategy  of internationalisation,  since of 2 500 firms  that could potentially be exporters only 2 000 are 
today.  The  report  suggests  giving  more  weight  when  selecting  projects  to  the  growth  potential  of 
firms, the relative scale of projects  and their payoff  rather than the size of businesses themselves. The 
report  also  proposes  creating  a  subprogramme  aimed  at  smaller  scale  projects  funded  by  small 
businesses. 

Preparation for  the  1997-99 programming  period 

Preparations  for  the  1997-99  phase  took  up  the  second  half  of  1996  and  covered  the  same  eligible 
areas. The content of the draft  programmes has not changed significantly.  The structure of the Lolland 
programme  is identical except for  an operation  concerning support infrastructure  which  is turned  into 
an  operation  to  assist  strategic  infrastructure.  The  same  applies  to  North  Jutland,  except  that  two 
priorities  for  1994-96  have  been  run  together  because  of  the  difficulty  of  distinguishing  between 
manufacturing  and service firms. This will simplify  the management of this programme. 

OBJECTIVES 3 and 4 

Fig. V-8:  Objective 3 - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million - 1996 prices): 
Priorities 
ESF 
Vocational integration of young people (a) 
Integration of jobless and long-term 
unemployed  (b) 
Integration of people threatened with exclusion (c) 
Technical  assistance (d) 

1SPD 

Total 

58.4 

142,4 
61.9 
—54 
268.1 

(c) 22% 

(d) 2% 

(a)  21% 

(b) 55% 

The  implementation  of  the  SPD under  Objective  3 made  good  progress  in  1996, and  appropriations 
allocated  for  the  three  years  1994-96  were  committed  as  forecast.  Schemes  involving  training 
(especially  in the target groups), vocational training, counselling and monitoring have concentrated  on 
helping  participants  make  contacts  with  the  world  of  work  and  on  individual  counselling  and 
monitoring  in  accordance  with personal plans  of action  drawn up with  the help of public job  centres. 
It  is important  for  the  most  vulnerable  groups  that  project  content  should  correspond  to the  needs  of 
the local labour market, personal  qualifications,  the conditions of a normal working life and the needs 
of the individual.  1996 also saw the adoption of new legislation to strengthen the administration  of the 
ESF,  the  management  of  funds,  the  selection  of  projects,  oversight  rules,  monitoring,  accounting 
procedures  and  assessments, as well as the gathering of data for assessments. A new computer  system 
was also installed, part of which  will serve the central authorities  and part of which will be at regional 
level. 

776 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Fie. V-9: Objective 4 - Programming 1994-99 (ECU  million - 1996 prices) 
Priorities 
Anticipating labour market trends and 
vocational training needs (a) 
Vocational training, advice and guidance (b) 
Improving vocational training systems (c) 
Tççhniçal assistance fd) 

ESF 

l  SPD 

Total 

5,8 
19.8 
11,7 
_L£ 
J&l 

W.4% 

(a) 15% 

(c)  30% 

(b)  51% 

The Objective 4 SPD was adopted  in  1994 to cover the three-year period  1994-96 and was worth ECU 
13  million,  all  of  which  was  committed  by  the  end  of  1996.  Since  this  was  a  new  departure,  the 
Danish authorities made considerable efforts  to set up the implementing machinery and good  progress 
was made in  1996. The target  group for  the programme are workers threatened  with redundancy  who 
need to be helped to cope with change by vocational training schemes. The programme also sets out to 
develop  new  ways  of  forecasting  training  needs  and  improving  vocational  training  systems  so  as  to 
increase  the flexibility  of  workers  in terms  of qualifications  required. The  SPD has been  extended  to 
cover the period  1997-99, with  an additional  ECU 25 million  in funding.  It was essential  to  continue 
the strategy  already begun because there was little data for  assessing the programme  adopted  in  1994. 
Any  other  changes  that  may  be  needed  can  be  made  later  in  light  of  the  mid-term  assessment  to  be 
carried out in mid-1997. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) agriculture 

Table V-6: Programming 1994-99(ECUmillion- 1994prices): 

Total  Mesures 
127,0  Production 
Marketing 

100,3 

79% 
21% 

As  regards  improving  production  structures,  most  of  the  Community's  funding  is  investment  aid 
(ECU  57.1  million),  followed  by  assistance  for  new  entrants  to  farming  (ECU  30.8  million).  As 
regards processing and marketing, the SPD has been implemented  with success. By the end of  1996, a 
total  of  79  projects  had  been  approved,  mainly  in  the  meat  sector  (36)  and  in  the  milk  and  milk 
products  sector  (35). In  all,  48% of  the  Community  contribution  had  been  committed  by  the  end  of 
1996. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) fisheries 

Fie. V-IO: Objective 5(a)  fisheries - Programming 1994-99 (ECUmillion), 

Aiustment and redirecting of fishing effort  (a) 
Other fleet structuring measures (b) 
Renewing and modernising the fleet (c) 
Aquaculture (d) 
Protected marine areas (e) 
Port facilities (f) 
Processing and marketing of products (g) 
Promotion of products (h) 
Socio-economic measures (i) 
Other measures (\) 

FIFE 

37.7 
0.0 
35.0 
9.2 
3.2 
9.8 
30.1 
7.2 
pm 

Total 

2211 

0),o% 

(h)5 

(9)22% 

(a)  27% 

(f)7% 

(e)  2% 

(d)7% 

(c)25% 

Programme  implementation  in  1996 involved the commitment of the  1996 tranche and payment  of the 
second  advance  for  1994.  The  take-up  of  funds  was  very  high  in  the  case  of  processing,  fleet 
adjustment  and  other  measures. The  Danish  authorities  have  notified  an  early-retirement  scheme  for 
fishermen  which  will be incorporated  into the  1997 programme. The Commission has approved  seven 
of nine national  implementing regulations, with three remaining to be approved  in 1997. 

8th  Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

17] 

OBJECTIVE  5(b)6 

Fig.  V-ll:  Objective  5(b)  -  Programming  1994-99: 
Population  ('000s) 
Area (krn?) 

Bv Fund: 

1SPD 

361 
8.374 
ECU million 

(c)  37% 

(d) 2% 

(a)  25% 

O Diversification, protection  ! 
j 

of the environment  (a) 

(b) 

i 
•  Devlopmenl of  businesses 
| 
i 
i 

D Tourism (c) 

(b)  36% 

•  Technical assistance (d) 

j 

EAGGF 
ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

21,6 
10.8 
21,6 
54,0 

40% 
20°/o 
40% 
100% 

in  December  1994  was  adjusted 

The  SPD  adopted 
financing 
schedule  to  take  account  of  the  late  approval  of  the  programme  and  changes  in  socio-economic 
conditions  which  had  taken  place  in  the  mean  time.  The  Monitoring  Committee  discussed  the  1995 
annual  report  and  a  new  table  analysing  the  projects  approved,  and  it  also  approved  plans  for  an 
information  campaign  and  the  preparation  of  the  intermediate  assessment  (assessment  plan,  terms  of 
reference). 

in  November  1996  to  amend 

the 

Table  V-7: 

Denmark  - Assistance  by  Objective  - 1996  in the programming  for  1994-96/99  (ECU  million) 

Programmes 
(year  of  adoption) 

Total  volume 

Struct. F. 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 

% 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 

% 

(1) 

(2) 

(2)/(I) 

(3) 

(3)/(l) 

Objective  2* 
SPD  Lolland  (1994) 

SPD  North  Jutland  (1994) 

Objective  3 
SPD  Denmark  (1994) 

Objective  4 
SPD  Denmark  (1994) 

Total 

| 

| 

Objective  5(a)  agriculture 
Forecast  Denmark  R.  2328.91  (1994) 
SPD  Denmark  R.  866  and  867  90  (1994) 

Total 

Objective  5(a)  fisheries 
SPD  Denmark  (1994) 

Objective  5(b) 
SPD  Denmark  (1994) 

T O T AL 

After  deduction  of transfers  to  1997-99. 

30,5 

210,5 
241,0 

7,0 
47,1 
54,1 

-0,2 
23,0 
22,S 

9.3 
43.8 
53.1 

134% 

9 3% 
911% 

2.1 
1.6 
5.7 

6,4 
17,3 
23,7 

9 1% 
37% 
44% 

584,3| 

268.11 

42,0| 

I27.0| 

47%| 

4I.0| 

1I5.2| 

43% 

87,7| 

38,9| 

7.01 

I3.0| 

33%| 

7.7| 

I0.7J 

27% 

354,4 
213,6 
568,0 

100,3 
26.7 
127,0 

17,0 

5,1 
22,1 

50.3 
10,5 
60,8 

50% 
39% 
48% 

16,4 
5,7 
22,1 

32.9 
8.4 

•11,3 

3 3% 
3 1% 
32% 

| 

438,8| 

139,9| 

23,3| 

69.9J 

50%| 

0.0) 

30,3| 

22% 

204,4 
2.124,2 

54,0 
682,0 

3,7 
120,9 

13.5 
337,2 

25% 
4 9% 

0.1 
74,5 

5,8 
226,9 

11% 
3 3% 

2.2.  Implementation  of  the  Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

Note: 
Denmark  is  involved  in  eight  Community  Initiatives:  Urban,  Konver,  Employment,  Adapt,  SMEs,  Pesca, 
Leader and  Interreg.  Five  Community  Initiative  programmes  were  adopted  at national  level  between  1994  and 
1995, and  four  Interreg programmes. The three  programmes  remaining  to be approved,  the  programmes  under 
the  SMEs  Initiative  and  Leader  and  an  Interreg  programme  with  Sweden  were adopted  in  1996. 

Support  for  the  development  of technological  potential  in Den/nark  : 
Development  of  the  information  society  in  Denmark  is a  goal  in  the  community  Initiative  programmes  under 
Interreg,  Konver  and  SMEs.  The  Interreg  programmes  shared  by  Denmark  and  Germany  are  designed 
to 
reduce  the  isolation  of  the  three  regions  concerned  (Plammgsraum  V and  Sonderjyllands  Ami,  Ostholstein, 
Liibeck  and  Storstroms  Amt,  and  Kern  and  Fyns  Amt)  and  its  impact  on their  economies  by  stimulating  RTD, 
education  and  RTD  training  as  well  as  (he  development  of  small  businesses  (ECU  2.S  million;  total  volume: 
the  cross-border  cooperation  programme  for  the  Baltic  (Denmark,  Poland, 
ECU  5.7  million).  Similarly, 
Baltic  States)  contains  measures 
'Baltic  House  '), 
in  the field  of communications  and  the  media  (ECU  0.6  million;  total  volume:  ECU 
training  and  cooperation 
for 
1.3  million  -  e.g.  'Baltic  Media  Centre),  while  the  programme  between  Denmark  and  Sweden  provides 

the  development  of  small  businesses 

to  support 

(e.g. 

6  Eligible  areas: North  Jutland,  Viborg,  Ringkobing,  South  Jutland,  the  Islands. 

18 

RthrAnnual report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

framework  programme  and  the  importance  of  RTD  and  innovation  in  the  development  aid  provided 
by  the  Structural  Funds  should  be  strengthened.  This  was  achieved  in  practice  by  significantly 
increasing the Structural Fund appropriations for RTD and innovation18. The cohesion dimension  was 
better  integrated  in the 4th  RTD framework  programme,  most notably  in  operations  3  (dissemination 
of  the  results)  and  4  (training  and  researcher  mobility).  For  example,  1%  of  each  specific  RTD 
framework  programme  is  reserved  for  operations  to  disseminate  and  exploit  the  results,  and  an 
"Innovation  Programme" in tandem with the operations under Article  10 of the ERDF Regulation  was 
launched  in  1995  to  introduce  regional  innovation  and  technology  transfer  strategies  (RUTS), 
regional  innovation  strategies  (RIS) and regional  technology  transfer  projects  (RTT)19. In the case  of 
researcher training and mobility,29% of the applications for  study grants come from  the Objective  1 -
6 regions and those same regions account for 26% of the coordinators for Euroconferences,  while host 
facilities  in the Objective  1 regions have increased from 4% in the 3rd RTD framework  programme  to 
15%  in the 4th  programme. Research  workers  in the Objective  1 regions also participated  in many  of 
the research  projects  under  the 4th  programme  since in  1996 40% of  projects  implementing  the  RTD 
framework  programmes included  at least one participant from  an Objective  1 region. 

Yet the  disparities  persist 

Despite  this  progress,  the  scientific  and  technological  indicators  show  that  the  technology  gap 
between  Member  States  and  regions  is  still  significant.  Thus,  in  the  case  of  RTD  expenditure,  the 
disparities  between  the  cohesion  countries  and  the  other  Member  States  are  very  great  in  terms  of 
gross  expenditure  as  a  percentage  of  GDP,  private  sector  involvement  and  the  number  of  scientists 
and engineers employed. Sources of innovation  funding  are harder to come by in these Member  States 
and  there  is  a  significant  trade  deficit  in  technology.  Research  and  innovation  activities  in  the  four 
Member  States  in  question  are  highly  concentrated  in just  a  few  regions,  usually  in  and  around  the 
capital. 

RTD - what the Report on economic and social cohesion teaches us : 
The most dynamic and successful  laboratories  and enterprises are located  in the 
heart  of  Europe  in  "islands  of  innovation"  which  host  almost  80%  of  the 
laboratories  involved  in  international  cooperation  in  RTD  and  where  an 
interactive  network  to  develop  new  products  and  production  processes  is 
characteristic. 
In  10 years the expenditure on RTD as a percentage of GDP has increased from 
0.4%  to 0.63% in Portugal, from 0.34%  to 0.6%  in  Greece, 0.8% to  1.24%  in 
Ireland. In Spain, it increased from 0.48% à 0.93%. 
As regards Member  State participation  in the RTD framework programmes, the 
situation  is  encouraging  in  some  respects.  While  the  relative  position  of  the 
Member  States  in  terms  of  expenditure  on  the  2nd  and  3rd  RTD  framework 
programmes  has  not  changed,  the  share  of  the  four  cohesion  countries  has 
increased  from  one framework programme  to  the  next.  At  the  same time, the 
relative  position  of  France,  the  United  Kingdom  and  Germany  only  increased 
marginally or actually decreased. 
In qualitative terms, research institutes and public universities continue to be the 
major participants from Objective  1  regions, with little private sector input. New 
scientific knowledge has nevertheless been obtained and applied through the rapid 
launch  of  new  products  and  production  processes.  Small  firms  find  it  hard  to 
benefit from the programmes, however, and while the programmes have brought 
about closer  cooperation  between  partners from the  north  and  south  of Europe, 
there  is  a  risk  that  such  closeness  will  diminish  the  research  in  terms  of  its 
relevance  to  the  specific  economic  and  industrial  needs  of  the  least-favoured 

The  cohesion  regions  are  much  slower  in  adapting  to  the  information  society  which  involves  in  the 
first  place  introducing  a  high-performance  telecommunications  system.  There  is  less  access  to 

18 See below. 
19 See Chapter I.B.2. Innovative actions and technical assistance 

178 

8th Annuut Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

special  measures  to promote  new  technologies  in  the  context  of priorities  dedicated  to developing  industry, 
the media, RTD and tertiary education. 
The  Konver  programme  focuses  on  new  technologies  as  a  way  of  strengthening  the  competitiveness  of  the 
regions by developing  human resources and management skills in firms,  especially through business  advisory 
services, knowledge development and connection of firms to advanced communications  networks. 
Finally, the SME  programme  is involved with technological development  under  the voucher system  ('service 
ticket ') where there is a need to ensure the continuity and competitiveness of firms  and the creation of jobs. 

Three  new  Community  Initiative  programmes  were  adopted  in  1996.  The  SME  programme  was 
adopted  in  March  1996  and  covers  areas  eligible  under  Objectives  2  and  5(b). This  means  that  the 
Monitoring  Cornmittee  is  the  same  as  for  the  SPDs  under  these  Objectives.  This  programme  is  the 
extension  of  an  existing  national  programme  of  vouchers  ('service  ticket')  for  business  start-ups 
designed  to  provide  new  entrepreneurs  with  'à  la  carte'  access  to  advisory  services  and  training  in 
conjunction  with  drawing  up  a  business  plan.  Another  programme  adopted  in  April  1996  is  the 
Denmark-Sweden  Interreg  programme.  Denmark  is now  involved  in five  Interreg  programmes,  three 
with  Germany,  one  with  the  Baltic  region  and  one  with  Sweden,  the  five  programmes  are  running 
well.  Under  Interreg  II  C  (ECU  4  million),  Denmark  has  started  to  prepare  two  programmes  with 
neighbouring  countries,  one  in  the  North  Sea  area  and  one  in  the  Baltic.  Finally,  the  Leader 
programme  was  adopted  in  June  1996. This  is  aimed  at  safeguarding  thriving  rural  communities  by 
stopping  the  drift  away  from  the  land  and  attracting  new  residents,  raising  skills  and  protecting  and 
improving the environment. To make the programme  as effective  as possible,  the schemes  will  cover 
only half the areas eligible under Objective 5(b). 

Additional  funding  allocated  from  the  reserve  for  the  Community  Initiatives  came  to  ECU  13.5 
million. This  money  will  be used  to reinforce  the Initiatives  Adapt, Employment,  Leader,  and  above 
all Pesca as well as the new strand C under Interreg II. 

Among programmes already running, the Urban programme involving the city of Âlborg (Objective  2, 
North  Jutland),  which  shares  the  Monitoring  Committee  for  the  SPD  under  Objective  2,  saw  work 
start  in  1996 on  setting up  the  Centre  for  Sustainable  Urban  Development.  The  Konver  programme, 
due  to  run  from  1995  to  1997  to  assist  Karup  (Jutland)  and  Copenhagen,  has  been  implemented  on 
schedule.  This  programme  has  not  received  additional  funding  from  the  reserve  for  Community 
Initiatives  and  so  will  not  continue  beyond  1997.  The  Employment  and  Adapt  programmes  saw 
projects  coming  on  stream  in  the  first  half  of  1996. There  are  42  Adapt  projects  and  30  under  the 
Employment  Initiative  (8  under  Youthstart,  15 under  Horizon  and  7  under  NOW),  the  sponsors  are 
largely  traditional  institutions,  except  for  the  Horizon  projects  which  are  being  running  mainly  by 
NGOs.  The  commonest  topics  are  business  start-ups  by  women,  teaching  information  technology 
skills  to  the  handicapped,  the  creation  of  bridges  for  passing  from  school  to  occupational  training, 
support  for  small  businesses  and  the  setting-up  of  job-sharing  schemes,  a  specifically  Danish 
approach.  Few  projects  under  Pesca  terminated  in  1996,  but  27%  of  the  budget  has  already  been 
allocated  to  individual  projects  and  at the end  of  1996 the Commission  decided  to commit  the  whole 
of the assistance for  1994-99 in a single decision. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

179 

Table V-8:  Denmark  -  Community  Initiatives  - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99  (ECU 

million) 

Initiative 
(number of  programmes.) 

Total volume 

SJF. 
assistance 
Ml 

Commitments  Commitments 

199o 

1994-96 

% 

(2V(V 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 

% 

(3vm 

65.7 
20.7 
26.7 
48.6 
5.1 
5.3 
3.0 
175.2 

Adapt (1) 
Employment  (1) 
Leader (1) 
Pesca(1) 
SME(l) 
Konver (1) 
Urban  (!) 
Total  (7) 
Interres/Reten  (5)** 
Programmes adopted  in  1996 
Leader 
SMEs 
Total  (2) 
Intrrrrvd) 
"* 
•  Excl. reserve 
• •  For programme details see Chapter VII. Table 2.2. 
" "•  For programme details see Chapter I.B. 1. Community Initiatives. 

26.7 
5.1 
31.8 

29.5 
10.6 
8.2 
16.4 
2,6 
2,4 
ÏJS 
71,1 

8.2 
2.6 
10,7 

24.2 
9.0 
6.5 
9.5 
2.6 
0.0 
0.2 
SIS 

6.5 
2.6 
9,1 

29.5 
10.6 
6.5 
12.3 
2.6 
2.4 
1.5 
65J 

6.5 
2.6 
9,1 

100% 
100% 
80% 
75% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
92% 

80% 
100% 
85% 

6.2 
2.4 
2.0 
0.8 
0,8 
0,0 
0.1 
123 

2.0 
0.8 
2,7 

8.9 
3.2 
i.O 
22 
0.8 
U 
0.5 
18.6 

2.0 
.0,8 
2,7 

30% 
30% 
24% 
13% 
30% 
50% 
32% 
26% 

24% 
30% 
25% 

ISO 

3.  G E R M A NY 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds  (1996)) 

. 

. 

3.1.  Implementation  of  assistance  hy  Objective  in  1996 

Support  for  the  development  of technological  potential  in the  regions  of  Germany: 

Objective  1  :  Technological  development 
is  an  important  element  in  the  strategy  for  the  development  and 
conversion  of  the  new  German  Lander,  with  4.2%  of  Community  funding  being  spent  on  research, 
technological  development  and  innovation..  The  aim  of  the  R&D  and  innovation  priority  is to  increase  both 
through  initial  and  continuing  training  measures 
the  number  and  the  quality  of staff  in  R&D  establishments 
so  as  to  provide  support  for 
the  development  of  businesses  producing  products  and  using  production 
processes  requiring  technological  know-how.  The ERDF  contribution  to this priority  accounts  for  7% of  total 
the  economic 
ERDF  appropriations 

the  CSF.  These  measures  are  implemented  under  the  OPs  for 

for 

in  research 
development  of  each  Land'  under  an  R&D  and  innovation  priority.  They  cover  investment 
departments  and  industrial  laboratories,  development  and  design  advice,  aid for  businesses  involved  in  RTD 
and  investments  in  RTD  infrastructure  and  innovation  centres.  They  also  provide  support  for  measures  to 
the  modernisation  of 
improve  cooperation  between  businesses 
In 
of  technological  advice  services. 
technology  and  the'development 
information  and  communications 
addition  to  this  priority,  the  CSF  also  supports  RTD  in  businesses  through  investments  in  technology, 
the 
promotion  of  innovation  centres  and  the  development  of joint  training  centres for  businesses. 

in  developing  products  and  processes, 

• 

in  Saxony:  aid  has  been  granted 

in  the  Landkreis  Riesa-Grofihain.  The  technology  centre 

to  a  technology  business 
Example  of  a  project  financed 
in 
"incubator" 
renewable  energy  and  laser-treatment  of  raw  materials  for  which  it  can  provide  demonstrations  of 
cutting  and  welding  of  metals.  The  centre  is  working  with  the  Fraunhofer-lnstitut 
in 
solar  energy  systems)  in Freiburg  to produce  a fuel  cell.  Businesses  are  also provided  with  advice  and 
training.  The  eligible  investment  amounts  to  around  ECU  250  000,  of  which  ECU  150 000  is  being 
supplied  by  the  ERDF. 

(specialising 

is  basically 

involved 

Objective  2  (1994-1996):  All  the  SPDs  include  measures  to  support  technological  development,  principally 
RTD  (20.7%  of  Community  appropriations),  either  in  the  form  of  a  priority  devoted  exclusively 
to  this 
objective  or  under  the SPD  s other  priorities: 

• 

• 

• 

(ECU3.5  million; 

total  cost:  ECUS.5  million),  and.  under  another  priority, 

in 
Lower  Saxony:  support  is  provided  under  one  priority  for  R&D  in  businesses  and  innovation 
training 
products  and  processes  by  promoting  cooperation  between  businesses  and  research  and 
establishments 
for 
continuing  scientific  training  in applied  technology  (laser,  tourism,  quality  control  in the  construction 
industry;  ECU  0.5 million;  total  cost:  ECU  1.1 million),  and finally,  as part  of measures  to protect  the 
environment,  aid  is given for  technology  designed  to reduce,  recycle  and  treat  sewage  and  waste,  air-, 
water-  and  soil- purification  technology,  biotechnology  and  biodegradable  materials. 
Example  of  a project funded 
in  Lower  Saxony:  ERDF  aid has been granted for  a project  to develop  a 
continuous  electrostatic  filter,  headed  by  the  "Fachhochschule"  in  Braundschweig-Wolfenbiittel. 
Without  this  aid,  the project  could  not  have  gone  ahead.  This new  technology-,  which  enables  a  high 
degree  of powder  recycling,  has  the  potential  for  widespread  use  in  surface  treatment.  A  patent  has 
already  been  granted. 
Saarland  : two  specific  priorities,  one for  research  and  technology  providing  for  the  development  of a 
science  park  and  the  promotion  of  the  work  of  research  establishments  and  the  application  of  the 
results  of their  work  in SMEs  (ECU  3.9  million;  total  cost:  ECU  9.3 million)  and  the  other  concerning 
the  transfer  of  technology  and  know-how  and  providing  support  for  bodies  involved  in  technology 
transfer  and  innovation  advice  (ECU  3.3  million,  total  cost:  ECU  14.4 million).  In  addition  to  these 
the  SPD  provides  support  for  improving  research,  scientific  and  technological  capacities 
priorities, 
and  improving  qualifications  to satisfy  the  requirements  of the labour  market. 
Although  the  other  SPDs  do  not  contain  specific  technological  development  priorities,  they  do  not 
ignore 
technological 
development  (Bavaria  and  Rhineland-Palatinate)  ;  innovation  by  setting  up  risk-capital  funds  for  the 
introduction  of new  technology  and  providing  cash-flow  support for  SMEs  concerned  with  technology 
technology  parks  and  other 
(Bremen), 

the  creation  or  extension  of  technology 

the  issue:  in  order  to  improve 

the  environment  for  SMEs, 

infrastructures, 

they  promote 

MecklenburgrVVestcrn  Pomerania:  ECU  71.6  million  (total  cost:  ECU 457  million);  Brandenburg:  ECU  1  14.4 
million  (total  cost:  ECU  259.3  million);  Saxony-Anhalt:  ECU  73.1  million  (total  cost:  ECU 225.7  million); 
Saxony:  ECU  207.8  million  (total  cost:  ECU  390.1  million);  Thuringia:  ECU  38.9  million  (total  cost: 
ECU  145.1  million);  Eastern  Berlin:  ECU  61.8  million  (total  cost:  ECU  111.3  million). 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds (19&6) 

181 

installations  (Bavaria  and  North  Rhine-Westphalia)  and  the  development  of  service  and  advice 
providers,  particularly  in  the  field  of  technology  transfer  (Bremen,  Hesse  and  North  Rhine-
Westphalia).  In  additionnas  part  of  environmental  protection  measures,  they promote  innovation, 
technology  transfers  and the adjustment of manufacturing procedures  to environmental  requirements 
(West Berlin) and the use of environmentally friendly  technology and services (Bremen). Finally, some 
of  these  SPDs  stress  the  need  to  improve  qualifications  in  the  fields  of  research,  science  and 
technology and advice services on continuous training (Bavaria, Hesse and Schleswig-Holstein). 
Examples of projects financed  between 1994 and 1996: 

Hesse:  The ERDF provided  support for  setting  up the  "Kassel business incubator"  in the  former 
Hindenburg  barracks,  promoting  the  creation  of  new  technology-oriented  businesses.  The  centre 
provides  a  wide  range  of  advice  and  is  in  close  contact with  regional  R&D bodies  with  the  aim  of 
improving  technology 
transfers.  Synergy  is  sought  between  the  business  incubator  and  its 
environment,  the objective  being  to strengthen existing businesses in the region and  to attract  more. 
This project provides  an  example of  the  structural  regeneration of former  military land It  involves a 
total investment of ECU 6.5 million, of which ECU 2.3 million is provided  under the Objective 2 SPD. 
North  Rhine-Westphalia:  EU ROM AT  GmbH, a  research  establishment  specialising  in  innovative 
materials  and  manufacturing  processes,  heat-resistant  raw  materials  and  surface-treatment 
technology,  receives aid directed essentially towards the development  of new technology. EUROMAT 
makes  available  its  results to  businesses which  do  not  have  their  own  research facilities.  The work 
essentially involves the development of new materials for  new uses, raw materials with new properties 
and  surface-treatment  technology. Support for  these  technology-transfer measures amounts  to more 
than ECU 4.3 million. 

In  total,  4,5%  of  Structural  Fund  appropriations  in  Germany  are  to  support  technological 

development (Objectives  1, 2 and 5(b)). 

Table V-9: 

Germany - Funding directly linked to technological development in 1994-99 (ECU million) 

TOTAL 

SF 

,2c 
84% 
12% 
4% 
100% 

1.600.0 
223.8 
SI.? 
1-905.1 

575,1 
Obj.  l 
99,2 
Obj. 2 
23.6 
Qfri. 5(b) 
697.9 
TOTAL 
NB: The programming procedures and different  approaches adopted by the Member Stales 
invite caution in interpreting  the figures, in particular spending on information  society  projects, 
which are often  linked to other areas such as industry and RTD. 

.2L 
36% 
44% 
29% 
^7% 

Public 
384,7 
116.9 
-JL0. 
f37.6 

Member State 
Private 
Total 
640.2 
1.024.9 
7,7 
124,6 
21.7 
?7.7 
fifiy.fil 1.207.2 

Financing by the Structural Funds 

JK-
64% 

56% 
7 1% 

100% 

IDRTD 

OBJECTIVE  l8 

Fie. V-12: Programming 1994-99 (ECUmillion) 
Priority 
Productive  investments  (a) 
Aid to SMEs  (b) 
R&.D. innovation  (c) 
Environment  (d) 
Human resources, training  (e) 
Agriculture, rural areas,  fisheries  (f) 
Technical  assistance (P) 
Bv Fund: 

ERDF 
FSE 
FEOGA 
FIFG 
Total 

6.860,9 
4.092,0 
2.644,5 
83,5 
13.68Q.? 

1 CSF  118  OPs 

Averarc ner OPl 

50% 
30% 
19% 
1% 
100% 

760.0 

(f)  24% 

(9)2' 

(a) 18% 

(e) 27% 

(d)  8% 

8 Eligible  areas:  Eastern  Berlin,  Brandenburg,  Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania,  Saxony,  Saxony-Anhalt, 

Thurinsia. 

182 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996)) 

Principal  achievements  in 19969 

is  providing  ECU  13.640 billion  at  1994  prices,  which 

indexation  for  Thuringia,  ECU  38.8 million,  was  devoted 

Assistance  under  the  CSF  is granted  under  seven  priorities. ERDF, ESF and EAGGF  operations  are 
coordinated  in  each  Land  by  three  OPs  (in  East  Berlin,  Structural  Fund  assistance  is  covered  by  a 
represents 
single  OP).  The  CSF 
ECU  13.920 billion  at  1996 prices. Not  all  the decisions  resulting  from  this  indexation  were  adopted 
in  1996  but  most  of  the  programmes  benefiting  from  ERDF funding  were  amended  during  the  year. 
The  extra  amount  after 
the 
'Infrastructure'  priority,  with pai>financing provided  exclusively  by the Land. For Berlin, the amount 
resulting  from  indexation  (ECU  14 million)  will  be used  to  strengthen  all  the  development  priorities 
financed  by  the  ERDF.  In  Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania,  the  appropriations  resulting  from 
indexation,  i.e. ECU  16.3 million,  were added  to the funds  available  for  the ERDF-dominated  OP. In 
Saxony,  the  ERDF-dominated  OP was subject  to three  amendments,  including indexation,  permitting 
ERDF  appropriations  to  be  increased  by  ECU 3.2 million  (bringing  them  to  ECU 2.1 billion  at  1996 
prices).  In  Saxony-Anhalt,  unused  1995  ESF  appropriations  were  transferred  to  the  1996-99  period 
and the amount  of ECU 66.3 million  resulting from  indexation  has not yet been allocated. This  is also 
the case for Brandenburg  (ECU  1.7 million). 

to 

Implementation  of  the  CSF  priorities  is  already  bringing  concrete  results.  The  principal  aim  of  the 
priority  relating  to productive  investments  and additional  investments  in  infrastructure  is the creation 
of branches, subsidiaries and new businesses, the development of industrial and craft  sites, local roads 
and  technology  centres. By  the end  of  1996, aid  had  been  granted  to more than  4 000 projects  under 
this  priority  and  some  38 000 jobs  had  been  created  and  around 90 000  maintained.  For  example,  in 
Thuringia,  aid  was  granted  for  the  creation  of  56 craft  areas,  28  tourist  facilities,  27 waste-water 
treatment  plants,  13 cultural  establishments,  two  road  projects  and  a technology  centre. Note  should 
also  be  taken  of  the  extension  of  an  electronic-coupler production  facility  in Wismar  (Mecklenburg-
Western  Pomerania).  Technical  restructuring  and  an  increase  in  capacity  allowed  the  number  of 
permanent  employees torje  increased by  170. In Berlin, aid was granted  for a major  project  involving 
the  rationalisation  and  modernisation  of  the  production  facilities  of  a  company  specialising  in 
electrical engineering, permitting the creation of 200 jobs. 

Table V-10: 

Implementation of  the  "Productive investments and  infrastructure with  direct economic 
benefits"priority in 1996 : 

Lander 

Projects  assisted 

Jobs  created 

Jobs  maintained 

Eastern  Berlin 
Brandenburg 
Mecklenbure-Westem  Pomerania 
Saxonv-Anhalt 
Saxonv 
Thurineia 

Tot?) Prioritv  1 

81 
338 
969 
251 
2.171 
215 
4.025 

608 
5.273 
3.488 
12.129 
12.570 
3.868 
37.936 

3449 
12.246 
4430 
11.801 
48.234 
9.756 
89.916 

Operations  under  the  SME  priority  are  intended  to  stimulate  investment  in  and  make  available 
services  to  SMEs.  The  priority  is  in  two  parts,  the  first  concerning  productive  investments 
(investments  relating  to  the  setting  up  of  SMEs,  growth,  rationalisation  and  conversion)  and  the 
second  principally  concerning  services to SMEs  (creation  and  operation  of infrastructures  with  direct 
economic  benefits,  the  provision  of  shared  premises  and  services  in  technology  centres,  creation  of 
vocational  training  structures, mobilisation  of local  development  potential, guarantees,  aid for  market 

9  A total  of ECU  119.5 million  was paid  under the  1991-93 CSF for  the new Lander  (ECU 42.6 million  from  the 
ERDF, ECU 52.2 million from the ESF, ECU 24.5 million from the  EAGGF and  ECU 0.2 million  of  fisheries 
appropriations). The  ERDF payments  concern  only  Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania  (ECU  10.9 million)  and 
Saxony  (ECU  31.6 million) and, of the ECU  1  567 billion of ERDF appropriations available under the  1991-93 
CSF, ECU  1  479 billion  or 95% has been paid. The final  reports on Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania,  Saxony 
and  Saxony-Anhalt  were  presented  in  1996. An extension  of the payment  deadline  to  31 December  1996  was 
granted  for  Eastern  Berlin, Thuringia  and Brandenburg. This extension  was required  because  of  administrative 
problems, continuing  uncertainty regarding property and investment delays. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

183 

access  and  business  management).  By  the  end  of  1996, around  10 000 projects  had  received  aid  under 
this  priority,  creating  some  50 000  jobs  and  maintaining  around  84 000  more.  For  example,  in 
Saxony-Anhalt,  the  ERDF  granted  aid  of  more  than  ECU  1.3  million  to  "DTS  Systemoberflàche",  a 
company  specialising  in  veneering  and  mechanical  polishing  for  the  wood  and  furniture  industry, 
which  has developed  a patented  material  ("Elesgo  film").  Twelve  permanent jobs  should  be  created. 

Table  V-ll: 

Implementation  of the  "SME"  priority  in  1996  : 

Lander 

Eastern Berlin 
Branv-criv-urg 
Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania 
Sawpv-Ann?H 
5a* wv 
Thurineia 

Tofri priority? (at 

SUMWi) 

Projects, assisted 
620 
LÛ2S. 
jLlàfc 
-222 
JLS22 
605 
?,??? 

Jobs created 

Jobs maintained 

JL2éi 
5.405 
1?.2?1 
7.846 
13.815 
6.067 
48J33 

6423 
,10.924 
7.288 
.979 
30.054 
17.610 
84.278 

By  the  end  of  1996,  aid  had  been  granted  for  650 projects  under  the  priority  relating  to  research, 
technological  development  and  innovation,  including  268  in  Saxony  and  251  in Eastern  Berlin. 

Operations  under  the  priority  relating  to  the  protection  and  improvement  of  the  environment 
essentially  involve  investments  by  industry  in  environmental  protection,  investments  in  businesses 
supplying  environmental  products  and  services  at  supra-regional  level  and  infrastructure  which 
industrial  sites,  waste-water 
contributes 
treatment,  business  and 
technology,  etc.).  The  ERDF 
contribution  to  this  priority  represents  12% of  the total  ERDF  appropriations  allocated  to the  CSF.  By 
the end  of  1996, 764  projects,  including  340  in  Saxony, had  received  aid under the  priority. 

to  environmental  protection  (rehabilitation  of  derelict 

innovation  centres  for  environmental 

The  "Employment"  OP,  mainly  funded  by  the  ESF,  under  the  priority  to  combat  unemployment  and 
promote  human  resources,  vocational  training  and  further  training,  is  intended  to  improve  initial  and 
further  training,  retraining  and  employment.  Between  1994  and  1996,  more  than  800 000  people 
participated  in  initial  training  (34%),  continuing  training  (53%)  and  employment  (13%)  measures 
part-financed  by  the  ESF.  Women  accounted  for  54%  of  those  involved,  4 3% were  young  people  and 
17%  were  long-term  unemployed  or  people  threatened  with  long-term  unemployment.  The  effects  on 
employment,  although  difficult 
to 
26 285  young  people  from  deprived  backgrounds,  largely  part-financed  by  the  ESF,  appears  to  have 
reduced  youth  unemployment  by  3%  (down  to  14.2%).  Overall,  unemployment  stood  at  17%  at  the 
end  of  1996  and  could  well  have  been  around  28%  without  the  measures  mainly  part-financed  by  the 
ESF.  The  ERDF  is  to  contribute  ECU  584.1  million  (or  8.5%  of  total  ERDF  appropriations)  over  the 
1994-99  period  to  the  priority  relating  to  the  development  of  human  resources.  By  the  end  of  1996, 
ERDF funding  had  been  granted  for  187 vocational  training  infrastructure  projects. 

the  apprenticeship  training  given 

to  assess,  are  significant: 

The  aim  of  the  rural  development  programmes,  mainly  funded  by  the  EAGGF  under  the  priority 
relating  to  agriculture,  rural  development  and  fisheries,  is  to  improve  the  economic  situation  of  the 
farming  sector  and  develop  rural  areas.  The  economic  situation  in  rural  areas  in  the  new  Lander 
remains  difficult,  with  unemployment,  particularly  amongst  women,  very  high.  The  creation  of 
permanent  jobs  is  therefore  the  primary  aim  of  EAGGF  assistance.  Thousands  of  jobs  have  been 
created  or  maintained,  in  both  farming  itself  and  the  food  industry.  However,  infrastructure  is  still 
rudimentary  and  insufficiently  adapted  to  the  needs  of  business  and  the  population.  Furthermore,  the 
development  of  villages  has  proven  to  be  an  excellent  instrument  for  integrated  rural  development, 
based  on  a  multidisciplinary  and  bottom-up  approach  which  gives  local  inhabitants  a  large  say  in 
designing  and  prioritising  the  investments  to  be  made.  The  EAGGF  is  providing  ECU  2  608  billion 
total  ERDF 
for 
appropriations)  to  this  priority  and,  by  the  end  of  1996,  ERDF  appropriations  had  enabled  assistance 
to  be  provided  to  615  projects,  the  majority  of  which  involved  the  construction  of  infrastructure  in 
rural  areas. Finally,  the  fisheries  OP, under  the  same  priority,  (aid  from  the  FTFG of  ECU  83.5  million 
at  1994  prices)  is  progressing  satisfactorily.  After  reprogramming  in  1995  to  accommodate  an 

is  contributing  ECU 425.3  million 

these  measures.  The  ERDF 

(or  6%  of 

184 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996)) 

acceleration  of  investments  in  several  areas,  by  the  end  of  1996,  funding  "had  been  provided  for 
around  200 projects  (particularly  in the processing  industry and for  fleet  modernisation)  for  which  the 
total eligible investment  was around ECU 55 million. 

Finally,  by  the  end  of  1996,  396 technical  assistance  operations  funded  by  the  ERDF  had  been 
approved.  These  measures  are  intended  inter  alia  to  aid  the  implementation  and  monitoring  of  the 
OPs. 

OBJECTIVE 210 

Ftp. V-13: Proprammine  1994-99 (ECV : 
Bv  sector: 
Productive environment  (a) 
Human resources  (b) 
Development  and rehabilitation  (c) 
Environmental  protection  (à) 
Technical  assistance  fe> 
Bv  Fund: 

-ti - 1996 prices and situation > 

(d)7%  (e)27. 

(c) 18% 

(a) 33% 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

481.0 
222 4 
703,4, 

9  SPDs 

Average ner SDP 

1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-9611 

70% 
30% 
100% 

78.2 

(b)40% 

Nine  SPDs  had  been  adopted  for  the various Lander under Objective  2 for  the  1994-96 prograrnming 
period  by  the  end  of  December  1994.  These  are  mainly  programmes  to  promote  employment  by 
stimulating  productive  investments  in  the  regions  concerned,  constructing  economic  infrastructure, 
supporting  SMEs  and  promoting  research  and  development.  The  appropriations  allocated  for  all  the 
programmes  had  been  fully  committed  by  the  end  of  1996.  Well-targeted  measures  managed  to 
overcome  the  problem  of  a  low  level  of  commitments  at  the  beginning  of  the  programming  period. 
However,  for  five  of  the  SPDs  (Bavaria,  Berlin,  Hesse,  North  Rhine-Westphalia  and  Saarland), 
appropriations  totalling  ECU 40.1 million  (6.5% of  the  original  total)  were carried  over  to the  1997-
99 period12. 

Indexation  in  line  with  1996  prices  was  carried  out  for  all  these  programmes  and  there  was  a  large 
number of amendments, mainly involving measures and financial  transfers. For Berlin,  appropriations 
originally  intended  for  R&TD were transferred  to measures  to provide private  investment  aid  and  aid 
for  development  measures  in certain  areas was strengthened. For Bremen, it was decided  to reallocate 
ERDF  appropriations  from  one  operation  to  another  and  from  one  year  to  another  and  a  detailed 
allocation  of  ESF appropriations  was made. A number  of  small-scale  measures  in the  SPD for  Hesse 
were  cancelled.  This  was  also  the  case  with  the  SPD  for  Lower  Saxony,  where  the  productive 
investments  priority  was cancelled because of the lack of national  part-financing  (the  1994  instalment 

l<3 Eligible areas: Lower Saxony, Bavaria, Berlin, Bremen, Hesse, North Rhine-Westphalia,  Rhineland-Palatinate, 

Schleswig-Holstein. 

1 ] Total  payments  of  ECU  23 million  were  made  under  the  CSF for  the  1992-93  period,  which  included  seven 
OPs  for  six  Lander  (ECU 3.3 million  from  the  ERDF  and  ECU  19.8 million  from  the  ESF).  By  the  end  of 
1996,  the  six  Lander  had  received  a total  of  ECU  188.9 million  from  the  S t r u c t u r al  F u n d s.  The  detailed 
situation  with  regard  to  the  OPs  is  as  follows:  for  Bremen  and  Emden,  the  final  payment  applications  were 
submitted,  the  final  reports  approved  and  payments  made  in  1996;  Saarland,  Rhineland-Palatinate,  North 
Rhine-Westphalia  and  Berlin  requested  a  postponement  of  the  payment  deadline  to  31 December  1996.  The 
delays  were due  to  unforeseen  difficulties  during  the final  phase  of  implementation  of the projects  concerned 
(the  withdrawal  of  a  number  of  private  investors  in  Berlin,  difficulties  caused  by  high  levels  of  soil 
contamination  in Rhineland-Palatinate, appeals against projects  in Saarland, etc.). 

12 The  transfers  for  each  of  the  programmes  are  as  follows:  Bavaria,  ECU 2.5 million  (17%  of  the  original 
(23%);  North  Rhine-Westphalia, 

(3%);  Hesse,  ECU 5 million 

assistance);  Berlin,  ECU 5.2  million 
ECU 26.1 million  (7%); Saarland. ECU  1.2 million (2%). 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fundi (1996) 

185 

was  carried  over  to  1995  and  1996 and  the  appropriations  reallocated  to  infrastructure  with  a  direct 
economic  impact).  The  allocation  of  appropriations  between  the  various  operations  in  the  North 
Rhine-Westphalia  SPD  was  reviewed  and  the  text  of  the  provisions  on  technical  assistance  slightly 
amended.  A  number  of  other  amendments  were  also  made:  in  Rhineland-Palatinate,  development 
operations  in  various  zones  were  strengthened  because  a  measure  to  promote  tourism  could  not  be 
completed  in the time planned; in Saarland, a new measure to promote the creation  of new  teleservice 
businesses  was  planned;  in  Schleswig-Holstein,  indexation  was  carried  out  to  strengthen  the  Kiel-
Horn  project. 

For  those programmes  receiving  a Community  contribution  of  more  than  ECU 40 million,  1996  saw 
the  preparation  and  commencement  of  the  mid-term  reviews  (specifications,  tendering  procedure, 
methods). The  review  is  being  carried  out  by  outside  experts  who  should  complete  their  evaluation 
reports  and  the  calculation  of  the  basic  data  for  the  programmes  of  lesser  importance  (Hesse, 
Schleswig-Holstein,  Bavaria  and  Rhineland-Palatinate)  in  April  1997.  Work  was  also  continued  to 
organise  monitoring  with  the  establishment  of  the  Monitoring  Subcommittees  for  those  SPDs 
receiving  the  largest  Community  contributions,  i.e.  more  than  ECU  40 million.  This  involves  the 
programmes  for  Berlin,  Bremen,  Lower  Saxony,  North  Rhine-Westphalia  and  Saarland.  The  new 
Committees  began  work  during  the  year  and  contributed  to  the  drafting  of  the  new  programming 
documents for the  1997-99 period. 

Preparation  of the 1997-99 programming  period 

As  part  of  the  preparations  for  the  1997-99  programming  period,  the  new  development  plans  which 
will serve as the basis for  negotiations  between  the Commission  and the Federal  Government  and the 
Lander  were  submitted  to  the  Commission  in  May  1996  against  a 4 background  which  remains 
unchanged  from  that  prevailing  during the  1994-96 programming  period. The  Commission  is  due  to 
adopt decisions on the new programmes in the spring of  1997. 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

Fie. V-14: Objective 3 - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million -1996 prices) 
Priority 
Vocational integration of jobless threatened 
with lone-term unemployment (a) 
Vocational integration of young people seeking 
work (b) 
Integration of peoDle threatened with exclusion  (c) 
Eaual opportunities for B77men and women (d) 
Technical assjsfimçç WJ pilot Project? (t) 

ESF 

944,1 

442,0 
78.1 
160.2 
-5L2 
1.682.1 

1 CSF/12 OPs 

Total 

(d)10% 

(e>3% 

(c) 5% 

(b) 26% 

(a) 56°/ 

Average per Q? 

140.21 

The correct  implementation  of  the CSF and  the  12 OPs  in  1996 is illustrated  by the fact  that  half  the 
appropriations  for  the  1994-99  period  had  been  committed  by  the  end  of  1996. which  is  a  positive 
result  if  account  is taken  of  the  fact  that  the  OPs  were  only  adopted  at  the end  of  1994 and  most  of 
them did not  get up to speed until  the  second  half  of  1995. Applications  under the AFG-Plus  Federal 
OP, which complements the "Employment  Support Act" (Arbeitsfôrderungsgesetz - AFG), were much 
higher  than  expected.  The  most  successful  measure  was  the  provision  of  training  to  those  ineligible 
under the AFG, principally  women, the measure therefore  helping to improve equality  of  opportunity. 
The heavy demand  led to a reduction  in the measures planned for handicapped  people and  discussions 
were  opened  between  the Commission  and  the German  authorities  to find  a way of maintaining  these 
measures  without  damaging  the  AFG-Plus  programme.  Non-profit-making  temporary-employment 
agencies  have  now  been  set  up  under  the  regional  OPs.  These  agencies  place  the  long-term 
unemployed  in  businesses  on  fixed-term  contracts  with  the  aim  of  then  getting  the  businesses  to 
employ  them  on  permanent  contracts.  During  periods  when  the  workers  are  without  a contract,  they 
can  undertake  training  so as to  improve  their chances  of  finding  permanent  work. This  approach  is a 

186 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996)) 

sort  of  pathway  to  employment,  offering  work  experience  in  a  company 'plus  training.  Training 
requirements can be assessed during the period of work experience and businesses can recruit  workers 
who fulfil  their requirements. 

The Monitoring Committee again looked the question  of employment policy, particularly  the extent to 
which  ESF assistance  under Objective  3 reflects  Community  employment  policy  (discussions  centred 
in  particular  on  job  creation  and  improving  the  employability  of  workers).  Finally,  the  mid-term 
review  was  begun  with  the  selection  by  invitation  to  tender  of  twelve  assessors  for  each  OP  and  an 
assessor responsible for  the CSF and coordination  of the other twelve assessments. The draft  report  is 
expected to be ready by mid-1997. 

Fie. V-  15: Objective  4 - Programming  1994-99  (ECU million  -  1996  prices): 
ESF 

Priority 
Anticipating  labour market trends and personal 
Qualification  needs (a) 
Training, retraining and advice (b) 
Improvement and development of appropriate 
training svstems (c) 
Technical  assistance  (d) 

29.1 
187.0 

34.7 
14.5 
265.3 

Total 

(c) 13% 

(d)5% 

(a) 11% 

(b)71% 

1SPD 

The SPD adopted  in  1994 for the  1994-96 period consists of  11 regional  programmes and one Federal 
programme. Although  several Lander overcame the start-up problems encountered  in  1995, others, as 
well  as the  Federal  authorities, required  more time to  set up the  innovative  training courses  required 
by the SPD. The use of funding  improved  over the year. Furthermore, the programme was extended in 
May  1996  to  cover  the  period  1994-99  with  contributions  of  ECU 265.3 million  from  the  ESF, 
ECU 87 million  from  the  national  budget,  ECU  144 million  from  the Lander  and  ECU  151.8 million 
from  the private  sector. The measures concerned  were not changed. The  severe restrictions  on  public 
finances  are making it increasingly  difficult  to meet the national part-financing  laid down  in the SPD, 
but  the  national  authorities  and  the  Commission  took  steps  to  increase  the  flexibility  of  financing 
structures  in  order  to  remedy  the  situation.  One  very  positive  aspect  is  that  businesses  are  often 
deciding to participate in the programme after  obtaining good results with the initial projects.  Finally, 
the mid-term review of the SPD could result in reprogramming to ensure the programme's  success. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) agriculture 

Table  V-12: Prorrammine  1994-99  (ECU million  -  1996 prices and  situation): 

Total 

1.086.5 

Measures 
Production 
Marketing 

868.2 
218.3 

80% 

According  to  the  revised  forecasts,  the  Community  contribution  to  measures  relating  to  production 
structures  totals  ECU 868.2 million.  Two-thirds  of  that  amount  are  accounted  for  by  compensatory 
payments  in  less-favoured  areas,  which  cover  51%  of  the  utilised  agricultural  area.  Around 
220 000 farmers  received  such  aid  in  1994,  slightly  down  on  the  previous  year.  A  total  of 
ECU  113 million  is earmarked  for  young farmers. Investment  aid represents  15% of the total and was 
paid to  1 800 farms  in  1994, with  a large percentage  going to Bavaria, Schleswig-Holstein  and  Lower 
Saxony.  Given  the  expiry  on  1  January  1997  of  Article 38  of  Regulation  (EEC)  No 2328/91  laying 
down  special  conditions  for  investment  aid  in the new Lander, uniform  conditions  for  the old and  the 
new  Lander  were  adopted  at  the  end  of  1996  for  the  German  agricultural  investment  programme 
(Agrarinvestitionsforderprogramm  1997-2000), in order to ensure uniform  application  throughout  the 
country. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

187 

Implementation  of the ten SPDs relating to the processing and marketing of products accelerated  after 
initial  delays.  By  the  end  of  1996,  approximately  40%  of  the  Community  contribution  had  been 
committed  for  approved  projects. Aid is concentrated  in the fruit  and vegetables, meat, milk and  milk 
products  and  flowers  and  plants  sectors.  Following  market  developments,  particularly  in  the  meat 
sector, a number of requests for amendments to existing programmes were submitted. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a)  fisheries 

Fie.  V-16:  Objective  5(a)  fisheries  - prorrammine  1994-99 (ECU  million): 

Adjustment  and  redirection  of  fishing  effort  (a) 

Other fishing  fleet  measures  (b) 

Modernisation  and  renovation  of  the  fleet  (c) 

Aquaculture  (d) 

Protected  marine  areas  (e) 

Port facilities  (f) 

Processing  and  marketing  of  products  (g) 

Promotion  of  products  (h) 

Socio-economic  measures  (i) 

Other measures  (\) 

Fire 

6.8 
0.0 
12.3 
7.1 
0.0 
5.6 

39.4 
US 
pm 

__L8_ 
76.0 

Total 

0)0% 

(h)3%(J)2%  (a) 9% 

(c)  17% 

(9)  53% 

Implementation  of  the  programme  is  progressing  satisfactorily.  These  are  now  around  350 projects 
(relating  particularly  to  the  processing  industry  and  fleet  modernisation)  with  eligible  investments 
totalling  ECU  75 million.  Assessment  work  was  also  carried  out  in  1996  (selection  of  an  assessor, 
discussion  of  provisional  results). A  mid-term  revision  of  the  programme  will  be  carried  out  on  the 
basis of the final  report, expected in spring  1997. 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)13 

Fit.  V-17: Objective 5(h) • Protramminp 1994-99: 
Population ("OOOs ) 
Area (Km2) 

Bv  Fund: 

8 SPDs 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
Tfttal 

475.1 
231.0 
522.9 
1229.0 

Average r>er SPPl 

7.823 
9ft  178 
ECU milium 

39% 
19% 
43% 
100% 

153.6 

(e)19% 

(d)0.1% 

<«)42% 

<b)39% 

D Diversification et 

adjustment of agricultural 
structures (a) 

•Development of  non-

agricultural sectors (b) 

I Development of human 
resources (c) 

•Environmental protection 

(Saarland) (d) 

Financing  was  increased  in  1996  because  of  the  increasing  awareness  in  society  of  the  problem  of 
rural  development  and  the  positive  experience  of  the  1989-93  period.  This  permitted 
the 
implementation  in  two  years  of  the  programme  adopted  for  the  three  years  1994-96,  despite  the 
budgetary  restraints  being  experienced  by  the  Lander.  As  already  concluded  from  the  ex  post 
evaluation  of  the  three  programmes  implemented  during  the  1989-93  period,  the use  of  national  aid 
schemes  as a source  of  national  part-financing  was again  very  effective  in permitting  rapid,  problem-
free  implementation  in  1996. As regards  monitoring of the programmes, in addition  to examining  the 
annual progress  reports, for  two SPDs, the Monitoring Committees  amended the national  aid  schemes 
in  order  to  adjust  the  programmes  in  line  with  the  rhythm  of  implementation  and,  for  the  SPDs  as a 
whole, laid  down  the guidelines  for  the mid-term  review  of  the programmes. An  initial  report  on  this 
phase  of  implementation  was  drafted  by  the  assessors  at  the  end  of  1996  and  the  final  reports  are 
expected  in April  1997. 

13 Eligible  areas:  Baden-Wiirttemburg.  North  Rhine-Westphalia,  Saarland,  Lower  Saxony,  Bavaria,  Hesse, 

Rhineland-Palatinate.  Schleswig-Holstein. 

8th Annual report on the Structural Fundi  (1996) 

19 

telecommunications  networks and to funding  and fewer  people subscribe to information  services  there 
than  in  the rest of  the Community.  Investment  in telecommunications  in  the cohesion  countries  is, in 
general, 40% less than of investment in the core regions.20. 

Table  0-1: 

General  RTD  and  telecommunications 

indicators 

-EL. 

IRL 

B  1 PK 

NT,  I  TÎK  I Divergence 

0.? 

o.?l 

I 
'41 

1.231  0.851  2.021  1.481  0.771  1.1  il"  1.47 

1.691  1541  2.811  2.421  1.381  2.06J " 2.21 
M 

O.ttl  0.1? 
, 
51  H  AA 

P.471  0.871  0,911 
3 
°f 
2.21 
2.42 
o.vl 
0.55 

RTP.fi) 
Total expenditure 
f%QPP) 
Private expenditure 
(%GDPV 
Total number of scientists and engineers 
(%  emnloveeO 
Scientists and engineers in 
jhejgvjje^ejt^r^^grr^gloveej^ 
TFT FrOMMTTNTCATTONS  m 
Telephong lines (ft inhabitants) 
Fwltffrer  100 ling?) 
Digital lines (%) 
Connection to motile telephone (USP) 
Cellular terminals (% habitants 
Ç^ble^yvisiopf%^eh9|ds) 
ISPIS govgrasc fft) 
ï$PN,5titeçriPtio"sf%) 
Internet hostf f%) 
( 1 ) Source  : 5th Periodic Report on the Socio-economic Situation and Development of Community Regions: reference year 1992 
(2) Source : Communication "Cohesion and the Information Society" (COM(97)7 final) 

Jâ. 
11.3 
71.2 
J±L 
9.1 
_5L4 
Jl 
24 
5.3 

40.2 
32.6 
60.6 
83.8 
3.7 

32.3 
JL2_ 
JLL 

1.6J  .  2.8 

AAl 

i.sl 

2.4l 

2.3l 

3.8l 

o.i 

1.3l 

2.24 

l.5l 

4.6 

4l 

-663 

-75% 

ZÛS3L 

-75% 

-26% 
•188% 
• 15% 
+30% 
-59% 
-84% 
-62% 
dSL 

The increasing  speed  of technological  change 

The  pace  of  technological  change  has  increased  in  recent  years  and  the  Community  and  its 
least-favoured  regions  are  not  always  equipped  to  cope  with  it.  The  White  Paper  on  Growth, 
to  increase 
competitiveness  and  employment  highlighted  the  factors  and  conditions  needed 
competitiveness  on  world  markets  in a time of  increased  economic,  social  and  technological  change. 
On the one hand, innovation  must no longer be seen as a linear process, but as the result of  numerous 
interactions between  research  laboratories  and enterprises either developing or using new  technology. 
The  demand  for  technology  to  meet  new  and  increasing  needs  brings  this  interaction  about. 
Innovation  itself  takes  several  forms  and  is  geared  as  much  to  the  products  as  to  an  enterprise's 
production  processes  and  structure. In this context priority  should  be given  to investing in  intangibles 
in  the  enterprises  themselves  (SMEs  in  particular)  and  to balancing  the  demand  for  technology  with 
supply  (especially  at  regional  level).  Research  and  development  must  thus  be  extended  through  the 
dissemination  of  results  and  technology  transfer,  and  be  boosted  by  the  need  to  satisfy  new  social 
needs (including, for example, the environment, health, biotechnology, culture). 

On  the  other  hand,  the  development  of  the  information  society  is  bringing  about  an  upheaval  in  the 
way  enterprises  are  organised,  and  will  shortly  do  the  same  to  lifestyles  and  working  practices.  A 
highly  sophisticated  ability  to  adjust  will  be  required  in  response,  with  accompanying  measures 
needed  at  several  levels,  all  interlinked.  Improvements  to  basic  telecommunications  services  and 
infrastructure  are  needed  to  complete  the  European  communications  networks  serving  the  entire 
Community  territory.  It  is  also  necessary  however  to  spread  the  use  of  the  new  information  and 
communication  technologies,  to  SMEs  in  particular,  and  to  encourage  in  this  regard  technological 
awareness  and  RTD  in  this  field.  The  changes  will  be  accepted  only  if  the  users  of  the  new 
information  and communications technologies are sufficiently  trained. There is thus a need to improve 
training  for  the  users  and  the  public  at  large  by  making  teaching  and  training  relevant,  and  for  the 
producers  of these technologies through  training and vocational  retraining. 

2,° For more information  see in particular: ""European Report on the scientific and technological indicators 1994" 
(November  1994, EUROFFICE); "Fifth periodic Report on the Socio-economic Situation and Development of 
Community  Regions"  (1994,  EUROFFICE);  "First  Report  on  Economic  and  Social  Cohesion"; 
Communication "Cohesion and the Information  Society" (COM (97)7 final of 22 January 1997). 

188 

8lh Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996)) 

Table V-13:  Germany  - Assistance  by  Objective  -  1996  in the context  of programming  for 1994-96199 

(ECU  million) 

P r o g r a m m es 

(year  of  a d o p t i o n) 

Total  cost 

SF 
assistance 
(I) 

Commitments  Commitments 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

1996 

1994-96 
(2> 

1996 

1994-96 

(2V(I) 

(3) 

(3)/(l) 

Obiective 1 
Regional  OPs 

OP  Westem+B33  Berlin  (1994) 

OP  Brandenburg  (1)  (1994) 

OP  Brandenburg  (2)  ( 1994) 

OP  Brandenburg  (3) (1994) 

OP  Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania  (1)  (1994) 

OP  Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania  (2) (1994) 

OP  Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania  (3)  (1994) 

OP  Saxony  (1)  (1994) 

OP  Saxony  (2) (1994) 

OP  Saxony  (3) (1994) 

OP  Saxony-Anhalt  (1) (1994) 

OP  Saxony-Anhalt  (2) (1994) 

OP  Saxony-Anhalt  (3)  ( 1994) 
O P T h u r i n g i a ( l ) ( 1 9 9 4) 
O P T b u r i n g » a ( 2 ) ( 1 9 9 4) 
O P T h u r i n g i a ( 3 ) ( 1 9 9 4) 
Multi-regional  OPs 

2.442.9 
6.141.4 
2.417.8 

889.1 
5.851.6 
1.880,7 

814.5 
8.993.3 
1.679.4 

909.1 
9.488.8 
2.058.9 

974.2 
5.467,4 
2.432.9 

778.6 

OP  Fisheries  (1994) 
OP  Oualificanon  of workforce  (1994) 

197.2 

2.360.5 
SS.778.4 

Total 

743.1 
964.8 
729.9 
471.9 
801.4 
676.6 
366.0 

2.110.6 
621,5 
630,4 

1.190.8 
583.5 
590,6 

1.060.6 
521.0 
457.9 

83 JS 
1.076.7 

118.9 

99.9 
115.6 

74.9 
141.4 
111,5 

66.3 
352.4 
177.8 

84.3 
1.0 
93.9 
101.5 
159.3 

794 
63,9 

274 
171.3 

13.680.9 

2.041.0 

Obiective  2* 
SPD  Lower  Saxony  (1994) 
SPD  Bavaria  (1994) 
SPD  Berlin  (1994) 
SPD  Bremen  (1994) 

SPD  Hesse  (1994) 

SPD  North  Rhine-Westphalia 
SPD  Rhineland-Palatinate 
SPD  Saariand 
SPD  Schleswio-Holsre.n  M9941 

Obiective  3 

Regional  OPs 

OP  Baden-Wurttemburg 

OP  Lower  Saxony  (1994) 

OP  Bavaria  (1994) 

OP  Berlin  (1994) 

OP  Bremen  (1994) 

OP  Hamburg  (1994) 

OP  Hesse  (1994) 

OP  North  Rhine-Westphalia  (1994) 

OP  Rhineland-Palatinate  (1994) 

OP  Saarland  (1994) 

OP Schleswig-Holstein  (1994) 

Multi-regional  OPs 

Federal OP 

95.7 

30.5 
401.5 
177.6 
48.0 
1.262,2 
49,7 
240,6 
32.4 

Total 

2.338.2 

115.8 
276.8 

125.3 
113.0 

93.5 

86.1 
135.4 

674.8 

65.8 
90.9 

912,8 

43,1 
12.3 
155.4 
47.6 
16.6 
340,4 
23.8 
48.6 
15.6 

703.4 

52.4 
121.2 
564 
50.8 
394 
39.1 
49,6 
280.6 
294 
40.9 
34.4 

29.6 

04 
67,0 
32.6 
•4.7 
225.4 

0.2 
28.1 
0.2 
379.1 

8.6 

37.2 

164 
84 
64 

H4 
8.1 
55.8 
4,6 

6.1 
11.3 

330.3 
326.2 
322.9 
209.7 
365.7 
408.1 
170.9 
942.5 
357.6 
230.5 
339,7 
267.8 
262.6 
450.6 
229.0 
194,7 

464 
478.0 
5.955.7 

43.1 
14.2 
116.2 
47,6 
16,6 
340,4 
23.7 
48.6 
15.6 

665.9 

25,0 

55,8 

25.0 

24.2 

18.8 

174 

23.6 

98.8 

14.8 

19.1 

234 

44% 
34% 
44% 
44% 
46% 
60% 
47% 
45% 
58% 
37% 
29% 
46% 
44% 
42% 
44% 
43% 

56% 
44% 

43% 

100% 
115% 
75% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 

95% 

48% 
46% 
44% 
48% 
48% 
45% 
48% 
35% 
50% 
47% 
68% 

94,2 
107.2 
103.5 

71.4 
15Z6 
106,0 

40,6 
382,9 
112.6 
123,0 
174.2 

763 
110,2 
202.5 

93.7 

42.8 

201.2 
263.0 
265.5 
175.8 
329,6 
262,4 
110,1 
774.8 
254,9 
207,7 
303.0 
200,5 
212.9 
321,4 
183.1 
140,7 

15.1 
85.6 
2.094.4 

26,7 
331.0 

4.564.5 

7.2 
2,4 
15.8 
6.7 
0.9 
127,1 
2,6 

18,4 
1.7 
182.7 

8,1 
36.9 
8,2 
6,7 
4.2 
9.4 
8,6 
50,6 
3.8 
7.3 
9,6 

13.9 
11.7 
45.8 
17.1 
114 
184.6 
14.3 
31.4 
9.4 

18.7 
46.2 
15,1 
19.4 
14.0 
14,2 
18.6 
85,0 
10,4 
17.7 
19.3 

27% 

27% 

36% 

37% 

4 1% 

39% 

30% 

37% 

4 1% 

3 3% 

2 5% 

34% 

36% 

3 0% 

3 5% 

3 1% 

32% 
3 1% 

33% 

32% 
95% 
29% 
36% 
70% 
54% 
60% 
65% 
60% 

36% 
38% 
27% 
38% 
36% 
36% 
38% 
30% 
35% 
4 3% 
56% 

? 7^ 

31% 

339.7 

48% 

Tout 

2.589.7 

5J79.8 

887,6 

1.682.1 

338.2 

512.6 

474.3 
820.4 

53% 

49% 

134.2 

287.S 

243.1 
521.8 

SPDOennanv 

Obiective  5(a)  aprieulture 

SPD  Lower  Saxonv  R. 866 and  867/90  (1995) 

SPD  Bavaria  R.866  and  867/90  (1995) 

SPD  Bremen  R. 866  and  867/90  (1995) 

SPD  Hambure  R_ 866  and  867/90  (1995) 

SPD  Hesse  R. 866  and  867/90  (1995) 

SPD  Baden-Wurtenburg  R. 866  and  867/90 

(1994) 

SPD  North  Rhine-Westphalia  R. 866  and  867/91 

(1994) 

SPD  Rhineland-Palatinate  R. 866  and  867/90 

MQQ41 
•  After deduction of transfers to  1997-99. 

( 1 ) Economic development 

(2) Rural development 

(3) Labour market 

1 

648.ll 

265.31 

26.61 

56.21 

2!%l 

8.7» 

23.51 

99. 

99.6 

342.2 
4.5 
24,1 

84,0 

127,1 

132.5 

76.6 

29.9 
854 
0,7 
4.3 
21.0 
21.8 

30.1 

18.8 

5.7 

16,3 

0,1 

0.0 

6.3 

5.1 

10.0 

3,6 

10.4 
29.8 
0.2 
0,7 
9.6 
8.6 

35% 
35% 
35% 
16% 
46% 
40% 

14,8 

49% 

6.6 

35% 

1.4 
12,2 
0,1 
0.0 
4,0 
4,9 

7,7 

2.8 

3.8 
19.0 
0.2 
0.3 
5,6 
6,7 

13% 
*'',% 
25% 
8% 
27% 
3 1% 

11.6 

38% 

5.3 

2 8% 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

P r o g r a m m es 

(year  of  adoption) 

Total  cost 

SF 

Commitments  Commitments 

assistance 

1996 

1994-96 

% 

•  Payments 

P a y m e n ts 

1996 

1994-96 

189 

% 

SPD  Saarland  R. 866  and  867/90  ( 1995) 
SPD  Schleswig-Holstein  R.  866  and  867/90 

17.8 
10.2 

<l) 

3,1 
3.1 

(1995) 
Forecast  - Germany  ^  212R/9J  (1094) 

Total 

3.538.3 
4.456.8 

868.2 
1.086.5 

(2) 

(2)/(l) 

(3Ï 

«Vf 11 

1.5 
0,0 

143.3 

191.8 

2,0 
0.5 

4T1.3 
514,6 

6 5% 
16% 

50% 
47% 

1.2 
0.0 

1.5 
0,2 

143.0 
177,3 

333.1 
387.2 

4 6% 

8% 

38% 
36% 

Obiective  :**<a) fisheries 
SPD  Gem,™v  (10941 

Obiective  5(b) 

SPD  Baden-Wurtenburg  (1995) 

SPD  North  Rhine-Westphalia  (1995) 

SPD  Saarland  (1995) 
SPD  Lower  Saxony  (1994) 
SPD  Bavaria  (1994) 
SPD  Hesse  (1994) 
SPD  Rhineland-Palatinate  (1994) 
SPD  Schleswip-HoKrein  (1994* 

T OT A! 

1 

376.91 

76.0l 

12.81 

37.61 

50%l 

3.9l 

20.0| 

26% 

450.8 
117.9 
108,0 
687.1 
2.933,4 
232.3 
426,8 
229.6 

74.9 
46.8 
24.1 
245.1 
560.2 
80.8 
111.3 
85.9 

14.3 
6.2 
1.2 
33.0 
79.7 
10.9 
22,4 
20.2 

23.0 
11.7 
4.0 
77,4 
215,1 
34.5 
42.6 
41.1 

Total 

5.185.9 

74.064.1 

1.229,0 

18.723 J! 

187.7 

3.351.6 

449.5 

8.477.2 

3 1% 
2 5% 
17% 
32% 
3 8% 
4 3% 
38% 
4 8% 

37% 

4 5% 

6.8 

5.0 

0.5 

36,8 

118,3 
10,8 
15.0 

19.3 
212.6 

2.967,2 

11.2 

7,8 

2.3 

62.5 

185,8 

23,6 

2 74 
26.2 

346.8 

6.203.4 

15% 
17% 
9% 
25% 
3 3% 
29% 
25% 
3 1% 

28% 

3 3% 

3.2.  Implementation of the Community initiatives in 1996 

Note: 
Germany  is participating  in all the Community Initiatives with the exception  of Regis. Most of the Community 
Initiative  programmes  (CIPs)  were  approved  by  the  Commission  in  1995. At  the  end  of  that  year,  a  total  of 
19 programmes  were still  to be approved  for  Leader,  Urban,  Rechar,  Résider, Retex,  SMEs  and  Konver  plus 
one  Interreg  CIP.  These  programmes  were  approved  in  1996  (2  Leader,  6  SMEs,  1 Rechar,  3  Konver,  1 
Résider,  1 Retex,  2  Urban,  and  1 Interreg  in  cooperation  with  Austria),  bringing  the  number  of  CIPs  being 
implemented  in Germany to 83 and the number of Interreg CIPs to  18. 

Support for  the development of technological potential in Germany: 

Most of the programmes under the SMEs  Initiative give priority to the technological development of SMEs. In 
North  Rhine-Westphalia,  ECU 2.1 million  (total  cost:  ECU 13 million)  is  earmarked  for  promoting 
technology  and  innovation,  in Bavaria, ECU 3.7 million (total cost ECU 10.6 million) for  promoting  quality 
and  innovation  in  SMEs  and,  in  Schleswig-Holstein,  ECU0.7million 
(total  cost  ECU 1.4million)  for 
innovative  businesses.  In  the  new  Lander,  the  SMEs  CIPs  are  also  making  a  large  contribution  to  job 
creation, with the Saxony-Anhalt programme providing ECU 4.9 million (total cost ECU 11 million) for  R&D 
in distance  working, the  creation of networks and the  utilisation of patents,  while  the Saxony  CIP  provides 
ECU 16.6 million (total cost ECU 47.2 million) to promote the introduction of new technology. 
As  regards  the Initiatives  relating to  industrial conversion, the Konver programmes  aim  to give priority  to 
technological  development  as  a  means  of promoting  economic  diversification.  Most  of  these  programmes 
involve conversion from  military to civilian technology  (examples: Bavaria,  Saarland, recycling of  cars and 
production  of  tanker  lorries; Schleswig-Holstein,  Bremen,  institute  of production  engineering),  support  for 
innovation  and  technology  transfer  (Saxony-Anhalt,  Bremen  and  Brandenburg)  and  cooperation  between 
scientific  workers at  European  level (Bremen).  From  the point  of  view of financing,  ECU 2.8 million  (total 
cost ECU 4.3 million) and  ECU  1.4 million (total cost ECU 2.9 million) are provided for  implementation  of 
the  measures  in  the  Saxony-Anhalt  and  Bremen  programmes  respectively.  The  Résider  programme  in 
Brandenburg  is  supporting  education and  training  measures  in  the  fields  of  innovative  environmental  and 
infrastructure  technology.  The  Retex  CIPs  also  give  priority  to  technological  development  (in  Saxony, 
ECU  12.6 million out of a total of ECU 33.5 million is being granted for  supporting  R&D in businesses and 
technology  centres and, in Thuringia, ECU 3.1 million out of a total of ECU 8.2 million is being provided  for 
the  transfer and  introduction  of new  technology  through improving know-how  in businesses and  developing 
cooperation. 
to  solve  the  problems  caused  by  poor 
Germany  and  Denmark  are  cooperating  under  Interreg 
communications  in  three  regions  (Planungsraum  V  and  Sonderjyllands  Amt,  Ostholstein,  Lubeck  and 
Storstroms  Amt.  and  Kern and  Fyns Amt) and  the consequences for  the  economies  of  those  regions.14.  The 
CIPs covering  Germany and  Luxembourg (Euroregio),  France (Saarland, Lorraine,  Palatinate) and Poland 
(Mecklenburg- Western Pomerania) give priority  to RTD and technology transfers.  That covering France and 
Switzerland  (Upper  Rhine)  is providing  ECU 2.5 million  (total cost ECU 4.9 million)  to stimulate  R&D and 
___________ 
develop telecommunications. 

14 See Chapter V.2. Denmark. 

/ 90 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996)) 

All  the CIPs  have  now  been  approved  by the Commission  and are now  in the initial  stage. In  1996, 
16 new  CIPs  were  approved,  including  five  in  Brandenburg.  The  largest  group  of  approved 
programmes  (a total  of  six)  come  under the SMEs  Initiative  and involve  a total  of ECU 26.1 million 
from the Structural Funds. Five of these programmes concern the old IJinder, the sixth being in one of 
the new  Lander. The  Brandenburg  CIP concentrates  on technical  measures  and measures  relating to 
business  management  in addition  to traditional  investment  support.  In Lower  Saxony,  the CIP gives 
priority  to quality  guarantees  and the transfer of  intangibles.  Operations in Schleswig-Holstein  relate 
to quality management and the search for markets for innovative  products. Under the slogan "Mining 
region to modem  industrial region", the new Rechar programme in Brandenburg provides  support for 
operations  to create and maintain jobs  while  improving the environment  and economic  structures. In 
addition,  two  Urban programmes, for Saarbriicken and Hesse,  have been  approved, the  latter aiming 
to renovate  a district  of  1.1 km2 with a population  of  around 5 000 to  increase  its attractiveness and 
turn  it  into  a  meeting  place.  It  is  planned  inter alia  to  open  a youth  and  leisure  centre  in  a  former 
coffee-roasting  factory  and to lay out  10 000 m2 of green areas. 

A  number  of  industrial  conversion  programmes  have  also  been  approved,  including  three  Konver 
programmes,  for  Baden-Wurttemburg,  Saxony  and  Brandenburg.  The  programme  for  Brandenburg 
aims,  in particular,  to put to economic  use and exploit  the economic  potential  of  buildings  currently 
undergoing  conversion  in  the  region.  The  main  objectives  of  the  programme  in  Saxony  are  the 
renovation  of  old  buildings  and land formerly  used  by troops  of  the CIS  and the promotion  of  their 
rational  use  by  the  municipalities  concerned  (installation  or  creation  of  businesses).  The  Résider 
programme  in  Brandenburg  involves  operations  relating  to  infrastructures,  environmental  resources 
and  human  resources.  Operations  such  as  the  renovation  of  old  factory  buildings  with  the  aim  of 
putting them to economic use and cooperation between businesses and research centres should lead to 
the  creation  of  permanent  jobs.  The  Retex  CIP  in  Brandenburg  also  aims  to  increase  economic 
diversification  by  encouraging  inter  alia  cooperation  between  businesses 
in  marketing  and 
purchasing. 

The  Commission  approved  the  final  Leader  programme,  for  Schleswig-Holstein.  The  bottom-up 
approach adopted for this Initiative has been found to be most suitable for German rural areas, in both 
the old and the new Lander. The local groups have drafted  a large number of promising projects and, 
in the old Lander, 60 local action groups (LAGs) and 15 other collective bodies have been set up. The 
conference  on Leader II held in Germany  allowed  a fruitful  exchange  of  views between  local  groups 
and  the  various  official  bodies  concerned.  Progress  on  implementation  varies  from  one  Land  to 
another but, overall, progress is in line with forecasts. 

The  complexity  of  administrative  procedures  caused  start-up difficulties  with the Pesca programme. 
Given  the  needs  of  the  areas  dependent  on  fishing  and  the  high  number  of  applications  received, 
progress can reasonably  be expected  in the near future. The programme was twice amended in  1996: a 
single commitment  was agreed and appropriations  were concentrated  by means of a transfer from the 
ESF to the ERDF and the FIFG. 

As  regards  the  Initiatives  relating  to  human  resources,  the  implementation  of  which  has  been  to  a 
large  extent  regionalised,  with  the  Lander  responsible  for  85%  of  the  available  funding  (15%  is 
intended  for  funding  supra-regional  projects  by  the  Federal  Government),  projects  were  selected 
following  the first  calls for  submissions. Under the Employment Initiative, 242 projects were selected, 
including 24 at Federal  level  (73 for Now,  120 for Horizon and 49 for Youthstart). The main focus of 
the projects  under the three  strands  of the Initiative is training. Emphasis is also placed on developing 
local  partnerships  and  cooperation  with  businesses  to  provide  work  experience.  One  of  the  major 
themes  of  the  Now  projects  is  the  creation  of  businesses  by  women.  Under Youthstart,  a number of 
projects  aim  to prepare  young  people  for  vocational  training.  Horizon  places  the  stress  on  the  whole 
series  of  stages  leading  to  employment.  A  total  of  220 projects  were  selected  under  the  Adapt 
Initiative,  including  17  at  Federal  level.  As  under  the  Employment  Initiative,  emphasis  is  placed  on 
training  activities.  However,  a  number  of  projects  concentrate  on  analysing  the  problems  caused  to 
businesses, certain  professions  and certain  regions by economic  developments. The range of  activities 
is  verv  wide,  including,  for  example,  management  skills  in  SMEs,  strategies  for  thé  development  of 

8th  Annual  Report  mi  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

191 

businesses  by  the  conquest  of  new  markets  or  the  development  of  new* products,  job  creation, 
particularly  through  the  introduction  of  new  technology  and  new  ways  of  organising  work  and  the 
creation  of  a  network  of  those  involved  in  the  regional  labour  market  in  order  to  stimulate 
employment. 

A number  of  programmes  were  adjusted.  In certain  cases  this  involved  reprograrriming (for  example, 
new  financial  allocation  between  priorities,  redefinition  of  eligible  measures)  but  in  most  cases  the 
reason  was  to  allocate  amounts  resulting  from  indexation15.  In  total,  the  amount  resulting  from 
indexation  at  1996 prices is almost ECU 25 million for the Initiatives concerned, i.e. Interreg, Konver, 
Résider,  SMEs,  Rechar,  Urban  and  Retex. In addition,  ECU 317.7 million  was  allocated  to  Germany 
as  a  reserve.  These  additional  appropriations  will  be  allocated  to  Konver  (more  than  one  third), 
Interreg  and  Employment  and  will  permit  the  launching  of  new  Urban  programmes  (Zwickau  and 
Kiel) and an increase in funding  for the Interreg IIC programmes16. 

Table V-14: Germany  -  Community  Initiatives  -  1996 in  the context of programming for  1994-99  (ECU 

million) 

Initiative 
(number  of CIPs) 

Adapt ( 1 ) 
Employment  (1) 
Leader(15) 
Pesca ( 1 ) 
SMEs (15) 
Rechar (7) 
Konver (16) 
Résider (9) 
Retex (8) 
Urban (10) 
Toul  (83) 
InTtrrrtrn/RtnenflXI" 
CIPs adopted m 1996: 
Leader  Schleswig-Holstein 
Leader technical assistance (creation of the 
national network) 
SMEs Rhineland-Palatinate 
SMEs Brandenburg 
SMEs Lower Saxony 
SMEs Saarland 
SMEs Baden-Wurttemburg 
SMEs Schleswig-Holstein 
Rechar Brandenburg 
Konver  Brandenburg 
Konver Saxony 
Konver  Baden-Wunenburg 
Résider Brandenburg 
Retex Brandenburg 
Urban  Saarbrucken 
Urban  Halle  (Saxony-Anhalt) 
Toul  (16) 
Intern f  f /)«•" 
* Excluding reserve 
*" For programme details see Chapter Vll 
"*  For programme details see Chapter I.B 

Total cost 

SF» 
assistance 
(1) 

Commi tints 
1996 

Commi tints 
1994-96 
(2) 

% 

(2)/(l) 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 
(3> 

(3)/m 

480.4 
298.4 
401,0 
62.0 
402.3 
450.1 
548,4 
606.4 
290.4 
298.3 
3.837,8 

16.6 
2.0 

4.6 
20,9 
9.5 
3,1 
1.8 
3,6 
49.3 
53.9 
40.9 
51.7 
42.4 
6.0 
22.6 
5.2 
334.0 

228.8 
156,8 
177.4 
23.0 
184.2 
158.6 
233,9 
192.8 
703 
973 
1.523.2 

6.6 
1.0 

2.3 
14.9 
4.7 
1.5 
0.9 
1.8 
30,3 
37.1 
25.1 
12.7 
26.2 
3.3 
8.0 
2.7 
179,2 

33.8 
26.8 
15,9 
19,4 
41,7 
62,6 
89,0 
36.6 
9.5 
12.0 
347,2 

6,6 
1.0 

23 
14,9 
4,7 
1.5 
0,9 
1,8 
30.3 
37.1 
25.1 
12.7 
26.2 
3.3 
5.6 
2.7 
176,8 

76.7 
50.0 
140,5 
23.2 
142.9 
118.5 
219.6 
99.1 
32,3 
91,0 
993.7 

6.6 
1.0 

23 
14.9 
4,7 
1.5 
0,9 
1.8 
303 
37.1 
25.1 
12.7 
26.2 
33 
5,6 
2,7 
176^ 

34% 
32% 
79% 
101% 
78% 
75% 
94% 
51% 
46% 
93% 
65% 

100% 
100% 

100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
70% 
100% 
99% 

17,3 
29.5 
14.3 
0,0 
263 
23 2 
70.8 
20.8 
8.6 
113 
221,9 

2.0 
0,4 

U 
4.5 
1.4 
0.8 
0.4 
0.9 
15.1 
18.6 
12J5 
6.3 
13.1 
1.6 
1.7 
1,4 
81.9 

38.8 
41,0 
53.1 
1.9 
57,1 
50,0 
109.5 
52.0 
16.7 
34.5 
454.7 

2.0 
0,4 

1.2 
4.5 
1,4 
0,8 
QPI 
0.9 
15.1 
18.6 
12,5 
6.3 
13,1 
1,6 
1.7 
1.4 
81,9 

17% 
26% 
30% 
8% 
31% 
32% 
47% 
27% 
24% 
35% 
30% 

30% 
40% 

50% 
30% 
30% 
50% 
50% 
50% 
50% 
50% 
50% 
50% 
50% 
50% 
21% 
50% 
46% 

Table 2.2. 
.1. Community Initiatives 

15 SMEs Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania, Konver Mecklenburg-Western  Pomerania and Hesse, Retex Baden-
Wurttemburg. Résider Lower Saxony, Urban Rostock, Interreg Germany (Saxony)-Poland-Czech Republic. 

16 See also Chapter I.B.I. Community Initiatives. 

192 

4.  GREECE 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in Greece-
Support  for  technological  development  is  a  key  factor  in  the  development  strategy  of  the  Greek  CSF 
transmission 
(accounting  for  4.8%  of  Community  appropriations).  Telecommunications  and  data 
applications,  which open  up access for  the  information society  in Greece,  along  with RTD, form  part  of all 
CSF  priorities,  i.e.  integrating  the  national  territory  through  the  development  of  major  infrastructure: 
improving  living  conditions:  developing  the  economic  base;  developing  human  resources  and  fostering 
employment;  and  reducing  regional  disparities  and  improving  communications  in  island areas  through  13 
regional  programmes. 
In  the  first  instance,  improving  and  modernising  telecommunications  (under  the  CSF, ECU 250.7 million; 
total  cost:  ECU 452.2 million)  is  planned  as  a  means  of  reducing  the  remoteness  of  certain  areas.  A 
multiregional OP for  telecommunications  (ECU 203.7 million; total cost: ECU 383.8 million) follows  on from 
the previous  programming period  (CRASH programme,  1992-93). Despite encouraging  results, the quality of 
the network  was still poor  at the end of  1993 (the rate of line breakdowns  was the highest in the  Community, 
waiting  time for  new  lines  was  exceptionally  long),  and  the  network  was  the  least  digitised  in  the  Union, 
reflecting  the  lowest level of per  capita  investment  in the European  Union. The Telecommunications  OP not 
only envisages  improving  infrastructure  (raising the level of digitisation  of the network to 90% and speeding 
up the  introduction of advanced  technologies  - RNIS, ATM  - and pilot  services), but encouraging  enterprises 
to  use  the  new  technologies  through  training  schemes,  modern  management  methods  and  stimulating  the 
creation of new services by the market. In addition to this multiregional  OP, improving basic  communications 
and  infrastructure  networks  generally  is an  aim  of  most  regional  OPs  (the Péloponnèse,  mainland  Greece, 
Ionian  Islands,  etc.)  and  especially  of  those  whose  main  strategy  is  to  develop  tourism  (Northern  Aegean, 
Southern Aegean,  etc.). 
While  there  is  no  OP  specifically  aimed  at  developing  data  transmission  applications,  a  number  of 
multiregional  OPs  provide  support  for  them  in  the  context  of  improving  living  conditions  (health  and 
insurance)  and  developing  human  resources (education and public  administration). For example, one of the 
main measures under the Health OP is to develop an IT system for  health authorities and modernise scientific 
infrastructure  and  equipment  (distance  medicine).  The Education  OP too  allocates  ECU 40.5  million  (total 
cost: ECU 54 million) to linking universities, technical colleges and the Education Ministry network;  the OP 
for  the modernisation  of the public  administration,  with a budget of ECU  117.5 million (total cost: ECU 235 
million),  seeks  to  improve  the  management  of  human  resources  and  the  effectiveness  of  officials  in  the 
taxation,  customs,  finance  and  budget  ministries,  through  the  introduction  of  new  technologies  (data 
transmission networks, major information systems, etc.) and management techniques. 
RTD, however,  receives the bulk of the financial support.  The CSF strategy is to enhance Greece's  technical 
and economic  capability, capitalising on the foundations  laid down earlier by the first OP in relation to RTD 
and by  the STRIDE  Initiative  and  the  Community research programmes.  The RTD sub-priority  is the subject 
of  a  multiregional  OP  with an  allocation  of ECU 316.2  million  (total  cost: ECU 579.1  million).  Of all  the 
areas of assistance  covered by  the programme,  technology  transfer and  innovation,  (stepping up  technology 
transfer  through  the purchase  of licences, small industrial  research projects,  developing  existing  technology 
parks,  improving  information  networks)  is  the  sector  receiving  the  most  support.  Funding  is  allocated  in 
descending  order  to: support for  RTD  in highly profitable  productive  sectors (biotechnology, new  materials, 
etc)  requiring  close  cooperation  between  production  units  and  scientists  and  technological  operators; 
rethinking and expanding research infrastructure; refreshing human potential  by updating researchers'  skills, 
training new researchers in advanced  technologies and providing  training for  technicians and  administrators 
in RTD and  innovation. Part of the RTD programme,  with an allocation  of ECU  7 million, is devoted  also to 
developing  the  universities'  and  research  centres'  network  and  disseminating  research results  (data  bases, 
multimedia  bases, etc.). Support for  RTD is planned also at regional level: 

•  Central Macedonia  (one of the few  regions of Greece enjoying a comparative advantage  in view of 
the  presence  of  educational  and  research  establishments)  :  developing  post-university  study 
programmes,  improving  the  infrastructure  of  these  establishments  (building  new  accommodation 
and  laboratories),  and  developing  links  between  research programmes  and  the productive  sector 
(aid for  small  businesses  to manufacture  innovative products,  patent  applications  and  the  transfer 
of new technology in cooperation with the universities and technical institutes); 
similar  arrangements  are  made for  RTD  and  innovation  in  Crete (another  region  with  high  RTD 
potential):  ECU 34.2 million (total cost: ECU 56.5 million); 

• 

•  western  Greece:  developing  the  infrastructure  of  the  university  of  Patras  and  the  existing 

technology  institutes, expanding their role in promoting  technological research in Greece. 
For the development  of the economic  base, lastly, and particularly for  modernising  industry and  services, the 
Industry  and services  OP, with funds of ECU  720 million (total cost: ECU 2.8 billion), provides  material and 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

193 

qualitative  aid  for  investment  projects  in  enterprises  with  access  to  advanced  technologies.  Similarly, 
encouragement  is given  to fisheries research to develop the fishing industry, aquaculture  and  the processing 
of fishery products. 

Table V-15:  Greece - Funding  directly linked  to technological  development  in 1994-99 (ECU  million) 

IOTAL. 

s__ 

Public 
__-
_____& 
__g___iiis_L 
100% 
NB: The programming procedures and different  approaches taken by the 

_2L 
5 5% 

1.207.6 

MIA 

Mcmhyr Statf 
Total 
Private 
12__ 
546.2 

Funding of the Structural Fonds 

v% 

4 5% 

Member Sûtes invite caution in interpreting these figures,  in particular spending on 

information  society projects,  which arc often  linked to other fields such as 

industry and RTD. 

ORDT 

•Telecom. 

"Telematics 

4.1.  Implementation  of assistance bv Obiective in  1996 

OBJECTIVE 1 

Fie.  V-18: Proerammine  1994-99  (ECU  million  -  1996  prices): 
Priorities: 
Major infrastructure  (a) 
Improvements in living standards (b) 
Economic  competitiveness  (c) 
Human resources and employment (d) 
Reduction of régional disparities (e) 
Technical  assistance  (D 
Breakdown  bv  Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

9.643,7 
2.638,1 
1.853,0 
131,1 
14.205,? 

1 CSF/32  OPs 

Average per OP 

Main features  of  1996 

2.895.6 
1.456.8 
2.740.4 
2.633.9 
4.541.2 

68% 
18% 
13% 
1% 
100% 

--ILS. 

(d)  18% 

Significant  progress  was  made  in  1996  on  the  implementation  mechanisms  approved  with  the  Greek 
authorities.  The  ELKE  agency  Cone-stop-shop  ") for  productive  investments,  and  MOU 
(management 
organisation  unit)  were  set  up  to  improve  the  managerial  capabilities  of  the  regions  and  ministries. 
The  use of  project  data  sheets as a programming  tool  was  extended  to all  the CSF programmes  and  the 
establishment  of  special  agencies  for  implementing  major  projects  continued  (EGNATIA  S.A.  for  the 
east-west  trunk  road,  ERGOSE  for  rail  projects,  KTTMATOLOGIO  S.A.  for  the  land  registry).  All 
these  agencies  are expected  to be fully  operational  in  1997, making  it possible  for  major  projects  to  be 
implemented  effectively  and  thus  improve  financial  implementation  on  the  ground.  In  addition,  the 
Greek  authorities  have  decided  to  finance  major  transport  projects  (especially  road  transport)  using 
the  system  of  concessions.  This  should  help  attract  private  capital  and  make  it  possible  for  new 
sections  of  road  to  be  built  where  the  public  funds  available  (from  national  and  Community  sources) 
have  been  insufficient  to date to guarantee  their  completion. 

A  new  programme  was  adopted  in  1996,  the  Technical  assistance  OP,  comprising  essentially  the 
MOU  (management  organisation  unit)  measures,  on  which  preparations  began  in  1996,  along  with  an 
information  and  public  awareness  plan  under  the  CSF,  and  finally  technical  assistance  measures  for 
the  modernisation  of the  agencies  and  public  enterprises. 

Turning  to  programmes  already  implemented,  the  national  Railways  and  Telecommunications  OPs, 
and  the  regional  OPs  for  Western  Macedonia  and  Western  Greece,  were  given  additional  funding 

; 94 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

through  indexation  of  the  ERDF  appropriations  and,  together  with  the  Technical  Assistance  and 
Urban Development  OPs, underwent financial  reprogramming. Adjustments  to the financing  plans  for 
these  programmes  were  made  to  bring  them  into  line  with  local  conditions.  A  more  thorough  (mid 
term)  review  of  all  programmes  based  on  their  implementation  and  the  findings  of  the  available 
evaluations  is to start in autumn  1997. 

Implementation of the national Agriculture OP is very  satisfactory,  as a result mainly  of the  Objective 
5(a) measures, particularly  those assisting mountain  and less-favoured  areas and forestry  measures. A 
large number of projects  for the processing and marketing of agricultural  products were approved  too. 
To  meet  new  priorities  in  the  OP, part  of  the  indexing  was  allocated  to  it. The  1997  instalment  was 
already  committed  in  1996  and  the  first  advance  paid.  A  number  of  low-cost  innovative  measures 
under  the  OP  are  having  greater  difficulty  in  getting  started,  for  example  the  introduction  of  a 
geographical  system  for  the  combined  operation  of  data-processing  systems  (GIS)  for  uniform  and 
integrated  data  management.  Progress  in  implementing  the  rural  development  component  of  the 
regional  OPs, despite  an  improvement  in  1996, has again been uneven  between  OPs, and  the  original 
delays  have been  only  partly  made up. Some OPs have been  proceeding  very satisfactorily  (Thessaly, 
Southern  Aegean, Crete, Eastern  Macedonia  and Thrace), unlike  others which  have failed  to make up 
all  the  previous delays  (Epirus, mainland  Greece, Northern  Aegean). The remaining OPs fall  between 
the two. 

The Fisheries and Aquaculture OP has given rise to reprogramming, the inclusion  of the  1995  deflator 
(ECU  1.8  million),  the  adoption  of  a  study  on  fishery  products  processing/marketing  sectors,  the 
adoption  of a specific  measure for  the measurement  of several  fishing  vessels, and the introduction  of 
a  programme  manager. Progress  at the end  of  1996 on the fleet  sub-programme  is  satisfactory,  while 
the other two sub-programmes  covering the processing/marketing  of fishery  products  and  aquaculture 
respectively  are lagging  well  behind. Commitments  indicate, however,  that the situation  will  improve 
in  1997 in view of the time needed to carry out the measures. 

Generally  speaking,  1996  has  been  a  turning  point  in  the  successful  implementation  of  the  CSF  in 
Greece.  Improvements  in  the  main  macro-economic  indicators  have  resulted  in  a  resumption  of 
private  investment.  In  particular,  private  investment  under  the  Industry  and  services  OP  is 
substantially up on  1995, and the implementation  of major projects  through the system of  concessions 
permitting  private  capital  holdings  is  also  on  the  right  track.  This,  combined  with  significant 
improvements  in the  implementation  arrangements,  is creating satisfactory  conditions  for  the  success 
of the CSF in  Greece  both  in  terms of local  take-up  and  of  impact  on the macro-economic  indicators 
and  in  generating  and  maintaining  sustainable  jobs.  The  Greek  authorities  have  provided  public 
investment  funds  for  1997 which  are substantially  up on  1996 at  a difficult  time  of  declining  public 
deficits.  This  should  ensure national part-financing  for  CSF operations, and  a high  level  of uptake  in 
1997 and the making up of some of the delays registered  in the period  1994-96. 

1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-99 

As  regards  the  financial  implementation  of  its  CSF, Greece  reached  the  average  for  the  Objective  1 
countries  at  the  end  of  1996. Taking  into  account  ERDF commitment  applications  submitted  by  the 
Greek  authorities  in  December  1996  which  were  not  implemented  that  year  owing  to  lack  of 
appropriations,  the  situation  regarding  the  Structural  Funds  as  a  whole  is  as follows:  appropriations 
committed  at the end  of  1996 represent 46% of those programmed,  and  appropriations  paid  represent 
32%  of  total  aid  (or  69% of  appropriations  committed). Implementation  in  relation  to the ERDF and 
the  EAGGF  is  further  advanced  even  than  under  the  CSF programming.  EAGGF  appropriations  for 
the  national  agricultural  programme  committed  up  to  the  end  of  1996 represent  60% of  total  aid  for 
the  period  1994-99,  and  those  paid  represent  49%. Turning  to  rural  development,  in  all  for  the  13 
OPs,  EAGGF  appropriations  committed  to  the  end  of  1996 represent  44%  of  the  aid  and  those  paid 
account for 29%. 

8th  Annual  Report  un  the  Structural  Funds  (1996) 

195 

Progress on the ground, moreover, is satisfactory  with 71 %  of programmed expenditure  implemented 
at the end of  1996 for all Funds (73% for  1996 only). For the reasons set out above, this  satisfactory 
rate of implementation should gather pace in 1997. 

Table V-16:  Greece  -  Assistance  by  Objective 

1996  in  the  context  of programming  for  1994-99  (ECU 

million) 

Programmes 
(year of adoption) 

gtoKrt'vt I 
Regional OPs 
OP Attica (1994) 
OP Crete (1994) 
OP Northern Aegean ( 1994) 
OP Southern Aegean ( 1994) 
OP Epirus (1994) 
OP Continental Greece ( 1994) 
OP Western Greece (1994) 
OP Ionian Islands (1994) 
OP Central Macedonia ( 1994) 
OP Western Macedonia (1994) 
OP Macedonia-Thrace  (1994) 
OP Péloponnèse (1994) 
OP Thessaly  (1994) 
Multiregional OPs 
OP Technical assistance ( 1996) 
OP Culture-tourism (1995) 
OP Postal services (1995) 
OP Télécommunications ( 1995) 
OP Agriculture (1994) 
OP Railways (1994) 
OP Urban development (underground railv 
OP Education and basic training ( 1994) 
OP Energy (1994) 
OP Environment (1994) 
OP Social exclusion (1994) 
OP Public service (1994) 
OP Continuing training (1994) 
OP Natural gas (1994) 
OP industry and services ( 1994) 
OP Fisheries. Aquaculture (1994) 
OP Research and technology  ( 1994) 
OP Roads - Ports - Airports (1994) 
OP Health and prevention fl 9^ 
TOTrM, 

Toul cost  SF assistance 

Commitmentst Commitments) 

JÏL 

19% 

1994-96 
(?) 

J2WL 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 

_____ 

i___LL 

938.5 
435.3 
327.9 
380.0 
346.9 
623.0 
513.9 
228.2 
816.9 
332.0 
689.0 
440.2 
560.9 

84.8 
795.6 
117.1 
383.8 
1826.7 
548.0 
1.566,0 
1.847,6 
946.3 
515.0 
328.0 
305.4 
1.283.0 
825.4 
2.808.9 
311.7 
579,1 
2.542.4 
339.0 
________ 

685.7 
312.3 
210,2 
224,1 
236.5 
371.8 
310,7 
170,7 
588.5 
244,0 
494.3 
286.0 
375.8 

67,3 
229.1 
78.0 
203.7 
1.264.4 
329.1 
783.0 
1.385.7 
352.1 
376.7 
246.0 
168.6 
756.0 
354.6 
720,0 
150.0 
316.2 
1.327,4 
226.4 
i?,m? 

3,4 
9.5 
0.0 
33.1 
31.9 
46.8 
44,4 
24.9 
161.7 
32,1 
73.0 
6.8 
71.2 

13.5 
54,5 
0.0 
43.4 
216.8 
85.4 
62,6 
0,0 
59.8 
62.2 
0,0 
0,0 
104,7 
85.3 
0.0 
0.0 
47.2 
184.5 
31.5 
______ 

3011 
140.5 
89.8 
99.6 
125.1 
156.7 
133.9 
75.3 
336.4 
96,5 
219.8 
91.8 
1818 

13.5 
74.0 
10,8 
89.3 
744.8 
223.5 
473.6 
395.8 
212.5 
157.5 
68.8 
482 
313.5 
201.7 
1812 
42.8 
127,2 
640.4 
_ 5U 
6.127.6, 

44 
45 
43% 
44% 
53% 
42% 
43% 
44% 
57%, 
40% 
44% 
32% 
49% 

20% 
32% 
14% 
44% 
59% 
68% 
60% 
29% 
60% 
42% 
28% 
29% 
41% 
57% 
25% 
29% 
40% 
48% 
25% 

121.2 
46.4 
29.0 
32.6 
62.6 
36.8 
29,4 
17.0 
86.2 
25.0 
55.5 
40.2 
44.2 

6.7 
33,0 
4.9 
62.2 
200,6 
10,4 
139.2 
0.0 
112,1 
28,1 
0.0 
10.2 
120.4 
0.0 
51.6 
11.2 
423 
164,5 

_____ 

1.646.1 

279.2 
119.5 
773 
76.1 
104.4 
121,5 
97.3 
56,2 
220.4 
75.7 
166.9 
79.3 
131.9 

6,7 
42.7 
5.4 
63.9 
602.8 
120.9 
352.1 
2512 
189.3 
77.2 
40.2 
35.3 
251,9 
94,9 
143.9 
26.7 
91.0 
364,7 
35.1 
4.4Q3.1 

41% 
38% 
37% 
34% 
44% 
33% 
31% 
33% 
37% 
31% 
34 
28% 
35% 

10% 
19% 
7% 
31% 
48% 
37% 
45% 
18% 
54% 
20% 
16% 
21% 
33% 
27% 
20% 
18% 
29% 
27% 
J_-t 
_2-L-c 

196 

gth Annual Report on the Structural Fund-; (1996) 

42.  Implementation  of the Community Initiatives in 1996 

Note: 
Greece participates  in all the Initiatives other than Regis, and  all the CIPs (one per Initiative)  were adopted  in 
1994 and  1995. This means  10 programmes implemented  at national  level therefore,  to which should  be added 
3 Interreg CIPs (two Regen and one for cross-border cooperation). 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in Greece: 
The funding  from  the  Greek  CIPs  to  technological  development  is  much  less  than  under  the  Objective  I 
programmes.  The  only  Initiatives  having  a  direct  bearing  in  this  area  are  SMEs  and  Interreg.  SMEs  has 
earmarked.  ECU2.7  million  (total  cost:  ECU6.7million) 
the  development  of  data  transmission 
applications  to  improve  the  international  competitiveness  of  Greek  small  businesses.  The  Interreg  external 
borders  CIP  has  set  aside  ECU 8  million  (total  cost:  ECU  16.5 million)  to  encourage  cross-border 
cooperation  between Greece, Albania and Bulgaria on basic telecommunications  infrastructure. 
Under  the Adapt  programme  a  data  network  and  data  bases  are  to  be  developed  covering jobs,  and  the 
Employment  Initiative proposes  the use of distance  training, telecommuting and multimedia centres by young 
people  and  other  disadvantaged  groups. Among  the  industrial  restructuring  initiatives, Konver  supports the 
development  of an electronic network to regenerate small businesses dependent on the defence sector. 

for 

Preparations for the implementation  of the SMEs, Résider, Rechar and Urban CIPs took place in  1996 
while  Retex  and  Interreg-Regen  Gas  are  proceeding  at  a  normal  pace.  The  Regen  programme  for  a 
cable  between  Greece and Italy has run into problems involving social acceptance  by the Italian  local 
authorities  on  environmental  grounds.  Implementation  of  the  Interreg-External  frontiers  programme 
was  well  under  way  but  has  come  to  a  standstill  on  account  of  the  political  and  social  situation  in 
neighbouring countries  (Bulgaria  and especially  Albania). The Interreg Greece-Italy  Initiative is to be 
approved  in  1997, as  should  Interreg  II C  (drought,  flooding  and  cooperation  on  regional  planning). 
The  SMEs  and  Regen  Gas  CIPs  have  undergone  financial  reprogramming  and  benefited  from 
indexation,  and  the  agricultural  component  has  been  incorporated  in  the  Interreg-Extemal  frontiers 
CIP.  In  the  case  of  Leader  H,  1996  was  the  year  in  which  final  evaluation  was  made  of  the  revised 
financing  plans of the various local groups and their agreements with the Ministry of Agriculture were 
concluded.  Priority  was  given  to  local  groups  which  presented  an  integrated  programme.  The 
measures  will  in  fact  start  to  run  in  1997. For  Pesca,  an  interim  management  body  was  set  up  but, 
despite the efforts  made, it has not yet been possible to launch the programme. Projects  approved  and 
now  running  under  the  Employment  Initiative,  on  the  other  hand,  currently  total  107  (29  Now,  44 
Horizon, and  34 Youthstart  projects). Now  supports the setting up of advisory  and  guidance  services, 
including  services  for  women  managers.  Youthstart  promotes  the  development  of  training  and 
guidance  in growth  sectors  such as tourism, the environment  and culture. Horizon-Disabled  is mainly 
concerned  with  trials  to provide  sheltered  employment,  little  developed  up to now  in  Greece,  and  to 
assist  the  disabled  in  the  workplace.  In  view  of  the  challenges  facing  Greece  due  to  the  arrival  of 
refugees  and  immigrants  from  the  former  USSR,  a leading  place  in Horizon  has been  given  to  these 
projects,  which account  for 45%  of the total  budget. The number of projects  approved  under Adapt is 
115.  The  dominant  theme  is  the  introduction  of  new  technologies  and  innovative  measures  for 
improving  business  productivity  and  competitiveness.  The  project  promoters  both  for  Employment 
and  Adapt  are  mainly  public,  but  the  private  sector  contributes  10%  to  the  total  funding  of  the 
measures. 

It  should  be  noted  also  that  the  monitoring  of  the  CIPs  has  been  streamlined.  Some  Monitoring 
Committees  are  responsible  for  several  programmes  of  common  concern  (for  example,  SMEs  and 
Résider).  Similarly,  the  SMEs  Initiative  has  become  a  forum  for  discussing  all  SME  measures 
contained  in  the  CSF  and  the  Community  Initiatives.  The  distribution,  lastly,  of  the  Community 
Initiatives  reserve  means  that  a  further  ECU  72.5 million  can  be  allocated  to  all  the  Greek 
programmes except-SMEs, chiefly  for the new Interreg IIC, Leader and  Konver17. 

17 See also Chapter I.B.I. Community  Initiatives. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

197 

It  is  too  early  yet  to  make  an  assessment  of  the  outlook  for  the  CIPs, most*of  which  are  still  in  the 
start-up  phase.  Interreg-Regen  Gas  is  undoubtedly  well  under  way,  in  conjunction  with  the  Natural 
gas OP. Interreg-External  frontiers  too is expected to move ahead when social and political  conditions 
in  neighbouring countries return to normal. 

Table V-17:  Greece -  Community  Initiatives 

1996 in  the context of programming for  1994-99  (ECU 

million) 

Initiative 
(No of CIPs) 

Total cost 

S.F." 
Assistance 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
(2) 

Adapt  (I) 
EMPLOI (1) 
Leader(1) 
Pesca (1) 
SMEs(l) 
Rechar (I) 
Konver ( 1 ) 
Résider ( 1 ) 
Retex ( 1 ) 
Urban ( 1 ) 
Toul  (10) 
hterree/Reeen  (.1)** 

44.6 
86.9 
263.6 
54.6 
156.9 
2.0 
20.3 
8.9| 
145.3 
67.2 
850.3 

30,1 
64,4 
148.0 
27.1 
83.3 
1,5 
119 
4.7 
87.5 
45.2 
504.8 

20 
4,6 
0.0 
22.3 
IS.3 
0,2 
0.0 
0.6 
50.2 
1.1 
1173 

27,4 
12,6 
22.6 
26.8 
28.8 
1.5 
11.5 
4.7 
62.0 
5.6 
203,4 

Pavments 
1996 

Pavments 
1994-96 

JMiL 

91% 
20% 
15% 
99% 
35% 
100% 
89% 
1005 
71<* 
125 
40% 

4.8 
2.3 
0.0 
0.3 
9.2 
0,1 
0.0 
0.3 
25.9 
0.6 
43.4 

_______  _______ 
28 
10% 
8% 
9% 
17% 
50%| 
44% 
50% 
40%| 
5% 
n% 

8.4 
6,4 
11.3 
2.6 
14.4 
0,8 
5.7 
2.3 
35.0 
2.3 
89.1 

* Excluding reserve 
••  See programme details Chapter VII. Table  22. 

z 

This  report  has  been  prepared  by  the  Directorate-General  for  Regional  Policy  and  Cohesion  (DG 
XVT) in collaboration  with the Directorates-General  for Employment,  Industrial Relations  and Social 
Affairs  (DG  V),  Agriculture  (DG  VI)  and  Fisheries  (DG  XIV)  and  with  contributions  from  the 
Directorates-General  for Competition (DG IV), Transport (DG VU), Environment, Nuclear Safety and 
Civil  Protection  (DG  XI),  Science,  Research  and  Development  (DG  XH),  Telecommunications, 
Information  market  and Exploitation  of  Research  (DG XIII), Internal  Market and Financial  Services 
(DG XV), Energy (DG XVH), Budgets (DG XIX) Financial Control  (DG XX)  and Enterprise Policy, 
Distributive Trades, Tourism and Cooperatives (DG XXTfl). 

20 

8th Annual report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

2.  Structural Funds and development of the technological potential of the regions 

The Structural Funds as the instrument for lasting technology development 

All the above has had an effect  on Structural Funds aid in the period  1994-99. As the first  Report on 
Economic  and  Social  Cohesion  points  out,  regional  technology  development  requires  policies  that 
accompany  enterprises  undergoing  technological  change  and  help  the  workforce  adjust  so  that 
regional economic structures can modernise and diversify. The Structural Funds not only provide the 
regions  with  the necessary  infrastructure  for  this  adjustment,  they  encourage  the regional  and local 
actors  to  increase  regional  competitiveness  by  basing  it  on  innovation  and  high-valued  added 
industries. To achieve this, investment in technology development has increased strongly between the 
first and second prograrnming periods, passing from ECU 3.5 billion to ECU 7.5 billion, i.e. 6% of the 
Community  funding.21. 

The approach too has evolved. In the first  programming period, the Structural Funds aimed above all 
to improve regional capabilities in science and technology by improving RTD infrastructure22  and by 
helping  to  develop  skills  formerly  unexploited.  This  assistance  helped  public  administrations  to 
appreciate  the  strategic  importance  of  technology  development  for  regional  productivity,  it 
encouraged  both  the  forging  of  links  between  universities  and  business  and  private  sector 
involvement,  and  facilitated  access  to  the  RTD  framework  programme.  In  numerical  terms,  the 
Objective  2 regions devoted the greatest  share of appropriations to RTD (9% of the total budget, as 
against  3% in  the  Objective  1 regions),  but  Community  funding  in  1994  accounted  for  a  fifth  of 
national spending on research and development in Ireland and a third in Portugal. 

The programmes for the period  1994-99 promote a new approach. In the first place, the share devoted 
to the  development  of  technological  potential  in  the  Objective  1 regions  has  increased  appreciably 
(6.5% compared to 2% earlier), while the share in the Objective  2 regions has reached  19% and the 
place  of  new  technologies  and  their  dissemination  is  increasing  in  the  other  Objectives  and  the 
Community  Initiatives.  Secondly,  it  would  appear  that  the regional  capacity  to  innovate  and  adopt 
new technologies depends not only on regional supply (R&D capacity and mechanisms to spread the 
technology), but also, and to an increasing extent, on demand, or more precisely the receptiveness of 
the economic structure (in particular the SMEs) which is often  insufficient  because unable to identify 
and express its needs. The current programmes therefore  try to strengthen enterprise  involvement in 
technology  development,  to  encourage  technology  transfer  from  the  most  developed  to  the  least 
developed regions and to train users by investing in research infrastructure and developing a definitive 
strategy based on the market demand rather than on the scientific and technological supply. 

21  See Chapter LA. Assistance by  Objective. 
22  Thanks  to  programmes  such  as Ciência in  Portugal  (which  has  created  more  than  50  new  RTD  facilities  and 
infrastructure 

improved  100  existing  ones),  the  science  and  technology  plan  in  Greece,  the  scientific 
programmes  in Spain, the national research  and technology  development programme  in Italy, etc. 

]98 

5.  SPAIN 

5.1.  Implementation of assistance bv Objective in 1996 

Sth Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in the regions of Spain 
Objective  1:  Support  for  technological  development  is  included  in  several  CSF  priorities.  Altogether,  it 
represents  5%  of  Community  appropriations for  the  CSF. As  regards  RTD,  1.5% of  CSF  appropriations, 
primarily  under  the  'Improvement  of  the System  of  Production ' priority  is allocated  to  the  major  economic 
sectors and  to businesses,  whose  level of investment  in RTD in  1994 was  only half  the  Community  average. 
This priority is being implemented at different levels and in different directions : 

• 

stepping  up of public  and private  RTD activities,  encouragement  of business participation  in RTD 
and innovation projects, financing of training grants for  the private  sector in centres of  excellence, 
under  the  multiregional  sub-CSF  and  some  regional  OPs  (Andalusia,  Valencia,  Extremadura, 
Galicia  and  Murcia)  which  support  private  investment  in  RTD  and  business  cooperation  with 
universities and research centres; 

»  measures for  industry  and  crafts: under  the multiregional  sub-CSF,  implemented  by  means  of the 
'Regional  aid for  production  activities  OP  (ECU 387  million;  total  cost:  ECU 3  126  million): 
technological upgrading of businesses, distribution of new technologies, participation  of  businesses 
in  international  industrial  technology  cooperation  projects;  in  some  regional  OPs  (Andalusia, 
Castile-La  Mancha,  Castile-Leôn,  Valencia,  Asturias  and  Murcia:  support  for 
innovation  in 
production  technologies and technology transfer) and in some global grants (Murcia,  Andalusia). 

RTD  is also playing  a  major  role  in the modernisation  of  the  agricultural  and  fisheries  sectors,  whose  low 
productivity  is often linked to a low level of technology. In Andalusia,  Castile-La Mancha,  Valencia, Murcia, 
Asturias  and  Galicia, one  of the priorities  is to spread  the use  of the most appropriate  methods  to  improve, 
diversify  and  realign agricultural production  whilst adjusting  it to the  CAP. In  the fisheries sector,  the main 
measure  under the OP for  Murcia is océanographie research to develop aquaculture. 
For the development  of human  resources, the multiregional sub-CSF  is designed  to train research  workers in 
businesses,  research centres and  universities, and  consolidate  the rele  of the Technology  Transfer  Offices in 
the  universities.  These  are  measures  frequently  implemented  by  means  of  global  grants  in  Andalusia, 
Salamanca,  Castile-Leôn and Murcia, supplemented by most regional OPs, which provide support for  : 

•  RTD training measures in businesses (Andalusia and  Valencia) and the development  of multimedia 

• 

educational material to spread new technologies and management methods  (Andalusia), 
research  projects  promoting  the diversification  of  economic  activities  (Canary  Islands),  and  the 
strengthening  of  ties  between public  research  and  the production  sectors  (Cantabria,  Castile-La 
Mancha and  Extremadura), 
• 
the development of RTD infrastructures and facilities  (Cantabria,  Valencia, Galicia and Murcia), 
•  basic  research,  applied  research  and  competitive  and  pre-competitive  research  (Valencia  and 

Galicia), and university research (Murcia and Extremadura); 
the distribution of information technology (Extremadura). 

• 

Outside  RTD,  the  allocation  of  2.5%  of  the  total  CSF  budget  to  telecommunications  is  particularly 
noteworthy  in  view  of  its  important  role  in  spatial  structuring.  This  is  a  continuation  of  the  efforts  of  the 
preceding  programming  period  to  iron  out  regional  imbalances  in  the development  of  networks  and  public 
services. All  the  regional  OPs provide for  access  to the  infrastructure for  the population  as  a  whole  and its 
modernisation,  and greater the use of the network by introducing new advanced services (ISDN: from 37% to 
65% in 1999). 
Objective  2  (1994-96):  the  CSF  defines  a  strategy focusing  on  RTD  and  innovation,  and  the  seven  OPs 
contain  a  priority  to  promote  RTD  and  information  technologies  (in  total  ECU 111.3  million;  total  cost: 
ECU  176.8  million).  The  ERDF  appropriations  under  these  OPs  are  targeted  at  the  financing  of 
infrastructure  (construction  and  enlargement  of  premises,  acquisition  of  scientific  equipment,  laboratory 
facilities)  and  research  programmes,  and  at  involving  research  centres  in  technological  development  for 
SMEs. ESF assistance is directed mainly at training for  research workers and research centre  administrators, 
the  recruitment  of  research  workers  and  post-graduate  study  grants for  research,  science,  technology  and 
innovation. Examples of the most significant regional OPs are : 

•  Aragon  :  development  of  the faculty  of  sciences  at  the  University  of  Zaragoza,  the  Combustion 
Technology  Research  Laboratory  of  the Aragon  Technological  Institute,  and  university  education 
(ECU 9.4 million; total cost: ECU 17.6 million); 

•  Catalonia:  construction  and  equipment  of faculties,  advanced  technology  institutes  and  research 
centres for  food,  and  the  establishment  of  a  Mediterranean  maritime  study  centre  (ECU 20.5 
million; total cost: ECU 42 million); 

•  Madrid: development  and  equipment of the Alcalâ  de Henares and  Carlos III  University Research 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

199 

Centres, 
ECU  53.5  million); 

training  for  research  workers,  university  study  grants 

(ECU  26.6  million; 

total  cost: 

•  Navarre: 

equipment  of  the  regional  public  university  and 

university  study  grants  for  research  workers,  and  support  for  advanced 
total  cost:  ECU  9.3  million): 

the  Navarre  Technology 

Centre, 
training  (ECU  4.5  million; 

•  Basque  Country:  equipment  of  specialised 

financing  of  research  programmes 
million;  total  cost:  ECU  67.2  million). 

part-
technology  centres  and  university  departments, 
in  those  centres,  and  training  for  research  workers  (ECU  31 

the 

(Madrid) 

development 

encouraging 

technological 

the  CSF  priority 

of  businesses,  under 

the  construction  of  a  technology  centre  for  businesses 

technology  park,  the  development  of  the  Zamudio  Technology  Park 

is  supplemented  by  aid  measures  for  the  creation  and  development  of  technology  parks  and 
This  assistance 
business 
aid  for 
in  Zaragoza 
competitiveness.  Examples  are  the  equipment  of  the  Training  Centre  for  Advanced  Technologies 
the  extension  of  the 
(Aragon), 
Alcalà  de  Henares 
(Basque 
Country)  and  the  extension  of  a  research  laboratory  for  car  engines  (Catalonia).  The  OPs  for  Catalonia, 
Rioja  and  the  Basque  Country  also  encourage  business  research  activities. 
The  regional  OPs  focus 
their 
development,  especially  that  of  telecommunications,  does  receive  support,  in  a  sub-priority  of  the  CSF  in  the 
'Communications  development'  priority 
Objective  3:  The  ESF  provides  assistance  for  the  implementation  of  measures  on  technological 
skill  improvement 
research,  biotechnology  and  information 

training  and 
in  the  most  promising  sectors  and  as  part  of  transfer  development  and  application  of 

and  data  transmission  applications.  However, 

less  on  telecommunications 

(Balearic 

strategy. 

Islands), 

technology  methods. 
the  Centre  for  Fashion  Design 

for 

The  project 
commercial,  marketing, 
provides  for 
technological 
by practical  work  experience. 

industrial, 
technological  and  training  aspects  of  the  textiles  and  clothing  sector.  It 
include 
followed 

training  measures  for 
integration  of  young  persons,  which 
training  in  new  design  and  production  methods,  the  theoretical  part  being 

the  vocational 

(FUNDISMA) 

in  Madrid 

covers 

the  introduction  of  new  technologies 

in  the  SPDs  on  revitalisation  and  diversification  of  the  economy  provide 

for 
Objective  5(b):  The  priorities 
the  SPD  for  Aragon 
support  for  mechanisation  and  the  development  of  new  technologies.  For  example, 
supports 
in  the 
Bandenas  area,  and  the  SPD  for  the  Basque  Country  stimulates  research  linked  to  the  development  of  high-
quality  regional  products.  These  measures  are  backed  up  by  support  for  scientific  and  technical  training  and 
research  centres. 
In  total,  Community  financing  for  technological  development 
appropriations 

in  the  production  processes  of  most  farming  businesses 

in  Spain  represents  5.1%  of  Structural  Fund 

(Objectives  1, 2 and  5(b)). 

Table  V-18: 

Spain  - Financing  directly  linked  to  technological  development 

in  1994-99  (ECU  million) 

TOTAL 

SL 

1.282,3 
91% 
Objective 1 
9% 
Objective 2 
1113 
fLS. 
Ohi. 5fb) 
_ i _£ 
IMftl  1.3H4 
TOTAL 
NB : In  view  of the programming  procedures and differem  approaches taken  by the 

2.404.2 
234.3 
13.9 
____£__ 

Memhyr  State 
Public  PriYatt  Total 
53% 
1.121,9 
121,9 
48% 
6% 
l?.l 
g?ftl  1.256.9 

1.121,9 
123.0 
12,1 

0,0 
I.I 

1.11  1.258.0 

Member  Slates, caution  is required  in  interpreting  these  figures,  in particular  spending 

on  information  society  projects,  which  are often  linked  to  other fields  such  as 

industry  and  RTD. 

Financing by the Structural Funds 

47% 
52% 
-___£ 
_____ 

2% 

49% 

49% 

ORTD  •Telecom.  •Telematics 

200 

OBJECTIVE 1*8 

Fi£. V-19: Programming 1994-99 (ECU million): 
Priorities: 
Adjustments  to the svstem of production (a) 
Human  resources (b) 
Access to isolated  areas (c) 
Basic  infrastructure  fd) 
Bx  Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FTFG 
Total 

14.998,4 
6.118,7 
3.309.6 
1.008.7 
25,435,4 

1  CSF  164  OPs 

Average per OP 

Main features  of  1996 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

(d)7% 

(a) 35"; 

(c)  25% 

(b)  33% 

59% 
24% 
13% 

4% 

100% 

397.4 

Eleven  new assistance  measures  were  adopted  in  1996,  representing  a  total  amount  of  ECU 703.2 
million, i.e. less than  3% of the total  Community  contribution  to the CSF. They  included  three  major 
ERDF projects, two ERDF global  grants, two ERDF and EAGGF OPs and four  single-fund  OPs (two 
ERDF and two ESF). The three  major  projects  cover  energy  infrastructure.  The first,  the Gibraltar-
Cordoba gas pipeline, is one of ten priority energy projects  adopted at the Essen  summit in December 
1994 and is part  of the development  of trans-European  energy  networks. The second,  the Valencia-
Cartagena  gas pipeline  (first  stage  Paterna  -  Callosa  del Segura),  will  play  a  strategic  role  for the 
entire  natural  gas transport  system,  because  it will  enable  it to be linked  to the future  regasification 
installation  in Cartagena,  thus  improving the security  of supply  for the  entire  transport  network. The 
third  major  project,  the  conversion  of  the methane  tanker  unloading  installations  in  Huelva,  will 
increase the storage capacity for liquid natural  gas at the Huelva installation, thus diversifying  supply 
and improving the safety  and flexibility  of the natural gas transport  system in the Iberian peninsular as 
a  whole.  The  project  will  also  contribute  to  energy  diversification  and  improvement  of  the 
environment. 

The  global  grant  for IDAE  (Instituto para  la Diversifïcaciôn  y  el Ahorro  Energético  - Institute for 
energy  diversification  and saving)  is an ERDF  assistance  measure. It is designed  to improve  energy 
efficiency  and promote  renewable  energy  sources.  The grant  to Castile-La  Mancha  is designed  to 
introduce financing  products better suited to the situation of businesses in the region. Two of the new 
OPs  adopted 
involve  the  ERDF.  The  OP  PITMA  II  (Programa  Industrial  y  Tecnologico 
Medioambiental  - Industrial  and technological  programme for the environment)  is designed  firstly to 
develop the supply  of technologies,  plant,  "green" products  and environmental  services for industry, 
and  secondly  to reduce or eliminate the pollution  caused by industry  and industrial  products. The OP 
Technical  Assistance  is intended to help administrative  institutions  obtain the best results  possible in 
the  programming,  management,  administration  and evaluation  of the forms  of  assistance  under the 
CSF.  Two OPs are  financed  mainly  by  the  EAGGF.  They  are the  'Economic  development  and 
diversification  in rural areas OP and the technical assistance programme for statistical updating. 

As  regards  implementation  of the  CSF as a whole  in  1996, the CSF Monitoring  Committee,  meeting 
in December,  decided to add a new sub-priority "Information  Society", designed to encourage  the use 
of  new  computing  technology  by  public  service  authorities,  in  job  creation  and  technological 
innovation,  and provide  equal  access  to information.  The Commission  has also  ordered  an  analysis 
with  a  view  to  simplifying  and  rationalising  aid  programmes  by  means  of  an  inspection  and 
monitoring  system,  to prevent  any cumulation  of aid. As regards  assessment, the reports  on part one 
have already  been  drawn  up and submitted  in the various  Monitoring  Committees. The report  on the 
CSF is to be drawn up in the second half of 1997. 

18  Eligible  areas:  Andalusia,  Asturias,  Canary  Islands,  Cantabria,  Castile-Leôn,  Castile-La  Mancha,  Extremadura, 

Galicia,  Murcia,  Valencia,  Ceuta  and  Melilla. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

201 

1996 in the context  of programming for  1994-99 

95%  of the amount  originally provided for in the CSF was programmed  (ECU 769.4 million under the 
ERDF is still  to be programmed). The most  dynamic  Autonomous  Communities  in terms  of  the  level 
of  implementation  are  Valencia,  Ceuta,  the  Canary  Islands,  Cantabria  and  Galicia.  In  terms  of 
priorities,  most  progress  was  made  with 
'Integration  and  spatial  structuring',  followed  by 
'Development  of the economic fabric'  and  'Infrastructures  to support economic activities". In terms of 
institutions,  the  highest  rate  of  implementation  was  recorded  by  the  central  authorities,  followed  by 
the regional  authorities, public enterprises  and local authorities. 

Implementation  of the fisheries  programme progressed  at a rate of  100% of the  1994 instalment,  80% 
of that for  1995 and 25% of that for  1996, thus making it possible to pay the Member State the second 
advance for  1996 (i.e. 34% of the total programmed  for the period  1994-99). Nevertheless, the annual 
timetable  was  reprogrammed  in November,  to transfer  ECU 56 million  of  the  1995 instalment  to  the 
1996 instalment  and take account of indexation for  1994/95 in the  1996 instalment. 

OBJECTIVE 219 

Fie. V-20: Proerammine 1994-96 (ECU million - 1996 prices and situation): 
Bv sector : 
Productive environment (a) 
Human resources (b) 
Land improvement and restoration (c) 
Environmental protection (d) 
Technical assistance (el 
Bv Fund : 

| 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total! 

787,6 
208,6 
996.21 

1 CSF/8  OPs 

Average per OP1 

*79% 
21% 
100% 

124.5 

1996 in the context  of programming for  1994-99 

(c)1 5%( d ) 4 %<e>1% 

(b) 28% 

(a) 52% 

In  1996  the  eight  OPs  under  the  CSF  for  1994-96  progressed  as  planned.  Cornrnitments  were 
completed  and  the  unused  balance  transferred  to  the  period  1997-99  so  that  the  appropriations  for 
each  OP  had  actually  been  committed  on  the  ground  by  the  end  of  December  1996,  representing 
Community  financing  of  ECU 990 million,  i.e. 88%  of  the  contribution  originally  laid  down  in  the 
CSF. This  Structural  Fund  financing  was made up of ECU 781.4 million  from  the ERDF (i.e. 90% of 
the  allocation  originally  provided  for),  ECU 368.3  million  of  which  was  actually  paid  out  in  the 
Member  State  in  1994-1995,  and  a total  of  ECU 208.6 million  financed  by  the  ESF  (i.e.  80%  of  the 
allocation  originally  provided  for),  ECU 98.6 million  of  which  was  actually  paid  out  in  1994  and 
1995.  Completion  meant  that  an  unused  amount  of  ECU  139.3 million  could  be  transferred  to  the 
1997-99  programming  period  (12%  of  the  original  CSF  assistance),  plus  ECU  16.1  million20  from 
indexation  of  the CSF for  1995 and  1996. These  transfers  relate  to the  seven  regional  OPs under  the 
CSF, and range from  6% of the original assistance under the OP (Basque Country) to 38% (Aragon). 

19  Eligible  areas: Aragon,  Balearic  Islands, Catalonia,  Rioja,  Madrid,  Navarre,  Basque  Country. 
20  This  amount  was  distributed  among  five  OPs:  Catalonia  (ECU  6  million).  Basque  Country  (ECU  5  million), 

Madrid  (ECU  3 million),  Aragon  (ECU  1.1  million)  and  Navarre  (ECU  1 million). 

202 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Table V-19:  Objective 2 - Spain- Implementation of the CSF by priority in 1994-96 (ECU million) 

Priority 

ERDF 

ESF 

TOTAL 

1. Employment and 
competitiveness  of businesses 
2. Protection  of the environment 
3. Research, technology  and 
innovation 
4. Transport  hnked to economic 
activities 
5. Local and urban  development 
6. Technical  assistance 
TOTAL 

240.3 
22.1 

31% 
3% 

100.9 
0.0 

48% 
0% 

341.2 
22.1 

34% 
2% 

77.7 

10% 

473 

23% 

125.2 

13% 

269.9 
167.6 
3.9 
781,4 

35% 
21% 
0% 
100% 

0.0 
55.4 
4.8 
208.6 

0% 
27% 
2% 
100% 

269.9 
223,0 
8,6 
990,0 

27% 
23% 
1% 
100% 

Preparation  of the 1997-99 programming  period 

for  all 

In August  1996 the Spanish  authorities  submitted  their Conversion  Plan  1997-99, and eight draft  OPs 
(one  ERDF/ESF assistance  measure  for  each  of  the  seven  recipient  Autonomous  Communities,  and 
one  multiregional  ESF  assistance  measure 
the  Commission's 
recommendations,  the  central  Spanish  authorities  chose  to  use,  as  in  1994-96,  the  three-stage 
procedure  (Conversion  Plan,  CSF  and  OP). As  with  the  CSF for  1994-96,-the Plan  has  six  priorities 
and  is based  on one single part-financing  rate of 50% for  all measures21. The proposed  distribution  of 
Community  assistance  is  ECU  1  023  million  from  the  ERDF  and  ECU 295.2  million  from  the  ESF. 
Preparatory  meetings  between  the central  authorities  and  the  Commission  were  held  in  October  and 
December  1996.  Following  approval  of  the  CSF,  the  proposed  OPs  will  have  to  be  adjusted 
considerably  in line with  the CSF priorities  and to take account  of the transfer  of  appropriations  from 
the period  1994-96. 

regions).  Despite 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

Fie.  \-21:  OBJECTIVE*  - Programming 1994-99 (ECU million - 1995 prices): 
Priorities 
Vocational  integration  of  the  long-term 
unemployed  (a) 
Vocational  integration  of young  people 
seeking employment  (b) 
Intégration  of people  threatened  with exclusion  (c) 

519,9 

743,7 

165.7 

ESF 

(c)11% 

(d) 4% 

(a) 35% 

Eoual  opportunities  for  men  and women  (d) 

Total 

____Z 
l;.4?4.S 

(b) 50% 

1  CSF/11  OPs 

Average ner OP 

135.9 

1996  was  the  second  year  of  implementation  of  the  CSF for  Objective  3, which  was  adopted  for  the 
period  1994-99 with a strategy targeted  at facilitating  access to the labour market by strengthening  the 
active  job-seeking  process,  improving  the  functioning  of  the  labour  market  and  stimulating  job 
creation,  and  upgrading  vocational  skills  by  reforming  the  vocational  training  system.  The  CSF 
promotes the concentration  of resources on facilitating  access to and improving the quality of training, 
and  greater  use  of  integrated  formulas  (sandwich  courses, training  and  placement  services). Four  of 
the eleven OPs (71 % of the total amount) are managed by national bodies, the other seven (29% of the 
total  amount) by the Autonomous Communities. The average implementation  rate for  the programmes 
is  satisfactory,  with  100%  of  available  appropriations  for  1996,  i.e. ECU 244.1  million,  being 
committed  and  75% paid  out in the form  of advances. As regards  monitoring,  the partnership  and  the 
strategic  role  of  the  Monitoring  Committee  have  been  reinforced.  The  Committee  ensures  that  the 
approach  defined  in  the  programming  documents  is  followed  and  has  approved  adjustments  to 

21 The regional breakdown of the new appropriations allocated by Spain for this period (ECU 1318 million) is as 
follows:  Aragon,  ECU 82.9  million;  Balearic  Islands,  ECU 13.1  million;  Catalonia,  ECU 636.5  million; 
Madrid, ECU 178.2 million; Navarre, ECU 25 million; Rioja, ECU 14.7 million; Basque Country, ECU 367.6 
million. 

8th Annual  Report  on  the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

203 

prograrriming  in  line  with  the  objectives,  priorities  and  changes  in  actual  requirements  on  the  job 
market. In addition, a technical  assessment group was set up to assist the Monitoring Committee in the 
interim assessment  work to be carried out in  1997 (technical assistance  appropriations  will be used  for 
this). 

Fie. V-22: OBJECTIVE 4 - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million - 1994 prices) 
Priorities 
Pre-emptive  measures, guidance and advice  (a) 
Continuing  training  of  workers  (b) 
Technical  assistance  (c) 

ESF 

. 

7  SPD 

Total 

36,9 
308.4 
233 
368.6 

(c)6% 

(a) 10% 

(b) 84% 

The  level  of  implementation  of the Objective 4 SPD was not as high as planned, but there was a clear 
improvement,  with  53% of  the  available  amount  for  1995  being  implemented  (this  amount  includes 
the  1995 instalment  as provided  for  in  the  original  plan  plus  the  amounts  not  implemented  in  1994). 
However,  financial  reprogramming  was necessary  in  December  1996 to transfer  the  unused  amounts 
of  the  1995  instalment  to  1996,  1997,  1998  and  1999. As  regards  quality,  it  was  the  Commission's 
concern  not  to  lose  sight  of  the  priorities  in  the  SPD,  with  the focus  on  training  in  SMEs,  giving 
priority  to  the  least  skilled  workers  and  promoting  equal  opportunities.  The  emphasis  was  also  on 
horizontal  training  in  the framework  of  Objective 4, i.e. concentration  of measures  on  skills  common 
to more than one sector and linking training to anticipated  demand. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) agriculture 

Table V-20: Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million - 1996 prices and status): 

Total 

276,0 

Measures 
Production 
Marketing 

157.0 
119.0 

57< 
425 

The  implementation  forecasts  for  the  improvement  of  production  structures  were  reduced  to 
ECU  157 million  for  the period  1994-99  (not including  support  for  the fruit  and  vegetable  sector), as 
against the ECU 207 million  originally provided  for  in  1994. This was because in  1996 Spain  decided 
to  transfer  part  of  the  appropriations  originally  allocated  to  these  measures  to  aid  measures  for 
processing  and marketing fruit  and  vegetables. A decision  on the SPD for this is to be taken  in  1997. 
Most  of this revised  aid is investment  aid (ECU 46 million), followed  by aid for  less-favoured  regions 
(ECU 43 million)  and  aid  for  young  farmers  (ECU 35 million). In the  years  following  preparation  of 
the  SPD  on  processing  and  marketing  of  products  in  1994,  application  of  the  measure  has  been 
standardised.  In  those  regions  not  covered  by  Objective  l22,  the  Community  awarded  a  total  of 
ECU 68 million  (ECU 32 million  in  1995 and ECU 36 million in  1996) for 496 investments  with  total 
eligible  costs  of  ECU  313  million  (ECU  146 million  in  1995  and  ECU  167  million  in  1996).  More 
than  50% of  investments  in the  Objective  1 regions  and  in those  outside  Objective  1 were in the  fruit 
and  vegetable and meat sectors. 

22  EAGGF aid  was ECU  351 million  (ECU  120 million in  1995 and ECU  131 million  in  1996). The total  eligible 
cost  of  the  1  235  investments  receiving  aid  was ECU  821  million  (ECU 394  million  in  1995 and  427  million 
in  1996). 

204 

OBJECTIVE 5(a)  fisheries 

Fie. V-23- OBJECTIVE  5(a) fisheries - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million): 

I 

FIFO 

Adjustment  and  redirection  of fishing  effort  la) 
Other  fishing  fleet  measures  (b) 
Renovation  and  modernisation  of the fishing  fleet  (c) 
Aquaculture  (d) 
Protected  marine  areas (e) 
Port facilities  (f) 
Processing  and marketing  of products  (g) 
Promotion  of  products  (h) 
Socio-economic  measures  (i) 
Other measures  CO 

Tv-ta» 

40.6 
0.0 
35.9 
7.2 
1.8 
6.0 
23.9 
1.8 
pm 
2.4 
121.9 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

(h)2%(j)2%  W °% 

(9) 20% 

(a) 33% 

(c) 30% 

Implementation  of  the SPD advanced  at a rate of  100% of the  1994 instalment,  80% of that  for  1995 
and  25%  of  that  for  1996,  enabling  the  second  advance  for  1996  to  be  paid  to  Spain.  However, 
reprogramming  was  necessary  to transfer  ECU 8 million  of  the  1995  instalment  to  1996,  and  to  take 
account of indexation  for  1994/95 in the  1995 and  1996 annual instalments. 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)23 

Fie.  V-24: OBIECTIVE 5(b) - Proerammine 1994-99 ft994prices): 
Population  ('000s) 
Area (kin2) 

1.731 
85.223 
ECU  millim 

Bv Fund: 

7 SPDs 

EAGGF 
ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

414,6 
160.8 
88.6 
_______ 

Average ner SPDl 

62% 
24% 
13% 
100% 

94,9 

(e) 13% 

(a) 31% 

(d) 10% 

(c) 22% 

D Basic infrastructure (a) 

B Diversification of economic 

activity (b) 

•  Protection of natural resources 

(O 

E Improving rural living conditions 

(b)24% 

W) 

•  Human resources (e) 

The  Objective  5(b)  SPDs  progressed  satisfactorily  in  1996  as  regards  both  financial  and  physical 
implementation.  The  result  of  this  good  progress  was  that  50%  of  the  financial  allocation  was 
committed  by  the  end  of  1996  and  36% paid  out.  The  situation  for  the  EAGGF  (4  regions  brought 
forward  commitment  of the  1997 instalment)  was  very  satisfactory,  but  there  were problems  with  the 
ESF,  for  which,  by  the  end  of  1996,  two  regions  had  committed  barely  25%  of  the  appropriations 
provided  for  the period. The assistance under four  of the seven  SPDs (Balearic Islands, Rioja,  Navarre 
and  the  Basque  Country)  was  indexed,  which  represents  an  additional  total  of  ECU 2.9  million  for 
these programmes. 

The  work  of  the Monitoring  Committees  focused  on approval  of the  technical  assistance  programmes 
for  each  region,  comprising  three  strands  (information  on  the  measures  provided  for  in  the  SPD, 
technical  assistance  for  implementation  and  assessment), on assignment  of the amount  resulting  from 
indexation  for  1995-96,  allocated  to  the  financing  of  these  technical  assistance  programmes  (on 
average  these  appropriations  account  for  0.2%  of  the  public  expenditure  provided  for  in  the 
programmes),  and  finally  on the stepping up of  some of the most  advanced  measures. However,  most 
effort  went  into assessment  work, concentrating  on feasibility  studies  in the  seven  regions  to  improve 
prior appraisal  and prepare on-going assessment, approval  of the list of specifications  and  selection  of 
assessors  for  on-going  assessment  (four  regions  had  assessment  carried  out  by universities  and  three 
others  by  private  companies),  and  the  organisation  within  the  framework  of  the  national  Monitoring 
Committee  of  a seminar  on  the  assessment  of  rural  development  programmes,  in  which  the assessors 
for the seven  regions took  part. 

23 Eligible areas: Aragon. Balearic Islands. Catalonia. Rioja, Madrid, Navarre and the Basque Country. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

205 

Table  V-21: 

Spain  - Assistance  by  Objective  -  1996  in  the  context  of programming  for  1994-96/99  (ECU 
million) 

Programmes 
. (year  of adoption) 

Total cost  SF assistance 

Commitments  Commitments 

_ jn 

41,4 

16.3 
27.5 
298.5 
27,4 
1.894.5 
575.3 
12.0 
39.1 
43.1 
5.559,0 
440.4 
1.410,8 
41.6 
116.5 
1.179.4 
218.2 
154.4 
1.779.5 
47,5 
628.5 
2.752.3 
172.6 
746.3 
70.9 
225.5 
1.577.5 
209,9 
299.8 
2.493,4 
242.0 
464,1 
82.4 
518,0 
767,3 
59,4 
127.3 
536.6 
110.8 
158.6 
3.691,7 
418,4 
274.2 

Obiective 1 
Regional OPs 
GG Castile-La Mancha < 1 ) ( 1996) 
OP Ceuta-Melilla (2) ( 1996) 
OP Trade and tourism (2) (1996) 
MP Gas pipeline Gibraltar-Cordoba  ( 1 ) (1996) 
MP Natural  eas installations Huelva (1) (1996) 
GG Andalusia (1995) 
OP Andalusia  (3) (1995) 
OP Cantabria (2) (1995) 
GG Salamanca (1995) 
GG Sodical (Castile-Leôn)  ( 1995> 
OP Andalusia (1) (1994) 
OP Andalusia (2) (1994) 
OP Asturias (1) (1994) 
OP Asturias (2) (1994) 
OPAsrunas(3)(1994) 
OP Canary Islands (.1 ) (1994) 
OP Canary Islands (2 ) 0 994 ) 
OP Canary Islands (3) (1994) 
OP Castile-La Mancha ( ! ) ( 1994) 
OP Castile-La Mancha (2) (1994) 
OP Castile-La Mancha  (3)0994) 
OP Casiile-Le6n  (1)0994) 
OP Castile-Leôn  (2)0 994) 
OP Castile-Leôn  (3) 0994) 
OPCeuta  (1)0994) 
OP Donana Phase 2 (4) ( 1994) 
OP Extremadura  (1) (1994) 
OP Extremadura  (2) 0 994) 
OP Extremadura  (3)0 994) 
OP Galicia  (1)(I994) 
OP Galicia (2) (1994) 
OP Galicia (3) (1994) 
OPMelilla(1994) 
GG Murcia  (1)0994) 
OP Murcia (1)0994) 
OP Murcia (2) (1994) 
OP Murcia (3) (1994) 
OP Multiregional  Cantabria (1)0 994) 
OP Multiregional  Cantabria (3 ) (1994) 
OP Regional Cantabria  ( I ) (1994) 
OP Valencia  (1)0994) 
OP Valencia (2) (1994) 
OP Valencia (3) (1994) 
Multiregional OPs 
OP UDdatinc of statistics ( 1996) 
OP Technical assistance 0 ) 0 996) 
OP Rural development  0996) 
MP Gas pipeline  Valencia-Cartagena  (1) (1996) 
GGIDAE  0 ) 0 9 9 6) 
OP PITMA 110-5)0996) 
OPTechnical  assistance (3) (1995) 
GG Chamber of commerce  0995) 
OP Regional aid  0994) 
GG Competitiveness  of SME* (1994) 
(1) Single-fund OP-ERDF 
(2) Single-fund OP - ESF 
(3) Single-fund  OP - EAGGF 
(4) Including appropriation* under innovative measures (budget heading B2-
(5) Industrial and technological programme tor the environment 

79.4 
26.7 
538,2 
60,7 
964.6 

37.0 
3.125.9 
344,9 

623,7 
18.4 

6.5 
13.1 
20.6 
99.0 
7.3 
223.9 
342.0 
9.0 
12.9 
6,5 
2.938,9 
330,3 
809.2 
31.2 
81.1 
694.7 
185.4 
80,7 
936,6 

35.6 
288,4 
1.612.6 
129.4 
381.1 
47.4 
146.6 
1.011.9 
167,9 
169.8 
1.544,5 
181.5 
303,5 
42,1 
79.2 
487.3 
44.6 
55.6 
343.0 
54.3 
105.0 
1.207.9 
313,8 
103.5 

59.6 
20.0 
275.4 
23.8 
118.3 
59.7 
13.8 
19.2 
387.0 
241,5 

1996 

1994-96 
_______ 

J2ML 

1,6 
13,1 
20,6 
89.8 
7.3 
34.7 
29.8 
0,0 
0.0 
0,0 
613.7 
62.6 
213,1 
5.3 
16.2 
137.2 

0.0 
9,7 
203.9 
6.3 
37.9 
381,3 
44,5 
66.3 
7.1 
0.2 
155.8 
45,7 
24.8 
296,1 
29.5 
59,5 
12,2 
13,3 
0.0 
12.3 

8.1 
113,0 
11.7 
0,4 
210,1 
54,0 
22.5 

20.1 
8,0 
41,4 
23.8 
23,7 
7,7 
0.0 
0.0 
55.6 
36.0 

1.6 
13.1 
20,6 
89.8 
7,3 
102,7 
133.5 
1.4 
6.3 
3.6 

1.647.6 
136.6 
516.0 
15.8 
41.3 
505,6 
54.8 
39,5 
514.0 
18.0 
123.: 
784,4 
64. 
171.6 
35,4 
58,1 
372.0 
67,1 

72.2 
1.102,7 
78.2 
142.1 
28.1 
25,6 
228,7 
17.9 
25.5 
247.7 
17,0 
15,0 
936,4 
181,3 
54.9 

20.1 
8.0 
41.4 

23.8 
23.7 
7.7 
2.0 
1.1 
220,1 
102.7 

2 5* 
100* 
100* 
9 1* 
100* 
4 6* 
3 9* 
15* 
4 9* 
5 5* 
5 6* 
41 
64 
51% 
5 1* 
7 3* 
30* 
4 9* 
5 5* 
51 
43 
4 9* 
5 0* 
4 5* 
75% 
4 0* 
37% 
4 0* 
43 
71 
4 3* 
47 
67% 
3 2* 
47% 
40% 
46% 
72% 
31% 
14% 
78% 
58% 
53% 

34% 
40% 
15% 
100% 
20% 
1 3* 
14* 
6* 
57% 
4 3* 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 
(3> 

0.8 
3.9 
10.3 
71.8 
5,8 
54.3 
58.5 
0.0 
1.9 
0,0 
159,4 
56.6 
122.5 
5,0 
17.3 
66.4 
0.0 
12 2 
102,0 
5,8 
41.3 
225.7 
33.1 
62.8 
8.6 
17.5 
97.2 
33,2 
32.2 
318.4 
23.6 
65,4 
4,4 
16,8 
67,8 
9.9 
12,2 
66.9 
6,0 
0,2 
174.1 
51,8 
25,5 

10.0 
4,0 
20,7 
19,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
0.6 
44,5 
24,1 

0,8 
3.9 
10.3 
71.8 
1  5.8 
54.3 
110.3 
0,7 
5.0 
1,8 
986.5 
105.4 
282.3 
13,3 
37,4 
342,3 
27,4 
36.1 
374,5 
14,3 
95.5 
548.1 
43,0 
147,1 
31.2 
46,4 
270.1 
43.8 
60,9 
776,9 
61,0 
131.5 
13,4 
22,9 
196.6 
11,9 
23,3 
121.4 

10.2 
7.5 
6 2 3* 
147.0 
51,4 

10,0 
4.0 
20,7 
19,0 
0.0 
0.0 
1,0 
0.6 
191.9 
77.5 

12* 
30* 
50* 
7 3* 
8 0* 
24* 
3 2* 
8* 
39% 
2 8* 
3 4* 
32% 
3 5* 
43% 
4 6* 
4 9* 
15* 
45% 
40' 
40% 
33% 
34% 
3 3* 
39* 
66* 
3 2* 
2 7* 
26% 
36% 
50* 
34* 
4 3* 
3 2* 
29% 
40% 
27% 
42% 
35% 
19% 
7* 
5 2* 
4 7* 
5 0* 

17* 
2 0* 
8* 
80* 
0* 
0* 
7* 
3* 
5 0* 
~">% 

206 

Programmes 
(year of adoption) 

OP Local environment  (1994) 
OP FORŒM  (1994) 
OP Agri-food  industry (1994) 
OP INEM (6) (1994) 
OP Scientific  infrastructure  (1994) 
OP Local (1994) 
OP Ministry of Education  0994) 
OP Ministries (1994) 
OP Autonomous bodies (1994) 
OP Fisheries (1994) 
GG Industrial technology (1994) 
Technical  assistance 

Obiective 2* 
Regional OPs 
OP Aragon (1995) 
OP Balearic Islands (1995) 
OP Catalonia (1995) 
OP Rioja  (1995) 
OP Madrid (1995) 
OP Navarre (1995) 
OP Basque Country  (1995) 
Multiregional OPs 
OPMulrire-ionnK2H10Q<;> 

Regional OPs 
OP Aragon (1994) 
OP Balearic Islands (1994) 
OP Catalonia (1994) 
OP Rioja (1994) 
OP Madrid  (1994) 
OP Navarre (1994) 
OP Basque Country (1994) 
Multiregional OPs 
OP Various bodies (1994) 
OP INEM (6) (1994) 
OP Multiregional ( 1994) 
OP Universities 1994> 

Obiective 4 
SPD Spain (1994) 
Technical  assistance 

Obiective 5(a) a-rieulture 
Forecasts for Spain R. 2328/91 (1994) 
SPD Snain R. 866 and 867/90 n«JQ4> 

SPD Snain HQ941 
Obiective 5rt>) 
SPD Balearic Islands (1995) 
SPD Aragon (1994) 
SPD Catalonia (1994) 
SPD Rioja (1994) 
SPD Madrid  (1994) 
SPD Navarre (1994) 
SPD Basque Counrrv 0994\ 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

Toul cost 

SF assistant 

Commitments  Commitment! 
• 

% 

1996 

1994-1996 
(2) 

m/m 

Payments 
*  1996 

Payments 
1994-1996 
(3> 

% 

(31/(1) 

828.6 
447.6 
3.028,6 
3.433.7 
479.4 
812.5 
1.953,6 
72.2 
416.6 
1.685.6 
472,6 
0.5 
50.001.0 

148,7 
57,6 
4.665,3 
64,9 
327.1 
102.6 
1.889,0 

64.7 
7319.9 

45,1 
28,8 
210,3 
9.6 
250,2 
94.6 
279,2 

75,6 
1.364.4 
730,6 
201,2 
3.289.6 

1.045,0 
0.2 
1.045.1 

396,7 
396.7 
793.4 

(1) 

580.6 
262.5 
1.220.0 
2.575.3 
342.2 
580,6 
1.465,2 
54.2 
299.2 
1.008,7 
143.2 
0,5 
25435.9 

40.5 
8.7 
448,2 
8.5 
128.3 
21.4 
311.6 

29.1 
996.2 

20.3 
12,9 
94.6 
4,3 
112,6 
42.6 
125,7 

34,0 
614,0 
328,8 
90,5 
1.480,3 

368,6 
0.2 
368.8 

157.0 
119.0 
276.0 

Total 

Total 

Total 

Tout! 

Total 

0,0 
41.3 
215.3 
564.2 
60.5 
0.0 
246.6 
14.3 
0.0 
158,3 
26,3 
0.3 
4.614.8 

39,0 
-0,2 
159,2 
-0,5 
49,1 
0,0 
130,6 

0.0 
377.2 

0,3 
0.0 
15.8 
0,0 
6.9 
10.3 
21,0 

0,1 
110.7 
44,1 
30.6 
239.9 

49,5 
0.0 
49.5 

0,0 
25.0 
25.0 

96.8 
138.8 
658,8 
1.340,4 
196,1 
193.5 
565.6 
19.9 
92,7 
462,8 
52.8 
0.3 
12.987.3 

52,8 
10,2 
448,2 
11,4 
128.3 
22.8 
323.0 

39.7 
1.036.4 

20,3 
12.9 
46,9 
4,3 
43.7 
23.8 
62,3 

34,0 
277.8 
102,4 
38.0 
666.5 

167.6 
0.2 
167.8 

51.7 
50.7 
102,4 

17% 
5 3* 
54% 
52% 
57% 
33% 
3 9* 
37% 
31% 
46% 
37% 
66% 
51% 

131% 
117% 
100% 
134% 
100% 
107% 
104% 

137% 
104% 

100% 
100% 
5 0* 
100% 
39% 
56% 
50% 

100% 
45% 
31% 
42% 
45% 

45% 
99% 
46% 

33% 
43% 
37% 

0,0 
20.6 
205,7 
682,4 
55.8 
48.4 
281,9 
10.5 
1.6 
229.5 
25,1 
0.0 
3.833.6 

48.4 
69.4 
525.6 
1.252,9 
108.5 
125.8 
527.6 
13.3 
51,8 
338,7 
47,5 
0.0 
9.403.6 

16.8 
2,6 
55.3 
3.2 
38.3 
0.0 
30.3 

12.8 
1593 

2.8 
2.0 
8.9 
0.2 
9.6 
9,8 
20.3 

2.3 
143,6 
53,0 
19.6 
272.1 

10,0 
0.0 
10.0 

8.7 
20.0 
28.7 

23,7 
7.8 
275.7 
9,1 
67,8 
16,7 
178,7 

27.7 
607.2 

5,4 
3,0 
31.9 
0.9 
32.2 
19,9 
46,1 

4,8 
255,7 
93,6 
23.3 
516.7 

75.9 
0.2 
76.0 

44,0 
40.5 
84.5 

8% 
26% 
43% 
49% 
32% 
2 2* 
3 6* 
25% 
17% 
3 4* 
33% 
4% 

37% 

5 9* 
90% 
62% 
107% 
53% 
78% 
57% 

9 5* 
61% 

27% 
23% 
34% 
20% 
2 9* 
47% 
37% 

14% 
42% 
28% 
26% 
35% 

21% 
99% 
21% 

2 8* 
3 4* 
31% 

1 

326.41 

121.91 

19.91 

59.71 

49%l 

32.71 

42.71 

35% 

147,3 
763,6 
366.7 
184,7 
112.9 
162.8 
82.1 
1.820.1 
64.595,4 

46.5 
298,6 
148,0 
39,7 
49,3 
57,8 
27.1 
666.9 
29346.0 

10,1 
80.5 
27.8 
13,5 
7,9 
24,9 
7.6 
172.3 
5.498,7 

18.3 
159.4 
62.4 
19,7 
19,2 
41,4 
14.0 
334.4 
l»Hr«î 

39% 
53% 
42% 
50% 
39% 
72% 
5 2* 
50% 
5 2* 

6,7 
53.3 
21.3 
11.0 
6.1 
21.3 
4,7 
124.4 
4.460,9 

13,4 
110,1 
45.9 
14.9 
13.9 
35.4 
9.2 
242.8 
10.973.6 

2 9* 
3 7* 
3 1* 
3 8* 
28% 
61% 
3 4* 
36% 
3 7* 

Total 

TOTAL 
* Amounts after deduction of transfers  to 1997-99 
( 1 ) Single-fund  OP - ERDF 
(2) Single-fund  OP - ESF 
(3) Single-fund  OP - EAGGF 
(4) Including appropriations  under innovative measures (budget heading B2-1820) 
(5) Industrial and technological  programme for the environment 
(6) National  institute for employment 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

207 

5.2.  Implementation  of the Community Initiatives in 1996 

Note: 
Spain is involved  in all Community  Initiatives. Each  Initiative is implemented  by a single national  programme, 
with  the  exception  of  Leader  (17  global  grants  in  each  Autonomous  Community,  ten  of  which  in  the 
Objective  1 regions).  23 of  these CIPs and  two Interreg CIPs were adopted  in  1994 and  1995. Five  of the  six 
programmes  still  to  be  decided  (Interreg  Spain-France,  Interreg  Spain-Morocco,  Rechar,  Résider  and  the 
SMEs Initiative) were adopted  in  1996 (leaving the Konver programme outstanding). 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in Spain : 
The SMEs  programme  gives greatest priority  to technological  development. In order to raise the  competitive 
level  of  SMEs,  the  CIP  supports  training  in  information  technology  and  its  more  widespread  use  (ECU 
13.5 million;  total  cost:  ECU  36.9 million),  and  RTD  (ECU  56.9 million;  total  cost:  ECU  134.4 million). 
There are also measures to improve data transmission links between companies to facilitate  contact with their 
clients, suppliers  and administration  departments. All  these priorities are implemented by means of the ARTE 
programme,  which  encourages  the  use  of  advanced  communications  by  SMEs  through  various  measures: 
support for  new  initiatives  by financing  studies,  analysis  and  technical  assessment for  individual  SMEs  or 
groups  of  businesses,  encouraging  the  use  of  advanced  communications  services  by  developing  business 
information,  the  development  of  innovative  solutions  based  on  data  transmission  applications,  and  the 
improvement of technological services centres for  businesses. 
Most  of  the  budget  for  the  Interreg  programmes  with  France,  Portugal  and  Morocco  is  given  over  to 
technological  development  for 
the  setting  up  of  advanced 
telecommunications  services  (ECU 10.4 million; total cost: ECU 24.8 million). 
As  regards  the Adapt  Initiative,  the  CIP encourages  cooperation  between  research and  training  centres and 
the  public  and  private  sectors,  whereas  the  Employment  programme  focuses  on  data  transmission 
applications  (ECU 9.8 million;  total  cost:  ECU 15.1 million)  as  a  means  of  reducing  barriers  affecting  the 
handicapped,  and, under the NOW programme,  on the use of computerised data bases. 
Finally,  the Regis  programme  finances  the setting  up of an advanced  communications  centre to stimulate  the 
locally-generated  development  of  the  Canary Islands  based  on  technology  transfers  between  the  university 
and  the private  sector,  and projects  on the introduction of advanced infrastructure services in most sectors of 
the  economy.  Support for  RTD  in  the form  of  the  development  of  the  Canary Islands Astrophysics  Institute 
receives 2% of the budget. 

fibre  optics  and 

installation  of 

the 

By the end  of  1996, all CIPs  had been  adopted  except  Konver. The CIPs  adopted  in  1996 include  the 
SMEs CIP,  to  which  ECU 251.1 million  has  been  allocated,  and  the  Résider  CIP,  which  covers 
several  regions  - Asturias, Cantabria, Valencia,  Galicia, Navarre  and the Basque Country  - which  are 
eligible under Objectives  1 and  2. The Rechar CIP was also approved  in  1996 for  several  coal-mining 
areas  in Andalusia, Aragon, Asturias, Catalonia,  Castile-Leon  and  Galicia,  all located  in area  eligible 
under  Objectives  1, 2 or 5(b). The Interreg programme  for  Spain-Morocco,  which  has been  allocated 
ECU  101.4  million  of  assistance  from  the  ERDF  and  ECU  1.1  million  from  the  ESF,  was  also 
approved.  In  addition,  Spain  receives  an  additional  ECU 312.96  million  by  way  of  the  Community 
Initiative  reserve.  This  amount  will  reinforce  the  Initiatives  Adapt,  Employment,  Leader,  Pesca, 
Retex, Urban  and above all the new strand Interreg  IIC2 4. 

Implementation  of  the  Regis  programme  and  the  Leader  programmes,  both  among  the  programmes 
adopted  in  previous  years,  began  satisfactorily.  For  the  latter,  which  were  approved  in  July  1995, 
1996 focused  on  the  establishment  of  innovation  programmes  by  15 groups  on  skill  acquisition  and 
implementation  by  20 innovation  groups. Under  the Employment  Initiative, almost  500 projects  were 
selected  following  the  first  invitation  to  tender  (174 projects  for  Now,  230 Horizon  projects  and 
94 Youthstart  projects).  The  three  strands  focus  on  training  and  the  promotion  of  new  services,  in 
particular  in  rural  areas.  The  main  themes  of  the  Now  projects  are  the  development  of  employment 
programmes  and  the  promotion  of  traditional  activities  in  rural  areas.  Under  Youthstart,  there  are  a 
large  number  of  projects  for  implementing  vocational  integration  programmes.  Horizon  focuses  on 
eliminating  obstacles  to access  to  work,  and  on  the  promotion  of  advice facilities  and  the use of  new 
technologies.  Under  Adapt,  184 projects  were  selected  following  the  first  invitation  to  tender. 
Training activities play a major  role, in particular  in areas linked  to new technologies. Other  activities 

24 See also Chapter I.B.I. Community  Initiatives. 

8th Annual report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

21 

More  support for  technology  development  is needed 

While  qualitative  progress  has undoubtedly  been  achieved,  thanks  in particular  to the  boost  given  by 
the Community  Initiatives and pilot projects,  more assistance is necessary. In the field  of research  and 
technology  development,  1996  provided  an  opportunity  to  reassess  the  relationship  between  the 
cohesion  policy  and  the  RTD  policy.  The  relationship  was  on  the  one  hand  studied  in  the  first 
Cohesion  Report. Then,  following  the conclusions  of the panel assessing RTD measures taken  during 
the  last  five  years,  in  April  1997  the  Commission  adopted  the  proposal  on  the  5th  framework 
programme  for  1999-02.23 Following the Green Paper on Innovation24,  it also adopted  an Action  Plan 
for  Innovation25.  It  also  decided  to  prepare  a  Communication  on  cohesion,  innovation,  RTD  and 
competitiveness, extending the  1993 communication  on the same subject. This was adopted  in  1997. 

On  information  technologies,  the  Commission  adopted  a Communication  entitled  "Cohesion  and  the 
information  society"26  with  a  view  to  having  greater  account  taken  of  this  new  dimension  in  the 
Structural  Fund  programmes.  The  Communication  recognises  the  interdependence  of  economic  and 
social  cohesion  and  the development  of the information  society  in Europe. This  involves  successfully 
exploiting  the  interaction  between  these two spheres of activity  at increasingly  sophisticated  levels of 
complimentarity.  The  introduction  of  the  information  society  is  a  pivotal  factor  for  regional 
development.  The  new  developments 
technologies  have 
significant  and  inescapable  effects  on  employment  opportunities,  lifestyles  and  the  regional 
organisation  and spread  of economic activity. The information  society affects  the ability of  enterprises 
to diversify  and  adapt  their product range, to increase their penetration  into regional  and local  markets 
and  to  imagine  new  and  more effective  forms  of organisation. The general  impact  of  the  information 
society  on  all  society  activities,  i.e.  education  and  training,  health  services,  leisure  and  recreations, 
public administration, etc, is also creating a new pattern for social relationships. 

in  information  and  communications 

While  the  communication  acknowledges  the  Structural  Funds'  contribution  to  completing  and 
improving  telecommunications  infrastructure,  it  also  calls  for  a  new  approach.  A  whole  series  of 
factors  going  beyond  telecommunications  alone are a precondition  for  true  entry  into  the  information 
society,  among  which  can  be  cited,  the  educational  and  training  levels  reached  by  the  general 
population,  the  roles  of  the  public  and  private  sectors  in  promoting  the  information  society,  public 
awareness, the ability  to organise and  invest  in an efficient  information  society  strategy. In this  regard 
the  communication  recognizes  the  extra  effort  that  must  be  made  as  regards  telecommunications 
infrastructure  and  legislation  so  that  cohesion  might  be  more  effectively  integrated  into  the  process. 
The  communication  notes  however  that  a major  effort  is  needed  to  stimulate  demand  by  identifying 
the  regional  strategies  for 
the  information  society,  by  developing  training  programmes  for 
businessmen  and  public  administrators,  by  supporting  new  applications  development,  by  launching 
public  information  campaigns  through  the establishment  of public/private  partnerships. The  Structural 
Funds  are  the  instrument  through  which  such  an  integrated,  coordinated  approach  can  be  developed 
and through  which  inter-regional  partnerships can  be tried out. 

23  COM(97)  142 final  of  30 April  1997. See also  the Communications  'Inventing  tomorrow  - Europe's  research 
at  the  service  of  its  people"  COM(96)  332  final  of  10 July  1996; "Towards  the  5th  Framework  Programme: 
Additional  material  for  the policy  debate" (96) 595 final  of 20 November  1996; "Towards  the 5th  Framework 
Programme: scientific  and  technical objectives", COM(97) 47 of  12 February  1997. 

24  COM(95) 688 final  of  13 December  1995. 
25  The First Action  Plan  for  Innovation  in Europe, COM(96) 589 final  of 21 November  1996. 
26  COM(97) 7 final  of 22 January  1997. 

208 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

are aimed at providing guidance for businesses in, among other things, quality management and ways 
of  meeting  environmental  requirements.  There are also  projects  on local  development  in rural  areas 
and the promotion  of businesses in the social economy  sector. Although implementation of the Pesca 
programme  did not really  begin  until  the end of  1995, no new payments  were  made  in  1996, some 
measures being replaced by others and the amounts involved reallocated between the Funds. 

Table  V-22: 

Spain  -  Community  Initiatives 
million) 

1996  in  the  context  of programming  for  1994-99  (ECU 

Initiative 

(number  of CIPs) 

T#tal cost 

S.F. 

Commitments 

Commitments 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

assistance* 
(1) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2Ï 

(2W1) 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3vm 

Adapt (1) 
Employment (1) 
Leader(17) 
Pesca <1) 
SMEs(l) 
Rechar (1) 
RejtisO) 
Résider (1) 
Retex (1) 
Urban (1) 
Total (26) 
Interree/Reeen (4)** 

403.2 
571,4 
1.162.1 
93.0 
1.383.1 
60,0 
385,5 
464,3 
361.1 
248,7 
5.132.5 

256.4 
386.6 
354.8 
41.5 
251,1 
34,2 
216.9 
73.6 
90.4 
162.6 
1.868J2 

of which  CIPs adopted in  1996: 
SMEs 
Rechar 
Résider 
Toul  (3) 
Imerree  (7)*** 
* Excluding reserve 
** For programme details see Chapter VII. Table 2.2. 
*"  For programme details see Chapter I.B.I. Community Initiatives 

1.383.1 
60.0 
464,3 
1.907,4 

251,1 
34.2 
73.6 
358,9 

33.7 
56.0 
9,5 
0,0 
35.3 
32.7 
47,4 
7,6 
0,0 
33,2 
2554 

35.3 
32.7 
7,6 
75,6 

81,8 
114.7 
121,6 
6,9 
35.3 
32.7 
75,4 
7.6 
38.5 
56.0 
570.6 

35.3 
32,7 
7.6 
75,6 

32% 
30% 
34% 
17% 
14% 
95% 
35% 
10% 
43% 
34% 
31% 

i4% 
95% 
10% 
21% 

18.7 
35.3 
9,8 
0,0 
17.6 
16.3 
59.9 
3.8 
0.0 
22.7 
i 8 4a 

17.6 
16.3 
3.8 
37.8 

42.7 
64.6 
44,7 
3.5 
17.6 
16,3 
59.9 
3,8 
34,2 
34,1 
321,4 

17.6 
16.3 
3.8 
37.8 

17% 
17% 
13% 
8% 
7% 
48% 
28% 
5% 
38% 
21% 
17% 

7% 
48% 
5% 
11% 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

209 

6.  FRANCE 

6.1.  Implementation of assistance bv Obiective in 199625 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in the regions of France: 
Objective  1:  All  the  SPDs  take  account  of  the  technology factor.  In  the  fields  of RTD  and  innovation,  the 
SPDs  which  go furthest  in  exploiting  the potential  for  technology  development  are  those for  Corsica  and 
Nord/Pas-de- Calais: 

• 

• 

in Nord/Pas-de-Calais:  the RTD priority  (ECU 38.4 million; total cost: ECU 86.8 million) includes 
development  of RTD in businesses, strengthening the supply of technology and strategic services by 
skills  centres  and  networks,  technology  training  and  stimulation  of  research  in  higher  education. 
These  measures  are  supplemented  by  the  development  of  environmental  technologies  (ECU  9.8 
total  cost:  ECU  31.8  million)  and  incentives  for  environmental  research  (ECU  1.5 
million; 
million; total cost: ECU 3 million); 
in  Corsica:  the  programme  is  built  around  technology  transfer  in  agricultural  and  marine 
production  (ECU  1.6  million;  total  cost:  ECU  3.7  million)  and  in  businesses,  research  (ECU 
1.4 million;  total  cost:  ECU 3.5 million)  and  the development  of  human  resources  in  those  areas 
(ECU 0.8 million; total cost: ECU 2 million). 

Objective  2  (1994-96):  RTD  and  innovation  play  a  key  role  in  the  SPDs  (20.9%  of  Structural  Fund 
assistance).  Several SPDs allocate  a total of ECU 236.15 million (total cost: ECU 531.8 million) to priorities 
concerning  the  development  of  training  and  research  in  businesses  (ECU  174.2 million;  total  cost:  ECU 
371.4 million)26,  increasing  regional  R&D  and  innovation  capacity  (ECU  42.9 million;  total  cost:  ECU 
114.3 million)27  and  improving  the technological  environment of firms (Loire Region: ECU  19 million; total 
cost:  ECU  46,2 million).  These priorities,  and  the  measures  included  in  the other  SPDs,  reflect  the  general 
interest  in  encouraging  R&D  and  innovation.  This  involves  aid for  innovative  projects  (Alsace,  Lorraine, 
Lower  Normandy  and  Champagne-Ardenne),  aid  for  research28  (ECU  12.9 million;  total  cost:  ECU 
40.3  million)  and,  more  specifically,  the development  of  environmental  technologies29  and  new  information 
technology  and communications  (Nord/Pas-de-Calais: ECU 8.3 million; total cost: ECU  16.6 million). 
In addition  to these measures, the SPDs specifically aim to assist technology development  in businesses (ECU 
61.5  million  in  all;  total  cost:  ECU  172.4  million)  by  stimulating  demand  for30  or  supply  of1  RTD,  by 
strengthening 
inter-regional  and 
international  cooperation  in the field of research (Upper Normandy),  by strengthening  existing skills  centres 
and  networks  and  encouraging  the  R&D  efforts  of  businesses32,  and  by  granting  aid  for 
technology 
dissemination  (Alsace),  including  support for  technology  transfer  in  SMEs  (ECU  14.7 million;  total  cost: 
ECU 46.3  million)33. 
The SPDs  also  concentrate  on  R&D and  technology  transfer structures  (ECU 23.7  million;  total  cost: ECU 
51  million)34,  university  and  research facilities  (Centre: ECU  1.2 million;  total  cost:  ECU  3.9  million),  the 

technology  development  programmes  (Lower  Normandy), 

through 

25 In  addition  to  the  assistance  for  1994-99  set  out  below,  during  1996  the  closure  process  began  for  certain 
assistance  adopted  by the Commission  before  1989. Payment  of balances amounted  to about ECU  36 million. 
The  following  were  closed:  three  major  projects  adopted  in  1989  (Guadeloupe,  Champàgne-Ardenne)  and 
1992  (Midi-Pyrénées);  three  IDOs  (Tam-Aveyron,  Nord/Pas-de-Calais,  Brittany)  adopted  in  1986-88;  the 
IMPs  for  Languedoc-Roussillon  and  Aquitaine  adopted  in  1987;  the  NPCIs  for  Lorraine,  the  European 
development  pole  and  Charente-Maritime  adopted  in  1986-87; the Rechar  CIP for  Burgundy  and  the Envireg 
CIP  for  Provence-Alpes-Côte  d'Azur  adopted  in  1990; five  Objective  2  programmes  for  1989-91  (Lorraine, 
Aquitaine, Midi-Pyrénées, PACA); the Objective  5(b) programme for Limousin adopted  in  1990. 

26 Auvergne, Brittany, Nord/Pas-de-Calais, Picardy, Centre. 
27 Champagne-Ardenne,  Upper Normandy, Midi-Pyrénées. 
28 Aquitaine, Nord/Pas-de-Calais, Lower Normandy. 
29 Nord/Pas-de-Calais, Loire Region, Lower Normandy, Picardy. 
30 Aquitaine: ECU 5.1  million (total cost: ECU 39.8 million). 
31  Champagne-Ardenne: ECU 9.1  million  (total cost: ECU 23 million). 
32 Nord/Pas-de-Calais,  Rhône-Alpes. 
33 Centre, Loire Region, Picardy, Brittany, Rhône-Alpes, Provence-Alpes-Côte  d'Azur, Champagne-Ardenne. 
34 Aquitaine, Brittany,  Midi-Pyrénées. 

210 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

development  of  centres  of  excellence  (e.g.  life  industries  in Lower  Normandy  (ECU  2.9  million;  total  cost: 
ECU 8.7 million)  and  technology platforms  in Aquitaine (ECU 9.8 million; total cost: ECU 41  million)). 
In most of the SPDs  this support for  RTD and  innovation is accompanied  by human  resource measures.  Such 
measures  are  either  general  and  aim  at  strengthening  training  in  research  (ECU  18.1 million  in  all;  total 
cost: ECU 54.1 million)35,  or more specific (ECU 49.7 million in all; total cost: ECU 96.3 million), aiming  to 
develop  advanced  scientific  training3**,  strengthen  secondary and  higher  technical  education  in  conjunction 
with the skills  centres  in the area37  and finance research grants for  technology  transfer centres38,  or  develop 
vocational  training  centres39,  training for  managers  and  research  technicians40  and  researchers,  advanced 
technicians  and  R&D advisers41,  or again  technology facilities for  training  and  apprenticeship  structures42. 
In addition  to these measures,  some programmes  link the increase in training capacity to the strengthening  of 
the  ties  between  research,  skills  centres,  higher  and  technical  training  establishments  and  businesses  (ECU 
79.7 million  in all; total  cost: ECU  173.2 million)43.  This approach  is also found  in other  measures,  such  as 
the  adaptation  of  job-seekers'  skills  to  the  labour  market  (Brittany:  ECU  2.3 million  (total  cost:  ECU 
5.2 million)),  support  for  links  between  jobs  and  training  (Brittany:  ECU  2.1 million  (total  cost:  ECU 
4 million); Picardy:  ECU  15.5 million (total cost: ECU 31.5 million)). 
Objective 5(b):  The 20 SPDs provide  support for  technology development  in rural areas as part  of  the  effort 
to strengthen  the business and industrial fabric  in those areas. Measures include support for  new  technologies 
(Upper  Normandy,  Auvergne  and  the  upland  areas  of  Languedoc-Roussillon),  development  of  research 
(Upper  Normandy,  Languedoc-Roûssillon,  Rhône-Alpes),  introduction  of  new production  processes  (Upper 
Normandy),  technology  transfer (Languedoc-Roussillon, Limousin,  Champagne-Ardenne,  Loire  Region),  and 
training  in  innovation  (Midi-Pyrénées)  and  research  (Auvergne,  Languedoc-Roussillon,  Lorraine),  and  the 
encouragement  of  competitive  know-how  (e.g. Auvergne,  Massif  Central).  RTD  also plays  a  key  role  in the 
adaptation  and diversification  of agriculture and forestry  (Auvergne, Brittany,  Midi-Pyrénées). 
In  all,  financing  for 
(Objectives  1, 2 and  5(b)). 

technology  development  in France accounts for  7% of Structural  Fund  appropriations 

Table V-23: 

France  - Financing directly linked  to technological development  in programming  1994-99 
(ECU  million) 

TOTAI. 

Objective 1 
Objective 2 
Ohiective 51 
TOTAL 
NB: The  programming  procedures and different  approaches taken by the Member States 

220,9 
812,7 
Hl.l 
1.174,7 

82,2 
355,8 
600 
J2L2. 

Pufrli.  Private 
34,2 
141,5 
49.8 
225.5 

_SL 
19% 
69% 
_____ 
100% 

Struct, Funfr 
__L 
47% 
39% 
22% 
_-S_i 

104-5 
315,4 
31.3 
4513 

Member State 
Total 

116.4 
497.3 
109.8 
723.5 

invite caution  in interpreting  these  figures,  in particular spending  on information  society  projects. 

which  arc often  linked  to other  fields  such as RTD and industry. 

Financing by the Structural  Funds 

4% 

53% 
61% 
78% 
JQSb. 

96% 

ORDT  "Telematics 

35  Auvergne,  Lower  Normandy,  Champagne-Ardenne,  Loire  Region,  Picardy,  Poitou-Charentes,  Provence-

Alpes-Côte d'Azur; Nord/Pas-de-Calais,  Poitou-Charentes. 
36 Midi-Pyrénées: ECU 0.5 million (total cost: ECU  1.5 million). 
37 Brittany:  ECU  9.2  million  (total  cost:  ECU  18.4  million);  Picardy:  ECU  1.3  million  (total  cost:  ECU  2.6 

million). 

38 Brittany: ECU 0.8 million  (total  cost: ECU  1.8 million). 
39 Brittany: ECU 4.6 million  (total cost: ECU 9 million). 
40 Centre: ECU 0.2 million  (total cost: ECU 0.4 million). 
41 Nord/Pas-de-Calais: ECU 20.7 million (total cost: ECU 41.4 million). 
42 Nord/Pas-de-Calais: ECU  12.4 million (total cost: ECU 21.7 million). 
43 Nord/Pas-de-Calais, Auvergne, Alsace, Loire Region, Picardy, Upper Normandy,  Franche-Comté. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

211 

OBJECTIVE 1 

Fie.  V-25: Proerammine  1994-99  (ECU  million):  Avesnes-Douai-Valenciennes 
Priorities: 
Stimulation of economic activity (a) 
Research and development (b) 
Human resources (c) 
Regional regeneration (d) 
Technical assistance (e) 
Bv Fund: 

ERDF 
.  ESF 
EAGGF 
Total 

308,1 
82.4 
49.5 
440,0 

70% 
19% 
11% 
100% 

1SPD 

Fig.  V-26:  Proerammine  1994-99  (ECU  million):  Corsica 
Priorities: 
Reducing isolation (a) 
Agricultural and marine production (b) 
Universities, research (c) 
Tourist and cultural heritage (d) 
Environment (e) 
Economic development (f) 
Human resources (g) 
Technical assistance (h) 
Bv Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

149,4 
31,0 
64,3 
7,5 
252.9* 

59% 
12% 
25% 
3% 
100% 

1SPD 
•including ECU 0.7 million not yet programmed 

Fie.V-27:  Proerammine  1994-99  (ECU  million):  Overseas  departments 
Priorities: 
Access, spatial balance (a) 
Environment and infrastructure  (b) 
Production, competitiveness, industry. 
crafts (c) 
Human resources, social balance (d) 
Agriculture, rural development (e) 
Fisheries and aauacukure (T) 
Tourism (g) 
Technical assistance (h) 
Bv Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

743,3 
412,1 
320.3 
30,7 
_1_____4 

4 SPDs 

Avenge per SPP 

49% 
27% 
21% 
2% 
100% 

-22___. 

(e) 0,5% 

(a) 32% 

(d) 38% 

(c)21% 

(b) 9% 

(g)12% 

<»»1% 

(f)7% 

(e) 12% 

(a) 27% 

(d)  6% 

(c)5% 

(b) 30% 

(g)  \% 

b) 20% 

(d)27% 

(c) 19% 

212 

Main features  of  1996 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Implementation  of  the  six  SPDs  adopted  in  July  1994  was relaunched  in  1996. Four  of  those  SPDs, 
Corsica,  French  Guiana,  Guadeloupe  and  Martinique,  were  amended.  The  largest  amendment 
concerned  the SPD for  Guadeloupe  and took the form  of reprogramming needed  to repair the  damage 
done by  a number  of cyclonic  storms during the summer of  1995. Implementation  of the  programmes 
for  the  Antilles  was  seriously  held  up  by  these  storms.  In  French  Guiana,  implementation  of  the 
current  programmers  delayed  because  the  necessary  resources  must  first  be  allocated  to closing  the 
programme  for  the  first  period.  By contrast,  the programme  for  Réunion  is running  smoothly  and  the 
three first  instalments and the corresponding first  advance payments are due to be committed  and paid 
at the beginning  of  1997. However,  the programmes  for  the overseas  departments  have not  yet  really 
got  underway  in  the  fisheries  sector.  By  the  end  of  1996 fewer  than  ten  projects  had  been  adopted. 
This is because aid for  the construction  of vessels has been suspended  and it has been difficult  to  find 
private-sector  projects  for  aquaculture  and the processing and marketing of products. Several  projects 
concerning facilities  for  fishing  ports have been launched. In Corsica, the programme  is making  more 
satisfactory  progress (26% of planned investments have been committed). 

With  regard  to  the  evaluation  exercise,  the  Monitoring  Committees  had  appointed  all  the  teams  of 
independent assessors by the end of  1996. 

1996 in  the  context  of programming  for  1994-99 

As  expected,  most  of  the  SPDs  got  off  to  a  siow  start,  particularly  in  Corsica,  Guadeloupe,  French 
Guiana  and  Martinique.  Community  commitments  stood  at  about  31% for  these  four  SPDs,  with 
payments at around 22% of all the appropriations  available for  1994-99. 

OBJECTIVE  2 

7P  *»44 

Fie.  V-28: Proerammine 1994-96 (ECU million - 1996 prices and situation): 
Bv sector: 
Productive environment (a) 
Human resources (b) 
Land improvement and restoration (c) 
Environmental protection (d) 
Technical assistance (e) 
Bv Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

1.339.5 
242.1 
_LSSL_. 

19  SPDs 

Average ner SPD 

85% 
15% 
100% 

____2 

(d)6%(e)1% 

(c)  18% 

(ayp% 

(b) 35% 

1996 in the  context  of programming  for  1994-96 

The  national  and  Community  commitments  for  the  19  SPDs  for  1994-96  were  closed  in  close 
collaboration  with  the  national  and  regional  authorities.  The  Community  appropriations  initially 
available  for  1994-96  amounted  to  ECU  1  763  million  at  1994  prices  (ECU  1  790  million  after 
indexing).  The  SPDs  were  closed  at  a total  of  ECU  1 582  million,  i.e.  88% of  the  initial  allocation. 
Hence only four  of the programmes  (Alsace, Franche-Comté, Upper Normandy  and  Poitou-Charentes) 
were  fully  implemented.  The  remaining  ECU  208.6  million  not  yet  spent  will  be  transferred  to  the 
new appropriations  for  1997-99 for the same regions. 

44  Eligible  areas:  Alsace,  Aquitaine.  Auvergne,  Lower  Normandy,  Brittany,  Burgundy,  Centre,  Champagne-
Ardenne,  Franche-Comté,  Upper  Normandy,  Languedoc-Roussillon,  Lorraine,  Midi-Pyrénées,  Nord/Pas-de-
Calais,  Loire  region.  Picardy,  Poitou-Charentes.  Provence-Alpes-Côte  d'Azur  and  Rhône-Alpes. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

213 

Among  the  measures  part-financed  by  the  Structural  Funds  and  completed" in  1996,  the  following 
deserve to be  mentioned: 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

in  Provence-Alpes-Côte  d'Azur,  two  industrial  projects  in  the  microprocessor  sector,  ATMEL 
(new factory,  creation  of 700 new jobs) and CGS Thomson (extension  of a factory,  creation  of 250 
new jobs); 
in  Lower  Normandy,  creation  of  a  skills  centre  for  life  industries  at  Cherbourg,  including  a 
specialised  research  and  training centre, a technological  innovation  centre  for  the  development  of 
innovative products and a marine technology centre. This project  led directly to the creation of  175-
jobs; 
in  Nord/Pas-de-Calais,  the  renovation  programme  for  the  districts  of  Capécure  at  Boulogne-sur-
Mer. The  programme  involved  renovating an industrial  area concerned  with fisheries  and  sea  food 
to bring it up to standard. The total  investment  is estimated  at ECU  185 million  over six years  and 
includes  the  modernisation  of  businesses  (to  bring  them  up  to  the  European  standards), 
rehabilitation  of  industrial  wasteland,  infrastructure  and  port  facilities.  During  1994-96.  the 
Structural  Funds  contributed  ECU  21.5  million  to  the  financing  of  a  programme  costing  ECU 
118.5  million  to  convert  industrial  wasteland  and  port  facilities.  140  firms  were  involved,  with 
4 000 direct jobs and as many indirect ones; 
in  Upper Normandy,  Community  assistance in the Dieppe employment  area, where  unemployment 
is  high,  at  16%,  led  to  the  implementation  of  an  integrated  operation  to redevelop  and  modernise 
the  port  (trade  and  cross-channel  traffic),  to connect  it to the national  and European  road  network 
and  create  the  Eurochannel  activity  park  (industrial  estate,  business  incubator  facilities,  business 
hotel). The operation  received  ECU  13 million  from the ERDF. Specialising in industrial  activities 
and  related  services, Eurochannel  has provided  a home for  50 firms,  some international  (Toshiba) 
and  others  SMEs  (plastics,  sea  food).  Of  the  7 000 jobs  in  the  Dieppe  employment  area,  almost 
1 000 were created by this operation; 
in Aquitaine, the firm  SERMA Technologies created at Pessac the first  European  centre for  testing 
electronic  components  and  the  physical  and  electrical  microanalysis  of  physical  circuits  with  an 
investment  of  ECU  3.34  million.  42  new jobs  were  created  in  addition  to  the  23  people  already 
employed  by  the  company.  This  analysis,  test  and  expertise  centre  has  achieved  scientific 
validation  through  the  close  collaboration  it has  developed  with  the university  of  Bordeaux  I and 
the micro-electronics  laboratory  (IXL) linked to the CNRS (national centre for  scientific  research). 
The  operation  was  carried  out  with  ERDF  assistance  worth  ECU  570  000,  which  acted  as  a 
catalyst  enabling  the  firm  to carry  out  its  investments  more  rapidly  and  to  recruit  a much  greater 
number of staff  than  that initially  planned; 

•  a second  project  in Aquitaine  was implemented  by the firm  S.A.  SERTA  (Société d'études  and  de 
réalisations techniques  d'Aquitaine),  located  at Saint Jean  d'lllac, which has high level  technology 
potential  in  a  variety  of  fields:  research  offices,  mass-production  manufacture,  sheet-metal  work, 
paint,  optical  grinding  and  quality  (ISO  9002  certification).  The  investment  committed  at  the  end 
of  1996 amounted  to  ECU  860 000  and  concerned  production  facilities  for  high-speed  machining 
and automated  design  and management. ERDF assistance accounted  for 25% of the investment  and 
helped  create some 20 jobs. 

Preparation for  the  1997-99 programming  period 

At  the  end  of  1996  the  French  authorities  had  sent  the  Commission  20  proposals  for  SPDS  (19 
regional programmes and one national programme for technical assistance). 

214 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Fie. V-29: Objective 3 - Proerammine  1994-99 (ECU million -1994 prices): 
ESF 
Priorities 
Integration  of those threatened  with  long-term 
unemployment  (a) 
Vocational  integration  of young people  seeking 
employment  (b) 
Integration  of those threatened  with  exclusion  (c) 
Eaual opportunities  for  men  and  women  (d) 
Technical  assistance  and  nilot  projects  (ej 

1 SPD 

Total 

690,7 

976,6 
710.3 
18.0 
166.8 
________! 

(9)7% 

(a) 27', 

(c) 28% 

(b) 37% 

The  implementation  rate  for  Objective  3  in  1995  was  71%4 5.  The  increase  in  the  volume  of  funds 
consumed  in  1995 clearly  benefited  those  most  threatened  by unemployment.  Most  of  those  targeted 
by  the  measures  implemented  are  aged  under  25  (60%). In  1996, ECU 421.6  million  of  the  initially 
planned  annual  instalment  of  ECU  478.9  million  was  committed,  and  the  first  and  second  advances 
were  paid.  The  implementation  rate  for  1996  was  79%.  At  its  meeting  in  November  1996  the 
Monitoring  Committee  proposed  some  reprogramming,  mainly  involving  the  replacement  of  certain 
measures  in  priority  1 (training  with  access  to  a job,  return-to-work  contracts,  aid  for  unemployed 
who create or take over a business, retraining leave agreements)  and priority  2 (partnership  fund)  with 
new measures. In  financial  terms, the reprogramming  involved  the transfer  of  some ECU  200  million 
from  priority  1  to priority 3 (integration  of those threatened  with exclusion). Efforts  were also made in 
1996 to correct and improve certain aspects of the management of several measures. 

Fie. V-30: Objective 4 - Proerammine 1994-96 (ECU million  -1996prices): 
ESF 
Priorities 
Pre-emptive measures relating to skills and Qualifications  (a) 
Increase in the training effort  (b) 
Improvements  to training schemes  (c) 
Technical assistance (.1 

1SPD 

Total 

67.8 
501.2 
.31.1 
53.3 
653.4 

(c) 5% 

(d)  8% 

(a)  11% 

(b)76% 

Projects  under  Objective  4,  initiated  in  1995, gathered  steam  in  1996. The  number  of  projects  rose 
from  533  at  the end  of  1995  (484  regional  and  49  national)  to  2 076  in  1996  (2 049  regional  and  27 
national).  In  financial  terms,  about  58%  of  the  1996  instalment  was  implemented,  as  against  about 
25% in  1995. 

Although,  during  1995, the training  priority  was  implemented  almost  exclusively,  to the detriment  of 
priorities  1  and 3, the number of projects  for these two priorities increased  sharply during the first  half 
of  1996. Moreover,  projects  concerning more than one priority are beginning to appear. However, this 
diversification  is  less  evident  when  looking  at  costs,  since  91% of  the  regional  budgets  and  93% of 
national  budgets  are  allocated  to  the  training  priority.  Projects  are  fairly  evenly  spread  across  the 
different  sectors  and  work forces.  73% of  participants  are employed  by establishments  with  less  than 
250  employees.  While  financing  in  1995  was  concentrated  on  the  large  firms  in  the  automobile, 
electrical  engineering and electronics  industries, in  1996 a wider range of firms  benefited,  particularly 
at  regional  level.  This  is  the  result  of  the  waning,  in  financial  terms,  of  the  large  projects  in  the 
automobile  industry  (the  proportion  of  the  regional  budgets  allocated  to firms  with  more  than  1 000 
employees has shrunk from  35% to 20%, and that of the car industry from  33% to 22%). This  relative 
dispersion  does  not  seem  to be  having  much  effect  on  the breakdown  by  sex  and  by  qualification  of 
those benefiting  from  training measures: early  information  suggests  a very  slight  increase,  at  regional 

45 By priority:  vocational  integration  of  the  unemployed:  87%; vocational  integration  of  young  people: 74%; 
integration of those threatened with exclusion: 60%; equal opportunities: 70%; technical assistance: 16%; pilot 
projects: 19.5%. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

215 

level, of the number of women  (from  20% to 24%) and an increase in the number of white-collar  staff 
(from  16%  to  26%)  to  the  detriment  of  other  qualifications.  Despite  these  changes,  there  is  little 
change in the characteristics of the projects  themselves. 

OBJECTIVE  5(a)  agriculture 

Table 24: proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million - 1994 prices): 

Total 

1.745,5 

Measures 
Production 
Mprtgting 

1.486,6 
2-5S.9 

85% 
15% 

The  three  main  measures  to  improve  the  efficiency  of  production  structures  are  aid  for  the 
modernisation  of  farms,  aid  to  young  farmers  and  compensatory  allowances.  Investment  aid  for 
modernisation  was paid to 9 213 farms in  1995 (number of approvals), i.e. up 24% on the year  before, 
which  itself  was  27%  up  on  1994.  This  second  year  of  growth  confirms  the  upward  trend  in  the 
number  of  commitments  which  started  in  1993. Where  young  farmers  are  concerned,  8 435  start-up 
dossiers  were  approved  in  1995,  i.e.  a  6.2%  increase  on  1994.  After  a  sharp  fall  in  1992  and  no 
change in the number of start-ups since, this new increase suggests a fresh  surge in start-up aid, which 
is  seen  as  a  priority  in  France.  Lastly,  concerning  compensatory  allowances,  which  are  granted  to 
some  140 000  holdings  each  year,  the  amount  of  the  premiums  granted  for  suckler  cows  and  sheep 
was  increased  in  1995/96  to  take  account  of  the  structurally  low  income  of  stock  farmers.  Despite 
increased  participation  by  farmers  in  the  measures  described  above,  expenditure  during  1995  was 
lower than  expected. 

The  SPDs  to assist the processing and marketing  of agricultural  and forestry  products  were drawn  up 
in  1994  and  the  decentralised  implementing  structures  were  set  up  in  1995.  Community  assistance 
was finally  applied  fully  in  1996, when  an agreement  was reached  to grant  aid  in the wine  sector  for 
investments  to  improve  quality.  Community  assistance  for  these  measures  for  1994-99  amounts  to 
ECU  259 million. At the end  of  1996, the French  authorities  had cornmitted ECU  163 million  of  that 
amount,  corresponding  to ECU  862 million  of  investments  in the  approved  projects.  More  than  50% 
of Community  assistance was granted to investments in the meat, fruit  and vegetables sectors. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) fisheries 

Fie. V-31: Obiective 5(a) fisheries - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million): 

Adjustment of fishing effort  (a) 
Other fishing fleet measures (b) 
Modernisation and renovation of the fishing fleet (c) 
Aauaculture (d) 
Protected marine areas (e) 
Port facilities  (f) 
Processing and marketing of products (e) 
Promotion of products (h) 
Socio-economic measures (i) 
Other measures (Y\ 

FIFG 

16.2 
27,0 
20,3 
33,7 
0,0 
8.1 
54,8 
5.0 
pm 
______ 
189.9 

Total 

(1)0% 

0)13% 

(a)9% 

(h) 3 % ^^ 

"______/  0 > )1 4% 

(g)28% 

(c)11% 

(f)4% 

(1)18% 

Although  the  multiannual programme for  the fishing  fleet  provided  for  a halt to state aid for  renewal 
of the French  fishing  fleet,  the commitment  of funds  under the SPD, implementation  of which  did not 
commence  until  1995, is  progressing  satisfactorily.  However,  there  is  room  for  improvement  in  the 
payments  to  final  beneficiaries  (ECU  29.2  million,  or  15% of  the  Community  allocation). The  SPD 
was  amended  so  that  ECU  7  million  of  surplus  appropriations  from  the  "Guarantee  fund"  measure 
could be used for campaigns to promote fishery  products and measures to improve product  quality. 

216 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)46 

Fie.  V-32: Obiective S(b) - Proerammine 1994-99: 
Population ('000s) 
Area (kw?\ 

9.759 

ECU miliicn 

(c)33% 

By Fund 

20 SPDs 

EAGGF 
ERDF 
ESF 
Iota. 

1.008.4 
943.2 
294.2 
________ 

Average per ______ 

45% 
42% 
13% 
100% 

112.3 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

(a) 14% 

(b)51% 

D Agricultural 

diversification (a) 

•  Economic development 

(b) 

•Attractiveness of rural 

areas 

•Technical  assistance 

Following the setting up of the SPDs in  1995, implementation reached a satisfactory  cruising speed in 
most  of  the  French  regions  in  1996.  The  Commission  committed  32%  of  the  Community 
appropriations planned for the entire period, although this amount is still insufficient  to make up the 
delays  from  1994  and  1995. 72%  of  these  appropriations  have  been  paid,  demonstrating  a  sound 
ability to implement operations in the field. The Monitoring Cornmittees met in each of the 18 regions 
concerned,  holding  a  total  of  35  meetings,  including  those  of  the  inter-regional  Monitoring 
Committees set up for the two "massif  SPDs (Massif central and Massif des Pyrénées). During these 
meetings  the  harmonised  monitoring  arrangements  were  set up. Special  attention  was  paid  to mid 
term  assessment  that  the  data  needed  to  adjust  the  SPDs  would  be  available  for  1997.  The 
Commission  steered the work of the Cornmittees to monitor the development priorities laid down for 
each  region.  To  that  end,  it  worked  in  partnership  with  the  regional  and  national  authorities  to 
standardise  and harmonise the financial  and physical data forwarded  to the Monitoring Committees. 
Alongside the progress of the programmes, specific presentations were given of priority aspects such 
as  employment,  the  quality  of  agricultural  products  and  measures  for job-creating  small  firms  and 
industries. 

46  Eligible  areas:  Alsace,  Aquitaine,  Auvergne,  Lower  Normandy,  Burgundy,  Brittany,  Centre,  Champagne-
Ardenne,  Franche-Comté,  Upper  Normandy,  Languedoc-Roussillon,  Limousin,  Lorraine,  Midi-Pyrénées, 
Loire region, Poitou-Charentes, Provence-Alpes-Côte  d'Azur and Rhône-Alpes. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

217 

Table V-25:  France - Assistance by Objective -1996  in the context of programming for  1994-96/99 (ECU 

million) 

Programmes 
(year of adoption) 

Total volume 

S.F 

Objective 1 
SPD Avesnes-Douai-Valenciennes  (1994) 
SPD Conica  (1994) 
SPD Guadeloupe (1994) 
SPD French Guiana (1994) 
SPD Maninique (1994) 
SPD Réunion (1994) 
Technical as s is tance 

Total 

Objective 2* 
SPD Alsace (1994) 
SPD Aquitaine  (1994) 
SPD Auvergne  (1994) 
SPD Lower Normandy  (1994) 
SPD Burgundy  (1994) 
SPD Brittany  (1994) 
SPD Centre (1994) 
SPD Oiampagne'Ardenne (1994) 
SPD Franche-Corwé (1994) 
SPD Upper Normandy  (1994) 
SPD Languedoc-Roussillon  (1994) 
SPD Lorraine (1994) 
SPD Midi-Pyrénées  (1994) 
SPD Nord/Pas-de-Calais  (1994) 
SPD Loire Region  (1994) 
SPD Picardy  (1994) 
SPD Poitou-Charentes  (1994) 
SPD Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur (1994) 
SPD Rhône-Alpes  (1994) 

1.339.6 
684,6 
8313 
309.5 
660,4 
1.267,2 
0.3 
5.093,8 

47.3 
3714 
109.5 
155.9 
122,4 
228.9 
128.4 
245.1 
117.4 
428,8 
232.8 
212.6 
151.1 
925.0 
362.3 
479.0 
130.5 
264.7 
220.7 

Total 

4.934,6 

(1) 

440.C 
252,9 
351.9 
164.9 
329.8 
659.7 
0,1 
2.199,4 

19,9 
100.2 
52,9 
49.3 
36.5 
82.9 
16.3 
55,7 
48.5 
149.0 
56.1 
98.1 
41,4 
303.0 
130.2 
12Z4 
54.1 
99,4 
65.8 
1.581,6 

Commitment! 
1996 

Commi tments 
1994-96 
(2) 

% 

(2V(1) 

113.5 
29.5 
12,5 
24,2 
40,8 
76,4 
0.1 
297,0 

0,3 
62,3 
13.0 
10,4 
8,0 
54,4 
-6.3 
25,7 
3U 
45,2 
13,8 
20.9 
14,2 
188.9 
43.2 
45,9 
20,0 
29,0 
35.7 

*65S,8 

183.4 
78.C 
113.1 
51.0 
98.4 
270,6 
0.1 
794,6 

19.9 
100.2 
51,6 
45.9 
37,6 
819 
17.9 
50,4 
48,5 
136,8 
56,1 
101.3 
41.4 
3019 
128.4 
1214 
54,1 
94,6 
67,4 
1.560J. j 

42% 
31% 
32% 
31% 
30% 
41% 
105% 
-  36% 

100% 
100% 
98% 
93% 
103% 
100% 
110% 
90% 
100% 
92% 
100% 
103% 
100% 
100% 
99% 
100% 
100% 
95% 
102% 
99% 

Payments  1  Payments 
1994-96 
(3) 

1996 

1 

65.2 
33.0 
213 
20.5 
211 
88.0 
0.1 
251,2 

6.1 
63,7 
3,7 
6.6 
16.0 
312 
1,1 
24.2 
24.9 
64.3 
17,1 
273 
113 
39.9 
36.0 
116 
15.2 
9,8 
0.0 

105.2 
60.4 
78.3 
373 
60.6 
195,8 
0.1 

537,9 

15,9 
833 
29,0 
28,0 
13.9 
463 
13.2 
36,6 
33.6 
106,0 
34.0 
63,0 
20,2 
1016 
63,0 
615 
30.4 
27,8 
15.8 

% 

(3V(1) 

24% 
24% 
22% 
23% 
18% 
30% 
102% 
24% 

80% 
83% 
55% 
57% 
65% 
56% 
81% 
66% 
69% 
71% 
61% 
64% 
49% 
34% 
48% 
51% 
56% 
28% 
24% 

412,2 

835,5 

53% 

Objective 3 
SPD France (1994) 
Objective 4 
SPD France (1994) 
Objective 5(a) agriculture 
SPD France Regs. 866 and 867/90 (1995) 
Forecasts  France Reg. 2328/91 (1994) 

| 

| 

Total 

5.443.4| 

15614| 

421.6) 

1.200.0| 

47%| 

402.91 

906.6J 

35% 

1.820.11 

653.4| 

91,7| 

187,l| 

29%| 

49.61 

97.31 

15% 

1.404.5 
4.595,4 
5.999,9 

258,9 
1.486.6 
1.745,5 

45.9 
174.8 
220,7 

81.0 
657.6 
738,6 

31% 
44% 
42% 

28,6 
178.3 
206,9 

46,1 
4019 
449,0 

18% 
27% 
26% 

Objective 5(a)  fisheries 
SPD France (1994) 
Objective 5(b) 
SPD Alsace (1994) 
SPD Aquitaine (1994) 
SPD Auvergne  (1994) 
SPD Lower Normandy  (1994) 
SPD Burgundy  (1994) 
SPD Brittany  (1994) 
SPD Centre (1994) 
SPD Champagne-Ardenne  (1994) 
SPD Franche-Comté (1994) 
SPD Upper Normandy  (1994) 
SPD Languedoc-Roussilton  (1994) 
SPD Limousin  (1994) 
SPD Lorraine (1994) 
SPD Midi-Pyrénées  (1994) 
SPDLoire Region  (1994) 
SPD Poitou-Charentes  (1994) 
SPD Provence-Alpes-Côte  d'Azur (1994) 
SPD Rhône-Alpes  (1994) 
SPD Massif Central (1995) 
SPD Massif des  Pyrénées  (1995) 

After deduction  of transfers  to  1997-99 

Total 
TOTAL 

| 

843.0| 

189.9| 

0.0| 

63.3| 

33%| 

0.0| 

41,11 

22% 

169,1 
782.6 
724,7 
433,4 
407.6 
510.6 
259.7 
100,1 
439.8 
319 
344,3 
560,8 
304.6 
849.9 
334.2 
450,8 
288.0 
849,9 
27,4 
17.8 
7.888,2 
32.023.0 

48,8 
229,9 
164,7 
1333 
11Z7 
186.3 
84.1 
29.3 
78,1 
11.2 
119.9 
128.0 
96.8 
283.1 
122,0 
130,1 
95.0 
171.2 
12,7 
8.6 
2.245,8 
11.177.9 

11.5 
49,7 
17,7 
11.9 
19,7 
33.0 
17.0 
15 
17.3 
1.2 
15.6 
21.9 
20.9 
38,8 
14 
21,7 
11.1 
20.9 
1.3 
0.0 
J35.9 
2.022.6 

183 
84,1 
615 
43,4 
49,4 
59.2 
211 
6,6 
31.2 
13 
27.3 
53.9 
31.1 
717 
30,2 
415 
13.1 
45,8 

14 
1,1 
709,1 
5.252.8 

37% 
37% 
38% 
33% 
44% 
32% 
26% 
22% 
40% 
20% 
23% 
42% 
32% 
26% 
25% 
33% 
24% 
27% 
19% 
13% 

32% 
47% 

7.3 
323 
19.9 
14.9 
16,8 
31.8 
9,2 
3.7 
8,1 
0.3 
16.1 
24,7 
15.5 
39.6 
112 
193 
10,4 
17.0 
0.8 
0.0 
300,2 
1.623.0 

10.6 
513 
483 
310 
30.9 
48.0 
11.7 
5,8 
16,4 
0,8 
210 
46.1 
21.2 
57.8 
24,0 
30,6 
18,2 
30.2 

13 
03 
508,1 
3375.6 

22% 
22% 
29% 
24% 
27% 
26% 
14% 
20% 
21% 
7% 
18% 
36% 
22% 
20% 
20% 
24% 
19% 
18% 
10% 

6% 
23% 
30% 

218 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

6.2.  Implementation of the Community Initiatives in 1996 

Note: 
France  is  participating  in  all  the  Community  Initiatives,  which  are  being  implemented  in  85  programmes, 
including  15 for  Interreg, all regionalised  except  for five (Employment,  Adapt, Retex, SMEs for  Objectives  2 
and  5(b)  and  Pesca). The  Commission  had  adopted  52 programmes  in  1994  and  1995  (47  at  national  level): 
one  for  Employment,  five  for  Interreg,  six  for  Rechar  II,  five  for  Résider,  the  amendment  of  the  Retex 
programme,  three  programmes  for  SMEs,  one  for  Regis,  all  the  Konver  programmes,  the  Pesca  programme, 
the  Adapt  programme  and  eleven  programmes  for  Leader.  The  33  remaining  programmes  were  adopted  in 
1996: three for Regis, one for Rechar, two for Résider, eight for Urban, nine for Leader and ten for Interreg. 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in France: 
The SMEs  Initiative  gives a key role to new technologies  and innovation  in strengthening  the  competitiveness 
of  firms  in  areas  eligible  under  Objectives  I,  2  and  5(b).  In  Corsica,  SMEs  is  helping  to  improve  the 
production  system  and  create  innovative firms as  well as to develop  new forms  of cooperation  between  firms 
to facilitate  access  to  new  markets,  and  cooperation  between  firms  and  research  and  technology  transfer 
centres.  It  also  aims  to  improve  communications  and  information  systems  and  develop  tele-commuting.  In 
Nord/Pas-de-Calais, 
the  initiative  gives  priority  to  improving  the  technological  environment  of  SMEs, 
particularly  those up- and downstream of industrial firms (ECU 1.5 million;  total cost: ECU 6 million). In the 
Objective 2 and 5(b)  areas, the programme  aims to set up new procedures  and disseminate know-how.  In  this 
connection  it is promoting  the creation  of a  'counter-guarantee fund' for  SMEs  implementing partnership  or 
innovative  projects  and  the  creation  of European  partnerships  and  collective  modernisation  and  innovation 
projects  (between  70 and  100) as an extension of the Stride  programme. 
The  Interreg  programmes  also  attribute  great  importance  to  RTD  (ECU  20.6 million;  total  cost:  ECU 
42.4 million),  communications  (ECU  4.4 million;  total  cost:  ECU  9.4  million)  and  data-transmission 
applications  (ECU 4.4 million; total cost: ECU 9.1 million): 

•  France-United  Kingdom:  the  CIP for  East Sussex-Upper  Normandy-Picardy  supports  cooperation 
between  research  and  technology  transfer  centres for  the  benefit  of  SMEs  and  aims  to  stimulate 
communication  and  the  sharing  of  knowledge  through joint  databases,  bilingual  documentation 
sources  and  the  use  of  new  communications  technologies  (ECU  3.2  million;  total  cos:  ECU  6.5 
million);  the programme  for  Nord/Pas-de-Calais  -  Kent also  aims  to  strengthen  communications 
and support  technology development  (ECU 8.5 million; total cost: ECU 18.2 million); 
•  France-Italy:  the  programme  for  Corsica-Tuscany  gives  priority  to  encouraging 

technology 
transfer  in order  to stimulate  cooperation  between firms and  research and  innovation  centres;  the 
programme for  the Alps encourages firms to cooperate in the field of research. 

Under Regis,  ECU  7.1 million  (total cost: ECU  14.4 million) are allocated  to advanced  communications  and 
ECU  13.9 million (total cost: ECU 38.6 million) to RTD. 
In  the  context  of  the  industrial  conversion  Initiatives,  the  programmes  for  Konver  aim  to  strengthen 
technology potential  (e.g. Ile-de-France:  ECU 0.5 million; total cost: ECU 4.9 million) through  research and 
technology  transfer  to SMEs  and  industries which  can play  a  decisive  role  in economic  diversification  (e.g. 
Limousin:  ECU  1.8 million (total cost: ECU 4.6  million), Midi-Pyrénées:  ECU  1 million (total cost: ECU  2.5 
million),  Aquitaine,  Auvergne,  Brittany, Poitou-Charentes)  and  to develop  innovative  measures  in  firms  (e.g. 
Brittany,  Languedoc-Roussillon).  Under the Résider programmes  the  emphasis  is on networking.  In  Picardy 
ECU  0.5 million  (total  cost: ECU  1.5 million)  is allocated  to the development  of technology  networks  in the 
rehabilitated  areas,  while  in  Nord/Pas-de-Calais,  the  programme  encourages  cooperation  between  skills 
centres  and  firms  by  means  of  information  highways  and  the  use  of  communications  technology  by  small 
firms.  In Lower  Normandy,  an  electronic  information  management  network  will be set  up between  firms  and 
the  University  of  Caen.  The  programmes  for  Rechar  also  stress  the  importance  of  cooperation,  with  the 
programme  for  Nord/Pas-de-Calais,  for  example,  encouraging  cooperation  between  skills  centres  and  firms 
based on new  technologies. 
Regarding  the  Initiatives  concerned  with  human  resources,  the  Adapt  programme  allocates  part  of  its 
resources  to the design  and  implementation  of flexible  training schemes  based on the use of new  technologies 
and distance  education  (ECU  12 million; total cost: ECU 24 million), alongside  the creation of new  activities 
or  the  introduction  of new  technologies  and  studies  on  the impact of  new  technologies  on  human  resources. 
Employment  provides,  in  the  context  of  the  Horizon  Initiative, for  the  development  of  human  resources  in 
new  technologies,  tele-commuting  and  the  creation  of  the  infrastructure  necessary for  tele-commuting  and 
distance  learning (ECU  14.1 million; total cost: ECU 36.1 million). 
Lastly,  most  of  the  Leader  programmes  provide  for  the  promotion  of  research,  innovation  and  new 
technologies  in  the process  of  developing  and  creating  local products,  and  the  use  of  new  information  and 
communication  technologies  in  rural  society  (e.g.  tele-commuting,  distance  education  and  training,  tele-
centres,  etc.),  including  assistance for  the purchase  of equipment and development  of networks.  . 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

219 

Many  programmes  were  adopted  in  1996:  23  regional  programmes  and  the  last  ten  Interreg 
programmes: 
three  with  Belgium  (Wallonia-Champagne-Ardenne,  Flanders-Nord/Pas-de-Calais, 
Wallonia-Nord/Pas-de-Calais), one with Belgium and Luxembourg  (Wallonia-Lorraine-Luxembourg), 
one  with  Spain,  three  with  Italy  (Corsica-Tuscany,  Corsica-Sardinia,  Alps)  and  two  with  the  United 
Kingdom  (East  Sussex-Upper  Normandy-Picardy,  Kent-Nord/Pas-de-Calais).  Under  the  programme 
between  France and Spain, geographical  cross-border groups consisting of partners  from  both  sides of 
the  border  have  been  set  up  to plan  the joint  measures  provided  for  in  the programme.  The  regional 
programmes  adopted  in  1996  include  one  Rechar  programme  (Nord/Pas-de-Calais)  and  two  Résider 
programmes  (Nord/Pas-de-Calais and Lower Normandy). They also include eight Urban  programmes, 
which  offer  many lessons for future  programmes, since they seek to integrate unemployed  inhabitants 
through  economic  activity  in problem-ridden  urban  districts in  eight  large French  cities. Three  of  the 
four  Regis  programmes  were  also adopted  in  1996. These concern  the remotest  regions  and  cover  all 
the Community  Initiatives  including  Leader. Their  implementation  got  off  to a slow  start,  on  the  one 
hand  because  of  the  need  to close  the  programmes  from  1989-93  and,  on  the  other  hand,  because  of 
bad  weather  in  the Antilles. The  last  nine Leader  programmes  were  also  adopted  in  1996. The  local 
action  groups  for  the  whole  Initiative  were  selected  in  most  regions  by  tendering  procedure 
administered  at  prefecture  level.  14  regions  made  an  initial  selection  of  a  total  of  87  local  action 
groups, enabling the first  programmes to get underway  in the second half of  1996. 

Following  the  first  call  for  projects  under  Employment,  around  500  projects  were  selected  (157  for 
Now,  261  for  Horizon  and  83  for  Youthstart).  Most  of  the  projects  take  the  approach  of  creating 
activities  and  integration  pathways  and  include  a  number  of  innovative  practices:  in  the  case  of 
training programmes, these practices include inter-institutional  and multi-disciplinary work, the means 
and  tools  used  to  improve  the  integration  pathways  (therapeutic  listening,  creativity  workshops, 
theatre,  video,  writing  workshops,  cultural  visite),  enhancing  the  expertise  of  field-workers, 
overhauling teaching methods and practices, deepening relationships  with firms  and coordinating with 
local  development.  Practices  worth  mentioning  in  connection  with  the  creation  of  activities  include 
tools  to  facilitate  the  creation  of  activities,  financing  tools, the  inclusion  of  social  clauses  in  public 
procurement  contracts, involvement  of inhabitants and local authorities  in promising new markets and 
new  working  methods,  particularly  tele-commuting.  In  the  context  of  improving  training  schemes, 
new  vocational  profiles  have  been  defined,  with  the  observatories  acting  to  stimulate  innovation  in 
existing local schemes, training trainers/educators  and the different  categories of social workers. 

270  projects  were  selected  under  Adapt,  with  a  high  level  of  participation  among  small  firms  (on 
average  almost  100  per  project),  which  correspond  to  one  of  the  situations  targeted  (improving  the 
skills  of  employees  in SMEs  to take account  of changes  in technology  and  markets, quality  measures 
tailored  to  SMEs,  support  for  a  human  resources  management  culture  in  SMEs,  networks  for 
cooperation  between  SMEs)  The  other  noteworthy  feature  of  the  projects  concerns  the  general 
phenomenon  of  the  development,  transformation  or  emergence  of  new  skills,  giving  priority  to 
technological  developments, particularly  those linked with the information  society. 

The Monitoring Committees  of the 33 programmes approved by the Commission  in the second  half of 
1995  also  held  their  first  meetings  in  1996  (six  of  the  seven  Rechar  programmes;  five  of  the  seven 
Résider programmes; the three  SMEs programmes; the Regis programme  for  Réunion; the  13 Konver 
programmes  and  five  of  the  15 Interreg  programmes)  The  selection  of  projects  for  Pesca  at  regional 
level  did  not  begin  until  the  end  of  1995  or even  early  1996 and  information  on  the  progress  of  the 
programme is not yet available. 

Lastly,  the  decision  to  distribute  the  Community  Initiatives  reserve  will  bring  an  additional  ECU 
187.7 million  to France. This  amount  has been  spread  over all the Initiatives  except  SMEs  and  Regis, 
but the lion's  share will go to Employment. Leader, Urban  and  Adapt47. 

41  See also Chapter I.B.I. Community  Initiatives. 

220 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

Table V-26:  France  -  Community  Initiatives  -  1996  in  the  context  of programming  for  1994-99  (ECU 

million) 

Initiative 
(Number of  programmes) 

Adapt (1) 
Employment  ( 1 ) 
Leader (20) 
Pesca (1) 
SMEs (3) 
Rechar (7) 
Regis (4) 
Konver (17) 
Résider CI) 
Retex  (1) 
Urban (8) 
Total (70) 
Interres/Reeen  (15)** 

Programmes adopted in 1996: 
Leader Douai. Valenciennes 
Leader Centre 
Leader  Upper  Normandy 
Leader Lorraine 
Leader Midi-Pvrénées 
Leader Loire Region 
Leader Rhône-Alpes 
Leader ChamoaEne-Ardenne 
Leader Alsace 
Rechar  Nord/Pas-de-Calais 
Regis French Guiana 
Regis Guadeloupe 
Regis Maniniaue 
Résider Lower  Normandy 
Résider  Nord/Pas-de-Calais 
Urban Alsace (Mulhouse) 
Urban Ile-de-France (Les Mureaux) 
Urban  Ile-de-France (Aulnav-sous-Bois) 
Urban Rhône-Alpes  (Lvon-Est) 
Urban  Nord/Pas de Calais  (Valenciennes) 
Urban PACA  (Marseille) 
Urban Nord/Pas-de-Calais (Roubaix-
Tourcoing) 
Urban  Picardie (Amiens) 
Total (23) 
Interr-ee {10**** 
* Excluding reserve 
** For programme  details see Chapter VII. 
*"  For programme details see Chapter I.B 

Total 

S.F.' 

Commitments) Commitments! 

6223 
385.1 
477.1 
81.3 
139.2 
78.7 
504.1 
244.1 
173.2 
79.3 
152,7 
2.937.4 

4.5 
15.1 
1.8 
16.0 
583 
18.8 
28.1 
6.9 
8.4 
39.3 
47.3 
123.9 
123.8 
21.7 
45.7 
20.9 
17.0 
22.8 
26.6 
9.7 
17.6 
17.6 

-01 

249,7 
146.5 
190.0 
28.3 
58.5 
33.5 
266.1 
71,0 
62.1 
28.9 
55.7 
1.190.4 

2.0 
6.4 
0.8 
7.4 
22.0 
93 
13.2 
2.2 
3.7 
16.9 
28.4 
613 
60.8 
5.1 
14.4 
7.0 
7.0 
8.9 
7.0 
4.9 
7.0 
7.0 

1996 

0.0 
27.3 
92.7 
9.5 
0,4 
17.9 
52.2 
6.3 
23.5 
0.0 
53.8 
2833 

0.8 
6.4 
0.8 
7.4 
22.0 
9.3 
13.2 
2.2 
3.2 
16.9 
28.4 
8.0 
8.3 
5.1 
14.4 
7.0 
7.0 
8.9 
7.0 
4.5 
7.0 
5,4 

1994-96 
________ 
46.9 
49.6 
188.3 
28.3 
15.8 
33.3 
60.9 
70,7 
62.1 
7.0 
53.8 
616.8 

.avm 

19% 
34% 
99% 
100% 
27% 
99% 
23% 
100% 
100% 
24% 
96% 
52% 

0.8 
6.4 
0.8 
7.4 
22.0 
9.3 
13.2 
2.2 
3.2 
16.9 
28.4 
8.0 
8.3 
5.1 
14.4 
7.0 
7.0 
8.9 
7.0 
4.5 
7.0 
5,4 

39% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
10O 
100' 
100% 
100% 
88% 
100% 
100% 
13% 
14% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
92% 
100% 
77% 

100% 
65% 

Pavments 
1996 

Pavments 
1994-96 
£2. 

0,0 
15.6 
45.6 
8.5 
0.2 
14.9 
20,4 
3,1 
11,7 
0,0 
17.1 
137_2 

0.2 
1.9 
0.2 
3.2 
6.6 
4.6 
3.9 
0.7 
1.6 
8.4 
83 
4.0 
4.1 
2.6 
7.2 
2.1 
2.1 
2.7 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
1.6 

23,5 
26.7 
61,1 
83 
4,8 
16,7 
24.8 
35,1 
29,3 
3.4 
17.1 
251,1 

0.2 
1.9 
0.2 
3.2 
6.6 
4.6 
3.9 
0.7 
1.6 
8.4 
83 
4.0 
4.1 
2.6 
7.2 
2.1 
2.1 
2.7 
2.2 
2.2 
2.1 
1,6 

_______ 
9% 
18% 
32% 
30% 
8% 
50% 
9% 
49% 
47% 
12% 
31% 
2 1% 

12% 
30% 
30% 
43% 
30% 
50% 
30% 
30% 
44% 
50% 
30% 
7% 
7% 
50% 
50% 
30% 
30% 
30% 
32% 
46% 
30% 
23% 

2.1 
75.1 

2.1 
75.1 

30% 
24 

20.5 
712,6 

7.0 
309,7 

7.0 
200,2 

7.0 
200,2 

Table 2.2. 
.1.  Community  Initiatives 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

221 

7. 

IRELAND 

7.1.  Implementation of assistance by Obiective in 1996 

Aid for  developing  technological potential  in Ireland  : 
Through  the  priorities  for  the  productive  sector,  economic  infrastructure  and  hufnan  resources,  the  CSF 
promotes  technological  development to resolve unemployment, weaknesses  in local industry and the  country's 
peripheral  location. 
The productive  sector  priority  sees  R&D as  important for  making  industry  internationally  competitive.  The 
aim  is to increase  expenditure  on R&D to 2.12% of GDP in 1999. In the  'Industrial development'  OP,  which 
is a prolongation  of the  'Industrial development'  OP for  the period  1989-93, R&D measures qualify for  ECU 
269  million  (total  cost  ECU  499  million)  and  encourage  the  use  of  technology  in  business  through  aid  for 
infrastructure,  investment and  training. Business investment measures promote  technology  transfer.  They aim 
to increase business  expenditure  on R&D from  0.65% of GDP to 0.82% in 1999. Outside the industrial  sector 
R&D  is  aided  to  modernise  agriculture,  explore  and  exploit  natural  marine  resources  and  protect  the 
environment.  The  'Environmental  Services'  OP  includes  ECU  3.1  million  (total  cost: ECU  6.3  million)  for 
monitoring  environmental  research  into  sustainable  development,  clean  technology  and  industrial  waste 
reduction. 
The  R&D  strategy  is further  strengthened  by  a  'Human  resources'  priority  to  improve  access  to  and  the 
quality  of  education  and  training  in science and  technology  while developing  human potential  in these  fields 
through  specific  training  courses in the technical colleges and universities.  The ESF will aid  highly  qualified 
researchers  involved  in  industrial  R&D projects,  technology  management  programmes for  qualified  staff  in 
research  centres  and  industry,  and  training  and  educational  programmes  in  advanced  research  and  the 
application  of new  technology. 
Aid for  telecommunications  as one of the sectors  in the strategy  to modernise the  economic  infrastructure  is 
also  noteworthy.  CSF  investment  on  this  is  65%  greater  than  in  the  first  programming  period.  Such  an 
increase  is needed, not  because  the network needs modernising  - it is already  one  of the most advanced  and 
reliable  in the  Union in terms of digitisation  (70%),  speed  of repairs and  the wait for  new  connections  - but 
because  the adverse  effects of the country's  peripheral  location on its industrial strategy  need  to be  reduced. 
The  CSF  aims  to  complete  the  digitisation  of  the  network, install  the  entire  C7 signals  system  and  an  SDH 
network.  The  telecommunications  subprogramme  of  the  'Economic  infrastructure '  OP  is  implementing  this 
objective  (ECU  32  million  -  total  cost  ECU  68  million).  Considerable  work  will  be  done  on  connections, 
transmission  (using fibre optics) and mobile services (introduction of  GSM). 
Total funding  on technological  development  amounts  to 6.4% of  the Structural  Funds appropriations  in the 
Irish  CSF. 

Table  V-27: 

Ireland - Financing directly linked to technological development  in 1994-99 (ECU  million) 

TOTAL 

% 
100% 

Struct.  Funds 
% 
Gift 

?«.7 

Member  State 
Total 
Private 
2?4,7 
132.4 

Public. 
102,4 

Qbiect.Y-l 
NB: In view of the progamming procedures and different  approaches  taken by the Member States, 

S96.4 

caution  is required  in imepreung  these figures;, in particular spending  on information  society 

projects  which  arc often  linked  u> other fields such as RTD and industry 

Financing by the Structural Funds 

9°/ 

% 
??7f 

91« 

DR&D 

•Telecomms. 

222 

OBJECTIVE 1 

Fie.V-33: Proerammine  1994-99 (ECUmillion.  1994 yrices): 
By  Priority: 

Productive  sector  (a) 
Economie  Infrastructure  (b) 
Human resources  (c) 
Local  development  (d) 
Technical  assistance  (e) 
By  Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

2.562,0 
1.953,0 
1.058,0 
47,0 
5.620.0 

I  CSF  110  OPs  11  MP 

Average per OP 

Main  achievements  in  1996 

2.184.0 
1.113,0 
2.113,0 
200.0 

10-0 

45% 
35% 
19% 
1% 
100% 

_£_____ 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

(d) 4% 

(e) 0% 

(c) 38% 

(a) 38% 

(b) 20% 

The Irish economy continues to have a growth rate in excess of the Community  average, and  this is in 
part  thanks  to  aid  from  the  Structural  Funds.  Implementation  of  the  various  programmes  has 
progressed  normally. The  Technical  assistance'  OP was  approved  by  the  Commission  in July  1996, 
which  means  that  all  the  OPs  have  now  been  adopted.  Most  of  the  programmes  have  also  been 
adjusted  to  take  account  of  the  deflator  for  1995  and  1996 and  to  reprogramme  expenditure.  Thus, 
taking  programmes  in  receipt  of  EAGGF  funding  as  an  example,  the  'Agriculture  and  rural 
development'  OP,  approved  in  1994,  is  now  fully  operational  with  the  exception  of  two  minor 
operations;  the  'Development  of  the  food  industry'  subprogramme  of  the  Industry  OP  has  been 
amended  to take  account  of  its  slow  pace  in  the  early  years  and  the  'Local  development'  OP,  which 
includes  village  renewal  measures,  is  in  line  with  expenditure  forecasts.  Great  progress  has  been 
achieved  under  the  Fisheries  OP  (reprogramming  was  needed  to  bring  forward  cornmitments  from 
1997). While  the  scheme  introduced  in  1995 to reduce  the fishing  fleet  progressed  little  in  1996  and 
there has  been  a delay  in  implementing  aquaculture  legislation,  350 jobs  were nonetheless  created  in 
aquaculture  and  there  is  a  surplus  of  good  projects  in  the  area  of  fleet  modernisation  and  fishery 
products  processing.  A  research  vessel  was  built  with  an  ERDF  contribution,  recommendations  on 
safety  at sea were published  and an major campaign was launched to promote sea  food. 

A  special  CSF information  unit  was  set  up  in  1996 to  coordinate  information  on  the  CSF  in  Ireland 
and  to  improve  its  quality.  In  addition,  agreement  was  reached  on  the  light  rail  system  for  Dublin 
(LUAS) under the Transport OP. 

The preparations  for  ongoing assessment  of the CSF and the OPs were  started  by approving  the  terms 
of  reference  and  appointing  evaluators.  An  evaluation  of  the  aid's  regional  impact  has  also  been 
commissioned,  while  a  draft  report  has  already  been  produced  by  the  independent  consultants 
evaluating the Fisheries OP. 

1996 in the  context  of programming  for  1994-99 

Progress  on  the  CSF  is  substantial. The  amounts  actually  spent  are  in  line  with  the  forecasts  for  the 
first  three years. Total ERDF payments for  the first  three years amount to ECU 904.5 million, 67% of 
the  commitments.  ESF  commitments  for  1996  amount  to  ECU  321.2  million  out  of  a  total  of 
to 
ECU 322.9  million  provided  for 
ECU 846 million,  of  which  ECU  715 million  has been  spent  on the  'Human  resources'  OP. The  total 
number  of  FTFG  projects  approved  represent  53%  of  the  Community  aid  provided  for  the  period 
1994-99;  the  final  beneficiaries  have  spent  31% of  the  Community  aid,  22%  of  which  has  already 
been paid to them. 

the  year.  Total  payments  for 

the  three  years  amount 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

223 

Table  V-28: 

Ireland  - Assistance  by  Objective  -1996 
period  (ECU  million) 

in  the  context  of  the  1994-99 

programming 

Programmes 
(year of  adoption) 

Total cost 

S.F. 
assistance 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
121 

J2__1L 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 

(?)/(]) 

Obiective 1 
Technical  Assisistance  (1996) 
Tallaght  Hospital  project 
Agriculture, rural development  (1994) 
Local development ( 1994) 
Industry  (1994) 
Economic infrastructure  (1994) 
Fisheries (1994) 
Human  resources  (1994) 
Environmental  services (1994) 
Tourism  (1994) 
Transport  (1994) 
Technical  assistance 
TOTAI 

(1) 

9.5 
39.4 
933.1 
262.6 
1.043.3 
108,0 
79.1 
1.755,4 
78,0 
462.6 
900.8 
0__ 
____2___ 

12.6 
131,3 
1.816.6 
434.5 
1.872,6 
319.6 
179,6 
4.033.1 
125.6 
816.9 
1.426,6 
£__ 
11-169.2 

9,5 
0,0 
207.4 
71.2 
307.3 
15.4 
9.2 
313.1 
10.0 
74.9 
163.2 
_____ 
1-181-3 

9,5 
39.4 
506.7 
126,0 
56S.4 
27,3 
29,'' 
855.0 
34,0 
168,9 
496.3 

____. 
________ 

100% 
100% 
54% 
48% 
54% 
25% 
38% 
49% 
44% 
37% 
55% 
100% 
_____ 

2.* 
0.0 
228,9 
41,4 
167.2 
12.7 
9.2 
278.7 
11.5 
72.7 
75,5 

_J__> 
900.8 

2.8 
31,5 
491.9 
74.1 
363,3 
22,2 
23.9 
760,3 
30,7 
149,9 
319,8 

2.Z70.4 

30% 
80% 
53% 
28% 
35% 
21% 
30% 
43% 
39% 
32% 
35% 
?% 

40% 

7.2.  Implementation  of  the  Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

Note: 
All  the CIPs for  Ireland,  except  for  Urban, were  approved  in  1994 and  1995. Ireland  is not taking  part  in the 
Rechar, Résider, Konver or Regis Initiatives. The Urban programme was approved in  1996. 

Support for  the development  oftechnological  potential  in Ireland: 
Most  of  the  Community  Initiative  programmes  include  aid  measures for  technological  development,  but  the 
most substantial  amounts  are provided  by the SMEs  and Interreg programmes.  The SMEs  programme  helps 
enterprises  to  enter  markets  through  the  creation  of  data  bases  and  projects  to  develop  new  electronic 
services  (ECU  4.7  million;  total  cost  ECU  9.7  million).  One  of  the  Interreg  programmes  focuses  on 
developing  data  transmission  applications  between  Ireland  and  Wales  to  improve  information  systems 
covering  transport  and  protection  of  the  marine  and  coastal  environment.  The  programme  also  aids 
innovative  technology  as  part  of  cultural,  tourism  and  economic  cooperation.  The  programme  between 
Ireland  and Northern  Ireland  made expansion of the digital  telecommunications  network a priority,  together 
with  aid for  technological  innovation  as  a  necessary  tool for  managing  the programme  and  achieving  its 
objectives.  The programme  also provides for  a number  of R&D measures  to improve  research  capacity and 
infrastructure  in cross-border  centres. 
The Leader  programme  includes measures to encourage access to innovative  technology  through  telecentres, 
improve  enterprises ' and  local services ' R&D capabilities  and  services  (ECU 200  000;  total  cost  ECU  600 
000),  improve  data transmission  applications  (ECU 900 000, total cost ECU 2.2 million) through  training in 
new  information  technologies,  the  introduction  of  computerised  reservations  systems  and  telemarketing  for 
tourism,  aid for  technology  transfers  and  teleworking  to  create  small  enterprises  and  local  services,  and 
cross-border  operations  using innovative technology (teleconferencing,  trade, etc.) 
Lastly,  the Adapt  programme  devotes  7% of its appropriations  to closer  linking between SMEs  and  research 
centres  so  that  the centres'  activities  might be geared  better to the needs  of industry  (ECU  1.4 million;  total 
cost  ECU  2.1  million)  and,  based  on  the  results  of  some  previous  projects,  the  Employment  Initiative 
provides  distance  learning for  the  handicapped  through  the  use of data  communications  (ECU  1.3  million; 
total cost ECU 5  million). 

three  urban 

The  last  Community  Initiative  programme  to  be  approved,  Urban,  was  adopted  in  July  1996.  The 
programme,  with  a  budget  of  ECU  15.8  million  equally  divided  between  the  ERDF  and  the  ESF, 
and  Tallaght-
involves 
West/Clondalkin)  and  one  in  Cork  (Cork  city,  northside).  The  programme  is  broken  down  into  sub-
programmes  with  equal  allocations  for  each  area.  The  measures  concentrate  on  fostering  employment 
and  enterprises,  training  and  education,  local  infrastructure,  young  people,  the  environment  and  local 
development. 

(Dublin  Northside-Ballymun 

in  Dublin 

areas, 

two 

224 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

On  the  other  hand,  the  allocation  of  the  reserve  for  the  Community  Initiatives  will  increase  their 
budget in Ireland by ECU 41.7 million. While most of the extra appropriations will be allocated to the 
Leader and Employment programmes, some will also go towards Adapt, Urban, Interreg and Pesca48. 

Most  of the  Community  Initiative  programmes  were amended  to take account  of  indexation  for  the 
years  1995 and  1996 and  to reprogramme  expenditure  accordingly.  Physical  implementation  of the 
Peace programme speeded up appreciably. The 34 local action groups selected in  1995 for the Leader 
programme  are  now  operating.  The  Pesca  programme  has  helped  fund  an  increase  in  lobster  and 
mussel stocks. 

The first  call for proposals for the Employment Initiative resulted  in  132 project*; being selected (39 
Now, 73 Horizon  and  20 Youthstart). The Now projects  aim especially  to reduce  women's'  under-
representation  in  certain  sectors,  integrate  marginalised  women  into  society  and  reconcile  the 
competing demands  of family  and working life. The Horizon  projects  for  the handicapped  focus on 
developing in handicapped  people the skills to start up a business or develop business  acumen. The 
Horizon projects for the disadvantaged  seek new ways of reducing the high levels of unemployment, 
including  long-term  unemployment,  and  of  meeting  the  needs  of  the  most  disadvantaged.  The 
measures  favour  the  "bottom-up"  approach,  have  local-organisation  involvement  and  target  a wide 
variety  of  beneficiaries  (prisoners,  young  offenders,  former  prisoners,  drug-takers,  lone  parents, 
travellers,  unqualified  young  people).  Lastly,  the  Youthstart  project  gathers  together  the  various 
administrative and voluntary services with a view to encouraging integrated local efforts  on behalf of 
unqualified  young people below the age of 20 who risk social exclusion. 44 projects have been chosen 
for  the Adapt  programme covering  areas such  as improving  skills  in  manufacturing  enterprises  that 
have been established for a number of years, the development of information  systems, SME products 
and  quality  systems,  improvements  to  training  systems  (technical  and  pedagogical  training  for 
trainers) and the accreditation of continuing vocational training while employed, the creation  of jobs 
in  small  and  micro-enterprises  and  the  development  of  efficient  and  practical  ways  to  transfer 
technology from research institutes to SMEs. 

The interim  assessments  for  the Interreg, Peace, Retex, Leader  and Pesca programmes  have begun. 
Preparatory work for the other Initiatives will follow in 1997. 

Table V-29:  Ireland - Community Initiatives -1996  in the context of programming for 1994-99 

(ECU million) 

Initiative 
(number  of  programmes) 

Total  cost 

28.3 
100.5 
165.6 
14.4 
66.1 
22.8 
21.1 
418.7 

Adapt (1) 
Employment  (1) 
Leader(1) 
Pesca (1) 
SMEs(l) 
Retex (1) 
Urban (1) 
Total  (7) 
Interreg/Regen  (2)** 
Peace  II) 
of which  CIPs adopted  in 1996: 
Urban 
* Excluding  reserve 
•*  See programme details. Chapter  VII. Table 2.2. 

21.1 

SF 
assistance* 
m 

21,2 
76.1 
67.9 
7.8 
28.8 
11,4 
15.8 
229.1 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
(2) 

% 

ravm 

Pavments 
1996 

Pavments 
1994-96 

% 

(3)/(V 

3,5 
21,7 
0.0 
6.1 
2.3 
1,1 
1.8 
36.5 

7,4 
29.3 
7.5 
7,2 
28.8 
8.1 
1.8 
90.1 

35% 
39% 
11% 
91% 
100% 
71% 
11% 
39% 

4.0 
13,3 
0.0 
0.7 
0.7 
0.0 
0.9 
19,7 

6,0 
17,0 
3,8 
1,3 
8.6 
4.1 
0.9 
41.6 

28% 
22% 
6% 
17% 
30% 
35% 
6% 
18% 

15.8 

1.8 

1,8 

11% 

0.9 

0.9 

6% 

48  See also Chapter I.B.I. Community  Initiatives. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996} 

225 

8. 

ITALY 

8.1.  Implementation of assistance by Obiective in 1996 

Support for  the development  of the technological potential  of the regions of Italy: 
Objective  1:  Technological  development plays  an important part  in most of the priorities  in the  CSF. First of 
all, under  the  'Communications'  priority,  it is concerned with the development  of telecommunications  (basic 
telephony,  satellite  and  long  distance  telecommunications,  applications  in  the  public  sector  -  ECU  418 
million;  total  cost: ECU  1 194 million),  implemented primarily  through  the  'Telecommunications'  OP (ECU 
376.7 million;  total cost: ECU 1 076 million). This will assist in the modernisation of urban networks  by using 
fibre  optics and speeding  up the digitisation of exchanges, preparing  access to the ISDN and  the  development 
of  satellite  telecommunications  services,  giving  priority  to  the  establishment  of  telephone  circuits for  data 
transmission,  and improving  the quality and  reliability of services,  including  connections  between  exchanges 
and networks.  Data transmission  applications are included in this programme  and specifically  in the  regional 
OPs  (Molise:  computerisation  of  the  civil  service)  or  in  other  multiregional  OPs  (Road  transport 
infrastructure  OP: development  of a system for  the control and automatic monitoring of  motorways). 
RTD  is covered  by a sub-priority  (ECU 975.1 million; total cost: ECU  1 680 million) of the  'Infrastructure  to 
support  economic  activities'  priority.  The  multiregional  OP  implementing  it  (ECU  784  million;  total  cost: 
ECU  1  341  million)  includes  advanced  training,  infrastructure  for  research  and  the  dissemination  of 
innovation.  The  aim  is  to  develop  infrastructure for  science faculties  and  increase  the  number  of  students 
there  and  to  assist  research  centres  controlled  by  the  State  (ENEA,  CNR, INFN, INFM  and  Anton  Dohrn) 
while  also  promoting  industrial  research, developing  the  transfer  of  technology  and  expanding  science  and 
technology  parks  (mainly  to  support  initiatives  by  innovative  small  firms)  and  financing  a  large-scale 
programme  to set  up science  and  technology parks  in the Mezzogiorno.  The  RTD  sub-priority  is also  being 
implemented  by some of the regional OPs: 

•  Apulia:  support  for  research  and  innovation  under  the  priority  for  infrastructure  to  support 

economic  activity; 

•  Campania: development  of R&D and science education in universities; 
•  Abruzzi:  consolidation  of  support  structures for  technological  innovation  to  develop  services  to 

industry, craft firms and commerce; 

•  Sicily:  expansion  of  R&D  in  science, 

technological 

innovation  and  university  research 

infrastructure. 

The  CSF priority  for  industry,  craft  firms  and  business  services  is also  intended  to  expand  the provision  of 
real  and  financial  services  to  innovative  firms.  In  addition,  the  'Rural  development'  priority  supports 
research  and  experimentation  to  promote  agricultural  development  services  and  the  dissemination  of 
techniques.  This priority  is implemented both by the multiregional  OP on  'Agricultural dissemination ' and by 
some  regional  OPs such as that for  Sicily, which supports  the development  of agricultural  research  services, 
weather forecasting  for  agriculture,  etc. 
Objective 2 (1994-96): All  the SPDs except the one for  the Valle d'Aosta  include measures concerned  with the 
dissemination  of technologies,  innovation or data transmission applications. In some regions, this is a priority 
which seeks to strengthen  innovation-related economic  activities: 

•  Emilia-Romagna:  use  of  advanced  and  clean  technologies  and  higher  production  standards 
through  support for  cooperation between firms and  research centres and  training in innovation  for 
300 people  (ECU 3 million; total cost: ECU 9.7  million); 

•  Friuli-Venezia  Giulia: creation of 30 direct jobs  and  150 indirect jobs  through the dissemination of 
innovation  and  training for  qualified staff in the transfer of know-how  between firms and  research 
centres in Trieste (ECU 2.6 million; total cost: ECU 10.7 million); 

•  Tuscany: promotion  and dissemination of innovation  between research centres and small  industrial 
the  most 
the  purchase  of  technological  services  and 

firms,  assistance  for 
disadvantaged  (ECU 8 million; total cost: ECU  17.3 million); 

training  for 

•  Piedmont:  development  of 1 000 firms and creation of 650 jobs  through the development  of science 
and  research parks,  aid for  investment by small  industrial  firms  in innovative  sectors and  training 
in technology,  organisation  and quality control (ECU 42.7 million; total cost: ECU 91.6  million); 
•  Liguria:  purchase  of  technological  services  (feasibility  studies,  guidance for  new  projects,  etc.), 
training for  workers  in research institutes and  introduction  of short  university courses and  higher-
level specialist courses (ECU 10 million; total cost: ECU 21 millions). 

Although  it is not a priority,  other  regions support innovation as an instrument of industrial  conversion: 

•  Lazio:  measures to disseminate  innovation and  to train specialists  in the dissemination  of  scientific 

and technological  knowledge  to small firms; 

•  Lombardy:  development  of  advanced  technologies  in  small  industrial  and  craft  firms  and  the 

226 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

supply  of  services  for  the  use  of  research 
million;  total  cost:  ECU  6  million); 

infrastructure  and  the  transfer  of  technology 

(ECU  2.5 

•  Umbria:  diversification 

through 
innovation  and  the  development  of  multimedia  activities 
million); 

of  the  productive 

base 

the  promotion 
(ECU  3  million; 

and  dissemination 

of 
total  cost:  ECU  6.8 

•  Veneto:  establishment  of  a  science  and  technology  park  and  an  intermodal 

terminal 

(ECU  6 

million;  total  cost:  ECU  19  millions) 

•  Marche: 

support 

for 

telecommunications 

as  part  of 

the  development 

of 

local 

intermodal 

infrastructure. 

Total  expenditure  on  technological  development  under  the  regional  Objectives  (1,  2,  5(b))  accounts  for  11,7% 
of  Structural  Fund  assistance 

in  Italy. 

Table  V-30:  Italy  - Financing  directly  linked  to  technological  development 

in  1994-99  (ECU  million) 

S.F. 

Objective  1 
Objective  2 
Obiective Si 
TOTAL 
1.Ç11.Ç 
NB:  The  programming  procedures and different  approaches taken by the Member States 

3.371.8 
239.7 
50.7 
?,<rv2.2 

1.702,9 
93,4 

% 
51% 
39% 
31% 
49% 

,£uMc 
819,5 
108,6 
20.7 
?4v,Ç 

% 
92% 
7% 
1% 
100% 

Member  State 
Total 
Private 
849,4 
1.668,9 
146,3 
37,7 
35 2 
14.5 
1,859,4 

? YU 

% 
49% 
61% 
69% 
51% 

Finance by the Structural  Funds 

7% 

23% 

70% 

invite  caution  in interpreting the  figures, m particular spending  on information  society  projects, 

which arc often  linked  to other fields  such  as  RTD and industry. 

•  RTD  •  Telecom  •  Data transmission 

OBJECTIVE  1 
Fie.  V-34: Proerammine  1994-99 (ECU million): 
Priorities: 

Communications  (a) 
Industry  and  craft  industries  (b) 
Tourism  (c) 
Rural  development  (d) 
Fisheries  (e) 
Economic  infrastructure  (f) 
Human  resources  (z) 
Technical  assistance  (h) 
Bv  Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

Total 

8.951,0 
2739 
2.145,2 
233,0 
H.06S.2 

1  CSF  129  OP 

Average per OP 

Main achievements  in 1996 

64% 
19% 
15% 
2% 

_U___£ 

MU 

(g) 15% 

(h)  1% 

(a) 15% 

(b)  24% 

(d)16% 

In  order  to  improve  the  general  conditions  of  implementation  of  the  Structural  Funds  in  Italy,  the 
accent  in  1996 was on continuation  and  improvement  of the approach  which  had  led  to the July  1995 
Agreement  between  the  Commission  and  the  Italian  administration49.  This  resulted  in  better 
monitoring  instruments  and  it  was  agreed  to  adopt  a  two-stage  method  for  reprogramming  the  CSF. 
The first  phase comprises  very  close  monitoring  of  the  assistance  adopted  and  will  conclude  towards 
the  end  of  the  first  quarter  of  the  following  year.  To  achieve  this,  small  working  parties  were  set  up 
for  each  OP and  they  are  meeting  regularly.  The  second  phase,  based  on  the  progress  of  expenditure 
and  commitments  on  the  ground,  will  permit  a  possible  redistribution  of  the  resources  already 
allocated  to the initiatives  decided  on  in  1994-97. In addition,  because  of delays  in implementation,  it 

49  See  1995 Annual  Rapport. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996} 

227 

was  agreed  to  increase  the  monitoring  instruments,  including  the  number  of  meetings  of  the  CSF 
Monitoring Committee, which met on three occasions during the year. Apart from  this  reprogramming 
methodology,  the  main  horizontal  subjects  considered  throughout  1996  were  the  introduction  of  an 
appropriate  system  for  physical  monitoring,  the  allocation  of  indexation,  specific  attention  to  raising 
awareness on environmental  issues and monitoring the additionality  of the Structural Funds. 

The  Commission  also  adopted  five  new  operations  during  1996, two  regional  global  grants  (Crotone 
and  Manfredonia)  and  three multiregional  OPs  (two financed  by  the ERDF and  one by  the EAGGF). 
The  Crotone  global  grant  is  unusual  in  that  it  is  a  sort  of  territorial  pact,  with  local  people  deeply 
involved  in both  programming  and  the  management  of  measures. The  'Road  transport  infrastructure' 
OP was also approved  in  19^6; it provides ECU 249 million  towards  a total  cost of ECU 498  million. 
The  'Energy'  OP (ECU  170 million  from the ERDF) includes a series of measures for the gas network 
and. to  improve  the  electricity  grid.  The  'Services  for  the  commercial  exploitation  of  southern 
agricultural  production'  OP, with ECU 72 million  from  the EAGGF, was adopted  in  October  1996; it 
will  initiate  measures to organise  and  concentrate  the supply  of agricultural  products  with  due  regard 
to market  requirements. 

In  the  case  of  the  programmes  already  being  implemented,  and  specifically  those  financed  by  the 
EAGGF,  work  began  on  information,  organisation  and  the  selection  of  projects  under  the  regional 
OPs once the national  laws on part-financing  had been approved  in the first  half  of  1996. A very  large 
number  of applications were made. In Campania,  for  example, publication  of  the programme  resulted 
in  the  submission  of  23 000  projects.  About  70% of  appropriations  have  already  been  committed  by 
the regional  administration. The main effort  with regard  to actual  payments has concentrated  on  those 
programmes  which  can  make  up  the  backlog  in  applying  Regulation  (EEC)  No  2328/91  and  other 
regulations  of  long standing. The main  measures  were the payment  of the compensatory  allowance  to 
farmers  in disadvantaged  areas and the citrus fruit  plan in Sicily and Calabria. It should prove possible 
in  future  to  respect  the  annual  nature  of  payments  of  compensatory  allowances  more  fully.  Two 
programmes  are  planned  at  multiregional  level.  The  first  is  intended  to  enlarge  the  body  of  field 
workers  available  in  each  region  and  cover  salary  costs  for  the  first  six  years  following  their 
recruitment. The second  is the programme adopted  in  1996 for  services to develop southern  products, 
which  assists  the  setting  up  of  new  companies  (large-scale  commercial  bodies)  involving  producers, 
hauliers and distributors to improve conditions for the marketing and development  of quality  products 
in the  fruit  and  vegetables,  olive  oil  and  horticulture  sectors. In the case  of  fisheries,  the measures  in 
the  OP  which  have  proved  most  capable  of  absorbing  appropriations  have  been  adaptation  of  the 
fishing  effort  (particularly  the measure to promote joint ventures) and fleet  modernisation. 

The Commission  adopted  18 amending decisions, five  of  which  concerned  the Abruzzi  region,  which 
was  eligible  under  Objective  1  only  in  1994-96  and  applied  for  a  two-year  extension  of  national 
corrrrnitments  and  payments.  The  decision-making  procedure  began  in  1996. To  take  account  of  the 
particular  situation  of  this  region,  which  will  cease  to  benefit  from  Structural  Fund  assistance  after 
1997, the  CSF Monitoring  Committee  decided  that  ECU  25  million  of  the amount  made  available by-
indexation  of the CSF should  be allocated  to the region  of Abruzzi. Of that  amount,  an  extra ECU  10 
million  from  the  EAGGF  enabled  measures  for  which  a  large  number  of  applications  had  been 
received  to  be  honoured.  The  financing  plans  were  formally  amended  in  the  light  of  the  time  for 
implementation  available. 

1996 in the  context  of programming  for  1994-99 

At the  end  of  1996, the financial  situation  of  the CSF was critical,  since commitments  actually  made 
amounted  to  41% of  total  commitments,  while  payments  stood  at  17%. In  the  case  of  the  ERDF, 
commitments  totalled  41%  while payments  amounted  to 31% of total ERDF funding  for  the  different 
forms  of  assistance.  At  the  end  of  1996,  resources  available  but  not  yet  committed  by  the  ERDF 
totalled  ECU  1  537  million.  Similarly,  EAGGF  appropriations  committed  up  to  the  end  of  1996 
represented  25% of the appropriations  planned  for  1994-99 and payments  made to  13%. In the case of 
the  ESF,  commitments  were  around  41%  and  payments  16%  of  the  total  cost.  This  backlog  in 
commitments  and  payments  is  partly  due  to  long  than  expected  delays  in  approving  programmes. 

?3 

ËARTA 

THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS IN 1996 

228 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Since the vast bulk of assistance has now been approved, delays in implementation should be made up 
in the second part of the period. Eligible expenditure incurred by final  beneficiaries  under the FIFG 
amounted to ECU 15.8 million, about 7% of eligible costs programmed for 1994-99. 

The main feature  of  1997 should be continuation of the approach followed  since  1995 and improved 
monitoring instruments. 

OBJECTIVE 250 

Fie. V-35: Proerammine  1994-96 (ECU million - 1996 prices and status): 
Breakdown  bv  sector: 

Productive  environment  (a) 
Human resources  (b) 
Land improvement and restoration  (c) 
Environmental  protection  (d) 
Technical  assistance  (e) 
Bv  Fund. 

(d)7%  (e)2% 

(c)13% 

(a) 48% 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

400,1 
123,9 
J-__M 

II  SPD 

Average per SPD 

(b) 30% 

76% 
24% 
100% 

J2A 

1996 in the context of programming for 1994-9651 

In  line  with  the  approach  adopted  for  all  the  Objective  2 SPDs,  the  appropriations  not  committed 
before  the end of  1996 were transferred  to programmes for  1997-99. The amount involved was ECU 
169.7 million (after indexation), 25% of the ECU 693.7 million available. The ability of the regions to 
commit  the  appropriations  varied.  Only  one  region,  Emilia-Romagna,  succeeded  in  committing 
virtually  all the appropriations for  1994-96 while for  the other regions, transfers  ranged  from  9% of 
the  initial  assistance  (Lazio)  to  51%  (Umbria).  For  the  most  part,  it  was  the  resources  for 
infrastructure  which  had to be transferred  while the vast  bulk of those for  aid  schemes,  services to 
small firms,  economic development  and the transfer  of technology  were committed  in full.  In some 
regions,  the  situation  with  regard  to  the  payments  made  by  the  various  authorities  responsible 
improved  considerably  as compared  with  1995 (for  example, Valle d'Aosta:  53%; Piedmont: 33%; 
Tuscany: 30%). 

The  Monitoring  Committees  met  regularly  in  1996,  dealing  mainly  with  the  monitoring  bf 
implementation,  reprograrnming  and  the  selection  of  independent  assessors  responsible  for  interim 
and ex post evaluations. The partnership dialogue between  the Commission,  the central  government 
and the regional authorities remained satisfactory. The economic and social partners continued to play 
an active role in meetings as full members of the Monitoring Committees. 

50 Eligible areas: Emilia-Romagna, Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Lazio, Liguria, Lombardy, Marche, Umbria,  Piedmont, 

Tuscany, Valle d'Aosta,  Veneto. 

51  The  programmes  for  the  previous  period  1992-93  (ECU  183 million:  ECU  127  million  from  the  ERDF  and 
ECU  56  million  from  the  ESF)  were  closed  in  1996  because  extensions  to  the  deadlines  for  payments  at 
regional  level  had  been  granted  as  part  of  the  agreement  between  the  Commission  and  Italy  on  ways  of 
improving  the  management  of  the  Structural  Funds.  Certificates  of  final  payment  are  still  awaited  for  most 
programmes,  but  payments  should  amount  to 75% of  the  total  funds  available.  This  under-implementation  is 
due  mainly  to  the  problems  encountered  during  implementation.  This  is  particularly  true  of  infrastructure 
projects,  where  a  difficult  political  situation  has  further  complicated  the  administrative  procedures.  Other 
problems  have been  caused  by the  blockage  of  certain  projects  for  which  appropriations  had  been  committed 
and the devaluation  of the lira. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996} 

229 

Preparations  for  the  1997-99 programming  period 

The  areas  of  Italy  eligible  for  the  1997-99  phase  are  broadly  unchanged,  the  only  major  adjustment 
being the addition  of three municipalities  in the area of Ferrara (Emilia-Romagna). Including  transfers 
from  1994-96, the resources  available  total  ECU  967.5  million52.  The  draft  SPDs  were  submitted  by 
the Italian  authorities  in August  1996. Although  the strategies  very largely  continue those followed  in 
1994-96,  they  reflect  the  Commission's  guidelines.  Resources  will  be  concentrated  mainly  on  the 
development  and  strengthening  of  small  firms,  support  for  innovation  and  the transfer  of  technology, 
tourism,  local  employment  initiatives  and  the  protection  of  the  environment.  There  will  also  be 
specific  training  measures. Preparatory  meetings  involving  the  Commission,  the  national  authorities 
and the regions were held from  November onwards, to define  more closely the strategies, aims and, in 
some cases, the structure of the proposed  programmes. 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

Fie. V-36: Obiective 3 - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million- 1994 prices) 
Priorities 
Integration of the long-term unemployed (a) 
Initial training and integration of young people (b) 
Integration of those threatened with exclusion (c) 
Equal opportunities for men and women (d) 
Improving training systems and 
employment  services (e) 

All.2 
566,0 
131.6 
105.3 

ESF 

92.1 

(c)  10% 

(6)  7% 

(a) 32% 

(d) 8% 

1 CSF/16  OPs 

Total 

__2i____! 

(b) 43% 

Average per OP 
•including ECU  16.1 million for the Abruzzi from  1997. 

82.3 

Prograrrtrning for  Objective  3 includes a CSF adopted  in  1994 and  16 regional  and multi-regional  OPs 
adopted  in December  1994. The  rates  of  financial  implementation  are unsatisfactory,  which  suggests 
that  normal  implementation  has  not  yet  been  achieved.  In  order  to  make  better  use  of  resources  and 
explore new forms  of programming, the Italian  government decided  in  1996 to undertake a substantial 
mid-term reprogramming. Hence  a new multiregional  OP, to be adopted  in  1997 for  a period  of  three 
years  and  forming  part  of  the  confidence  pact  for  employment,  will  receive  ECU  27.1  million  from 
the  ESF.  The  way  this  OP  is  financed  includes  an  innovation  in  that  it  will  receive  the  resources 
allocated  to  the current  regional  and  multiregional  OPs  and  not  committed  by  the  end  of  1997,  1998 
and  1999. The  Ministry  of  Labour  will  be  responsible  for  coordination,  monitoring  and  assessment 
but  the  regions  will  be  responsible  for  implementing  the  measures.  The  internal  assessment  report 
prepared  by  the  Ministry  of  Labour  has  some  encouraging  features  such  as  a positive  assessment  of 
the  training  system  and  the  skill  level  of  young  people  (measures  for  young  people  are  moving 
towards  training which  is increasingly  based  on  activities of the upper  secondary type), and the  sound 
use  of  the  resources  allocated  to  training  in  equal  opportunities  and  for  the  socially  marginalised. 
There  is,  however,  a  substantial  shortfall  in  the  utilisation  of  the  appropriations  for  the  long-term 
unemployed. 

52 Emilia-Romagna:  ECU  14.1  million;  Friuli-Venezia  Giulia:  ECU  39.2  million;  Lazio:  ECU  76.9  million; 
Liguria:  ECU  129.5 million; Lombardy: ECU  34  million; Marche: ECU  31 million;  Piedmont: ECU  309.5 
million; Tuscany: ECU  158.9 million; Umbria: ECU 53.1 million; Valle d'Aosta: ECU  13.5 million; Veneto: 
ECU 107.8 million. 

230 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Fip. V-37: Objective 4 - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million 

1994 prices): 
ESF 

Anticipation, support for programming 
and management of a continuing training 
system (a) 
Training, adjustment  of human  resources 
to structural changes in the economic and 
productive system (b) 
Technical assistance (ci 

1SPD 

59,8 

319,1 
19.9 
_228_£ 

Total 

(C)  4% 

(a) 15% 

(b)81% 

Programming  for  Objective  4  comprises  an  SPD adopted  in  December  1994 for  1994 to  1999.  The 
low  level  of financial  implementation  for  1996 may be explained  partly  by delays  in making  available 
national  matching  funds  (from  both  public  and private  sources).  Italy  also  suffers  from  a  lack  of on 
going  training  for workers,  which  means  that  there  are very  few structures  which  can provide  support 
for  firms.  Hence  the  SPD  has  made  very  little  progress  in  anticipating  change.  However,  more 
assistance  has been  provided  for training,  guidance  and advisory  services  and the absorption  of  funds 
is  greater.  During  1995  and the first  half  of  1996,  there  were  4  071  projects  in  these  fields  but  only 
125 concerned  with  anticipating  change. Most  bodies  which  prepare  training  projects  are in the public 
sector  while  the bulk  of firms  proposing  projects  are small  ones. These  projects  are aimed  at the most 
vulnerable  workers  and training  concentrates  on new ways  of  organising  work.  The Commission  has 
asked  for a specific  analysis  of the projects  carried  out by  firms. 

Example of an Objective 4 project in Italy : 
Multimedia and distance training in Emilia-Romagna: The SINFORM  project 
is  designed  to  establish  a  data  transmission  network  to  distribute  multimedia 
products  and training  services  on the methodology  of distance  training.  This  is 
also the key point of certain  existing  distance  training  networks  in the rest of the 
Community. The aim of the project is to establish a regional  network covering the 
nine  provinces  of Emilia-Romagna  and including  a multimedia  centre  with  nine 
offices  and 66 computers, a library of multimedia  educational  software  and tests 
involving  200  instructors  and  organisers  of  European  projects.  The ESF will 
contribute  ECU 550 000 in  part-financing  towards  the total  cost  of ECU  1.44 
million.  It  is  expected  that  1 500 people  will  be  trained  over  the period  as a 
whole. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a)  agriculture 

Table V-31: Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million -1996 prices and status) 

Total 

626,1 

Measure 
Production 
Marketing 

494,4 
131.7 

__£ 
79% 
21?r 

As  far  as  improving  the  structures  of  production  is  concerned,  the  bulk  (41%)  of  the  Community 
contribution  concerns  aid  to  less-favoured  areas, followed  by  investment  aid  (33%)  and  aid  to  young 
farmers  (16%).  As  regards  measures  to  improve  the  processing  and  marketing  of  agricultural 
products,  in  1996  25  OPs  were  approved  for  11 regions  of  Italy;  at  the  end  of  1996  two  OPs  still 
awaited  approval. The Community contribution  to these OPs totals ECU  131.7 million. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

231 

OBJECTIVE 5 (a) Fisheries 

Fie.  V-38: Obiective 5(a) fisheries - Proerammine  1994-99 (ECU million): 

Adjustment and redirection of fishing  effort  (a) 
Other fishing  fleet measures (b) 
Renovation and modernisation of the fishing fleet (c) 
Aauaculture (d) 
Protected marine areas (e) 
Port facilities  (f) 
Processing and marketing of products (g) 
Promotion of products (h) 
Socio-economic measures (i) 
Other measures m 

Total 

FIFG 

35.4 
0.0 
33.6 
20.5 
1.2 
5.6 
28.1 
3.6 
pm 
_____ 
134.4 

(g)21% 

(a) 26% 

(d)15% 

(c) 25% 

Implementation  of  the SPD in  1996 concentrated  mainly  on  the measure  for  the permanent  cessation 
of activity, followed  by that for the modernisation  of the fleet.  In September  1996 eligible  expenditure 
incurred  by final  beneficiaries  amounted  to ECU 5.8 million, or  1.3%  of total  eligible costs  for  1994-
99. The  1994 instalment  has  not  yet been  closed  because  the  annual  reports  on  implementation  have 
not  been  submitted. The first  instalments  for  1995 were paid  at the end  of  1996 and  it has not  proved 
possible  to commit the two  instalments  for  1996. The level  of commitments  by the Italian  authorities 
is,  however,  much  higher  than  the  level  of  payments.  This  means  that,  since  projects  can  be  carried 
over a period not exceeding three years, the absorption  of appropriations  by beneficiaries  during  1997 
will probably  increase. 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)53 

Fie. V-39: Obiective 5(b)- Proerammine 1994-99: 
Population  (1000 hab.) 
Area (km2) 

Bv Fund: 

13 SPD 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
Total 

370,6 
122,6 
411,1 
904.3 

4 1% 
14% 
45% 
100% 

Average per SPOT 

69.6 

4.828 
_____£_. 
ECU million 

(à)  12% 

(e) 1% 

(a) 32% 

(c)  12% 

O Modernisation e; 
diversification de 

_ragriculture(a) 
«•Renforcement du secteur 

non agncole (b) 

•  Environnement  (c) 

D Ressources humaines (d) 

(b)43% 

•Technical  assistance (e) 

At  the  end  of  1996,  the  Objective  5(b)  SPD  was  still  suffering  from  delays,  particularly  as  regards 
payments.  This  situation,  which  is  similar  to  the  position  at  the  same  point  in  the  previous 
prograrriming  period,  is  the  result  of  the  complexity  of  the  implementation  procedures.  The  special 
features  of the Italian  administrative  system often  mean that between  12 and  24 months elapse  before 
programmes  can  actually  start.  By mid-1996, the  Italian  programmes  had  got  over the  administrative 
hurdle  and  were  being fully  implemented  in  "physical" terms. Commitments  rose  substantially  in  the 
second  half  of  1996. In  terms  of  the  resources  programmed  for  1994-96,  appropriations  committed 
increased  from  14% at the  end  of  June  to 56% at the  end  of  the  year  although  payments  remain  at  a 
low  level.  However,  the  regions  and  provinces  have  offset  delays  in  the  payment  procedures  by 
advances  to the final  beneficiaries  in the form  of bank guarantees. As regards programme  monitoring, 
during  the  first  half  of  the  year  the  Monitoring  Committees  concentrated  mainly  on  three  types  of 
activity:  adjustments  to  certain  elements  of  programming  in  the  light  of  new  territorial  requirements 
(10  of  the  13  SPDs);  implementing  technical  assistance  for  programme  implementation;  and 
arrangements for monitoring and evaluation (the interim assessment reports will be completed by mid-
June  1997). In  the  second  half  of  the  year,  the  Committees  were  more  concerned  with  assessing  the 
impact of measures, particularly  in terms of jobs. 

53 Areas  eligible:  Emilia-Romagna,  Friuli-Venezia  Giulia,  Lazio, 

Liguria,  Lombardy,  Marche,  Umbria, 

Piedmont, Tuscany, Trento, Bolzano, Valle d'Aosta, Veneto. 

232 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

Table  V-32: 

Italy - Assistance  by Objective - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-1996/99  (ECU 
million) 

Programmes 
(year of adoption) 

Objective 1 
Regional OPs 
GG Crotone (3) (1996) 
GG Manfredonia  (3) (1996) 
OP Abruzzi  (1995) 
OPAbruzzi(l)(1995) 
OPCalabria  (1)0995) 
OP Campania  (1995) 
MP Port of GioiaTauro (3) (1995) 
OP Apulia (1995) 
OP Sicily (1995) 
OPBasilicata(1994) 
OPCalabria (1994) 
OPMolise(1994) 
OP Sardinia (1994) 
Multiregional OPs 
OP "MEGA H"(l)  (1996) 
OP£nerzv(3)(1996) 
OP Road infrastructure  (3) (1996) 
OP Industry and services '1995) 
OP Water resources  ( 1995) 
OP Tourism  (1995) 
OP Agricultural advisory services (1) (1995) 
OP "Emergency" Emploi (1994) 
OP Technical  assistance (2) (1994) 
OP Training for instructors (1994) 
OP Training for migrant workers  ( 1994) 
OP Ministry of Education  (1994) 
OP Fisheries  (1994) 
OP Research  and development  ( 1994) 
OP Telecommunications  (1994) 
OP Rail transport  (1994) 
Technical  assistance 

Obiective  2» 
SPD Emilia-Romagna (1994) 
SPD Friuli-Venezia Giuha (1994) 
SPD Lazio (1994) 
SPD Liguria (1994) 
SPD Lombardy  (1994) 
SPD Marche (1994) 
SPD Umbria  (1994) 
SPD Piedmont (1994) 
SPD Tuscany  (1994) 
SPD Valle d'Aosta (1994) 
S P P V c n c w n^ 

Total 

Total 

Qbjwtin ? 
Regional OPs 
OP Bolzano (1994) 
OP Emilia-Romagna  (1994) 
OP Friuli-Venezia  Giulia (1994) 
OP Lazio (1994) 
OP Liguria (1994) 
OP Lombardy  (1994) 
OP Marche  (1994) 
OPUmbna(1994) 
OP Piedmont  (1994) 
OP Tuscany  (1994) 
OPTrento(1994) 
OP Valle d'Aosta (1994) 
PPVgnttP(l?94) 
(1  ) EAGGF single-Fund  OP 
(2) ESF single-Fund  OP 
(3) ERDF single-Fund  operation 
* After  deduction  of transfers  to  ! 997-99 

Total  cost 

S.F. 
assistance 
LU 

Commitments] 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
__________ 

Payments 
1V96 

Payments 
1994-96 
__) 

_______ 

______ 

90.9 
60,6 
365,7 
187,6 
502.Û 
2.890.8 
120,0 
2.406.4 
2.603.6 
1.138,9 
1.313.9 
521.Û 
2.103.0 

120.0 
485.0 
498.0 
5.362,4 
2.008.3 
302.E 
231.4 
524,0 
112.1 
271,4 
29.5 
384.3 
560,0 

1.341,3 

1.076,1 
1.756,6 
06 
______ 

39.3 
59,0 
158,4 
219.2 
73,2 
32,0 
37.3 
449,1 
403,1 
1,6 
152.7 
1.625.0 

54,4 
409,8 
118.6 
271.7 
94,0 
389.1 
81.7 
67.7 
271.6 
145,8 
62.7 
27.6 
240.7 

35.0 
25,0 
165.5 
93,9 
241,0 
1.327,9 
40,0 
1.148,4 
1.337,2 
583.2 
580.3 
292,0 
967.1 

72.0 
170.0 
249,0 
2.592,7 
871.0 
130.0 
162.0 
355,7 
76.0 
184,0 
20,0 
254,0 
233.0 
784,0 
376.7 
701,0 
0_5 
______ 

12,0 
14,1 
59,0 
81,6 
21.1 
12,3 
17,4 
143,4 
113,6 
0,6 
48.9 
324.0 

24.5 
184,4 
53.4 
122.3 
42,3 
P5.1 
36.8 
30.5 
122,2 
65.6 
28.2 
12,4 
108,3 

35.0 
25.0 
74.0 
34.5 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
130.9 
65,4 
51,1 
22.0 
98,6 

3.7 
45.3 
28.8 
1.253.6 
114.6 

0,0 
31.6 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
4.3 
19.9 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
0.0 
05 
2.038.7 

0,0 
-2,7 
32,2 
34,7 
0,1 
-4.4 
-6.5 
63,7 
73,3 
-2.8 
26.4 
214.0 

2,7 
46.9 
5.9 
0.0 
13.5 
00 
02 
5.3 
36.6 
10.2 
8.8 
2.9 
16.8 

35,0 
25.0 
165,5 
93.9 
76.2 
177.2 

40,0 

203,7 

320,3 
163,4 
124.0 
59.7 
269.1 

3,7 
45.3 
28,8 
2.003.9 
255.3 
22.2 
66,0 
32,7 
7.0 
16.9 
6.2 
88.4 
66.5 
65.9 
215.9 
385.2 
06 
_______ 

12,0 
21,3 
52,5 
65,3 
23,1 
16,6 
28,5 
128,8 
113,6 
3,2 
48.9 
514.0 

6.4 
74,6 
13,9 
18.3 
19.8 
26.2 
5.7 
9.9 
55.0 
20.0 
13.0 
4,8 
33.0 

100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
32% 
13% 
100% 
1 
24% 
28% 
21% 
20% 
28% 

5% 
27% 
12% 

77% 
29% 
17% 
41% 

9% 
9% 
9% 
31% 
35% 
29% 

8% 

57% 
55% 
102% 
_____ 

100% 
151% 
89% 
80% 
110% 
135% 
164% 
90% 
100% 
584% 
100% 
_____ 

26% 
40% 
26% 
15% 
47% 
15% 
16% 
32% 
45% 
31% 
46% 
38% 
30% 

0,0 
12,5 
28.3 
16.6 
0,0 
0,0 
20,0 
0,0 
132,7 
42,0 
43,8 
19,8 
49.9 

1,8 

22,7 

14.4 
1.324.4 
57.3 
0.0 
26.1 
0,0 
0,0 
0.0 
3,2 
9.5 
19.2 
0.0 
81.8 
0.0 
0J 
I-926.1 

0,0 
0.0 
16,1 
34.2 
0.1 
0,0 
0.0 
14,0 
17,5 
0,0 
13.2 
95.1 

3.1 
45,6 
2.9 
0.0 
2,5 
00 
01 
2.7 
24.3 
5.1 
7.4 
0.3 
8.4 

0.0 
12,5 
74.0 
47,3 
41,8 
89,8 
20,0 
92.9 
206 
94,4 
80.3 
39,1 
136.8 

1,8 

22,7 
14.4 
1.699,6 
127,7 
11.1 
43,3 
16,3 
3.5 
8,5 
4,1 

43,7 
35,2 
32,9 
172,7 
308.2 
01 
_____ 

6,0 
12,0 
26,3 
49.5 
11.6 
10.5 
17.5 
46.6 
37.7 
3,0 
24.5 
245.1 

4.9 
59.5 
6.9 
9.2 
5.7 
13.1 
2.8 
5.0 
33.4 
10.0 
9,6 
1,2 
16.5 

0% 

50% 
45% 
50% 
17% 
7% 
50% 
8% 
15% 
16% 
14% 
13% 
14% 

3% 
13% 
6% 

66% 
15% 
9% 
27% 
5% 
5% 
5% 
21% 
17% 
15% 
4% 
46% 
44% 
19% 
__2 

50% 
85% 
45% 
61% 
55% 
85% 
101% 
32 
33% 
542% 
50% 
47% 

20% 
32% 
13% 
7% 
13% 

7% 

8% 

16 

27 
15 
34% 
10 
15% 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996} 

P r o g r a m m es 

( y e ar  of  adoption) 

Total  cost 

S.F. 

C o m m i t m e n ts  Commitments 

% 

assistance 

1996 

(1) 

1994-96 

(2) 

(2)/fl) 

P a y m e n ts 

*  1996 

Payments 
1994-96 

233 

% 

(3vm 

Multiregional  OPs 

OP Innovative  measures  (1994) 

OP Technical  assistance  (1994) 
O P T r n i n i n - ( 1 9 9 4) 

Obiective  4 
SPD  Minisrrv of l a b o ur  (1994) 

Obiective  5(a)  agriculture 

Regional  OPs 

OP Bolzano  R. 866790  (1995) 

OP  Bolzano  R. 867/90  (1996) 

OP  Emilia-Romagna  R. 866/90  (1996) 

OP  Friuli-Venezia  Giulia  R. 866/90  (1996) 

OP  Friuli-Venezia  Giulia  R. 867/90  (1996) 

OP Lazio  R.  866/90  (1996) 

OP  Lazio  R.  867/90  (1996) 

OP Liguria  R. 866/90  (1996) 

OP  Liguria  R. 867/90  (1996) 

OP  Lombardy  R. 866/90  (1996) 

OP  Lombardy  R. 867/90  (1996) 

OP  Marche  R. 866/90  (1996) 

OP  Marche  R.  867/90(1996) 

OP  Marche  Water  Zoo  R. 866/90  (1996) 

OP Umbria  R.  866/90(1996) 

OP  Umbria  R.  867/90(1996) 

OP Piedmont  R. 866/90  (1996) 
OP  Piedmont  R. 867/90  (1996) 

OP Tuscany  R. 866)90  (1996) 

OP Tuscany  R. 867/90  (1996) 

O P T r e n t o R.  866/90(1996) 

O P T r e n t o R.  867/90(1996) 

OP Valle  d'Aosta  R. 867/90  (1996) 

OP  VenetoR.  866/90(1996) 

OP  V e n e t o R.  867/90  (1996) 

Multiregional  OP 

Forecast*  lrnlv  R  ?32R/91  M994) 

Obiective  5(a) 

fisheries 

SPD  Italv  (1994) 

Obiective  5(b> 

SPD Friuli-Venezia  Giulia  (1995) 

SPD y g u r ia  (1995) 

SPD  Marche  (1995) 

SPD  Piedmont  (1995) 

SPD  Bolzano  (1994) 

SPD Emilia-Romagna  ( 1994) 

SPD  Lazio  (1994) 

SPD  Lombardy  (1994) 

SPD  Umbria  (1994) 

SPD Tuscany  (1994) 

SPD Trento  (1994) 

SPD  Valle  d'Aosti  (1994) 

S P D V e n -m  (19941 

118,9 
77.8 

456.8 

53.5 

35.0 

205.6 

Total 

2.889.0 

1.300.1 

0,0 
0,0 
0.0 
2.145.9 

9,0 
5.9 
34.8 
350.3 

17% 

17% 

17% 
27% 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
2.098.4 

4,5 
3.0 
17,4 
202.7 

8% 

8% 

8% 

;<5% 

1 

886.11 

398.81 

38.31 

9 8 . 9| 

25%l 

19.11 

49  4| 

12% 

34.9 

1.6 

44.2 

13.3 

1.7 

32,1 

2.7 

7,5 

1.1 

132.6 

4.6 

62.7 

1.2 

3,2 

20,4 

1.6 

82,7 

4.8 

53.0 

4.1 

30.8 

3.8 

0.7 

72.6 

3.1 

7.1 

0.4 

8.8 

3.4 

0.5 

8.0 

0.7 

2,3 

0.3 

26.5 

1.2 

16,3 

0,3 

0,8 

4,1 

0.4 

15,2 
1.2 

10.0 

1,0 

6,5 

1,0 

0,2 

14.5 

0.8 

7.1 
0.4 
8.8 
3.4 
0.5 
8.0 
0.7 
2,3 
0,3 
26.5 
1.2 
16.3 
0.3 
08 
4.1 
0.4 
15.2 
1.2 
10,0 
1,0 
6,5 
1.0 
0.2 
14,5 
0-8 

7.1 
0,4 
8.8 
3,4 
0,5 
8,0 
0.7 
23 
0.3 
26,5 
U 
16.3 
0.3 
0.8 
4.1 
0.4 
15.2 
1.2 
10.0 
1,0 
6,5 
1.0 
02 
14,5 
0,8 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 
;oo% 
100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 
100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

i  100% 

24% 
40% 

3.5 
0.1 
2.7 
1,0 
0.2 
2,4 
0.2 
0,7 
01 
8,0 
0.4 
4.9 
01 
0,4 
1,2 
01 
4.6 
0.4 
3,0 
0,3 
2,0 
03 
01 
4.4 
0.2 

3,5 
C.I 
2,7 
1,0 
0.2 
2,4 
02 
07 
01 
8,0 
04 
4.9 
0,1 
0.4 
1.2 
0,1 
4,6 
0,4 
3.0 
0.3 
2,0 
0.3 
01 
4.4 
0,2 

50% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

5 0% 

30% 

3 0% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

30% 

0.0 
41.1 

58.7 
99.8 

12% 

76"% 

7"owf 

1.464.9 

2.086.0 

494.4 

626.1 

0.0 
131,7 

117.5 
249,2 

1 

456.41 

134.41 

O.Ol 

44.81 

33%l 

11.91 

23.11 

17% 

273.4 

189.6 

425.1 

438.2 

159.2 

311.6 

514,9 

213.8 

341.9 

742.2 

66.0 

13,9 

Total 

1.033.2 

4.723.0 

44,0 

35.8 

76.2 

83.5 

43.6 

57,1 

145,7 

40.3 

75.5 

133.0 

19,9 

4.2 

145.6 

904.3 

6,8 
2,1 
03 
0,0 
6.8 
0.0 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.4 
1.4 
0,0 
9.8 
33.6 
4.6022 

12,0 
6.3 
9.2 
9,8 
11.9 
6,8 
16,7 
4,8 
10.7 
22.2 
2.6 
0.6 
27.1 
140.6 

6 . 4 6 12 

27% 

18% 

12% 

12% 

27% 

12% 

11% 

12% 

14% 

17% 

13% 

14% 

19% 

;<?% 
36% 

3,4 
0,5 
02 
0.0 
3.7 
0,0 
0,0 
0,6 
0,0 
9,9 
1.5 
0.0 
11.4 

31.2 
4.222.9 

6,0 

2.6 

4.6 

4.9 

6.3 

u 

8.3 

3.0 

5.4 

17.8 

2,1 

0,3 

20,1 
84.7\ 

14% 

7% 

6% 

6% 

14% 

6% 

6% 

8% 

7% 

13% 

10% 

7% 
!4<Tr 

9% 

4.186.4! 

2 3% 

T O T 4I 

42.033.8 

17.955.8 

8.2.  Implementation of the Community Initiatives in 1996 

Note: 
Italy takes part in all the Community  Initiatives except Regis. All except Leader are implemented  through  non-
regionalised  programmes.  In  1994 and  1995, 21  CIPs  were  adopted  for  the  Initiatives  Rechar,  Retex 
(amendment of the CIP  adopted  in 1993), Adapt,  Leader,  Pesca  and the  Regen  strand of Interreg. The  Leader 
(10),  Urban,  Résider,  SMEs  and Konver  programmes  which  remained  were  adopted  in  1996,  as were  five 
Interreg CIPs (three with France, one with Albania and one with Switzerland). 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in Italy: 
The SMEs programme  provides  ECU 31 million (total cost: ECU 87.9 million) to help small firms define  their 
priorities for  technological  innovation,  to promote  cooperation  between  small firms and research  centres, to 
encourage  the development  of networks  to exchange  RTD  know-how, and to encourage  the use of advanced 
telecommunications  systems  to diversif}' production  and market  opportunities. 
Most of the Interreg  programmes  include measures relating to transfers of innovation and  technology  to  local 

234 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

small firms  (ECU 4.6  million; total cost: ECU 13.8 million)  and  the development  of  data  transmission 
networks (ECU 2.4  million; total cost: ECU 5.1  million). Furthermore,  the programme with  Greece is 
intended to develop in Italy the advanced telecommunications  infrastructure  required  to connect the two 
countries ' networks (ECU 8.5 million). 
In the field of human resources, the Adapt programme seeks to make use of the new technologies while taking 
account of industrial changes and the new employment opportunities (in the audio-visual sector,  information 
and communications technology,  etc.) and stimulate  new methods of training such as distance  learning.  The 
Employment CIP concentrates on new specialisations, particularly in RTD and innovation,  the management 
of firms or  cooperatives,  and the training  of  instructors.  It promotes  synergies  with measures  under the 
Community framework research programmes  in the fields of information  technologies  and communications 
such as flexible learning,  distance learning and data transmission applications for  the handicapped (e.g.  the 
TIDE programme). The Leader programmes  too provide support for  distance learning and  work, the 
promotion of rural tourism and reservation systems using multimedia or data transmission applications (ECU 
6 million; total cost: ECU 13 millions), and transfers of innovation and technology to local  firms. 
The  Rechar  and  Résider  CIPs include measures to  support technological  innovation and  the Urban 
programme offers support in a number of Italian towns for projects relating to the use of training services or 
information by data transmission. 

The  Commission  approved  14 new  programmes  in Italy  and five  Interreg programmes. These  include 
the  SMEs  CLP,  a  single  programme  for  all  the  eligible  areas,  to  which  the  Structural  Funds  will 
contribute  ECU  191.7 million. This  programme  includes  provision  for  assistance  to improve  services 
to firms  in the fields  of quality and  innovation  and to improve access by small firms  to finance  and the 
capital  markets.  The  Résider  programme  affects  nine  regions;  the  ERDF  will  provide  ECU  85.6 
million.  The  priority  areas  for  assistance  are  the  improvement  of  the  environment  where  it  has 
deteriorated  (47%), the  promotion  of  new  economic activities  to  stimulate  diversification  (33%)  and 
help  in  the  development  of  tourist  activities  (4%). The  Konver  programme  (ECU  46.1  million  from 
the  ERDF)  is  mainly  devoted  to  the  promotion  of  replacement  economic  activities,  and  in  particular 
the  establishment  and  development  of  small  firms  (68%)  and  the  improvement  and  restoration  of 
military  areas  and  areas  seriously  affected  by  military  activity  (15%). For  example,  it  is  banned  to 
provide  assistance  in  Apulia  to  support  services  to  small  firms  in  the  fields  of  the  environment, 
environmental  quality  (the  ecolabel)  and  workers'  safety.  The  Urban  CIP  covers  13  municipalities 
(Rome,  Genoa,  Venice,  all  of  which  are  outside  Objective  1, and  Naples, Salerno, Palermo,  Catania, 
Siracusa, Reggio Calabria,  Cosenza, Bari, Foggia and Cagliari, which  are eligible under Objective  1). 
In five towns, assistance will concentrate on the suburbs and in eight  on the historic centre. Each  town 
will manage its own sub-programme  and management is decentralised  to local level. 

The  largest  number  of  CLPs adopted  in  1996  was  under  the  Leader  Initiative  (total  assistance  ECU 
105.5 million). Approval  of the LEADER  programmes  was thus completed  in  1996 with  the  adoption 
of  seven  programmes  for  the  Objective  5(b)  areas  and  two  for  the  Objective  1 areas  (Molise  and 
Sicily).  There  are  intended  to  provide  extra  funding  for  rural  development  to  complement  measures 
financed  under  the  Objective  1 OPs.  Priority  was  given  to  the  areas  with  greatest  difficulties,  those 
with  hilly  and  mountainous  terrain.  In  the  case  of  the  Objective  5(b)  areas,  selection  of  the  local 
action  groups  at  regional  level  proved  particularly  complex  (selection  is  based  on  quantified 
qualitative  criteria,  intended  principally  to  ensure  a  satisfactory  territorial  concentration)  and  by  the 
end  of  the  year  had  been  completed  in  three  regions  or  autonomous  provinces  (8  groups  selected), 
while  the  procedure  was  in its final  phase  in  six  other regions. In the Objective  1 regions,  the  groups 
had been  selected  in Calabria, the Abruzzi  and, in part, Campania.  Selection  by the other regions  is in 
progress. Technical  assistance  to  launch  the national  network  of Leader  groups  was  also  approved  in 
1996. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

235 

infrastructure, 

include  tourism,  sea  transport  and  communications 

Five  Interreg  programmes  were  approved  in  1996.  The  Sardinia-Corsica  programme  concerns  the 
province  of  Sassari  in  Sardinia  and  the  department  of  Corse  du  Sud  and  includes  assistance  for 
communications  between  the  two  islands  and  environmental  protection..  The  Corsica-Tuscany 
programme  concerns  the  department  of  Haute  Corse  and  the  province  of  Livorno.  Its  priorities  for 
assistance 
the  transfer  of 
technology  and economic and cultural exchanges between the two areas. On the Franco-Italian  border, 
the  Alpes  CIP  concerns  the  Alpine  regions  (Rhône-Alpes,  Provence-Alpes-Côte  d'Azur;  Valle 
d'Aosta,  Piedmont,  Liguria).  The  priority  sectors  for  assistance  are  improving  communications 
between  frontier  areas,  promoting  the  cultural  heritage  of  these  areas  and  encouraging  economic 
activity  on the border. The Italo-Swiss CIP concerns the frontier  areas of the Valle d'Aosta,  Piedmont, 
Lombardy  and the province of Bolzano. Assistance is intended  to improve cooperation  between  small 
firms,  infrastructure,  the  development  of  agricultural,  forestry  and  fisheries  production  and  the 
development  of  the  natural,  historical  and  cultural  heritage.  The  programme  involving  Italy  and 
Albania  concerns  the  areas  on  the  sea  frontier  between  the  two  countries  (Apulia  in  Italy)  and 
complements  the  Italy/Albania  Phare  programme  for  1995-99,  which  covers  the  coastal  areas  of 
Albania.  The  programme's  resources  are  concentrated  on  a  limited  number  of  fields:  transport  and 
communications  (improving  port  systems  and  telecommunications),  cooperation  among  small  firms, 
tourism  and the environment.  During  1996, negotiations  between  the authorities  concerned  continued 
on  one  Interreg  programme,  the  Greece-Italy  CLP  (approval  and  effective  implementation  were 
expected  in  1997). 

Another  important  feature  of  1996 was the  Commission  decision  on  allocation  of  the  reserve,  which 
provided  an  additional  ECU  199  million  for  Italy.  This  amount  went  mainly  to  the  Employment, 
Leader,  Interreg  II C, Adapt,  Urban  and  Konver  Initiatives54. The programmes  which  benefited  from 
the reserve will be the subject  of fresh  programming  or integration in  1997. 

Implementation  of  most  of  the  programmes  was  Subject  to  substantial  delays.  In  view  of  the  late 
approval  of  the  various  programmes  (end  1995  and  1996),  1996  was  mainly  devoted  to  establishing 
the Monitoring  Committees  and to the adoption,  at national  level,  of  procedures  for  the approval  and 
implementation  of  the  various  projects.  As  a result  the  financial  results  of  implementation  for  1996 
are  only  slight.  All  the Monitoring  Committees  for  the Initiatives  approved  in  1996  were  set  up. For 
some  programmes  (Retex,  Interreg  Italy-France  (Corsica-Sardinia),  Interreg  Italy-Albania,  Urban), 
proposals  for  amendments  intended  to  bring  the  terms  of  programming  more  closely  into  line  with 
actual  progress  and  with  the  expected  use  of  resources  were  considered.  In  the  case  of  the  Pesca 
programme,  which  is  not  managed  entirely  at  central  level,  since  it  comprises  11  regional  sub-
programmes  and  two  multi-area  sub-programmes,  with  some  sub-programmes  managed  by  the 
national  administration  and  others  by  the  regional  administrations,  this  division  of  management 
between  administrations  caused  difficulties  of  coordination.  While  the  first  advance  (50%)  of  the 
1995 instalment  (FIFG  and  ERDF)  was paid  by the Commission,  no expenditure  was  incurred  by  the 
beneficiaries,  even  though  in the case of some sub-programmes  the projects  had already been  selected 
(mainly  where the sub-programmes  were managed by the central  administration). 

Under  Employment,  234  projects  (197  regional  and  37  multi-regional:  52  Youthstart,  67  Now,  115 
Horizon)  have  been  financed  since  1994.  The  projects  under  Youthstart  concern  the  training  of 
instructors  and  the  creation  of jobs  in  growth  sectors  such  as  the  environment,  the  cultural  heritage 
and  tourism.  The  main  aim  of  the  Now  projects  is  to  help  with  the  establishment  of  firms.  The 
projects  under  Horizon-handicapped  (71  projects)  provide  specific  training  for  the  disabled  while 
those  under  Horizon-disadvantaged  (44  projects)  focus  on  training  and  integration  into  the  labour 
market.  The  main  aim  of  the Adapt  programme  is to  assist  the national  plan  to establish  an  on-going 
training  system. Since  1995,  182 projects  have been  selected, of which  141 are regional  and 41  multi-
regional.  Most  projects  relate  to  the  training  of  the  staff  of  firms,  many  of  which  are  in  the  services 
sector (tourism  and the environment). 

54  See  also  Chapter  I.B.I.  Community  Initiatives. 

236 

8th Annual Repon  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Table V-33 : 

Italy -  Community  Initiatives  -  1996 in the context  of programming for  1994-1999  (ECU 

million) 

Initiative 
(number of  CIPs) 

Total  cost 

SS. 
assistance* 
(1) 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
(2) 

% 

(2)/m 

Pavments 
1996 

Pavments 
1994-96 
(3) 

Adapt (1) 
Employment  (1) 
Leader(22) 
Pesca (1) 
SMEs(l) 
Rechar (2) 
Konver ( 1 ) 
Résider (1) 
Retex (2) 
Urban (1) 
Total  (33) 
Inlerreg/Reaen (7)** 
CIPs adopted  in  1996: 
Leader Technical  assistance 
(implementation  of national  network) 
Leader Lombardv 
Leader U curia 
Leader Molise 
Leader  Marche 
Leader Trento 
Leader Piedmont 
Leader  Veneto 
Leader Sicily 
Leader Lazio 
SMEs 
Konver 
Résider 
Urban 
Total  (14) 
Interred  (5)*** 
* Excluding reserve 
"  For programme details see Chapter VII. 
*m* For programme details see Chapter LB 

360.5 
569.6 
757.1 
82,4 
645.5 
34.1 
250.4 
505.6 
257.2 
280.7 
3.743.0 

190.0 
348.7 
288,7 
34.2 
191.7 
1.7 
46.1 
85,6 
79.0 
117.7 
1383.3 

3,1 

2,0 

14,6 
15.6 
18,1 
35.9 
8.6 
39.9 
57.9 
65.2 
60,6 
645,5 
250.4 
505,6 
280.7 
2.001.7 

4.5 
3.9 
9.8 
8.4 
2.2 
9.3 
16.3 
32.6 
16.3 
191.7 
46.1 
85.6 
117.7 
5465 

45,6 
82.7 
49,3 
0,0 
44.7 
0.0 
21.6 
42.8 
0,0 
26,4 
313.0 

2,0 

4.5 
3.9 
0.3 
1.1 
1.4 
1.2 
6.0 
7.2 
3.6 
44.7 
21.6 
42.8 
26.4 
166,7 

81,7 
134.2 
77.9 
4,4 
44.7 
1.7 
21.6 
42.8 
12.1 
26,4 
447.4 

43% 
38% 
27% 
13% 
23% 
100% 
47% 
50% 
15% 
22% 
32% 

2.0 

100% 

4.5 
3.9 
0.3 
1.1 
1,4 
1.2 
6.0 
7.2 
3.6 
44.7 
21.6 
42.8 
26.4 
166.7 

100% 
100% 
3% 
13% 
62% 
13% 
37% 
22% 
22% 
23% 
47% 
50% 
22% 
30% 

23,1 
41.9 
22.3 
0.0 
22.4 
05 
10,8 
21,4 
0,0 
13.2 
155.4 

08 

1.9 
1.6 
OI 
0.6 
04 
0.6 
3.0 
3.6 
0.9 
22.4 
10.8 
21.4 
13.2 
81.3 

Table 2.2. 
.1. Community initiatives 

% 

avm 
22% 
19% 
13% 
6% 
12% 
50% 
23% 
25% 
8% 
11% 
16% 

41.1 
67.6 
36.3 
2.2 
22.4 
0,8 
10.8 
21.4 
6.0 
13.2 
221.9 

0.8 

40% 

1.9 
1.6 
0.1 
0.6 
04 
0.6 
3.0 
3.6 
0.9 
22.4 
10.8 
21.4 
13.2 
813 

42% 
41% 
1% 
7% 
19% 
7% 
18% 
11% 
6% 
12% 
23% 
25% 
11% 
15% 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

237 

9.  LUXEMBOURG 

9.1.  Implementation of assistance bv Objective in 1996 

Support for  the development  of the technological potential  of the regions of  Luxembourg: 
Objective 2  (1994-96):  The strategy of the SPD for  the conversion of the traditional metal-working  industry  to 
the  electrical  sector  gave  priority  to  the  industrial  sector, partly  through  measures  to promote  technological 
innovation.  This involves not only support for  RTD, particularly  materials analysis  (including the promotion  of 
transfers  of  technology  between  research  centres  and  firms),  but  also  technical  and  scientific  assistance  to 
firms  and the training of staff in RTD. 
Objective  5(b):  The development  of the new technologies  is supported  by  the SPD as a  means  of giving  fresh 
life to rural areas  by reducing  the distance  between work and  home, so making  countrydwellers  economically 
independent  and  keeping  them  in  rural  areas,  by  improving  day-to-day  living  conditions,  and  through  the 
protection  and  safeguarding  of  the  countryside.  Measures  therefore  support  RTD  in  small  industrial, 
commercial and craft firms and in administrations which wish to establish local offices in rural areas. 
Total support for  technological  development accounts for  13.2% of the appropriations  under Objective 2. 

Table V-34: 

Luxembourg  -  Financing  directly  linked  to  technological  development  in  1994-96  (ECU 
million) 

S.F 

TOTAL 

Mvmfryr State 
Public  Private  Total 
1.7 
JLZ 
_________ 
NB: The-programming procedures and different approaches taken by the Member States 
invite caution in interpreting the figures, in particular spending on information society projects. 
which are often linked to other fields such as RTD and industry. 

29% I  _____ 

__L 

2A 

100% 

1A 

OBJECTIVE 255 

Fie. V-40: Proerammine 1994-96 (ECU million -1996  prices and status): 
Breakdown bv sector: 
Productive environment (a) 
Human resources (b) 
Land improvement and restoration (c) 
Environmental protection (d) 
Breakdown by Fund: 

ft 
71% 

Financing by Structural Funds 

100% 

(d)29% 

(a)  14% 

(b) 28% 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

4,6 
0,8 
5.3 

85% 
15% 
!_____ 

(c) 29% 

1SPD 

1996  in  the  context  of programming 

for  1994-96 

The  SPD  for  1994-96  was  closed  at  the  end  of  1996  after  the  Monitoring  Committee  had  decided  to 
adjust  the  financing  plan  for  the  assistance  by  making  transfers  between  measures  and  reducing  the 
Community  contribution.  The  main  point  to  note  is  the  extra  funding  for  the  measure  for  human 
resources,  to  which  the  ESF  will  now  contribute  ECU  194  000.  Because  of  the  low  level  of 
commitments  at  the  end  of  1996,  the  Community  contribution  has  been  reduced  to  ECU  5.3  million 
and  ECU  1.8  million  (25%  of  the  original  assistance,  including  indexation)  has  been  transferred  to 
1997-99  because  of  under-utilisation  by  the  measure  to  promote  productive  investment  (aid  scheme 
for  firms)  and  the  measure  for  the  treatment  of  industrial  waste. 

Preparation  of  the  1997-99  programming 

period 

Two  meetings  to negotiate  on  the  SPD  for  1997-99  were held  in  1996. 

55  Eligible areas: Esch-sur-Alzette, Capellen. 

238 

OBJECTIVES  3 AND 4 

Fie. V*41: Obiective 3 - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU  million - 1994 prices): 
Priorities 

ESF 

Integration of the long-term  unemDloved  (a) 
Vocational  inteeration of  young people (b)  . 
Integration of those threatened  with exclusion  (c) 
Eaual  opprtunities for men and women  (d) 
Horizontal measures (?) 

1  CSF/2  OP 

Total 

Average ner OP 

5.5 
3.1 
9.9 
1.2 
_£-_. 
Ml 

Ml 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

(d)6%  <e>4% 

(a)  27% 

(c) 48% 

(b)15% 

In  1996  the  main  target  groups  for  assistance  under  Objective  3  were  workers  with  poor  skills, 
particularly  those  in  sectors  where  access  to  training  is  poorly  developed  or non-existent.  A  total  of 
547  people  received  finance  from  the  ESF.  Under  the  Objective  4  SPD,  13  training  measures 
benefiting  1 394 people were implemented. 

Fie. V-42: Objective 4 - Proerammine 1994-96 (ECU  million -1994 prices) 
Priorities 
Anticipation  of  labour market trends and 
skill requirements (a) 
Vocational training and retraining, 
guidance  and counselling  (b) 
Improvement and development  of training 
systems  (c) 
Horizontal  measures for the whole  SPD  (à) 

ESF 

0,2 

1,2 

0,6 

(d)14% 

(a) 9% 

(c)  26% 

(b)51% 

I  SPD 

Total 

__i 

OBJECTIVE  5(a)  agriculture 

Table  V-35: Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million -1996 prices and status): 

Total 

38,4 

Measure 
Production 
Marketing 

36,7 
__L2 

96% 
4% 

Expected  implementation  to improve agricultural  structures was reduced  in  1996 to ECU 36.7 million 
for  1994-99  (as  compared  with  the  ECU  37.3  million  originally  planned  in  1994).  Luxembourg 
decided  to  transfer  part  of  the  appropriations  originally  allocated  to  these  measures  to  aid  for  the 
processing  and  marketing  of  products; a decision  on this  SPD is to be taken  in  1997. The  largest  pan 
goes to aid for  less-favoured  areas  (ECU  19 million), followed  by investment  aid (ECU 9 million) and 
aid  to  young  farmers  (ECU  9  million).  Since  1994,  Luxembourg  has  allocated  two  thirds  of  the 
Community  aid  planned  for  1994-99 to  the  processing  and  marketing  of  products.  ECU  1.15 million 
out of ECU  1.7  million  will  go to investments  to improve quality  in the wine-growing  sector,  the only 
one  concerned  by  the  programme.  The  total  eligible  costs  of  investments  which  have  received 
Community  assistance amount to ECU 8 million. 

8th Annual  Report  on  the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

OBJECTIVE  5(a)  fisheries 

Fie. V-43: Obiective 5(a) fisheries - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million) 
______ 

Adjustment  and redirection  of the fishing  effort  (a) 
Other fishing  fleet measures  (b) 
Renovation  and modernisation  of  the fishing  fleet  (c) 
Aauaculture  (d) 
Protected  marine  areas  (e) 
Port facilities  (f) 
Processing  and  marketing  of products  (z) 
Promotion  of  products  (h) 
Socio-economic  measures  (i) 
Other  measures (\) 

_____ 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.7 
0.0 
0.0 
0.3 
0.1 
pm 
_____ 
-Li 

239 

(h)9% 

(9)27% 

(d) 64% 

There  was  very  little  investment  activity  in  the  Objective  5(a)  fisheries  programme  during  1996. 
Eligible  expenditure  incurred  for  the  first  half  of  the  programme  amounted  to  8%  of  the  amount 
planned  for  1994-99. The volume of investment is expected to increase in  1997 and  1998. 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)56 

Fir  V-44: Obiective 5(h).  Prorramminr 199*99: 
Population (1000 hab.) 
Area (km1) 

30 
831 
ECU  million 

(c)51% 

( a ) 2^ 

Bv Fund: 

1 SPD 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
Total 

3.1 
0.8 
2.2 
6.0 

51% 
13% 
36% 
100% 

E  A fresh boost  tor 

agriculture and forestry 
(a) 

•  Employment in the 

secondary and tertiary 
sectors (b) 

•  Tourism and quality of 

(b) 28% 

life (c) 

Delays  in  implementing  the  programme  on  the  ground  gave  rise  to  concern,  which  led  the 
Commission  to  intervene  on  a number  of  occasions. For example,  it proved  impossible  to  organise  a 
Monitoring  Committee  meeting. This  means  that  some important  decisions  - the technical  assistance 
plan, the preparation  of assessment and the criteria for selecting projects - have still not been taken. • 

Table V-36: 

Luxembourg - Assistance by  Objective  -  1996 in  the  context of programming for  1994-
1996/99 (ECU million) 

P r o g r a m m es 

(year  of  adoption) 

Total  cost 

S.F. 
assistance 

(11 

C o m m i t m e n ts 

Commitments 

1996 

1994-96 

(21 

% 

(21/(11 

Payments 

1996 

P a y m e n ts 
1994-96 

% 

(31 

(31/(11 

1 

I8.2I 

5,3l 

-1.5| 

6.0I 

113%l 

0.3l 

4.3l 

80% 

O h i e r t i v e 2* 
SPD Luxemboure  (19941 

OP  Private  promoters  (1994) 

OP  Public  nromoters  (19941 

Objective  4 
SPD  Public  tjromoters  (19941 

21.6 
24,4 

46.0 

9,7 

11.0 
20,7 

Total 

| 

6.11 

2.3l 

Forecasts  Luxembourg  R.  2328/91  (1994) 

SPD  Luxembourg  R.  866  and  867/90  (1994) 

Total 

128.8 

11.2 
139.9 

36.7 
1.7 

38.4 

Objective  5('a1 fisheries 
S P n i . n x m n h o i . r - 0 « » -> 

Ohiertive  «(hi 

SPD  Luxembour?  (19941 
TOTM, 

1 

3.?| 

111 

25.5 
239.5 

6.0 
73.8 

Amounts after deduction of transfers to 1997-99 

36  Eli cible  area:  North  Luxembourg. 

1.6 

1.8 
3.4 

0.4| 

4.3 
0.0 

4.3 

O.ol 

0.0 
6.6 

4,6 

5.3 
9,9 

0.9| 

15,6 

1.0 

16,5 

, 
l . ll 

0.8 

35,2 

4 7% 

4 8% 

48% 

1,6 

1.8 

3.4 

4.0 
4.9 

8.9 

4 2* 

4 5% 

43% 

38*1 

0.3l 

O.ôl 

2 5* 

4 2% 
57% 

43% 

52 
0.0 

5.2 

100*1 

0 „l 

1 4* 

4 8% 

0.0| 

9 j| 

10.0 

0.5 

10.6 

. 

0.3l 

0.4 

25.2 

2 7* 

3 2* 

28% 

V» 

7* 
3 4% 

240 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

9.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives in 1996 

Note: 
Luxembourg  does  not  participate  in  four  of  the  Initiatives:  Rechar,  Retex,  Regis  and  Pesca.  Five  CIPs  were 
adopted  in  1994  and  1995  (Employment,  Urban,  Adapt,  Leader,  Interreg).  One  Interreg  programme  with 
Belgium and France was still to be approved  and this was done in  1996. Three national programmes  still to be 
approved  concerned  SMEs (adopted  in  1996), Résider and  Konver. 

; 

Support for  the development  of the technological potential  of  Luxembourg: 
Support  for  technological  development  plays  a  comparatively  large  role  in  the  SMEs  and  Interreg  11 
Community  Initiatives.  The. SMEs  CIP  finances  measures  of  two  types  to  promote  RTD  to  increase  the 
international  competitiveness  of  small  firms.  These  are  respect for  the  environment  through  the  sound 
management  of  resources  and  the  use of  clean  technologies,  and  the promotion  of strategic  management  in 
small  firms  through  the  development  of  information  systems  on  public  contracts,  communications  in  the 
construction sector,  etc. 
The Interreg  11 programme  between Luxembourg  and  Germany encourages  the transfer of technology  (ECU 
1.6  million:  total  cost:  ECU  3.1  million)  and  the  establishment  of  cooperation  networks.  The  programme 
involving  Luxembourg,  Wallonia  and  Lorraine  contains,  among  the  measures  likely  to  introduce  new 
technologies,  the  creation  of  structures  to  provide  information  and  support  to  small  firms  and  the 
development  of  human  resources  through  the adjustment  of  training  to  meet  the needs  of  local  industry  and 
the setting  up of information  networks. 

Two new Community  Initiative programmes  were  approved  in  1996. The first,  adopted  in  September 
1996,  is  the  SMEs  CIP  for  areas  eligible  under  Objectives  2  and  5(b).  Community  assistance  will 
provide  25%  of  the  total  investment  planned.  The  main  measures  are  based  on  two  priorities, 
encouraging  small  craft  and  industrial  firms  to  take  account  of  the  environment  and  promoting 
strategic management in small  firms. 

An Interreg programme covering Luxembourg, Belgium and France was also approved  in February. It 
embraces  the  districts  of  Arlon,  Virton,  Bastogne  and  Neufchâteau  in  Belgium,  the  departments  of 
Meuse, Meurthe-et-Moselle  and Moselle  in France, and  all  of Luxembourg. The programme  has  four 
priorities:  cross-border  economic  development  (provision  of  venture  capital  for  small  firms  on  a 
cross-border  basis;  premises  for  firms;  the  development  of  locally-generated  potential);  the 
development  of  human  resources  (European  technology  college); the  attractiveness  and  environment 
of the cross-border  area (design  and implementation  of cross-border  facilities  for  waste  management; 
establishment  of  local  partnerships  in  the countryside;  improving  water and  river  quality); and  cross-
border urban  development  (town planning,  structuring cross-border urban  areas). The first  meeting of 
the  Monitoring  Committee  was  held  in  November.  The  arrangements  for  monitoring  the  programme 
were  approved  (Rules  of  procedure,  organisation  plan  for  implementing  the  programme,  selection 
criteria) and a number of projects  were considered  (study on the exploitation  of cross-border  aquifers, 
study on preventing flooding  of the Chiers, etc.). 

The  Commission  was  unable  to  approve  the  joint  Resider/Konver  programme  submitted  by  the 
Luxembourg  authorities.  A  number  of  essential  points  such  as  a  description  of  the  measures  were 
missing  from  the  latest  version  of  the  programme  received  on  9  February  1996.  Despite  the 
Conrrnission's  repeated  requests,  the  Luxembourg  authorities  did  not  submit  a  new  version  during 
1996. 

Turning  to the programmes  already  implemented,  the Employment  and Adapt  CIPs made  satisfactory 
progress  during  1996.  These  Initiatives  are  financing  three  and  two  projects  respectively,  all  for  a 
four-year  period. Under Employment,  the Youthstart  project  seeks to identify  young people  who  have 
not succeeded  in the education  system and offer  them, through  guidance and counselling, a recognised 
vocational  qualification.  The Horizon  project  tries to create jobs  for  the disadvantaged  in  horticulture 
(establishment  of a company  to maintain  open  spaces), and the Now project  offers  integrated  training 
to  women  seeking  to  re-enter  the  labour  market.  The  Adapt  project  provides  training  and  advice  to 
firms  and  is  establishing  a  data  base  containing  information  for  workers  on  the  on-going  training 
available.  As  for  the  new  Integra  strand  of  the  Employment  Initiative,  for  which  Luxembourg  has 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

241 

been  allocated  no extra finance,  in  1996 Luxembourg proposed a draft  in the form  of  a pilot  project 
under Article 6 of the ESF Regulation. Implementation of Leader is proceeding  satisfactorily. 

Following  the decision  on  the  allocation  of  the reserve  for  the  Community  Initiatives,  Luxembourg 
received ECU  1.23 million which will go to the Résider and Leader Initiatives57. 

Table  V-37: 

Luxembourg  -  Community  Initiatives  -  1996  in  the  context  of programming  for  1994-99 
(ECU  million) 

initiative 
(number  or  CIPs) 

Toul  cost 

S.F. 
assistance* 
m 

0.3 
0.3 
1.0 
0.3 
0,5 
IS 

0.8 
0.6 
4.8 
1.4 
1.0 
8.7 

Adapt (1) 
Employment ( 1 ) 
Leader (1) 
SMEs(l) 
Urban (1) 
Total  (5) 
Interrev/Renen  (2)** 
CIPs adopted in  1996: 
SMEs 
Interred  ( / > "* 
* Excluding reserve 
** For programme details see Chapter VII. Table 2.2. 
**" For programme details see Chapter LEU. Community Initiatives 

1.4 

0.3 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-1996 
(2> 

% 

ravm 

Pavments 
1996 

Pavments 
1994-1996 
(3) 

% 

(3V(1> 

0.2 
0.0 
0.0 
0.3 
0.0 
0.5 

0.3 
0.3 
1.0 
0.3 
0,5 
2.4 

100% 
100% 
100% 
72% 
100% 
96% 

0.1 
0.0 
0.0 
0.1 
0.2 
0,4 

0.1 
0.2 
0.4 
0.1 
0,3 
1.0 

30% 
50% 
40% 
22% 
50% 
40% 

0.3 

0.3 

72% 

0.1 

0.1 

22% 

57  See also Chapter I.B.I. Community  Initiatives. 

242 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

10.  THE NETHERLANDS 

10.1. 

Implementation of assistance by Obiective in 1996 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in theregions of the  Netherlands: 
Objective  1:  The Flevoland  SPD allocates  ECU  14.4 million  (total cost: ECU  86.9 million)  to assisting  RTD 
in four  spheres  : 
• 

the  "Regional  Technology Plan " which  combines  increasing  regional RTD  capacity  with working 
towards the region's socio-economic objectives (ECU 0.2 million): 

•  creating  a technology  transfer centre to assist SMEs  and a network of regional  telecommunications 

• 

centres (ECU  1.5 million): 
the  KIM project,  which  helps  businesses  employ  people  with  university  backgrounds  and  highly 
qualified  staff  in order  to introduce new technologies  and new  working methods  into business and 
industrial 
environmental  aspects, 
industry 
hydrodynamics,  development  of coastal areas, fire prevention,  etc. - ECU 0.2 million); 

resource  management, 

(hydraulics,  water 

•  building  new  applied  research infrastructures  and providing  industry  with financial assistance  for 

R&D (ECU 12.5 million). 

RTD  is  also  a  key factor  in  the  strategy for  modernising  agriculture  (ECU  5.6  million;  total  cost:  ECU 
23.2  million).  The SPD  encourages  the  concentration  and  extension  of  high-level  RTD  through  relocations 
and  the  creation  of  research  institutes  (e.g.:  the Lelystad  1DL-DLO research  centre,  creating  250 posts  for 
highly  qualified  staff),  the  diversification  of  their activities  and  the development  of a  centre  to facilitate  the 
transfer  of  research  results  to  the  agri-industrial  sector  and  to farms.  The  SPD  also  provides  support  for 
fisheries  research (ECU  1.1 million; total cost: ECU 20.7  million). 
Objective  2  (1994-96):  The  Objective 2 SPDs  devote  10%  of  the Structural  Fund  contribution  to RTD.  The 
measures  are  intended  to strengthen  the industrial fabric  by stimulating product  innovation and  development, 
more  specifically: 

•  Arnhem-Nijmegen:  sites for  business  and  industry  (the Mercator  Science  and  Technology  Park  in 
Nijmegen,  the  HBO-Bedrijfscentrum  in Arnhem,  the  Bedrijvencentrum  Simon  Stevin  in  Arnhem): 
development  of 
industrial  structures  and  expertise  (business  clusters  -  e.g.:  a  business 
collaboration  project  in  the  silver-plated  goods  industry;  promotion  of  innovation  and  quality 
(e.g.:  medical  technology;  new  business  activities,  etc.),  investment  in  human  capital  (ECU  6.9 
million  in total; total cost: ECU 25.6 million); 

•  Groningen-Drenthe:  encouragement  of technological  innovation, assistance for  RTD,  guidance  on 
the  application  of  environmental  technologies,  creation  of  a  technological  development  centre 
(ECU 0.5 million;  total cost: ECU 1.2 million); 

•  Twente-Overijssel:  development  of  technological  infrastructures  and  expertise  (ECU  1.8  million; 
innovation  (ECU  0.5 million;  total  cost:  ECU 

total  cost:  ECU  5.3  million)  and  support  for 
1.1 million) - e.g.: technology institutes in the Business  and Science  Park; 

•  South  Limburg:  development  of products,  business  sites and environmental  technologies  and  high-

level training  in technology  (ECU 8.2 million; total cost: ECU 25  million); 

•  South  East  Brabant:  equipping  research  centres  (ECU  9.7 million;  total  cost:  ECU  39.7 million), 

improving  technological  training and the transfer of expertise to new businesses. 

Apart from  RTD.  the programmes  are devoting  1.5% to telecommunications,  specifically  linking  up with  the 
telecommunication  networks  and  basic  infrastructure  and  equipment.  Only  the  Twente  SPD  makes  more 
precise  provision, for  the construction  of a cable link in the Business and Science Park and  the  establishment 
of a Data  Transmission  Study  Centre to develop multi-modal  transport in the region. As for  data  transmission 
applications,  the  Twente  SPD  is  providing  support  for  the  development  of  data  transmission  applied  to 
transport and Groningen-Drenthe  is supporting  the creation  of a Data Transmission Development  Centre. 
Objective 5(b):  In Friesland  research and  information centres are being developed  and technology  transfer in 
the  context  of  business  development  will  be facilitated.  In  Groningen-Drenthe  priority  is  being  given  to 
developing  business  clusters  with  the  help  of  a  grant  of  ECU  7.3 million  (total  cost: ECU  32.9  million),  as 
well as support for  new products  and technologies and  informing businesses about innovation.  In Overijssel it 
is  planned  to  develop  data  transmission  services  and  research  projects  and  develop  new  products  in  the 
context of developing  natural  resources and  agriculture. 
In  total.  Community  financing  for  technological  development  in  the  Netherlands  accounts  for  13.2%  of 
Structural  Fund appropriations  (Objectives  1 and 2). 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Fund'; (1996) 

243 

Table  V-38: 

Netherlands  -  Financing  directly  related  to  technological  development  in  1994-99  (ECU 
million) 

T O T AL 

.Structural Funds 

Objective  1 
<_________•__ 
T O T AL 
N'B: The programming procedure and different  approaches taken by the Member Slates 
invite caution in interpreting these figures, in particular spending on information  society protects, 

Public  Private  Total 
110,7 
-JL0_ 
-lSfl-2. 

-_. 
58% 
J22L 
100% 

89,9 
-_L_. 
J___ 

20,8 
-22J1 
_____ 

132.7 
97 8 
230.S 

22,0 
27.6 
49.6 

_%_ 
17% 

22% 

Mgmfcr State 
_%_ 
83% 
_____ 
____ 

Financing by the Structural  Funds 

3% 

97% 

ORTD 

"Telecom. 

which are often  linked  ID other fields such as RTD and industry. 

OBJECTIVE  l58 

Fir.  V-45: Proerammine  1994-99  (ECU  million): 
Priorities: 

Industry  promotion  (a) 
Tourism  (b) 
Agriculture, rural  development  (c) 
Fisheries  (d) 
Human  resources  (el 
Business  infrastructure  (f) 
Transport  infrastructure  (2) 
Research  and development  (h) 
Technical  assistance  (i) 
By  Fund, 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

80,0 
40,0 
21,5 
8,5 
150.0 

1SPD 

Main  features  of  1996 

22.0 
5.2 
21.2 
8.2 
28,0 
17.0 
31.4 
14.4 

53% 
27% 
14% 
6% 

100% 

(h)10% 

(02% 

(a) 15% 

(9)21% 

(f)11% 

(e) 19% 

The  general  objectives  of  the  Flevoland  SPD  include  bringing  per  capita  GDP  up  to  85%  of  the 
Cornrnunity  average,  achieving  employment  growth  3%  higher  than  the  national  average  and  an 
unemployment  rate  below  the  national  average  and  reducing  disparities  in  unemployment  rates  within 
the  region.  Not  all  of  these  goals  have  yet  been  achieved.  Per  capita  GDP  is  catching  up  with  the 
national  average  and  employment  growth  is  almost  3%  higher  than  the  national  rate,  but  for  the  first 
time  unemployment 
is  slightly  higher  than  the  average  for  the  Netherlands  and 
unemployment  disparities  within  the  region  increased  between  1994 and  1995. 

in  Flevoland 

Among  the  main  points  to  be  noted  concerning  the  implementation  of  the  SPD  in  1996, the  first  is  the 
introduction  of  subject-based  meetings  to  stimulate  open  discussion  between  the  partners  on  specific 
subjects  such  as,  in  1996,  fostering  job  creation,  interim  assessment,  agricultural  policy, and  the 
Regional  Technology  Plan.  Secondly,  Flevoland  is  one  of  the  regions  participating  in  the  territorial 
employment  pacts. The  region  drafted  an  action  plan  called  "Action  for  employment",  which  follows 
the  lines  of  the  Objective  1 SPD  but  stresses  the  need  for  greater  coordination  of  the  various  regional 
partners  on  the  basis  of  three  principles:  dynamism,  creativity  and  synergy,  the  aim  being  to  achieve 
coherence  between  existing  projects  rather  than  launch  new  ones.  The  impact  on  employment  of 
projects  already  approved  is  estimated  as  follows:  10 492  permanent  jobs  (6  749  created  directly  and 
3  743  indirectly)  and  2  793  temporary  jobs. 

The  implementation  of  the  various  measures  meant  that  the  1995  instalment  could  be  paid  out  and  that 
for  1994  closed.  The  following  measures  are  progressing  satisfactorily:  support  for  business  and 

58  Eligible  area:  Flevoland. 

244 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

industry  (particularly  SMEs)  and transport  infrastructure  (the main  project  is  the conversion  of road 
No 27  into a motorway  (the A27),  which  will  improve Flevoland's links with the centre and south of 
the country; work  on this project is up to schedule). In other areas (fisheries,  business  infrastructures 
and research  and development) progress is  slower. On the other hand, the Regional  Technology  Plan 
has  given  rise  to  an  increased  number  of  research  and  development  projects.  Measures  relating  to 
fisheries  are  proceeding  as  forecast,  beginning  with  the  implementation  of  the  measure  to  adjust 
fishing  effort  by the permanent decommissioning  of  vessels; measures  relating to product  processing 
and marketing  have now also  been  launched.  In the case  of  the  'Agriculture  and rural  development' 
priority,  apart  from  measures  under  Objective  5(a),  the  measures  financed  by  the  EAGGF  are 
essentially  to  assist  agricultural  research,  sustainable  farming,  new  agricultural  activities  and  water 
management.  All  these  measures  are  considerably  behindhand  with  their  financial  implementation 
because  of  long  gaps  between  legal  and budget  commitments  and  payments.  So  at the  end  of  1996 
only  two  of  the  six  annual  instalments  had been committed,  i.e.  30% of  the  appropriations provided 
for.  A  discussion  day  on  farming  in  Flevoland  was  organized  and  measures  to  accelerate 
implementation have been taken. 

1996 in the context  of programming for  1994-99 

The  mid-term  assessment  report  was  submitted  by  the  assessor.  Its  main  conclusions  were  that the 
structure,  strategy  and coherence  of the programme are still  sound but organisation  and management 
could  be  better integrated.  It also  recommends  a greater  concentration  of  effort  on  certain  areas,  in 
particular  combating  unemployment,  diversification  in  areas  dependent  on  fisheries  and  creating 
centres  of  activity  in  certain  sectors  such  as the food  industry,  transport and distribution,  the media, 
tourism  and  leisure.  Generally  speaking  it  may  be  said  that  the  SPD  has  helped  to  improve 
cooperation  between  the  various  partners  in  a  region  which  has  not  traditionally  had  cooperative 
networks.  The  operation  of  the  Monitoring  Committee  has  been  improved,  in  particular  by 
introducing  subject-based  meetings,  which  have  drawn  many  participants;  of  the  eligible  Dutch 
regions, only Flevoland has taken this particular initiative. 

OBJECTIVE 259 

Fie  V-tt- Proerammine 1994-96 (ECUmillion): 
By sector, 
Productive environment (a) 
Human resources (b) 
Land improvement and restoration (c) 
Protection of the environment (d) 
Technical assistance (e) 
By Fund  : 

(d) 2%  (e) 3% 
(c)13%  ^ _ _ _ - _ T — ^ (a>  4 6% 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

144.0 
80,2 
_____ 

5 SPDs 

______________ 

1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-96 

(b) 36% 

64% 
36% 
100% 

44.8 

The  five  SPDs  were  closed  in  1996,  with  a  substantial  proportion  of  the  appropriations  initially 
programmed (ECU 80.1  million, i.e., 27% of the total initial assistance) not committed and transferred 
to  the  1997-99  period.  These  transfers  vary  among  thé  regions  from  17%  to  33%  of  the  initial 
assistance60.  The  1994  and  1995  annual  instalments  were  closed  for  all  the  SPDs  except  that  for 

59  Eligible  areas:  Àrnhem-Nijmegen,  Groningen-Drenthe,  Twente-Overijssel,  South  Limburg,  South  East 

Brabant. 

60  The 

transfers  represent 

initial 
assistance),  ECU  11.2 million  for  Arnhern-Nijrnegen  (20%),  ECU  9.9  million  for  Twente-Overijssel  (17%), 
ECU  14.1  million  for  South  Limburg  (32%),  and  ECU  22.6  million  for  South  East  Brabant  (33%). 

the  following  amounts:  ECU  22.3  for  Groningen-Drenthe 

(29%  of 

the 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

245 

Twente,  while  the  first  instalment  for  1996  was  committed  for  three  of  them  (Groningen-Drenthe, 
Arnhem-Nijmegen  and  South  East  Brabant). It  was  only  in  1996 that  the  systems  for  monitoring  the 
different  SPDs  became  fully  operational,  enabling  all  financial  information  and  indicators  to  be 
transmitted  in detail. 

Each programme developed  in different  ways: 
• 

in  Groningen-Drenthe  two measures  - the Regional  Technology  Plan  and  measures  relating  to  the 
environment  and  energy  - were  completed  and  will  serve  as  a  basis  for  the  next  phase,  while  the 
measure  assisting  businesses  with  advice,  internationalisation,  technology  and  investment  were  a 
marked  success  and  had  to be allocated  additional  funding.  However, there was some difficulty  in 
engaging  the  interest  of  the  final  beneficiaries  of  the programme,  mainly  because  of  the  diversity 
of administrative procedures  involved; 

• 

•  under  the  Twente  programme,  the Commission  approved  two  venture capital  funds  as  well  as  the 
Regional Technology Plan  which  serves as a framework  for the selection  of technological  projects. 
In  this  programme,  several  measures  -  a  multi-mode  transport  infrastructure  project  and  an 
industrial  infrastructure  project,  financed  by  the  ERDF  and  transport,  distribution  and  tourism 
projects  financed  by  the  ESF  -  are  encountering  difficulties,,  whereas  the  ESF  measure  to  assist 
industry  is  making  rapid  progress.  The  assessment  concludes  that  employment  in  industry  is 
continuing  to fall,  but  that the  measures  to assist  industry  and  help develop  businesses,  which  are 
working well, could help to slow down this decline; 
the  rate of  implementation  in  Arnhem-Nijmegen  is  explained  by  the  fact  that  some  measures  are 
late  (in  particular,  tourism  and  ESF measures).  Strategies  for  assisting  industry  and  tourism  were 
improved,  but  it  was noted  that  sectoral  and  semi-public  organisations  needed  to  participate  more 
actively; 
in  the  case  of  South  East  Brabant,  ESF  financing  was  almost  fully  used  in  1996  and  ERDF 
measures  to  assist  industrial  sites,  business  parks  and  the  working  environment  progressed  well, 
while  those  to  assist  tourism  and  technology  and  training  centres  were  not  so  successful.  The 
assessment  shows  that  the  objectives  of  the programmes  should  be  achieved,  that  the  programme 
schedule  was  complied  with,  there  were  no  difficulties  with  monitoring  or  part-financing,  SMEs 
were effectively  informed  and the first finalised  ESF projects enabled  86% of the unemployed  who 
had taken part in training to find  a job; 
in  South  Limburg  the  programme  was  adjusted  firstly  because  of  indexation,  with  the  resulting 
amount  being  allocated  to  measures  to  assist  tourism  and  technical  assistance  (adaptation  of  the 
monitoring  system),  and  secondly  because  of  the  amounts  not  used  by  the  measures  to  assist 
industry  and  create  new  companies  were transferred  to the  tourism  measure;  the  transfer  is  to  be 
compensated  for in the  1997-99 programme. 

• 

• 

Preparation  of the  1997-99 programming  period 

Preparation  of the  1997-99 programming period began in the second half of  1996. Each of the  projects 
submitted  follows  on  from  measures  in the  1994-96 programming period, but with  some  modification 
of the priorities. For  example, the draft  SPD for  Groningen-Drenthe  places  greater  emphasis  on  local 
employment  initiatives, the economic  importance  of certain  towns and the Regional Technology  Plan, 
and  less on  infrastructure.  Similarly, the quality  of life  and the  local  economy  as well  as  employment 
initiatives  have been  added to the priorities in South East Brabant. Investment  in Twente will  be more 
focused  than  in  the  past  on  future-oriented  sectors  capable  of  creating  jobs  and  diversifying  the 
regional  economy,  which  means that  more financing  will be going to assist  productive  infrastructure, 
technology  and  industry.  Similarly,  the  emphasis  of  the  Arnhem-Nijmegen  draft  programme  will  be 
shifting  from  economic  infrastructures  towards businesses and information  technology. 

246 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fund<: (1996) 

Fie. V-47: Obiective 3 - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million - 1995 prices) 
Priorities 

ESF 

Training  (a) 
Placement  (b) 
Reintegration  (c) 
Technical assistance fd) 

I  SPD 

480.0 
120.0 
277.0 
_____ 
923.0 

Total 

(d) 5% 

(c) 30% 

(b)  13% 

(a)  52% 

The Objective  3 programme progressed according to plan, with the entire annual instalment  (ECU  164 
million)  committed  and  a  total  of  128  900  participants  in  projects  financed  by  the  ESF  (74  900 
receiving  direct  training,  6  460  receiving  counselling  and  47  540  participating  in  reintegration 
projects).  Expenditure  tends  to  concentrate  more  on  the  reintegration  projects  than  on  counselling. 
This  reflects  the  tendency  of  employment  services  to  seek  individual  approaches  to  assist  the 
unemployed  and  the  prograrriming  for  the  following  years  may  be  officially  changed  to  reflect  this 
shift  during the mid-term review. In  1996 ESF financing  of the traineeship  system was also  extended; 
this  system  offers  training  in the work  place, work experience  and  one  day  of  theoretical  training  per 
week. The ESF is also  organising  ways of matching supply  and demand  for  trainees by region  and  by 
sector,  which  will  make  it possible  to place  an  additional  four  to five  thousand  young  trainees  every 
year. 

Financial  implementation  was rather less good  than  in previous years  because  of the time it takes  for 
the  regional  employment  offices  to  submit  projects  under  the  ESF  pan-financing  system.  The 
allocation  of  certain  budgets  to  a  particular  promoter  has  meant  that  in  certain  cases  they  have 
remained  unused  if  the  promoter  did  not  succeed  in  organising  the  project.  The  cost  of  the  projects 
seems  to  have  slightly  increased  because  unemployment  has fallen  in  the Netherlands  and  so  greater 
effort  is now required to help those who remain  unemployed. 

Fie. V-48: Objective 4 - Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million - 1994 prices): 
D_*___.*_. 
Priorities 
Encouraging  interest in training  (a) 
Matching training with needs (b) 
Training programmes  (c) 
Technical  assistance  (d) 

r cr 
ESF 

I 

13.0 
29.1 
106.7 
7.4 
J_-_ 

____l 

(d) 5% 

(a) 8% 

(b) 19% 

I  SPD 

(c) 68% 

The  Objective  4  SPD  finally  started  progressing  at  a steady  pace  in  1996. 69 projects  were  selected 
for  a  total  amount  of  ECU  40  million.  Most  of  them  were  clusters  of  several  businesses  (120  on 
average)  from  the  same  sector  (17  sectors  in  all)  and  they  were  organized  by  the  "O&O"  funds, 
sectoral  training funds  administered  by the social partners. It is estimated  that 41 000 people  received 
training  under  these  projects,  with  25  000  of  them  working  in  SMEs.  Of  the  programme's  three 
priorities,  the  most  financing  goes  to  the  third  priority,  training.  It  seems  that  forecasting  labour 
market  trends  and  the  development  of  training  programmes  is  already  well  developed  in  the 
Netherlands.  Under  the  'Anticipation'  priority,  an  employment  monitoring  system  was  set up,  which 
has already  worked  effectively  in  the  coordination  of  existing efforts  and  which  will  examine  trends 
in  supply  and  demand  on  the  labour  market  and  establish  whether  the  Objective  4  programme  is  in 
step  with  these  trends.  This  programme  is  already  well  known  to  the  target  group  and  is  finding  it 
increasingly difficult  to cope with the large number of project  proposals. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

241 

O B J E C T I VE  5 ( a)  a g r i c u l t u re 

Table V-59: Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million • 1994 prices): 

Total 

118,0 

Measure 
Production 

78.8 
39.2 

.St 
67% 
33% 

Investment  in the modernisation  of production  structures  mainly  went to the housing  of  farm  animals 
in  1995. The  number  of  farms  benefiting  from  investment  aid  in  1995 fell  significantly,  from  918 in 
1993 and 883 in  1994 to 226 in  1995. This fall  is attributed  to the "wait-and-see" attitude of the Dutch 
agricultural  sector  as  a  result  of  trends  in  agricultural  income.  This  is  reflected  in  the  downward 
revision  of expenditure for  1995 (- 43% compared to the forecasts  made in  1994). Since  1993, setting-
up aid fqr young farmers  has no longer been provided. The SPD for product processing and marketing 
began as programmed. Most of the projects are innovative or have an environmental emphasis. For the 
sake  of  simplicity,  in  1996  the  Netherlands  proposed  integrating  the  different  arrangements  for 
investment  aid available under a number of Community  Regulations  into a single legal  instrument  for 
investment  aid. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) fisheries 

Fif.  V-49: Obiective 5(a) Fisheries - Proerammine  1994-99 (ECUmillion). 

Adjustment  and redirection  of fishing  effort  (a) 
Other fishing  fleet  measures  (b) 
Renovation  and modernisation  of  the fishing  fleet  (c) 
A'auaculture  (d) 
Protected  marine areas  (e) 
Port facilities  (f) 
Processing and-marketing of products  (e) 
Promotion  of products  (h) 
Socio-economic measures  (i) 
Other measures  ffl 

Total 

_____ 

8.0 
0,0 
2.2 
US 
0,0 
20,4 
8.5 
6.0 
pm 
0.0 
MA 

(h) 13% 

0 ) 0* 

( a)  17% 

( g ) l 8 % _ ^^ 

I 

* *\ 

(c)5% 

(d) 3% 

(f)  44% 

The  implementation  of  the  programme  on  the  ground  began  with  measures  for  the  adjustment  of 
fishing  effort,  namely the permanent  decommissioning of vessels. Certain projects  concerning the  fish 
processing industry were also launched, whereas implementation  of most of the other measuses under 
the SPD has been relatively  slow. 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)61 

Fie. V^SO: Objective 5(b) - Proerammine 1994-99: 
Population (1000 hab.) 
Area (Km2) 

800 
5405 
ECU million 

(a)  11% 

0 ) 1% 

(»)8% 

Bv Fund: 

5 SPDs 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
Total 

Average per gp; a 

81.8 
17.6 
50.6 
______ 

55% 
12% 
34% 
100% 

30.0 

(c)42% 

D Agricultural and horticultural 
| 

development  (a) 

~  Setting up businesses (b) 

•_ 
•Tourist  infrastructure  (c) 

"Protection of the 
environment  (d) 

•Human  resources  (e) 

I 
j 

1 
i 
! 

! "Technical assistance  (f) 

i 

A  certain  delay  in  the  implementation  of  projects  was  noted  in  the  case  of  one  region  (Groningen-
Drenthe).  The  Commission  insisted  that  the  procedure  for  paying  final  beneficiaries  should  be 
speeded  up.  In  September  1996  the  Cornmission  approved  an  amendment  Qf  the  Overijssel  SPD 
concerning  a  transfer  between  two  measures,  and  at  the  end  of  1996  the  province  of  Limburg  also 

61  E l i g i b le  a r e a s:  F r i e s l a n d,  G r o n i n g e n - D r e n t h e,  L i m b u r g,  Overijssel,  Z e e l a n d. 

<?  J 

CHAPTER! 

IMPLEMENTATION OF PROGRAMMING 

248 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

submitted  a request  for  an  amendment. The Monitoring  Committees  in  the  various  provinces  decided 
to reserve the amounts derived  from  the indexation  of the programmes  (1995/96) for  1999. One of  the 
most  important  aspects  of  their  work  was  assessment.  It  was  organized  at  national  level  by  the 
Ministers  for  Agriculture  and  Economic  Affairs.  The  mid-term  assessment  will  be  conducted  by  the 
same  external  agency  for  each  region  and  the  final  reports  will  be  presented  at  the  end  of  the  first 
quarter of  1997. 

Table V-40:  Netherlands - Assistance by Objective -1996 in the context of programming for  1994/99 (ECU 

million) 

Programmes 
(year of adoption) 

OhiectiyeJ 
SPD Flevoland HQ94Ï 
Obiective 2" 
SPD Arnhem-Nijmegen (1994) 
SPD Groningen-Drenthe (1994) 
SPD Twente-Overijssel  (1994) 
SPD South Limburg (1994) 
SPD South  East Brabant (10941 

Total 

Obiective 3 
SPD Nerherlands (19941 
Obiective 4 
SPD Netherlands fl9941 
Obiective 5(a) agriculture 
Netherlands forecasts  R. 2328/91 (1994) 
SPD Netherlands R  866 nnd 867/90 (1 994> 

1 

1 

Total 

Total cost 

S.F. 
assistance 
(1) 

Commitments Commitments 

% 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(l) 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 
(3) 

% 

(3vm 

1 

958.7| 

150.0| 

4.8l 

42.0l 

28*1 

11.81 

31.51 

2 1* 

173,1 
195,9 
156.4 
102,9 
169.6 
798.0 

45.6 
54,8 
49.0 
29.5 
45.3 
224,1 

2U 
16,7 
24,5 
12,0 
24.6 
99.1 

39.2 
50.0 
43,0 
25.8 
46.0 
204.2 

86% 
91% 
88% 
87% 
102* 
91% 

3,8 
13,3 
8.2 
1,4 
12.6 
39.3 

12,7 
30,0 
17,5 
8,3 
23.3 
91.8 

28% 
55% 
36% 
28% 
51% 
41% 

2.219.71 

935.31 

152.21 

434.51 

46*1 

124.61 

377.9! 

40% 

363.61 

156.21 

O.ol 

22.21 

14*1 

O.Ol 

ll.ll 

7* 

461,7 
313.7 
775.3 

78,8 
39.2 
118,0 

2,1 
6.9 
9.1 

20,8 
13.5 
34,3 

26% 
34% 
29% 

1.2 
5.3 
6.5 

8,1 
10.5 
18.6 

10% 
2 7* 
16% 

Obiective 5(a) fisheries 
SPD Netherlands fl994) 
Obiective 5(b) 
SPD Friesland (1994) 
SPD Groningen-Drenthe  (1994) 
SPD Limburg (1994) 
SPD Overijssel  (1994) 
SPD 7-Hand  (1994) 

TOTAL 
* After deduction of transfers to 1997-99 

Total 

I 

127.51 

46.61 

6.4| 

15.51 

33*1 

6.5l 

12.71 

2 7* 

266,9 
157,4 
48.4 
70,2 
49.2 
592.1 
5.834.9 

68,7 
34.9 
19,1 
15.5 
11.8 
150.0 
\Wà 

6.7 
1.5 
5.0 
1,6 
0.8 
15.6 
PPA 

19.3 
5.7 
7,3 
4.9 
3.9 
412 
793,9 

28% 
16% 
38% 
32% 
3 3* 
27% 
45% 

5.1 
1.0 
3.3 
2.3 
0.9 
12.7 
?0i,4 

10.3 
3.1 
4.5 
3.9 
3.4 
25,3 
568,9 

15% 
9% 
24% 
25% 
2 9* 
17% 
32% 

10.2. 

Implementation  of the Community Initiatives in  1996 

Note: 
The  Netherlands  is not participating  in the Rechar  or Regis  Initiatives.  Twelve  CEPs  (Community  Initiative 
programmes)  at national  level  were  adopted  in 1994  and 1995 for all the Initiatives, to which 7 Interreg CEPs 
should  be added. At the end of  1995,  only the Konver  CIP remained  to be adopted,  and this was approved in 
1996. 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in the Netherlands : 
Most  of the  Dutch  CIPs  contain  measures  to support  technological  development.  In  this  respect,  the SMEs 
programme  provides  not only for  the development  of telecommunications  as a basic factor  in the constitution 
of  networks  between  businesses,  but also, on the RTD side, several  measures  to promote  the introduction of 
new  procedures,  techniques  and products,  as  well  as  cooperation  with  research  centres  (e.g. open  days, 
exchange  projects,  training  on the job) and the transfer of technology.  Furthermore,  one of the  programme's 
strands  focuses  on new information  systems,  aiming  to  introduce  new technologies  into  businesses.  Under 
Interreg,  certain programmes  have  introduced support  measures for  telecommunications.  Some  programmes 
involving 
telecommunications 
infrastructure,  as is also  the case for  the Netherlands  and Belgium,  to provide  connections  with  the trans-
European  electronic  networks.  On the RTD side,  cooperation  programmes  between  the Netherlands  and 
Belgium  and the Netherlands,  Belgium and Germany provide  support for  cooperation  between  businesses and 
research  centres, as well as technology  transfer to stimulate  innovation and the modernisation  of  production 
procedures  and  products. 
In  the  case  of  the industrial  conversion  Initiatives,  in Ijmond  Résider  is promoting  new technologies  and 
industrial  development  as well as nerworks in the industrial and service  sectors,  with  the help  of a  grant of 
ECU 3.7 million  (iota! cost: ECU 9. J million) for business  innovation  and creation.  The Retex  programme  is 

the  Netherlands  and  Germany  give  priority  to  the  reinforcement  of 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

249 

also providing  support for  technological  development and innovation in the Twente region. 
Under  the Employment,  initiative,  the Horizon  strand facilitates  the  integration  of  handicapped  people  and 
disadvantaged  groups  into  the  labour  market  through  the  development  of  distance  working  and  the 
introduction  of flexible  training systems such as distance  learning and interactive education. 

The Konver CEP was finally  adopted by the Commission  in March  1996. It covers eight Dutch  regions 
(Kop  van  Noord-Holand,  The  Hague/Delft,  Rijnmond,  Walcheren,  part  of  the  province  of  Utrecht, 
Veluwe,  Amhem/Nijmegen  and  North  West  Brabant),  and  focuses  mainly  on  the  conversion  of 
defence-related  industries,  the  stimulation  of  innovation,  the  revitalisation  of  industrial  sites,  the 
development  of  tourism  and  training.  The  decision  on  the  allocation  of  the  Community  Initiative 
reserve  will  give  this  programme  an  extra  ECU  15.1 million  and  extends  it  to  1999. 49%  of  the  first 
advance has already been allocated to projects  by the Dutch authorities and the programme is arousing 
great  interest, with a large number of applications by project  managers. 

The Corrtmission's decision  on the Community Initiatives will give an extra ECU  184.55 million  to the 
Netherlands.  Apart  from  the  sum  allocated  to  Konver,  this  amount  has  been  distributed  among  the 
Adapt, Employment, Leader, Pesca, Résider, Urban  and Interreg Initiatives62. In the case of Interreg LI 
C,  under  the  flood  prevention  strand,  the  Netherlands  will  receive  ECU  100 million  to  implement  a 
programme  in  the  Meuse-Rhine  basin.  This  programme  was  drawn  up  at  the  end  of  1996  in 
cooperation  with the Belgian, German, French, and Luxembourg authorities and will have a Structural 
Funds package of ECU  135 million  at its disposal (in addition to the sum allocated to the Netherlands, 
the  package  is  distributed  as  follows:  Belgium:  ECU  7.5 million;  Germany:  24.9 million;  France: 
2.6 million; no budget for Luxembourg). 

As  regards  existing  programmes,  the  Résider  (Ijmond)  programme  wjll  be  extended  to  1999  and 
allocated  an additional ECU 5 million from  the reserve. The programme  is succeeding well: at the end 
of  1996, 70%  of  the  Structural  Funds  package  was  committed  to projects  and  the  total  cost  will  rise 
from  ECU 50 million to ECU  100 million because national, regional and private part-financing  will be 
higher than  initially  envisaged. The aid scheme for  advice for  SMEs has been  particularly  successful, 
especially  because  of  the  great  demand  for  ISO certifications,  which  has  meant  that  funding  for  this 
measure  has  had  to  be  doubled.  The  Retex  Initiative  has  been  integrated  as  a  measure  under  the 
Objective  2  SPD  for  Twente  to  encourage  SMEs  to  innovate,  and  it  has  already  paid  out  50%  of  its 
allocation.  The  SMEs  CEP  started  up  in  1996  and  65%  of  its  annual  instalment  for  1996  was 
committed  to  projects,  which  means  that  it  is  behind  schedule.  There  are,  however,  considerable 
differences  from  measure  to  measure:  the  measures  to  assist  technology  projects,  exchanges  of 
experience  and  the  networking  of  demonstration  projects  are  going  well,  while  others  such  as 
demonstration  centres,  RTD  centres  and  the  introduction  of  new  technologies  in  SMEs,  still  need 
more work. 

Under  the  Urban  Initiative  the  two  first  programmes  -  for  Amsterdam  and  The  Hague  -  started  up 
relatively  late  because  of  hesitations  by  the  Dutch  authorities  about  which  cities  to  choose.  In  1996 
important  work  was  done  under  the  Amsterdam  programme.  The  Dutch  authorities  also  decided  to 
allocate an additional  ECU  13.1 million from  the reserve to two new  CEPs for  Rotterdam  and  Utrecht, 
programmes  for  which  were  presented  at  the  end  of  1996.  In  the  case  of  Pesca,  the  ECU  2  million 
extra  allocated  from  the  reserve  will  go  to  non-Objective  1  areas.  The  implementation  of  this 
programme  is,  however,  relatively  slow,  both  within  and  outside  the  Objective  1 area,  in  particular 
because  of  internal  coordination  difficulties  arising  from  the  fact  that  several  Structural  Funds  and 
national  authorities  (the Ministry, local authorities, etc.) are involved  in  part-financing. 

See also Chapter I.B.I. Community  Initiatives. 

250 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

The four Leader programmes have been progressing satisfactorily  and the network of the four eligible 
regions  is  operational.  The  assessment  will  cover  all  four  programmes  with  a  specific  separate 
analysis for each region and will be carried out by the same external agency. In Flevoland the projects 
selected  have  three  priorities:  reducing the  vulnerability  of  the  agricultural  sector,  strengthening  the 
tourism sector and increasing the viability of villages. 

Under the Employment Initiative, 41 projects (15 Now projects,  17 Horizon projects and 9 Youthstart 
projects) were selected in  1995 and began at the end of that year and the beginning of  1996. The Now 
projects  focus  above  all  on  women  in ethnic  minorities  and on  social  welfare.  The Horizon  projects 
for  handicapped  people  support  the  development  of  a model  of  "accompanied  employment",  while 
those  to  assist  disadvantaged  young  people  concentrate  in  particular  on  the  long-term  unemployed. 
The Youthstart projects mainly concern young people of foreign  origin with few  or no  qualifications. 
The Dutch authorities presented a revised draft of the programme inserting a new strand, Integra, and 
arrangements  have  been  made  to  launch  an  invitation  for  projects  as  part  of  the  second  series  of 
Employment  projects  in  1997. Under the Adapt programme 67  projects  became operational  in  1996. 
Particular  priority  is  given  to  SMEs  and  support  is  provided  for  new  businesses  as  potential  job-
creators.  The  projects  also  concern  the transfer  of  know-how  and  expertise  from  big  companies  to 
small  ones,  cooperation  between  SMEs  and  R&D  and  training  institutions,  and  improving 
opportunities for women on the labour market. Another revision of the CLP was proposed to include a 
new  strand, Adapt (a), and in this case too arrangements have been made to launch  an invitation  for 
projects  at  the  same  time  as  the  second  1997  series  of  Adapt  projects.  A  conference  to  stimulate 
interest in this new strand among project promoters was held in October 1997. 

Table V-41:  Netherlands 

Community Initiatives -1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 (ECU 

million) 

Initiative 
(number  of  proes.) 

Total  cost 

S.F. 
assistance* 
(1) 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
(21 

% 

(?)/fl) 

Pavments 
1996 

Pavments 
1994-96 
f?) 

142.8 
91.4 
35.2 
34.2 
26.9 
32.0 
51.5 
3.5 
87.9 

505.3 

57.6 
42.4 
8,5 
10.6 
10,3 
12,0 
18.1 
1.0 
9,3 
169.9 

0.0 
2.2 
0.0 
9.3 
0.8 
11,0 
0,0 
0,0 
0.0 
23.4 

11.5 
6.5 
8.2 
10.5 
10,3 
11,0 
18.1 
1.0 
7.9 
85.0 

20% 
15% 
97% 
99% 
100% 
91% 
100% 
100% 
85% 
50% 

0.0 
1.1 
0.0 
1.1 
0,2 
3,3 
1.0 
0.0 
0.0 
6.8 

5.8 
3.2 
2.5 
1.7 
3.1 
3.3 
8.4 
0.5 
2.4 
30.8 

% 

10% 
8% 
29% 
16% 
30% 
27% 
46% 
50% 
25% 
18% 

Adapt  (1) 
Employment  (1) 
Leader(4) 
Pesca  (1) 
SMEs(l) 
Konver (1) 
Résider (1) 
Retex (1) 
Urban  (2) 
Total  (13) 
Interree/Reeen  (7)** 

CIPs adopted  in  1996: 

KQBYEL 

Excluding  reserve 
* For programme  details  see Chapter VII. Table : 

32.0 

12.0 

11.0 

11.0 

91% 

3.3 

3.3 

2 7* 

8th Annual  Report  on  the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

251 

11.  AUSTRIA 

11.1. 

Implementation  of assistance  bv Obiective  in 1996 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in the regions of Austria: 
Objective  1: The Burgenland  SPD seeks to boost commerce, industry and  tourism  by stimulating  RTD and to 
improve  the quality  of life by generating  a  climate  inducive  to innovation  and technological  development. 
Allocated  ECU  15.5 million  (total  cost:  ECU 82.6 million),  this  priority  comprises  measures  to  assist 
enterprises  geared  to  technology  and  innovation,  telecommunications  networks  and  applications,  the 
construction  of, and provision  of  equipment for,  technology  centres  and technical  high  schools,  and  the 
staffing  of technology  transfer  centres.  Under other priorities,  targets for assistance  also  include  training in 
RTD skills for  the unemployed and young people and back-up in the realm of technological  know-how. 
Objective 2: All Austrian  SPDs  under Objective 2 comprise support measures for  technological  development: 
•  Upper Austria:  development  of technology  infrastructures  (e.g.  FA7AT  - centre for  innovation in 
the  field  of  technology 
training  centres,  allocated 
transfer)  and  basic  and  in-service 
ECU 4.3 million  (total cost: ECU 17.7 million); support for  RTD,  including innovation  in products 
and production  processes  (ECU 1.3 million; total cost: ECU 19.6 million); 

•  Lower  Austria:  support for  RTD to bring  the region's  level  of  industrial  technology  up to the 
national  average,  give  the region  a  technological  bias,  set up national  and  international-scale 
research  establishments  and  improve  technology  transfers  to  regional  SMEs;  support  for 
innovative  SMEs; 

•  Styria:  support for  technology  and innovation  transfers  to  SMEs  and back-up for  cooperative 
research  projects  in  enterprises  (ECU 5.8 million;  total  cost:  ECU 49.4 million);  developing 
human resources RTD capacity (ECU 2 million; total cost: ECU 4.9 million); 

•  Vorarlberg: 

investment  and  RTD  projects 

(ECU 4 million; 

total  cost:  ECU 56.8  million); 

improving know-how  (ECU 1 million; total cost: ECU 5.9  million). 

Objective  5(b): The Objective  5(b) SPDs  provide  support for  technological  development  as a  means of 
developing  economic activity and creating jobs  in rural areas: 

* ' 

•  Lower  Austria:  300  agricultural 
enterprises and research centres; 

innovation  projects; 

technological  cooperation  between 

•  Styria  and Vorarlberg:  conversion of industrial and  marketing  activities  through the development 

of technology  transfer; 

•  Carinthia: RTD in agriculture. 

Overall, Structural  Fund appropriations flowing  into technological development  in Austria amount  to 14% of 
Community funding  (Objectives  1 and 2). 

Table  V-42: 

Austria - Funding directly linked to technological development  in 1994-99 (ECU  million) 

TOTAL 

SF 

J2L 
27< 

82,6 

15,5 
Objective  1 
____________ 
21.7 
_2L 
TOTAL 
NB: The programming procedures and different  approaches taken by the Member States 

40,2 
166.2 

228.5 

JOQS 

311.1 

206.4 

67.6 

40.7 

26,9 

73J 

206.9 
274.0 

_&_ 
19% 
9% 
i___ 

Public  Private 

Member  State 
Total 
67,1 

Financing by the Structural  Funds 

11% 

ft 
81% 

91% 
____ 

invite caution in interpreting the figures, in particular spending on information  society projects, 

89% 

which are often linked to other fields such as industry and RTD. 

The amounts under Objective  1  refer only to the RTD priority. 

The amounts relating to Objective 2 do not take account of RTD measures covered by the human 

resources priority in the Stvria SPD. 

I RTD "Telecom. 

252 

OBJECTIVE l63 

Fie. V-51: Proerammine 1995-99 (ECU million): 
Priorities: 
Trade and industry (a) 
Research and development (b) 
Tourism (c) 
Agriculture and environment (d) 
Promoting growth and job stability (e) 
Technical assistance (f) 
Breakdown bv Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
Total 

107,64 
33,12 
24,84 
______ 

J SPD 

Main features  of  1996 

56.8 
15.5 
58.7 
24.2 
26.3 
4J 

65% 
20% 
15% 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

(e) 16% 

(d)15% 

(a) 35% 

(c)24% 

(b) 10% 

In  1996  major  progress  was  accomplished  in  the  implementation  of  the  Burgenland  SPD,  where 
implementation  has reached  a satisfactory  level  after a difficult  starting-up period and is now  in line 
with  the  forecasts.  At  the  end  of  1996,  the  competent  federal  and  Land  authorities  had  approved 
projects  entailing  an  ERDF  contribution  of  some  ECU 60 million  (36%  of  assistance  in  1995-99). 
Progress was especially marked in measures providing direct aid for productive investment in industry 
and  in  those  geared  to  improving  tourism  potential  and  business  infrastructures  (industrial  estates, 
science parks, etc.). The Austrian authorities approved a number of strategic projects in each of these 
areas  during  the  year  (e.g.  major  industrial  investment  projects  like  Leocell  in  Heiligenkreuz  and 
Strohal in Mullendorf,  the Technologiezentrum in Eisenstadt, and the Rogner GolfSchaukel project in 
Stegersbach).  Similar progress  was recorded in rural development  measures. Significant  results have 
been  achieved  in the creation  of  alternative  employment  in rural areas  and in the field  of  renewable 
energy  resources. Much effort  has been  spent on  strengthening  agricultural  holdings,  setting up new 
marketing structures and creating new income opportunities in tourism (spa and sports activities). 

1996 in the context  of programming for  1995-99 

In terms of  financial  implementation,  starting-up problems  led to delays  in payments  during the  first 
half-year.  Despite  considerable  improvement  in  the  fourth  quarter,  it proved  impossible  to  start  the 
1996 ERDF and EAGGF instalment before the year closed. 

63  Eligible  area:  Burgenland. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

253 

OBJECTIVE  2M 

Fie. V-52: Proerammine 1995-99 (ECU million -1995 prices): 

Priorities: 
Investment in business (including  tourism) 

(a) 
R&D. innovation, technology transfer  (b) 
Support infrastructures  (c) 
Training  and  retraining  (d) 
Technical  assistance  (e) 
Breakdown  bv  Fund: 

' 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

70,246 
30,754 
101.9 

4  SPDs 

Average ner  SPD 

Main features  of  1996 

40,8 
10.2 
16.7 
30.5 

70% 
30% 

25.3 

(e) 3% 

(d) 30% 

(a) 40% 

(c) 17% 

(b) 10% 

1996 saw satisfactory  progress in the implementation  of the four  SPDs adopted  in  1995 for  the period 
1995-99.  Take-up  of  funding  was  generally  highly  satisfactory  in  the  case  of  measures  to  assist 
productive  investment.  In  certain  cases,  measures  of  a more  innovative  character  are  lagging  behind 
and  they  should  be publicized to a greater extent. At the end  of the year, appropriations  committed  to 
selected  projects  accounted  for  34%  of  those  available  for  the  whole  programming  period  and 21% 
had  been  paid  to the final  recipients. The Monitoring  Committees  held  two meetings  in  1996. At  the 
first,  the  membership  of  the  Committees  was  approved  and  the  Austrian  authorities  provided 
additional  information  on the practical arrangements for implementing the programmes. 

1996 in the  context  of programming  for  1995-99 

As  the  SPDs  were  only  approved  in  November  1995,  implementation  could  not  commence  before 
1996. Nevertheless, the possibility  of retroactive application  made  it possible to catch up most  of  the 
time  lost  in  1995. Commitments  and  payments  for  the  four  programmes  as  a whole  are now  in  line 
with programming in the SPDs. 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

Fie. V-53: Objective 3: Proeammine for 1995-99 (ECU million 
Priorities 

1995 prices): 
ESF 

Support for  categories  hit by  structural 
changes(a) 
Integration  of  long-term  unemployed,  the 
elderly  and persons threatened  with 
exclusion  (b) 
Integration  of handicapped  (c) 
Vocational  integration  of young DeoDle (d) 
Promoting  equal  opportunities  for men  and 
women  (e) 
Technical assistance (f 

1SPD 

25,8 

113,8 
95.2 
22.9 

61,1 

(f) 5% 

(a) 8% 

(e)  18 

(d) 7% 

(c) 29% 

(b) 33% 

T?tal 

334.0 

During  1995  and  up  to  31  May  1996, around  28  100 persons  received  assistance  under  measures  in 
the  SPD  for  Objective  3  (26 700  for  projects  for  skill  improvement  and  aid  for  employment,  the 
remainder  being  for  the  use  of  consultancy  and  monitoring  structures).  Most  of  the  projects  (70%) 
entail  the  participation  of  up  to  20  persons  only,  there  being  numerous  small-scale  projects  in  the 
priorities  targeting  the  integration  of  handicapped  persons  and  the  promotion  of  equal  opportunities 
for  men  and  women. Aid for  the integration  of  young people  into working  life  has become  necessary 

64  Eligibles areas: Lower Austria, Upper Austria, Styria and Vorarlberg. 

254 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

in Austria,  where unemployed  below the age of 25  numbered 49 000 in January  1997  (in the case  of 
females, this represents a 2.6% rise over January  1996). Measures for the vocational  integration of the 
handicapped  constitute  a  new  approach  for  the  authorities,  which  were  only  concerned  with 
handicapped  persons  with jobs  prior to the Objective 3 programme.  Suitable  structures for providing 
advice  and guidance,  improving  skills  and implementing  aid for employment  had therefore  to  be set 
up in  1996, which slowed down the implementation of the programme though time lost will be caught 
up in  1997. To promote equal  opportunities for men and women,  one example  of  a measure  adopted 
in  1996 involves  increasing the number of places for girls to learn skills in occupations dominated by 
men  (4 000  to  6 000  places  per  month).  Measures  to  encourage  the  integration  of  long-term 
unemployed  into  the job  market  were  initiated  in  1996  and  have  achieved  very  convincing  results, 
with 500 persons finding  a job and 80% of the enterprises surveyed indicating they were aware of the 
programme. 

Fig.  V-54: Objective 4: Proerammine 1995-99 (ECU million - 1995 prices): 
Priorities 
Anticipating  labour market trends  and 
upgrading  of  skills  (a) 
Vocational  training  (b) 
Improving  and  developing  vocational 
training  (c) 
Technical  assistance  (à) 

ESF 

4-5 
46.0 

8,4 

1SPD 

•Total 

2.1 
61.0 

(C)14% 

(d) 3% (a) 7% 

(b) 76% 

At  the  end  of  October  1996,  20 882  persons  had  benefited  under  measures  provided  for  in  the 
Objective  1 SPD. The  latter centered  on  the training  of  workers  with  insufficient  skills,  supervisory 
staff,  and short-time and seasonal  workers (19  169 persons). These figures  far exceed  forecasts.  Two 
thirds of these persons fall between 25 and 45, 20% are older, and more than one quarter are women. 
If the prograrnme is to succeed, enterprises' awareness and motivation must be stepped up. Thanks to 
effective  public-awareness  measures  by  the  Austrian  employment  authorities,  the  number  of 
employers concerned is actually  rising. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) agriculture 

Table V-43: Proerammine for 1995-99 (ECU million - prices and status 1996). 

Total 

392,8 

Measure 
Production 
Marketing 

330,5 
62.3 

__ 
84% 
16% 

1996 was the first year of full-scale  application of assistance to improve production structures, forecasts 
for  the  implementation  of  which  were  approved  by  the  Commission  in  1995.  The  assistance  covers 
investment aid, aid for young farmers, investment aid in less-favoured  areas, and aid to adapt vocational 
training  to  the  requirements  of  modern  agriculture.  Community  funding  for  production  structures 
(ECU 330.5 million)  comprised  ECU 60.7 million  for  investment  aid,  ECU 37 million  for  young 
farmers, ECU 1.2'million for vocational training and ECU 220.5 million for less-favoured  areas. Austria 
has  requested  adjustments  to  the  system  for  classifying  less-favoured  areas  established  in  1995,  on 
account  of  difficulties  arising  in  certain  regions.  The  Community  contribution  (ECU 62.3 million) 
towards  improving  structures  for  the  processing  and  marketing  of  products  forms  part  of  total 
investments  amounting  to  ECU 913 million.  At  the  end  of  1996,  approximately  44%  of  the  total 
investment  planned had already  been committed  to  189 approved projects. The most  advanced  sectors 
are meat (56 projects  and 45% of total assistance committed), milk and milk products (34 projects and 
26% of the total cornmitted) and fruit and vegetables (32 projects and 22% of the total committed). 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

255 

OBJECTIVE 5(a)  fisheries 

Fie.  V-5S: Objective.5(a)  fisheries  - Proerammine  1995-99  (ECU  million). 

Adjustment and redirection of fishing effort  (a) 
Other fishing fleet measures (b) 
Renovation and modernisation of the fishing fleet (c) 
Aauaculture (d) 
Protected marine areas (e) 
Port facilities  (f) 
Processing and marketing of products (g) 
Promotion of products (h) 
Socio-economic measures (i) 
Other measures (i) 

__ 

Total 

FTFG,. 

0.0 
0,0 
0.0 
1.1 
0.0 
0.0 
0.9 
0.0 
pm 
0.0 
___ 

(h)  2% 

(g)  44% 

(d)  54% 

After  the  programme's  adoption  in  July  1995  and  its  administrative  preparation  (rules  of  procedure, 
project  selection  criteria,  etc.),  1996  was  devoted  to  practical  implementation.  At  the  end  of  1996, 
75 projects  had  been  selected  and  were  in  various  stages  of  implementation.  An  interim  assessment 
report was expected by mid-1997. 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)65 

Fie. V-56: Obiective S(h) - Prorramminr 199S-99: 
Population ('000 inhab.) 
Area (km2) 

2.276 
_______ 

ECU million 

(f)17% 

( 9)  1% 

(a) 28% 

Breakdown  bv  Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
Total 

175.0 
71.8 
164,2 

411.0 

7  SPD 

Average ner SPDl 

(e)4% 

43% 
17% 
40% 
______ 

58.7 

O Diversification and development 
of agriculture and forestry  (a) 

H Diversification and development 
of non-agricultural sectors (b) 

•Protection of the environment (c) 

"Tourism (d) 

•  Local development and village 

(b) 28% 

renovation (e) 

D Human resources (f ) 
•Technical assistance (g) 

Implementation  of appropriations for the seven  SPDs has been fairly  satisfactory  bearing in mind that 
1996 was the first  year of operation  of the programmes. Take-up of commitment  appropriations  under 
the  three  Funds  in the  Member  State  amounts  to  36% of  forecasts  for  the  whole  period.  Community 
payment appropriations  stand at 60% of commitment  appropriations. 

65  Eligibles areas: Lower Austria, Carinthia, Upper Austria,  Salzburg, Styria, Tyrol and Vorarlberg. 

256 

8th Annual Repon on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Table  V-44:  Austria  -  Assistance  by  objective  -  1996 in  the  context  of  programming  for  1995-99 

(ECU  million) 

Programmes 

(year of adoption) 

Total cost 

Qhjtctivf 1 
SPDftnr-enlnnrWIOO^ 

Objective 2 
SPD  Lower Austria  (1995) 
SPD  Upper Austria  (1995) 
SPD Styria  (1995) 
SPDyorarlheroMOQM 

_2bic£i_____ 
SPD Austria M »W 

Objective 4 

SPP Austria (l???) 
Objective  5(a)  agriculture 

SF 
assistance 
m 

Commitments! Commitments 

1996 

I 
1995-96 
L_j___ 

_____ 

Payments 

1996 

Payments 
1995-96 

own 

831,4| 

165,61 

_5J>I 

33.81 

20%l 

12.61 

27.0l 

199.2 
67,0 
463,4 
86Ji 

816,1 

22.4 

10,8 

58,0 
9.9 
101,0 

0.0 
0,0 
11.4 
0,0] 

11,4 

22,4 
10.8 
22.5 
9.9 

65.5 

100% 
100% 
39% 
100% 
65% 

0.0 

1.4 

10.2 
___ 
11.6 

7,6 
5.4 
15.7 

_ 4J 
33.0 

Total 

779,31 

334,01 

65.71 

129,81 

.39% I 

71.81 

103.1 

_____ 

34% 
50% 
27% 
44% 
33% 

_____ 

17I.4| 

61,01 

0,01 

11,71 

19% I 

__-L 

57,8 
J12. 

9.41 

15% 

88,6 

1Q.3 
107.91 

27Î 
JVI5 

27% 

Forecast  Austria R. 2328/91  (1995) 

ISPP Austria R, gffi and M 7W (19K» 

1.240,7 

912,9 

Total 

2.153.5 

330.5 

62.3 
392.8 

44.8 
31,2 
75.9 

106.3 

31,2 
137.4 

32% 

.50% 
35% 

Objective f(a) fisheries 
SPpAustn?(19?5) 

Objective fft>> 
SPD Lower Austria  ( 1995) 
SPD Carinthia  (1995) 
SPD  Upper  Austria  (1995) 
SPD  Salzburg  (1995) 
SPD  Styria  (1995) 
SPD Tyrol  (1995) 

lsppyoraritagfl9?5) 

TOTAL 

22,51 

2.01 

0.01 

2.01 

|00%! 

O.sl 

LQ! 

50% 

762,7 
404,8 
539,3 
104,3 
629,1 
1 8U 
58.3 

111.6 
58,0 
98.5 
16,0 
85.3 
34,4 
7,2 

Total 

2.679.9 

7.454.0 

411,0 

1.467.4 

12,7 
11.3 
1U 

1,8 
10.0 
4,0 
0,6 

51.6 

209.6 

33,9 
22.3 
30.1 
4.8 
26.2 
10,7 
__L0 

130,0 

510,1 

30% 
38% 
3 1% 
30% 

3 1% 
3 1% 
.27%! 

32% 
.35*; 

8,3 
4,1 
8.2 
12 
12,9 
4.0 
0.7 

39.3 

216,7 

18.9 
9,6 

17,6 
2.7 
20,9 
7,3 
1,4: 
78,5 

360.6 

17% 
17% 
18% 
17% 
25% 
2 1% 
19% 

19% 

25% 

11.2. 

Implementation of the  Comrn units  Initiatives in 1996 

Note-
Austria, is not involved in Konver, Pesca or Regis. Of the new Member  States, Austria has adopted  the highest 
number of programmes  since  1995, i.e. four  implemented  at national  level  and  four  Interreg  programmes (all 
with  countries  of central  and eastern  Europe,  namely  Hungary,  the  Czech  Republic,  Slovakia  and  Slovenia). 
The  remaining  programmes  (Urban,  SMEs,  Rechar,  Résider,  Retex,  eight  Leader  and Interreg  programmes 
with Germany and Interreg with Italy) were all adopted in 1996 with the exception of the Austria-Italy  Interreg 
programme. 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in Austria: 
The  Initiatives  contributing  most  towards  strengthening  Austria's 
technological  fabric  are  the  SMEs 
programme  and  certain industrial conversion Initiatives. The SMEs  programme  devotes  the greater pan  of its 
funds  to the  introduction  of advanced  electronic data  transmission  in SMEs  and  clean, more  energy-efficient 
technology  (ECU 3.8 million;  total  cost:  ECU 18.8 million).  It  provides  backing  for  the 
production 
implementation  of pilot projects  (ECU 2.2 million;  total cost: ECU 8.5 million - e.g. setting-up  of telecentres, 
establishment  of  virtual  enterprises,  etc.),  the development  of  distance  training  courses  and support  for 
training  needed  for  the  introduction  of  new  environmental  technology  and  telematics  applications 
(ECU  1.3 million;  total cost: ECU 3.2 million). 
In  the  field  of  industrial  conversion  Initiatives,  the Rechar  programme  supports  the introduction  of  new 
technology  in the district ofVoitsberg  and  the municipalities of Pantaleon  and Ampflwang,  while  the  Résider 
programme  relates to economic diversification  in regions affected  by the declining  steel industry  through the 
development  of  new  environmentally-friendly  processes  and  materials,  technology  transfer,  technology 
advisory  services  to enterprises, and support for  the latters'  technology  infrastructure. In addition,  the Retex 
programme  provides  backing for the modernisation  of the textile and  clothing  industry and the  development 
of the tertiary  sector  through  better know-how  (e.g. encouraging  the development  of production  technologies 
and new products,  promoting  innovation, etc.) and  vocational training  in new methods and technology. 

13  new CEPs  were  adopted  under  national  programmes  and one under  Interreg.  The second  Urban 
programme  for Graz  was  adopted  in October.  It covers  the Gries  area,  which  has 16 000  inhabitants, 
and  will  finance  an integrated  set of economic,  social  and  infrastructure  measures.  Quantitative  targets 
were  set under  the  programme,  including  the creation  of some  350  new  jobs.  For its part,  the Urban 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Fund1! (1996) 

257 

programme  for  Vienna  was  adopted  in  December  1995.  The  first  meeting  of  the  Monitoring 
Committee  took  place  on  15 May  1996. The  SMEs  programme  was  adopted-in  April  1996,  covering 
all  areas  eligible  under  Objectives  1,  2  and  5(b).  It  focuses  on  measures  to  encourage  the  use  of 
information  technologies,  environmentally  friendlier  production  techniques  and  strategic  planning  in 
SMEs. 

The  three  industrial  conversion  CIPs  were  also  adopted.  The  Retex  programme,  adopted  in  May, 
covers  various  parts  of  areas  eligible  under  Objectives  2  and  5(b)  (Lower  Austria,  Styria  and 
Vorarlberg),  and  is mainly  geared  to  measures  to improve  technical  knowledge, cooperation  projects 
and  vocational  training.  Adopted  in  July,  the  Rechar  CIP  covers  the  area  of  Styria  falling  within 
Objective  2  and  that  of  Upper  Austria  falling  within  Objective  5(b).  Funds  are  largely  allocated  to 
assistance for  new technologies, promoting services and tourism, the rehabilitation  of old pitheads and 
training measures. The programme  is overseen  by the Monitoring Committees competent for the areas 
concerned  under  Objectives  2 and  5(b). Lastly,  the  Résider programme,  also  adopted  in  July,  covers 
regions  in  Styria,  Lower  Austria  and  Upper  Austria,  with  the  appropriations  being  allocated 
principally  to  innovation  in the steel  industry  for  materials  or production  techniques, the  introduction 
of new  technologies  and  quality  control  in SMEs, and  training. Like the Rechar CLP, this  programme 
is  overseen  by  the  Monitoring  Committees  competent  for  the  various  areas  concerned  under 
Objective  2. 

Lastly,  eight  Leader  CIPs  were  adopted  in  1996,  comprising  seven  regional  programmes  and  one 
technical  assistance  programme  relating  to  the  national  network  of  local  groups.  The  regional  CIPs 
entail  ECU 20.6 million  in  Community  financing  out  of  a  total  estimated  cost  of  ECU 65.4 million. 
26 LAGs  were  set up and,  in  line with  the strengths  and  weaknesses  of their regions, opted  for  fairly 
widely diverging objectives. Some LAGs, albeit a minority, chose areas of technological  development 
or research.  In  Burgenland  (Objective  1 ),  the  projects  selected  by  the Leader  groups  seek  to  achieve 
sustainable  development.  Owing to administrative  problems,  the  programme  took  time  to  get  off  the 
ground but implementation  is now going well. 

The  human  resources  programmes  were  adopted  in  1995.  Under  Employment,  54  projects  were 
selected  in  1996  pursuant  to  the  last  call  for  proposals  (16  Now,  17  Horizon,  9  Integra  and  12 
Youthstart  projects),  the  programme  being  incorporated  into  the  new  Integra  section.  The  Now 
projects  concentrate  on  employment  and  the training  of  women  in frontier  technology  sectors  and  on 
their access  to management  posts and  the establishment  of enterprises. The Horizon  projects  focus  on 
quality  training  for  the handicapped  and  their  integration  by  providing  assistance  rather  than  shelter, 
and they involve action by advisers, trainers, social workers, human resources managers and the social 
partners.  The  Integra  projects  combine  information  on  the  employment  market,  advisory  services. 
work experience  and measures  tailored  to the individual  to assist  the socially  marginalised,  the  target 
groups being  the long-term unemployed,  single mothers  and persons threatened  with  social  exclusion. 
The  Youthstart  projects  give  priority  to  young  people  in  economically  less-favoured  regions,  those 
under threat  of  marginalisation,  young people  who are experiencing  learning difficulties  or  who  have 
dropped  out  of  the  school  system  and  young  people  of  immigrant  origin.  In  the  case  of  Adapt,  30 
projects  were  selected,  focusing  on aid  for  innovation  and modernisation  of  SMEs. Local  networking 
is in  place  to  cover  SMEs  and  support structures  with  the participation  of private  and  public  training 
bodies. The projects  also include innovation  in the field  of training  in environmental  protection  work, 
quality assurance systems for  industry' and the service sector and teach-yourself  material. 

258 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Adopted  in  December  1995,  the  four  Interreg  programmes  for  the  external  frontiers  with  Slovenia, 
Slovakia,  the  Czech  Republic  and  Hungary  took  off  extremely  slowly,  in  particular  because  of  the 
difficulty  of finalising  cross-border cooperation  measures  with  the countries concerned.  Nevertheless, 
great  strides  were  made  in  1996 and  implementation  is now  progressing  satisfactorily  in  most  cases. 
The  next  Monitoring  Committee  meetings  will  take  place  at  the  same  time  as  those  of  the  joint 
programming  and inspection  committee for each adjacent  country  in June  1997. 

Lastly,  the  distribution  of  the  reserve  for  the  Community  Initiatives  enabled  an  additional 
ECU  18 million  to be allocated  to Austria  and apportioned  among the Interreg, Urban, Leader,  Emploi 
and Adapt Initiatives, Interreg's share amounting to one third66. 

Table  V-45: 

Austria  -  Community 
(ECU  million) 

Initiatives  -  1996  in  the  context  of  programming 

for  1995-99 

Initiative 
(number  of  programmes) 

Total 

SF 
assista Dec*' 
m 

25.S 
49.4 
72.7 
34.8 
7.0 
30.4 
16.2 
55.3 
2913 

Adapt (1) 
Emploi  ( 1 ) 
Leader (9) 
SMEs(l) 
Rechar ( 1 ) 
Résider ( 1 ) 
Retex ( 1 ) 
Urban (2) 
Total (17) 
Interreit/Reven (5)** 
CIPs adopted in 1W6: 
Leader Technical assistance (setting up 
national  network) 
Leader Stvria 
Leader Salzbure 
Leader TVTOI 
Leader Lower Austria 
Leader Carinthia 
Leader Vorarlberc 
Leader Upper Austria 
SMEs Austria 
Rechar Stvria. Upper Austria 
Résider Styria. Lower  Austria, Upper 
Austria 
Retex Lower Austria. Stvria. Vorarlberc 
Urban Graz 
Total  (13) 
Interrev  11)'** 
* Excluding reserve, except for  Urban Graz 
"  For programme details see Chapter  VII  Table 2.2. 
*** For programme details see Chapter I.B.I.  Community  Initiatives. 

0.5 
14.9 
2.8 
5.3 
14.0 
8.4 
1.0 
19.0 
34.8 
7.0 

30.4 
16.2 
234 
177.8 

11.6 
23,0 
23.4 
9.0 
1.8 
5.2 
2.6 
13.4 
90.0 

0,3 
4.3 
0.8 
1.7 
5.6 
2.9 
0.4 
4.9 
9.0 
1.8 

5.2 
2.6 
3.6 
43,1 

Commitments 
19% 

Commitments 
19V5-96 
(2> 

% 

f2V(l> 

Pavments 
1996 

Pavments 
1995-96 
f3) 

% 

f3Wl) 

0,0 
0.0 
18,1 
9.0 
1,1 
4,4 
2,6 
5,8 
41.0 

0,3 
4.1 
0.6 
i.4 
4.5 
2.5 
0.4 
43 
9.0 
1.1 

4.4 
2.6 
2.9 
38,1 

11,6 
23,0 
20.1 
9.0 
1.1 
4.4 
2.6 
12,7 
84.4 

0.3 
4.1 
0.6 
1.4 
45 
15 
0.4 
4.5 
9.0 
1.1 

4,4 
2.6 
2.9 
38,1 

100% 
100% 
86% 
100% 
60% 
84% 
100% 
95% 
94% 

100% 
95% 
80% 
80% 
80% 
85% 
100% 
91% 
100% 
60% 

84% 
100% 
81% 
88% 

0.0 
0,0 
5,7 
2.7 
0.6 
2.2 
1,3 
2.3 
14,8 

0.1 
1.2 
0.2 
0.4 
1.3 
0.7 
0.1 
1.3 
2.7 
0.6 

2.2 
1.3 
0.9 
13,1 

5,8 
11.5 
6,1 
2.7 
0,6 
2.2 
1,3 
5.8 
3 53 

0,1 
1.2 
0.2 
0.4 
1.3 
0.7 
0.1 
1.3 
2.7 
0.6 

2.2 
1.3 
0.9 
13,1 

50% 
50% 
26% 
30% 
30% 
42% 
50% 
43% 
40% 

40% 
29% 
24% 
24% 
24% 
25% 
30% 
27% 
30% 
30% 

42% 
50% 
24% 
30% 

66  See also Chapiter I.B. 1. Community  Initiatives. 

8th Annual  Report  on  the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

259 

12.  PORTUGAL 

12.1. 

Implementation of assistance by Obiective in 1996 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in Portugal  : 
The importance  of technological  development  is recognised in both the main priorities  of the  CSF, improving 
the  competitiveness  of  the  economy and  increasing  skill  levels.  Within the  'Competitiveness'  priority,  a sub-
priority  is devoted  to telecommunications.  It  continues  the progress  on  advanced  services  made  during  the 
first  programming  period  (supply of ISDN and  introduction  of  fibre  optic  links  into  the  local  network).  The 
development  of  telecommunications  as  regards  both  quantity  (infrastructure)  and  quality  (reduction  of  the 
time  to  install  lines  and  number  of faults  per  line),  and  the  promotion  of  advanced  telecommunications 
services  and  stimulation  of supply  to meet market needs  is being  implemented  by  the Infrastructure  OP, the 
Telecommunications  strand of which has ECU 276 million (total cost: ECU 550.2 million). 
A  larger  budget  is  allocated  to  RTD  in  the  priorities  for  the  modernisation  of  the  main  sectors  of  the 
'Industry'  sub-
Portuguese  economy.  Under  the  the  'Modernisation  of  the  economic  fabric'  OP,  the 
programme,  which  has  to  deal  with an  industrial  structure  highly  specialised  in  labour-intensive  activities 
involving  a  low  level  of  technology,  stresses  the  development  of  scientific  and  technological  infrastructure 
and  encourages  their  use  by  firms  through  involvement  in  the  research  activities  related  to  the  design  and 
improvement  of new products  and processes.  This programme  also  includes grants  to firms for  the  purchase 
and  development  of  new  technologies.  Commerce and  services  are  covered  by  a  separate  sub-programme 
which supports  the modernisation  of equipment in firms in the field of customer services and the  management 
of payments  (diversification  of selling methods by using computer  techniques and  telecommunications).  As  in 
the 1989-93  CSF, the  'Agriculture'  sub-programme  contributes to the expansion  of agricultural  research and 
the training  of farmers  and  technicians. Similarly,  the  'Fisheries'  sub-programme  supports  research  into the 
fishing  industry  and  better  use  of  the  resources  available  to  the  processing  industry.  In  addition  to  these 
multiregional  sub-programmes,  support for  the  modernisation  of  agriculture  and  fisheries  is  provided  by 
some  of  the  regional  programmes.  The  OP for  Madeira  lays  particular  emphasis  on  the  importance  of 
research  in these fields. In general  terms, this assistance also helps diversify  economic activity  in the various 
regions.  Each  of  the  regional  OPs  enjoys  a  differentiated  budget  for  science  and  technology,  and  for 
telecommunications. 
The  measures  to  assist  firms  and  RTD  infrastructure  are  complemented  by  education  and  skills for  those 
working  in  science  and  technology  as  provided  for  in  the  CSF  priority  for  human  resources.  This  is 
implemented  through  the  'Bases for  knowledge and innovation'  OP, which seeks  to consolidate  the results of 
the  earlier  CIENCIA programme.  The  'Education'  sub-programme  pays particular  attention  to  the teaching 
of  science  and  technology,  at  both  non-compulsory  secondary  level  and  in  higher  education,  and  to  the 
training  of  teachers.  These  measures  should  benefit  600  000  people.  The  'Science  and  technology '  sub-
programme,  which has  ECU  376  million (total cost: ECU  525  millions), provides  support for  the  'Industry' 
sub-programme  with  regard  to university research and  the  integration  of  research  workers  into  industry by-
financing  projects  for  cooperation  between  universities  and  firms  and  training  laboratory  assistants  and 
research centre  managers. 
The development  of data  transmission  applications  is  covered  not  only  by some  of  the  measures  considered 
but also  in the strategy for  the  modernisation  of  the  postal  sector  and  the PRINEST  OP,  which  supports  the 
provision  of  infrastructure for  computer  applications  to  develop  a  system  of  statistical  information  able  to 
assist  in the modernisation  and  economic development  of Portugal  and  which  will build  on the  results  of  the 
earlier PREDER  programme. 
In total, finance for  technological  development  in Portugal  accounts for  9,5% of the appropriations from  the 
Structural  Funds. 

Table  V-46:  Portugal  -  Financing  directly  related  to  technological  development 

in  programming 

for  1994-99  (ECU  million) 

TO' 

ST. 

% 
1 WA 

Tr 
.  6] ft 

Member State 
Private 
222.? 

627.6 

Y*MK 

Total 
850.5 

Objective.  1 
1..???.7 
NB:  The  programming  procedures and different  apprtachcs taken  by the Member States 

2  190.2 

invite caution  in interpreting  the  figures,  in particular spending  on information  society  protects, 

which arc often  linked  to other fields  such as  RTD and industry. 

1994-96 

Financing by the Structural Funds 

% 
39% 

2 1% 

2% 

77°/ 

— RTD 

-Telecom.  B-Data trans. 

260 

OBJECTIVE 1 

Fie. V-57: Proerammine 1994-99 (ECIJ million -1996 prices): 
Priorities: 
Human resources and employment (a) 
Economic competitiveness (b) 
Living conditions (c) 
Regional economic base (d) 
Technical assistance M 
Breakdown bx Fund: 

3.079,2 
6.418.4 
1.264.0 
3.153.4 
- J - IZ 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

8.730,5 
3.160,9 
1.947,9 
208,1 
_!_____. 

1 CSF/17 OPs 

Avenge per Of 

Main features  of  1996 

62% 
23% 
14% 
1% 
100% 

826.3 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

(d)22%  _ L 4 — __ 

fe) 1% 

(a) 22% 

(c)9% 

(b)46% 

A  significant  feature  of  1996  was  the  start  of  the  interim  evaluation  of  all  the programmes  and  sub-
programmes  in  the  CSF. This  took place  in  a  spirit  of  partnership  between  the  Commission  and  the 
Portuguese authorities. Teams of independent experts were selected  by means of a call for  tenders  for 
each  item  of  assistance under the CSF. The Monitoring Committee  for each  sub-programme  set up  a 
technical  working  party  on  evaluation  to  which  each  assessor  was  required  to  present  two  progress 
reports  prior  to the definitive  final  report  expected  early  in  1997. The  whole process  ran  completely 
smoothly. Only the Technical  Assistance OP is being evaluated  as part of the evaluation  of the  whole 
of  the  CSF planned  for  1997, but  its  design  had  already  been  decided  on  in  1996. These  evaluation 
studies, for most of which the final report is already  available, should ensure that the mid-term review 
of the CSF planned  for mid-1997 is of a good quality. 

Some programmes  were  amended  and/or  reprogrammed.  Among  the  multiregional  programmes,  the 
Technical  assistance  OP was  amended  as regards  the  financial  implementation  of  the ESF  strand  by 
transferring  to  1996 appropriations  which had not been used in  1994 and which could not be absorbed 
in  1995. Following  decisions  taken by the Monitoring  Committee  in  1995, the  'Modernisation  of  the 
economic fabric'  OP received  a further  Community contribution  of ECU  101 million. Of this  amount, 
ECU  61 million  from  the ERDF and ECU  11 million from the ESF were allocated  to the  Autoeuropa 
major  project.  The  'Infrastructure  to support  development'  OP  was  reprogrammed  to  bring  financial 
in  1994  in  line  with  actual  implementation  by  the  Energy,  Transport  and 
implementation 
Telecommunications  sub-programmes,  to  provide  an  extra  ECU  10.9  million  for  the  Transport  sub-
programme  and  to  cope  with  the  varying  rates  of  implementation  of  the  Transport  and  Energy  sub-
programmes. These changes balanced  each other out and did not result in an amendment  to the annual 
'Environment  and  urban  renewal'  OP  was  also 
financing  schedule  for  the  programme.  The 
reprogrammed  both  to include  private  social  solidarity  institutions  (TPSS) among  the  beneficiaries  of 
the Urban Renewal  sub-programme  and to make a transfer  between  measures in the Environment  sub-
programme. This reprogramming  also made it possible to increase the appropriations  available for  the 
setting  up  of  small-scale  economic  activities  in  shantytowns  (up  to  15% of  the  total  amount  for  the 
measure  'Renovation  of shantytowns"). 

The  'Vocational  training'  and  'Bases of knowledge'  OPs were also reprogrammed, as was the  'Health 
and  social  integration'  OP.  Following  decisions  taken  by  the  CSF  Monitoring  Cornmittee  in 
December  1995, the  'Bases  of  knowledge'  and  'Innovation'  OPs received  an extra ECU  14.4 million 
from  the  ESF  as  a  result  of  the  1995  indexation  to  provide  finance  for  technical  and  vocational 
education.  Implementation  of the  'Vocational  training  and  employment'  OP, which  accounts  for  40% 
of  assistance  from  the  ESF  under  the  CSF,  continued  to  be  very  satisfactory,  at  almost  100%.  The 
'Training  of  the  civil  service'  sub-programme  continued  to  experience  some  problems.  In  April,  the 
programme  received  an  extra  ECU  10.2  million  from  the  'Agriculture'  sub-programme  to  pay  for 
training  schemes  devised  by  the  Portuguese  farmers'  federation.  The  measures 
agricultural 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

261 

'Apprenticeships'  and  'Training  of  instructors'  also  received  transfers  of  amounts  not  used  by  other 
measures.  The  CSF  Monitoring  Committee  also  decided  to  allocate  to  this  programme  ECU  18 
million  from  the  1995  indexation  of  the  CSF  for  a pilot  measure  to  train  managers  and  workers  in 
small  firms.  The  'Health  and  social  integration'  OP  was  reprogrammed  on  two  occasions.  In  May 
1996, the  amounts  not  used  in  1994  were transferred  to  1995  and  1996  and  the  measure  'Economic 
and  social  integration  of  the  handicapped'  received  a  further  ECU  8.5  million  not  used  by  the 
measures  'Support  for  sociocultural  development"  and  'Economic  and  social  integration  of the CLD" 
under the  'Social integration'  sub-programme. In December  1996, the  1995 instalment  was adjusted  to 
reflect  implementation  and  the  amounts  not  used  were  transferred  to  future  years.  This  amendment 
concerned  mainly  the  'Health'  sub-programme,  since  implementation  of  the  'Social  integration'  sub-
programme was 99%. 

Two  regional  programmes  were  also  amended.  The  Community  contribution  to  the  Norte  OP  was 
increased  by ECU 4.1 million in  1996. The Azores OP was amended to increase the ERDF's  financial 
contribution  by  ECU  5  million  and  apply  to  measures  financed  by  the  EAGGF the  ECU  5.1  million 
from  the  FIFG  which  had  not  yet  been  used.  This  decision  was  taken  on  condition  that  the  FIFG's 
contribution  was  increased  correspondingly  when  the measures  financed  by  that  financial  instrument 
reached the degree of implementation  originally  estimated. 

While  programming  generally  made  satisfactory  progress,  there  were  some  delays  and  difficulties. 
The  delay  in  implementing  the  Technical  assistance  OP  was  due  both  to  the  late  adoption  of  the 
programme  and  to  changes  in  the  structure  for  managing  the  ESF  in  Portugal.  A  great  deal  of  this 
delay  should  be  made  up  in  1997.  The  special  features  of  the  multifund  programme  'Locally-
generated  development'  (PPDR-ERDF,  EAGGF,  ESF)  continued  to  cause  some  problems  in 
implementation,  mainly  because  the  PPDR  is  a  programme  which  requires  a  high  degree  of 
participation  in decision-making by regional and local bodies through partnerships between the public 
and  private  sectors. From  the  second  half  of  1996, however,  its  implementation  generally  improved 
thanks  to  the  pace  achieved  by  certain  measures, particularly  the RIME  and  SLR aid  schemes. In  the 
case of the  'Bases of knowledge and innovation'  OP, there are still some problems in the  'Science and 
technology'  sub-programme, which provides for the financing of research projects  submitted by teams 
of  research  workers  to be  selected  by means of  a procedure based  on  a public  invitation.  Preparation 
of the rules for  these invitations  took longer than planned  and  it was not until  1996 that  financing  foi* 
this  type  of  measure  could  begin.  This  meant  that  implementation  of  the  sub-programme  remained 
relatively poor. 

_ 

In  the  case  of  the  'Modernisation  of  the  economic  fabric'  OP  and  the  'Industry'  sub-programme 
(PEDIP II), it should  be noted that, following  improvements  made to national procedures  in Portugal, 
the time required to consider applications for investment aid has been considerably  reduced. The main 
aid  schemes  are  virtually  exhausted.  Within  the  'Modernisation  of  the  economic  fabric'  OP,  the 
'Agriculture'  sub-programme  was  implemented  at  a rate  of  91%  in  1996. Among  the  eight  measures 
in this  sub-programme,  some  significant  variations  should  be noted:  support  for  agricultural  holdings 
reached  a rate of  124%, agricultural  infrastructure  84% and the processing and marketing of products, 
61%,  which  may  be  explained  by  the  longer  time  required  to  complete  these  projects.  The  'Support 
for  commerce  and  services'  sub-programme  regained  a  certain  vigour  after  a  period  of  slow 
implementation.  Under  the  'Fisheries'  sub-programme,  which  concerns  continental  Portugal,  223 
projects  were  approved  in  1996, involving  total  public  expenditure  of  ECU  32.4 million,  60% of  the 
total  programmed  (the  private  sector  contributed  ECU  11.8  million).  Public  expenditure  approved 
since the beginning of the sub-programme  amounts to ECU  129.5 million  and the implementation  rate 
at the end  of this period  is 20% of the total  programmed  for  1994-99. Such  a level  of  implementation 
required  reprogramming  to  redistribute  the  balance  not  used  in  1994  to  1997,  1998  and  1999.  This 
reprograrnrning  will  make  available  the  funds  required  to  establish  a  new  socio-economic  measure 
arising  from  the  changes  introduced  by  Regulation  (EC)  No  1796/95  amending  Regulation  (EC)  No 
3699/93. 

Turning  to  the  two  regional  OPs  containing  measures  for  fisheries,  52  projects  in  the  Azores  were 
approved  between  1994  and  1996 involving  investment  totalling  some ECU  18 million,  to which  the 

262 

8th  Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Community  will  contribute  ECU  11.2  million  and  national  public  finances  ECU  4.2  million  (the 
private  sector  is contributing  ECU 4  million). Financial  implementation  for  that period  is  17% of  the 
total  programmed.  The  trend  is  improving  and  the  level  is expected  to be  satisfactory  by  the  end  of 
1997.  In  Madeira,  1996 was  mainly  a year  for  retrieving  the  delays  which  had  accumulated  in  1994 
and  1995.  The  number  of  projects  approved  since  the  beginning  of  the  programme  (51  projects) 
involved  a  total  investment  of  ECU  15.5  million  with  public  expenditure  approved  for  that  period 
amounting  to  ECU  10.3  million,  of  which  the  FIFG  will  pay  ECU  7.7  million.  The  rate  of 
implementation  for  the first three years amounts to  19% of the total  programmed  for  1994-99, but  the 
positive trend noted  in  1996 suggests that this may improve substantially  in 1997. 

1996 in  the  context  of programming  for  1994-99 

In general,  implementation  of  the CSF is proceeding  satisfactorily,  although  at a slightly  slower  pace 
than  in  1995. The  overall  rate  of  implementation  in  1996  was  about  82%. The regional  programmes 
are  progressing  well  in  financial  and  physical  terms  and  their  impact  on  the  development  of  the 
regions is considerable  (particularly  in terms of basic infrastructure  related to living conditions). Most 
of  the  sectoral  programmes  are  also  progressing  without  problems  and  some  sectors,  such  as 
'Telecommunications'  and  'Transports',  have exceeded  the  rate of  implementation  planned  for  1996. 
Implementation  of the four  multifund  programmes to which the EAGGF is contributing was generally 
in  line  with  estimates.  More  specifically,  the  rate  of  implementation  of  the  'Agriculture'  sub-
programme  of  the  'Modernisation  of the economic  fabric'  OP is in excess  of programming  (the  1997 
annual  instalment  was  committed  in  1996). The  rate  of  implementation  of  the Azores  OP  (PEDRA) 
required  its EAGGF component  to be increased by ECU 5 million. 

Table  V-47: 

Portugal  -  Assistance  by  Objective  -  1996  in  the  context  of  programming 
1994-99 (ECU  million) 

for 

Programmes 
(year of adoption) 

QbtotiYC ,1 
Regional OPs 
OP Azores (1994) 
OPAlentejo(1994) 
OPAlgarve(1994) 
OPCentro(1994) 
OP Lisbon-Tagus Valley ( 1994) 
OP Madeira (1994) 
OP None (1994) 
Multiregional OPs 
GG Support for local  investment (1995) 
OP Technical assistance  (1994) 
OP Knowledge and Innovation (1994) 
OP Locally-generated  development (1994) 
OP Environment and urban renewal  ( 1994) 
OP Training and employment ( 1994) 
OP Infrastructure  ( 1994) 
OP Economic modernisation (1994) 
0PPRINEST(1)(1994) 
OP Health and social  integration (1994) 
Technical assist;^ 
TOTAL 
(1) Statistical  infrastructure 

Total cost  SF assistance  Commitments) 

1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
_____ 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 
(3) 

(21/(1) 

___£!_. 

840.2 

250.6 

101.9 

490.5 

517.2 

665.2 

729.5 

33.3 

135.6 

2.276.2 
1.231.8 
973.7 

1.890.7 

3.979,6 

10.490.1 

40.0 
940.0 
0.9 
?X7.M 

621.0 
182.0 
76.0 
362.0 
3X2.0 
369.3 
541.1 

25.0 
101.7 
1.689.4 
595.0 
559.0' 
1.389.8 
1.997,9 
4.420.5 
30.0 
705.0 
0.8 
14.047.? 

157.0 
29.8 
16,0 
71,5 
75,5 
124.7 
107,5 

0.0 
15.5 
307.9 
14.9 
174.3 
358.1 
659,8 
803.3 
7,7 
44.5 
0J_ 
2.968.0 

373.2 
108.4 
44,5 
197.5 
200.0 
273.3 
317.5 

25,0 
44,0 
895,5 
82.1 
229,4 
767,4 
1.278,3 
2.329.4 
30,0 
321,0 

08 

_Z__i2_4 

60% 
60% 
59% 
55% 
52% 
74% 
59% 

100% 
43% 
53% 
14% 
41% 
55% 
64% 
53% 
100% 
46% 
96% 
54% 

137,4 
29.0 
19,4 
82.8 
62.0 
85.2 
98,0 

7.5 
14.0 
254.1 
24,4 
158.5 
206.6 
342.7 
806.5 
3,7 
102.7 

0J. 
2,434.6 

318,6 
72.8 
38,2 
171.2 
151,5 
209,0 
246,2 

7,5 
31,0 
666,8 
62,1 

202,6 
553,4 
860,6 
1.804,9 
20,9 
280.9 
0.8 
5.698.7 

51% 
40% 
50% 
47% 
40% 
57% 
46% 

30% 
30% 
39% 
10% 
36% 
40% 
43% 
41% 
70% 
40% 
96% 
4 1% 

12.2. 

Implementation  of the  Community  Initiatives in  1996 

Note: 
Portugal  takes part  in all the  Initiatives and  all  the programmes  were adopted  between  1993 and  1995. Eleven 
CIPs are  being  implemented  at national  level  (one per Initiative), plus two Interreg CIPs, one under  the  Regen 
strand and the other under the cross-border cooperation  strand. 

8th Annual  Report  on  the Structural  Funds (1996) 

263 

Support for the development of technological potential in Portugal : 
Although most of  the  Community  Initiatives  in Portugal  promote technological  development,  the largest 
contribution comes from  two  measures under the  SMEs  Initiative: grants for  projects  to encourage 
technological skills in small firms through  technical support or the transfer of technology from scientific and 
technological bodies to small firms (ECU  13  million;  total cost:  ECU 24 million),  and training  in advanced 
technologies for the managers of firms (ECU 11.8 million; total cost: ECU 21.6 million). 
The Adapt programme also includes a number of measures  relating  to the introduction of new technologies 
and support for  the establishment  of information  networks and the Employment  CIP supports  uses of data 
transmission (new technologies, distance working,  etc.) by less favoured groups in society and the purchase of 
equipment  (ECU 4  millions;  total cost: ECU 5  million). The Leader programme  supports research  and 
innovation in  the  processing of  local products and  the  use  of  new  technologies  for  information  and 
communications  in  rural  areas. Interreg  is  concerned with  the  installation of  fibre  optics  and SDH 
connections between Spain and Portugal and the establishment of information networks in the tourism sector 
as a contribution to the development of the information society. 

A  significant  feature  of  1996  was  the  Commission  decision  on  the  allocation  of  the  reserve  for  the 
Community  Initiatives.  Portugal  will  receive 
an  additional  ECU  52.4  million,  mainly  for  the 
extension  until  1999  of  the  four  industrial  Initiatives  (Retex,  Konver,  Résider  and  Rechar67)  and  the 
new strand Interreg II C. 

As  far  as the  programmes  already  being  implemented  are  concerned,  Retex  was  amended  to  include 
the  results  of  the  indexation  for  1994,  1995  and  1996  (a  total  of  ECU  5.8  million).  Community 
assistance for  repayable loans  was reduced, mainly to benefit  measures to support  internationalisation 
and  greater productivity.  During  1996, the proportion  of finance  from  this programme  to  firms  in  the 
textiles  sector  fell:  more  than  757c  of  finance  under  the  Retex  CEP is  now  being  used  for  economic 
diversification  measures  in regions of Portugal heavily dependent on textiles. 

There  have  been  some  delays  in  implementing  programmes.  Implementation  of  the  SMEs  CE?  was 
delayed  because  of  changes  in  national  legislation  but  this  programme  should  operate  normally  in 
1997.  The  delay  in  the  financial  and  physical  implementation  of  the  Urban  programme  arose  from 
difficulties  in  introducing  an organisational  system among the various partners and to  some problems 
which  proved  more  difficult  to  resolve  than  had  originally  been  expected  (mainly  in  the  Casal 
Ventoso  area  of  Lisbon,  which  has  very  poor  housing  and  a  severe  drugs  problem). There  is  a  good 
chance  of improvements  in  1997 because  the programme  managers now have action  plans, studies  on 
securing the first urban  indicators  and  methods  of organising the local partnership. It should  be  noted 
that  in  December  1996,  at  the  initiative  of  the  Portuguese  authorities,  a  seminar  to  exchange 
experiences  was  arranged  for  the  managers  of  the  six  sub-programmes  comprising  the  Urban  CIP. 
This  proved  to  be  very  useful.  In  the  case  of  the  Leader  programme,  the  late  selection  of  the  local 
action  groups  led to some problems  because  of the excessively  long gap between  the first  and  second 
phases  of  prograrnming.  However,  the  programme  got  underway:  all  the  LAGs  have  now  been 
selected  and  implementation  of  the  financing,  plans  has  begun.  There  was  some  delay  too  in 
implementing  the  cross-border  cooperation  strand  of  the  Interreg  II  programme.  The  Regen 
programme,  however,  was  implemented  as  planned  and  by the end  of  1996, the national  gas  pipeline 
and  its  first  link  with  the  Spanish  gas  network  had  been  completed.  This  strand  was  the  subject  of 
technical reprogramming during  1996. 

Under  the Employment  Initiative,  some  130 projects  were  selected  during the  first  call  for  proposals 
(40  under  Now,  57  under  Horizon  and  33  under  Youthstart).  In  all  three  strands,  the  stress  was  on 
training. The  main  theme  of  the  Now  projects  was  the  development  of  employment  programmes  and 
encouraging  women  to  set  up  businesses.  A  large  number  of  projects  under  Youthstart  concern 
vocational  guidance  and  training  for  young  people.  Under  Horizon,  the  stress  was  on  creating 
conditions  which  encourage  the  employment  of  people  with  handicaps.  57  projects  were  selected 
under  the  Adapt  Initiative,  many  of  them  to  do  with  training. Most  projects  are  designed  to  improve 
management  systems and the restructuring of small firms in various  sectors of the economy. 

67 See also Chapter I.B.I. Community Initiatives. 

264 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

The  first  applications  and  selection  of  projects  under Pesca  began  at the end  of  1995 and the work of 
the  Monitoring  Committee  concerned  amendments  to  the  programme  and  its  launch.  Information 
campaigns were held in the Azores and Madeira during  1996. 

Since the bulk  of  the  CIPs  had  been  approved  by the Commission  in  1995,  1996 was the first  year of 
actual  implementation,  following  the  period  required  for  introduction  of  the  national  legislation 
required,  establishment  of  the  teams  to  manage  the  programmes,  etc.  The  levels  of  financial 
implementation  for  most  of  the  Initiatives  may  be considered  satisfactory  in terms  of  the  Community 
assistance  planned  in the programmes. 

Table  V-48: 

Portugal  -  Community 
1994-99  (ECU  million) 

Initiatives 

1996  in  the  context  of  programming  for 

initiative 
(number  of  CIPs) 

Total  cost 

S.F. 
assistance" 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 

Payments 
1996 

1994-96 
1994-96 

Adapt ( 1 ) 
Employment  ( 1 ) 
Leader ( 1 ) 
Pesca ( 1 ) 
SMEs(l) 
Rechar  (I) 
Resis(l) 
Konver (1) 
Résider (1) 
Retex ( 1 ) 
Urban (1) 
Total  (11) 
lnxerrev/Reven  (2)"'" 

29.2 
54.7 
156.X 
53.2 
235.9 
1.1 
156.8 
10.7 
10.8 
45X.0 
62.4 
1-29.7 

21.0 
40.3 
117.6 
29.3 
124.0 
0.9 
124.0 
7.9 
6.9 
194.X 
44.6 

711 

17.0 
3.9 
4.0 
23.2 
1.2 
0,0 
58.3 
0.0 
0.0 
83.4 
0.0 
191.1 

______ 
21.0 
9,6 
10.7 
27.5 
14,4 
0.9 
80,4 
7,9 
6.9 
194.8 
9.2 
383.3 

-2-01 

100% 
24% 
9% 
94% 
12% 
100% 
65% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
21% 
54% 

4.3 
2,1 
4.9 
4.5 
0.6 
0,4 
55.3 
0.0 
2,6 
27,4 
0.0 
102.0 

6.3 
5,0 
8.4 
6.6 
7.2 
0.7 
72,9 
3,9 
55 
90,4 
4.6 
211,6 

(3V(1) 

30' 
12% 
7% 
23% 
6% 
80% 
59% 
50% 
80% 
46% 
10% 
30% 

* Excluding  reserve 
** For programme-details see  Chapter VII. Table 2.2. 

8th Annual Report  oh the Structural Funds (1996) 

265 

13.  FINLAND 

13.1. 

Implementation of assistance bv Obiective in 1996 

Support for  the  development  of technological potential  in the regions of Finland: 
Most  of  the  development  measures  under  the  various  objectives  reflect  the  national  strategy  to foster  the 
information  society.  The  strategy  aims  to  establish  Finland  as an advanced  information  society  and  global 
competitor  in  information  and  communications  technologies  by  modernising  the public  and  private  sectors 
through  the introduction  of information technology and networks (e.g. use of the Internet), development  of the 
information  industry  (e.g.  multimedia),  university courses  in new  technology  (e.g. doctorates  in  information 
technology),  popularisation  of  the  information  society  (e.g.  educational  materials,  virtual  schools)  and 
improvements  to  infrastructure  (e.g. telecommunications  liberalisation,  expansion  of  digitisation,  legislative 
reform). 
Objective  6:  One its main  goals  is to prepare  the population for  participation  in the  information  society  and 
to use all  the  technologies  it offers for  economic growth,  competitiveness  and  employment.  Two priorities  in 
the SPD are  involved: 

• 

enterprise  development:  cooperation  between  research  and  educational  centres  and  businesses, 
technology;  development  of 
development  of  services 
telecommunications  services  to facilitate  innovation  transfer  to  areas  located far  from  advanced 
centres (ECU 9.4 million; total cost: ECU 33.1 million); development of data transmission  services 
and  applications  in  research,  education  and  social  services,  the  creation  of  telecentres  in  rural 
areas, etc. 

to  RTD  and  advanced 

linked 

•  development  of  human  resources:  investment  in  advanced  educational  establishments  and  in  the 
RTD  activities  needed  to  improve  training  (ECU  16.7 million;  total  cost: ECU  35.3  million);  aid 
for  research  and  training  in  key  economic  sectors  (e.g.  funding  researchers  in  enterprises, 
development  of  university  RTD,  etc.;  ECU  9.5  million,  total  cost:  ECU  19.3  million);  improved 
cooperation  between 
educational 
establishments  and  enterprises  so  that  innçvation  might  be  better  directed  and  managed  (e.g. 
technology  transfers,  development  of technological  management,  etc; ECU  11 million,  total  cost: 
ECU  23.6  million),  development  of  the  information  society,  especially  in  telecommunications  and 
tele-working  so  that  the  working  place  and  time  can  be  planned  in  alternative  ways  (distance 
education,  training  of  businessmen  in  new  technology,  research  in  such  fields,  training  for 
managers of research and education centres, etc. ECU 3.7 million; total cost: ECU 9.4  million). 

local  developpient  companies, 

the  research  centres, 

The  Objective  6 regions do  not  all accord  the same  importance  to these priorities:  the  regions  of South  and 
North  Savo  devote  substantial  funds  to  agri-food, forestry  and  environmental  RTD;  Central  Finland  and 
North  Ostrobothnia  emphasise  the  training  system,  data  networks  and  distance  learning;  North  Karelia  is 
concentrating  on  forestry,  metals  and  plastics 
in 
telecommunications  methods,  geographical  information, environmental and spatial research  and  information 
technology. 
Objective  2  (1995-96):  The  SPD  bases  modernisation  of  the productive  sector  on  using  the  opportunities 
offered  by the information  society.  This explains the importance placed  on technological  development  by two 
of the SPD's  three priorities  : 

research;  Lapland 

is  focusing  on 

training 

•  development  and  globalisation  of  enterprises:  enterprise  networking,  the  development  of  new 
products  and  production  processes,  transfer  of  technology  to  SMEs  and  the  development  of 
industrial niche markets.  One characteristic of the SPD is that clean technology  figures  among  the 
project  selection  criteria.  These  operations  have  a  considerable  impact  on  the  development  of 
environmental  technology  in  Kymenlaakso,  RTD  in  Pâijàt-Hàme  and  information  technology  in 
Central  Finland. 
improvements  to  training  levels  and  technological  support  for  economic  activities  (ECU  16.3 
million;  total  cost ECU  45.6  million):  cooperation  between  enterprises  and  research  and  training 
centres  (e.g. creation  of a know-how  centre  in  Uusimaa), introduction  of  innovation  in  enterprises 
(e.g.  teleworking),  development  of  data  networks  for 
technology  transfer,  development  of 
environmental  technology,  technological  cooperation  with  enterprises  in  neighbouring  countries; 
use of existing  university  research infrastructure  (e.g  Universities of Jyvàskylà  and Fori, Jyvdskyld 
Institute of Technology,  etc.) 

• 

Objective  5(b):  The  two  SPDs  support  technological  development  as  a  tool for  the  SPDs'  priorities.  To 
shorten  the distances  between  rural communities, the mainland Finland SPD concentrates  on developing  data 
communications  services  through  experimental  projects  to  create  networks,  telecentres  and  teleworking 
centres,  build  special  communications  links and provide  connections  by  modem  and  software.  In  the  Aland 
Islands  information  technology  is  used  to  reduce  the  region's  isolation  by  developing  SME  networks  and 

266 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

communications  infrastructures,  for  example,  by  creating  technology  and  know-how  centres,  encouraging 
teleworking,  distance  learning  and training, and by publicising  the region's  cultural  heritage. 
In  au\  the funds  allocated  to technological development  in Finland  represent 12.9% of the assistance from the 
Structural  Funds  (Objectives  6 and 2) 

Table  V-49: 

Finland  - Financing directly linked to technological  development in 1995-99 (ECU million) 

Member Stat? 

TOTAL 

Struct. Funds 
_SL 

27% 
7?% 
100% 

45.6 
124.6 
170.2 

Objective  2 
29,3 
163 
______ 
_________ 
50.3 
66.6 
103.6 
TOTAL 
NB:  The  programming procedures and different approaches taken by the  Member States 
invite caution in interpreting the figures, in particular spending on information society projects 
which are often linked to otehr fields such as RTD  and industry. 

36% 
40% 
_ _ - ft 

Public  Private 
9,2 
24.0 
_____ 

20,1 
50.3 
70.4 

Total  % 

64% 
60% 
__!% 

Financing by the Structural Funds 

20% 

~RTD 

80% 

irrc 

OBJECTIVE  668 

Fie. V-58:  proerammine 1995-99 (ECU million): 
By  priority: 
Industrial development (a) 
Human resources development (b) 
Agriculture, forestry, fisheries,-rural dev. and 
environment (c) 
Technical assistance (d) 
By  Fund: 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

172,5 
105,8 
177,6 
4,0 
45W 

1SPD 

Main features  of  1996 

153.7 
87.9 

209,1 
__U 

38% 
23% 
39% 

(d) 2% 

(a)  33% 

(c)  46% 

(b)19% 

The programme has been implemented at a relatively rapid pace. With rare exceptions, the funds were 
used appropriately for various groups of measures. At the end of the year, about 30%  of the assistance 
was allocated to various projects. Among the main project categories benefiting  from funding  are the 
launch  of  SMEs  and  investment  in  business  expansion,  cooperation  between  associated  enterprises 
under  certain  terms  (especially  as  regards  technology  transfers  within  business  niches),  training, 
information  society  projects,  tourism  development  and  small-scale  forestry  and  agricultural 
diversification  projects. Investments  in agriculture  and rural development  have suffered  some delays, 
however,  because  of  the need  to check  the  conformity  of  the national  aid  schemes  with  Articles  92 
and 93 of the Treaty and because of the strict national policy adopted in the case of the investment aid 
schemes.  With  70  projects  launched,  fishery  measures  are  progressing  satisfactorily,  except  for 
aquaculture where progress has been modest. 

In  the  first  five  months  of  the  year,  specific  issues  relating  to  implementation  and  procedure  were 
addressed  by  the  working  group  responsible  for  organising  Objective  6.  The  national  and  regional 
authorities and the Commission  were represented on the working group. The group's report served as 
a  guide  for  the  various  partners  implementing  the  programme  and  helped  to  improve  mutual 
cooperation,  particularly  between  the  central  government  and  regional  authorities.  However,  it  was 
hard to ensure  proper monitoring  of  the funding  and payment  decisions  because  of  the  large number 

68  Eligible  areas: Lapland,  Kainuu,  North  Karelia,  South  Savo,  North  Ostrobothnia,  South  Ostrobothnia,  North 

Savo, Central  Finland. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

267 

of  participants  and shortcomings  in the content  and use of the data  bases  relating  to the projects. 
Efforts  to improve the monitoring system are continuing. 

The  Monitoring  Committee  held  two  meetings,  the  most  notable  points  of  which  were  the 
appointment  of an external  evaluator  and  a decision  to invest in a regional  venture  capital  fund  - the 
first  investment of its kind in a Finnish  programme. The November meeting also prepared the way for 
the mid-term assessment, to be carried out in autumn of 1997. 

1996 in the context  of programming  for  1995-99 

While commitments for projects  progressed  relatively quickly, the same can not be said for payments. 
By the end of the year, the Commission  had paid out only  18% of the Structural  Fund  assistance. The 
problems  arising from  the  slowness in payment  are being closely  examined  as part of the work  being 
done on monitoring and ongoing  assessment. 

OBJECTIVE 269 

Fie. V-59: proerammine 1995-96 (ECU million. 1996 prices and status): 
By  priority: 
Business development (a) 
Skills and technology  (b) 
Environment  infrastructure,  tourism (c) 
Technical  assistance (<tt 
By  Fund: 

(c) 22% 

(d)2% 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

46,1 
9,7 
55.8 

83% 
17% 
100% 

(b) 24% 

(a) 52% 

1SPD 

1996 in the context  of programming  for  1995-96 

Of the three regional programmes, the Objective 2 SPD has progressed the most rapidly. At the end of 
the  year,  76% of  Community  funding  for the first  two years  (ECU 52.4 million  out of  an  initial 
appropriation  of ECU 69.2 million) had been committed. The remainder (ECU  14.4 million), plus the 
amount  resulting from  indexation for 1996, was transferred  to the new  1997-99 programme. As in the 
case  of the Objective  6 programme,  payments  to the beneficiaries  progressed  at a slower  pace  than 
commitments. At the end of the year the national  authorities had paid out to projects  only  16% of the. 
assistance  for  1995-96,  while  the  proportion  committed  was-  78%.  Furthermore,  the  partnership 
between  the central  and regional  authorities  developed  along the lines of the  Objective  6 programme 
and the same  difficulties  with  monitoring  arose as a result. It became  apparent  that the checks on  the 
results of the programme were not trustworthy, especially in terms of job creation: the aim of creating 
10 000 new jobs in the first  period does not appear to have been  achieved. 

Preparation  of the  1997-99 programming  period 

The  proposal  for  the new programme  was submitted  in  August  and approved  in  principle  by the 
Commission  in December.  The new programme  was made  more  detailed but simpler  in structure by 
reducing  the number  of measures  from  15 to 9; an early  evaluation  of the results  of the first  period 
was also undertaken  and ways of implementing the new financial  arrangements and of using the  funds 
more  effectively  were  explored  with  the Finnish  authorities.  Thus,  in the case  of infrastructure  and 
port  infrastructure  in particular,  it was agreed  to use EIB  loans,  experiment  with  financial  packages 
combining  grants  and  loans  and  encourage  inter-regional  projects.  The  evaluators'  report  also 
indicated  the need to be more pro-active in the preparation  of projects, especially  in very  small  firms. 
The aim of the second  period is to create or reskill  15  800 jobs. 

69  Eligible  areas:  Satakunta,  Kokkola,  Ita-Uusimaa  and  Kymenlaakso,  Varsinais-Suomi,  Lahti,  Jyvàskylà, 

Lappeenranta. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

27 

A.  ASSISTANCE BY OBJECTIVE1 

1.  General  overview 

1.1.  The implementation of the Objectives in 1996 

The  main  feature  of  1996 was the implementation  on the ground  of programmes  already  under way. 
Although  1996 was the third  year  of the  1994-99  programming  period,  it was, for  most  Objectives, 
Member  States  and  regions,  and  for  most  measures,  only  the  second  full  year  of  activity.  The 
Commission  adopted  only  50  new  measures  (35  OPs,  8  SPDs,  3  major  projects,  4  global  grants), 
which  concern  Objective  1  of  the  Greek,  Spanish,  Irish  and  Italian  CSFs,  Objective  3  (United 
Kingdom  only), Objective  5(a) with  the adoption  of all the OPs under  the Italian  CSF, and the  final 
stages in launching programming  in Sweden with the adoption  of the Swedish  SPDs under  Objectives 
4,  5(a) and 5(b). The new assistance  totals ECU 3 448 million  (comprising  55% from  the ESF,  32% 
from  the ERDF and  13% from  the EAGGF), and represents  less  than  3% of total  assistance  adopted 
for  1994-99 as a whole. 

Structural  Fund programming now involves 492 forms of assistance (i.e. OPs, SPDs, global grants and 
major  projects),  by far the largest  proportion  in the form  of  SPDs  and OPs, which  account  for 48% 
each  of the total  number  of  measures  (global  grants  account  for 2% and major  projects  for  1%). On 
average,  taking all Objectives  together,  there  are 33 measures  per Member  State; however, the range 
is wide, from  8 in Denmark and Luxembourg to 97 in Italy. 

Table 1-1:  CSF/SPD - Assistance and number of programming documents at the  end of 1996 

(ECU 

million) 

Forms, of assiittancr 
_____ 

Strurtural Fund assifitanrf 
F.ROF 
ESF 

ELK. 

Total 

Total 
1.6183 
682^ 
18.723,2 
13-44,9 
29346,0 
11.177,9 
5.672,0 
17.9553 
733 
1.7803 
1.467,4 
14.0473 
1.413,0 
1.205,2 
8659.1 

673.5 
65,6 
7.817.0 
9.360.0 
15.947,4 
3.483.6 
2.596.9 
9.721.7 
7,6 
305.8 
352.8 
8.730.5 
313.1 
314.9 
3.397.5 
_________  63.088.1 

Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Portugal 
Finland 
Sweden 
United, Kinpd ori 
!_______ 
* Period 1994-99 for Objectives I, 3,4 (Spain, France, Netherlands), 5(a) agriculture, 5(a) fisheries. 5(b);  period 1994-96 
for Objectives 2 and 4 (Belgium. Denmark. Germany, Luxembourg); period 1995-99 for Austria, Finland, Sweden (except Objective 2 in 
Finland: 1995-96) 

EAGGF 
241,0 
148.9 
4.253,9 
1.795.4 
4.002,6 
3.187,9 
1.047,7 
3.182.4 
403 
190,1 
581.9 
1.947.9 
581,6 
193.7 
________ 
39.910.9  21.978.2 

25.6 
139,9 
159.5 
130.0 
1.130,7 
228.1 
47.7 
367,4 
1,1 
55.1 
2.0 
208.1 
27,0 
44.1 
_____ 
6«9,9 

678,6 
328,3 
6.492.9 
2.5593 
8.265.3 
4.277,6 
1.979/7 
4.684.4 
24,6 
1.229.3 
530.7 
3.160.9 
491.3 
652.5 

__. 

_1_ 

- _ -L 

SPD 

Forecasts 

_-__. 

_H 

** Operational programmes; major projects; global grants; single programming documents; forecasts of implementadon for Objective 5(a)  agriculture. 

Much  of  the  delay  in  launching  programmes  that  occurred  in  1994  was  made  up  in  1996  as 
programming was implemented. This is illustrated by financial  implementation: commitments made in 
1996  represent  37% of  total  commitments  since  1994, taking  all the Objectives  together;  and, even 
more  significantly,  payments  in  1996 alone  represent  44% of total  payments  since  1994, which  is a 
sign  that the measures  have now taken  off.  Implementation  also involved  more and closer  monitoring 
of  programmes  under  the  Monitoring  Committees,  where  the  Corrimission  encouraged  the  sound 
financial  management  of  assistance,  the  selection  of  projects  in  line  with  by  the  Community's 
priorities  (combating  unemployment,  conserving  the  environment,  promoting  equal  opportunities, 

1 Throughout  this Report, unless otherwise specified,  sums of money are expressed at current prices, i.e. in the 
context  of  programming,  prices  for  the year  the assistance  was adopted  and  amended,  and  in the context 
commitments or payments, prices for the year of financial implementation. 

268 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

Fie. V-60:  Obiective 3: proerammine 1995-99 (ECU  million -1995 prices): 
By  priority 
Pathways of integration  (a) 
Job creation and development of human 
resources in SMEs (b) 
Young persons' employment needs (c) 
Measures for the Aland Islands (d) 
Technical  assistance  (el 

ESF 

110.0 

61.5 
82.2 
0.8 
__£ 

1SPD 

Total 

258.4 

(d)0,3%  (e)2% 

(c)32% 

(b)24% 

(a)  42% 

Adopted  in  July  1995,  the  Objective  3  SPD  had  its  first  full  year  of  activity  in  1996.  The  three 
priorities progressed well in general. The measures to help the excluded find a route back into the jobs 
market  and to train  the unemployed  in both SMEs and innovative workshops clearly exceeded  the aim 
of  the  programme  in  quantitative  terms.  Additional  training  through  apprenticeships  was  the  only 
measure  not  to progress  as  rapidly  as  envisaged,  but  an  information  campaign  directed  at  employers 
has  been  launched.  The  arrangements  for  monitoring  and  evaluation  were  finalised  in  1996.  Under 
Objective  3 300 projects  were begun  in  1996. The public can access  a description  of the  ESF-funded 
projects  through  a  dedicated  Internet  site. A  publicity  campaign  was  organised  and  the  information 
was  arranged  on thematic  lines for  project  leaders  and potential  participants. The territorial  pacts  for 
employment  initiative  was particularly  well  received:  a call  for  proposals  was  launched  at  the end  of 
the  year  and  78  municipalities  applied  to prepare  the  15 employment  pacts  to which  the  Objective  3 
Monitoring Committee has decided to allocate the appropriations for technical assistance. 

Fie. V-6I: Obiective 4: proerammine 1995-99 (ECU  million -1995 prices). 
By  priority 
Career trends forecasting  (a) 

FSE 

7.6 

Vocational training and retraining; careers 
guidance and advice (b) 
Development of know-how and innovative networks (c) 
Measures for the Aland Islands (d) 
Technical assistance (?) 

Total 

1  SPD 

(c)30% 

47,5 
25.5 
0.2 
_____ 
_S£_. 

(d)0_%  <e>4%  (a) 9% 

(b)57% 

.-

Much  interest  was shown  in Finland  in the Objective  4 SPD, adopted  in July  1995. A large number of 
SMEs participated  in the projects, especially  in the industrial  areas  in the south  of the country.  There 
were  180  projects  in  the  1995-96  period  and  the  number  of  participants  on  training  or  advisor}' 
courses  amounted  to  more  than  20 000  in  the  same  period,  26%  of  them  women,  in  about  7 000 
enterprises. At the end of  1996, 40% of the ESF budget had already  been committed  to projects. Most 
projects  had  been  submitted  by  training  bodies  and  public  authorities  and  implementation  of  the 
programme  was boosted  by  local  agents  responsible  for  researching  and  preparing projects  on  behalf 
of company  directors  who often  lacked  the time and resources  to implement  the training ideas  or plan 
the  project. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) Agriculture 

Table  V-50:  Programme implementation  1995-99 (ECU  million -1996 prices and status), 

______ 

3373 

Measures 
Production 
Marketing 

294,2 
43.1 

87% 
13% 

Following  the  Commission's  adoption  in  1995  of  the  forecasts  of  aid  to  production  structures 
(investment  aid  and  the installation  of young farmers),  1996 was the first  full  year of  implementation. 
In  parallel,  similar  but  less  extensive  arrangements  were  adopted  for  the  Aland  Islands,  thereby 
extending  aid  to  improve  production  structures  to  all  parts  of  Finland.  The  Community  aid  for 
production  structures  (a  total  of  ECU  294.2 million)  mainly  comprises  ECU  4  million  in  investment 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

269 

aid, ECU 26.7 million  in aid for young farmers  and ECU 257.5 million  in aid for  less favoured  areas. 
The Coinmission  also  authorised  additional  national  aid  schemes, especially  in  the horticulture,  pigs, 
eggs  and  poultry  sectors  that  are  covered  by  special  provisions  in  the Act  of  Accession.  Aid  for  the 
processing  and  marketing  of products  was approved  at the end  of  1995. The eligible  costs  amount  to 
ECU  359  million,  with  an  EAGGF  contribution  of  ECU  43.1  million.  The  aid  is  concentrated  in 
particular  on the meat  (45%) and  milk and milk products  sectors  (40%). The four  other  sectors  (eggs 
and  poultry,  fruit  and  vegetables,  potatoes,  oilseeds)  will  qualify  for  ECU  6  million.  At  the  end  of 
1996, the Finnish  authorities  had  approved  42 projects,  24 in the meat  sector,  8 in milk  and  6 in  fruit 
and vegetables, costing a total of ECU 98 million. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) fisheries 

Fie. V-62: Obiective 5(a)  Fisheries - proerammine 1995-99 (ECU 

million): 

Adjustment  and redirection  of the fishing  effort  (a) 
Other fishing  fleet  measures  (b) 
Renovation  and modernisation  of the fleet  (c) 
Aouaculture  (d) 
Protected  marine areas (e) 
Port facilities  ff) 
Processing and marketing  of fisheries  products  (e) 
Promotion  of fishery  products  fh) 
Socio-economic  measures (i) 
Othgr mgasurgs f j) 

_______ 

4.1 
0.0 
2.4 
6.0 
0.5 
1.0 
6.5 
2.2 
pm 
JL2. 
23.0 

Total 

(i) 0% 

(h)10%  0 ) 1% 

( a ) 1 8% 

(b)  0% 

(c) 10% 

(g)  29% 

(f)4% 

(e)2% 

(d) 26% 

The  programme  was  implemented  satisfactorily  in  1996, with the except  of aquaculture,  which  made 
little  progress. A total  of  386 projects  were launched,  and physical  commitments  account  for  24% of 
the  total  allocation  for  1995-99,  with  payments  standing  at  13%. The  Monitoring  Committee  has 
adopted  its rules of procedure and has started the process for choosing an external  evaluator. 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)70 

Fie.  V-63:  Obiective  S(b)  - nroerammine 
Population  ('000) 
Area (km2) 

1995-99: 

1.094 
95.219 
ECU million 

(f)  16% 

(9)  1% 

(a) 35% 

Bv Fund 

______ 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
Total 

94,5 
32,8 
66,7 
______ 

Average perSPDl 

4 9% 

17% 

34% 
100% 

97.0 

(c)8% 

B Local development and village 

renovation (e) 

(b)  30% 

QHuraan resources  (0 

'Technical  assistance (g) 

DDiversification and development of 

agriculture and forestry (a) 

B Diversification and development of 

non-agricultural sectors (h) 

IEnvironmental protection (c) 

"Tourism (d) 

As  the  two  SPDs  were  adopted  in  November  1995,  1996 was their  first  full  year  of  implementation. 
Implementation  revolved  around developing the national and regional procedures needed to take  fuller 
account  of  an  integrated  approach  to  rural  development  and  to  reflect  in  the  monitoring  system  the 
results  achieved  under  the  regional  chapters  of  the  SPD  for  mainland  Finland,  in  particular  by 
strengthening  the  regional  Monitoring  Committees.  One  of  the  other  main  tasks  was  to  launch  the 
ongoing  evaluation  process  by  selecting  an  evaluator  for  each  programme  and  'presenting  an  interim 
report  in  June  1997.  The  implementation  rate  has  remained  quite  low,  however,  caused  in  part  by 
delays in adopting the national aid schemes for agricultural measures in particular. 

70  Eligible  areas:  mainland  Finland,  land  Islands. 

270 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

report  in  June  1997.  The  implementation  rate  has  remained  quite  low,  however,  caused  in  part  by 
delays  in  adopting  the  national  aid  schemes  for  agricultural  measures  in  particular. 

Table  V-51:  Finland - Assistance  by Objective - 1996 in the context* of programming for  1995-96/99 (ECU 

million) 

Programmes 
(year  of  adoption) 

Total  cost 

S.F. 
assistance 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1995-96 

V. 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1995-96 

% 

(1) 

(2) 

(2)/(l) 

(3) 

(3)/(l) 

Objective  6 
SPD  Finland (1995) 
Objective  2* 
SPD  Finland (1995) 
Objective  3 
SPD  Finland  (1995) 
Objective  4 
SPD  Finland (1995) 
Objective  5(a)  agriculture 
Forecasts  for  Finland  Reg. 2328/91  (1995) 
SPD  Finland  Regs. 866  and  867/90  (1995) 

| 

| 

| 

| 

Objective  5(a)  fisheries 
SPD  Finland (1995) 
Objective  5(b) 
SPD  Aland  (1995) 
SPD  Mainland  Finland  (1995) 

Total 

Total 

T O T AL 
* After  deduction of transfers to  1997-99 

1.326.1 j 

459,9| 

77,2| 

I58.2| 

34%| 

4 2 . l| 

82.6| 

18% 

341.l| 

55,8| 

926,0| 

258,4| 

301.5| 

84.6| 

1.156,2 
359,2 
LSI  5,4 

294,2 
43.1 
337,3 

21.3| 

35,0| 

8.8| 

53.3 
0.0 
53,3 

52.4| 

94%| 

I4,2| 

29.8| 

53% 

95,3| 

37%| 

21.l| 

5I,3| 

20% 

23,6| 

28%| 

5.5| 

I2,9| 

15% 

107,8 
6,9 
114,7 

37% 
16% 
34% 

24,5 
2.1 
26,6 

51,8 
5,5 
57,3 

18% 
13% 
17% 

| 

81,9| 

23.0| 

0,0| 

23,0| 

I00%| 

0.0| 

6.9| 

30% 

10,3 
613,8 
624,0 

5.116,0 

2,6 
191,4 
194,0 
1.413,0 

0,3 
16.0 
16,3 

2 1 1 ,9 

2.6 
46,5 
49,1 
516,3 

100% 
24% 

2.1% 

3 7% 

0.1 
7.6 
7,7 
117,2 

0,8 
22,8 
23,6 
264,4 

30% 
12% 
12% 
19% 

13.2. 

Implementation  of the  Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

Finland  is  not  participating  in  5  Community  Initiatives:  Rechar,  Résider,  Retex,  Konver  and  Regis.  Two 
Community  Initiative  programmes  were  approved  in  1995  (Adapt  and  Employment);  the  remaining 
programmes (SMEs, Urban, 2 Leader, Pesca, 7 Interreg) were approved  in  1996. 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in Finland: 
Information  and communications  technologies play  an  important role  in most of the priorities  in the  Leader 
and  SMEs  programmes  (creation  of  networks,  internationalisation  and  cooperation,  data  bases,  new 
activities  under  development  -  electronics,  software,  etc.,  electronic  commerce,  etc.)  and  in  the  Adapt 
programme  (promotion  of teleworking, distance learning, introduction of new technologies  in enterprises and 
the  creation  of  databases).  The  Interreg  programmes  also  place  particular  importance  on  the  new 
information  technologies: 

•  between Finland  and Sweden:  introduction of telecommunications  technology and improvements to 
logistical systems  to reduce  the geographic  isolation of the border area, improve the technological 
capabilities  of enterprises and women and protect  the region's  environment; 

•  between  Sweden,  Finland  and  Norway:  in  the  Kvarken-MittSkandia  region,  coordination  of  the 
emergency  services  and  new  telecommunications  technology  (e.g., teleconferencing,  cross-border 
networks,  etc.)  and training development through distance learning and technology  transfers, etc.; 
in  the  northern  Arctic  region,  as part  of the  efforts  to  improve  the  living  conditions  of  the  Sami 
people,  human  resources  will  be  strengthened  through  information  technology  (e.g.  multimedia 
training,  development  of  technological  capacities  in  support  of  business,  teleworking,  distance 
learning); 

•  between  Finland,  Sweden,  Norway  and  Russia:  cooperation  and  dissemination  of  information 
between enterprises  through  networks, the organisation  of networks  between research  centres  and 
trade  and  industry,  development  of  training  in  multimedia  and  distance  language  learning, 
improvements  to the area's  internal operating capacity  by interconnecting telecommunications,  the 
use  of  information  technology for  mapping purposes,  shared  data  bases  and  emergency  services, 
etc.; 

•  between  Finland  and  Russia:  RTD  networks  to  exchange  experts,  improvements  to  information 
services  and  the  development  of  telecommunications  for  environmental  purposes  in  Karelia; 
telecommunications  improvements in the  "Nordic Triangle",  the application  of new technologies to 
environmental  protection  and  land planning,  increased  know-how  through  networking,  distance 
learning,  Open  Universities and the development of information research and  technology in south 
east Finland. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Fund1; (1996) 

271 

The  Urban  Community Initiative programme  for  Joensuu also  makes  full  use  of  data  transmission  and 
information  technology to prevent social exclusion  and assist the long-term  unemployed  back into the jobs 
market. It  is  aiding  the  introduction  and  extension  of  the chain of  Palveluelli  data  transmission  services, 
information and support for  the creation of SMEs through information technology and local residents' access to 
the information  networks.  Lastly, the Pesca programme seeks to create  three data networks linking producers, 
fish processors,  the markets and the advisory  organisations  with  a view to improving  the^vay the fish market 
operates. 

_^ 

Five  national  and  seven  Interreg  programmes  were  adopted  in  1996. Firstly,  the  Urban  Community 
Initiative  programme  approved  in July for the city of Joensuu  aims to make its target  group -  families 
in  difficulty  and  the  unemployed  living  in  a  vast  area  of  housing  estates  -  more  conscious  of  the 
responsibilities  involved  in  living  in  society  and  self-reliant;  it  also  aims  to  provide  training  and 
advice  and  involve  the  unemployed  in  improving  their  environment  so  that  a  return  to  more  social 
behaviour  is instilled  in the area  in question. The programme  is operated  directly  by the  municipality. 
Secondly, the  SMEs programme,  approved  in November,  concentrates  mainly  on  technology  transfer 
and  development,  the  globalisation  of  SMEs  and  inter-enterprise  cooperation  and  networks.  One  of 
the  Leader  programmes  involves  the  Objective  6 areas  and  the  other  the  Objective  5(b)  areas.  They 
were adopted  in August and July  respectively. The first  has already chosen  10 local action groups and 
the  second  12 local  action  groups,  all  of  which  have  begun  implementing  the  measures.  Leader  has 
been  generally  well received  as the rural development model it fosters  is highly relevant to the  efforts 
made  in Finland  in this regard. Lastly, the Pesca programme adopted  in March  has not yet  started  but 
the  Finnish  authorities  have  introduced  the  legislative  framework  (application  forms,  evaluation 
forms, national rules and regulations) that will allow it to begin early in  1997. 

The  seven  Interreg programmes  in which Finland  is participating were also approved  in July. Two of 
the  programmes  involve  cooperation  with  Sweden  (Aland  Island  and  Kvarken-MittSkandia),  one 
cooperation  with  Sweden  and  Norway  north  of  the  Arctic  circle,  three  cooperation  with  Russia  (the 
Barents  programme,  involving  also  Sweden  and  Norway,  the  Karelia  programme  and  the  South-East 
Finland  programme)  and  one on cooperation  between  Finland  and Estonia across the Gulf  of  Finland. 
Total  investment  in  the  programmes  amounts  to  ECU  199 million,  of  which  ECU  63 million  (the 
combined  Swedish  and Finnish  shares) comes from  the Structural Funds. The figures  show that  there 
has  been  a  significant  expansion  in  funding  possibilities  for  cross-border  activities.  On  the  Russian 
and  Estonian  side  efforts  are  being  made  to  fund  activities  that  improve  compatibility  between  the 
Interreg  projects  and  the  Tacis  and  Phare  programmes.  The  programmes'  originality  lies  in  the 
pooling of funding  and unified  financial  management along the Finno-Swedish border (a single region 
being  responsible  for  managing  the  funds  for  the  whole  programme)  and  in  the  advanced 
decentralisation  of  decision-making.  The  first  meetings  of  the  programme  Monitoring  Cornmittees 
were held in  October. 

The  Employment  and  Adapt  programmes,  which  had  been  adopted  in  1995, selected  projects  at  the 
start  of  the  year  which  were  subsequently  launched  during  the  year.  In  the  first  six  months,  3 000 
individuals  participated  in  a  total  of  31  Employment  projects  (11  Now  projects,  9  Youthstart,  11 
Horizon  -  equivalent  to  100 000  training  days))  and  involved  87  partners  in  other  countries  (in 
particular  Ireland,  the  United  Kingdom  and  Germany).  The  projects  are  directed  towards  the  long-
term unemployed, drug addicts, immigrants, former  prisoners and the handicapped, and the  promotion 
of  equal  opportunities  in  the  labour  market.  Support  for  social  enterprises  and  assisted  employment 
were  the  predominant  themes.  Under  the  Adapt  programme  (28  projects)  aid  was  provided  to  assist 
workers  adapt  to  industrial  change  through  virtual  work  experience  and  teleworking  projects.  One 
hundred  and fourteen  (114) partners from  other countries participated  in the projects  (mainly  from  the 
United  Kingdom, Italy and  Germany). Project  promoters  for  the two Initiatives were mainly  NGOs  or 
public authorities, educational  bodies in particular. 
Lastly,  the  decision  to  allocate  the  reserve  for  the  Community  Initiatives  enabled  an  extra  ECU  18.9 
million  to be released  to Finland  for  all the Initiatives, with the exception  of SMEs Initiative.71. 

71 See also Chapter I.B.I. Community Initiatives. 

272 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Tableau  V-52:  Finland 
million) 

Initiative 
(number of programmes) 

Adapt  (1) 

Employment ( I ) 

Leader(2) 

Pesca  (1) 

S M E i ( l) 

Urban(I) 

Total (7) 
Interree/Reven (7)** 
CIPs adopted in 1996: 
Leader Finland (Objective 6) 
Leader Finland (Objective 5(b)) 
Pesca Finland 
SMEs Finland 
Urban, Joensuu 
Total (5) 
Interred 
(7)' 
•  Excluding reserve 

M U U U I U^  1 _ 0 «1  VW 

Community  Initiatives  -  1996  in  the  context  of programming  for  1995-99  (ECU 

Total cost 

S.F. 

assistance* 
.  m 

19.70 
29.15 
28.09 
3,41 
11.09 
3,96 
95,40 

n,9 
16,2 
3,4 
11.1 
4.0 
46,6 

42.90 
66.25 
76.47 
8.75 
27.93 
* 28 
22738 

32.1 
44.3 
8,8 
27.9 
5.3 
118,4 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1995-96 

0.00 
0.00 
28.09 
3,41 
7.39 
3.15 
42.04 

11,9 
16,2 
3,4 
7,4 
3.1 
42,0 

_____ 

100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
67% 
80% 
95% 

100% 
100% 
100% 
67% 
80% 
90% 

19.70 
29.15 
28.09 
3.41 
7.39 
3.15 
9 0 4» 

11,9 
16,2 
3,4 
7,4 
3,1 
42,0 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1995-96 
<3, 

1.21 
0.00 
8,43 
1.13 
2.22 
1.57 
14,56 

3,6 
4.8 
1.1 
2,2 
1.6 
133 

9.85 
14.58 
8,43 
1.13 
2.22 
1.57 
37,77 

3,6 
4,8 
1,1 
2.2 
1.6 
133 

_____ 

50% 
50% 
30% 
33% 
20% 
40% 
40% 

30% 
30% 
33% 
20% 
40% 
29% 

For programme details see Chapter VII. Table 2.2. 

*•* For programme details see Chapter I.B.I. Community  Initiatives 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

273 

14.  SWEDEN 

14.1. 

Implementation  of assistance  bv  Obiective  in  1996 

Support for  the development  of technological potential  in the regions of Sweden : 
Objective  6: Each SPD priority  contains support  measures for  the information society  (16.2%  of  Community 
appropriations).  This falls  within the broader  objective of spreading know-how, and includes the  development 
of  communication  systems  and  associated  technologies,  encouraging  the  use  of  new  technologies  in 
businesses  and  developing  regional  databases.  It  also  involves  developing  advanced  telecommunications 
technologies  to fill in the gaps  in RTD for  small businesses and applying  these new technologies  to  education 
(basic  and  higher  education  through  distance  learning,  new  techniques  for  improving  the  quality  of 
education,  communication  among  Swedish  schools  and  with  schools  in  other 
countries  to  exchange 
experience).  As  part  of  the  development  of  human  resources,  new  teaching  techniques  are  being  used  to 
strengthen  cultural  identity  at  local and  regional  level (e.g.: documentary  databases,  cultural  and  historical 
databases,  etc.),  to improve  local public  services  and  to improve health  care and  the quality  of  life in  areas 
remote from  the  regional  centres  (e.g.  remote  medical prescriptions).  Under the priority for  supporting  the 
Sami people,  it is planned  to create a database  and multimedia facilities  in Sami to promote  their culture and 
to combine  traditional  reindeer  rearing techniques  with the use of new technology. Support for  technological 
development  is  also  essential  in  measures  to  support  employment,  trade  and  industry.  Finally,  the  use  of 
technology  is being  encouraged  to develop agricultural, forestry  and fisheries productivity  and  markets  while 
preserving  natural  resources. 

Objective  2:  RTD  plays  a  key  role  in  the  strategy  of  all  the  SPDs  (6.1%  of  Community funds),  both  in 
determining  priorities  and in selecting and implementing projects: 

•  Blekinge  : it is planned  to introduce information technologies (ECU 2.5 million; total cost: ECU 11 
million)  as  a  way  of  creating jobs  and  giving  all  citizens  access  to the  information  society.  This 
involves  promoting  research  and  information  technologies  in  all  private  and  public  socio 
economics activities  (businesses,  rural development, public  health care, infrastructures, RTD,  etc.), 
and infrastructure  and industrial development (creation of innovation centres); 

•  Norra Norrlandskusten  : one priority  (ECU 2.9 million; total cost: ECU 12 million)  is to stimulate 
the use of information  technologies,  in particular  in businesses, and another  (ECU 9 million;  total 
cost:  ECU  40.5  million)  is  to  encourage  collaboration  between  businesses  and  research  centres 
(spreading  information on technology, technology transfer  projects); 

•  Àngermanlandkusten  : this SPD does not have a priority for  information technologies  as such,  but 
innovation  in  businesses  (ECU  3.3  million;  total  cost  :  ECU  23.2  million). 

it  has  one  for 
Furthermore,  one of the project  selection  criteria is the application of new  technologies.; 

•  Bergslagen  :  here  encouragement  of  the  use  of  new  technologies  is focused  on  businesses,  in 
particular  in  the  least  populated  areas  and  the  areas  furthest  from  urban  centres,  through 
total  cost:  ECU 
cooperation  between  businesses  and  research  centres  (ECU  5 million; 
18.8 million) and training in R&D (ECU 3 million; total cost: ECU  11.3 million); 

•  Fyrstad  :  technological  development  is  integrated  in  local  development  measures,  measures  to 
develop  human  resources and  to improve training, but also in measures to  improve  the  capacities 
total  cost:  ECU  17.9 million),  particularly  as  regards 
of  businesses  (ECU  3.3 million; 
environmental  technologies. It is also one of the project selection criteria. 

Objective  5(b)  :  All  the  programmes  have  a  technology  component,  with  telecommunications,  RTD  and 
telematics  treated as instruments for  overcoming  the isolation of rural areas: 

•  Skâergarden  :  use  of  new  telecommunication  technologies  and  telematics  to  link  the  islands  with 

the rest of the country; development  of distance  learning; 

•  Vâstra Sverige and  Vasterbotten/Gàvle/Dala : telecommunications  development; 
•  Sydbstra Sverige  : support for  RTD  programmes; 
•  Gotland: support for  telematics  applications. 

In  total, the financing of technological  development  in Sweden accounts for  17.1% of Structural  Funds 
assistance  (Objectives  6 and 2). 

274 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Fund* (1996) 

Table V-53: 

Sweden  -  Financing  directly  related  to  technological development  in  the 1994-99 
programming period (ECU million) 

TOTAL 

Structural  Funds 

__L 

_SL 

Objective 2 
Objective 6 
TOTAL 
NB: The programminj! procedures and diflcrent approaches 

138.1 
_____ 
24.9 

29,6 
40.8 
70.5 

100% 

61% 

21% 
47% 
31% 

Member State 
Total 

Public  Private 
43.7 
_ i __ 
_-_. 

64.8 
.32.4 
___. 

108.5 
_____ 
154.4 

79% 
53% 
____t 

Financing by the Structural  Funds 

27% 

iaken by the Member Slates invue 10 tauuon in interpreting  these figures, in particular 

spending on inlormauon society  projects, which arc nl'ten linked to other field'! such as RTD. 

73% 

OBJECTIVE 672 

Fie. V-64: Proerammine 1995-99 (ECU million): 
Priorities: 
Employment  trade and industry (a) 
Promoting  know-how (b) 
Agriculture,  fisheries  and natural  resources 
(c) 
Rural  development  and community  work (d) 
Sami  community (e) 
Technical  assistance (fl 
By  Fund. 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

Total 

122,6 
63,9 
61,4 
4,1 
252.9 

1 SPD 

Main  achievements  in 1996 

82.6 

66,1 
41.7 
7.6 
5.2 

49% 
25% 
24% 
2% 
100% 

(e) 3% 

(1)2% 

(d) 17% 

(a)  33% 

(c)  26% 

(b) 19% 

The Objective 6 SPD, approved in November  1995 aims to create 9 500 new jobs and 900 businesses. 
Cornmittees  responsible for project  selection  have  been  established  in each  district  for most  of the 
measures,  and a  regional  group  has been  set up with  responsibility  for  measures  relating  to  R&D 
measures, information  technologies and tourism where these require a strategic  approach. 

The  pace  of  implementation  of  the  SPD  was  disappointing  in  1996.  A  working  party  for 
implementation  had been  set up by the Monitoring Committee to draw up guidelines for regional and 
local  authorities responsible for project  selection in each of the seven districts covered by Objective 6. 
These  guidelines  were  not  in  the  end  published  until  the  middle  of  1996, with  the  result  that 
implementation  was  delayed.  However,  the situation  improved  in the second  half  of the year,  so that 
by  the end of  the  year  the  projects  approved  accounted  for  about  80% of  the  financing  package 
provided  for  1995-96. Most  progress  was made under  measures  relating to local  development, R&D 
and  information  technologies,  while  measures  to  support  businesses  lagged  behind.  Since  Small 
businesses  expressed  concern  about  access  to  the SPD, a  special  group  was set up  to  study  the 
problem  and report  to the SPD's  Monitoring  Committee.  Under  the RTD measure  the  Monitoring 
Committee  approved  an  allocation  of  ECU  9 million  to  the  Kiruna  Research  Institute  for  the 
Environment  and Regional Planning; this is the largest-scale project  approved to date. 

Eligible  areas:  Jàmtland.  Varmland,  Kopparberg.  Gàvleborg,  Vàsternorrland,  Vâsterbotten,  Norrbotten. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

275 

1996 in the context  of the 1995-99 programming  period 

At  the  end  of  1996  about  80%  of  Structural  Funds  assistance  for  1995-96  had  been  allocated  to 
various  projects.  However,  only  6.5%  of  the  1995  and  1996  tranches  had  actually  been  paid  to  the 
final  beneficiaries.  The  1996  tranche  could  therefore  only  be  opened  for  one  of  the  Funds,  the 
EAGGF, before  the end of the year. 

OBJECTIVE 273 

Fie.  V-65:  Proerammine 1995-99 (ECU  million at 1995  prices and 1996 situation). 
Priorities: 
Development of businesses (a) 
Innovation, research and technology (b) 
Working environment, toursim, local 
development (c) 
Training, qualifications (d) 
Technical assistance (g) 
Bv Fund. 

33,8 
24.3 
__4__ 

79.5 
17.8 

ERDF 
ESF 
_______ 

121,7 
38,3 
160.0 

S SPDs 

Average per SPD 

Main achievements  in 1996 

76% 
24% 
100% 

____ 

(d)  15% 

(e)3% 

(c)21% 

(b)  11% 

(a)  50% 

The  five  Objective  2  SPDs  were  approved  in  November  1995  for  the  1995-99  period.  They  focus 
principally  on measures  to improve the business  climate,  support  local  Small  businesses  and  develop 
tourism,  and  they  set  ambitious  targets  in  terms  of job  creation  (about  21 000 new jobs).  During  the 
first  half  of  1996,  the  national  and  regional  authorities  made  a  considerable  effort  to  establish 
adequate  structures  and  procedures  for  the  administration,  monitoring  and  assessment  of  the 
programmes. The  programmes'  implementation  fell  somewhat  behind.  In  the  second  half  of  the  year 
the  situation  improved  markedly.  At  the  end  of  the  year  the  projects  approved  at  regional  level 
accounted for  20% of the Structural Fund assistance available for  the programming period.  Moreover, 
in  most  of  the  regions  many  projects  were  nearing  completion,  which  gives  grounds  to  expect  that 
most of the initial delays will be made up during  1997. 

""" 

The  Objective  2  Monitoring  Committees  met  three  times  in  1996.  At  their  meetings  they  finalized 
implementation  arrangements  and  the  interim  assessment  process  was  initiated.  They  also  analysed 
difficulties  encountered  in  the  implementation  of  SPDs  (project  approval  procedures,  delays  in 
payments to final  beneficiaries,  participation  by small businesses). 

1996 in the context  of the 1995-99 programming  period 

Despite  the  rapid  improvement  in project  approval  rates  during  the  second  half  of  the  year,  the  level 
of payments to final  beneficiaries  remained  very low (at the end of the year they accounted  for  hardly 
more  than  5%  of  the  appropriations  available  for  the  whole  programming  period).  This  was 
principally  because  of  delays  in approval  during  the first  half  of  the year, but  also to  a certain  extent 
because  of  the  comparative  cumbersome  nature  of  the  administrative  procedures.  As  a  consequence 
the Swedish authorities were not able to claim payment of the second advances, nor ask for  the  second 
tranche  for  the  Bergslagen  SPD  to  be  opened.  The  other  four  SPDs  are  programmes  with  a  single 
commitment. 

73  Eligible  areas: Ângerlandskusten,  Bergslagen,  Blekinge,  Fyrstad,  Norra  Noniandskusten. 

276 

OBJECTIVES 3 AND 4 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

Fig.  V-66:  Obiective 3: Proerammine 1995-99 (ECU  million at 1995 prices): 
Priorities 
integration of voung people in the labour market! (a) 
Combating  long-term unemployment (b) 
Integration in the labour market of those in 
danger of exclusion  (c) 
Technical assistance fd) 

ESF 

97.0 
173.0 

1 SPD 

Total 

63,0 
____ 
_ _ _ _» 

(d)  4% 

(c) 18% 

(a) 28% 

(b)50% 

The  Objective  3  SPD  was  not  approved  until  December  1995  -  projects  launched  after  1 July  1995 
are,  however,  retroactively  eligible  -  and  so  the  establishment  of  structures  and  procedures  for  the 
programme held up its launch on the ground  somewhat. That is why only 30 projects  were selected  for 
1995  (with  retroactive  financing).  Between  July  1995 and  the end  of  December  1996, however,  643 
projects  were financed  and 33 636 participants benefited  from  ESF financing.  54%  of the participants 
are  long-term  unemployed  and  39%  are  young  people.  46%  are  participating  in  schemes  for 
integration  into working life, 35% in skills development  schemes and  14% are receiving guidance  and 
counselling.  53% are  women  and  15% are  immigrants.  Preliminary  results  indicate  that  32%  of  the 
participants  registered  as  unemployed  before  taking  part  in  the  measures  are  no  longer  unemployed 
and that 23% gave up during the projects  (because they had found  work in 36% of cases, because they 
had started other training in the case of  15%,  or for unknown reasons in the case of 27%). 

Fie. V-67:  Obiective 4: Proerammine 1995-99 (ECU  million at 1995 prices): 
Priorities 
Forecasting, planning and development  (a) 
Skills development, guidance and counselling  (b) 
Cooperation and transfer structures, networks (c) 
Technical assistance (d) 

ESF 

1SPD 

Total 

26.0 
112.4 
26.0 
8.6 
_____ 

(c) 15% 

(d) 5% 

(8) i5o/o 

(b) 65% 

The  Objective  4  SPD  was  not  adopted  until  February  1996.  It  focuses  on  employees  of  small 
businesses  and  15%  of  the funding  is specifically  earmarked  for  small businesses  in the public  health 
care  sector  (networks  of  self-employed  individuals  may  also submit projects). The  general  strategy  is 
to  orient  production  to customer  demand  by  reorganizing  working  time  and  methods  and  developing 
employees'  skills. The  first,  compulsory,  stage  of  the  projects  is  an  analysis  of  the  situation  of  each 
business  prior  to  drafting  an  action  plan. No  project  is  launched  unless  it  has  been  approved  by  and 
involves  the  participation  of  the  business's  employees.  A  new  national  agency  is  responsible  for  the 
daily  administration  of  the  programme  while  the  national  employment  office  is  responsible  for  its 
financial  implementation.  Objective  4 has been  greeted  with a great deal  of  interest  in  Sweden.  3 066 
projects  were  selected  in  1996. These  involve  250  businesses  with  more  than  50  employees,  2  856 
businesses  with fewer  than  50 employees  and  1 467  with  fewer  than  10 employees. The total  number 
of  participants  is  63  620,  of  whom  37%  are  women.  However  there  is  a  risk  that  the  slowness  of 
financial  implementation  may dampen this enthusiasm. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) Agriculture 

Table  V-54:  Implementation forecasts 1995-99 (ECU  million.'situation  1996) 

________ 

92,2 

Measures 
Production 
Marketing 

6S.7 

23Ji 

___ 
75% 
25% 

Since  its  accession,  Sweden  has  been  gradually  establishing  the  support  measures  provided  for  by 
Community  legislation  for  improving  the  efficiency  of  agricultural  production  structures.  In  1995  it 
first  introduced  compensator)' payments  which  23 000  farmers  received  in  1996  and  which  accounts 
for  the  largest  part  of  Swedish  provisions  in  this  respect.  Measures  to  support  young  farmers  were 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

277 

applied  from  1996, in  which  year  149 beneficiaries  were  registered. This  figure,  which  is  lower  than 
expected, may be explained by the fact that the aid mechanism is new to farmers  in Sweden, who have 
still  to  become  familiar  with  it.  Finally,  the  support  arrangements  for  investment  in  agricultural 
holdings, which  were approved at the end  of  1996, are to be implemented  in  1997. The emphasis  will 
be on protecting the environment,  animal welfare  and diversification  of activities. 

The  SPD  for  assistance  with  product processing  and  marketing  was adopted  in March  1996. Eligible 
costs  total  ECU  188 million. The  meat  and  milk  and  milk product  sectors  will  receive  about  61% of 
the funds  available. The five  other  sectors  (poultry, fruit  and  vegetables, flowers  and plants,  potatoes 
and  forestry  products)  will  receive ECU  9 million.  Implementation  of  the  arrangements  began  at  the 
end  of  1996  with  the  approval  of  210 projects  with  a  total  value  of  ECU  15 million.  Milk  and  milk 
products account for the largest proportion (71%). 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) Fisheries 

Fie.  V-68:  Objective  5(a)  fisheries  - Proerammine  1995-99  (ECU  million): 

Adjustment  and reorientation of fishing effort  (a) 
Other fleet structuring measures (b) 
Renewing and modernising the fleet (c). 
Aauaculture (d) 
Protected marine areas (e) 
Port facilities  (f) 
Processing and marketing of products (e) 
Promotion of products (h) 
socio-economic measures (i) 
Other  measures  (T> 

_E_2__L 

4.0 

0.0 

12.0 

5.1 

1.9 

2.2 

9.0 

2.2 

pm 
____ 
_____ 

Total 

(j) 9% 

(h) 6% 

(a)  10% 

(g) 22% ^ _ _V 

:./  ~9_____|  (c) 29% 

W 6%  M S H f l n a* 

After  the  project  selection  procedures  had been  established,  project  financing  began  in mid-1996, the 
SPD  having  been  adopted  in  November  1995. Eligible  costs  committed  on  the  ground  at  the end  of 
1996  totalled  ECU  16.6  million,  or  14% of  the  total  provided  for  the  period  1995-99. Investment  is 
highest  in  the  processing  sector  (43% of  total  eligible  costs),  followed  by  the  adjustment  of  fishing 
capacity  and modernization  of the fleet  (17% of eligible costs each). 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)74 

Fir.  V-69: Obiective 5(b) - Proerammine 1995-99: 
Population  (1000 nab.) 
Area  (km2) 

Bv  Fund 

5 SPD 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
Total 

70,6 
30,3 
40,2 
______ 

Average per SPDi 

754 
______ 
m\tt\<>n  fCK>y 

50% 
21% 
28% 
100% 

28.2 

O Agriculture and forestry 

diversification and development 

_<a) 
— Diversification and development 
of non-agricultural sectors (t>) 

0)2% 

(a)  17% 

•  Protection of the environment 

(f)21% 

(e) 8% 

(d)1l% 

(c> 5% 

{b)36% 

(c) 

"Tourism (d) 

•  Local development and village 
.  renewal (e) 

—Human resources (f) 

•Technical assistance (g) 

The  five  Objective  5(b)  SPDs  were  adopted  in  May  1996  and  the  first  Monitoring  Committee 
meetings  were  held  in  May  and  June  in  order  to  begin  implementation  as  quickly  as  possible. 
Introducing  Community  rural  development  policy  in  Sweden  involved  new  approaches:  multiannual 
programming  with  long-term  strategies  and  the  monitoring  of  Objectives  were  innovations;  the 
regional  programmes,  which  include  areas  straddling  traditional  county  boundaries,  entailed  active 
cooperation  among  the  new  partners,  including  the  social  partners.  This  also  involved  creating  new 
authorities  (the regional  Monitoring  Cornmittees)  and  adapting  administrative  and  inspection  systems 
to Community  requirements. 

74  Eligible  areas:  Sydôstra  Sverige,  Vâsterbotten/Gâvla/Dala,  Vâstra  Sverige,  Skàvgârden, Gotland  (island  of). 

28 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

supporting  small  firms),  and  the  introduction  of  an  effective  and  efficient  system  of  interim 
assessment.  1996  was  also  the  year  for  preparing  the  second  stage  of  progranrrning  for  Objective  2 
assistance and  some Objective 4 programming2. 

1.2.  1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 

By the end  of  1996, practically  all  the assistance  planned  for  1994-99  had  been  adopted.  Programme 
implementation  had  gathered  pace  rapidly  over  the  three  years  and  now  reached  cruising  speed  for 
most Objectives, Member States and assistance. Comparing  1996 with the first  two years» we find  that 
37%  of commitments  for  the  period  1994-96  were made in  1996, 28% in  1994 and  35% in  1995. On 
the payments  side, the picture is even clearer:  of payments made since  1994, 44% were made in  1996 
compared  with 21 % in  1994 and 35% in  1995.  . 

Table 1-2:  CSFs/SPDs-Implementation 1994to 1996(ECUmillion) 

1994 

251,4 
121,0 
2 703,5 
1 884,6 
4 018,5 
1 903,7 
725,9 
1 572,6 
19,2 
323,0 
0,0 
3 169,8 
0,0 
0,0 
1 646,8 
18 339,8 

Commitments 
1996 
1995 

86,4 
95,4 
2 422,2 
2 653,0 
5 837,4 
1 326,5 
954,2 
2 282,5 
9,4 
183,8 
300,5 
1 379,7 
304,5 
277,4 
1 331,2 
19 444,1 

361,8 
120,9 
3 351,6 
1 590,0 
5 498,7 
2 022,6 
1 181,3 
2 606,2 
6,6 
287,1 
209,6 
2 968,0 
211,9 
140,4 
2 521,0 
23 077,6 

1994-96 
699,6 
337,2 
8 477,2 
6 127,6 
15 354,5 
5 252,8 
2 861,5 
6 461,2 
35,2 
793,9 
510,2 
7 517,4 
516,3 
417,8 
5 499,0 
60 861,5 

1994 

108,1 
64,9 
1 605,2 
1 051,3 
1 975,4 
803,2 
513,2 
767,5 
9,4 
189,3 
0,0 
1 596,9 
0,0 
0,0 
965,6 
9 649,9 

Payments 

1995 

102,2 
87,5 
1 631,0 
1 705,8 
4 537,3 
949,4 
856,5 
1 191,9 
6,5 
178,2 
143,8 
1 667,2 
147,2 
115,9 
826,2 
14 146,5 

1996 

262,7 
74,5 
•  2 967,2 
1 646,1 
4 460,9 
1 623,0 
900,8 
2 227,0 
9,3 
201,4 
216,8 
2 434,6 
117,2 
78,3 
1 751,4 
18 970,9 

1994-96 
473,0 
226,9 
6 203,4 
4 403,1 
10 973,6 
3 375,6 
2 270,4 
4 186,4 
25,2 
568,9 
360,6 
5 698,7 
264,4 
194,2 
3 543,2 
42 767,3 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
EUR15 

Fig. 1-1: 

CSFs/SPDs - Share of each year in implementation 1994 to 1996 

Commitments 

Payments 

• 

UK 

o 

a. 

US 

\ 

IX  BXH 

• 

U K '

l

i aE 

F 

BO. 

I 

L M .A 

F f

t

f S UK 

HJU5 

Financial  implementation  in  the  first  three  years  in  relation  to  the  overall  financing  planned  for  the 
period  1994-99  confirms  this  gathering  momentum.  Taking  all  the  Objectives  together,  the  share  of 
financing committed represents almost half the total, and the share paid represents one third of that  for 
the  whole  period.  However,  the  situation  varies  from  one  Objective  to  another.  Objective  2  is  a 
special case: the rate of implementation  during the first  phase,  1994-96, should be assessed  in the light 
of the delay  in launching the programmes, which  led to a reduction  in the amount  originally  allocated 
to the first  phase, with  transfer  of financing  to the second phase,  1997-99. Of  the financing  originally 

2  See  below  section  3 for  Objective  2.  and  section  4  for  Objectives  3 and  4. 

278 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Financial  implementation  in 1996 reflected  the fact that the programmes were being launched,  and on-
the-ground  implementation  did not begin  until  autumn.  However,  they  started  up relatively  slowly 
because  of the  novelty  of the  system  and,  to some  extent,  the uncertainty  of potential  beneficiaries 
about the timing and method of implementation. The state of implementation  was discussed at the two 
Monitoring  Committee  meetings  held  in each  region  in November,  and the importance  of  informing 
potential  beneficiaries  was stressed. The pace of implementation  was stepped up somewhat at the end 
of  the  year  and  it may  be hoped  that  this  progress  will  continue  in  1997. Monitoring  the  progress of 
implementation  will  be one of the  main  tasks  of the  assessors,  who  were  selected  at the end of the 
year and  will submit  their interim assessment reports in June  1997. 

Table V-55:  Sweden - Assistance by  Objective 

1996 in the context of the 1995-99 programming period 

(ECU million) 

P r o g r a m m es 
(year  adopted) 

Total  cost 

S . F. 
assistance 

(1) 

C o m m i t m e n ts  Commitments 

1996 

1 9 9 5 -% 
(2) 

% 

(2)/(l) 

Payments 
1996 

P a y m e n ts 
1995-96 
(3) 

% 

(31/(1) 

Obiective  6 
SPD  Sweden  (1095) 

Obiective  2 

SPD  Àngermanlandskusten  (1995) 
SPD  Bergslagen  (1995) 
SPD  Blekinge  (1995) 

SPD  Fyrstad  (1995) 
.SPD Norm  Norrlnndskiisten  (1995) 

Obiective  3 
SPD Sweden (1995) 
Obiective  4 
SPD Sweden (1996) 
Obiective  5(a)  agriculture 

Forecasts  Sweden  R. 2328/91  (1995) 
SPD  Sweden  R  866  and  867/00  (1996) 

I 

635.ol 

252.o! 

11,51 

56.4| 

22%! 

o.ol 

i\_*\ 

12% 

89,5 
321,4 
85,8 
145.5 
161.2 

803.4 

18,0 
67.0 
15,0 
24,0 
36.0 

160.0 

0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
0,0 
.0,0 
0,0 

18,0 
12,8 
15.0 
24,0 
36.0 

705.» 

100% 
19% 
100% 
100% 
100% 

66% 

0,0 
0.0 
0.0 

0,0 
00 
0.0 

6,2 
6,4 
5,0 
8,2 
12,3 
38.1 

34% 
10% 
34% 
34% 
34% 

24% 

771,ol 

347,ol 

O.ol 

73.ol 

21*1 

O.ol 

36.51 

11% 

612.61 

173.ol 

37.51 

37.51 

22%l 

18 si 

18.81 

11% 

267.8 
187,8 

455.7 

68.7 
23.5 
92,2 

15.5 
11.0 

26,5 

29.2 
11.0 
40.2 

4 3% 
47% 

44% 

22,4 
f  5 

27.9 

29.2 
55 

34.7 

4 3% 
23% 

38% 

Total 

1 

1 

Total 

Obiective  5(a)  fisheries 
SPD  Sweden  (199V, 

Obiective  5(h) 

SPD  Gotland  (1996) 
SPD  Skiirgàrden  (1996) 

SPD  Sydbstra  Sverige  (1996) 
SPD  Vasterborten/Gavle/Dala  (1996) 
SPD  Vasrro  Sverige  (1996) 

Total 

TOTAL 

| 

115.91 

40.ol 

O.ol 

40.0l 

100*1 

n ol 

17 ol 

^0% 

50,1 

3 03 
327.0 
199.7 
120.1 
727.1 

4.120,7 

11.2 
7.2 
49.0 
42,9 
30.7 

141.0 

1.205.2 

11.2 
7,2 
7,8 
8,0 

30.7 

64.9 

140,4 

11,2 
7.2 
7.8 
8,0 

30.7 

64.9 

417.8 

100% 
100% 
16% 
19% 
100% 

46% 

3 5% 

3,4 
2,1 
3.9 
4,0 

9.2 

22.6 

7 83 

3,4 
2.1 
3,9 
4.0 
9.2 

22.6 

1 9 4J 

30% 

30% 
8% 
9% 
30% 

16% 

16% 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

279 

14.2. 

Implementation  of  the  Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

Note : 
Sweden  is  not  taking  part  in  the  Rechar,  Résider,  Retex  or  Regis  Initiatives.  Two  of  the  programmes  were 
adopted  in  1995 (Employment  and Adapt). In  1996 the remaining  programmes  were adopted:  SMEs,  Konver, 
Urban,  Pesca,  2  for  Leader  and  8 for  Interreg  (1  together  with  Denmark,  1 with  Finland,  2  with  Finland  and 
Norway, 3 with Norway,  1 with Finland, Norway and Russia). 

Support for  technological  development potential  in Sweden : 
The  Swedish  programme  for  the  SME  Initiative  gives priority  to  making  small  businesses  more  competitive 
through  the  use  of  new  technologies.  It  stresses  the  importance  of  analysing  the  technological  needs  of 
businesses,  and provides  support for  technology  transfer and  application.  These measures,  which  have  been 
allocated  ECU  4.5  million  (total  cost: ECU  14.4  million) develop  the  role  of  new  technologies  in  reducing 
geographical  disadvantages  and creating opportunities for  small  businesses. 
Information  technologies  also  play  a  role  in  some  of  the  industrial  conversion  Initiatives.  The  Konver 
programme  in  Karlskoga  encourages  the  application  of  existing  technological  capacity  for  non-military 
purposes  through  cooperation  between  businesses  and  research  centres  via  the  Centre for  Technological 
Development,  while  in  Karlsborg  it supports  the  creation  of  small  businesses,  all  through  the  development 
and diffusion  of technology  (e.g. creation of networks) and training in technologies  and business  management 
(e.g. training  in specialized  technologies, distance learning,  etc.). 
The Interreg  programmes  treat the new technologies as a way of developing  cross-border  cooperation: 

•  between  Sweden  and  Norway:  improving  communications  and  using  new  technologies  in  the 
in  small 
media,  training  and  investment  in  information  technologies, 
businesses,  developing  joint 
information  systems  on  the  labour  market  (Inre  Skandinavia 
programme);  technological  cooperation  between  businesses,  universities,  local  authorities  and 
training  institutions,  the  extension  of  communication  and  telecommunications  networks  and 
distance  learning (  "No  Frontiers"  programme); 

innovative  activities 

•  between  Sweden  and  Denmark:  measures  to  promote  new  technologies  under  priorities  for 

industrial development,  the media, RTD and higher  education. 

The  Leader  programmes  also  take  advantage  of  new  technologies  (remote  marketing,  communications, 
commercial  management,  new services and businesses, distance  learning,  etc.).  In particular,  the provide  for 
the development  of investment and  training.in information technologies.  The  Urban programme  supports  the 
Facklan Development  Centre at Malmo, which provides support for  new businesses in the sphere  of the media 
and  technological  equipment,  the  Culture and  Media  Centre at  Augustenborgsskolan  and four  information 
centres  which  organize  workshops  and  training  in  communications  and  the  media,  video  conferences,  etc. 
in  small  businesses  and  the 
Finally,  Adapt  encourages  the  development  of  technology  applications 
development  of networks between private individuals, businesses, organisations  and research  institutes. 

Most  of  the  programmes  for  Sweden  were  adopted  in  1996,  with  a  total  of  six  national  programmes 
and  eight  Interreg  programmes.  Of  the  latter,  one  programme  involves  Sweden  and  Denmark,  one 
Sweden  and  Finland,  two  programmes  have  been  implemented  between  Sweden,  Finland  and  Norway, 
another  between  Sweden,  Finland,  Norway  and  Russia,  and  three  between  Sweden  and  Norway.  The 
first  series  of  meetings  on  seven  programmes  were  held  in  October  1996  (the  only  exception  was  the 
Sweden/Denmark  programme,  for  which  the  first  meeting  was  held  earlier).  The  Urban  programme, 
adopted  in  December,  concerns  the  city  of  Malmô.  It  affects  22  000  inhabitants  and  will  be  used  to 
finance  an  integrated  set  of  economic,  social  and  infrastructural  operations  with  the  aim  of  creating 
two  to  three  hundred  new  jobs  and  setting  up  25 new  businesses.  The  SME  programme,  which  was 
adopted  in  July,  covers  all  Objective  2,  5(b)  and  6  regions  and  areas  and  has  three  priorities:  the 
development  of  markets  for  small  businesses,  more  extensive  use  of  new  technologies  in  small 
businesses  and  encouraging  the  use  of  environmental  quality  as  a  way  of  increasing  competitiveness. 
The  Konver  programme,  which  covers  the  municipalities  of  Karlskoga  in  the  Ôrebro  district  and 
Karlsborg  in  the  Skaraborg  district,  was  approved  in  July  1996,  while  two  Leader  programmes  were 
adopted  in  June  and  the  other  in  July,  covering  Objective  5(b)  areas  and  Objective  6  regions 
respectively.  Under  the  5(b)  nine  local  action  groups  were  selected,  and  under  the  Objective  6 
programme,  three.  They  all  started  up  their  activities  before  the  end  of  the  year.  Finally,  the  Pesca 
programme,  adopted  in  March,  covers  16 municipalities  dependent  on  fisheries  outside  the  Objective 
6  area,  principally  on  the  western  coast  of  Sweden.  A  limited  number  of  projects  were  submitted  and 
selected  in  1996, but  the  Monitoring  Committee  held  meetings  during  the  year. 

280 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

The  only  two progranimes  approved  in  1995 were the Employment  and  Adapt  programmes. In  1996, 
under  the Employment  Initiative, 47 projects  were selected  (10 under  Now, 25 under Horizon  and  12 
under  Youthstart).  Many  of  them,  particularly  under  Now  and  Horizon,  have  an  emphasis  on  job 
creation  and  the  potential  for  self-employment.  Under  Youthstart  the  emphasis  is  on  ways  of 
motivating  and  supporting  young  people  by  developing  their  sense  of  initiative.  Under  Adapt  24 
projects  were  selected  in  1996.  They  concentrate  principally  on  the  staff  of  small  businesses.  The 
priorities  concern  identifying  new  ways  of  organizing  work,  developing  employee  skills  in  sectors 
where  information  technologies  play  an important  role, developing new forms  of training  in the  work 
place, creating jobs  in areas  with low populations  and encouraging women to go into or improve their 
position  in business. 

Finally  an  extra  ECU  15.8  million  from  the  Community  Initiative  reserve  has  been  allocated  to 
Sweden  as additional  funding.  It will be shared  among all the Initiatives except  SME and  Konver, but 
more than half of it will go to Interreg75. 

Table V-56:  Sweden -  Community  Initiatives 

1996 in  the context of the  1995-99 programming period 

(ECU million) 

Initiative 
(Number  of  programmes) 

Total cost 

S.F. 
assistance* 
(1) 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1995-96 
(2) 

% 

(2)/(1) 

Pavments 
1996 

Pavments 
1995-96 
(3) 

% 

(3)/(l) 

21,7 
39,9 
85,9 
10.5 
48,8 
11,4 
11.9 
230.2 

Adapt (1) 
Employment  (1) 
Leader (2) 
Pesca (1) 
SME(l) 
Konver (1) 
Urban (1) 
Total (8) 
Inierreg/Reeen  (8)"* 
of which programmes adopted in 1996: 
Leader Sweden (Objective 5b) 
Leader Sweden (Objective 6) 
Pesca Sweden 
SME Sweden 
Konver Karlskoga, Karlsborg 
Urban Mai mo 
Toul  (6) 
Interreg (8)*** 
* Excl. reserve, except Urban Mai mo 
** See details of Chapter VII. Table 2.2. 
"*  See details of programmes Chapter I.B. 1. Community Initiatives 

71.8 
14,1 
103 
48.8 
11,4 
11.9 
168,6 

113 
20,7 
16,1 
4.0 
17.2 
3,3 
5.0 
77 _5 

12,1 
4,0 
4,0 
17.2 
3.3 
5,0 
45,6 

0,0 
0,0 
13.4 
4.0 
13,0 
2,6 
3,1 
36.1 

10.0 
3,3 
4,0 
13,0 
2,6 
3,1 
36,1 

11,3 
20,7 
13.4 
4.0 
13.0 
2.6 
3.1 
68.1 

10,0 
33 
4.0 
13,0 
2,6 
3,1 
36,1 

100% 
100% 
83% 
100% 
76% 
78% 
63% 
88% 

83% 
83% 
100% 
76% 
78% 
63% 
79% 

0,0 
0,0 
4.0 
1.2 
3.9 
0.8 
0.9 
103 

3,0 
1,0 
1,2 
3,9 
0,8 
0,9 
10^ 

5,6 
10,3 
4.0 
1.2 
3,9 
0,8 
0.9 
263 

3,0 
1,0 
1.2 
3.9 
0.8 
0.9 
103 

50% 
50% 
25% 
30% 
23% 
24% 
19% 
35% 

25% 
25% 
30% 
23% 
24% 
19% 
24% 

75 See also Chapter I.B.I. Community Initiatives. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

281 

15.  UNITED KINGDOM 

15.1. 

Implementation of assistance bv Obiective in 1996 

Support for  the development  of technology potential  in the regions of the  United Kingdom 
Objective  I:  Most  of  the priorities  in the  three SPDs  allocate  an  important  role  to  technology  development 
(7.9% of all Community  funding). 
In the case of RTD: 

•  Highlands  and  Islands:  improved  marketing  through  information  technologies  (ECU  2.3  million; 
total volume: ECU  4.6 million), RTD in small businesses (ECU 6 million;  total volume: ECU  18.7 
million),  and environmental  research; 

•  Northern  Ireland:  within  the  priority  devoted  to  economic  development  are  the  programmes 
COMPLETE and Science and Technology, establishment of networks for  disseminating  technology 
and  strengthening  of research (ECU 31.9  million), and  development  of technology  infrastructures 
(ECU 25.7  million;  total volume: ECU 41  million  • e.g. research  centres, demonstration  projects, 
calibrating  and  evaluation)  and  training  in  the new  technologies  (ECU 25  million;  total  volume: 
ECU 38.5 million), and environmental research. Outside this priority,  research is also an  essential 
element  in the strategy for  developing  human  resources (ECU 3.8  million;  total  volume: ECU  5.8 
million),  transport  and  local  infrastructure  (ECU  9.8  million;  total  volume:  ECU  13.6  million), 
agriculture  and  rural development  (ECU  7.1 million;  total  volume:  ECU  15.5)  and protection  of 
the  environment; 

•  on Merseyside: a whole priority  (ECU 62 million; total volume: ECU 172 million) is being  devoted 
to  the  development  of  advanced  technologies  and  advanced  industries.  Support  is  going  to 
research,  technology  and  innovation  at  the  service  of  businesses  (including  development  of  new 
products  and processes),  commercialising  of  research  activities,  participation  in programmes  of 
research  and  creation  of  new  high-technology  firms.  Support  is  also  going  to  developing  clean 
technologies  and  to training in new techniques  of environmental  management,  as  well as  training 
in the new technologies  (e.g. encouraging science and technologyHn education centres,  identifying 
industry  needs,-establishing  links between  industry  and  the  education  sector,  developing  training 
centres for  advanced  technologies). 

In  the  case  of  the  information  technologies,  their  development  in  the  Highlands  and  Islands  (ECU  8.1 
million;  total  volume:  ECU  36.4  million)  includes  defining  the  needs  of  firms  and  the  impact  of  IT  on  the 
region,  developing  services  based  on  the  information  technologies  (for  instance  tourism),  and  improving 
access  to  and  use  of  advanced  telecommunications  by  firms  and  local  authorities  and  developing  support 
services  to help absorb IT and  communications  technology.  Turning to data-transmission  applications,  in the 
Highlands  and Islands the emphasis is on distance learning and links between  mobile units (ECU 4.4  million, 
total volume: ECU 8.8 million), while on Merseyside the emphasis is on advanced  data-transmission  networks 
within and between  local businesses and on networks providing  information about new  technologies. 
Objective  2  (1994-96):  All  SPDs  except  the  one  for  Gibraltar  contain  schemes  to  support  technology 
development  and  in particular  support for  RTD.  10 SPDs make stimulating  RTD a separate priority  covering 
either 
research  and 
technology/innovation76.  In detail, these priorities  include: 

the  development  of  advanced 

technologies  and  high-skill 

industries  or 

•  development  of  research  and  technology  to  meet  the  needs  of  small  businesses  and  industry 
(Eastern  Scotland,  West Midlands,  Greater Manchester,  Lancashire  and  Cheshire),  innovation  in 
small  businesses  and  industry  (East Midlands,  Western Scotland,  Eastern  Scotland,  East  London 
and  the Lee  Valley, Industrial South  Wales,  Yorkshire and  Humberside)  and  technology  transfers 
for  small  businesses,  including  aid for  the  development  of  new  products  and  processes  (East 
London  and  the  Lee  Valley,  Greater  Manchester,  Lancashire  and  Cheshire,  Plymouth,  West 
Cumbria and Furness,  Yorkshire and Humberside, East  Midlands); 
strengthening  skills  in the fields  of  technology  and  innovation  (Eastern  Scotland,  East  Midlands, 
Eastern  Scotland,  West Midlands  and  North  East  of  England,  East  London  and  the  Lee  Valley, 

• 

76  By  region,  the  funding  breaks  down  as  follows:  East  London  and  the  Lee  Valley:  ECU  12.7  million  (total 
volume:  ECU  27.7  million);  Greater  Manchester,  Lancashire  and  Cheshire: ECU  36.3  million  (total  volume: 
ECU  99.4  million); North  East  of England:  ECU 49.2  million  (total  volume: ECU  109.9  million);  Plymouth: 
ECU  4.1  million;  total  volume:  ECU  9.3  million);  Industrial  South  Wales:  ECU  31.7  million  (total  volume: 
ECU  77.3  million); West  Cumbria  and  Furness: ECU  6 million  (total  volume: ECU  17.4 million);  Yorkshire 
and Humberside: ECU 42 million (total  volume: ECU  102 million); Eastern  Scotland: ECU  18.4 million  (total 
volume:  ECU  42.4  million);  East  Midlands:  ECU  11.5  million  (total  volume:  ECU  33.4  million);  West 
Midlands: ECU 59.6 million  (total  volume: ECU  119.1 million). 

282 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Fund* (1996) 

• 

Greater Manchester,  Lancashire and Cheshire, North  East of England, Plymouth,  Industrial  South 
Wales, West Cumbria and Furness,  Yorkshire and Humberside); 
special  attention  to  the  environment  by  reinforcing  skills  in  advanced  and  environmental 
technologies  (West  Midlands)  and  assistance  for  the  introduction  of  clean  technologies  in 
businesses  (North East of England, Plymouth,  Industrial South  Wales, West Cumbria and Furness, 
East Midlands,  West Midlands). 

In  Thanet, a priority  devoted  to industry and services contains a programme for  the development  and transfer 
of  technologies,  and the SPD for  Western Scotland  also  devotes  a scheme  to applied  research,  technology 
development  and innovation  in the context of a strategy for  developing  regional businesses. 
In  the field  of telecommunications  and data-transmission  technologies,  most SPDs provide  support for  their 
development.  For instance,  the SPD for  the East Midlands  is supporting projects for  disseminating  advanced 
telecommunications  services  (such as information about  the availability  of services,  help with local access to 
them,  etc.) and the SPD for  Greater Manchester, Lancashire and Cheshire is encouraging participation  in the 
information  superhighways.  The programmes for  Yorkshire and Humberside  and East  London  and the  Lee 
Valley are providing  support for  advanced data-transmission  services  to strengthen  high-skill  industries and 
the adoption  of data  transmission  technologies by small businesses and as well as training in advanced  data-
transmission  services. 
In  total, the funding  from  the Structural Funds for  technology development  comes to 9.8% of total  Community 
funding  (Objectives  I, 2, 5(b)). 

Table  V-57: 

United  Kingdom 
-  Funding  directly 
programming  for  1994-99 (ECU  million) 

linked 

to  technology  development 

in  the 

_2L 
38% 
59% 

TOTAL 

- J L. 

460.5 

719.4 
______ 
1.211.0 

186,1 
Objective 1 
Objective 2 
310,1 
13.9 
_______i____i 
-SIM 
TOTAL 
NB: The programming procedures and different approaches taken by the Member Sûtes 
invite to caution in interpreting these figures, in particular spending 
on information society projects, which arc often linked to other fields such as industry and  RTD. 

316.4 
_J2_i 
449,9 

40% 
43% 
45% 
42% 

100% 

120.6 

Public  Private 
153.8 
92.9 
______ 
251.0 

Member  State 
Total 
274.4 
409.3 
17.2 
700.9 

60% 
57% 
____ 

OBJECTIVE  l77 

Main  achievements 

in  1996 

Fie. V-70: Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU  million): Merseyside 

Priorities: 
Major  businesses (a) 
Local businesses  (b) 
Technological  development  (c) 
Cultural  sector  (d) 
Local  development (e) 
Technical  assistance (P 
By  Fund  : 

1SPD 

186.0 
149.0 
62.0 
54.0 
361.0 
4.0 

58' 
41' 
0' 
100% 

ERDF 
ÈSF 
EAGGF 
______l 

475,0 
338,0 

3,0 

816.0 

Financing by the Structural  Funds 

4% 

89% 

JDRTD  ~Telecoms *DatatransH;  .àion  | 

(e)44' 

(0 0,5% 

(a) 23°, 

(b)  18% 

(d) 7% 

(c) 8% 

On  Merseyside,  definite  progress  has  been  made  with  the  programme  on  the  ground,  although 
significant  spending has  still not  occurred  on a large number  of projects  already  vetted  and  approved. 
A  venture-capital  fund,  the  Merseyside  Special  Investment  Fund,  has  been  set  up  and  it  received 
Commission  approval  in  March.  This  is  the  first  fund  of  its  kind  to  qualify  for  ERDF  support  in  the 
United  Kingdom.  The  number  of  EAGGF-funded  schemes  is  very  small  and  mainly  involves 

77  Eligible areas: Northern  Ireland, Merseyside, Highlands and Islands. 

8tk Annual Report on  the  Structural Funds (1996) 

283 

Objective  5(a);  progress  has  been  slow  and  it  has  been  decided  not  to  pursue  the  scheme  for  the 
processing  and  marketing  sector  (Regulation  (EEC)  No  866/90). An  intermediate  assessment  of  the 
SPD was carried  out  in  1996 by  independent  assessors, who indicated  three improvements  that  could 
be  made:  the  procedures  for  approving  applications  for  funding  from  the  ERDF  and  ESF  should  be 
speeded  up;  the  integration  between  the  ERDF  and  the  ESF and  between  various  schemes  could  be 
enhanced;  projects  should be considered  in a wider context in order to encourage a more strategic  use 
of  funding  for  the environment,  data transmission  and  growth  sectors  and  areas  such  as the centre  of 
Liverpool.  The  assessors  concluded  that  the  programme  is  basically  on  course  to  attain  its  overall 
targets  in  terms  of  new jobs  and  raising  GDP, but  that  the quantification  of  targets  in  the SPD  could 
be improved  and  refined.  Work  has started  on proposals  for  amending  the text  and  funding  profile  of 
the SPD. 

Example  of a project  on  Merseyside 
Familiarisation  with  science  and  technology  in  schools:  This  project  is running  from  1996  to  1998  and  is 
designed  to develop knowledge  about careers, in science and technology,  scientific  and  engineering  know-how 
and  the  links  between  schools  and  the  science  and  technology  industries.  For  instance,  some  pupils  spent  a 
week  at  the  Centre  for  Alternative  Technology  of  Mid-Wales  monitoring  the  energy  consumption  and 
electricity  use  of  their  group.  In  another  example,  several  schools  have  developed  training  activities  for 
teachers  in the  field  of  new  technologies,  including  IT,  or  have  sent  teachers  into  industrial  firms  to  improve 
their knowledge  of various technologies  so that they can include them in classroom  work. The project  is being 
part-financed  by the ESF  with  about  ECU  127 000; the  total  volume  is ECU  375  700  and  2 636  individuals 
will be involved. 

Fie.  V-71: Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU  million): Hiehlands and Islands 
Priorities: 
Business development (a) 
Tourism, cultural sector (b) 
Environment (c) 
Primary sector (d) 
Local development fe) 
Communications and services ff) 
Technical assistance (g) 
Bv Fund : 

'* 72.1 
24.2 
16.3 
68,7 
46,9 
79.7 
3_1 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

180,0 
55,2 
56.0 
19,8 
_____ 

58% 
18% 
18% 
6% 
100% 

1SPD 

(t)26%  _Jf?J% ___,  (a) 23% 

(e) 15% 

(d)22% 

In  the  Highlands  and  Islands,  implementation  of  the  SPD has picked  up. The  Monitoring  Corrimittee 
has adopted  new rules for  monitoring projects  so that, if necessary,  support from  the Structural  Funds 
can be withdrawn  where projects  are not managing to generate the spending required  to trigger  ERDF 
funding.  In  the case  of  the  EAGGF funding,  all  the  schemes  (reduction  of  production  costs,  product 
quality,  animal  welfare,  diversification  of  holdings)  are  operational  except  those  concerning  the 
environment  and woodland  management,  and financial  implementation  has kept to the financing  plan. 
A  number  of  innovations  have  been  introduced  into  the  programme  management.  The  three-tier 
structure  for  the  monitoring  and  implementation  of  the  programme  has  been  reduced  to  two  tiers,  a 
single  Monitoring  Committee  and  its  consultative  working  parties.  Thirteen  local  groups  have  also 
been  created  to  define  local  strategies.  Two  studies,  one  on  the  environmental  impact  of  the 
programme  and  one  on  local  economic  development,  have  been  funded  under  technical  assistance. 
Finally,  the  intermediate  assessment  of  the  SPD  has  begun,  with  an  independent  consultant  being 
designated  in November. The first  assessment report is expected  in April  1997. 

284 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Fie. V-72: Proerammine 1994-99 (ECU million): Northern Ireland 
Priorities: 
Economic development  (a) 
Communities  (b) 
Reducing  remoteness  (c) 
Agriculture and  fisheries  (d) 
Environment  (e) 
Technical  assistance (D 
Bv  Fund. 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
Total 

685,6 
354,6 
186,9 
15,1 

1.2AZ.2. 

55% 
29% 
15% 
1% 
1W% 

1  SPD 

(e)5% 

(00.1% 

(d)17% 

_ « « - - _ _• 

-^ 

(a) 26% 

(c) 26% 

(b) 26% 

In Northern  Ireland, economic life continues despite the political troubles. Spending under the SPD on 
economic  development,  improving  the environment  and  developing  tourism  has reached  the  different 
targets,  and  decisions  taken  on  routing  of  the  trans-European  networks  will  ensure  that  expenditure 
can  be  programmed.  The  underwater  gas  pipeline  from  Scotland  has  been  terminated  but  the 
electricity  interconnector  has  been  delayed  by  planning problems. Implementation  of  the  agricultural 
and  rural  development  schemes  has  been  uneven,  influenced  by  a  loss  of  confidence  among  farmers 
due  to the  BSE  crisis.  While  the  civil  unrest  during  the  summer  temporarily  slowed  progress  on  the 
programme for the physical and  social environment, the process of consultation  and partnership begun 
under  the  'Peace'  Community  Initiative  has  continued,  making  a  valuable  contribution  to  social 
cohesion  in  the  region.  A  round  of  reprograniming took  place  in  October  but  the  preference  was  to 
hold  back  the  additional  money  arising  out  of  indexation  until  the  results  of  the  intermediate 
assessment  were available in mid-1997. For the latter exercise, assessors have been appointed  for  each 
subprogramme  and  one  for  the  whole  of  the  SPD,  including  coordination  of  the  subprogramme 
assessments, and the subprogramme reports were already available by the end of the year. 

1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-99 

The stage reached  in financial  implementation  varies according to SPD. In the case of the  programme 
for  Merseyside, cornmitment  of  the  1996 tranche from  the ERDF could  not take place  because  actual 
spending  had  been  too  little  -  only  1%  -  to  trigger  the  ERDF  contribution.  By  the  end  of  the  year, 
however,  payments  under  the  ERDF  had  come  to  ECU  109  million,  about  23% of  the  total  ERDF 
allocation.  In  the  case  of  the  programme  for  the  Highlands  and  Islands,  comrnitments  speeded  up 
during  the  year  so  that  the  1996  tranche  was  committed.  By  the  end  of  1996,  payments  under  the 
ERDF had come to ECU 39 million  in total, about 22% of the ERDF allocation. Finally, in the case of 
Northern  Ireland  spending  in  1996  slightly  exceeded  the  year's  targets, but  although  the  outturn  was 
comparable  to  1995  some  reprogramming  was necessary  to  offset  the under-implementation  in  1994. 
Payments  still reached 40% of the total allocation for the period. 

8th  Annual Report on  the  Structural Funds (1996) 

285 

OBJECTIVE 278 

1996 in the context  of programming for  1994-96 

Fir. V-73: Proerammine 1994-96 (ECU  million -1996 prices and situation) 
By sector: 
Production environment (a) 
Human resources fb) 
Improvement and rehabilitation (c) 
Protection of the  environment (d) 
Technical assistance (e) 
By  Fund : 

ERDF 
ESF 
Total 

1.521,8 
495,7 
2.017,4 

13 SPDs 

Average per SPD 

75% 
25% 
100% 

______ 

(d)6%(e)i% 

(c)9% _6T> 

<b>3 5 %^ " ( a M 9% 

A  major  effort  was  required  to  implement  expenditure  before  programmes  were  wound  up.  ERDF 
payments came in all  to almost ECU 711 million  by the end  of  the  year,  corresponding  to  more than 
47%  of  the total  ERDF allocation  to all programmes. The  winding-up  of  commitments  none  the  less 
meant that transfers  had  to be  made  to the next  phase. All  the  regions  except  Gibraltar  had  to  carry 
over unused appropriations  to the  1997-99 prograrnming period, a total  of ECU  155 million  (at  1996 
prices; ECU  109.4  million  from  the  ERDF  and  ECU  45.6  million  from  the  ESF).  In  two  instances 
(Manchester-Lancashire-Cheshire  and  West  Midlands)  only  the  ESF  was  involved,  but  both  Funds 
were  concerned  in all  the  other  cases. The  transfer  total  amounted  to  7%  of  the  original  allocation 
under  Objective  2  to  all  programmes  in  the  United  Kingdom,  although  the  carryover  varied 
considerably  according to region  (from  less than  1% in the case of Greater Manchester-Lancashire  to 
37% 
in  the  case  of  Thanet).  The  greater  levels  of  under-implementation  did  not  necessarily  mean, 
however, that spending was less efficient  but reflected  the concern  of the regions to avoid  committing 
funds too quickly where applications needed careful  vetting to ensure that resources  were in line with 
the strategic needs of the regional economy. 

Programmes were also amended to take account of indexation  and to undertake  some reprogi-mming. 
No  decision  on  indexation  had  been  taken  before  1996, so  that  application  of  the  deflator  led  to  an 
increase for all programmes  of ECU 30.5 million  over initial  allocations (ECU 24.3 million  under  the 
ERDF and ECU 6.2 million under the ESF). Reprogramming took two forms: transfers  between  years 
and  transfers  between  schemes,  the  latter  only  being  agreed  where  the  regional  partnerships  could 
provide a strategic justification  in terms of new jobs. 

Turning to progress on the ground, one innovation  has been approval  of several venture-capital  funds. 
The  fund  approved  under  the  SPD  for  Yorkshire  and  Humberside,  in  particular,  is  confined  to  this 
region but others are being supported  in other regions. Nine major  projects  under Article  16(2) of  the 
coordination regulation  have been notified  to and approved by the Commission79.  Results  have  varied 
according  to region. For  example,  the priority  "New  Community Economic  Development"  (CED,  i.e. 
local economic development)  has continued  to encounter problems  in Eastern  Scotland  and  Industrial 
South Wales, but has been  particularly  productive of new jobs  in East  London. Other priorities  in  the 
field  of  innovation,  for  example  environmental  technologies,  have  made  considerable  progress  in 
Yorkshire and Humberside and, after  a slower start, in Greater  Manchester-Lancashire-Cheshire. 

78 Eligible areas: Eastern Scotland, Western Scotland, East Midlands, Gibraltar, East London & the Lee Valley, 
Industrial  South  Wales,  North  East  England,  Greater  Manchester-Lancashire-Cheshire,  Plymouth,  Thanet, 
West Cumbria &  Furness, West Midlands, Yorkshire &  Humberside. 

79 The Lowry  Centre  in  Salford,  an  extension  of  the tram  system  in Manchester,  the  Scottish  Exhibition  and 
Conference Centre in Glasgow, the International Centre for Life in Newcastle, the Earth Centre in Doncaster, 
Sheffield's  rehabilitation  project  "Heart  of  the  City",  the  Sheffield  Integrated  Waste  Management  project, 
Middleton Botanic Gardens, and the London East Manufacturing Initiative. 

2fi6 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Some  new  features  have  been  added  to the  management  of programmes. The  annual  reports,  most  of 
them presented  during  the year,  have adopted  a new format  as proposed  by the Commission  in  1995. 
This  has  generally  led  to  a  marked  improvement  in  the  content  and  quality  of  these  reports. 
Implementation  of the programmes  will  have to cope with the local  government  reorganisation  in  the 
United  Kingdom.  For  example,  Strathclyde  Regional  Council  has  been  replaced  by  twelve  different 
local  authorities,  with  implications  for  the  implementation  of  the  Western  Scotland  programme.  The 
reorganisation  of  local  government  is  continuing  and  will  probably  have  repercussions  on  other 
programmes  in the  1997-99 period. 

Technical  assistance has been  used  in several  cases to finance  a reinforcement  of various functions  of 
the Monitoring  Committees and their secretariats. TA also made it possible to support  studies to back 
up  the  implementation  of  programmes,  analyse  local  training  needs  and  survey  project  selection 
procedures  in the North-East,  as well as demand  for  industrial  sites and  premises  in Eastern  Scotland. 
The  Commission  also  published  a  study  on  the  implementation  of  innovative  local  development 
schemes  in  the  United  Kingdom  programmes  ("Social  and  economic  inclusion  through  regional 
development"),  the  results  of  which  were  presented  at  a  national  conference.  The  UK  Government 
also made a study  of Structural  Fund management  in England  and proposed  various reforms, the main 
features  of  which  are  simplified  procedures  for  part-financing  by  the  national  authorities  and  the 
introduction  of local action plans. 

Preparations for  1997-99 

A  basic  task  in  1996  was  preparing,  proposing  and  negotiating  new  programmes  for  the  1997-99 
prograrriming  period.  The  eligible  regions  remain  unchanged.  The  total  of  Structural  Fund  money 
available  is  ECU  2.5  billion.  Draft  conversion  plans  for  each  of  the  regions  were  tabled  in  August, 
assessed  by  independent  experts,  and  then  discussed  in  terms  of  actual  programmes  in  meetings 
starting  in  October  and  November.  One  of  the  aspects  discussed  was  greater  involvement  of  the 
partnership  compared  with  the  previous  period  at  all  stages  of  the  procedure,  starting  with  the 
preparation  of conversion  plans; these talks were launched at the beginning of the summer in  seminars 
held  in  some of the regions. This  involvement  was maintained  in the  detailed  discussions  which  took 
place  subsequently  during  the  year,  in  which  the  main  partners  participated  along  with  central  and 
local  government  officials.  Major  progress  was  made  by  the  end  of  the  year  in  discussions  with  the 
regions,  and  agreement  was  reached  with  the  partners  to  structure  the  programmes  according  to  the 
priorities  set  out  in  the  Commission's  communication  for  this  Objective.  The  main  goals  of  the 
Commission  in its meetings  with the regions  were in particular to maximise the creation  of new jobs, 
to  concentrate  on  promoters  of  change  in  each  region,  to  develop  more  fully  the  priorities  of  local 
development  (set  for  the  first  time  in  1994), to  continue  reducing  the  share  of  the ERDF funds  spent 
on  infrastructure,  to  identify  major  physical  investments  better  in  terms  of  geographical  location  and 
link them into the  local  economy, to ensure better integration  of ERDF and  ESF, and to start  schemes 
in the priority  areas of the environment,  innovation  and equal  opportunities. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

287 

OBJECTIVE 3 

1997-99 

1994-96 

Fig. V-74: Objective 3 - Programming 1994-99 (ECU million  - 1996 priées) 
Priorities 
Reintegration of persons out of work for 
more than six months (a) 
Integration of young people into working 
Ufefb) 
Integration into working life of persons 
threatened  with social exclusion (c) 
Equal opportunities (d) 
National projects (e) 
Local development (f) 
Technical assistance (g) 

383,1 
77,7 

567,0 

4822 

641,1 

783,6 

90,0 
40,7 
75,0 
25,0 
1.655,4 

12,2 
1-522,1 

2 SPDs 

Total 

TOTAL 

1.208,1 

1.265,8 

383,1 
167,7 
40,7 
75,0 
37.2 
3.177,6 

(c) 8% 

(a) 38% 

(b) 3% 

Average per SPD 

1.588,8 

2.416-5 

The  Objective  3  SPD  was  adopted  in  1994 to  cover  the  period  1994-96  and  contained  assistance 
worth ECU 1.501 billion at  1994 prices. The 1996 tranche was worth ECU 539 million. The SPD was 
implemented  with funding  contributed by central government and each of the following  sectors, all of 
them  represented  on  the  Monitoring  Committee:  local  authorities,  the  Training  and  Enterprise 
Councils,  higher  education  and  adult  education  establishments,  and  the  voluntary  sector.  In  1996, 
there were  8 000 projects  receiving funding,  of which  10% were being managed by voluntary  bodies, 
and  so  far  90% of  the funding  has gone  to training  schemes  (many  of  the projects  also  involve  an 
element  of counselling  and work  experience).  Implementation  has continued  to encounter  problems, 
however,  because  of  the  apparent  difficulty  the  various  sectors  have  in  meeting  the  financial 
requirements  for  each  scheme  in  the  programme.  Modifications  were  once  again  requested  in 
financing  plans  so that  projects  could  continue,  and this  often  delayed  payments  as  a  result  of  the 
necessary  amendment  procedures.  In  other  words,  the financing  plans  continue  to  be  used  more  as 
accounting  instruments  than  strategic  management  tools.  Finally,  discussions  on  the  new  SPD  for 
1997-99  began  in  spring  1996 and the new  programme  was  adopted  in  December.  It  introduces  a 
regionalised implementation  structure and a system for targeting within schemes so as to reinforce the 
concentration  of funding  and encourage integrated  projects. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) agriculture 

Table V-58: Proerammine implementation 1994-99 (ECU million 

1996 prices and situation) 

Total 

185,7 

Measures 
Production 
Marketing 

134,5 
51.2 

72% 
28% 

In the area  of improving production  structures, the scheme  actively  promoted  in the United  Kingdom 
in  regions  outside  Objective  1  are  compensatory  allowances.  In  1996,  allowances  were  paid  to 
holdings  accounting  for  a  total  of 4  million  hectares,  the  Community  contribution  being  ECU 24.4 
million.  Support  for  less-favoured  areas  goes  to cattle  and  sheep  farmers.  Under  other  aid  schemes, 
now  wound  up, a total  of  2 600 beneficiaries  continue  to receive  investment  aid and  other  types  of 
assistance representing 5% of EAGGF expenditure in 1996 under Objective 5(a). 

In the area of support for processing and marketing of agricultural products, the authorities in England 
have  had  problems  providing  public  funding  for  the  aid  scheme  because  of  government  spending 
limits.  Here  the  United  Kingdom  has been  authorised  to  confine  the  scheme  to  projects  submitted 
before  the end of March  1996, while in Scotland  and Wales the aid scheme will remain  in place  until 
the  end  of  1999. The  original  amount  of  the  Community  contribution  (ECU 227  million)  has  been 
reduced  to ECU 51.2 million. By the end of  1996, 177 projects  had been  approved  (69% in England, 
16%  in Scotland  and  15% in Wales), mainly  in the sectors  involving  meat  (46), fruit  and  vegetables 
(43), potatoes  (28) and milk  (27). The total  eligible  volume of these projects  is ECU 130 million and 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

29 

provided for the first phase, 89% was committed, and 47% paid. The Objectives where most progress 
has  been  made  on  implementation  are  Objectives  1  and  6  and  Objective  3,  with  over  half  the 
financing cornmitted and one third paid. Next come Objectives 5(a), for both agriculture and fisheries, 
for  which  between  40% and  50% of  the  financing  was  committed  and  a  little  over  a  quarter paid, 
implementation is least advanced under Objectives 5(b) and 4, where less than a third of the financing 
has been committed, and less than a quarter paid. 

There are also wide differences  between Member States. In four Member States (the United Kingdom, 
Portugal,  Spain,  Ireland)  rates  of  corrimitment  exceed  50%  of  assistance,  and  in  a  further  seven 
Member States (Denmark, Luxembourg, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Greece, Belgium) the rate 
is between 40% and 50%, ranging from 43% to 49% (Denmark  and Luxembourg are both above the 
average,  which  is  48%).  Only  four  Member  States,  Italy  and  the  new  Member  States,  have 
cornmitment rates  under 40%, but even  here  the  rate exceeds  one  third  of  available  financing.  This 
situation is broadly repeated on the payments side, with rates of 40%  or over in three Member States 
(the  United  Kingdom,  Portugal,  Ireland),  and rates  between  30% and 40% in  seven  Member  States 
(Spain,  Denmark,  Luxembourg,  Germany,  France,  the  Netherlands,  Greece),  of  which  the  first  four 
mentioned are above the average of  33%.  In three Member States (Belgium, Italy, Austria) the rate of 
payment  is  between  20% and  30%,  while  in  the  remaining  two  new  Member  States  (Finland  and 
Sweden) implementation.is below 20%. 

Table 1-3:  CSFs/SPDs  -1996  in the context  of programming for  1994-99-  (ECU million) 

Financing 
Commitments 

%  of  financing 

Payments 

%  of  financin» 
No of measures  • 
' OP/SPD/GG/MP/ Rmxaxts ol iinplcmcntaliiHi 

B 
I.6IX.X 
699.6 
43% 
473.0 
29'Â 
251 

DK 
6X2.X 
337.2 
49% 
226.9 
"3% 
X 

n 
1X.7237 
X.477.2 
45% 
6.203.4 
33«i5 
,._> 

_,,, 

Ft 
I3.X44.9 
6.127.6 
44 <*• 

4.403.) 
32<* 
32 

F. 
29.346.(1 
15.354.5 
52% 
10.973.6 
37% 
94 

F 
11.177.9 
5752.X 
ATZ 
3.375.6 
30% 

50 

IRF. 
5.672.0 
2.X6I.5 
50% 
2.270.4 
40% 
u 

I 
17.955.8 
6.4612 
36% 
4.1X6.4 
23% 
97 

1 
73.8 
357 
4X% 
257 
349 

8 

NI. 
1.780.3 
793.9 
45% 
56K.9 
32% 
16 

P 

\ 
1.467.4  14.047,5 
510.1  7.517.4 
35% 
54% 
360,6  5.698.7 
419 
rf!5~ 
17 

17 

FTN 
1.413,0 
516.3 
37% 
264.4 
19% 

9 

S 
1.2057 
.  417.8 
35% 
1947 
16% 
16 

UK 
8.659.1 
5.499.0 
64% 
3-5437 
41% 
32 

T-ml 
127.667.7 
60.861.5 

48% 

42.767.3 
33% 
492 

Structural assistance  and development of the technological potential  of the regions 
Financing  to  encourage  the  technological  development  of  the  regions  (research-development,  innovation, 
information society) has been significantly  increased in current programmes,  as mentioned in the  Introduction. 
The  overall  volume  of financing  increased from  about  ECU 3.5 billion  to  ECU 7.6  billion,  or  7%  of  all 
Community financing.  The  increase  is more  marked  in  the  Objective  1  regions  than  in  those  covered  by  the 
other Objectives,  because the initial level of financing  was lower. 
There are wide differences from  one Objective and from  one Member State to another. For all Objectives  taken 
together,  of  the  easily  identifiable  types of financing,  the  two most  significant  are financing for  RTD  and  for 
telecommunications,  which  account  respectively  for  81%  and  12%  of  Community  financing  for  RTD  and 
innovation;  however,  their relative weight varies from  one  Objective to another.  For Objectives  1 and  6,  RTD 
represents  83%  of  Structural  Fund  financing,  followed  by  investment  in  telecommunications  with  15%  of 
appropriations.  In  areas  eligible  under  Objectives  2  and  5(b),  a  major  share  (over  a  quarter  of  Community 
appropriations)  goes  to support  the development  of data  transmission  and  investment  in  telecommunications, 
all directly  linked to the information society. 

Table 1-4: 

CSFs/SPDs  - Financing  of technological  development  in the 1994-96/99  programming 
period  (ECU  million) 

TOTAL 

Structural Funds 

Total 

12354.37 

ERPF 

ESF  EACrfiF 

648.741 
15368.09 

100%l  5942.5311  1445.4431  336.6151 

80%  4485.334  1292.771  _________  ______ 
15%  1320.505 
-2L-. 
4% 
121.172 
136.692 

RDT<n 
__________________________ ___________ 
Data  transmission  <y\ 
TOTAL 
( I  )  Including science parks, innovation, technology  transfer 
(2) Infrastructure  and services. This row does no! necessarily correspond  to tbe sum of the two 
subcategories, as it is not always possible to identify  them within programmes. 
(3) Within the framework  of the information  society, data transmission applications in such fields as health, education and transport. 
(4) as % of total Structural Funds 
(5) as % of total Member States 
NB: In view of the  programming procedure and the different  approaches adopted by the Member States, some caution should be exercised in interpreting the data, 
especially  for expenditure related to the information  society, which is often  associated with other fields such as industry and RTD. 

___J_________ 
7.S06.8 

850.2 
60.1 
3.265.91 

Public 
81%-(4) 
3.887.4 
_______  _________  i__74__ 
_i__ 
_____ 
49% 
4.641.81 

7.861.31 

1.430.4  ________! 
190.3  ________ 
51% 

Member States 
Private 
Total 
2.083.5  ________  79%  (51 

___ 

288 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fund* (1996) 

the Community  contribution  comes  to ECU  33 million  or 65% of  the allocation  for  the  whole  of  the 
period. 

OBJECTIVE 5(a) fisheries 

Fie. V-75: Obiective5(a) fisheries- Proerammine 1994-99(ECUmillion) 
FIFG 

Adjustment and redirection of fishing effort  (a) 
Other fleet structuring measures  (b) 
Renewing and modernising the fleet  (c) 
Aquaculture  (d) 
Protected marine areas (e) 
Port facilities  (f) 
Processing and marketing of fishery  products (e) 
Promotion of fishery  products (h) 
Socio-economic measures (i) 
Pth?r "içOTref (i) 

13.5 
18.5 

13.3 

3.8 

0.4 

4.3 

22.7 
12.1 
pm 

0.2 
LI 

(i) 0% 

(h)14%  Û ) ° -2% 

(a)  15% 

(b)21% 

(g) 26%' 

(f) 5% 

(d)4% 

(c)15% 

. 

(e) 0,5% 

Total 

Following  the  adoption  of  national  legislation  on  structural  assistance  for  fisheries,  various  FIFG 
schemes  were  launched  at  the  end  of  1995  and  the  beginning  of  1996.  However,  progress  in 
implementing  them  is  still  slow  but  should  speed  up  in  1997,  in  particular  because  applications  for 
some  schemes  already  exceed  the  funds  available.  A  scheme  for  scrapping  fishing  vessels  part-
financed  by  the FIFG  was  introduced  in  1993 with  a budget  of ECU  72 million  over five  years,  and 
578  vessels  had  been  withdrawn  by  the  end  of  1996. Finally,  assessors  have  been  appointed  for  the 
mid-term assessment exercise. 

OBJECTIVE 5(b)80 

Fig. V-76: Objective S(b) - Pmgmmming 1994-99 
Population C000) 
Surface area (km*) 

By Fund 

11 SPDs 

2.841' 
67.987 
f 
ECU million 

(f) 1% 

(d) 15% 

(e)3%/ 
* 

(a) 6% 

,  EAGGFl 
ERDF 
ESF 
Total! 
_ _ _ _^ 

535,01 
1343 
151.2 
820,51 

Average per SPD| 

65% 
16% 
18% 
100% 

74.6 

(c)20% 

{b) 55% 

•  Diversification of 
agriculture  (a) 

•  Easinesses  (non-

agric.)  (b) 
B Tourism (c) 

D  Selection of  the 
environment  (d) 

•  Human resource,  (e) 

Q Technical assistance 

(f) 

Improving the procedures for implementing the various SPDs, all of them adopted  in  1995, was one of 
the  major  concerns  during  the  year.  A  number  of  regions  developed  local  implementation  plans 
(LIPS),  for  example  the  English  Northern  Uplands,  with  the  aim  of  injecting  a  stronger  "bottom-up" 
approach  into the  general  strategy  for  implementing  programmes. These  plans  were  also designed  to 
simplify  local  administrative  problems  due  to  the  involvement  of  a  large  number  of  authorities.  In 
other regions, attempts  for  improve programme  management  were  less radical. In most of the  regions 
the  criteria  for  selecting  projects  were  refined  to  enhance  performance  and  pick  the  best  projects. 
Progress  in  terms  of  financial  implementation  continued  to  be  slow,  reflecting  in  the  case  of 
commitments  the  low uptake  of  funds.  The  mid-term  assessments  will  provide  the Commission  with 
independent  assessments  of  progress  with  the  programmes.  The  terms  of  reference  for  -these 
assessments  were  adopted  by  the  Monitoring  Committees  by  the  end  of  the  year  and  some  of  them 
have already  been started. The reports are expected  in March-April  1997. 

80 Eligible  areas: 

the  Borders  region,  Central  Scotland/Tayside,  Dumfries  and  Galloway,  Grampian, 
Lincolnshire,  Wales,  East  Anglia,  the  English  Northern  Uplands,  South-West  England,  the English  Midland 
Uplands, the Marches. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

289 

Table V-$9: 

United Kingdom  - Assistance  by Objective  - 1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-
96/99 (ECU million) 

Programmes 
(year of adoption) 

Total volume 

S.F. 
assistance 
(1) 

Commitments 
19% 

Commitments 
1994-96 
m 

% 

(2vii) 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 
<3) 

% 

ravm 

Objective! 
SPD Highlands and islands (1994) 
SPD Northern Ireland (1994) 
SPD Merseyside (1994) 
Technical  assistance 

Total 

c 

Obiective 2 
SPD East London & the Lee valley ( 1994) 
SPD East Midlands (1994) 
SPD Eastern Scotland ( 1994 ) 
SPD Gibraltar (1994) 
SPD Greater Manchester. Lancashire. 
Cheshire (1994) 
SPD Industrial South Wales (1994) 
SPD North East Eneland (1994) 
SPD Plymouth (1994) 
SPD Thanet (1994) 
SPD West Cumbria and Furness (1994) 
SPD West Midlands (1994) 
SPD Western Scotland (1994) 
SPD Yorkshire and Humberside (1994) 

Total 

Total 

Touil 

Obiective 3 
SPD United Kingdom (1996) 
SPD United Kin-dom fl 994) 

Objective « a) agriculture 
Forecast U.K. Reg. 2328/91 (1994) 
SPD UK  Re*  866 and 867/90 (1994) 

SPD United Kin-dom (1994) 
Ohl-rtive *(h) 
SPD Borden Region (1995) 
SPD Central Scodand / Tayside (1995) 
SPD Dumfries and Galloway (1995) 
SPD Grampian (1995) 
SPD Lincolnshire  (1995) 
SPD Wales (1995) 
SPD East Anglia (1994) 
SPD English Northern Uplands (1994) 
SPD South West England (1994) 
SPD English Midland Uplands ( 1995) 
SPD The Marches (I99S) 

TOTAL 

1.012.4 
2.683.0 
2.005.1 
0.1 
5.700.6 

187,6 
195.2 
287,0 
13.5 
818.8 

400.9 
729.0 
61.6 
25.2 
62.2 
983,8 
759.8 
738.0 
5.262,7 

3.662.0 
4.012.4 
7.674.4 

625.7 
204.7 
830.4 

311.0 
1.242.2 
816,0 
0.1 
2.369.4 

73.2 
66.2 
117.9 
5.1 
332.2 

151.1 
291,9 
27.1 
8,9 
24,2 
372.8 
262.1 
284.8 
2.017,4 

1.655,4 
1.522.1 
3.177.5 

134,5 
51.2 
1*5.7 

42.9 
338.6 
124.3 
0.1 
505.9 

43,6 
38,4 
40.8 
0.1 
196,4 

75.2 
104.6 
-0.4 
-2.3 
-0.3 
134.1 
78.8 
101.7 
810.6 

529,7 
547.1 
1.076.8 

152 
0.0 
15,2 

124.8 
626.9 
286.4 
0.1 
1.038.2 

732 
70.1 
119.3 
5.1 
333.7 

150,5 
298.1 
28.6 
11.7 
24.7 
375.0 
264.5 
306.2 
2.060,7 

529.7 
1.522,1 
2.051,8 

61,8 
38.6 
100.4 

40% 
50% 
35% 
100% 
44% 

100% 
106% 
101% 
100% 
100% 

100% 
102% 
106% 
131% 
102% 
101% 
101% 
108% 
102% 

32% 
100% 
65% 

46% 
75% 
54% 

53.9 
299.5 
131.1 
0.01 
484.5 

19.2 
22.4 
71.6 
1.5 
44,9 

32.5 
87,0 
8.7 
0.6 
5,4 
192 
147.5 
50.9 
S71.5 

0.0 
581.7 
581.7 

22,4 
11.6 
34.0 

-94,6 
489.7 
231,6 
0.01 
815.9 

35.3 
40.8 
97,4 
4.0 
124.8 

76.7 
173.3 
232 
7.6 
17.9 
1572 
211.4 
120.6 
1.090.3 

0,0 
1.400.3 
1.400.3 

44.9 
30.9 
75.7 

30% 
39% 
28% 
8% 
34% 

48% 
62% 
83% 
80% 
38% 

51% 
59% 
86% 
85% 
74% 
42% 
81% 
42% 
54% 

0% 
92% 
44% 

33% 
60% 
41% 

1 

240.81 

88.71 

29.61 

44.31 

50%l 

8.3l 

20.11 

73% 

76,6 
64.0 
125.3 
96.2 
133,6 
483.4 
132,4 
262.3 
514,5 
33.3 
90.8 
2.012.3 
21.721.2 

30,4 
25,4 
47,7 
39,5 
53.7 
184.0 
60,0 
108.0 
219.0 
12.2 
40.6 
820.5 
8.65V.1 

1.1 
0.9 
7.6 
5.6 
1.4 
22.9 
0.0 
12.7 
24.6 
0.6 
5.4 
82,9 
2.521.0 

8.8 
4.7 
14,3 
1U 
9.0 
50,0 
8,6 
27.8 
55.8 
2.0 
11.5 
203.6 
5.499,0 

29% 
18% 
30% 
28% 
17% 
27% 
14% 
26% 
25% 
17% 
28% 
25% 
64% 

4,0 
1.9 
5.9 
5.6 
12 
19.2 
0.1 
8.7 
20,6 
0.6 
3.6 
71.4 
1.751.4 

12 
3.9 
9.5 
8.5 
5,1 
34.5 
4.6 
16.8 
42.4 
1.4 
7.0 
140.9 
3.5432 

_. 

24% 
15% 
20% 
21% 
10% 
19% 
8% 
16% 
19% 
11% 
17% 
17% 
41% 

Total 

15.2. 

Implementation of the Community Initiatives in 1996 

Background 
The United  Kingdom  is involved  in all the Community  Initiatives  except Regis, to which  should  be added the 
'Peace'  programme  for  Northern  Ireland.  In  all,  28  Community  Initiative  programmes  for  the  UK  were 
approved  in  1994  and  1995, joining  three  Interreg  programmes  adopted  in  1995.  There  were  13  other 
programmes  still  to be adopted,  one for  SMEs, one under  Résider, nine  under  Urban  and two under  Interreg 
shared  with France. All these Initiative programmes except the SME programme  for England  were adopted  in 
1996.  Regarding  Northern  Ireland,  which  is  eligible  under  Objective  1,  all  the  regionalised  programmes 
covering  it  were  adopted  in  1995, i.e.  those  under  Urban,  Peace,  Retex,  SMEs,  Employment,  Adapt  and 
Leader. The programmes under Konver and Pesca cover the United  Kingdom as a whole. 

Support for  development  of technology potential  in the United Kingdom 
The  four  SME  Initiative  programmes  already  approved  give  priority 
to  the  use  of  advanced 
telecommunications  and  to  RTD  in  increasing  the  competitiveness  of  businesses.  In  the  case  of 
telecommunications,  ECU 3 million  (total  volume: ECU 6.7 million) are going  to Northern  Ireland  to assist 
small  businesses  in  identifying  their  advanced  telecommunications  needs  and  doubling  their  use.  In  the 
Lowlands  region, an awareness  campaign in advanced telecommunications  is being funded  (ECU 1.6 million. 

290 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funas (1996) 

total  volume:  ECU  3.8  million),  while  in the Highlands  and  Islands  a  scheme  is being  supported  to  develop 
information  sources  by satellite  using advanced  telecommunications  as a  means of creating networks  among 
businesses.  In the field of RTD,  the stress is on  cooperation  among  businesses  (Northern Ireland)  or  between 
businesses  and  research  centres  in  order  to  strengthen  technology  transfers  (Highlands  and  Islands, 
Lowlands,  Wales), and on innovation  (Lowlands). 
The  national  programme  under  Konver  also  makes  provision  for  encouraging  technology  transfers  and 
cooperation  between  small  businesses,  centres  of  research,  universities  and  centres  of  technology  transfer 
with a  view to reinforcing the quality and flexibility  of the links between firms and  their suppliers and  to help 
create  networks  among  small  businesses.  Technology  is  to  be  used  to  enhance  the  competitiveness  of 
businesses  and  to make  various areas  less dependent  on defence activities  and other traditional  industries  by 
developing  civilian  applications  for  advanced  military  technologies.  Turning  to  the  Community  Initiatives 
dealing  with  human  resources,  the  Adapt  programmes  aim  to facilitate  technology  transfers  towards  the 
sectors  most  affected  by  changes  in  employment  patterns.  Staff  of  research  bodies  are  being  assisted  in 
training  firms  to  solve  detailed  technical  problems,  and  support  is  also  going  to  research  connected  with 
industrial  change  (innovative  technologies,  new production  systems,  IT  and  communications  systems).  The 
Adapt  programmes  also  include  schemes  to  disseminate  information,  raise  technology  awareness,  develop 
databases  on  employment  and  set  up infrastructure for  transmitting  data.  Under the Employment  Initiative, 
the Horizon  schemes  are  targeted  on adapting  workplaces for  the  handicapped  using  new  technologies  (e.g. 
telecommuting  for  the  handicapped),  on  using  information  technologies  and  interactive  video for  training 
purposes,  and on training teachers  how to adapt new technologies for  handicapped  users. 
The  programmes  under  Leader  also  contain  several  schemes  to  support  technology  development,  in 
particular  data  transmission  services  and  information  on  technology.  Support  is  being  given for  distance 
learning,  distance  working,  Internet  connections  between  businesses  and  'telecottage'  centres for  use  by 
small  businesses,  craft  firms  and  service companies  in order  to  improve  access  to services  and  cooperation 
among distributors, producers  and suppliers. 

The  main  developments  in  1996  were  the  approval  of  ten  new  programmes  and  allocations  from  the 
Community  Initiatives  reserve  fund.  Nine  of  the  new  programmes  approved  come  under  the  Urban 
Initiative.  The  largest  covers  three  urban  areas  on  Merseyside  (North  Huyton,  Liverpool  Central  and 
Netherton).  By  the  end  of  the  year,  practically  all  the  Monitoring  Committees  responsible  for 
implementing  this  Initiative  in  each  city  area  had  been  set  up  and  a  series  of  discussions  had  taken 
place  with  a  view  to  creating  or  further  developing  local  urban  partnerships  and  preparing  the  first 
urban  action  plans.  The  Résider  operational  programme 
for  England  was  also  approved. 
Implementation  of  this  Initiative  was  subsequently  delayed  by  a  disagreement,  now  resolved,  over  the 
participation  of  local  elected  politicians  on  the  Monitoring  Committee.  All  of  the  additional  funding 
available  from  the  Community  Initiatives  reserve  fund,  totalling  ECU  188.8  million  for  the  United 
Kingdom,  was  allocated  among  the  Initiatives  with  the  exception  of  the  SMEs  Initiative  and  Peace, 
most  of  the  money  going  to  Employment,  Konver,  Urban  and  Adapt81.  A  proposal  setting  out  how  to 
employ  these  resources  was  submitted  by  the  UK  authorities  in July  but  no  decision  has  been  taken. 

Turning  to  programmes  adopted  in  previous  years,  and  first  of  all  the  Leader  programmes,  31  of  the 
33  intended  local  action  groups  had  been  selected  by  the  end  of  the  year.  Progress  has  varied 
considerably,  with  the  groups  which  benefited  from  experience  of  Leader  I  being  the  most  advanced 
(Wales,  South  West  England,  Dumfries  and  Galloway  in  Scotland).  However,  the  new  groups  have 
also  made  progress,  although  major  efforts  had  to  be  devoted  to  getting  the  groups  up  and  running  and 
developing  programmes.  The  national  network  of  Leader  groups,  for  which  the  Commission  has 
proposed  part-finance  of  ECU  0,7  million  up  to  the  end  of  1999,  has  still  to  be  formed.  In  the  case  of 
the  programme  under  Pesca,  which  was  adopted  in  June  1995,  progress  has  been  slow  but  most  of  the 
difficulties  encountered  in  setting  up  its  management  and  procedures  have  been  overcome. 

Under  the  Employment  Initiative,  a  total  of  262  projects  has  been  approved  and  launched  in  1996. 
The  number  of  projects  in  Great  Britain  (i.e. excl.  Northern  Ireland)  is  239  projects  (81  projects  under 
Now,  104  under  Horizon  and  54  under  Youthstart).  The  projects  under  Now  mainly  concern  the 
certification  of  skills  acquired  and  financial  support  for  child-minding  facilities.  The  projects  under 
Youthstart  are  aimed  for  the  most  part  at  enhancing  the  basic  qualifications  of  young  people  and 
developing  less  formal  training-pathways.  In  the  case  of  Horizon,  the  projects  for  handicapped  people 

81  See also Chapter I.B.I.  Community  Initiatives. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fund<: (1996) 

^ 

29/ 

focus  on  the  use  of  new  technologies,  transition  to  non-sheltered  employment  and  awareness 
campaigns,  while  the  projects  for  deprived  groups  also  aim  at  less  formal  training  pathways,  with 
special  attention  given  to single parents and migrant workers. In both  strands, the majority  of  projects 
are  based  on,  or  include,  direct  training  schemes  and  about  a  quarter  seek  to  develop  systems  of 
training,  guidance, counselling  and employment.  In Northern  Ireland, the number of projects  selected 
under Employment  is 23 (7 projects  under Now,  11 under Horizon, 5 under Youthstart). Examples of 
Now  projects  are  training  for  trade-union  staff  and  women  in  rural  areas,  the  acquisition  of 
management  skills and training in new technologies. Among the Horizon projects  are programmes  for 
the  pre-vocational  and  vocational  integration  of  the  mentally  handicapped,  while  under  Youthstart 
there is a programme of training in new  technologies based on multimedia products. 

Under Adapt, a total of 87 projects have been approved. In Great Britain  (excl. Northern  Ireland) most 
of  the  83  projects,  as  under  Employment,  involve  training  schemes,  counselling  and  guidance, 
followed  by projects  to adjust  support  structures  and  systems. All the projects  focus  on  strengthening 
the  structure  of  local  small  businesses  and  improving  their  competitiveness.  The  main  topics  are  the 
information  society,  teleworking,  the creation  of new jobs  and  flexible  forms  of training. In Northern 
Ireland,  four  projects  have  been  selected  and  involve,  for  example,  the  introduction  of  technologies 
industries  leading  to 
for  exchanging  data  within  small  businesses  and  training  in  the  craft 
qualifications  meeting  industry  standards. As part  of  the preparations  for  a second  series  of  calls  for 
proposals  under  Employment  and  Adapt  in  1997,  about  twenty  events  within  and  between  various 
sectors  were  organised  with  the  cooperation  of  regional  and  industry  bodies,  helping  potential 
applicants to learn about the priorities for the Initiatives, the timetable and procedures. 

As  regards  the  Initiatives  dealing  with  industrial  conversion,  above  all  Rechar,  the  first  pan  of  the 
year  was  devoted  to  setting up  Monitoring  Committees  and  making  administrative  arrangements  for 
each  regional  programme.  Implementation  of  these  programmes  has  been  without  major  problems, 
and  as  an  example  it  is  worth  noting the  approach  taken  in North  East  of  England,  namely  an  action 
plan  and  strategic  plans  for  each  county  in  the  eligible  area.  The  Konver  programme  has  made 
satisfactory  progress, although  payments  have been  a little  slower. The  same  applies  to Retex. In  the 
case  of  the  SMEs  Initiative,  as under  the  other  Initiatives  a part  of  the year  was  spent  setting up  the 
Monitoring  Committees.  Calls  for  project  proposals  were  issued  under  the  programmes  for  the 
Lowlands  of  Scotland  and  Wales. The  UK authorities  have still not  submitted  a proposed  programme 
for  England.. 

As  for  Interreg,  finally,  1996  was  the  first  full  year  of  implementation  of  the  Wales-Ireland 
programme. Major  development  work and frequent  exchanges  of experience were necessary to get the 
programme up and running,  but all the projects  except  those for  transport  infrastructure  in Ireland  are 
joint  projects  with  participation  from  Ireland  and  Wales.  The  programme  involving  Gibraltar  and 
Morocco,  which  was  approved  in  December  1995,  saw  its  implementation  held  up  in  1996  by 
difficulties  over detailing the administrative arrangements  required. 

292 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Table V-60:  United Kingdom - Community Initiatives -1996  in the context of programming for 1994-99 

(ECU million) 

Initiative 
(number of programmes) 

Total volume 

Adapt (2) 
Employment (2) 
Leader(5) 
Pesca (1) 
SMEs (4) 
Rechar (8) 
Konver (1) 
Résider (3) 
Retex (2) 
Urban (10) 
Total (38) 
INTERREC/REGEN (5) • • 
PEACE (7) 
of which programmes adopted in  1996: 
Résider England 
Urban - London (Park Roval) 
Urban - Wales (Swansea) 

Urban • Western Scotland (Glasgow Paislev) 

650 
338.1 
160.4 
84.7 
43 
364 
230.6 
101.3 
78.2 
206.4 
2257.7 

48.9 
16.3 
11.7 

32.7 

17,7 

14.8 
14.9 

Urban - Yorkshire and Humberside  (Sheffield) 
Urban • East Midlands (Nottinehara) 
Urban - Greater Manchester. Lancashire and 
Cheshire (Manchester) 
Urban • East London and the Lee Valley 
(Hacknev Towers) 
Urban - West Midlands (Birmingham) 
Urban - Merseyside (North Huyton, Liverpool, 
Netherton) 
ToUl (10) 
INTERREG (2)»* 
* Excluding reserve 
••  For programme details see Chapter VII. Table 2.2. 
•••For  programme details see Chapter I.B. 1. Community Initiatives 

35.7 
230,7 

17,3 
20.6 

S J. 
assistance* 
_i__ 
286.1 
146.5 
66.2 
37,4 
20.1 
1632 
101.9 
45.5 
36.6 
98.8 
1.002,9 

Commitments 
1996 

Commitments 
1994-96 
_____ 

(21/(1) 

Payments 
1996 

Pavments 
1994-96 
_2) 

(3)/m 

18.7 
18.4 
10.1 
26.: 
0.4 
5.6 
2.5 
19.0 
6.2 
72.3 
1792 

19.0 
6.1 
5.6 

10.0 

6.8 
5.6 

8,0 

6.4 
6.4 

17.3 
912 

722 
49.8 
662 
31.3 
20.1 
87,1 
12.5 
422 
36.1 
892 
506.7 

19.0 
6.1 
5.6 

10.0 

6.8 
5.6 

8.0 

6.4 
6.4 

17.3 
912 

25% 
34% 
100% 
84% 
100% 
53% 
12% 
93% 
99% 
90% 
51% 

85% 
80% 
100% 

73% 

100% 
82% 

100% 

80% 
80% 

100% 
88% 

0.8 
t  21.6 
14.8 
1.9 
0,1 
5.7 
62 
9.5 
4.0 
36,1 
100J 

9.5 
3.1 
2.8 

5.0 

3.4 
2.8 

4.0 

32 
3.2 

27,5 
37.3 
19.6 
4.5 
7.4 
43.6 
62 
21.1 
18.1 
43.0 
228.3 

9.5 
3.1 
2.8 

5.0 

3.4 
2.8 

4,0 

3.2 
32 

8,6 
45,6 

8.6 
45.6 

10% 
25% 
30% 
12% 
37% 
27% 

49% 
43% 
23% 

43% 
40% 
50% 

37% 

50% 
41% 

50% 

40% 
40% 

50% 
44% 

22.3 
7.7 
5.6 

13.6 

6.8 
6.8 

8.0 

8.0 
8.0 

17,3 
1042 

^ 5 >3 

CHAPTERS 

FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1996 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fundi  (1996) 

295 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION BY OBJECTIVE IN 1996 
TABLE 1.1: OBJECTIVE 1 - CSF 

Member  State 

Fund 

Commitments 

(1994-1999) 

Payments 

(1994.1999V 

Excludm; carryovers 

Including dccommilmenis. 

Excluding carryovers 

Including carryovers 

and appropriations made 

carryovers anil appropriations 

and appropriations made 

available acain 

made available acain 

available again 

BELGIUM 

GERMANY 

GREECE 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

IRELAND 

ITALY 

NETHERLANDS 

AUSTRIA 

PORTUGAL 

UNITED  KINGDOM 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

ERDF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

| 

1 

! 

T O T AL 

! 

E R DF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

R FC 

T O T AL 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

74,25 

40,44 

R.(X) 

(),(X) 

122.69 

«97,35 

609,47 

506.65 

'27.50 

2.040.97 

1.157.34 

116.74 

315.93 

0.(X> 

1.590.01 

2.756,72 

1.160.33 

539,48 

158.32 

4.614.84 

132.83 

8 2 . 80 

8133 

0,(X) 

296.96 

591.86 

32120 

260.07 

821 

1.181.34 

1.64002 

171.47 

227,01 

0,(X) 

2.038.70 

0,00 

0,00 

4.80 

0.00 

4.80 

<).<X> 

().(X) 

4.96 

(MX) 

4.96 

1.R33.28 

73730 

377.03 

20.15 

2.967.97 

247.21 

159.46 

91.24 

7.97 

505.88 

15.369.13J 

9.331,07 j 

3399,40 j 

2.416.50 

222.161 

74.25 

40.44 
8,00 

0.00 

122.69 
89735 

609.47 

506.65 

2730 

2.040.97 
1.157.34 

116,74 

315.93 

().(X) 

1.590.01 

2.756.72 

1.160,33 

539.48 

15832 

4.614.84 
132.82 

82.80 

8133 

O.tX) 

296.95 
591.86 

32120 

260,07 

821 

1.181.34 
1.640.22 

171,47 

227.01 

O.(X) 

2 . 0 3 8 . 70 

O.tX) 

(MX) 

4 . 80 

(MX) 

4.R0 

(MX) 

O.(X) 

4 . 96 

(MX) 

4.96 

1.8332R 

73730 

377.03 

20,15 

2.967.96 
24721 

159.46 

91.24 

7.97 

505.88 

15369,11 

9331,05 

3399,40 

2.41630 

222.16 

59.99 

2X.27 

3 30 

0,(X) 

91.77 
1.213,40 

458,46 

407,41 

15.14 

2.094.42 
1.243.11 

120.43 

272.89 

9.65 

1.646.08 
1.79932 

1230.17 

557.96 

229.47 

3.817.12 
113,43 

77,94 

59.R4 

0.00 

25121 
336,09 

306,01 

25024 

8,43 

9(K),76 
1.644,14 

12234 

140.42 

1923 

1.926.12 
8.(X) 

0,(X) 

3,84 

(MX) 

11.84 

5.99 

131 

5.11 

0,(X) 

12.61 

1.56929 

524.72 

315.48 

25.08 

2.434.57 
277,47 

153.95 

4R.64 

4.45 

4X430 

13.671,00 

8270.43 

3.023,79 

2.06533 

311.46 

1 

59.99 

28,27 

• 

330 

0,00 

91,77 
1.213.40 

458.46 

407,41 

15.14 

2.094.42 
1243.11 

120.43 

272,89 

9,65 

1.646.08 
1.79932 

1230.17 

557.96 

229.47 

3.817.12 
113.43 

77.94 

59.84 

0,00 

25121 
336.09 

306.01 

25024 

8.43 

9(X).76 
1.644,14 

12234 

140.42 

1923 

1.926.12 
8.(X) 

(MX) 

3,84 

(MX! 

11.84 

5.99 

131 

5,11 

0,(X) 

12.61 
136929 

524.72 

315.48 

25.08 

2.434.57 
277.47 

153.95 

48.64 

4.45 

48430 

13.671.00 

8270,43 

3.023.79 

2.06533 

311.46 

Budget headings B2-1000, B2-1100, B2-1200, B2-1300. 

296 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION BY OBJECTIVE IN 1996 * 
TABLE 1.2: OBJECTIVE 2 - CSF 

Member  State 

Fund 

Commitments 
(1994-1996) 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

I T A LY 

LUXEMBOURG 

N E T H E R L A N DS 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SUEDEN 

UNITED  KINGDOM 

1 

' 

ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
IERDF 

ESF 
1 
1 TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
| E R DF 
ESF 

I T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF' 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 

TOTAL 

ERDF 
ESF 

Excluding carryovers 
and appropriations made 
available again 
65.47 
16,94 

R2.41 
19.90 
3.08 

22.98 
290.05 
94.23 

38428 
246.03 
131.86 

377.89 
594,09 
68.<X) 

662.09 
193,45 
36,90 

230.35 
0.00 
().(X) 

(MX) 
77,02 
22.12 

99.14 
7.62 
3.77 

11.40 
21.32 
(MX) 

21.32 
0,00 
(MX) 

(MX) 
625,01 
18839 

R 13.60 

2.705,4S| 

2.139,95j 
56530] 
\ 

Including decommitments, 
carryovers and appropriations 
made available acain 

61.50 
16.94 

7R.44 
19.7( 
3.08 

22.78 
284.84 
94.23 

379.07 
24532 
131.86 

377.1R 
587.77 
6R.(X) 

655.77 
177,12 
36.90 

214.02 
-1.47 
().(K) 

-1.47 
77.02 
22.12 

99.14 
7.62 
3.77 

11.40 
2132 
(MX) 

2122 

(MX) 

0.00 

(MK> 

6 2 2 . 03 
18839 

810.63 

2.66828 

2.102.78 
565301 
! 

Payments 
(1994-1W6) 

Excluding carryovers 
and apprc—iations made 
available acain 
.10.02 
10,67 

20.69 
2.11 
137 

3.67 
126.34 
56.40 

1R2.75 
46.39 
112.87 

15926 
34536 
66.R0 

412.16 
69.33 
25.75 

95.08 
0.<X) 
0 39 

0 29 
21.01 
1R28 

39.29 
7.47 
4.12 

11.59 
1424 
(MX) 

14.24 
().(X) 
0,00 

(MX) 
41337 
158.11 

571.49 

1.51031 

1.055,64 
454 XI 

ECU million 

Including carryovers 

10.02 
10.67 

20.69 
2.11 
137 

3.67 
126.34 
56.40 

182.75 
46.39 
112.87 

159.26 
34536 
66.R0 

412.16 
6933 
25.75 

95.08 
(MX) 
0 29 

0.29 
21.01 
1828 

3929 
7.47 
4.12 

11.59 
1424 
(MX) 

14.24 
(MX) 
(MX) 

._-. 

0,(K) 
413.37 
15X.II 

571.49 

1.510.51 

1.055.64 
454JÎ7 

Budget  headinss  B2-1201.  B2-1301. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

297 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION BY OBJECTIVE IN 1996 * 
TABLE 1.3 OBJECTIVE 3 - CSF 

Member  State 

Fund 

Commitments 
(1994-1999) 

Pavments 
(1994-1999) 

Excluding, —nyovos 
and appropriations made 
available again 

Including decomrniuncnis, 
carryovers and appeonhauoas 
made available acain 

Excluding carryovers 
and appropriations made 
available acain 

94.80 

42.00 

512.62 

239.91 

42139 

149.87 

3.40 

152.23 

65.69! 

34.991 

0.001 
i 

94.80 

42.00 

512.62 

239.91 

42139 

149.87 

3.40 

152.23 

65.69 

34.99 

- 

0.00 

1.076.80 

1.076,80 

81.91 

40.96 

28730 

272.12 

402.88 

102.441 

i 
3.36; 

124.62 

71.77 

1 

21.10] 

' 

0.00 

581.69 

ECU million 

Including carryovers 

81.91 

40.96 

28730 

272.12 

402.88 

102.44 

3.36 

124.62 

71.77 

_ 

21.10 

0.00 

581.69 

2.7933*2 

2.793,92 

1.99034 

1.99034 

• 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

LUXEMBOURG 

NETHERLANDS 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SUEDES 

UNITED  KINGDOM 

TOTAL 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

Budget heading B2-1302. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

INTRODUCTION 

A.1996 

1. The first  Cohesion  Report 
2. Support for employment 
3. The implementation  of assistance  in 1996 : The main  points in this report 

B. A SPECIAL  FOCUS ON RESEARCH  AND TECHNOLOGICAL  INNOVATION 

1. The context 
2. Structural  Funds and development  of the technological  potential  of the regions 

PART A  THE STRUCTURAL  FUNDS  IN 1996 

CHAPTER  I  IMPLEMENTATION OF PROGRAMMING 

A. ASSISTANCE  BY OBJECTIVE 

1. General  overview 

1.1. The implementation  of the Objectives  in  1996 
1.2.  1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 

2. Objectives  1  and 6 

2.1.  Implementation  of Objectives  1  and 6 in 1996 
2.2.  1996 in the context  of programming for  1994-99 

3. Objective  2 

3.1.  Implementation of Objective  2 in 1996 
3.2.  1996 in the context of programming  for  1994-96 
3.3. Preparing for the period  1997-99 

4. Objectives  3 and 4 

4.1.  Implementation of Objectives  3 and 4 in 1996 
4.2.  1996 in the context of programming  for  1994/95-96/99 

5. Objective  5(a) 

5.1. Objective  5(a) agriculture 
5.2. Objective  5(a) fisheries 

6. Objective  5(b) 

6.1. The implementation  of Objective  5(b) in 1996 
6.2.  1996 in the context of programming  for  1994-99 

B. OTHER  ASSISTANCE 
1. Community  Initiatives 

1.1. Overview 
1.2. The individual  Initiatives 

2.  Innovative  measures and technical  assistance 

2.1.  Innovative measures and technical  assistance under Articles 7 and  10 of the  ERDF 
Regulation 
2.2.  Innovative measures and technical  assistance under Article 6 of the ESF Regulation 
2.3.  Innovative measures and technical  assistance under Article  8 of the  EAGGF  Regulation 
2.4.  Innovative  action  and technical  assistance  under Article 4 of the FIFG  Reeulation 

9 

11 
1 ] 
13 
14 

17 
17 
20 

23 

25 

27 
27 
27 
28 
30 
30 
33 
34 
34 
36 
37 
39 
39 
40 
42 
42 
46 
48 
48 
49 

51 
51 
51 
56 
74 

74 
80 
81 
S2 

30 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

2.  Objectives 1 and 6 

2.1.  Implementation of Objectives 1 and 6 in 1996 

The forms  of  assistance  still  awaiting approval  were adopted  in  1996:  18 altogether,  representing a 
contribution  from  the Structural  Funds of ECU 1 331 million  (77% ERDF,  19% EAGGF, 3% ESF). 
These measures comprise  11 OPs (1 in Greece, 6 in Spain, 1  in Ireland and 3 in Italy), 4 global grants 
(2 in Spain and 2 in Italy), and 3 major projects (Spain). They represent only 1.4% of total assistance 
adopted  for  the  period  1994-99, and  are much  fewer  in  number  than  the  programming  documents 
adopted  in  1995  (26)  and  especially  in  1994, when  the present  programming  period  was  launched 
(141). 

Objectives  1 and  6 are programmed  through  6 CSFs and  14 SPDs. The various forms  of  assistance 
now  number  185  SPDs,  OPs,  global  grants  or  major  projects.  As  to  the  breakdown  of  financing 
between different  Funds, it is worth noting the following points. 

•  Almost one quarter of the forms of assistance (but 29% of total financing)  involve financing  from 
three of the Funds, if not all four. Fourteen programmes are financed by all four Funds (including 
12 SPDs in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Finland, Sweden, and the United Kingdom). These 
fourteen  programmes  represent  8% of the number  of programmes, but a volume  of financing  of 
11% of the total contribution. Thirty-one measures are financed from three Funds (17% of the total 
number, and  18% of total appropriations), with the predominant combination being joint  financing 
by the ERDF, the ESF and the EAGGF (30 programmes) and one programme receiving financing 
from the ERDF, the ESF and the FEFG. 

•  On the other hand,  102 measures, or 55% of measures but 43% of total financing, are financed  by a 
single  Fund. They  comprise  60 ERDF measures  (32% of  the total  of  185 forms  of  assistance), 
including 7 global grants and 5 major projects, 22 ESF OPs, 17 EAGGF OPs and 3 FIFG OPs. 
•  There  are  38 measures  financed  by two Funds. They represent  21% of assistance  measures, but 
28% of total financing. Most of them are OPs under the ERDF and the ESF (32 measures), with 
the others being financed either by the ERDF and the EAGGF (4 measures), or by the ESF and the 
EAGGF (2 measures), or by the ERDF and the FIFG (1 measure). 

The  implementation  of  the  various  forms  of  assistance  is  predominantly  regionalised.  Regional 
measures account for  106 out of a total of  185, i.e. 57%, breaking down as follows. 

•  SPDs  represent  13% of  the  total,  in  contrast  with  the  92 OPs, global  grants  or  major  projects 

within CSFs. 

•  Of the 92 regional measures within CSFs, almost half are in Spain (43), and none at all in Ireland. 
•  The  Member  States  where  regional  programmes  account  for  the  highest  percentage  of  the  total 
number  of  programmes  for  implementing  the  CSF are  Germany  (89%  of  the  CSF),  and  Spain 
(67%);  these  are  the  only  two  Member  States  where  over  half  the  measures  in  the  CSF  are 
implemented as regional programmes. 

•  The  ratio  between  the  regional  programmes  and  the CSF as a whole in  terms  of  the  volume of 
financing  is substantially similar, although slightly less than that for the number of measures: 52% 
of the financing under CSFs is implemented under regionalised measures. 

•  The proportion  of financing implemented regionally is once again highest in Germany (over 92% 
of appropriations within the CSF) and Spain (62%). In two Member States, Greece and Portugal, 
the  share  of  regional  programmes  in  total  appropriations  (33%  and  18%  respectively)  is 
considerably  smaller  than  the number  of  regionalised  programmes  relative  to  total  programmes 
within the CSF (41% in both cases). 

298 

8th  Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION BY OBJECTIVE IN 1996 * 
TABLE 1.4: OBJECTIVE 4 - CSF 

Member  State 

Fund 

Commitments 
(1994-1999) 

Payments 
O 994-1999) 

- 

Excluding cdry overs 

including  d c c o m m i u n c n i s, 

and approprialiiins  nude 

carryovers and  appropriations 

available again 

made available  acain 

Excludinc carryovers 
and appropriations made 
available acain 

ECU  million 

Lncluduic carryovers 

11.75 

7.<X> 

26.6» 

4 9 . 54 

9 1 . 68 

38.28 

0.37 

(UK) 

0.00 

8.77 

37.50 

1 
271.501 
i 

11.75 

7.(K) 

26.61 

49.54 

91.68 

. 

38.28 

1 

0.37 

I 
().(K)j 

0.00 

X.77 

37.50 

271.50 

5.91 

7,68 

8,70 

10.02 

49.62 

19.14 

(US 

0,00 

3.51 

5.5(>| 
I 

18,75 

129,08 

5.91 

7,68 

8,70 

10.02 

49.62 

19.14 

0.25 

0.00 

3 31 

5 30 

18.75 

129,08 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

l 

'  ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

FSE 

l 

1 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

LUXEMBOURG 

NETHERLANDS 

i 
! 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SUEDEN 

TOTAL 

* Budget heading B2-1303. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

299 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION BY OBJECTIVE LN 1996 * 
TABLE 1.5: OBJECTIVE 5(a) Agriculture - CSF 

Member  State 

Fund 

Commitments 
(1994-1999) 

Payments 
(1994-1999) 

Excluding carryovers 
and appr<~nati<BU made 

available acain 

Including decommiunenu. 
carryovers and appropriations 
made available acain 

Excludinc. carryovers 
and appropriations made 
available acain 

Including carryovers 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

EAGGF 

EAGGF 

EAGGF 

* 

!  EAGGF 

1 

EAGGF 

I 
1  EAGGF 

LUXEMBOURG 

:  EAGGF 

NETHERLANDS 

EAGGF 

J 

AUSTRIA 

EAGGF 

FINLAND 

SUEDEN 

EAGGF 

!  EAGGF 
1 

UNITED  KINGDOM 

EAGGF 

j 
1 

i 

26,80 

22.08 

191.84 

1 

25,<X) 

220,661 

131.69 

431 

9,05 

75.94 

! 

53.32 

26.50 

1503 

TOTAL 

J  EAGGF 

802.43 

26.80 

22.08 

191.84 

25.IK) 

220.66 

131.69J 

431 

9.05 

75.94 

i 
5332 

42.59 

22.07 

17734 

28,74 

206.89 

41.08 

5.21] 

| 
6,49! 

1 

77,13 

26.60 

26.5()| 

* 

27.86! 

15.23 

802,43 

34.01 

696.00 

42.59 

22.07 

17734 

28.74 

206,89 

41.08 

5.21 

6.49 

77.13 

26.60 

27.86 

34,01 

696.00 

Budget  headines  B2-1001.  B2-1002. 

300 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION BY OBJECTIVE IN 1996 * 
TABLE 1.6 : OBJECTIVE 5(a) Fisheries - CSF 

Member  State 

Fund 

Commitments 
(1994-1999) 

Payments 
(1994-1 » 9) 

Excluding carryovers 
and appn^nauom made 
available «tain 

Including decoramiunents, 
carryovers and anranrutxns 
made available acain 

Excluding carryovers 
and appTupnauons made 
availableacain 

Including carryovers 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

LUXEMBOURG 

NETHERLANDS 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SUEDEN 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

UNITED  KINGDOM 

FIFG 

TOTAL 

FÏFG 

20.42 

2308 

12,77 

19.X9 

().(X) 

().(X) 

<>.(XI 

6.36 

0,(X) 

(MX) 

(MX) 

2935 

11207 

20.42 

2308 

12.77 

19.89 

(MX) 

(MX) 

(MX) 

6.36 

(MX) 

0,00 

0,00 

2935 

11207 

16.50 

(l.(X) 

3.88 

32,74 

().(X) 

11.93 

(),(X) 

6,46 

0.80 

(MX) 

(MX) 

807 

16,50 

(MX) 

3.88 

32,74 

(MX) 

11.93 

(MX) 

6,46 

0.80 

(),(X) 

0,(X) 

807 

803» 

8038 

Budget heading B2-1101 excluding measures under Article 4 of the FIFG Regulation. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

301 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION BY OBJECTIVE IN 1996 * 
TABLE 1.7: OBJECTIVE 5(b) - CSF 

Member  State 

TunrJ 

Commitments 
(1994-1999) 

Payments 
(1994-1999) 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

LUXEMBOURG 

NETHERLANDS 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SUEDEN 

UNITED KINGDOM 

FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 
FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

TOTAL 

TOTAL 

FEDER 
FSE 
FEOGA 

Excluding carryovers 
an) appropriations made 
available again 
(MX 
2.71 
4.16 

Including decommiunenu, 
carryovers and appropriations 
made available acain 
(MX 
-  2.71 
4.16 

Excluding carryovers 
and appropriai» *n made 
available acain 
(MX) 
2.07 
1.40 

6.86 
(MX) 
(MX) 
3,73 

3.73 
72.65 
15.39 
99.68 

1X7.71 
37.33 
908 
125.69 

172.30 
127.16 
28.41 
18033 

335.91 
0.00 
0.42 
33.17 

33.59 
(MX) 
0.00 
(MX) 

(MX) 
2X19 
0 05 
1301 

15.56 
8 33 
13.85 
29.45 

51.62 
15.16! 
l.lll 
(MX) 

16.27! 
34.09 
12.83 
17.99 

64.91 

64.17i 
17.76J 
I.OOj 

82.931 

97138 

360.98 
102,00 
508,40 

6.86 
(MX 
0.00 
3.73 

3.73 
72.65 
1539 
99.68 

187.71 
37.33 
9 08 
125.69 

17230 
127.16 
28.41 
18033 

335.91 
0.00 
0.42 
.  33.17 

33.59 
(MX) 
0.00 
0.00 

(MX) 
2J09 
0 05 
1301 

15.56 
8 33 
13.85 
29.45 

51.62 
15.16 
1.11 
(MX) 

1607 
34.09 
12.83 
17.99 

64.91 
64.17 
17.76 
).(K) 

82.93 

97138 

360.98 
102.00 
508.40 

3.47 
0.(X) 
0.14 
(),(X) 

0.14 

9901 
11.46 
101.90 

21237 
33.49 
6 04 
84.67 

124.40 

117.63 
37.01 
14537 

3(X)00 
0.00 
0 07 
30.89 

31.15 
(MX) 
(1,00 
(MX) 

(MX) 
5.03 
0 38 
7 08 

12.70 
11.17 
12.96 
15.20 

39.34 
4.46 
0.08 
3.13 

7.67 
11.71 
4 39 
6 34 

22.64 
5336 
1538 
2.70 

71.44 

825.72 

336,07 
9038 
399,07 

Including carryovers 

(>.(X) 
2.07 
1.40 

3.47 
0.0(1 
0.14 
0,00 

0.14 

99.21 
11.46 
101.90 

21237 
33.49 
604 
84.67 

124.40 
117.63 
37.01 
14537 

3(X)O0 
().(X) 
0 07 
30.89 

31.15 
(MX) 

0.00 

0.00 
5.03 
038 
7 0* 

12.70 
11.17 
12.96 
15O0 

39.34 
4.46 
0.08 
3.13 

7.67 
11.71 
4 39 
6 34 

22.64 
53.36 
1538 
2.70 

71.44 

825,72 

336.07 
9038 
399,07 

Budget headings B2-1003, B2-1202, B2-1304. 

302 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION BY OBJECTIVE IN 1996 * 
TABLE 1.8: OBJECTIVE 6 - CSF 

Member  State 

Fund 

FINLAND 

SUEDEN 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

TOTAL 

TOTAL 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

Commitments 
(1995-1999) 

1 

Payments 
(1995-1999) 

Excluding carryovers 
and appropriations made 

available acain 
3030 
13.48 
33.20 
(MX) 

Including decomntiunenu, 
carryovers and apfraon—uons 
made available acain 
3030 
13.48 
33O0 
(UK) 

Excluding carryovers 
and apnropnauom made 
available acain 
6.72 
7.76 
27.64 
(MX) 

77.18 
(MX) 
(MX) 
11.47 
(MX) 

11.47 

88,65 

3030 
13,48 
44.67 
0.00 

77.18 
(MX) 
0.00 
11.47 
(MX) 

11.47 

8&6S 

3030 
13.48 
44.67 
0.00 

42.12 
(MX) 
(MX) 
9.02 
(MX) 

9.02 

51,14 

6.72 
7,76 
36,66 
0,00 

ECU  million 

Including carryovers 

6.72 
7.76 
27.64 
0.00 

42.12 
(MX) 
(MX) 
9.02 
0.(X) 

9.02 

51,14 

6.72 
7.76 
36.66 
0,00 

Budget headings B2-1004. B2-1102, B2-1203, B2-1305. 

8th  Annual  Report  on the Structural  Fundi 

(1996) 

303 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE COMMUNITY INITIATIVES* 

Community 

Initiatives 

Fund 

Commitments 

(1994-99) 

millions d'ECUs 

Payments 

. 

(1994-99) 

Excluding carryovers 

Including decommiunents. 

Excluding carryovers 

Including carryovers 

and appropriations made 

carryovers and annropnations 

and appropruuons nude 

available acain 

made available acain 

available aratn 

ADAPT 

EMPLOYMENT 

LEADER 

ERDF 

ESF 

1 

IERDF 

|ESF 

1 

I 

1 

ERDF 
ESF 

1 
.  1 

EAGGF 

! 

• 

PESCA 

! 

1 

PME 

RECHAR 

ERDF 

ESF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

EST 

ERDF 

ESF 

REGIS 

| 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

KONVER 

1 

I 

RESIDER 

RETEX 

URBAN 

INTERREG/PEACE 

I 

ERDF 

EST 

I 

IERDF 
JEST 

1 

ERDF 

ESF 

ERDF 

IESF 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

TOTAL 

! 

1 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

22243 

0,00] 

222,43 

246,70| 

339| 

2433V 

251481 

99.93 
«.«4 

8W1 

13039| 

780SJ 

73-5 

4439J 

181^2! 

16738 

1434 

1193)31 

103,77 

16.17 

157,96 

12807 

1149 

17,00 

0 40 

133.00J 

90.91 i 

42,09| 

13437| 

11842I 
15_75] 

15443J 

14241 

1142 

21S40J 

187,94 

27,06J 

84739) 

737,09 

70,66 

3938 

0,46 

^795391 

145834 

752,10 

139.49 

45.65 

222.431 
o.oo] 
222.4» 

263J41 

3 39 

259.75 

251461 

993*31 

68,64 

83.091 

134361 

79,05 

8,94 

4637 

181.9_l 

16738J 

1434! 

I1953J 

103.7T 

16.171 

157.9fi| 

12807 

1149 

17.00 

0.80 

13340I 

904U j 

42.091 

13437| 

11842I 
ISTSj 

154.43 

14241 

11.62 

215. 

=T 

187,94! 

27.061 

84739! 

737491 

7046 

3938 

0.46, 

2415.981 

1459.14J 

7 6 9 3» 

139,48! 

4743! 

86,961 

0.00 

863* 

17035 

149 

168.66 

1334l|' 

50,94 

2536 

5730 

20441 

102 

2*5 

1636 

88,7l| 

83,40 

5 32 

*M 
5334J 

848! 

U 5 4S 

12343 

5 40 

7 43 

0 30 

95,07) 

7442 

21,05 

79,591 

7049 
849 

- 7 4 l| 

62,00' 

541! 

10841 

96,72j 

11391 

46S.H 

41806 

3001 

1630 

0 03 

1 3 1 3 02 

1.035,62: 

37948j 

8043 

17.09! 

0.001 

86.961 

17035 

•  149 

16846 

13341 

50,94 

2536 

5730 

2044 

102 

2 45 

1636 

_ _ 7j 

83,40 

532 

61.631 

5344J 

8 48 

I353S 

123,13 

5,10 

7.03 

0 30 

95.07 

74,02 

21.05 

793S 

70,69 
849 

6 7 41 

62,00 

5 41 

10841 

96,72 

1139 

46SJ» 

41806 

3001 

1630 

0O3 

1 3 1 3 -2 

1.035.62 

37948 

8043 

17.09 

Budget headings B2-1400, B2-1410, B2-1412, B2-1420, B2-1421, B2-1422, B2-1423, B2-1424, B2-1430,  B2-1431, B2-
1432. B2-1433, B2-1440, B2-1450, B2-1460. B2-1470 

304 

Sth~Annual Report on the Structural Fundi  (1996) 

TABLE 3: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSITIONAL AND INNOVATIVE 

MEASURES' 

Member  State 

F u nd 

Excluding carryovers 

Including decommitmenis, 

Excluding carryoven 

Including carryovers 

C o m m i t m e n ts 

P a y m e n ts 

ECU million 

and ar-nir*iauons made 

carryovers and arfrnpruuons 

and  appropriations made 

available train 

made available acain 

available  team 

B E L G I UM 

D E N M A RK 

E R DF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

G E R M A NY 

j 

GREECE 

S P A IN 

F R A N CE 

I R E L A ND 

I T A LY 

L U X E M B O U RG 

N E T H E R L A N DS 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

i 

E R DF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

2 7 08 

(MX) 

2633 

0.49 

0 06 

3 38 
ooo 
0 40 

(MX) 

2.3R 

4.91 

132 

1.95 

0.79 

0.R6 

1JM 

(MX) 

0,08 

0 34 

132 

1231 

2 04 

2 37 

235 

4,95 

6 46 

0.06 

0 34 

5 07 

100 

2 3 -5 

2138 

0.79 

1.08 

(MX) 

13.48 

100 

1.87 

9.48 

0.93 

OJrV 

(MX) 

0.09 

0 . 00 

(MX) 

1.67 

(MX) 

0 03 

0 07 

1.17 

2 8 44 

(MX) 

27.79 

0,49 

0 06 

7 43 

0 00 

4 35 

0.00 

2.38 

7 44 

131 

4.88 

0.79 

0.86 

2,79 

(MX) 

0.94 

0 34 

1.31 

14.46 

2 04 

4.78 

2 34 

4.90 

K59 

0.06 

2.46 

507 

100 

25J4 

2138 

2.68 

1.08 

(MX) 

1743 

l oo 

6 32 

93R 

0.93 

0 31 

().(X) 

031 

'  0.00 

(MX) 

3 , 18 

(MX) 

1.75 

007 

1.17 

2 3 40 

0.04 

21.90 

134 

0,12 

4 44 

0,90 

2.91 

(MX) 

0 04 

8 36 

5 06 

2,68 

0.49 

0.14 

2 35 

(MX) 

0 35 

1.01 

0.7X 

2 5 37 

17.48 

3.70 

2.61 

1.78 

17,49 

9 33 

3.43 

3.46 

1,07 

2 4 36 

21.65 

2 33 

0.01 

0.36 

22,90 

0.75 

8.83 

1231 

0.80 

0 32 

(MX) 

0 32 

0.00 

(MX) 

4 46 

2 35 

1.19 

(MX) 

0.92 

23*40 

0,04 

2 1 . 90 

134 

0.12 

4 44 

0.90 

2.91 

0.00 

0.24 

8 36 

5 06 

2.68 

0.49 

0.14 

2 35 

(MX) 

0 35 
un 
0.78 

2 5 47 

17.48 

3.70 

2.61 

1.78 

17.49 

9 33 

3.43 

3,46 

1.07 

2 4 36 

21.65 

2 33 

0.01 

0 36 

2X90 

0.75 

8.83 

1231 

0.80 

0 32 

(MX) 

0 32 

0.00 

(MX) 

4 . 46 

2 35 

1.19 

(>.(X) 

0.92 

Budget headings B2-1800, B2-1810, B2-1820, B2-1830. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

305 

TABLE 3: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION OF TRANSITIONAL AND INNOVATIVE 

MEASURES ' (CONTINUED) 

M e m b er  State 

F u nd 

Excn—ng carryovcn 

Including  decon__UK_—J 

Eichiding canyovsn 

In—_iBf  carryovers 

C o m m i t m e n t; 

P a y m e n ts 

E CU  million 

•1 anpn^naiio— made 

d apprnpnaliam nude 

available again 

made available  m a il 

available at am 

AUSTIUA 

PORTUGAL 

FINLAND 

SUEDEN 

UNITEDKINGDOM 

COMMUNITY 

TOTAL 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

c 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 
. 
ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

0 37 

005 

0.01 

(Ml 

(MX) 

3,74 

(MX) 

005 

1.44 

2,04 

1 46 

005 

003 

039 

0.59 

106 

005 

0.18 

(MX) 

(1.83 

8 47 

331 

0.83 

0.43 

3.90 

50,18 

50.01 

0.17 

(MX) 

(MX) 

16145 

80,67 

36.93 

23.03 

20.42 

1 J2 

0 05 

0,76 

0.11 

0.00 

4 37 

-0.18 

106 

1.44 

2.04 

2,43 

0 05 

1.00 

0 39 

0 39 

3 07 

0 05 

2 00 

(MX) 

0 . 83 

8 44 

331 

1.16 

0,43 

3.85 

S942 

59.48 

0.17 

-0,03 

0.00 

1963« 

89.95 

6300 

22,90 

20.31 

0,49 

(MX 

0 , 44 

0.06 

(MJO 

1248 

9.66 

0.86 

1.14 

0.81 

0 32 

(MX) 

031 

0.01 

(MX) 

X.17| 

(MX) 

1.02 

0.02 

«J 4 

7 40 

3,64 

134 

009 

1.62 

3242 

31.68 

0.94 

(MX) 

(MX) 

188X3 

102.93 

5334 

22,97 

8.79 

0 49 

0.00 

0.44 

0.06 

0.00 

12.48 

9.66 

0.86 

1.14 

O.RI 

0 52 

(MX) 

0 31 

0.01 

(MX) 

U7 

0 . 00 

1.02 

0 , 02 

0.14 

7 J0 

3.64 

134 

0 09 

1,62 

3242 

31.68 

0.94 

(MX) 

(MX) 

18843 

102.93 

53.34 

22.97 

8.79 

* Budget headings B2-1800, B2-1810, B2-1820, B2-1830. 

3o  ^ 

CHAPTER Vn 

FINANCIALIMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 

8th Annual Report on  the Structural Funds (1996) 

31 

Table 1-5:  Objective 1 - Share of regional and  multiregional programmes in total assistance (ECU  million) 

SPD 

CSF 

TOTAL 

Total 

-EL 

IRL 

14 
13% 
6-336,4 
_ _ _ Sl 

Régional programmes 
Number 
™».o.Ootal..QbJ.l 
Financing 
fepHptalQfri,) 
Multiregional programmes 
Number 
S..9Î.ï9M.9.fei.-.i. 
Financing 
%oftoialQfriT1 
Total 
Number 
S._9.U9M.Ql>J.-.L 
Financing 
%ofto^lQbj,l 

0 
JS&. 
0,0 
0% 

14 
8%. 
6336,4 
7% 

92: 
87%j 

16 

13 

43 

13 

42.086,5;  12.520,6 

4.510,6 

15.685,4 

0,0 

6.836,5 

2.533,4 

87%; 

79j 
100%[ 
44.661,4: 
L_Q__i 

19 

21 

11 

16 

10 

1.160,2 

9334-3 

9.750,5 

5.672,0 

7231,1 

11.513,3 

1711 

18 

32 

64 

11 

29 

17 

86.747,9!  13.680,8 

13.844,9 

25.435,9 

5.672,0 

14.067,6 

14.046,7 

93%l 

106 
57% 
48.422,9 
_£_, 

79 
43% 
44.661,4 
48% 

185 
100% 
93.0843 
100% 

•Number 
I Fin—icing 

1996 was first  and foremost  a year when  programmes  were  implemented  on the ground.3  For  almost 
one  half  of  the  measures  (86  altogether,  or  46%),  this  implementation  led  to  changes  in  the 
programmes.  Basically,  there  were  three  sorts  of  changes: by  far  the  most  numerous  were  financial 
reprogramming  of  the  measures  (in  86%  of  cases);  they  also  involved,  in  37%  of  cases,  financial 
decisions  relating to an  increase  in  assistance  from  the Funds, or more  frequently,  transfers  between 
the  different  Funds  and  indexation  of  financial  amounts;  lastly,  in  one  third  of  cases,  they  involved 
changes  to  the  programmes  such  as  amendments  to  planned  actions  or  operations,  but  without 
necessarily  adjusting  priorities.  Amendments  were  made  in  ten  of  the  thirteen  eligible  Member 
States,4 and  10% of the changes concerned programmes amended more than once.5 

Promotion of technological innovation in  the  regions eligible under Objectives 1 and 6: 
Support for technological development is increasing in importance in relation to the period 1989-93.  It more 
than doubled in the Objective  1 regions and countries,  rising to 7%  of all Community financing (from 2.5% 
between  1989  and 1993). This increase  is partly the result of including new regions under Objective 1, with 
substantially higher levels of R&D  expenditure than the original regions,  but it is also due to an appreciable 
increase in financing in the original regions too,  especially in Italy, Ireland and  Greece. In general,  common 
trends are  emerging,  including increased participation by  the private sector,  which reflects a shift towards an 
approach more closely geared to  the  demand for innovation and technology,  the adoption by certain regions 
of technological development strategies — a step encouraged by  the  Commission in the first instance  in pilot 
projects — and  a relative increase in ESF  financing. 
Objective  1 programmes give priority to RTD  but also cover telecommunications  (15%). The scale of RTD 
measures varies from one  Member State to another.  The  types of measure financed relate to: 
• 

infrastructure  (building  and rehousing  of research  centres,  university  laboratories  and centres for  the 
dissemination  of results)  and support for  the scientific and technological system (RTD and  innovation 

3 For more details, see Chapter V.  Country-by-country survey. 
4 The Dutch, Austrian and Swedish SPDs have not been changed. 
5 Five programmes were amended twice (Saxony-Anhalt (Economic development), Ireland (Local Development), 

Basilicata, Sicily, Northern Ireland) and one programme was amended 3 times. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fundi (1996) 

309 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE* 
TABLE 1.1 : OBJECTIVE 1 - CSF 

M e m b er  S t a te 

Fund 

C o m m i U b c a ts 
(1994-99) 

Firlmhnt  u m y mm 

and M|'|'r'i')'naliTf( nma 

u»iyu»ut and _-nropri___ 

available agau 

ma— available again 
(1> 

P a y m e n ts 
'1994-99) 

E»chi4i»g caryovcg 
and  apf(D|~ia——Bade 
available again 

millions d' Ecus 

% 
am) 

u x i — ug carryo—r» 

(2> 

B E L G I UM 

G E R M A NY 

G R E E CE 

S P A IN 

F R A N CE 

I R E L A ND 

I T A LY 

N E T H E R L A N DS 

A U S T R IA 

P O R T U G AL 

U N I T ED  K I N G D OM 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 
T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 

EAGGF 
FIFG 
T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

FIFG 
T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 

EAGGF 
FIFG 
T O T AL 
ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 

EAGGF 
FIFG 
T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 

EAGGF 
FIFG 

T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 
T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 
T O T AL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

FIFG 
T O T AL 
ERDF 

ESF 
EAGGF 

FIFG 
T O T AL 

T O T AL 

E R DF 
ESF 
E A G GF 
FIFG 

142.1* 
65.14 
22.0C 
0.37 
229.6<i 

2.742.32 
1.775.9* 
1 . 3 6 8 -5 
46.50 
5 9 3 3 . 05 

4 . 3 0 8 J6 
X0I.44 

1.015.12 
37.10 
ft  16?  7? 
ft.I23.9I 
2.826.42 
1.519.15 
462.78 
12  932.26 

369.52 
268.27 
150.53 
6.30 
794.62 

1.340.46 
940.51 

5 9 Z 63 
17.41 
2 8 9 1 . 00 

3 . 6 5 U6 
633.82 
704.7V 
66.54 

5  063 S1 

24.30 
8 _0 
6.70 
2.80 

42.00 

19.96 
5.04 
8.76 

0.00 

33.76 

4.758.66 
1.533.39 
1.153.17 
72.16 
7 5 1 7 37 

548.45 
.321.57 

151.15 

17.03 
1.038.20 

42—37,69 

26J>36,67 

9.179,78 

6.692-S5 

728,99 

142.18 
65.14 
22.00 
0.37 
229.69 
2 . 7 4 1 32 
1.775.98 
1-368-5 
46.50 
5  933.05 

4.308.56 
801.44 

1.015.12 
37.10 
ft  162  2? 
8.123.91 
2.826.42 
1.519.15 
462.78 
12  932.26 

369.51 
268.27 

150.53 

6.30 
794.61 

1.340.46 
940.51 

592.63 
17.41 
2.891.0O1 
3.65L36 
633.82 

704.79 
66.54 
5063.5ol 

24.30 
8J20 
6.70 
2.80 

4 2 . 00 
19.96 
5.04 
8.76 

0.00 

33.76 

4.758.65 
1.533.39 
1.153.17 
72.16 
7  517.371 

, 

548.45 
321.57 

151.15 

17.03 
1 0 3 8 . 20 

4 2 - 3 7 . 67 

2 - 0 3 6 —5 

9.179,78 
6 . 6 9 2 -5 
728,99 

. 

113.74 
40.62 
9.58 
0.19 
164.13 
2.240.46 
1.311.18 
986.08 

26.74 
4.564.47 
3.090.88 
531.96 
791.01 
23.89 
4437,74, 
5.381.87 
2.397.11 

1.226.58 
338.69 
9 3 4 4 . 25 
221.32 
179.79 

97.49 
3.46 

904  M 
845-59 
535.70 

13.93 
2.299  75 
2.731.71 
308.36 
3 9 Z 06 

35-21 
3.467.341 
19.44 
5.06 
5.39 
1.58 

,  31.47 

15.97 
4.03 
7.01 

0.00 

3 . 7 3 0 38 
1,149.09 
735.11 
5 8 -2 
1I572..Q1 
446.88 
258.84 
101-33 

8.82 
8 1 5 86 

3 1 3 2 6 J8 

1 8 J 9 7 . 19 

7.031,63 
4 . S 8 7 J3 

510,73 

113.74 

48.03 
9.58 
0.19 
!71  U 

2.240.46 
1.311.18 

986.08 
26.74 
4 5 6 4 47 
3.090.88 
531.96 
791.01 
23.89 

4  4 37  74 

5.381.87 
2.397.11 
1.249.04 
338.69 
9 3 6 6 . 72 

2 2 1 32 
208.59 

97.49 
3.46 
530.87 

904.54 

845.77 

535.70 
13.93 
2.299.93 

2.731.71 
322.60 

392.06 
35-21 
3  4 8 1 59 
19.44 
5.06 

5 J9 
1.58 
3!  47 

15.97 
4.03 
7.01 

0.00 

27.01 

3.730-38 
1.174.9C 

735.11 
5 8 -2 
5  698  61 

446.88 
258.84 
101.33 
8.82 
8 1 5 86 

3 1 . 4 2 5 30 

18JS97.19 

7 . 1 0 - 08 
4 . 9 0 9 30 

5 1 0 . 73 

. 

80% 
7 4% 
4 4% 
5 0% 
7 5» 

8 2* 
7 4» 
7 2» 
5 8% 

7 7% 
7 2* 
6 6% 
7 8* 
6 4* 

7 2% 
6 6% 

8 5% 
8 2* 
7 3* 
7 2* 
6 0% 
7 8* 
6 5% 
5 5% 

6 7% 
6 7* 
9 0% 
9 0* 
8 0* 
8 0% 

7 5% 
5 1% 
5 6* 
5 3* 
6 9% 

8 0% 
6 2% 
8 0* 

5 6» 
7 5* 
8 0% 
8 0* 
8 0% 
0% 
8 0* 

7 8* 
7 7* 
6 4* 
8 1? 
7 6* 
X l? 
8 0* 
6 75 
5 21 
7 9? 

74<ï 

73<3 

77<; 

7 3 '; 

7 0 '; 

Budget  headings  B2-1000, B2-1100, B2-1200, B2-1300. 

310 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE * 
TABLE 12:  OBJECTIVE 2 - CSF 

Payments 
(1994-96) 

Exchxlmg -«rryrrverx 
and an»m»_nms made 
available again 

% 
(2)1(1) 

Indnduig carryover* 

(2) 

34.41 
13.28 

47.69 
19.87 
3.79 

23.67 
230.83 
102.25 

333.09 
442.25 
164.97 

607.21 
671.80! 
160.7l| 

832.521 
188.98 
56.08 

245.06 
3.01 
1.26 

4.28 
54.48 
3731 

91.80 
21.27 
11.74 

33.01 
26.64 
3.15 

29.79 
26.78 
11-28 

38.06 
711.03 
371.79 

1.082,82 

33683* 

2.431 Je 
937.62 

34.41 
1539 

50.00 
19.87 
3.79 

23.67 
230.83 
108.85 

339.68 
442-5 
164.97 

607.21 
671.80 
163.65 

835.46 
188.98 
56.08 

245.06 
3.01 
1.26 

4.28 
54.48 
3731 

91.80 
21.27 
11.74 

33.01 
26.64 
3.15 

29.79 
26.78 
11.28 

38.06 
711.03 
37931 

1.09034 

338835 

Z43136 
956.9» 

31%. 
5 2* 

36% 
4 5* 
44% 

4 5* 
4 8* 
59% 

5 1* 
56% 
67% 

59% 
50% 
7 4* 

54% 
4 5» 
57% 

48%i 
66% 
65%, 

66% 
38% 
62% 

45%. 
46% 
62% 

50% 
S8% 
50%. 

5 7* 
32* 
50% 

36% 
475 
71% 

53% 

525 

4X5 
675 

Member Slate 

Fond 

Cinnmitmer-s 
(1994-96) 

EiduOmf —nynvc-, 
•mal an—. -*uono> nude 

lAdndmc <k—n_—«am. 

_rry,ivt-i «nu _|i|»unn_—m 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

LUXEMBOURG 

NETHERLANDS 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SWEDEN 

UNITED KINGDOM 

ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 

TOTAL 

TOTAL 

ERDF 
ESF 

available agaà) 

made available agam 
(1) 

114.59 
2535 

139.94 
44.74 
8.53 

53.27 
488.10 
183.03 

671.13 
791.13 
245.97 

1.037.10 
1.345.77 
220.71 

1.566.48 
43Z74 
9736 

530.30 
6.03 
1.94 

7.97 
143.97 
60.18 

204.15 
4633 
19.01 

6535 
46.12 
6.30 

52.42 
83.22 
2236 

105.78 
132833 
535.12 

2.063.65 

6.497,73 

5.071,47 
1.42606 

110.62 
29.98 

140.60 
4434 
833 

53.07 
482.89 
183.03 

665.92 
790.42 
245.97 

1.036.39 
1.339.46 
220.71 

1.560.16 
416.41 
9736 

513.97 
436 
1.94 

6.50 
143.97 
60.18 

204.15 
46.53 
19.01 

6535 
46.12 
630 

52.42 
83.22 
2236 

105.78 
132536 
535.12 

2.060.68 

6.465,19 

5.034-30 
1.43039 

* Budget headings B2-1201, B2-1301. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

311 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE 
TABLE 1.3 OBJECTIVE 3 - CSF 

Member State 

Fund 

C o m m i t m e n ts 
(1994-99> 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

LUXEMBOURG 

NETHERLANDS 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SWEDEN 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

E—tataf —rrymm 
and «inm^uunto made 
available again 

lndiKfcni —eooDU—ioncnia. 

carryover* and an|¥upna_an% 

nude available again 
(1) 

192.56 

127.00 

820.40 

666.50 

19236 

127.00 

820.40 

66630 

1.199.99 

1.199.99 

350.34 

9.86 

434.50 

129.7SJ 

9532 

73.00 

r 

350.34 

9.86 

4343Û 

129.75 

9532 

73.00 

Payments 
(1994-991 

—d—aag carryoven, 
and anpro-nauon made 
available agam 

% 
av(\) 

Inclinant -înyiivu.» 

<2> 

148.34 

88.46 

513.77 

516.66 

90636 

202.67 

8.45 

377.93 

103.80 

51.26 

3630 

156.42 

8 1* 

115.19 

91%. 

521.77 

6 4* 

516.66 

7 8* 

906.56 

76% 

202.67 

58% 

8.95 

91% 

377.93 

8 7* 

103.80 

8 0* 

51.26 

54% 

3630 

50% 

UNITED KINGDOM 

ESF 

2.051.80 

2.051.80 

I.4O0.26 

1.40026 

68% 

TOTAL 

ESF 

6.15133 

6.15133 

435436 

43973-7 

7 1* 

Budget heading B2-1302. 

312 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Fundi (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE * 
TABLE 1.4: OBJECTIVE 4 - CSF 

Member State 

Fund 

Cummitments 
(1994-99) 

Ex—alas carryoven 
and ann-j^'UMoro made 
available again 

Including d—unoiBùaBcnt— 

canynven and annmpn_MM» 

ECU million 

% 
(2>/(l) 

I 

Payments 
(1994^9) 

Excluding carryoven. 
and appropria—« made 
available agam 

indnifeng  ia/ryoven 

CI) 

8.23 

10.68 

2331 

75.85 

9732 

49.45 

0.59 

11.12 

8.23 

50%. 

10.68 

82% 

2331 

4 2* 

75.85 

4 5* 

9732 

52% 

49.45 

50% 

0.59 

66» 

11.12 

5 0* 

# 

9.36 

9.36 

8 0* 

12.92 

18.75 

12.92 

55% 

18.75 

50% 

made available again 

( II 

1638 

13.00 

5622 

167.64! 
1 

187.07 

98.90 

0.90 

2223 

11.70 

23.60 

3730 

635.13 

317,76 

317.76 

50% 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

LUXEMBOURG 

NETHERLANDS 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SWEDEN 

TOTAL 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

ESF 

16.38 

13.00 

5622 

167.64 

187.07 

98.90 

0.90 

2223 

11.70 

23.60 

3730 

635,13 

Budget  heading  B2-1303. 

8th Annual Report On the Structural Fundi (1996) 

3)3 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE * 
TABLE 1.5: OBJECTIVE 5(a) Agriculture - CSF 

Member State 

Fund 

Commitments 
(19944*9) 

Excmdint i—ryovm. 
and ar-aunrmoom Bade 
available again 

u•lyiMUji ami ^ifauiniaDaak 

BELGIUM 

EAGGF 

DENMARK 

EAGGF 

GERMANY 

EAGGF 

SPAIN 

EAGGF 

FRANCE 

EAGGF 

ITALY 

EAGGF 

LUXEMBOURG 

EAGGF 

NETHERLANDS 

EAGGF 

AUSTRIA 

EAGGF 

FINLAND 

EAGGF 

SWEDEN 

EAGGF 

UNITED  KINGDOM 

EAGGF 

79.83 

60.75 

51436 

10241 

739.39 

249.16 

1633 

3432 

137.44 

114.74 

4022 

100.40 

ECU million 

% 
(2V(\) 

li—udug carryovers 

Payments 
(1994-99) 

Fidudmg c-rvovm 
and appropnaoon made 
aval table agam 

59.10 

4126 

387.16 

8435 

449.86 

99.81 

10.58 

.  18.64 

107.88 

57.31 

34.72 

75.74 

59.10 

74%. 

41.26 

68% 

387.16 

75% 

8435 

83% 

449.86 

61% 

99.81 

4 0* 

10.58 

64% 

18.64 

54% 

107.88 

78% 

5731 

50%. 

34.72 

86% 

75.74 

75% 

made available again 
(1) 

79.83 

60.75 

514.56 

10241 

739.39 

249.16 

1633 

3432 

137.44 

114.74 

4022 

100.40 

TOTAL 

EAGGF 

2.189.75 

2.189,75 

1.42630 

1.42630 

65% 

*  Budget  headings  B2-1001,  B2-1O02  (i.e.  excluding  budget  headings  B2-1000  -  Structural  measures  directly  related  to 
market policies  (1994 only - ECU 43.65 million in both commitments and  payments), and refunds  under Regulation  (EEC) 
No 2328/91  for  1993 (ECU  356.6 million in commitments and ECU 417.02 million in payments). 

314 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Fundi  (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE * 
TABLE 1.6 : OBJECTIVE 5(a) Fisheries - CSF 

ECU million 

% 
(2)/(l) 

Including carryover). 

(2» 

19.K3 

81% 

3029 

43% 

20.02 

5 3* 

42.71 

72% 

41.13 

655 

23.13 

52% 

0.11 

10% 

12.66 

82% 

1.00 

50% 

6.90 

30%. 

12.00 

30% 

20.  n 

45» 

22936 

22936 

54% 

M e m b er  S t a te 

Fund 

Oimmi—tents 
fl9V4-9V> 

Payment» 
. (1994-99) 

Excluding carryover. 
and aprnipnanoiK made 
available again 

Indudmg d—snuninnenix 

carryovers and appropriations 

made available agam 

Excluding  carryover. 

and appropriation» made 
available again 

19.83 

3029 

20.02 

42.71 

41.13! 

1 

23.131 

0.11 

i 

12.66J 

l.OOl 
! 

6.90 

12.00 

20.10 

B E L G I UM 

D E N M A RK 

G E R M A NY 

SPAIN 

F R A N CE 

I T A LY 

L U X E M B O U RG 

FTFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

i 
j 

FIFG 

1 
1 
1 

I 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

N E T H E R L A N DS 

FIFG 

AUSTR1A 

F 1 N L A ND 

S W E D EN 

FIFG 

FIFG 

FIFG 

UNITED  KINGDOM 

FIFG 

! 

T O T AL 

FIFG 

! 

. 

1 

24.50 

1 

69.X7; 

37.64 

59.72 

1 
6327J 
1 

44.77 

; 
1.10: 

1532J 

2.00J 

1 
23.00J 

i 

40.00l 

1 
1 
44.3.3 

1 

425.72 J 

2430 

69.87 

37.64 

59.72 

6 3 27 

44.77 

1.10 

1532 

2 00 

23.00 

40.00 

4 4 33 

425,72 

*  Budget heading  B2-1101 excluding measures under Article 4 of  the FIFG  Regulation. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE * 
TABLE 1.7 : OBJECTIVE 5(b) - CSF 

Member State 

Fond 

' 

Gmmitmetts 
(1994-99) 

Excludag _Tryove» 
and «|—opruiionv made 
available «gain 

IncU—fcog dcconflyBBcnu. 

carryovers and i|iyauoi_uoi_ 

Payments 
'1994.991 

—dudmg carryovers 
and appropruona» made 
available agam 

Indudug carryover. 

(21 

315 

ECU million 

% 
(Did) 

made available again 

4.82 
4.25 
6.95 

16.03 

5.93 
1.29 
6.30 

13.51 

171.69 

42.84 

234.92 

449.45 

81.97 

2 2 37 
229.84 

334.39 

2 8 4 28 

93.12 
331.69 

709.09 

4 3 36 

14.78 

81.95 

1 4 0 39 
0.43 
0.11 
0.30 

0.84 

16.11 
246 
2238 

41.16 
41.67 
2733 
60.75 

129.95 
31.19j 
629J 
11.60J 

49.081 

34.09; 
1283 
17.99 

64.91 ! 
130.54 
5423 
18.86 

203.63 

215233 j 
1 
84638! 
28231! 
1.023.74 

* 

241 
2.85 
279 

8.05 
3.74 
0.78 
1.29 

5.80 
139.53 
26.90 
18034 

346.77 
6921 
13.44 
160.19 

242.84 
201.44 
72.70 
233.99 

508.14 
21.93 
7.44 
5528 

84.65 
021 
0.05 
*  *  0.15 

0.42 
12.44 
1.49 
1133 

2525 
27.84 
19.80 
30.85 

7830 
1224 
267 
8.69 

23.61 

11.71 
439 
634 

22.64 
90.84 
38.41 
11.63 

140.88 

1.48738 

59335 
191.15 
70238 

2.41 
285 
279 

8.05 
3.74 
0.78 
1.29 

5.80 
139.53 
26.90 
180.34 

346.77 
6921 
13.44 
160.19 

242.84 
201.44 
7270 
233.99 

508.14 
21.93 
7.44 
5528 

84.65 
021 
0.05 
0.15 

0.42 
1244 
1.49 
1133 

2525 
27.84 
1930 
3035 

7830 
1224 
267 
8.69 

23.61 
11.71 
4.59 
6.34 

22.64 
90.84 
38.41 
11.63 

140.88 

1.48738 

59335 
191,15 
70238 

5 0% 
6 7* 
4 0% 

5 0* 

6 3* 
6 1% 
2 0* 

4 3% 
8 1% 

6 3* 
7 7* 

7 7% 
84% 

60%. 

7 0* 

73%. 

7 1* 

7 8* 

7 1* 

7 2% 

5 0* 
5 0% 
6 7% 

6 0% 

5 0% 
5 0% 
5 0* 

5 0% 
7 7% 
6 0* 
50%. 

6 1* 
6 7* 

7 2% 

5 1% 

6 0% 

3 9% 
4 2% 
7 5% 

4 8% 
3 4* 

3 6% 

3 5* 

3 5* 
7 0* 

7 1% 

6 2% 

69% 

6 9% 

7 0% 
6 8% 
6 9% 

BELGIUM 

DENMARK 

GERMANY 

SPAIN 

FRANCE 

ITALY 

LUXEMBOURG 

NETHERLANDS 

AUSTRIA 

FINLAND 

SWEDEN 

UNITED KINGDOM 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

TOTAL 

TOTAL 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 

4.82 
425 
6.95 

16.03 
5.93 
129 
6.30 

13.51 
171.69 
42.84 
234.92 

449.45 
81.97 
22.57 
229.84 

334.39 
28428 
93.12 
331.69 

709.09 
43.86 
14.78 
81.95 

140.59 
0.43! 
0.11 
0.30 

0.841 

16.11 
246| 
22381 

41.16! 
41.671 
2733 
60.75 

129.951 
31.19J 
6.29 
11.60 

49.08! 
34.09 
12.83 
17.99 

64.91 
130.54J 
5423! 
18.86! 
1 
203.631 

215233 

84638 
28231 
1.023.74 

* Budget headings B2-1003, B2-1202, B2-1304. 

316 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 1: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE * 
TABLE 1.8 : OBJECTIVE 6 - CSF 

Member State 

Fond 

Commitments 
(1995-99) 

Ex——nf carryoven 
and appnipria—ns made 
available agam 

carryovc—* and _jHau|aianon\ 

made available at—i 
(1) 

Payments 
(199S-99I 

Exclodaig carryoven 
and approonauo». made 
available agam 

I—ladmg carryoven. 

(21 

ECU million 

% 
(2)1(1) 

FINLAND 

SWEDEN 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

TOTAL 
ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

TOTAL 

TOTAL 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

> 

52.90 
3438 
70.00 
0.70 

15X.18 
21.86! 
U39| 
22.411 
0.731 

56.391  • 

21437 

74.76 
45.97 
9231 
1,43 

52.90 
3438 
70.00 
0.70 

)58.18 
21.86 
11.39 
22.41 
0.73 

56.39 

21437 

74.76 
4537 
9231 
1,43 

17.92 
18.31 
46.04 
0.35 

82.62 
10.93 
5.70 
14.49 
0.37 

31.48 

,  114,10 

2835 
2431 
6033 
0,72 

17.92 
1831 
46.04 
0.35 

82.62 
10.93 
5.70 
14.49 
0.37 

31.48 

114,10 

2835 
2431 
6033 
0,72 

34%, 
53% 
66% 
50% 

52% 
50% 
50% 
65% 
50% 

5 6* 

53% 

3 9* 
52% 
65% 
65% 

* Budget headings B2-1004, B2-1102, B2-1203, B2-1305. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

317 

TABLE 2 : FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 

TABLE 2.1:  OVERALL IMPLEMENTATION 

INITIATIVES* 

Community 

(1994-99) 

Excluding ——oven 

InrhMlmg 

and ara*opria—at made 

available again 

Pay—eats 

(1994-991 

Exdadini carryoven 

a—appiopnauoni made 

available again 

Incladmg carryover» 

(2)/(l) 

EMPLOYMENT 

LEADER 

r«scA 

ERDF 

ESF 

ERDF 

ESF 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

1  • 
ERDF 

ESF 

FIFG 

SMEs 

i 

ERDF 

EST 

ERDF 

ESF 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

ESF 

ERDF 
ESF 

ERDF 

ESF 

! 

ERDF 

ESF 

1 

REGIS 

URBAN 

INT£3——G/PEACE  I 

JERDF 
|ESF 
1 EAGGF 
IFIFG 

TOTAL 

i 

ERDF 

EST 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

530391 

10,04! 

520.05 

•555371 

939 

54538 

«93,04: 

31635 

71.(0 

304.48 

18234 

8430 

8.91 

3WJS 

350,77 

25233! 

39,171 

J94.73 
165,04 

1139 

1730 

030 

371_2j 

31838 

52751 

293371 

26636| 

27.01 

31935 

305391 
13.96 

3 » * »! 
30935 

4135 

1 2 2 U» 
1

!
8

t
f

o

538334 

3.476.16 

1.44731 

369.15 

9023 

0.O9I 

10,1 
.M 
.OS1 

520. 

93» 
562.421 

720.42 

326.75 

74,40 

31936 

18736 

85.60 

930 

9216 

385.451 

35637 

2838 

292.46 

253—9 

39.17 

216.78 

18739 

1139 

1730 

030 

371221 

31838 

5275 

28136| 
30.41 

3053»| 
13.96! 

372371 
32137J 

51291 

1.43230 

129031 

8835 

53.45 

0.60 

5.71238! 

3.74534 

1.48327 

389.71 

9336 

23938J 

532 

23434 

32438) 

4391 
319.991 

2*«32J 
11335 

2834 

12431 

373»! 

430j 
" « j1 
» 3 7l 

15632J 
144,141 

ttW 

13630| 

11721 

19381 

1S737| 
145.15 

5.10 

733 

030 

___-
156331 

2637) 

143. 

143: 

14331 
136331 

638! 

1133J 
M3J0I 

.18331 

70335 

64432 

38,06 

21,16 

030 

236836 

1.75732 

72737 

15260 

3037 

239381 

5.021 

2343*1 

3193* 

266J3 

11336 

2834 

124.41 

37UM 

430 

334 

29.97 

15632 
144,14 

1228 

11734 

1938 

15737 

145.15 

5.10 

733 

030 

182301 

15633 

2637 

157391 

14336 

1432 

1363a 

6.981 

16625 
14330 

2235 

70632 

644.02 

39.08 

2322 

030 

237538 

1.757.75 

733.01 

154.66 

3037 

45% 

50% 

45% 

5 7* 

48% 

57% 

37% 

35% 

38% 

39% 

26% 

5% 

34% 

33% 

411% 

40% 

4 3* 

4 7* 

46% 

50% 

73% 

78% 

43% 

41% 

38% 

49% 

49% 

50% 

51% 

51% 

48% 

__s_%j 

45% 

50% 

45% 

45% 

45% 

4 9* 

50% 

44% 

43% 

50% 

4 7* 

47% 

49% 

40% 

3 3* 

Budget headings B2-1400, B2-1410, B2-1412, B2-1420, B2-1421, B2-1422, B2-1423, B2-1424, B2-1430, B2-1431, B2-
1432,  B2-1433, B2-1440, B2-1450, B2-1460, B2-1470. 

 
 
 
 
32 

• 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

projects,  developing  and  disseminating  know-how).  As  a  rule,  assistance  concentrates  less  on  creating 
new infrastructure  than on enhancing  infrastructure financed in the previous period; 
support  for  industry  (grants  and  loans for  the  development  of  new  products  and  processes  and  for 
technology  transfer;  services,  standardisation  and  technological  audit; setting  up and supporting  centres 
for  innovation  and  technology  transfer;  support for  participation  in  the Fourth  Framework  Programme 
for  research); 

•  co-operation  between  the  various  actors  in  technological  development  (businesses,  especially  small 

• 

businesses;  technology  centres, universities, etc.) and technology transfer; 
training  measures  (post-graduate  training, training of research workers, management training  in the field 
of  research/technology). 

Financing  of  telecommunications  mainly  involves  basic  services  and  infrastructure,  where  there  are  wide 
disparities  between  Objective  1  regions  and  the  rest  of  the  Union; basic  services  and  infrastructure  are  a 
condition for  the  development  of  information  technology  in these  regions.  This concerns  digitalisation  and 
the modernisation  and extension of networks. Expenditure planned for  advanced services  covers: 
•  better access to these services for  business  users; 
• 
•  extension  of  GSM  coverage  (Spain,  Italy,  Ireland)  and  development  of  satellite 

extension of the ISDN (Spain, Portugal, Italy, Greece) and optical fibre links; 

telecommunications 

services  (Italy). 

There are  a few  measures  directly  related to data transmission  applications.  They correspond  to projects  in 
the fields of government  (Greece, Portugal),  health services (Greece, Spain),  education  (France,  Greece,  the 
United Kingdom, Spain)  or electronic transactions  (Italy). 
A  comparison  between  the  various  Member  States  shows four  typical  situations:  some  Member  States 
(Netherlands,  Germany,  France)  do  not  use  Community  appropriations for  telecommunications,  but  rather 
for  RTD,  to an  extent  at  least  equal  to  the  average for  Objective  1; others  (Spain,  Greece,  Portugal)  have 
adopted  the opposite priority,  Le. they  use a  large proportion  of appropriations for  telecommunications  and 
incur  RTD  investment  expenditure  below  average for  Objective  I;  the  other  Member  States  plan  to  spend 
Community  appropriations  in both  areas,  but some  (Belgium, Ireland, the  United Kingdom)  concentrate  on 
RTD,  with  above  average  expenditure,  while  their  investment  in  telecommunications  is  below  average  for 
Objective  1. Italy is alone  in planning  above average  investment both for  RTD and for  telecommunications. 

Table 1-6:  Objectives  1 and  6 and technological  development,  1994-99 (ECU  million) 

TOTAL 

% 

ERDF 

£ - _ _ _. 
_D-_____i_au---__-__-__. 
Data transmission (3) 
TOTAL 
( 1 ), (2), (3). (4). (5):  See notes to Table 1-4  (Chapter I) 

_________ 
.____. 
183.7 
11.«73.6 

77% 
29% 
_•% 
100% 

3.632.2 
1.303.0 
_____ 
S.017.2 

Structural  Fiinrtc 

ESF  EAGGFM 
________ 
-_-_ 
00 
J_-
328.0 

1.062.5 
______ 
__Q_: 
1.104.» 

Total 

% 

Public 

S.023.7  _______  _____ 
1.334 JT  _________ 
1340.9 
1%(4) 
___. 
4.007.9 

«1-Jt 
6.4S1.0 

54% 

M-mlrti r State 
Private 

Total  % 

1513.5  ______  64%  (5) 
822.9 
2.163.8 
34%  (5) 
10*61  ____! 

-3-1 

2.372.4  ______  54% 

The  role of the information  society  in the SPDs  of the  Objective 6  regions is particularly  important.  Sweden 
and  Finland  take an  overall  approach  to the information  society,  which  leads them not only  to devote  more 
of the available  financing  to measures  linked to the  information society,  but also  to concentrate  their  efforts 
on  improving  the  conditions  of  demand,  by  improving  the  technical  knowledge  of  staff, supplying  schools 
with  the  required  connections  and  developing  suitable  services  and  applications.  The  overall  priority  is 
reflected  in  measures  for  the  development  of  information  technologies,  RTD  and  education,  but  also  in 
measures  to  enhance  the  competitiveness  of  businesses  (by  making  available  new  applications  and 
information  networks)  and  in  measures  to  correct  the  isolation  of  these  regions  (development  of  public 
services,  health, and regional  identity through information  technology). 

318 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 
INITIATIVES 

TABLE 2.2: IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATE and BY PROGRAMME 

Community 

. 

Initiatives 

( n u m b er  of  CIPs) 

SF  assistance 

C o m m i t m e n ts 

C o m m i t m e n ts 

(1) 

1,44437 

1996 

1994-96 

(2) 

•• 

.22133 

522.74 

A D A P T O T) 

Belgium 

FUutders 

Walluniii 

D e n m a rk 

G e r m a ny 

Greece 

Spain 

F r a n ce 

I r t U ad 

Italy 

Luxembour]; 

Netherlands 

Austria 

Portugal 

Finland 

United  Kingdom 

Great  Britain 

Nortliem 

Ireland 

E M P L O Y M E NT  (17) 

Belgium 

Flanders 

WaUtmia 

D e n m a rk 

G e r m a ny 

Spain 

F r a a ce 

Ireland 

Italy 

L u x e m b o u rg 

Nether—nos 

Austria 

Portugal 

Finland 

Sweden 

Liniled  Kingdom 

Great  Britain 

Northern 

treUmd 

L E A D ER  (102) 

D e n m a rk 

G e r m a ny 

Baden-Wuntemberg 

Lm.tr 

Saxony 

Bavaria 

Eastern  Berlin 

Brandeburg 

Hesse 

Mecklrnhurg-Westem 

Pomerania 

Nonh 

rViinc-Westphalia 

RJiincland-Pulaluiale 

Sarrland 

Sajumy 

Saxony-Anhall 

SdilesKit-Holsiein 

Tluaintui 

Networks 

% 

(2W1) 

P a y m e n ts 

1996 

3 6* 

1<X>9 

HX» 

HX» 

H X» 

3 4* 

9 1* 

3 2* 

1 9* 

3 5* 

4 3* 

1 0 0* 

2 0* 

1 0 0* 

H X» 

HXr* 

1 0 0* 

2 5* 

2 4* 

too* 

UM 

6 31 

3.16 

3.35 

6.20 

17.29 

4.82 

18.7(1 

0.0(1 

4.00 

23.08 

0.06 

0.00 

0.00 

4 31 

1.21 

0.00 

0.77 

0.0(1 

0.77 

Payments 

1994-96 

(3) 

.•.23931 

(mi) 
1 7% 

9.36 

4.49 

4.87 

8.85 

38.75 

8.39 

42.75 

23.47 

5.95 

41.13 

0.09 

5.76 

5.79 

6.3(1 

9.85 

5.63 

2 7 32 

2 6 39 

0.93 

3 0* 

3 0* 

3 0* 

3 0* 

1 79 

2 8* 

1 7* 

9* 

2 8* 

2 2* 

3 0* 

1 0* 

5 0* 

3 0* 

5(1* 

5 0* 

t o* 

9* 

3 0* 

2 5 31 

12.3(1 

13.20 

24.19 

33.77 

2 0 27 

33.69 

0.0(1 

3.46 

45.60 

0 25 

0.00 

o.<xi 

17.01 

O.0C 

0.(X1 

18.68 

1539 

2 79 

31.2(1 

14.96 

16.24 

293(1 

76.69 

27.41 

81.79 

46.94 

i 

81.71 

0.3(1 

1131 

1137 

21.0(1 

19.7(1 

11.25 

7 2 17 

69,07 

3.1(1 

. 2 6 3 44 

. : . : . , -; 

•  .-57231 

-•••: 

' 3 8* 

1 7 * 33 

::••::•..-32*31 

••>•:  - 2 i% 

10.41 

10.41 

0.0(1 

8.95 

2 6 34 

43V 

56.05 

27.31 

21.73 

82.69 

o.(x: 

2 21 

0.0(1 

3.92 

0.0C 

0.0(1 

18.44 

17.43 

1.02 

2 5 1 36 

6 33 

15.89 

0.U1 

0.63 

0.(X1 

0.1X1 

1.62 

0 31 

0.30 

o.(x: 

().(X1 

0.61 

0.1X1 

3.93 

6.64 

0.66 

I.IX 

32K1 

1221 

19.89 

1036 

49.98 

1262 

114.67 

4 9 38 

2 9 34 

134.16 

0.3C 

6.45 

23.01 

9 38 

29.15 

20.69 

49.80 

37.90 

11.9C 

7 2 0 32 

6 33 

140.46 

5.67 

18.84 

6.08 

0.24 

18.83 

6.2(1 

1536 

3 34 

8 35 

1.82 

18.01 

1536 

6.64 

13.92 

UK 

1 0 0* 

1 0 0* 

H X» 

1 0 0* 

3 2* 

2 09 

3 0* 

3 4* 

3 9* 

3 8* 

1 0 0* 

1 5* 

H X» 

2 4* 

1 0 0* 

1 0 0* 

3 4* 

2 8* 

1009 

4 8% 

8 0* 

7 9* 

1 0 0* 

1(X>* 

1 4* 

1 0 0* 

1 0 09 

1(X)9 

1009 

KXI* 

1 0 0* 

1 0 0* 

1 0 0* 

MX» 

1(X>* 

H X» 

I ( X» 

5 20 

5.20 

0 30 

2 37 

29.47 

2 34 

3 5 33 

1 5 37 

1 3 35 

41.91 

(MX) 

1.11 

0.00 

2 14 

0.(X1 

0.00 

2 1 38 

2 1 27 

0.30 

16.05 

6.11 

9.95 

3.17 

41.04 

6 35 

64.64 

26.70 

16.95 

67.64 

0.15 

3 23 

1131 

4.97 

1438 

10.35 

3 7 26 

3 1 31 

5.75 

1 3 3 31 

'. 

- - « 6 32 

1.96 

1 4 25 

0.00 

0.19 

0.0(1 

U.CXI 

6.08 

0.14 

0.08 

(>.(X 

0.(X 

0.18 

0.(X) 

5.02 

J.99 

0.17 

0.4( 

1.96 

53.07 

1.7C 

5.65 

3.04 

0.07 

113(1 

1.86 

4.67 

1.06 

2 37 

0 35 

S3C 

8.63 

1.99 

4.18 

(>.4< 

5 0* 
so* 
5 0* 

3 09 

2 69 

1 0* 

1 79 

1 8* 

2 2* 

1 9* 

5 0* 

8% 

5 09 

1 29 

5 0* 

5 0* 

2 5* 

2 3* 

4 89 

1 8% 

2 49 

3 0* 

3 09 

3 09 

79 

3 09 

6 0* 

3 09 

3 0* 

3 09 

3 0* 

3 0* 

3 0* 

5 59 

3 09 

3 09 

4 09 

31.2(1 

14.96 

16.24 

293c: 

228.80 

30.1(1 

256.4(1 

249.7(1 

21.2(1 

190.(1(1 

0.31 

5 7 35 

1137 

21.(XI 

19.7C 

1125 

2X6.6(1 

2833(1 

3.1(1 

1324.13 

32.1C 

1221 

19.89 

1036 

156.8(1 

64.40 

386.6(1 

14630 

76.111 

34*70 

0.3(1 

42.44 

23.01 

40.3(1 

29.15 

20.69 

14630 

134.60 

11.9(1 

1 3 1 1 3» 

8.16 

177.43 

5.68 

18.84 

43.05 

0 24 

1833 

62(1 

1536 

3 34 

8 35 

1.82 

18.01 

1536 

6.64 

13.92 

I.IX: 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

319 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 

INITIATIVES 

TABLE 2.2: IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATE and BY PROGRAMME (continued) 

C o m m u n i ty 

Initiatives 

(number  of  CIPs) 

Greece 

Spain 

Andalusia 

Aragon 

Asturias 

Balearic  Islands 

Canary  Islands 

Cantabria 

Castile-La  Mancha 

Castile-Lean 

Catalonia 

Extremadura 

Galicia 

La  Rioja 

Madrid 

Murcia 

Navarre 

Basque  Country 

Valencia 

France 

Alsace 

Aquitaine 

Auvergne 

Lower  Normandy 

Burgundy 

Brinany 

Centre 

Champa gne-A  rdenne 

Corsica 

Douai.  Valenciennes... 

Franche-Comté 

Upper  Norm  andy 

Languedoc-Roussillon 

Limousin 

Lorraine 

Midi-Pyrénées 

Loire  Region 

Poitou-Charentes 

Ptvvence-Alpes-Côte 

d'Azur 

Rhône-Alpes 

Ireland 

Italy 

Abruzzi 

Busilicatu 

Bolzano 

Calabria 

Campania 

Em ilia -Rom  agna 

Friuli-Venezia  Giulia 

Lazio 

Liguria 

Lombardy 

Marche 

Molise 

Umbna 

Piedmont 

Apulia 

Sard in in 

SF 

C o m m i t m e n ts 

Commitments 

Payments 

Payments 

1996 

1994-96 

1996 

1994-96 

(1) 

148.00 

354.79 

68.81 

27.48 

13.00 

3,13 

12.33 

6,41 

41.00 

53.50 

13.62 

24.00 

43.80 

3.68 

3.60 

9.52 

4.81 

2,47 

23.63 

190.00 

3.67 

17.23 

12.78 

10.13 

8.53 

14.09 

6.42 

2.24 

3.05 

2.04 

5.78 

0.82 

14.39 

15.04 

7.44 

22.03 

9.28 

9.83 

12.06 

13.15 

67.92 

288.72 

15.97 

19.55 

4.80 

23.15 

25.82 

6.35 

4.90 

16.34 

3.95 

4.53 

8.45 

9.85 

8.41 

9.25 

26.60 

32.37 

92.73 

188.29 

0.00 

9.52 

0.47 

3.30 

0.48 

0.06 

0.23 

0.09 

0.45 

0.41 

0.13 

1.56 

0.60 

0,25 

0.24 

0.05 

0.64 

0.16 

0,42 

3.22 

2,17 

0.82 

1.01 

1.05 

9.83 

6.42 

2,24 

0.00 

0.79 

0.81 

0.82 

1.44 

0-54 

7.44 

22,03 

9.28 

1.82 

7.84 

13.15 

0,00 

49.29 

9.33 

0.66 

0.54 

0.99 

0.77 

1.05 

1.17 

3-57 

3.95 

4-53 

1.11 

0.27 

1.58 

1.23 

0.54 

0.52 

(2) 

(2)A1) 

22.56 

121.62 

10.32 

27,48 

1 5* 

34% 

15% 

100% 

13,00 

100% 

3.13 

2.07 

1.06 

4.92 

10.00 

2.25 

100% 

17% 

16% 

12% 

19% 

16% 

24.00 

100% 

3.50 

3.68 

3.60 

1.79 

4.81 

2.47 

3-54 

3.22 

17.23 

12.78 

10.13 

8% 

100% 

100% 

19% 

100% 

100% 

15% 

99% 

88% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

8.52 

100% 

14.09 

100% 

6.42 

2.24 

3.05 

0.79 

5.78 

0,82 

1 4 39 

15.04 

7.44 

22.03 

9 -8 

9,83 

12.06 

100% 

100% 

100% 

39% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

100% 

13.15 

100% 

7.50 

77.91 

15.36 

2.38 

4.80 

6.95 

3.54 

1.74 

1.47 

3.57 

3.95 

4.53 

1.11 

0.27 

1.5X 

1.23 

6.5K 

1,09 

11% 

27% 

96% 

12% 

100% 

30% 

14% 

27% 

30% 

22% 

100% 

100% 

13% 

3% 

19% 

13% 

25% 

3"* 

0.00 

9.83 

0.23 

3.74 

1.45 

0,03 

0.11 

0.04 

0,22 

0.20 

0.06 

2.81 

0 30 

0.07 

0.07 

0.03 

0.19 

0,05 

0.21 

(3) 

11.28 

44.69 

5.16 

8.24 

3.90 

1.25 

1.04 

0.53 

2.46 

5.00 

1.12 

7 20 

1.75 

1.10 

1.08 

0.90 

1,44 

0.74 

1.77 

45.60 

61.13 

1.61 

3,92 

1.88 

2.74 

1.30 

2.95 

1.93 

0.67 

0.42 

0.24 

0.24 

0.24 

3.42 

1-53 

3.18 

6.61 

4.64 

1.78 

2-35 

3.95 

0.00 

1.61 

5.17 

4.02 

3.24 

2.81 

4.23 

1.93 

0.67 

0.97 

0.24 

1.73 

0.24 

4.32 

4.65 

3.18 

6.61 

4.64 

3.31 

3.62 

3.95 

3,75 

22.30 

36.29 

4.67 

0.33 

0.16 

0.50 

0.38 

0.53 

0.58 

0.94 

1.61 

1.89 

0.56 

0.13 

0.62 

0.61 

0.27 

0.26 

7.68 

1.19 

2.03 

3.48 

1.77 

0.87 

0.74 

0.94 

1.61 

1.89 

0.56 

0.13 

0.62 

0.61 

3.29 

0.54 

(3)/(l) 
8% 

13% 

8% 

30% 

30% 

4 0% 

8% 

8% 

6% 

9% 

8% 

30% 

4% 

30% 

3 0% 

9% 

30% 

30% 

7% 

32% 

44%. 

30% 

3 1% 

32% 

33%. 

30% 

30% 

30% 

32% 

12% 

30% 

30%. 

30% 

3 1% 

43%. 

30% 

5 0% 

34% 

30% 

30% 

6% 

13% 

48%. 

6% 

42% 

15% 

7% 

14% 

15% 

6% 

4 1% 

42% 

7%. 

1% 

7% 

7% 

125 

2% 

320 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 

-NITIATIVES 
TABLE 2.2: IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATE and BY PROGRAMME (continued) 

Community 

Initiatives 

(Bomber  of  CIPs) 

SF 

Commitments 

1996 

1994-96 

Payments 

Payments 

1996 

. 

1994-96 

(1) 

(2) 

(2VU) 

O) 

Sicily 

Tuscany 

Trento 

Valle d'Aosta 

Veneui 

Networks 

Luxembourg 

Netherlands 

Drenthe 

Flevoland 

Noordoost Friesland/hoordwesl Gnmingen 

Noordwe.il Friesland 

Austria 

Lower Austria 

Burgenland 

Carinthia 

Upper  Austria 

Salzburg 

Styria 

Tyrol 

Vorarlberg 

Networks 

Finland 

Obj. 5(h) areas 

Obj.  a  areas 

Sweden 

Obj.  5(b)  areas 

Obj.  6  areas 

United  Kingdom 

England 

Scotland 

Highlands and Islands 

Northern Ireland 

Wales 

-

nsexxts) 
Belgium 

Germany 

Greece 

Spain 

France 

Ireland 

Italy 

Netherlands 

Portugal 

Finland 

United  Kingdom 

tSMEs<35) 

Belgium 

Flanders 

Wallonia 

Denmark 

Germany 

Baden-Wumemberg 

Lower Saxony 

3238 

14.81 

224 

0.47 

16.34 

2(X1 

1.01 

8.46 

1.05 

211 

264 

2.65 

7.23 

0.72 

138 

0.19 

5.98 

20(1 

0.00 

0.00 

0.0(1 

o.(x: 

0.(X! 

0.00 

7.23 

0.72 

138 

0.47 

5.98 

2(X1 

1.01 

8.18 

1.05 

202 

23<: 

2.61 

233S 

18.11 

20.12" 

229 

5* 

6 2* 

100* 

3 7* 

H X» 

HX» 

9 7* 

H X» 

9 6* 

9 5* 

9 8* 

8 6* 

8 0* 

7 8* 

8 5* 

9 1* 

80* 

9 5* 

80* 

HX» 

100* 

9* 

100* 

H X» 

I K» 

839 

83* 

83* 

lOT» 

HX» 

1 0 0* 

1009 

1009 

HX» 

499 

71  « 

100* 

7 5* 

1 0 1* 

9 99 

1 7* 

4.47 

0.0(1 

246 

4.48 

0.64 

4.07 

138 

0.36 

025 

4.01 

28.09 

16.15 

11.94 

1337 

10.03 

3.34 

10.03 

3.45 

0.77 

3.12 

1.66 

1.04 

4.09 

4.47 

201 

246 

4.48 

0.64 

4.07 

138 

036 

0.25 

10.74 

28.09 

16.15 

11.94 

13.37 

10.03 

334 

662(1 

25.85 

8.41 

11.96 

1135 

8.62 

7.83 

1343*1 

SXtM 

1.67 

934 

1938 

2225 

0.0(1 

932 

6.06 

0.00 

9.34 

2322 

3.41 

3.97 

26.2(1 

18132) 

4.61 

269 

1.92 

235 

41.72 

0.85 

4.74 

20(1 

1227 

2321 

26.76 

6.91 

283(1 

l O t» 

7.17 

4.42 

10.49 

27.48 

3.41 

3.97 

3127 

1210 

26V 

9.41 

235 

14292 

(1.85 

4.74 

9 1* 

1 3* 

999 

9 49 

100* 

100* 

849 

38 %| 

HX» 

I U» 

HX» 

HX» 

789 

HX» 

HX» 

538 

237 

29(1 

4,9.1 

0.8(1 

427 

1.72 

036 

025 

11739 

28.09 

16.15 

11.94 

16.11 

1209 

4.02 

66211 

2535 

8.41 

11.96 

1135 

8.62 

I6.W1 

20C 

I6.4C 

23.00 

27.1C 

413C 

283(1 

7.84 

34.17 

10.63 

2926 

3.41 

3.97 

37.42 

L00431 

12.H1 

269 

9.41 

235 

184.25 

0.85 

4.74 

3.62 

0.36 

0.41 

0.07 

299 

03(1 

0.(X1 

0.00 

0.(X1 

U.(X1 

0.0(1 

0.0(1 

5.73 

134 

0.27 

0.74 

135 

0.19 

122 

0.41 

0.11 

0.10 

4.85 

8.43 

4 35 

338 

4.01 

3.01 

1.1X1 

1431 

6.07 

1.89 

245 

237 

203 

134 

3.62 

0.36 

0.41 

0.16 

2.99 

0.8(1 

0.41 

245 

032 

o.«: 

0.75 

0.78 

6.06 

1.34 

(1.60 

0.74 

135 

0.19 

1.22 

(1.41 

0.11 

0.1 C 

8.44 

8.43 

4.85 

338 

4.01 

3.01 

MX! 

19.63 

734 

232 

339 

3.13 

284 

4.73 

:  30341 

* 7 3q 

0. 

0 32 

(MX) 

031 

O.(X) 

8.49 

0.74 

0.1X1 

1.14 

4.46 

1.13 

1.19 

1.94 

88.71) 

1.77| 

0.81 

0.96 

0.77 

26,28 

0.43 

1.42 

O.60 

218 

1.92 

236 

3.46 

8.49 

1.3C 

2 21 

1.72 

639 

1.13 

1.19 

4,48 

156.421 

4.01 

0.81 

3 21 

0.77 

57.13 

0.43 

1.42 

own 
119 

2* 

199 

3 3* 

189 

4 09 

409 

299 

309 

299 

289 

2 9* 

269 

249 

239 

259 

279 

249 

2 9* 

2 4* 

3 0* 

4 09 

7* 

3 0* 

3 0* 

3 (» 

2 5* 

2 5* 

2 5* 

3 0* 

299. 

3 (» 

3 09 

2 8* 

3 3* 

309 

14% 

309 

139 

89 

99 

89 

309 

1 7* 

69 

169 

239 

339 

3 (» 

129 

1 6% 

3 3* 

3<» 

3 4* 

3 (» 

319 

5 0* 

3 (» 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

321 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 

INHIATIVES 

TABLE 22:  IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATE and BY PROGRAMME (continued) 

Initiatives 

(number of  CIPs) 

SF 

1994-96 

(2) 

Bavaria 

Berlin 

Brumhburg 

Bremen 

Hesse 

Ueckienbtag-Western 

Pomerania 

North  Rhine-Westphalia 

Khineumd-faUumate 

Sarrland 

Saxony 

Saxony-Anhalt 

Schleswig-HoLstein 

Thuringia 

Spain 

France 

Corsica 

Nord/fas-de-Calais/Haoumi 

Obj  2 and  S(b)  areas 

Ireland 

Italy 

_4B£—BlMUrf 

Austria 

Portagal 

Finland 

United  Klagdam 

Scotland 

Highlands 

Northern  Ireland 

Wales 

REGIS (6) 

Spain Canary  Wands 

France 

Guadeloupe 

French  Guiana 

Maninique 

Réunion 

Portugal 

pCEC—AXOO) 

Belgium 

Cluuelet 

Limburg 

Gcrmaay 

Lower  Saxony 

Brandeburg 

North  Rhine-Weslpimlia 

Sarrland 

Saxony 

Saxony-Anhalt 

Thmingia 

Spain 

France 

Burgundy  • 

Ltuigurdoc-RoussUlan 

Lorraine 

6.97 

14.61 

14.9(1 

0.97 

1.16 

18.67 

7.92 

232 

134 

43.67 

35.10 

132 

29.0(1 

8 3 33 

251.1(1 

58,49 

3.04 

6.29 

49.17 

28.81 

191.66 

0 35 

1034 

8.98 

123.98 

11.09 

1721 

20.09 

8 32 

3.04 

6 20 

2 33 

3 0 7 3 1! 

216.93 

2 6 6 38 

6 1 31 

2 8 38 

6 0 32 

11536 

12430 

41122] 

15.68 

0.93 

14.75 

158.63 

1.65 

30.25 

66.45 

6.26 

2930 

1922 

5.(X! 

132 

3421 

3334 

1 34 

1.01 

10.93 

0.1X1 

().(K1 

14.9(1 

0.0(1 

0.(X! 

0.37 

0.(X 

2 32 

134 

1.IW1 

1338 

132 

(MX1 

1832 

35.28 

0 38 

(MX1 

().(X1 

0.38 

2 30 

44.73 

0 25 

0,80 

8.98 

1 21 

7 39 

13.04 

0 35 

0.00 

0.00 

0.0(1 

0.35 

«73*1 
47.44 

5 2 18 

8 35 

2 8 38 

8 28 

7.47 

58.34 

1 1 9 3* 

o.ix; 

IMX1 

0.0(1 

6 2 60 

(MX! 

30.25 

21.86 

0.1X1 

9.99 

03C 

0,(X! 

0.15 

32.65 

1735 

0.1X1 

0.0C 

0.85 

6.97 

14.61 

14.90 

0.97 

1.16 

15.02 

7.92 

2 32 

1 34 

5.99 

35.1(1 

1.82 

29.0(1 

28.77 

3 5 28 

15.79 

26C 

6.29 

6.91 

28.79 

44.73 

0.25 

1034 

8.98 

14.42 

73V 

13.04 

20.0V 

8 32 

3.04 

62(1 

233 

•-2UM 

75.45 

60.94 

8.05 

2 8 38 

8.28 

1624 

803V 

2 9 2 3d 

15.68 

0.93 

14.75 

118.48 

1.65 

3 0 25 

29.6C 

4 36 

29.81 

17.62 

5.1X1 

1 32 

32.65 

3 3 34 

1 34 

0.81 

10.93 

Payments 

Payments 

1996 

1994-96 

(3) 

<?V(1> 

0.1X1 

(UK! 

4.47 

0.(XI 

(MX! 

0.11 

0.00 

1.16 

0.77 

2 45 

1437 

0.91 

0.1X1 

9.16 

17.64 

0.19 

(MX! 

(MX! 

0.19 

0.69 

22.37 

0.08 

0.24 

2 69 

0.6(1 

2 22 

3.91 

0.11 

0.00 

0.0(1 

0.0(1 

0 . 1! 

13535) 

5 9 35 

20.41 

4.02 

8 32 

4.14 

3.74 

552V 

«1331 

0.0(1 

(MX! 

0.(X! 

23.18 

0.00 

15.13 

1.67 

1.14 

5.1X1 

0.25 

(MX! 

0.08 

1633 

14.89 

(MX1 

0.4] 

5.47 

3 0* 

3 1* 

3 (» 

5 (» 

3 (» 

2 6* 

5 0* 

5 0* 

SO* 

119 

5 (» 

5 0* 

3 3* 

1 7* 

7* 

8* 

2 6* 

3 09 

4* 

3 0* 

1 2* 

2 2* 

3 (» 

3 0* 

6* 

2 1» 

2 3* 

3 7* 

3 2* 

3 1* 

5 (» 

3 <» 

26% 

2 8* 

v* 

7* 

y)'i 

7* 

5 9* 

3 3% 

5 09 

SIM 

5<M 

329 

SIM 

SO* 

X'i 

Wi 

5<M 

5 09 

SIM 

20V 

4.48 

4.47 

0.4V 

0.35 

4.77 

3.96 

1.16 

0.77 

4.64 

1735 

0.91 

9.65 

14.39 

17.64 

4.81 

0.78 

1.89 

2 15 

8.64 

2 2 37 

0.08 

3.1(1 

2 69 

7.21 

2 22 

3.91 

7.45 

2 69 

0.96 

3.10 

0.70 

I 3 7 . S* 

59.85 

24.X0 

4.02 

8 32 

4.14 

8.12 

72.92 

137J3I 

7.84 

0.47 

7 38 

49.98 

0.83 

15.13 

5 34 

2.28 

14.91! 

8.81 

231! 

0.76 

1633 

16.67 

0.77 

0.41 

5.47 

am) 
H X» 

1 0 09 

H X» 

K X» 

H X» 

8 0* 

H X» 

H X» 

K X» 

1 49 

H X» 

H X» 

H X» 

3 59 

1 49 

2 7* 

8 5* 

H X» 

1 4* 

H X» 

2 39 

7 29 

1 0 0* 

i n» 

1 2* 

6 7* 

7 6* 

H X» 

1 0 0* 

1009 

1 0 0* 

K X» 

3*%l 
3 5* 

239 

139 

1009 

149 

149 

6 59 

71*J 
H X» 

H X» 

H X» 

7 59 

H X» 

H X» 

4 5* 

7 3* 

H X» 

9 2* 

H X» 

H X» 

9 5* 

9 9* 

100* 

8 0» 

H X» 

322 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 

INITIATIVES 

TABLE 2.2: IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATE and BY PROGRAMME (continued) 

Omunuaity 

Initiatives 

(number of  CIPs) 

Conunitments 

Commitments 

Payments 

Payments 

1996 

1994-96 
tt) 

(2WD 

1996 

1994-96 

(3) 

Midi-Pyrénées 

Nord/fus-de-Cain is 

Provencr-Alpes-Côle 

d'Aair 

Rhtme-Aipcs 

Italy 

Sordini)) 

Tuscany 

Austria  Styria.  Upper  Alisiriu 

Portugal 

United  Kingdom 

East  Midlands 

Eastern  Scotland 

North East England 

North  West  England 

Wales 

Well  Midlands 

Western  Scotland 

Yorksliire 

KONVER  (43) 

Belgium 

Brussels 

Flanders 

Wallonia 

Denmark 

Gen—uiy 

Badeii-Wurtlemberg 

Lower  Saxony 

Bavaria 

Berlin 

Branaeburg 

Bremen 

Hambiug 

Hesse 

Mecklenburg-Western 

Pomerania. 

North  Rliine-Westphulia 

Rliinelund-Palatinule 

Saarland 

Saxanx 

Saxony-Anlialt 

Schleswig-Holstein 

Tliunngiit 

France 

Alsace 

Aquitaine 

Auvergne 

Lower Normandy 

Brittany 

Centre 

Cliampagnc-Ardennc 

lle-dr-F  ranee 

Languedoc-Roussillim 

Limousin 

Lorraine 

Midi-Pvrénêe.i 

Nord/Pas-de-Cuiais 

Picards 

Pmum-Charenies 

1.15 

16.89 

1.01 

1.01 

1.68 

0.78 

0.9(1 

1.85 

0.86 

163.25 

4 2 15 

10.IX 

23.46 

6.9C 

20.46 

12.66 

3.1 

4437 

3 0 2 31 

11.45 

1.73 

4.81 

4.92 

2 38 

2 3 3 .b 

12.67 

12.92 

1267 

11.76 

37.lt 

4.47 

1.24 

1264 

33.69 

14.9(1 

13.91 

1 24 

25.09 

11.16 

8.94 

19.45 

12.91 

71.02 

4.25 

13.16 

132 

233 

5.16 

4.15 

2 43 

5 32 

3.14 

4.05 

1.11 

4.05 

1.11 

9.4: 

0.11 

16.89 

(MXI 

(MX! 

0.1X1 

0.0(1 

0.00 

1.11 

0.0(1 

537 

0.92 

0.1X1 

(MXI 

1.03 

0.1X1 

233 

o.(x: 

1.09 

1 3 3 3» 

0.00 

0.0(1 

0.0(1 

0.00 

0.0(1 

89.01 

12.67 

0.(X1 

422 

13C 

37.10 

0.1X1 

0.1X1 

0.22 

0,00 

0.(X1 

4.87 

039 

25.09 

0.00 

275 

0.0(1 

0.0(1 

628 

0.21 

1.3(1 

0.3(1 

O.Od 

0.70 

023 

0.47 

0.78 

0.38 

0.00 

0.1X1 

0.41! 

0.1X1 

1.01 

0.1X1 

1.15 

16.8V 

1.01 

1.01 

1.68 

0.78 

0.9(1 

1.11 

036 

87.14 

5.16 

lo.txi 

23.46 

6.<x: 

20.46 

1266 

3.04 

5.46 

371221 

11.45 

1.73 

4.8(1 

4.92 

2 38 

219.62 

1267 

12.92 

1267 

11.76 

37.1(1 

4.47 

1 24 

1264 

19.45 

14.9(1 

13.91 

124 

25.09 

11.16 

8.94 

19.45 

11.48 

711.71: 

4.25 

13.16 

1 32 

2 02 

5.16 

4.15 

243 

5 32 

3.14 

4.05 

1.11 

4.05 

1.11 

y.42 

132 

H X» 

K X» 

H X» 

H X» 

K X» 

K X» 

K X» 

6 0* 

K X» 

5 3* 

1 2* 

H X» 

K X» 

K X» 

K X» 

K X» 

H X» 

1 2* 

74% 

H X» 

H X» 

K X» 

1 0 0* 

H X» 

9 4* 

H X» 

KX» 

K X» 

H X» 

K X» 

H X» 

101» 

1 0 0* 

5 8* 

K X» 

H X» 

K X» 

K X» 

K X» 

101» 

1 0 0* 

8 9* 

1 0 0* 

K X» 

K X» 

H X» 

8 7* 

K X» 

K X» 

K X» 

K X» 

H X» 

K X» 

1(K» 

K X» 

H X» 

K X» 

K X» 

0 3 7| 

8 

(MXI 

0,(X! 

0.45 

(MX) 

0.45 

0 35 

0.43 

5.72 

0.46 

0.00 

0.1K1 

3.45 

0.0(1 

i.: 

0.0(1 

035 

037 

8.44 

0 31 

0 31 

0.84 

0.39 

0.45 

035 

0.69 

4337 

238 

5.00 

11.73 

3.45 

10.23 

6.33 

132 

273 

(3m) 
5 0* 

5 1» 

. V» 

5 0* 

5 09 

5 0* 

5 (» 

3 (» 

8 0* 

2 7* 

6* 

5 (» 

S» 

5 0* 

5 0* 

5 0* 

5 0* 

6* 

93371 

182.401 

36%l 

0.0(1 

0.1X1 

0.1X1 

O.tX) 

0.0(1 

70.81 

634 

(MX) 

211 

1.99 

1835 

0.00 

0 37 

5 39 

9.73 

0.1X1 

5.6(1 

0 38 

1235 

4.97 

264 

0.0(1 

1MX1 

3.14 

0.11 

0.65 

0,15 

(MXJ 

0.35 

0.12 

0 24 

0.39 

0.19 

0.1X) 

0.1X1 

0.20 

0.1X1 

1131 

0.1X1 

5.73 

0.86 

240 

246 

1.19 

I W 35 

6.34 

6.45 

6.34 

5.88 

1835 

224 

0.37 

6.32 

9.73 

7.45 

6.96 

0.62 

1235 

538 

4.47 

9.72 

5.74 

35.13 

213 

638 

0.76 

1.01 

238 

208 

122 

276 

137 

2U2 

'  0.33 

202 

0 36 

4.71 

0.76 

5 1» 

5 0* 

5 0* 

5 0* 

5 1» 

4 7* 

S» 

SO* 

S» 

5 1» 

5 1» 

5 0* 

3 0* 

5 1» 

2 9* 

5 1» 

5 1» 

S» 

5 0* 

5 (» 

5 09 

5 (» 

4 49 

4 99 

5 (» 

5 (» 

5 09 

4 3* 

5 1» 

5 1» 

5 1» 

S t» 

5 1» 

5 0* 

3 1» 

5 0* 

5 0* 

SO* 

S I» 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

323 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 

-NITIATIVES 

TABLE 22:  IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATE and BY PROGRAMME (continued) 

Community 

Initiatives 

(number of  CIPs) 

Provence-Alpes-Côte 

d'Azur 

Rlume-Alpes 

Italy 

Netherlands 

Portugal 

Sweden Karlskoga.  Karlsborg 

United  Kingdom  A  Gibraltar 

RESIDER  (27) 

Belgium 

Clutrierai 

Liege 

Germany 

Lower  Saxony 

Bavaria 

Brandeburg 

Bremen 

Nonlt  Rliine-Westphaliu 

Sarrland 

Suxony 

Saxony-Anhalt 

Tliuringia 

Spain 

France 

Lower  Normandy 

Burgundy 

Lorraine 

Nord/Pas-de-Calais 

Picardy 

Provence-Alpes-Côte 

d'Aatr 

Rlume-Alpes 

Italy 

Netherlands 

Austria  Styria.  Lower  Austria.  Upper  Austria 

Portugal 

United  Kingdom 

England 

Wales 

Western  Scotland 

R E T EX  (21) 

Belgium 

Flanders 

Wallonia 

Germany 

Baden-  Wurttemberg  • 

Lower  Saxony 

Bavaria' 

Brandeburg 

Hesse' 

North  Rhine-  Westphalia  ' 

Saxony 

Tliuringia 

Greece* 

Spain* 

France* 

Ireland* 

SF assistaitce 

Oanmitnteats 

Commitments 

(!) 

5.87 

2 23 

46.09 

12.05 

7.94 

3.35 

101.94 

518341 

24.43 

11,9(1 

1233 

19277 

17.07 

5.39 

26.24 

3.28 

101,119 

12.9(1 

14.88 
5.<x: 

6.12 

4.69 

73.64 

621(1 

5.13 

1.84 

31.11 

14.35 

2 31 

5.18 

2 18 

85.60 

18.10 

5 34 

6.91 

45.46 

2 2 28 

1296 

1033 

1996 

(994-96 

(2) 

0 3( 

0.00 

2 1 38 

11.02 

().(X1 

2 62 

2 49 

5 37 

2 23 

2 1 38 

11.02 

7.90 

2.62 

12.48 

13437} 

311371 

(MXI 

(MX! 
tux: 

3636 

226 

0.00 

2624 

(MX; 

3.3(1 

o.ix: 

4.76 

(MX! 

0.0(1 

036 

7.62 

2 3 30 

5.13 

0.01 

3 38 

1 4 35 

0.00 

0.01! 

0.44 

4 2 75 

0.(X! 

4 39 

0.0C 

18.98 

18.98 

0.00 

0.00 

23.68 

11.15 

1233 

99.05 

17.07 

5.39 

26.24 

3.28 

11.69 

9,39 

14.88 

5.00 

6.12 

4.69 

7.62 

6 2 10 

5.13 

1 34 

31.11 

1425 

2 31 

5.18 

2 18 

42.75 

18.1(1 

4.39 

6.91 

4 2 17 

18.98 

1296 

1 0 23 

am) 
K X» 

H X» 

4 7* 

9 1* 

K X» 

7 8* 

1 2* 

6 0» 

9 7* 

9 49 

H X» 

5 1* 

H X» 

K X» 

H X» 

1 0 0* 

I I* 

7 3* 

K X» 

1 0 0* 

1 0 0* 

1 0 1» 

1 0* 

1 0 0* 
in» 
1009 

101» 

H X» 

101» 

H X» 

101» 

5 1» 

H X» 

8 49 

K X» 

9 3* 

8 5* 

K X» 

1 0 0* 

6 0 6 3d 

154331 

398391 

66%l 

4.4C 

1.411 

3.ix: 

70.32 

2 07 

1.81 

8.81 

3.29 

1.36 

1 37 

41.85 

936 

8 7 32 

90.39 

28.89 

11.45 

1.4C 

1.4(1 

0.1X1 

9.47 

1.84 

0.6C 

0,1X1 

3 29 

0.(X1 

1.05 

1.36 

132 

5 0 21 

0.00 

0.1X1 

1.15 

4.41! 

1.40 

3.00 

32.33 

2 07 

1.81 

8.81 

3.29 

0 35 

122 

5.02 

9 36 

621X1 

3 8 33 

7.04 

8.08 

H X» 

K X» 

K X» 

4 6* 

1 0 0* 

1 0 0* 

K X» 

H X» 

4 1» 

7 8* 

1 2* 

1 0 1» 

7 1* 

4 3* 

2 4* 

7 1* 

Payments 

1996 

Payments 

1994-96 

<3» 

(3V(D 

0 25 

(MX! 

10.79 

3.31 

(MX! 

0.79 

6.24 

79391 

6.27 

(MXI 

627 

20.80 

1.13 

0.00 

13.12 

(MXI 

4.17 

0.1X1 

2 38 

0.00 

0.00 

0 28 

3.81 

11.75 

2 37 

0.1X1 

1.79 

7.18 

(MX) 

0.00 

0 22 

2 1 38 

1.02 

22(1 

26(1 

9.49 

9,49 

0.1X1 

0.00 

6 7 3 1] 

0.7(1 

0.70 

(MXI 

8 39 

0.92 

03(1 

3.78 

1.65 

0.08 

0 33 

0.68 

0.66 

25.89 

0.00 

(MX! 

0.00 

2.94 

1.11 

10.79 

3.31 

3.95 

0.7V 

6 24 

mw 
11.84 

5 38 

6.27 

52.04 

8 33 

27(1 

13.12 

1.64 

8.36 

4.69 

7.. 

2 50 

3.06 

2 34 

3 31 

2930 

237 

0.92 

1535 

7.18 

0.7V 

135 

0.74 

21.38 

8.37 

2 20 

5 33 

21.08 

9.49 

6.48 

5.11 

2 1 1 3A 

22(1 

0.7(1 

13U 

16.71 

1.03 

0.9C 

4.78 

1.65 

0 44 

0.61 

2 31 

4.78 

35.04 

34.16 

3.4 

4 . 1* 

5 1» 

5 1» 

2 3* 

2 7* 

5 0* 

2 4* 

6* 

3 0% 

4 8* 

4 7* 

5 0* 

2 7* 

5 0* 

5 1» 

5 0* 

5 0* 

8* 

3 6* 

5 0* 

5 0* 

5 0* 

5 0* 

5* 

4 7* 

5 (» 

5 0* 

5 0* 

5 (» 

3 4* 

3 0* 

3 4* 

I S* 

4 6* 

4 2* 

8 1» 

4 r i* 

4 3* 

5 1» 

S t» 

3 5% 
so* 

5 09 
stw 

2 49 

S IM 

SI 19 

M  9 

S 09 

3 29 

3 99 

f ,9 

S IM 

4119 

3 X9 

1 29 

'  CIP  adopted  in  1993, assis—nee  1993-97. commitments  and  payments  1993-96 

324 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 

-NriTATIVES 

TABLE 22:  IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATE and BY PROGRAMME (continued) 

Initiatives 

(number of  CIPs) 

Italy 

Objective  I  regions  * 

Obj  2 and  5(h)  areas  * 

Netherlands  Twente 

Austria  Lower  Austria.  Styrui  and  Vorarlberg 

Portugal* 

United  Kingdom 

Northern  Ireland 

United  Kingdom 

U R B AN  (44) 

Belgium 

Antwerp 

Brussels 

Cluirieroi 

Denmark 

Germany 

Berlin 

Brandeburg 

Bremen 

Chemnitz 

Ouishurg 

Erfun 

Halle 

Magdeburg 

Rostock 

Sarrbrucken 

Spain 

France 

Amiens 

Aulnay-sous-Boii 

LesMureaux 

Lyon-Esl 

Marseille 

Mutliouse 

Rouhaix-Tourcoing 

Valenciennes 

Ireland 

Italy 

Luxembourg 

Netherlands 

Amsterdam 

Tlie  Hague 

Austria 

Gr»e 

Vienna 

Portugal  Lishtm  and  Oporui 

Finland  Joensuu 

Sweden  Muinui 

United  Kingdom 

Bimunghum 

Glasgow 

Hackney 

Northern  Ireland 

Manciuzster 

North  Huywrt.  Liverpool  Nethenon 

Notungluuu 

Park  Royal 

'  CIP —lop—J  in  1993. assis—nee  1993-97.  uMimttraents and  payments  1993-96 

Cnmmlliwnts 

Payments 

Payments 

1994-96 

(2) 

1205 

7.9(1 

4.16 

1.01 

23V 

19431 

36.15 

3,75 

32.4(1 

372371 

10.45 

238 

2.2C 

5.66 

132 

91.0(1 

16.1(1 

720 

8.0(1 

92(1 

8.1(1 

1239 

2 73 

9.16 

120C 

5.62 

5 33 

56.04 

53.77 

73C 

8 38 

7.0C 

7.0C 

7,ix: 

7.rx: 

5.42 

4.48 

131 

2636 

0 31 

739 

3.67 

4 22 

1266 

289 

9.77 

9.22 

3.15 

3.14 

89.21 

6.43 

9.99 

6.43 

16.95 

8.04 

17.3C 

536 

6.12 

am) 
1 5* 

2 1» 

1 09 

H X» 

K X» 

H X» 

9 99 

8 99 

1009 

3 5W 

1 0 0* 

K X» 

H X» 

H X» 

H X» 

9 3* 

H X» 

KX» 

K X» 

H X» 

101» 

100% 

1 0 09 

7 1* 

9 89 

7 0* 

1 29 

3 4* 

9 6* 

1009 

1 0 0* 

1 0 0* 

1009 

H X» 

1 0 0* 

7 7* 

9 29 

1 19 

2 29 

10O9 

8 59 

7 99 

9 19 

9 59 

8 19 

H X» 

2 19 

8 09 

6 3* 

9 1» 

8 0* 

7 3* 

W» 

K X» 

H X» 

H X» 

8 2* 

8 0* 

0.01! 

(MX! 

0.00 

0.00 

2 39 

83.45 

6.18 

0.0(1 

6.18 

215301 

220 

o.ix: 

22(1 

(MXI 

0.18 

I2IX1 

O.tX! 

(MX! 

o.(x: 

0.00 

129 

0.00 

2 73 

0 24 

2 12 

5.62 

1.11 

33.19 

53.77 

7.00 

8.88 

7.00 

7.011 

7.1X1 

7.0C 

5.42 

4.48 

1.81 

26.36 

0.0C 

0.00 

0.011 

0.0(1 

5.82 

28V 

2 93 

(MX! 

3.15 

3.14 

7 2 26 

6.43 

9.9V 

6.43 

O.»! 

8.04 

1730 

5 36 

6.12 

1996 

1994-96 

(3) 

0,<X1 

(MX! 

0.1X1 

0.1X1 

1.29 

27.36 

3.97 

(MX! 

3.97 

6.03 

3.95 

21» 

0 31 

1.29 

90.42 

18.07 

138 

16.21 

am) 
89 

H» 

5* 

5 1» 

5 0* 

4 6* 

4 9* 

4 5* 

5 09 

148,111 

M6351 

24% 

1.1(1 

(MX! 

l.ll! 

0.1X1 

0.09 

11.27 

3.81 

(MX! 

3.26 

(MXI 

0 39 

.0.00 

137 

0.12 

0 33 

1.69 

0 36 

2268 

17.14 

210 

266 

210 

221 

210 

210 

1.62 

224 

0.91 

13.18 

0 21 

(MX) 

0.00 

(MX) 

233 

0 37 

1.47 

(MX) 

137 

0.94 

5 22 

129 

1.1(1 

2 83 

0.4V 

34,46 

5 31 

2 41 

4,1X1 

2 99 

2 43 

3.91 

1.37 

4 38 

5 38 

1.69 

2 26 

34.10 

17.14 

2 IC 

2 66 

21(1 

2 21 

2 10 

2.10 

1.62 

2 24 

0.91 

13.18 

0.23 

~ 2 37 

l.li: 

127 

5.75 

0.87 

4.89 

4.61 

137 

0.94 

36.13 

42.98 

3.21 

4.99 

3.21 

0.1X1 

4.02 

8.65 

278 

3.06 

3 21 

4,99 

3.21 

6.85 

4.02 

8.65 

2 78 

3.06 

5 09 

5 09 

SO* 

5 1» 

329 

359 

349 

349 

S t» 

339 

3 09 

3 09 

5 (» 

369 

4 69 

219 

59 

2 19 

3 19 

30» 

3<» 

3 (» 

3 2* 

3 1» 

3 t» 

2 3* 

4 0* 

6* 

I I* 

SO* 

2 S* 

2 4* 

279 

4.3' 

2 4* 

SIM 

KM 

401 

19'. 

439H 

4 «9 

379 

4()9 

41M 

5 1» 

5 1» 

4 1* 

4 0* 

78.99 

3937 

39.62 

1.01 

259 

194.81 

36.6C 

42C 

32.4(1 

631351 

10.45 

2 38 

22(1 

5.66 

132 

97.35 

16.11! 

72(1 

8.1X1 

9.2(1 

8.1C 

1289 

2 73 

,1238 

1225 

8.0C 

4521 

16260 

55.75 

7.0C 

8 38 

7.0! 

7.tx: 

731 

7.(X 

7.(X 

4.87 

1532 

117.65 

0 31 

93(1 

4.65 

4.65 

1336 

339 

9.77 

443V 

3.96 

4.97 

98.84 

8.04 

13.65 

8.04 

16.95 

8.04 

17.3C 

ft.79 

7.65 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

325 

TABLE 2: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF THE COMMUNITY 

INITIATIVES 

TABLE 22:  IMPLEMENTATION BY MEMBER STATE and BY PROGRAMME (continued) 

Community 

Inltln-vts 

(numberof  CIPs) 

{Sheffield 

Swansea 

lOTc—BSG/PCACE (CO) 

Germany/Austria 

GermanyrTnmce/Swiaertand: Upper central and southern Rhine 

Germany/France: RhmelandPalalmale/SarTland/Lorraine 

Germany/Luxembourg: Euregio 

Germany/NeUterUtnds/Belginm: Euregio Meuse-Rliine 

Germany/Netlierlands: Ems-DoUard 

Germany/Netherlands: Euregio 

Germany/Netlierlands: Euregio Rliine-Meuse-Nnrtli 

Germany/Netlierlands: Euregio Rliiiw-Waal 

Germany/Potund/Czecli Republic: Saxony 

Germany/Poland: Brandenburg 

Germany/Poland: Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania 

Germany/Czech Republic: Bavaria 

Germany/Switzerland: Lake Constance 

Austria/Hungary 

AustriafCzedi Republic 

Austria/Slovakia 

Austria/Slovenia 

Belgium/France/Luxembourg: Wullonia-Lorruine-Luxembourg 

Belgium/France: Ardennes 

Belgium/Netherlands: Euregio Scheldemond 

Bdgium/Nctheritmds: Middengebtd 

Denmark/Germany: Fyns Amt/K.E.R-N. 

Denmark/Germany: Stoestr+m/OsthoLruutOMbeck 

Denmark/Germany: South Juuand/Plonungsraum V 

Denmark/Baltic Sea 

Denmark/Sweden 

Spain/Morocco 

Spain/Portugal 

Spain/Portugal (Regen Natural gas) 

Finland/Baltic States: Coastal Southern Finland 

Finland/Russia: Karelia 

Finland/Russia: Soutli-east Finland 

Finland/Sweden/Norway: Nonli Cape 

Finlmd/Sweden/Ntirway: Kvarken and Millskandiu 

Finland/Sweden: Islands 

France/Germany: PAM IN A 

France/Belgium: Nord/Pas-de Calais/Flanders 

France/Belgitau: Walloniu/Nord/Pa.i-de-Calais/Picardy 

France/Spain 

France/lusty: Corsica/Sardinia 

France/Italy:  Corsica/Tuscuny 

France/United Kingdom: Upper Normandy. Picardy and East Sussex 

France/Unued Kingdom: Nord/Pas-de-Cuiais/Keni 

France/Switzerland: Franche-Comté 

France/Switzerland: Rlume-Alpes 

Greece/Albania/Bulgaria 

Greece/Italy (Regen Electricity) 

Greece: Completion of energy networks (Regen) 

Ireland/United Kingdom: Nonliem Ireland 

Ireland/United Kingdom: Wales 

Italy/Albania: Apulia 

Italy/France 

lutly/Switttriand 

United Kingdom/Morocco: Gibraltar 

Sweden/FinlanaVNorway/Russia: Barents Sea 

Sweden/Norway: Nordic green bell 

Sweden/Norway: Golhenburg/Boltits/Àlvsborg 

Sweden/Norway: Inner Scandinavia 

PEACE Ireland/Northern Ireland 

(TOTAL (4151 

1994-96 

(2) 

6.791 

5.61 

13323d 

24.61 

2335 

2327 

8.04 

33.46 

22.47 

22.01 

6.38 

1133 

19.68 

10.08 

8.83 

16.80 

6.90 

830 

43(1 

530 

9.00 

2623 

1245 

11.09 

32.41 

1.8C 

53C 

11.1C 

200 

10.6C 

14.08 

240.19 

19336 

4.04 

1032 

7.69 

830 

4.98 

3.65 

10.09 

16.91 

1035 

8.77 

3231 

18.19 

34.06 

6.96 

7.1(1 

0.60 

6630 

2202 

103.2(1 

28.08 

1131 

1532 

15.07 

15.65 

0.71 

6.68 

3.07 

4.45 

3.08 

126.66 

am) 
10091 

100*1 
«*1 
1009 

959 

1009 

10(» 

949 

KX» 

HX» 

HX» 

KX» 

13* 

14» 

14» 

HX» 

KX» 

81» 

HX» 

101» 

KX» 

879 

HX» 

HX» 

HX» 

HX» 

100» 

1 «» 

100» 

82» 

14» 

449 

88* 

669 

769 

809 

729 

759 
«» 
919 

949 

149 

149 

979 

989 

KX» 

IS* 

HX» 

11* 

2 1* 

29* 

56* 

18* 

14* 

19* 

26* 

78* 

100* 

64* 

56* 

819 

689 

4 2* 

6 7* 

5,61 

« 4 7 3H 

24.6(1 

0.00 

1.00 

(MXI 

0.1X1 

0.(X 

(MX! 

(MX! 

0.0C 

3.08 

(MX! 

0.87 

0.1X! 

205 

0.1X1 

036 

0.64 

3.12 

2623 

12.45 

129 

320 

036 

138 

235 

020 

10.60 

14.08 

165.14 

131.43 

4.04 

1032 

7.69 

8.80 

4.98 

3.65 

0.0(1 

16.91 

10.05 

8.77 

3231 

18.19 

34.06 

6.96 

0.U! 
o.ix: 
38.23 

17.77 

5820 

1.22 

0.9C 

1532 

15.07 

15.65 

034 

6.68 

3.07 

4.45 

3.08 

9536 

Paynatuts 

199436 

(3) 

3 3* 

2 31 

738 

731 

7.18 

241 

10.04 

6,74 

6.6C 

1.91 

3.46 

934 

5.04 

4.41 

5.43 

298 

264 

135 

1.65 

27C 

1218 

3.74 

333 

9.72 

034 

13« 

333 

0.60 

3.18 

734 

10335 

16233 

121 

3.16 

231 

033 

0.21 

1.0Q 

3.03 

8.46 

5.02 

436 

9.8V 

5.46 

1022 

3.48 

222 

0.18 

48.99 

11.01 

8236 

14.04 

5.91 

7.76 

733 

732 

021 

0.00 

0.92 

134 

0.92 

S6.49 

am) 
509j 
50*1 
2 2% 

3 0* 

2 9* 

3 1* 

3 (» 

2 8* 

3 0* 

31» 

309 

309 

79 

79 

79 

329 

439 

249 

309 

309 

30» 

4 0» 

309 

3 0» 

309 

309 

3 09 

309 

30% 

2 49 

7* 

199 

7 49 

209 

239 

249 

3* 

3* 

259 

27» 

4 7* 

7* 

79 

29% 

2 9» 

309 

89 

319 

39 

169 

159 

4 59 

99 

7* 

I I» 

1 3* 

3 9* 

3 0* 

09 

1 7* 

249 

2 19 

199 

3391 

281 

46S0J1 

7 38 

0,1X1 

030 

0.00 

(MX! 

(MXI 

(MX! 

0.0(1 

0.00 

134 

0.1X1 

0.43 

(MXI 

0 35 

(MXI 

0.17 

0.19 

0.93 

12.18 

3.74 

039 

0.96 

0.11 

032 

0.86 

036 

3.18 

7.04 

5921 

118.99 

121 

3.16 

231 

033 

021 

1.1X1 

0.1X1 

8.46 

5.02 

43« 

9.89 

5.46 

1022 

3.48 

(MXI 

(MX) 

34.96 

8.89 

78.06 

0.61 

0.45 

7.76 

733 

732 

021 

0.00 

0.92 

134 

0.92 

41.68 

(1) 

6.791 

5.61 

3.17034 

24.60 

2438 

23.27 
8.04 

35.71 

2247 

22.01 

6.38 

1133 

149.44 

73.49 

63.07 

16.81 

6.91 

11.00 

430 

53C 

9.0C 

30.20 

1245 

11.09 

32.4) 

130 

520 

11.10 

200 

13.0C 

10137 

5520(1 

22030 

638 

1338 

9.63 

1221 

6.62 

4.04 

11.06 

17.99 

7132 

6244 

33.68 

1839 

34.06 

45.10 

7.10 

537 

314.04 

75.77 

183.67 

156.96 

84.64 

8133 

56.97 

20.0(1 

0.71 

10.46 

530 

53d 

43(1 

31X1.1X1 

___ 

____c 

8.78437, 

4 7 *| 

13132-1 

2.7443-T 

326 

8th Annual Report on tie Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 3: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF TRANSITIONAL AND 

INNOVATIVE MEASURES * 

M e m b er  S t a te 

F u nd 

Cornmitments 

P a y m e n ts 

ECU  million 

Excluding carryovers 

Indwling decomnai 

Excludiar.  u i i y w ui 

Inclut!inp carryoven 

and appropnauo— made 

—ii)m»tii and a|-au|»—ion» 

and appropria—— made 

made available again 

available agam 

B E L G I UM 

7 5 . 64 

77.05 

D E N M A RK 

G E R M A NY 

G R E E CE 

S P A IN 

F R A N CE 

I R E L A ND 

I T A LY 

L U X E M B O U RG 

N E T H E R L A N DS 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

1 

1 

().(X> 

71.42 

3.68 

0.53 

0.00 

7232 

3.68 

0.85 

6 22 

0,20 

1,61 

(MX) 

4_42 

10,18 

2 39 

3,73 

2.12 

1.74 

34.11 

2.11 

27.77 

0 36 

3.67 

80.16 

5724 

4,02 

8,09 

10.80 

17341 

0.06 

3 22 

9.98 

4.09 

25.70 

2138 

1.80 

1,65 

0.88 

44.40 

120 

9.41 

30.45 

3,34 

0 3 2l 

l).(X) 

(1.32 

O.tX) 

O.tX) 

6 , 08 

1.06 

1.06 

0.27 

3.69 

1032 

0 20 

6.31 

().(X) 

4,42 

17JM 

2.58 

11.50 

2.12 

1.74 

3 6 . 45 

2 11 

3 0 . 13 

0 36 

3,65 

82,46 

5724 

6.38 

8,09 

10,75 

2 0 36 

0.06 

6.11 

9,98 

4_22 

31,45 

2138 

7 35 

1.65 

0.88 

49.481 

120 

15.12 

29.82 

3.34 

i£l\ 

().(X)| 

1.621 

0.00 

(MX)' 

7 36 

o,tx 

3.7( 

0.27 

3.69 

7924 

6.65 

70.14 

2.14 

0.31 

9.17 

3.30 

4.11 

021 

1.55 

3 8 26 

30.14 

5.84 

130 

0.78 

3534J 

7 39 

18.77 

6.48 

2.70 

7 2 - _| 

50,45 

6.85 

9,43 

5.87 

70251 

31.79 

11.77 

2338 

3.11 

3633 

2233 

8.02 

523 

0.77 

11624 

33.14 

19.1X1 

60.21 

3.89 

1 

0.711 

(MX 

I 

0.71 
! 

(MX 

(MX 

1433 

10.64 

1.87 

0.44 

1.99 

7 9 3» 

6.65 

70.42 

2 14 

0.48 

9.17 

3.30 

4.11 

0 21 

1.55 

4 0 38 

30.14 

8 27 

130 

0,78 

3 5 34 

"739 

18.77 

6.48 

2.70 

78.11 

50.45 

1235 

9.43 

5.87 

7 1 38 

32.79 

11.77 

2338 

3,25 

3 6 35 

2233 

8.02 

5.23 

0 77 

11835 

33.14 

21.11 

« ) . :i 

3.K9 

1.16 

().(X) 

O.tX) 

DIX) 
1530 

10.64 

2.43 

0.44 

1  9V 

Budget headings B2-1800, B2-1810, B2-1820, B2-1830. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

327 

TABLE 3: FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 OF TRANSITIONAL AND 

INNOVATIVE MEASURES (continued) " 

Member State 

Fund 

Commitrnents 

P a y m e n ts 

ECU  million 

Excluding, carryovers 

lnuhidmi decon—ùmcnu. 

Eld—Mis'  fay—oven 

lnct—inr  carryovers 

and appropriations made 

carryovers and appiopria—<ai 

and anpropr—iocs made 

available acain 

made available  acain 

available  again 

A U S T R IA 

P O R T U G AL 

F I N L A ND 

SWEDEN 

U N I T ED  K I N G D OM 

C O M M U N I TY 

T O T AL 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

•Lignes budgétaires B2-18O0. B2-1810, B2-1820. B2-1830 

0 . 63 

0.25 

0.25 

0.13 

(MX) 

7 9 , 49 

59.01 

7.60 

7,77 

5,10 

1,96 

0 25 

0.51 

0,61 

0.59 

1 33 

0 25 

0,40 

0.02 

1.17 

1823 

331 

3.70 

0,70 

10.32 

96,69 

9629 

0.18 

021 

0.01 

498,98 

245.40 

137.W 

6623 

50.35 

1 38 

0.25 

1.00 

0.13 

(MX) 

8 0 38 

58.76 

9 25 

7.77 

5.10 

2 73 

0.25 

128 

0,61 

0.59 

3 -5 

0.25 

2,41 

0.02 

1.17 

2039 

331 

6.41 

0,70 

1026 

10639 

105.67 

0.17 

0.18 

0.16 

55130 

253,46 

181.46 

6537 

50.81 

1 -3 

038 

0 38 

0,06 

(MX) 

7 8 59 

62.17 

6.12 

7 38 

2.72 

L23 

0,61 

0.61 

0.01 

(MX) 

2 30 

1.12 

1.12 

0.02 

0.14 

2322 

6 32 

9.62 

2.88 

4.19 

11036 

10739 

2.97 

0.00 

0.00 

690.74 

374.X3 

168.11 

119,78 

28.02 

0 34 

0.00 

0.58 

0.06 

0.00 

79.05 

62.17 

6 38 

7 38 

2.72 

0 32 

0.00 

0.61 

0.01 

0.00 

1 07 

(MX) 

1.12 

0.02 

0.14 

2 3 22 

6.52 

9.62 

2 88 

4.19 

11036 

107,69 

2 97 

(MX) 

(MX) 

70130 

373.62 

179.88 

119.78 

28,33 

Budget headings B2-1800, B2-1810, B2-1820, B2-1830. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

33 

2.2.  1996 in the context of programming for 1994-99 

Table  1-7: 

Objectives  1 and  6 - 1996  in the  context  of programming 

for  1994-99  (ECU  million) 

R 
740.1  * 
229.7 
3 1* 
1713 
2 3* 

r  .1 

I> 

Fl 

F. 

13.680.9 ** 
5.933.1 
4 3* 
4.564.5 
33* 

13.844.9" 
6.127.6 
4 4* 
4.403.1 
32* 

25.435.9  " 
12987.3 
5 1* 
9.403.6 
37* 

F 

2.199,4* 
• 794.6 
3 6* 
537.9 
24* 

IRI. 
5.672.0  " 
2.861.5 
5 0* 
2.270.4 
4 0* 

I 

14.0682" 
5.0633 
36% 
3.481.6 
2 5* 

NI-
150.0* 
420 
2 8* 
31.5 
2 1* 

A 
165.6* 
33.8 
2 0* 
27.0 
16* 

P 

14.047.5  ** 
7317.4 
54* 
5.698.7 
4 1* 

IP 

17  . 

M 

6 

II 

79 

1 

1 

17" 

FIN 
459.9 * 
158.2 
34*. 
826 
18* 

!. 

s 
252.0* 
56.4 
2 2* 
31.5 
125 
1 

UK 
2.369.4 * 
1.038.2 
4 4* 
815.9 
3 4* 

•>. 

Toi-L. 
93385.7 
423432 
46% 
313193 
3 4* 
IKS 

Financial; 
Commitments 

%afiman_ng 

Payments 

No of measure**** 
' Prueninuned by SPD» 
••  Pmgramawx) by CSF» 
—  OP.SPD.GG.MP 

After  the first  three  years  of the programming  period,  the forms  of assistance  adopted  accounted  for 
the  full  amount  of  financing  provided  for  Objectives  1  and  6  and  for  each  Member  State. 
Implementation  as a percentage of total assistance is progressing,  since almost half the assistance was 
committed  and  one  third  paid.  1996  was  the  best  year  for  implementation  since  1994, providing 
further  confirmation  of  the  tendency  to  make  up  for  the  time  lost  at  the  beginning  of  the  period. 
Commitments  are  an  indicator  of  the  launching  of  new  measures  at  Community  level  and  on  the 
ground;  those  made  in  1996  represented  36% of  total  commitments  made  between  1994 and 1996, 
compared  with  30% in  1994, and 34% in  1995. Most  significantly,  payments  really  began  to take off 
in  1996, showing  that  measures  were  being  carried  out on  the  ground.  1996 accounted  for  44% of 
total payments made since  1994, compared  with 22% in  1994 and 34% in  1995. However, it must be 
recognised  that the slow start in  1994 and also to some extent in  1995 has not yet been fully  offset,  at 
least  in  certain  Member  States.  Some  countries  have  already  committed  the  1997  instalment  for 
certain  programmes  (some  German  Lander,  Greece,  Ireland,  Portugal,  Northern  Ireland).  However, 
others  have  been  able  to  commit  the  1996  instalment  only  on  the  basis  of  reprogi_mming  (Italy, 
France), which cut financing  for the first two years to the actual take-up level, and increased  financing 
for  subsequent years. 

Table 1-8:  Objectives 1 and 6 - Implementation 1994 to 1996 (ECU million) 

_____ 

98,0 
1.869,5 
1.884,6 
3.593,5 
275,2 
725,9 
796,2 
20,0 
0,0 
3.169,8 
0,0 
0,0 
313,7 
12.746.4 

Cftmmjtmgntfi 
1996 

_____ 

9,0 
2.022,6 
2.653,0 
4.778,9 
222,5 
954,2 
2.228,6 
17,2 
28,8 
1.379,7 
81,0 
44,9 

______ 
14.639.0 

122,7 
2.041,0 
1.590,0 
4.614,8 
297,0 
1.181,3 
2.038,7 
4,8 
5,0 
2.968,0 
77,2 
11,5 
505,9 
15.457,8 

Payments 

___________ 
229,7 
5.933,1 
6.127,6 
12.987,3 
794,6 
2.861,5 
5.063,5 
42,0 
33,8 
7.517,4 
158,2 
56,4 

_____ 

50,2 
1.218,1 
1.051,3 
1.797,8 
139,3 
513,2 
379,3 
10,1 
0,0 
1.596,9 
0,0 
.  0,0 

1-038.2 
42.843.2 

___________ 
6-923,6 

1995 

29,6 
1.252,0 
1.705,8 
3.772,2 
147,4 
856,5 
1.176,1 
9,6 
14,4 
1.667,2 
40.5 
22,5 
163,8 
10-857,6 

1996 

1994.96 

91,8 
2.094,4 
1.646,1 
3.833,6 
251,2 
900,8 
1.926,1 
11,8 
12,6 
2.434,6 
42,1 
9,0 
484,5 
13-738,6 

171,5 
4.564-5 
4.403,1 
9.403,6 
537,9 
2.270,4 
3.481,6 
31,5 
27,0 
5.698,7 
82,6 
31-5 
______ 
_______ 

B 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 

_______ 

~^3 

CHAPITER V m-

REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OFPINÀNCIAL IIV_PI__MEOTATION 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

331 

TABLE 1 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1996 
TABLE 1.1 : COMMITMENTS 

oM-m— 

5<a)(a(r.) 

* a) 

J___ 

___* 

3 M» 

»AX] 

_*__, 

_____ 

_4__J_ 

10.59! 

333» 

_2__ïï 

Mnltneeic-ol 

E—lofincC-—tBdi 

Weal of tneOreai Bell 

GERMANY 

~ ^ * T» 

_____ 

4 5 3» 

2J0I 

2n.8tt 

15,13 

SUg 

3473» 

Total 

(2) 

am) 

•nVTMl 

1 3 *1 

M4.4gl 

£  _____2 
__3_ 

im.mi 

7V1.4nl 

685.70J 

__32____ 

37S,Xol 

19K.75 

___-. 
3.3.1 

v-STJ 

4<M.»I 

J7M31 

VflSUll 

4-B434I 

Mo-U—bort-Weac—, Purnaania 

Bnnr-.nliinii 

Thunnru 

S——iwit-Hobuan 

North  Rhinc-Wptm—la 

p~*"*r*^_t-Pal_rtimc 

BidetvWttfttephoT 

Sam—«I 

Mnruierional 

CKEECE 

Anal  Sttrc-sfcaiK—a(l) 

Kent  Ke  DIL M—cdooart 

Mop, ft Pit Sua-. EU. ai 
Thmalia,s 

Krai* 

________ 
jThn—a<4) 

Noon  Anaiolikoo Etouu (5) 

Molurcniw-I 

[SPAIN 

—Mik4_M__a 

Basque Cuonirv 

LaRinia 

A r a n» 

7133 
4.177.441 

102.571 

Ccuui and  Mclilki 

Canary —and». 

iMulurerior—I 

(l)ln—jdinithe  OPforj 

(2) indndini tbe OPs lor 

—oUncnuI Gran—, western Greece and 

_;  Pclono_—e 

(3) lncl—in? tbe Oft. for 

Entras and Inc Ionian—an—s 

(4) lndudinf. the OPs fur 

Tura— and Eastern  M_»Ionia 

(5) Indodinf  the OP* lor 

the uian— in the non—n and soutnon 

___ffl 

W.6fl 

32341 

m il 

37.19! 

_____! 
K.141 

Ï 
___r 

6.«tl 

5.13 

26.M 

-12_Q 

« 7 3* 

:UB7^T 

71.23 

P^ 

»34j 

•»m\ 

__*__H 

1723» 

•**«ffl 

3X.V»I 

15.7»! 

O.lol 
"_____ 

3.30-

0.41 

l.Sftl 

0.42 

qopl 

27.77J 

VOftl 

2 1» 

2 8* 

2 0* 

3 3* 

- J» 

- 3* 

21*1 

U* 

7 0* 

17* 

l «* 

»* 
1 9* 

1 4* 

2 0* 

2 7* 

2 6* 

1 3* 

3 8* 

3 6* 

I I* 

I t* 

2 5* 

I S* 

2 8* 

2 2* 

1 3* 

0*1 

2 3* 

1 0* 

1 9* 

14*1 
15*1 
8*J 
12* 
I I* 
IV* 
I »* 

2 5* 

2 4* 

3 4* 

2 8* 

2 4* 

3 2* 

2 2* 

2 2* 

17* 

2 9* 

17* 

1 4* 

2 1* 

5* 

3 1* 

lft* 
)ft* 

332 

8th Annual  Report  on the-Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

TABLE 1 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1996 

TABLE 1.1 : COMMITMENTS (continued)  * 

O H K HW 

4 

5(a) (ap-J 

SO*) 

ECUBMIIK-I 

T o t al 

Ct) 

amy 

jyrfiqr  Ni-nMBdv, 

Lower  N o n - i w ov 

PK-rdY 

> | giw»Jy 

INotuyp-wie-C—— 

Bn_»v 

___r_J___«__ 

F——Wi-O—lé 

r-wor-An-a. 

L-Bfuedoc-RottattUiit 

______________________ 

Ma—-wc 

__________ 

|l ,~i[-|»>~ 
___________ 

ITALY 

Fimlii-Rr-naea» 

______ 

\Tmxnay 

A n n— 

5aniin_i 

Mnrurcrmnal 

LPXEMBOURC 

Mururcrkmjl 

NETHER-ANPS 

N.nnJ-NoJer—x! 

OnM-Ne-criand 

WcM-Naieriand 

Znid-Nc—rtind 

Mulurrrmnxl 

_-_-_ 

4113» 

_ _ _ l _ a _ _l 

_______ 

L«?L 

.—3-Ql 

— » — »! 

0.82 

2r>1.46J 

I.70! 

2623oJ 

20.119 

62.32J 

l43ol 

133«) 

28.V8I 

I9.68J 

32.»7l 

20.931 

2I.901 

3833) 

.  1033 

V—II 

«735 

- 33 

4935 

7337 

M 37 

5537 

_9_r 
).6nl 

29.491 

40JtOJ 

______ 

5,r>7S.H 

_ _ _ _ _ _ • _] 

______ 

-i-t_* 

33X.97I 

151.161 

108301 

Xn.OKJ 

l.3rV9jml 

______ 

•^  1 

j_!_SL 

J-
•I 

J. 

_______ 

__9_ 

SJtXl 

1331 

6.7fti 

6.40J 

3.9o[ 

2341 

______ 

I7.42[ 

-F 

3X38 

____! 

_______ 

___*i 

_____ 

____L 
28381 

____4 S 

____ 
____________ 

1.217.85 

3631J 

- Ml 

_____ 

133 

.___* ____ 

____. 

0.52 

56J3 

101.62 

4321 

1439 

___t  _t_L__l 

2 5 34 

6 6 . 02 

____s}_ _a 

M 3 7| 

3 1 C 31 

36.6x1 

_!____ 

23.371 

l » *l 
7 t* 

2 »* 

1 4* 

3 «* 

3 4* 

18» 

1 6* 

4 3» 

34» 

21» 

2 2* 

2 2* 

2 7* 

3 7* 

I S* 

3 2* 

2 1* 

1 4* 

29» 

16» 

25» 

11» 

13» 

S» 

2 7* 

I I» 

14» 

rt* 

21» 

I S» 

21» 

31» 

3* 

1 2* 

2 6* 

2 2* 

1 2» 

3 4» 

3 0» 

4* 

1 0* 

1 3* 

4 3* 

1 0* 

1 0* 

1 9* 

»* 
9< 

1 4* 

I S* 

2 0* 

2* 

44» 

1 4* 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

333 

TABLE 1 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1996 
TABLE 1.1 : COMMITMENTS (continued) 

U — t i r a — -/ 

Reek* 

Aaria__—t 

OMec_*e 

(1) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

«a) <aer.) 

5(a) 
(l-h-n—) 

SO») 

6 

ECU million 

O 

1 
1 

Total 
(2) 

1 
1 

« 
a v tn 

1 
1 

— £ - _ -. 
31734 
212.031 

n.4.1 

• _ >» 

_3_a 
_!__> 
2131 
J___ 

75.9* 

_-_-_! 

>SM1 

2 5 33 

_____r 
ï____r 

7I,4S| 

124.681 

2.3X6.02 

I9U3I 

J-i-Uj 
42-M[ 

I6.0tll 

03-1 

44J1| 

1134 

77,18 
_ _ _ * _ * •_ 

__L_1. 

______ 

n j-

'343»| 

_£__! 

g - a| 

21.32 

34.99 

5332 

_____! 

______  m .o  -•••-.awurt 

IS_3 

_____!  -S-Sl 

3730J 

« "- 

"**. 

33/>li 

Mdoieiio—I 

Centre 

Lghno and Tatu» Valkv 

4263 

A——in 

62i.no! 

369.30J 

12.1IW.72 
-»M»I 

_4_L 

1134 

24.no! 

19.971 

IK.00J 

I03.onl 

1.106.4»! 

»•»—331 

Malûrertooa) 

FIN—WP 

Aland I——h 
___________ 

•Smihnrl n*— ( —_ 

IV-aiyeriec 

MeUen—Nop—-

OvreNorrlaad 

MntUterirHo) 
__________________ 

Y<—IfwhitT _ad Hu—henidc 

[Ea-Aat-a 

South Eaa 

- _ _l 
158.93] 

U » J» 
10730] 

75301 

J2_,__ 
L _ __ 
—a.»» 

234.48 
-m-B 
-LL_4 

___ 
- T W JI 

117.02! 

109.61 

_4____ 

1 4* 

8* 
20» 
13» 
19» 
a» 
20» 
20» 
18» 
16» 
21» 
25» 
34» 
21* 
17» 
10* 
11* 
18* 
14» 
100* 

p* 
16» 

0» 

0» 

2 6» 

3 3» 

2 7» 

SS» 

1 0* 

36*. 

2 9* 

27» 

2 1* 

2 7* 

29*1 

>.ool 
97351 
_______ 
393.461 

1.1-0391 

385,04 
j og 
1395.93 

3,071 

__]__ 

437J 

42,93 
______ 

____[ 
_i___L 

______ 

22.941 

_____ 

2 4 35 

_——_ 
_____  _____! 

•F^ 

_____! 

T-
T-

-51-7 
• y wl 

___2j 
___•____ 

Mnlurerional 

CTMMTJNTTV 

hnoTAL 

________•) 
_________  _l______i 

1.076.W» 

_____ 

2933 

2MtM\ 

t.T96.n> 

-xrsM 

—-,431 

_______ 

_______ 

334 

8th Annual Report on  the Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 1 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1996 
TABLE 12  : PAYMENTS 

1 

2 

3 

4 

* a > ( a _ T .) 

* a) 

SO») 

O b l r e t tn 

1 

( n _ t r i t «) 

« 

ci 

T o t al 

(2) 

(2WI) 

•1.77 

3»3» 

. 

« 1 *1 

£.»! 

4 2 3» 

1 * 34 

-! 

4,70 

: 

4 5 37 

2.701  . 

11.81 

. 

1.50 

1.165311 

9I_77 

IS.Vw! 

27.67Î 

0.54)  . 

. 4.64 

7,4*1 

2.67!  . 

26.14.' 

16.34 

4 8 , 9* 

7 , M!  : 

2137 

.. 

J 
J 

7 f t | t! 

8,70 

J 

22.OT1 

177.34 

3 38 

2 1 2 ^7 

M c — b a - S t a l e/ 

•tartan 

B E L G I UM 

Brauet. 

Flanders 

W a l l o nB 

Mnlurermnal 

D E N M A RK 

East of  lac Great  Bell 

W e xl «f  the G n at  B e ll 

M u l u r c t i n i ul 

C E B M A NY 

Saarta-dk— 

M e — k a h o r t - W e — an  Pi—«ran u 

Brand—norr 

.—tmrv-Anhalt 

Saxony 

T n u r i a f ia 

Berlin 

Sen leswir-Hobaero 

Hamhurr 

Lower Sazonv 

Bremen 

North  R h m e - W e a n h a— 

Hesie 

Rhineland-Palaiinair 

B _ _ o v W _ — t n h e rr 

B a n na 

. — i t a od 

M-MreticmaJ 

GKBXT. 

A n — S i c r e»  k _ N _ _ ( l> 

Kent.  Ke  DiL  M _ e d o n i as 

Prion. &  DiL  Ster.  E l l. Q) 

T b m - l i aN 

Krilis 

I r a r o u O) 

Thral—<4) 

N i x > n A i _ o f a _ g u E f c o u ( S) 

M u l u e t i n n aJ 

S P A IN 

A s — — on 

0) 

1 . 7 « _ 5¥ 

iv.72 

44S.X2! 

1 

J 

1 

1 

I 

1 

! 

j 

1 

1 

| 

' 

1 

! 

! 

1 

1 

! 

1 

13___t 

7 5 3 X1 

6 , 96 

4X.66 

J 

J 

*" 

2.11 

1.57 

69X.2ol 

-\ 

2 4 — « * - *» 

X.OO 

r r » M î| 
J 

182.75 

1.924.19 

299,17 

2.304.39 

•  2X2.02 

2 . 4 6 6 33 

3.S4S.OS 

2.135.45 

9 9 2 . 06 

IS6.3X 

44.64 

496.32 

104,44 

902,33 

1X9.29 

208.15 

170.33 

791.46 

140.45 

360.65 

6IX.47 

339.11 

9432 

15.X3 

. 

1.69 

7.19Î 

6,67 

127.11 

0.89 

237 

] 

2.36 
1X.44 

J 

-i 

J 

J 

] 

-1 
-j 

1 

3 6 6 6 . 91 

100.771 

1 * - S 4 » . «I 

1—«4_««| 

6X3.7o| 

I 2 U 4J 

8 3 2 3 o| 

9 6 8 3 0l 

375.M)j 

3 1 2 3» 

4 0 7 3 0| 

494.30J 

1 1 1 . ! *' 

106.461 

44,llt! 

4 6 . 40 

79.6x1 

55.4*' 

434.3ol 

6 1 3 9! 

9.839.05J 

1.019,92 

| 

1 

1 

1 

I 

1 

! 

i 

1 

-

-j 

J 

J 

J

.J 

.J 

40.9ft! 

2 8 7 3 ») 
J 
j 
J 
J 
J
-! 

6.67] 
9.57! 

9.361 

36.90i 

4.I61 

50.61! 

X3X1 

3.—! 

8.101 

8.161 

7.3lj 

134.2s! 
.1 
J 

-j 

J 

J 

1 

-1 
•i 
-! 

Castile-La  M a n —. 

! 

1.301.031 

1 4 9 35 

3 1 3 1 4 4 *1 

3 X t _ C2 

1 5 9 J* 

272.12 

N 32 

•  . .. 

G al K XI 

A s t u n» 

C a n u h na 

Basque  Country 

N a n UK 

La  Rinia 

A r a t im 

M a d r id 

C a s i i k - L e on 

E x n — u u n ra 

r , . i , . ,. 

Vaien—i 

B - — n c k l a n ds 

Andalusia 

M n r oa 

C e m a a d M e — la 

r . n — < l _ n ds 

M n l u r e t m n al 

' 

j 

! 

! 

| 

i 

! 

1 

1 

i 

! 

2.073341 

4 0 7 . 40 

V M . 4 4I 

144.78 

517.72, 

466.X2 

126.57 

S 6 32 

3X6. X4 

293.71 

73.0oi 

J 

J 

J 

J 

-1 

1196.031 

3233» 

1.373,63! 

162.56! 

J 
J 

J 
J 
-1 
-1 

30.32! 

2036! 

J 

3.151 

I6.75J 

383 ll 

-1 

J 

9.Xl| 

034! 

id 

93x! 

J 

-I 

704.4 il 

J 

5 5 3 6! 

X.8x! 

1.64X.9|I 

251.44! 

-| 

71.23J 

-' 

2.64! 

4.177.44 ' 

434.34' 

676.191 

10n.65i 

102.571 

1.190.16 

I6.901 

78.ft7i 

-1 

-! 

-| 

-i 

-1 

1,9x1 

J 

-j 

J 

' 

• 

-j  _ . . , . ,_ 

.: 

-1 

( 1 ) _ _ — mi  the OP lor Attica 

(2) lndudin; the (>Ps lor uiotin— tal Greece, western Greece and 

the Péloponnèse 

(3) In—idinr the OPs tor Epulis and the Ionian Is—Kk. 

<4) lodudin? the OPs (or Tar—c and -astern Ma——nia 

(5) ln_ndai(  the OPs lor the —lands in the northern and soainem 

12  90V.X?! 

16X4.4X 

!2.K3i 

21X.55! 

10,02' 

2K  7-J 

32.741 

3.47 

. 

0,25 

3,22 

»,14 

0.14 

. 
. 

I V 37 

36.76 

5.01 

1 0 33 

15.04 

6,78 

118.34 

0,54 

. 
. 
. 

J 
J 

H 

. 

1243» 

J 
J 
] 
4.67J 

2132J 

10.991 

533ol 

6.I1J 

•1 

J 

21351 

J 

6.6ft! 

J 

J 

j 

J 

J 

2 1— 

2 * 4 47 

1.10 

9 X7 

10.5X 

° i44 
1 2 . 1» 

. 

0,09 

12.10 

2.60 

74.61 

154.41 

53.05 

« . 71 

2.11 

1.66 

X2.94 

2 2 1 3* 

J . W J1 

1.69 

10.55 

58.99 

2 6 39 

23.05 

0.83! 

5.X0l 

5 3 5| 

0.37| 

3.04 

3 3 6l 

) lM 

309.72 

341.02 

386.94 

6 4 1 . 5) 

339.94 

122.52 

36.08 

V.73 

X 5 31 

1 4 21 

6.76! 

197.17 

5.61 

6.76 

7.68 

5.89 

Z 67 

2 9 37 

31.04 

27 £  1 

146.94 

30.16 

47.17 

437,74 

4 3 43 

— H » 31 

1 2 1 34 

111.14 

106.46 

44.18 

4 6 40 

79.68 

55.48 

6 1 39 

J 
J 
J 
. 

. 
. 

43,43 

1063.35 

184.17 

4 . C 4 5 3* 

0 32 

150.08 

0,30l 

407.70 

1.45J 

0.04! 

0.0$l 

0.191 

0.07J 

3.74J 

0.07J 

14633 

73.10 

5530 

3133 

14.45 

76.61 

S4.07 

0,20l 

323,70 

2 3 l| 

165.37 

O.Oftl 

X5.55 

031 

0,03 

251.65 

11.31 

0.23i 

434.57 

0.03 

106.67 

16.90 

59.97| 

138.64 

. 

. 

. 

. 

. 
. 

J 

J 
. 

. 
-

. 
. 

. 

. 
.. 
. 
. 
. 
J 
J 

. 
J 
. 
. 
J 
J 

J 

J 

-| 

J 

-I 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

. 

J 

1144g! 

2  101X4 

l (« 

1 3* 

1 7* 

1 3* 

4 0 *. 

' 

1 2* 

3 0* 

3* 

1 2* 

1 4» 

2 1* 

1 6* 

1 5* 

1 6* 

1 8* 

1 6* 

1 2* 

2 3* 

2 2* 

1 7* 

1 4* 

2 2* 

1 6* 

1 5* 

1 6* 

1 9* 

2 1* 

1 2* 

1 2» 

1 8* 

1 3* 

1 1* 

1 2* 

1 5* 

2 0* 

1 1* 

1 4* 

1 1* 

1 5* 

1 1* 

2 0* 

1 6* 

1 4* 

1 2* 

2 5* 

2 6* 

2 0 *. 

I X* 

1 5* 

1 2* 

1 2* 

!<* 

I f .* 

1 0* 

1 6* 

1 6* 

1 2* 

1 6" 

J 
J 
J 
j 

J 

J. 
J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

-j 

-J 

J 

J 

J 

X.7ol 
.1 
J 

J 

J 

J 

-1 

. 
J 
. J 
-1 

J 

J 

. 

. 

. 

J 

J 

J 

1.42 

0.12 

7.6x! 

M ol 

2.841 

4.9SJ 

"  I2.19J 

130I 

H2.97I 

3.XX 

• J 
J 

J 

J 

J 
J 

3 

. ~ T '< 

J 
J 
J 
j 
4 

J 
J 

J 

J 

J 
J 

J 

J 

-

. 

. 
•  J 

32.74 

. 
. 

. 
. 
. 

J 

.1 

J 

-! 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

335 

TABLE 1 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1996 
TABLE 12  : PAYMENTS (continued) 

Member State/ 

Recton 

Ile-de-France 

Upper Normandv 

Lower Norma—Jv 

Chamr—insc-Aruenne 
____•__. 

Nwd/Pas-de-C—aIs 

Briuany 

Loire Rex*» 

Ptmoo-Charenle. 

Aaoilainc 

Rnnoe-Alpes 
_________________ 
Pmvence-AincvCûte tTAzur 

Guadeloupe 

n _ _ « J B> 
Muimtiir—_1 

1TA-Y 

Ea_—-Romaxna 

1—-hardy 

______ 

Campania 

Apulia 

LUXEMBOURG 

Mnloreeional 

NETHERLANDS 

Noord-Neoer—_ 
________________ 
iWesi-Neoerland 
Zmd-NederlaixJ 

Muliirctinnal 

Oht-ctWr 

SXaHajr.) 

«.) 

-__-

_______ 

14.8W 

1931 

15331 

8.09 

24,6x! 

17,021 

16,13 

1 0 3 T! 

206,8v) 

o.xol 

1530 

9.831 

65.191 

_____ 
____r 

351.7o[ 

231.92! 

2ft2.5o! 

22532J 

413.281 

5.901,15! 

1 » - P » 3 »| 

.1JM.1-I 

9538! 

;413fl 

1133 

3135 

268.67J 

X.7SH 

83x| 
____34J_ 

8,97 

6361 

24381 

0.271 

10361 

34331 

17331 

16.08! 

0.6s! 

J2S> 

_ 4 4 _ _ _. 

IV.Ttd 

1230! 

I.99! 

132,70! 

1.56032; 

_L__£_sl 

76,321 

_________  _li__l 

164.701 

39391 
1.337J 
I2.O2! 

1,3X9,1  ft! 

_&___ 

__.il 

____. 

_____ 

__-

0.2ftl 
I33.301 
_____ 

5,791 

Total 

(2) 

___4_Jfl 

5J5J 

12321 

5338 

1737 

2631 

jm 

3736 

_____sl 

23823» 

-*m 

I 4 »| 

2 4* 

4 0* 

1 3* 

1 1* 

3 2* 

2 1* 

I I* 

16* 

2 3* 

2 0* 

1 9* 

2 2* 

2 1* 

2 5* 

IX* 

2X% 

17* 

I I* 

9* 

19* 

I I* 

13* 

7*1 

6* 

I S* 

1 2* 

12* 

I t* 

16~ 

1 2» 
_____ 
12* 
2*1 

1 6* 
12*1 

2 4* 
11*1 

ixt 
13* 
in 
I I» 
12t 

KM 

336 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 1 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1996 
TABLE 1.2 : PAYMENTS (continued) 

IMe—ber State/ 

Rrfkw 

AUSTRIA 

South Ainuu 

West Aouru 

Mulurrnonal 

PORTUGAL 

N<«_ 

Centre 

UsN«i-Ta)ru.\ Valley 

Aleacr» 

Azure. 

Mulurrrion.il 

FINLAND 

Manner-Suoni 

Aland—ands 

SWEDEN 

Xtniland med ()ama 

Vastsverire 

Syib—rife 

MeHersa Ncmiand 

OvreNorrtai«J 

Mulu-mmal 

UNTTED KINGDOM 

North 

Yort—lire and  Hinnherudr 

East Midlands 

East Ane— 

South Easi 

Soot» West 

West Mid—Kb 

NcmhWesi 

Wate. 

Scot—_ 

Nonhian Ireland 

Gihraiur 

Mururcrnm-

aiMMDNTTY 

TOTAL 

ObtrcQ. 

Urn) (ft.) 

| 

5(a) 
(n—cries) 

| 

50» 

77.13 

• 4 »! 

•1 

1430 

1.557421 

3I734J 

212.031 

1x4,53! 

K4t.32! 

l _ 6 ll 

12.6|i 

-1 

J 

-' 

14.758,71 i 

243*371 

541,lol 

362.(X>' 

42ft.59| 

182.001 
7ft.00J 
621.no1 
369.W1 

97.96.' 

X2,KV 

61,95^ 

29.0l' 
19.3X1 
137.43! 

K5.I7; 

12 1X0,721 

1 9 30  M! 

—Wt4»| 

1953ft! 
2.ftW 
1.310,45! 

L—X~»l 

1134i 

243fll 
19.97! 

IX.OOJ 

103.0oi 
1 lOft.491 

1 

j 

| 

! 

1 

-| 

-1 
_' 
-! 

-1 

J 

J 
J 

J 

J 

J 

113»l 

71.77 

-! 

10.17 

I.43J 

-j 

-I 

331 

. 

. 

J 

-' 

71.771 

3.51 

77.pl 

J 
J 
J 

. 

-1 
J 
-| 

J 

-1 

-

-1 

•! 

-j 

-1 

. 
. 
. 
-

J 

. 
. 

1434! 

21,1» 

S3» 

244» 

-j 
-1 

-j 

1434! 

21.10' 

-
5.50! 

' 

-1 

-! 

J 
J 

.1 

j 

J 

-1 

18.75 

_ 

J 

-

J 

IX.7s! 

J 

J 

J 

J 

9.6—43' 

4*43*1 

571,4»! 

5814»! 

447.60! 

336.121 

I68.xxl 

60.00! 

97.85! 

246,12' 

393.461 

I.IX0.39I 

3X5.04! 

902.X41 

1.295.93! 

•  5.07! 

4.M2.74) 

3.1XA30J 

J 

-j 

J 

-! 

- 

-' 

J 

131.Ill 

J 
53.891 

299.49i 

-J 

0,0]l 

-1 

92,44' 

50.94 

223X 

J 

1935! 

X.70* 

79.171 

44.V5I 

32,4*' 

219.03* 

j 

1351 

J 
J 
-1 
-I 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J

J 

J 

J 

.J 

J 

-i 

$8l_69i 

•[ 

-J 

J 
J 
J 
-1 

J 

J 

-1 

J' 

J 

J 

J 

2ft,60 

273* 

. 

. 
. 

« 

27.86 

3441 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

34,Oil 

-1 

-1 

J 

J 

O.Kfl! 
.1 
' 
J 

J 
J 

. 

-' 

. 

-1 

*_T*I 

-i 
J 
-1 
-I 
-I 

J 

-1 

J 

3»34 

8.33 

16.96 

I4,05i 

J 

747 

7.59 

0,08 
J 
2244| 

3.371 
J 
j 
J 
1 

1V37I 

7144 

X.73! 
J 
l.lftl 
O.Oftl 
-i 

20.6ll 

-J 

J 

Total 

(2) 

Î3I3S 

24.02 

29.95 

1734 

160,04 

3.08 

2.83 

Z06 

6X4 

1»243 

233*3» 

97.96 

82.83 

61,95 

29,01 

1938 

137.43 

85,17 

2.022.87 

131.77 

9,16 

0,0* 

122.53 

«9,12 

3.37 

0,94 

J 

102.03 

1436 

1.57 

12.98 

1644 

. 

0.94 

. 

9.90 

84.80 

-| 

J 

J 
J 
J 

J 

J 

42,1- 

J 
J 
42.1-! 

Ml 

J 
J 

9,o:[ 

J 

J 

1 5* 

8* 

1 4* 

10* 

19* 

1 7* 

I X* 

2 3* 

15* 

1 6* 

2 5* 

2 2* 

2 3* 

17* 

»« 

5* 

31 

9* 

7* 

3 0* 

0*. 

5* 

0* 

0* 

X* 

2 3* 

1 6* 

16* 

0* 

2 7* 

1 2* 

2 1* 

16* 

15* 

33* 

2 3* 

309!. 

16* 

1 5* 

I S* 

I M . 7* 

1J52J5 

1 ** 

J 
-) 
J 
-j 

J 

-I 

J 

3.94 

334 

*M 

4.4X 

16.12 

101,17 

54.88 

26.79 

0.06 

26.12 

2931 

83.65 

192.18 

56.65 

299,65 

30194 

135 

677.22 

46744 

J 

19331 

J 

4.94. 

J 

J 

J 

X37I 

-1 

17.39! 

J 

J 

4361 

-1 

., 

. 

J 

-! 

-1 

9.33 

3,45 

. 

48.9S 

4*744 

l3».*174ol 

I3_X73l! 

1311311 

I.V90J4! 

I29.a«l 

69*,»» 1 

M ,5»l 

825.721 

51 J- 

131332 

2*4X4.1 • 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

337 

TABLE 2 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 

TABLE 2.1 : COMMITMENTS 

Reetea 

B E L G I UM 

B n t u eh 

Flanden. 

W a l l o o i. 

MultireTitsnal 

D E N M A RK 

East of  the  Great  Belt 

West  or  the G r e *i  Belt 

M u h i r e r H * u1 

G E — M A NY 

Sjiarla i h - xm 

M e — l e n h o r r - W e s i em  Pnmerania 

B r a n d e a b v rr 

S _ x o n v - A a h a li 

Saxony 

T b u n n tu 

B e r l in 

S t h l e r w i r - H o l s —D 

H—r—b—rs 

L o w er  Saxnnv 

Bremen 

N o n-  Rhine-Wesffba— 

Hesse 

Rhinelano-r——naic 

B a o o i - W a r a e m n e rt 

B a r a r ia 

S a n — -I 

M i i h i r e r i n c i al 

G R E E CE 

M o l u r e t i r m al 

STAIN 

C a s d i e -U  M a n —a 

C o l i c si 

Asturias 

C-mahria 

B a w n e O w n t ry 

N a r a ne 

L a R i ma 

Anwue 

M a d r id 

C a s t i l e - L c ta 

r j t r a n — u rj 

("aiTilnnh 

Valent— 

Balearic  Islands 

Andalu.— 

M t n —i 

C e ou  and  M e u l ii 

Canary  Islands 

MulumriimaJ 

_-t-_' 

* •)  lap-.) 

*a) 
(0——to) 

1 . 7 4 1 3» 

Z2»4»l 

I4»,»0 

I » 2 37 

163»! 

7*33l 

243»! 

1*43! 

2 0 3 4 * 49 

5 . 9 3 3 4 s! 

« 6 5 32 

82»4*1 

S143s| 

37441 

44»,45 

19.72 

44S.X2 

J 

1.165.51 

_29,ft9) 

131.51 

7 5 3 42 

6_96 

4 X . 66 

69X.20I 

,> 

J 

-| 

J 

J 

J 

5X33 

K2.37 

5 3 47 

9.32 

43.7$ 

8.00 

1.924.19 

2.304.39 

2 . 4 6 6 53 

944.62! 

X5X.X2! 

X 7 0 0 4! 

3.S45.05 

1.53038' 

2.135.45 

X74.25I 

992.06 

330.3o! 

I  lft.20 

15,61 

43.12 

47.5X 

J 

4 

-1 

-1 

J 

J 

| 

! 

1 

! 

I56.3X 

44.64 

496.32 

104.44 

9 0 1 35 

1 X 9 39 

208.15 

170.33 

791.46 

140.45 

5.7(1 

8 9 37 

X__53 

16.77 

O.jrvl 

8.*s| 

I.ixj 

0.27! 

2735! 

I4,0»| 

5.«ft! 

^&-L 

1 2 7 4» 

133»! 

J 
J 

127.00l 

. 
-1 
J 
1 

-1 

2 4 , 22 

1 3 31 

17.49 

55.7fii 

1 8 . 8 ll 

4 
\ 

13.0O1 

~ 3 2l 
J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

4 

«avwl 
J 
l 

60.75i 

-\ 

j 
J 

J 

J 

J 

0.491 

O.ft»! 

1 0 . 4 l| 

0.23 

14.X4 

J 

-i 

.1 

^ i r50 

«»37 

J 

4.74) 

I I 3 x! 

-i 

1 3 3 11 

J 

4 

69.871 

1 3 , 5 li 

J 

.! 
-i 

4 

4 

•  J 

J 

-! 

J 

J 

4 

4 

J 

- 

J 

J 

4 

4 

J 

J 

41.131 

J 

77,39.' 

-i 

114SI 

3*534,' 

42371 

23.04) 

215.15! 

-I 

3.991 

340.41 

9844J 

1637 

23—Si 

-J' 

9.6f>! 

•j 
-  J 

-j 

J 

23.67 
J 

14.18 

4839 

14_79 

24,97 

24,98 

19.09 

.-j 

J 

•) 

6.57) 

8.63! 

2 9 31 

2.03 

3.666.91 

524.451 

-! 

474.28 

56.2? 

431.26 

37.ft4l 

1 4 3 4 * 45 

• 3 2 7 4 3! 

A n a l.  S u r e»  k ai  N—»  (1 ) 

6X5,70l 

3 0 1 i« 

K e nL  Ke  D IL  M a k e o r - _s 

P d o p.  A  r >L  <__.. _ _.  _) 

Thessalias 

K r h is 

h n m a < 3i 

T h r a k i s M) 

83230l 

432.93J 

96X30J 

3X1371 

37540) 

I82.X4! 

312JOJ 

14032! 

4073oj 

200,4ll 

494.30I 

219.X4i 

Niaoo  A a a u i l i k ou  E r e ou  (5) 

434.30I 

IXV.49I 

9X39.051 

4.077.12I 

. 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

-j 

-i 

-j 

J 

J 

-1 

J 

J 

-1 

-1 

-1 

J 
! ' 

-j 

.1 

J 

J 

J 

J 

-i 

-J 

J 

J 

, 

J 

-1 

J 

-j 
J, 
J 

-1 

j 

J 

J 

j 

-j 

-i 

j 

-! 
J 
J 

J 

J 

J 

4 

J 

J 

J 

3 I 3 1 4 J .I 

I 2 i - 7 3_ 

1 . 0 3 * 39 

« * * 3 *| 

I C 7 3» 

IO231I 

S»,72J 

334J»I 

1308.031 

656.80 

2  073.341 

1.323,02! 

934.44! 

573.171 

517.72! 

281,Oft| 

4 6 6 . X- 

126371 

$ 6 3 2! 

3X6.841 

293.711 

- 

J 

4 

J 

J 

323.01 

22JS3 

1 1 37 

52:X4 

128.28 

2 . I 9 6 . 0 3! 

1.030.021 

1.373.63) 

511.34' 

J 

-i ' 
J 
.1 
-I 

6 2 3 2! 

23.771 

4.34] 

2032! 

43.70! 
J 

J 

704  41 

J 

448.16! 

4 6 . 9 l] 

1.648.9IJ 

I . I 7 2 3 9! 

J 

-| 

71331 

-i 

lO.lftl 

12.95! 

4 1 7 7 . 4 41 

2.196.171 

676.1vl 

2 9 7 . 7 l! 

M 2 3 T| 

7ft,49! 

1.190.1ft! 

$99.xv! 

.1 

J 

-j  B 

-! 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

-I 

J 
J 

J 

4 

\i 

J 

J 

J 

j 

J 

4 

J 

J 

J 

J 

. 

-

-' 

J 

J 

J 

-1 

J 

J 

-' 

-1 

4 

-i 

-' 

-! 

-! 

4 

J 

-i 

-I 

-i 

J 

J 

.! 

-1 

1290V.X7I 

4 269,011 

3V.75Î 

452.2o! 

167,8fV 

I 0 2 4 |i 

59.72: 

! 

1 

I 

i 

! 

i 

j 

1 

1 

1 

• 

J 

j 

J 

4 

14.05! 

413X1 

1 9 . 7 l! 

159.37! 

19.1X1 

4 

J 

62.44! 

J 

1X3V 

-1 

3,13' 

44.5! 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

1 0 3 21 

2.206.49 

l.Tv! 

2 9 9 . 50 

J 

76.49 

7 7 3 2! 

677.41 

373,Sfli 

5 464  3<* 

( I ) Indudint  the OP 1er At—a 

<2) Inc-idm; the OPs lor continental Crée—, western Greece and t 

(3) induthn? the OPs (or Entras and the Ionian Islands 

(4) ln_odu)£  tot : OPs lor Thrace and Eastern Ma—ifcnu 

(5) indudinj! the OPs (or the islands in the nunaern and south—11  > 

Total 

(2) 

1434» 

« 4 0 44 

V 93 

10.19 

< VM 

2 4 1 f t4 

X3.74 

5 0 1 9X 

2,00 

X6.XS 

S S JI 

4 0 2 32 

9,32 

1.52) 

4537 

61.791 

347.92 

s - 3 , 7 3| 

» 4 7C  — 

5.62! 

5.62 

62.031 

1.006.65 

137.81 

996,63 

9633 

966.37 

108.001 

1.63837 

V5.93J 

970.18 

42.72! 

513.44 

17.401 

9 8 . 13 

1.24! 

19.42 

5 7 3 2! 

243,71 

16.72) 

X3.34 

76.97| 

$ 4 1 71 

203st 

104.90 

24,78i 

112.39 

2 I 3 f ti 

7 7 . 90 

39.92Î 

324.03 

1 8 3 Sl 

9 2 35 

ÎSO.X»! 

J 674,74 

2SS4si 

4-33141 

-1 

4 

j 

J 

- 

3 0 1 10 

43195 

« 2 37 

iR_g4 

.4032 

200.41 

2 I 9 . X4 

j 

1X9,49 

203.45I 

4 . 2 X 0 37 

'57»37| 

15*2544 

4.921 

661.72 

3.S0I 

1.32632 

I3.00J 

5X6.17 

13161 

2 t t . ll 

2.471 

401.85 

4 , 8 |l 

'  92.78 

3,6x1 

39.10 

27.4XJ 

260.01 

3.60l 

194.76 

10,01)1 

1 0 4 0 . 02 

24,00) 

535.34 

2 3 $' 

559.75 

3.541 

1.176.13 

\ 

J 

J 

J 

4 

J 

J 

J 

j 

-j 

J 

4 

4 

J 

J 

J 

J 

-J 

J 

J 

J 

4 

4 

J 

J 

J 

J 

• 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

• 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

J 

-j 

4 

- 

J 

J 

4 

J 

4 ** 
52* 

S 4* 

4 1* 

6 61 

S 3* 

1 3 4* 

9 3* 

$ 0 *. 

4 7* 

7 0* 

5 2* 

4 1* 

3 9 *. 

4 6* 

4 5* 

5 2* 

6 3* 

4 3* 

4 9 1, 

X O* 

6 0* 

5 5* 

5 4* 

4 6* 

4 1* 

6 6* 

4 6* 

4 4» 

4 4* 

$2* 

3 9 *. 

4 9* 

4 5 *. 

4<M(. 

4 4* 

4 4* 

4 4* 

5 1* 

5 1* 

6 4* 

Ml 

5 4* 

8 61 

7 3* 

70S 

6 71 

w.1» 

4 7 '* 

<V<5 

TW'i 

7 11 

fi?'« 

« IS 

4 i '{ 

7 VJ 

S 7* 

J :1» 

34 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Fig. 1-3: 

Objectives 1 and 6 - Share of each year in implementation 1994 to 1996 

Conwntxnents 

Payments 

lllllillll 

F 

RN 

S 

IK  EURJS 

NL 

A 

T 

KL 

I 

O 

EL 

E 

llUlljlli 

F 

DU. 

1 

NL 

A 

D E LE 

B 

P 

• | ~M 

• | ~B 

D|~K> 

RN 

Altogether,  of  the  original  Member  States,  appropriations  committed  represented  over  50%  of  total 
assistance  for  three  (Portugal,  Spain,  Ireland),  over  40%  for  three  (Greece,  the  United  Kingdom, 
Germany),  over  30%  for  three  (France,  Italy,  Belgium)  and  less  than  30%  for  only  one  (the 
Netherlands).  On  the  payments  side  rates  of  implementation  are 40% of  assistance  for  Portugal  and 
Ireland,  over 30% in four  Member  States (Spain, Greece, United  Kingdom, Germany) and under 25% 
in  four  (France,  Italy,  Belgium,  the  Netherlands).  In  the  new  Member  States,  commitments  are  well 
advanced  in  Finland  (one  third)  and  represent  a  quarter  of  total  assistance  in  Austria  and  Sweden, 
whereas payments represent less than 20% of total assistance in all three new Member States. 

It is worth  stressing that, in general, implementation  in  1994-96 of commitments  and payments  in  the 
three  Member  States  that  have  made  most progress  (Portugal,  Spain,  Ireland: ECU 23  366  million  in 
commitments  and  ECU  17  373  million  in  payments)  represented  55%  of  total  commitments  and 
payments made between  1994 and  1996. Including in addition  financial  implementation  in Greece, the 
United  Kingdom and Germany, the  share of the six countries  that have made most progress  with  total 
implementation  in  1994-96 is  85% (ECU 36 465 million  in cornmitments and  ECU 27  156 million  in 
payments).  In  relation  to  total  assistance  under  Objectives  1  and  6  (ECU 93  086  million), 
commitments  in the three Member States that made most progress  represented  25% of assistance, and 
payments  19%.  Taking  the  six  Member  States  that  made  most  progress,  the  share  was  39%  of 
assistance for commitments and 29% for payments. 

3.  Obiective  2 

3.1.  Implementation  of Objective 2 in  1996 

Formally,  1996  was  the  last  year  of  implementation  for  the  first  phase  of  programming  under 
Objective  2,  which  is  divided  into  two  stages:  1994-96  and  1997-99.  In  practice  and  on  the  ground, 
this  was  the  second  year  of  implementation,  since  the programmes  were adopted  with  some  delay,  at 
the end  of  1994. The Commission  encouraged  the various partners  to speed up the implementation  of 
programmes  on  the  ground,  and  the  effort  in  this  direction  enabled  sufficient  appropriations  to  be 
committed  by  the  end  of  1996 to  ensure  that  transfers  to  the  second  stage  (1997-99)  did  not  exceed 
11 % of the assistance originally  programmed. 

Thus  implementation  in  19966 largely  made  up the  time  lost  owing  to  delays  when  the  programmes 
were  launched.  Adjustments  to  programmes  under  way  were  very  numerous.  There  were  101 
amendments  to  the  total  of  82  programmes,  including  76  amendments  affecting  the  amount  of 
assistance,  such  as  indexation  of  sums  of  money,  or  transfer  to  the  second  phase,  1997-99,  of 
assistance that had not been taken up;7 73 programmes were subject  to financial  reprogramming,  some 
of  them  more  than  once;  and  35  slight  adjustments  had  to  be  made  to  the  programme  content, 
involving the addition, removal or amendment  of measures. The programmes  of all the Member  States 

6 For more details, see Chapter V. Country-by-country survey. 
7 Transfers involved 61 programmes out of 82, or 74% of programmes. 

338 

'8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

TABLE 2 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 
TABLE 2.1 : COMMITMENTS (continued) 

M - _ —'  S«_U/ 
Htfion 

A_——act 

0) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

«a) <agr.) 

Oht-rti— 

«a) 
<n_MT_t) 

î(b) 

6 

Cl 

Total 

(2) 

* 

C2V(I) 

ltc-dc-Francc 

I.Unpcr Normands 

jjnwtr Norm—rwiv 

F_anlv 
J_________e___ 
fanrruiKrv 

Nflnl/r-s-dc -Calais 

a n a —v 

J____£__ 

Lunoutin 

Aquitaine 

M_i-FVr_u_s 

Rhûnc-Aipej. 

_ _ r _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ 

Provgncc-AipcyO'wc J Azur 

Corsica 

__________ 

____________ 

MulltrerKinaJ 

ITALY 

£i_l—-Ron—g—, 

Friuli-Vcnei— Giulu 

______ 

C a _ _ _ _ __ 

MulnreyMwial 

LUXEMBOURG 

MuHirerKHui 

«HHEIILANDS 

_____________ 

Ou--N__r—KI 

____________ 

_a>J-Ncdcrtai_ 

7 » 4 43 

I.T»»^»|  . 

____ 

161,01 

200,21 

14I.12 

__L 

SI.14) 

122.40i 

______ 

1.461 

12X.3ftl 

I 

245,53 

833ft! 

5 4 . 9 37 

17,28 

1048 

5039; 

Î3h 

i^r 

31,13 

62341 

45,77! 
_L_L. 
23.I4I 

K.4XI 

56,111 

I.70J 

262.50! 

390.661 
«'¥«}• 
193.2V) 
775.33I 

268.67| 
374.X21 

17.82! 

166,lfti 

151.1ftl 

98.37J 
113,14j 
51J3J 
270.72J 
0,02! 

24.147J 

2.861,471 
s4-vnj 

275_7l 

1 9 9 9 9! 

I.44I 

-! 
•j 

16241 
138,77! 

SiVrtt 

________ 

7 4 3 9i 

2 4 « . 1 .l 

______! 

J 

-! 
»»H 
_I_________|_ 

90.05| 

21J81 

19.391 

9.90I 

5.7o! 

27.77] 

14.9x1 

t3" 

4.79 

14.4ft! 
r 

______ 
_____) 
22.19J 

_F 
___L 

6.6ni 

___. 

433l 

33Ti 

______ 

0.27 

3 34 

_____ 

39_ol 

4-u.srJ 

v.ti 

_____ 

15,52 

1 5 3: 

____»!_ 

6.161 

4 7% 

1 0 0* 

X7* 

5 3* 

100* 

6 9* 

6 1* 

4 6* 

6 7* 

5 6* 

641 

5 5* 

7 5* 

6 3* 

6 5* 

501 

6 0* 

4 0* 

5 5* 

S 3* 

5 2* 

6 6* 

321 

2 7* 

_____ 

4 1* 

3 7* 

_____ 
_____ 

SOI, 

34% 

3 9* 

5 6* 

5 2* 

321 

4 0* 
» <* 
441 

591 

Vri 

411 

;x-t 

intw 

201 

iw 

yrt 

2K'4 

i ll 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

339 

TABLE 2 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION  199496 
TABLE 2.1 : COMMITMENTS (continued) 

" 

M o - Mr  State / 

R*X~a 

AUSTRIA 

East Amtna 

Soutb Anflna 

West Auslru 

M-ltnetionaJ 

PORTUGAL 

North 

Centre 

__—n-Taxus Valley 

Alentei» 

Alrarvc 

A-res 

Madeira 

MalùmioruJ 

PD—AND 

Mar—cr-Simni 

Aland .lands 

Mnlûrenrma) 

SWEDEN 

SmiUa—l med <_n_ 

Vfcttwenrc 

Svdxvrai»e. 

Mel—r—a Nnrrland 

Ovre Ntorrland 

Maltirerirmal 

ITNTTEDKINCDOM 

North 

Yor__ire and rta_—snide 

_ _ l M i d _ _ ts 

Eau Anilia 

South Era 

Sooth Wen 

We_M_i_K_ 

North Wesi 

Wale. 

S____J 

Northern Ireland 

Gibraltar 

Malmerm—11 

COMMUNITY 

TOTAL 

A-Maacc 

(1) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5<a)(aer.) 

n»|ec-~r 

5(a) 
( l - W r - >) 

SO,) 

* 

a 

Total 
(2) 

1 

% 
avm 

1337421 

33.7.1 

317.541 

.  33,7ftl 

212.03! 

184.53| 

X43.32I 

-J 

-! 

J 

14.751.711 

?3174ll 

541. loj 

362.0ol 

3I7.50J 

I97.4S| 

42639! 

.  200,041 

IXiiml 

.  108.44 

76.0TT 

.  4431 

ft21.0ol 

37.3.IX 

369.30l 

.  273.321 

I2IXD.72I 

6002,97 

L50X4»! 

195_3cj 

2.60I 

1310.4S| 

L2JB.Ï»! 

I.:M| 

24.00 

19.97 

18.00 

1 

I 

103.0ol 

1.106 4»! 

4 

. 

129.7S 

ÏI.7» 

13744 

24» 

*S5si. 

22.411 

2232 

20.62 

11.70 
. 
4 
-
4 
\ 

J 
-j 
J 
234» 
. 

J 

-i 

129.751 

I-

S242I 
1 

S2.42! 

l»S,7t| 
. 
24.00 

I5,00j 

IRjOol 

48.7x! 

»£J2 

-
95.32 

734» 

"I 
j 

4 

137.44 
. 

2.00 

J 

• 

. 

,4 

114,74 

234» 

23.ftfi 

373»! 

114.74 

40,22 

23.0T» 

4»,00J 

4 
4 
4 
4 
J 
40.f.ol 

. 
4i 
J 
J 
40.221 

12»4*! 

3345 

. 

4832 

473» 
. 
-

4 

4 

4»48l 

4A.4XJ 

2-601 

J 

64,»l| 

11_4| 
J 
41 
-! 
J 
53.661 

4 

73,00i 

37.50l 

«4*2431 

J43SJ» 

2 4 M 4 (! 

24Î14» 

447.60I 

336.12! 

I68.X8I 

6O.O0! 

9745! 

246.12 

393.46 

•  J 

-! 

J 

J 

1.1X0.39 

286.401 

3X5,04 

902,84 

1.295.93 

S.07 

4 142_74 

_I*ft_5» 

J 

1244- 

626-ol 

•j 

0.11! 

.1 

321831 

306.17! 

70.09) 

• 

J 

X4491 

28.631 

374.9ft! 

333.6»! 

IM34I 

383.82) 

5.06 

4 

J. 

4 

4 

j 

J 

-! 

J 

J 

j 

4 
J 
4 
2.051.80I 

.1 

-! 

4 

4 

J 

J 

J 

-j 

J 

4 
4 
4 
4 

J 

W » 4 tl 

4433 

20343J 

" 

J 

. 
4 

4 

4 

J 

-j 

4 

4 
- 

ioo_4o 

J 

J 

-! 

4 

4 

4 

j 

-j 

J 

4 
J 
4 
44„33l 

J 

27,7S! 
j 

8,95 

8.59I 

' 

J 

554oi 

J 

50.02 

38,95 

I337! 

-! 

-1 

4 

4 

-J 

-j 

4 

J 

4 
1 
J 
4 

4 

(443 

16_5 

9.42 

6.86 

5I.X9 

5»<57 

I06_7 

X0.45 

75.06 

332,78 

-UL31 

74W.T2 

9.22 

31730 

197.45 

209.26 

108.44 

4431 

373.18 

273.32 

4 

374.09 

6377.06 

158.1 - 

4 

J 

ISK.IR! 

5—«») 

J 
J 
J 
J 
56.39 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

J 

- 

J 

J 

4 
J 
4 

J 

904» 

3.1S 

R7.75 

« 4» 

. 
,.,«1 

J 
64.95 

«07,23 

49.63 

Z60 

555.01 

4XS48 

11-4 

24.00 

18.14 

18.00 

48.78 

365.72 

5 M .K 

-•05.7» 

23.46 

12-4 

10.72 

4 

,235 

J 

|9,09| 

32-4) 

49.98! 

65.18 

S3_$ 

374.04 

318,41 

89,77 

839 

97,44 

84,43 

M4.05 

6S2_2 

25033 

612,78 

680.11 

5.06 

227.95 

2 438,17 

14N.7S 

1440.T3 

13».»t7,«» 

4242S4»! 

—4*4.711 

t.l5I44l 

C3S—ti 

M 8 M ll 

425.721 

- Z I R 4 s! 

2343^ 

S"»},— 

* 4 4 _ t t_ 

3 8* 

3 3* 

3 8* 

4 1* 

3 9* 

54% 

5 9* 

5 5* 

4 9* 

6 0* 

5 9* 

6 0* 

7 4* 

5 2* 

4 »« 

2 5* 

100* 

4 2* 

3 1% 

100* 

100* 

9 1* 

100* 

4 7* 

3 3* 
—* 
X4* 

9 5* 

5 3* 

1 4* 

100* 

3 4* 

100* 

5 5* 

6 5* 

6 8* 

5 2* 

100* 

5 9* 

4 5* 

4 1* 

340 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 2 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 
TABLE 22:  PAYMENTS 

Ma_ber State/ 

ReeW-

Aaihtanr« 

(1) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5<a)(ap-.) 

Ohltcth-

«tab—tes) 

5(b) 

* 

a 

Total 

(2) 

* 
am) 

_ _ _ _ £ — _ _. 
___________ 
EaM of the Great Bel! 

Wcat of the Great Belt 

M—-lexional 

GERMANY 

JM»i 

njii 

171.54 

______ 

____. 

2 a _ 4 « j» 

3»| 

< 3 * 4 4 TT 

33*4» 

__a 

j _a 

-MS 

J__9 

5.65! 

* _ _J 

_?a 

10.68! 

__-. 

____l 

_«-»w 

Me——-inrr-W«__rn  ftup-w_i 

1.924,19 

___(. 

201-3! 

9.391 

143d 

14,03 

3/791 

5 -4 

6.70J 

1^97J 

I.4Si 

51 

333.0ftl 

279-1 

83-Sol 

96X.50J 

375.X0I 
___________*_ 
4073« 
494,30J 

434.30I 

9X39,0$! 

31-14.1* 

»4»34S| 

<07_1 

7440 

___3 

__£__ 

_ _ _ S _ — _ _ _-
. — - a-

T h m - tn 

Benin 

___wr-Ho——m 

H_nh_y 

UnwrS—tony 

Nenh R-ne-^eap—Uia 

Rh mrt-nl-l-,—matc. 

Ba_—-W_—aahent  . 

San——I 

Molurenon-I 
_______ 
A - _ S _ r _ s _p  N - U Ol 

K g-  He D,L Mak—ooias 

r _ c - . - D i t . S _r  EP  (2> 

The—alias 

Kriti« 
]_______ 
Bkr___*l_ 
Nison A—unlikoo Eeeou (5) 

MuWtcrio—tl 

I STAIN 

ICa-Ue _a Man—a 

BaMftie fnuntrv 

LaRinia 

Cam—-Leon 

_to___ara 

1.308.031 

3X6.X41 

293,711 

374,9o| 

13" 

Bale—-khuids 

71-31 

Cerna and  M e __ 

Canarv Islands 

Muluretiorul 

(1) ladadiai the OP (or Attica 

(2) In—adiai tbe OP» tor cuo_wital Grec—. 

1 Gn_ix and tbe Pclono—__ 

(3) la-odint  tbe OP» lor Enous and the: lotis 

(4) la-adine  the OPs for Thrace and Eauern 

Ma——tenia 

(5) Indedinf  the OP» lor the -land* in tbe 

a—tioa—_n) 

__4 

35,40) 
I.94! 

13481 

X4.55! 

3»*; 

3 1* 

3 2* 

2 8* 

4 9* 

3 3* 

9 1* 

3 7* 

3 2* 

3 3* 

21* 

3 8* 

3 3* 

3 1* 

3 6* 

_ 3 2* 

2 8* 

4 0* 

3 3* 

30*. 

3 8* 

3 5* 

3 6* 

3 3* 

2 7* 

3 2* 
_____ 
2 9* 

3 1* 

41* 

3 6* 

31* 

3 5* 

3X* 

3 9* 

3 4* 

3 5* 

2 9* 
______ 
3 7* 

471 

V i* 
2 7* 

105932 
______ 

X9.ll! 
_Sk*?i. 
2.4*1 

_____________J 

L 7 j[ 
3.W1 

_0_._|l_ 

J/t* 

«JO 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

341 

TABLE 2 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 
TABLE 22:  PAYMENTS (continued) 

M—nb— State/ 

- t * _* 

A_——_ct 

d» 

1 

2 

3 

4 

« • ) ( a t r .) 

Ohkc_ — 

* •> 
(fkberl—) 

a» 

6 

ci 

Total 

I 

« 

(2) 

(2V(1) 

j__a 

___•__. 

_______ 

2514*1 

342-43 

-2_S 

7.521 

_____ 
3 5* 

Tool 
g-'6| 

"j 

0.831 

32,Ool 

304: 

11.Mil 

_____) 

),63l 

21,15 

_____ 
_____<_ 

4X3o) 
3035 

21,95 

IX.IX! 

5.90J 

138! 

20„2 

29.0ol 

_24S_M! 

2—47 

__&__. 

j _ _ _ _ _i 

____  _____ 

_____* 

_i_2rt 

L°2l 

0.30l 

3,04) 

8.31 

2O.O7! 

17.77! 

lle^ks-France 

_______________ 
UTWP Normandv 

Chamnatnc-An—nac 
___—_—. 

Nord/P-s-dc-Calais 

___________ 

P o i i n o - Q _ r _ i l e\ 

F r a n c b e - C o _-

Aanitàine 

M-i-Pyitne— 

A___v__r__c 

Rhône-Aines 

Lan toe— «c-Rou-sUIon 
________________________ 

Cor—_ 

G__—3-ne 

P—u—oc 

Mol—rrioi—I 

IRELAND 

Multn-riona) 

ITALY 
____________ 

Fnuli-V———• » Giulia 
_____ 

Canipggo_ _ 

•—rdinu 

Molurr—or—1 

LUXEMBOURG 
_________ 
NETHERLANDS 

N u o r d - N a — r _ _I 

__________ 
WcM-N__r_i-
|_-d-Nc-a—mI 

- t - M Jl Ï 

___-53 

^T 

351.701 

62.501 
______ 
______ 

5.675.1(1 

S401J5 

5901.151 

2.270.3 
_ _ - _ _ _ _ J _ — _ _ _ _ _ __ 

268.671 

1742 

___L 

12,00! 
93of 

l 7 3 o! 

_-_a. 
__1 

4 3 9) 

142.09! 

206.7X1 

—«I 

151.161 

.301.85! 

1.353,72! 

1.200.001 

602.75! 

1.369.X0| 

93.V4I 

2446 

__2»i 

»38l 

<L33l 

_____ 

_______ 

124* 

___5___, 

29.9ft) 

30_ftl 

_____ 

« 40 

2848 

101-7 

5242 

14639 

____a 

6238 

_____ 

4 6 . 0M 

1.560.15 

231145 

2311.95 
44H42 

_____ 

60,11 

67* 

3 3* 

5 0* 

4 9* 

3 7* 

2 6* 

2 9* 

3 5* 

3 5* 

3 3* 

4 4* 

3 9* 

3 9* 

3 6* 

4 1* 

2 5* 

3 5* 

2 1* 

3 2* 

2 5* 

2 4* 

1 7* 

2 0* 

2 4* 

2 6* 

2 7* 

3 »* 

3 9* 

2 3* 

2 7* 

241 

2 6* 

14* 

1 3* 

2 1* 

221 

361. 

2 1* 

2 2* 

16* 

1 3* 

• 4 7* 

13* 

7* 

1 6* 

1 6* 

1 5* 

14* 

301 

3 4» 

341 

3 1* 

271 

251 

161 
_____ 
Mi 

mjU\ 

_ _ _ _• 

_ 0 _ _l 

0.621 

0.561 

O.94I 

3.29I 

1.19 

3.4X1 

342 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

TABLE 2 : REGIONAL BREAKDOWN OF FINANCIAL IMPLEMENTATION 1994-96 
TABLE 22: PAYMENTS (continued) 

M e m b er  S t a t e/ 

R — t o» 

A B _ _ a a re 

( I) 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5<a)<a*r.) 

O h f c e t l *-

( I M - r l t a) 

5(b) 

* 

a 

T o t al 

(2) 

* 

( 2 W) 

A U S T R IA 

East  An—ria 

South  Au*0— 

We—:  A i » 0— 

M u t u r c - K m al 

P O R T U G AL 

North 

Centre 

L—hon-Tat as  V a l l cv 

A J e n t rm 

A l t — vc 

A _ V_ 

M a d e— 

M n l u n m o — il 

F I N L A ND 

M a n n e r - S n o ut 

A l a nd  l - a n ds 

Mulurerkmal 

S 3 * _ D EN 

Sr—idand mc«J ( — n_ 

V a n s v e r i rc 

Svdsrerirc 

M e l l e n ia  Non—«J 

OvnrNontand 

M . l u r e r i o n -I 

U N I T ED K I N C D OM 

North 

Yen—tare _ _ H _ n h a _ _: 

_ nt  Midlands 

E - t A n r l ia 

Sooth  East 

South  West 

WeMMkOands 

North  West 

Wales 

S u — md 

Northern  Ireland 

G > h r _ _r 

Moltirrrion—1 

C O M M U N I TY 

T O T AL 

1 

1 

| 

! 

1 

1 

1 

j 

j 

i 

1 

I - 5 7 4 2! 

317341 

212.031 

IX4.53J 

X43.32I 

2 7 41 

27.01 

3 3 41 

7.62 

15.73 

9,67 

1 » 3 4» 

» 3* 

1 0 7 41 

1 40 

. 

4 

« 

. 

4 

lOt.XO.' 

V.36 

107.XX 

1 4 . 7 S I , 7 l| 

5 4 » X 4 -I 

541. loi 

246.24J 

362.0ol 

171.1ft! 

426.591 

151.481 

1x2.00) 

76:OOJ 

621.0o| 

369,toj 

72.79J 

38.15J 

3 I X . 59 

20X,97 

12  IXO.72I 

4 4 9 1 . 26 

4 
4 
4 

1 3 0 X 4 »! 

195.3ft! 
2 .J 
1310.45! 

l _ 8 2 , 7 »l 

1 1 _ 4| 

24.0ol 

19.97) 

I8.O0I 

103.00I 

I . I O 6 4 9I 

. 

. 
. 

. 
-
4 
. 

. 

J 

. 

4 

. 
• 
4 
4 

1.00 

. 

J 

5 1 4* 

12,92 

5 7 3 11 

«.«o 

2 * , 7 »l 

"I 
J 
-1 
4 
29,7ml 

3 1 4 61 

4 

X.20I 

5.04I 

6.16* 

ix.66i 

. 

12,92 

1X.7S 
4 
4 

4 

4 

J 

51.2* 

3 6 3» 

J 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

36.5ol 

IX.75I 

» . * « 2 4 3| 

8 1 5 4 ») 

1 4 » » 3 4J 

)  4 * 0 , 2 .. 

447.6fl( 

336.121 

168.8x1 

6O.O0I 

97451 

246.12J 

393.4ft! 

4 

• 

l » I _ 7i 

4 

4 

-j 

•  4 

-1 

4 

1 2 0 38 

40.79! 

-j 

4 1 9 T| 

2 3 - 01 

157.231 

1.1X0.39! 

231.57| 

124.7ft! 

3X5.04J 

901X41 

4 

76.6»! 

9438,' 

308.8ll 

1.295.93! 

489,70i 

5.07 

4  1 4 1 74 

3 . I X * 3 ol 

4 

O.Oll 

4 

4.05! 

4 

J 

4 

4 

J 

-! 

-) 

4 

4 

-! 

-j 

4 

4 

4 

1 4 0 0 - 6) 

.! 

4 

J 

-1 

4 

4 

4 

4 

-4 

4 

J 

4 

4 

J 

7 1 5 »! 

18,9_ 

303ft! 

29.02! 

4 
-1 
4 
1  •• 
-j 
4 
4 

. 

2 3 41 

2 1 83 

0.7X 

' • " •_"n 

4 

4 

] 

i 
J 

. 
J 
j 

4 

3 5 44 

3 9 - 4» 

6.83 

2.83 

1 06 

6 0 38 

49.11 

40.75 

24.13 

246.16 

2 1 1 42 

5 4 I 0 3I 

. 

4.61 

_ 

246.24 

171.16 

1S6.09 

72.79 

38.15 

318.59 

208.97 

207.01 

4  698.27 

• 2 4- 

3 7 . 77 

4 

137 

-r 

X2.62Î 

J 
. 

57,31 

3 4 . 72 
4 

6.90 

— . 00 

. 

4-

4. 

4. 

J 

34.77J 

7S.74I 

4 

12.00 

20.1» 

4 

4-

4 

-1 

4 

4 

4 

- 

4 

j 

4 

J 

J 

-i 

-| 

4 

4 

-1 

. 

J 

,. 

75.7*' 

2fl.lo! 

.1 

-J 

2 2 44 

3 1 4- 

3.37! 
J 
4 

•j 
J 
19.271 

1 4 » 4 xi 

1643I 
. 

5.13 

4.62J 

4 

42.43! 

J 

J 

34.4X! 

29.051 

4 

J 

8.3s' 

J 

4 
4 
-j 

-1 
4 
31,4x1 

4 

4 

•1 

4 

4 

4 

J 

4 

- 

4 

4 

4 

J 

302.17 

24.40 

0.78 

276.98 

2 M . 97 

3 37 

8.20 

5.98 

6.16 

IX.66 

178.59 

3 . 7 7 1 4* 

219.82 

126.70 

S l _8 

4.62 

49.73 

65.63 

166.78 

3 7 1 45 

134.23 

458.83 

511.34 

4.05 

36.20 

2 - 81 

O.94I 

- 
4 
25,87 

2 - L 2X 

11.73 

6.12 

5.36 

6 -8 

9 35 

lfi.12 

23.05 

26.39 

21.64 

1 0 1 04 

71134 

1 6 0 6 30 

7 1 1 34 

I39.917.4»! 

3 1 4 » 5 . 72 

3 _ X 8 3 î! 

- 4 J Ï 7 . V .I 

3 1 7 . » ll 

1 4 2 5 . 7 7! 

2 2 » 4 *1 

IM75* 

I K l. 

2 . 7 4 4 3* 

4 5 3 1 1 44 

2 S* 

1 9* 

2 3* 

2 2* 

2 9* 

4 »* 

4 6* 

4 7* 

3 7* 

4 0* 

5 0* 

S I* 

5 71 

3 9* 

3 »* 

1 2 1. 

3 0* 

2 1* 

1 7* 

3 0* 

3 4* 

3 0* 

3 4* 

I X* 

1 6* 

3 »« 

4 9* 

3 8* 

3 0* 

8* 

5 0* 

2 7* 

4 2* 

3 2* 

3 5* 

5 1* 

3 9* 
so* 

3 9* 

2 2* 

3 3* 

^•N3 

<_HAPTERIX 

MAJORPROJECTS 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

345 

MAJOR PROJECTS* 

Year of  adoption/ 

Member  Scale 

O b j. 

Total 

cost 

- R DF 

National 

Private 

Commitments 

assistance 
0) 

public 

contribution 

1996 

contribution 

1995-96 
(Ï) 

% 
( 2 V (0 

1996 

_ 

Payments 
1995-96 
(>) 

ECU  Million 

•/. 
PVU) 

199* 
SPAIS 

Gibraltar-Cordcbi gas pipeline 

Vilenciae-Carttgeiu gas pipeline 

Natural gas facilities in  Huelva 

1995 
limASU 
Tallaght Hospital  (Dublin) 

ITALY 

Port of Cioia Tauro (Calabria) 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

29S.47 

60.69 

27.40 

99.01 

23.81 

7.2S 

0.00 

0,00 

0,00 

199.46 j 

36,8S| 

20.12| 

89.81 

23.81 

7,28 

89.81 

23.81 

7.28 

9 1% 

100*/. 
IvW/. 

71.85 

19,05 

5.82 

71.85 

19.05 

5,82 

75V. 

80V. 

8Cr\ 

131,33 

39,37 

91,96 

0,001 

0.00 

39,37 

100*/. 

0.00 

31,50 

80*/, 

120.00 

40,00 

0.00 

80.0o| 

0.00 

40,00 

100V. 

20.00 

20,00 

SC*i 

* Major projects within the meaning of Article 16(2) of the Coordination Regulation. 

^} 

CHAPTER X 

ERDF an<_ ESF PILOT PROJECTS 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

35 

except  Austria  and  Sweden,  were  amended.8  By  far the  greater  number  of  adaptations  resulted  from 
the  normal  course  of  multi-annual  programming:  sums  of  money  need  to  be  indexed;  content  is 
adapted  in  the  light  of  practical  implementation,  in  particular  the  needs  of  the  recipients.  This  does 
not  reflect  on  the  way  the  programmes  were  designed,  as  long  as  the  adaptations  are  not  too  far-
reaching,  which  they  were  not.  In  general,  while  the  adaptations  had  to  take  account  of  the  initial 
delay  with  commitments,  they  enabled  the  lost  time  to  be  made  up  in  1996 and  helped  to  limit  the 
transfer of appropriations  to the second  stage  (1997-99). 

The promotion  of technological  innovation  in the areas eligible  under Objective 2: 
When programmes  were  being  drawn  up for  1994-96, support for  technological  development  in  the  areas 
eligible  under  Objective  2 was one  of the general priorities,  as a basic feature  in the productive  environment 
of  declining  industrial  regions  in  the  process  of  conversion.  This  support  was appreciably  increased  in 
relation  to  1989-93,  rising from  about  9% of Community financing  under  the CSFs to  17% in the SPDs  for 
1994-96.  The ERDF  accounts for  a total of 80% of this financing,  and the ESF 20%. In comparison  with the 
other Structural  Fund  Objectives,  Objective 2 programmes  are characterised  by the veiy  high priority  given 
to RTD,  which  receives  three  quarters  of Community appropriations.  The low share of telecommunications  is 
partly  due to the fact  that  these  areas  have  no pressing  need for  investment  in basic services, since  they are 
involve  expenditure  on 
usually  well  equipped.  However,  Objective  2  programmes  probably  do 
telecommunications  and  data  transmission  applications,  although  such  expenditure  cannot  easily  be 
identified  in specific  measures,  since  it will usually be spread over other measures of an economic  nature. 
Measures  involving  R TD  are  resolutely  geared  to  innovation  and  technology  transfer for  the  benefit  of 
businesses.  They  involve: 
•  measures  to promote  innovation, 
•  measures  to support  technology  transfer, 
•  measures  to support  research  in firms,  especially small firms, 
• 
Expenditure  in the field  of telecommunications  and data transmission  applications represents  one quarter  of 
Community financing;  it is shared  more  or less equally between basic and advanced services. However,  it is 
dispersed  among  other  measures,  and corresponds to specific  initiatives such  as the development  of a  growth 
infrastructure  for  advanced 
centre  for  advanced 
telecommunications  (Spain).  It  is  difficult  to  quantify  these  initiatives  they  are scattered  over  a  variety  of 
economic  development  measures. 

the development  of labour  in activities  linked to RTD. 

(France)  or  regional 

information 

technology 

Table 1-9:  Objective  2 and technological  development, 1994-96 (ECU million) 

TOTAL 

RTDd) 
Telecommunications (_i 
Data transmission O) 
TOTAL 
(1 ). (2). (3), (4). (5): See notes to Table 1-4 (Chapter I) 

2.736.6 
56,0 
56,2 
2.849,1 

811,2 
12,7 
21,1 
845,0 

% 
96% 
2% 
2% 
100% 

ERDF 

ESF 

Structural  Funds 
Total 
1.032,9 
12,7 
21,1 
1.066,7 

221.7 
0,0 
0,0 
221,7 

% 
97%  (A) 
1%(4) 
2%  (4) 

37% 

Public 
1.207,0 
16,2 
28.3 
1.251,5 

Private 

Member  States 
Total 
1.704,0 
43,4 
35,0 
1.782,5 

497,0 
27.2 
6,7 
531,0 

% 
96% (5) 
2% (5) 
2% (5) 

63% 

8  The  most  numerous  changes  were  those  to  the  Italian  and  French  programmes  (29  and  22  respectively).  15 
programmes  were  amended  more  than  once,  i.e. 43% of the adaptations  made  in  1996: 8 SPDs  or OPs were 
amended  twice  (Liège,  Bremen,  North  Rhine-Westphalia,  Aragon,  Lazio,  Umbria,  Veneto,  Twente),  3  SPDs 
were  amended  3  times  (Lower  Saxony,  Emilia-Romagna,  Tuscany),  3  SPDs  were  amended  4  times 
(Aquitaine,  Liguria,  Piedmont), and one SPD was amended  6 times (Marche). 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

349 

PILOT PROJECTS UNDER ARTICLE 10 of the ERDF REGULATION 

Type of project 
Member State /Title /Region 

Year of 
adoption 

Total  cost 
cost 

ERDF 
Assistance 

TECHNOLOGICAL  N O V A T I ON 

Regional  strategies for Innovation  (RIS) 

Belgium: Limburg 
Germany:  Weser-Ems 
Greece: Western  Macedonia 
Spain 

Aragon 
Extremadura 
Galicia 

France:  Auvergne 
Ireland:  Shannon 
Italy:  Calabria 
Austria: Lower Austria 
Portugal: Norte regional technology plan 
United  Kingdom: Yorkshire & Humberside 

Regional  technology  plan 

Greece: Central  Macedonia 
Spain:  Castile-Leôn 
Italy:  Abruzzi 
Transfer of technology 

Casttfle-La Manche/Northem  "IMPLACE" project 
Spain:  TRANSTEX"  project Extremadura 
Italy:  "REPORTING'' protect Apulia 

INPOltMATIQNSQCIETY 

Strategy for the development of the  information society (TRISI) 

Germany: Saxony 
Greece: Central Macedonia 
Spain: Valencia 
France: Nord/Pas-de-Calais 
Italy: Piedmont 
United Kingdom: North West England 

Majtirygiona) Q>ta tranpfl  frgipn 

WOLF project (Thessaloniki (EL), Sardinia (I), Galicia (E), Mangualde (P), 
Brandeburg  (D),  Northern  Ireland (UK), Ireland) 

Strategiv for the development of the 'information society CRIST) 

Germany 

Infosh  Schleswig-Holstein 
Bis 2006  Brandeburg 
Ireland: ShIPP Shannon 
Austria: TELEKIS  Styria 
Finland: Paraddis  Tampere 
Sweden: AC-DIREKT Vasterbotten 
United  Kingdom:  NiSTRAT North of England 

NEW SOURCES OF  EMPLOYMENT 

Germany 

"SDL" (Regional cooperation  network  creating new job opportunities for women 
in social  services for children, youngs people and disadvantaged  persons in run-
areas,  Baden-Wurttemberg) 
"Contracting Biiro" (Setting up and running for a pilot period of an  office 
providing  information  and contacts in energy  saving) 

Spain 

Italy 

"ERNE"  (Navarre) 
"ALEGRE" (local employment measures,  Castile-Leôn) 
"NYEC" (New employment initiatives, Cantabria) 
"NIOVALLES" (New job  initiatives, Catalonia) 
"REVOL" (Recycling of large urban  waste, Asturias) 

"HOME" (A house for people: new quality for a new comfort,  Apulia) 
"PICENUM  2000" (Active employment policy for the district of Ascoli  Piceno. 
"SECT" (Education  and child-minding,  Tuscany) 

1996 
1996 
1996 

1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1995 
1996 

1995 
1995 
1995 

1995 
1995 
1995 

1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 

0,499 
0,500 
0,400 

0,413 
0,309 
0,490 
0,501 
0,500 
0,500 
0,460 
0,400 
0.544 

0,400 
0,400 
0,400 

3251 
2,000 
2JXX) 

0,866 
0,507 
0,500 
0,497 
0,496 
0.501 

0,249 
0250 
0^00 

0206 
0,154 
0245 
0250 
0250 
0250 
023lD 
0,200 
0250 

0,200 
0200 
0200 

1,000 
1,000 
1.000 

0260 
0,254 
0250 
0249 
0248 
0250 

19951 

12331 

0.530 

1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 

0,500 
0,500 
0,500 
0,577 
0.500 
0,500 
0.500 

0,250 
0250 
0250 
0.250 
0250 
0250 
0,250 

1996 

0.509 

0250 

1996 

0.632 

0.316 

1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 

1996 
1996 
1996 

1.077 
0.818 
0.877 
0.887 
0.450 

0.800 
0.938 
0.512 

0.500 
0,500 
0.500 
0.430 
0.315 

0.470 
0.406 
JL25£ 

350 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

PILOT PROJECTS UNDER ARTICLE 10 of the ERDF REGULATION (continued) 

Type of project 
Member State /Title /Region 

Year of 
adoption 

Total cost 
cost 

ERDF 
assistance 

SPATIAL PLANNING 

Netherlands 

Flood prevention: "Tungelroyschebeek" 
Flood prevention: "Dalemse sluis" 
Flood prevention: "Woolderbinnenbeek" 
Flood prevention: "Keersluis Haatlandhaven" 

Germany/Netherlands: Flood prevention "Hollandsch-Duitsche gemaal" 

1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 

5,900 
5,600 
3,300 
4,800 
11.600 

2,950 
2,800 
1,650 
2,400 
4200 

8th  Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

351 

PILOT PROJECTS UNDER ARTICLE 6 of the  ESF REGULATION 

Typ«  of  project 
-MtmbcrSatt/Title 

Y e ar  of 
nf-rtnprits-. 

Total 
miff 

ESF 

N i - y c _ w T R r a r w * T r M W J W M i ^^ 

Belgium 

Advice agency for the employment of disabled people 
IGLOO (New forms of partnerships in areas related to housing) 
Trainees from SME's replaced by unemployed 
LEHRMAS (Social economy enterprises in the areas of environment, housing, services and cultural restoration) 
OLA (Training as 'logistic assistant"  for hospitals) 

Programme for immigrant families 
GREEN FUTURE (New sources of jobs in environmental activities) 
Incubator with experienced advisers (Business development Centre) 

Germany 

Local network to develop innovative methods of job creation 
TELA-START (Regional data tiansrnission network centres) 
Firm for social intégration in the recycling sector 

Women's Micro-Entreprise Birth and Adoption (Intermediate agency for women apprenticeships) 

Spain 

Assistance for the creation of very small firms by young people 
EVTV - FS (Feasibility study for the  creation of health services) 
PROMETEO (Treatment of agriculuiral waste by marginalised youth) 
RESTAURA-NATURA (Local office to promote new jobs in the hotel trade) 
SARELAN (Network for protected employment for the disabled) 
SARELAN (Platform to solve problems of jobs offer and demand) 
SERDOM (Domestic services by nurginalised people) 
New jobs in the Basque Country through teleworking and management training 

France 

Experiments in enterprises to reduce working time 
ARDi-EL (Platform to network  competing SMEs) 
CITY SERVICES (Development of  neighbourhood services) 
Training in the  construction industry for disadvantaged youth 
Pathways to employment 
('Mediation* agents in the area of public transport) 
MERCATOR (Teieworkiing training centre for disabled people) 
PEVERE (Training of youth in environment related professions) 
Job creation in neighbourhood services 
PRESENCE (Job creation in neighbourbood servcies for disadvantaged young people) 
RATP-BN92 (Partnership to develop quality transport) 
Training of disadvantaged groups in  construction related trades 

Ireland 

Pathways to Work (Job creation  in the areas of childcare, care for the elderly,...) 
RCCN (Training actions in the ain_ounity/ch-d/health care sectors) 

Italy 

Training and creation of employment in urban social  firms 
Reinsertion in tbe labourmarket 
European Network of Agency for temporary work (Network of temporary work employment agencies) 
MARE VERDE (Creation of a Sea Agency in tbe harbours) 
Local initiatives for the creation of jobs 
Tekworking in privacy (Multimedia technology in SMEs) 
TRANSFER - COOP (Transfer of management skills between cooperatives) 

Portugal 

Employment, tbe  environnent and the economy in integrated development 
PLACE (Network of local partners) 

Finland 

KUOPIO Dance Festival (Job creation for young people in the area of culture) 
RAIN (Network of rural small enterprises and farms using IT) 
YOPORE (NUOTTA)  (Network to promote employment related to the environment) 

Sweden 

Creation of local work centres (co-ops with monitor) 
Trans-national Training Project (Training for self-employment) 

United I—ngdooi 

,19% 
1996 
1996 
1996 
1996 

7 9 0 . 4 00 

4 3 9 . 5 00 

2.145.400 

1.000.000 

614.668 

209.891 

875.477 

2 4 5 . 9 00 

157.418 

377. KX) 

1996 
1996 
1996 

360.21)0 
1.7I9J02 
864.595 

2 7 3 . 1 00 

1.000.000 

5 8 6. KX) 

19% 
19% 
19% 

804.298 
3.112.112 
240.608 

6 4 3 . 4 00 

1.000.000 

192.500 

19% 

750.800 

600.640 

19% 
19% 
19% 
1996 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 

19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 
1996 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 

19% 
19% 

19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 
19% 

19% 
19% 

19% 
19% 
19% 

19% 
19% 

326.750 
80.300 
177.812 
1.320.000 
874.062 
1.2(X).(XX) 
1.533.750 
333.625 

1.582-00 
415.000 
5.358.012 
304.000 
1.588.088 
2.785.000 
600.000 
504.571 

3 5 0 . 2 00 

2 . 2 1 5 . 9 00 

163.375 

64.240 

1 5 Z 8 12 

7 5 0 . 0 00 

S00.000 

7 2 0 . 0 00 

720,(XX> 

2 6 6 . 9 00 

3 5 5 . 3 00 

2 2 0 . 3 00 

MXXI.OOO 

I73.(XX) 

760.0tX) 

7 8 8 . 0 00 

192.(XX) 

3 2 6 . 2 00 

2 6 5 . 4 00 

5 1 3 . 8 00 

3.584.000 

l.(XXMXX) 

4 0 6 . 2 00 

I62.4CKI 

3 6 5 . 2 09 

3 3 4 . 0 00 

276-00 
235.200 

1.507.943 

3.063.125 

1.068.980 
300.00D 
760.120 
3.143-00 
363.200 

I.000.0CX) 
1.000.000 
642.7<X) 
_XMXX) 
608. KX) 
l.tXX).(XX) 
259.200 

881.745 
134.600 

S54.(XX) 
118.100 

65.517 
698.655 
48Z800 

51.724 
86.207 
277.200 

1.841.268 
1.204.000 

l.ttXI.OCK) 

6 4 0 . 8 00 

Growth Rural Employment Bureau (Employment service bureau lor very small businesses and individuals) 
Mobility for food wholesale workers (Three country network) 
SME Base Emansion Tbrouph Social Entemri ses (Local consortium to surmon SMEs) 

19% 
19% 
J___ 

307.700 
39.624 
821,21V 

149.1IX 

18.750 
______ 

352 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

PILOT PROJECTS UNDER ARTICLE 6 of the  ESF REGULATION (continued) 

r W F O - M A T I ON  S O f - R T V.  M _ n » - _t  hv  the  f _ - . i r - T . i -. 

T y pe of project 
McmhfrlSi.tr ffitlf 

Year of 
nfaflnirhfinl 

Total 
rmt 

E ST  • 
jsas_u_x. 

G e r m a ny 

Brise  (Bremen) 

G r e e ce 

Athens 

S p a in 

Essimur  (Murcia) 

F r a n ce 

Teleparc  (Midi-Pyrénées) 

Ireland 

Stand  (Southwest  Ireland) 

F i n l a nd 

Nokis  (Northern  Karelia) 

S w e d en 

ITBIekinge  (Blekinge) 

United  K i n g d om 
WliiTWalnl 

Pttiit Mw4iiii-i-.l«—vti—iM-f»«.M»t—-frttwf th-M«—iih—'Cratx 

B e l g i um 

Developine  commercial  activities  for unqualified  and marcinaliscd  vounc  people) 

Computer recisinuion  svstem  for the  unemployed 

D e n m a rk 

1 9% 

5(X>.00() 

250.(XX) 

1 9% 

1 9% 

1 9% 

1 9% 

5(XMXX) 

250.000 

440.IXK) 

220.(XX) 

5IXMXX) 

250.IXX) 

498.5<X) 

249.450 

1996 

5 0 0 . 0 00 

250.000 

1 9% 

5 0 0 . 0 00 

250.000 

____ 

*>:*» ax) 

250 (XX) 

1994 

1994 

144737H 

355264 

205702 

91423 

A  further  education  and traininc  protect for encineers  and  technicians 

1994 

2120838 

952044 

G e r m a ny 

Technolocical  and consultancy  centre  for women  in L e i p ac 

Further education  for women  (East-German women,  esp. in  SMEs) 

Social  cooperative  enterprise  with  workshops 

Recvclinc  from  electronic  refuse 

Innovative  vocational  and educational  measures  for people  with  a criminal  record 

Greater  flexibility  and individual  attention  in tbe learomc  processes of vocational  traininc 

G r e e ce 

Specialisation of encineers in the  field of enercv  manacement in buildinc  and industry 

Study  and pilot  test for first implementation  of occupational  health it  safety  C AT distance  leamine 

Seuinc  up mobile  traininc  units at distria  and local  level 

Implementation  of traininc  usine  multimedia 

Spain 

Vocational  traininc  for manacers of European  funded  projects 

F r a n ce 

Resourcinc  operation  towards employment,  activity and economic  development 

Assessment  centre  for vounc  people  involved  in two local  assienments 

Ireland 

Employer  resouces  initiative 

Employabilitv  throucb  traininc 

Establishment of accreditation  svstem  of vocational  traininc 

N ew  employment - Arts  — Culture 

N ew  work  orcanisation  in Ireland 

Guidance  for vounc  people 

Italy 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1830001 

1373(101 

524WX) 

114IXXX) 

944(XX) 

3012000 

607998 

490667 

542667 

430667 

554667 

3NXXX1 

R55O00 

450000 

1506000 

303999 

368000 

407000 

323000 

416000 

1994 

201281 

150%1 

1994 

1994 

1098849 

980916 

494482 

264029 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1994 

383000 

309000 

422000 

287000 

232000 

317000 

12961XX! 

972(XX) 

144500(1 

1083000 

129601X1 

9721X10 

S T A RT  (DADO/TNTELFOR)  Svstem  for adroinistrative transparency  throucb data transmission  network 

1994 

90801X1 

454(XX) 

L u x e m b o u rg 

Mobile  traininc  centre 

N e t h e r l a n ds 

Local  centre for information  exchance 

Portugal 

N ew  model  for vocational  traininc of vounc  people  _  recurrent  traininc  for employees 

' 

Development  of policy  measures  for employment  and vocational  traininc 

Cwiperalives - an alternative  source  of employment  for the over 4 0s 

United  K i n g d om 

Virtual  traininc  (Traininc  in electronic  manufacturinc  industry  usine  multimedia  —chniuues) 

Partnership for improved  employment  for disabled  people 

Traininc  vounc  people  for industry 

D n ve  for youth  (skills  development^ 

1777188 

888594 

1994 

2498095 

1124143 

1994 

1994 

1994 

2MXXX) 

348453 

238373 

195(XX) 

261340 

178780 

1994 

2552(XX1 

127MXXI 

1994 

1994 

1994 

1175CXX) 

215000 

82S(XX1 

585(XX) 

161000 

37IXXXI 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

353 

PILOT PROJECTS UNDER ARTICLE 6 of the ESF REGULATION (continued) 

Type of project 
Member State/Title 

Belgium 

Integration  measures in the social  economy 
Pathways of integration evaluation 

Denmark 

EuroCab (Trans-national  testing of a training model for the integration of young people) 
Green education and nature care in Storstrom County (environment consciousness training) 
A personal helper for physically disabled  people 
Project 'Safe Habour* (training of young unemployed  people) 
FR1GG (Training project aiming at recycling and environmental  consciousness). 
Internet-pilots (IT for upskilling and improving labour market dynamics) 

Germany 

Apprenticeship corresponding to interests and aptitudes and ensure subsequent completion 
Improving  the professional  knowledge of employees  'lent* from  START Zeitarbeit 
Transmission of "social competence" to young people entering the working world 
Working time system agency 
T O.P  • (eco-friendly  production methods &.  products through training and research) 
Virtual community to assist handicapped  people 
Labour exchanges for active job search through self-organisation 

Greece 

Systemic  Methodology on  the Design  and Implementation of Vocational  Training 
Development  and Vst  of Human Resources in Major Projects 
Work card, multi-use employment  voucher (Training materials for the use of offenders  and ex -offenders ) 

Spain 

Training of local  development  experts 
Support system to assist 50 firms  in the field  of exporting 
European  University  Summer School in Continuing and Vocational Education 

France 

European networks for young artists 
Job creation in the area of sport facilities construction work 
Training, action and reserarch between the Fourth World and the University 
500 jobs in  1995 and  1996 
Ethical saving in solidarity with people exposed to exclusion. 
DIOGENE (Design  and construction of timber-frame social  housing) 

Ireland 

Tallaght Telemarketing  Initiative 
Ans  Awareness  Intervention 2 
European  Computer Driving  Licence in Ireland 
Early Years Tutor Training, course development  and certification 
Innovative  training  and development for computer applications in the health services 

Italy 

Arianna (New  forms of facilitation in matching job supply and demand) 
CARONTE (improving  the operation of the labour market) 
Monitoring  and channelling economic  events 
JOBN_T (New organisational  and administrative  models) 

Luxembourg 

Flexmobil  (greater flexibility  in working hours) 

Netherlands 

Examining  the scope for leave of absence arrangements 

Austria 

"Work book" for individuals to assist life-long  learning 
Cooperation between  local  business and training organisations 
Effects  on employment of laws and regulations in environmental  policy and ecology 

Portugal 

ALICE - (to increase the capacity of local  agencies) 
Interactive distance learning for small  firms 
Living  in a multicultural  Europe 

Finland 

Flexibility  through 6-hour shifts 
Development  of quality of working life  and lifelong  learning 
Medcn 
SALT - Resource and Development Centre 
A model  for directing a company's Competence cevelopment 
Matching competence to action through joining a network 
Healthy and productive workplaces 

Year  of 

of adoption 

Total 

cost 

ESF 

assistance 

1995 

1995 

1825000 

1090263 

575000 

490263 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

1995 

199 

199: 

1995 

1995 

1995 

199 

1995 

1995 

1995 
1995 
199. 
1995 

1781160 

801513 

2278979 

1025540,55 

1224720 

2562527 

1017236 

1527521 

1028837 

1520017 

42000 

546896 

531655 

1994375 

9637S9 

492950 

338468 

423823 

667038 

439685 
684007,65 
18000 
246104 
345607 
776930 
433705 

91900 
574580 
478739 

68925 
430935 
359054 

1852772 

1389750 

338331 

254123 

1253402 

564030,9 

2706870 

741000 

993283 

300000 

449361 

202212.45 

1903847 

400000 

282110 

299458 

126949,5 

134756,1 

428500 

551466 

346000 

346150 

321000 

413600 

259500 

259612,5 

847511 

635633,25 

264000 
329655 
166500 
1441949 

1ISS00 

14S344.75 

108225 

576779 

97)460 

6796195 

1559196 

199: 
1995 

1995 

1995 
1995 
199? 

454232 
103291 
3SSS70 

204854 

46481 

174992 

514127 

385595,25 

337800 
504147 

253350 

378110 

1995 
1995 

910000 

800000 

409500 

360000 

199 

1995 

199 

199 

571000 

256950 

2652100 

1193445 

550000 

699000 

247500 

314550 

354 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

PILOT PROJECTS UNDER ARTICLE 6 of the ESF REGULATION  (continued) 

Type of project 
Member State /Title 

Year or 
of adoption 

Total 
cost 

ESF 
assistance 

United  Kingdom 

Flexibility, choice and quality of life 
Glasgow Works 2 (new and cost-effective  ways to use public funds earmarked for unemployment  benefit) 
Cyber Café (innovative use of new technology u  an information  source and training mechanism) 
City Fringe : One thousand Jobs (deliver brokerage services, reduce employers' resistance to employing local people) 

1995 
1995 
1995 
1995 

212671 
3)6038 
940799 
906  147 

95701,95 
137861 
374152 
405.000 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

355 

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS 

356 

Adapt 
CAP 
CEEC 
CEEP 
CES 
CI 
CIP 
CSF 
EAGGF 
Ecos-Ouverture 
ECSC 
EFTA 
EIB 
EIF 
Employment 
ERDF 
ESDP 
ESF 
Europartenariat 

FIFG 
Forcem 
GG 
Horizon 

Interreg 

ISDN 
Konver 

LAG 
Leader 
MP 
NIS 
Now 
OP 
Pacte 

Peace 

Perifra 
Pesca 
Phare 

Rechar 
Recite 
Regen 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

Community Initiative for the adaptation of workers to industrial change 
Common agricultural policy 
Central and eastern European countries 
Centre européen de l'entreprise publique (European Centre for Public Enterprise) 
European confederation  of trade unions 
Community Initiative 
Community Initiative programme 
Community support  framework 
European Agricultural Guidance and Guarantee Fund 
Cooperation network with central and eastern European cities 
European Coal and Steel Community 
European Free Trade Association 
European Investment Bank 
European Investment Fund 
Community Initiative for the development of human resources 
European Regional Development Fund 
European Spatial Development Perspective 
European Social Fund 
Events  to  promote  contacts  between  businesses  in  regions  eligible  under  the 
Structural Funds and businesses elsewhere in the Community and/or non-member 
countries 
Financial Instrument for Fisheries Guidance 
Foundation for continuing training (Spain) 
Global grant 
Community  Initiative  for  the  occupational  integration  of  handicapped  and 
disadvantaged persons 
Community  Initiative  for  the  promotion  of  cross-border  and  inter-regional 
cooperation 
Integrated Services Digital Network 
Community  Initiative  for  the  conversion  of  regions  dependent  on  the  defence 
sector 
Local action group 
Community Initiative for rural development  projects 
Major  project 
Newly independent states 
Community Initiative for the occupational integration of women 
Operational programme 
Programme  for  sharing  of  experience  among  local  and  regional  authorities  of 
Europe 
Community Initiative for  reconciliation  and peace in Northern  Ireland  and  in  the 
border counties of Ireland 
Action programme for the remoter regions and declining activities 
Community Initiative for the fishing industry 
Programme  of  aid  for  the economic  conversion  of  central  and  eastern  European 
countries 
Community Initiative for the conversion of coal-mining areas 
Programme to create networks among the regions and cities of Europe 
Community Initiative for energy networks 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

357 

Regis 
Résider 
Retex 

R&D 
RIS 
RISI 
RTD 
SMEs 
SME(s) 
SPD 
Stride 

TEN(s) 
UNICE 

Urban 
WHO 
Youthstart 

Community Initiative for the most remote regions 
Community Initiative for the conversion of steel-rnaking areas 
Community  Initiative  for  the  diversification  of  economic  activities  in  regions 
heavily dependent on the textiles and clothing industry 
Research and development 
Regional Innovation Strategy 
Regional Information  Society Initiative 
Research and technological development 
Community Initiative for the adjustment  of SMEs to the Single Market 
Small and medium-sized firm(s) 
Single prograrnrning document 
Community  Initiative  on  science  and  technology  for  regional  innovation  and 
development 
Trans-European network(s) 
Union  des industries  de  la Communauté  européenne  - employers' federation  for 
industrial relations 
Community Initiative to assist declining urban areas 
World Health Organisation 
Community Initiative for the occupational integration of young people 

36 

Sth Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

3.2.  1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-96 

Table 1-10:  Objective 2 -1996 in the context of programming for  1994-96 (ECU million) 

A s s i s t a n ce  1994-96  b e f o re  t r a n s f e r» 

lt.0.0  " 

56.(1  * 

733.0  ' 

1  130.0 

" 

B 

UK 

D 

L 

A s s i s t a n ce  1994-96  a f t er  t r a n s f e rs 

1994-96  M o re 

t r a n s f e rs 

C o m m i t m e n ts 

*/•  of  assistance 

P a y m e n ts 

%  of  assistance 

"  TransrcToTIW4:9«:Tin9»)7:W 

isu  ol  m e a s u r es  — 

I n d i c a t i ve  a l l o c a t i on  1997-99 

A s s i s t a n ce  1997-99  a f t er  t r a n s f er 

•  I'rivnimmcd b>  S\'l)<. 
(1)  I ' N J .W 

(2) I'MJ-"*. 

133.5 

160.0 

140.6 

1 0 5% 

5ll.it 

__ 

j 

180.0 

214.7 

54.1 

56.0 

53.1 

9 8% 

23.7 

4 4% 

2  7 
2 

65.(1 

67.7 

703.4 

733.0 

66?.') 

9 5% 

339.7 

4 8% 

40.1 
y 

«54.(1 

«94.1 

990.2 

1  130.0 

1.036.4 

1 0 4% 

6 o : .: 

6 1% 

139.3 

* 

1.318.0 

r 
1  763.2 

1.5X1.0 

1  763.2 

1  560.2 

9 9% 

«35.5 

5 3% 

208.0 

1" 

2 0 5 9 .0 

1 

' 

• 684.0  " 

524.(1 

684.0 

514.0 

9 X% 

245,1 

4 7% 

169.7 

II 

798.0 

9 6 77 

L 

7.0  " 

5.3 

7.0 

6.0 

1 1 3% 

4.3 

« 0% 
l.x 
1 

8.0 

9.8 

NL 

UK 

E L R9 

A 

F IN 

S 

E U rU 

300.0 

' 

2  142.0  * 

6 . 9 7 5„ 

1(11.0  Mi 

69.2  *>-> 

160.0  Ml 

224.1 

300.0 

204.2 

9 1% 

91.X 

4 1% 

XO  1 

< 

359.1) 

439.1 

2  017.4 

6.239.7 

101.0 

2  142.0 

6.975.2 

2 0 6 0 .7 

6.241,11 

65.5 

1 0 2% 

1  090.3 

5 4% 

155.1 
n 
2 5oo.o 

1 0 0% 

3.2X7,5 

5 3% 

X26.ll 
7; 

X.I 47.11 

2  655.1 

X.973.1 

6 5% 

33.0 

3 3% 

4 

160.0 

105.8 

6 6% 

38,1 

2 4% 

S 

55.8 

69.2 

52.4 

9 4% 

29.8 

5 3% 

1 44 

1 

119.1 

133.5 

3 3 0 .: 

J I 6 Jt 

2 . I 4 2 .H 

223.7 

7 1% 

100,9 

3 2% 
14.4 

119.1 

1 3 35 

1  4 ? : . ;. 

2.2o7.o 

At  the  end  of  the  first  phase  (1994-96),  100%  of  the  adjusted  financial  allocations  to  the  original 
Member  States  had  been  committed,  and  53% paid,  which  corresponded  to  a rate  of  commitment  of 
the  initial  assistance  of 89% and a rate of payment  of 47%.  For the new Member  States,  commitments 
represented  71% of  adjusted  assistance  and  payments  32%). For  Objective  2  as  a  whole,  1996  was 
certainly  a  year  of  catching  up  for  financial  implementation,  since  the  amounts  committed  in  1996 
represented  41%  of  commitments  for  the  three-year  period,  compared  with  31%  of  the  total 
committed  in  1994  and  27%  in  1995. This  applies  even  more  to  payments,  since  the  appropriations 
paid  in  1996  represented  45% of  all  appropriations  between  1994  and  1996, with  payments  in  1994 
accounting  for  29% and those  in  1995 for 26%. 

Table 1-11:  Objective 2 - Implementation  1994 to 1996 (ECU million) 

1994 

57,5 
24.3 
248.8 
0.0 
591.3 
300,0 
8.0 
95.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
731.8 
2.057,6 

Commitments 
1995 

1996 

1994-96 

1994 

1995 

1996 

1994-96 

Payments 

4.6 
6,0 
38.0 
659,2 
313,1 
0,0 
-0,5 
9.2 
54.2 
31.1 
105,8 
518.3 
1.738,9 

78,4 
22,8 
379.1 
377,2 
655,8 
214,0 
-1.5 
99.1 
11,4 
21.3 
0.0 
810.6 
2.668,3 

140,6 
53,1 
665,9 
1.036,4 
1.560,2 
514,0 
6,0 
204,2 
65,5 
52,4 
105,8 
2.060,7 
6.464,7 

17,6 
11,7 
.  124,4 
0,0 
278.2 
150,0 
4.0 
40.2 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
365.9 
991,9 

11.8 
8,4 
32.5 
44S,0 
145,1 
0.0 
0.0 
12.3 
21.4 
15.6 
38.1 
153.0 
885,9 

20.7 
3.7 
182.8 
159.3 
412.2 
95.1 
0.3 
39.3 
11.6 
14.2 
0.0 
571.5 
1.510,5 

50,0 
23,7 
339,7 
607,2 
835,5 
245,1 
4,3 
91,8 
33,0 
29,8 
38.1 
1.090,3 
3.388,4 

B 
DK 
D 
E 
F 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
FIN 
S 
UK 
TOTAL 

Fig. 1-4: 

Objective 2 - Share of each year in implementation  1994 to 1996 

Cormitmits 

l\nn_t_> 

'£-> tf 

ISSN 0254-1475 

COM(97) 526 final 

DOCUMENTS 

EN 

05  08  13 

Catalogue  number  :  CB-CO-97-547-EN-C 

ISBN  92-78-26044-4 

Office  for  Official  Publications  of the European  Communities 

L-2985  Luxembourg 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

_^ 

37 

Progress  with  payments  varied  from  one Member  State  to another. In  two .of  the original  Member 
States (Luxembourg, Spain), the rate of implementation  of adjusted  assistance was over 60%, it was 
over 50% in another two Member States (United  Kingdom, France) and over 40% in four  Member 
States (Germany, Italy, Denmark, the Netherlands). Only in Belgium was the implementation rate for 
payments as a proportion of adjusted  assistance below 40%. Of the new Member States, Finland has a 
very good rate of implementation of payments — over 50% in two years —- while rates of payment for 
Austria  and  Sweden  are  below  40%  (at  one third  and  one  quarter  respectively),  but  programming 
covers the period 1995-99. 

The  Commission  has  decided,  pursuant  to  Article  9  of  the  Framework  Regulation,  to  transfer,  by 
means of a formal Commission decision reducing assistance for  1994-96, appropriations not taken up 
by the end of the period  1994-96 to programmes for  1997-99 for the same regions, thus making for 
easier financial  management  and avoiding overlapping between  the two phases  of prograjriming  for 
Objective  2. The proportion  of  initial  assistance  transferred  varies  considerably  from  one Member 
State to another. For three of the original Member States (Denmark, Germany, the United Kingdom), 
it stands at between 5% and 7%. In three Member States (Spain, France, Belgium), transfers  account 
for less than 20%, with Spain and France at the average level for the nine countries concerned. For a 
further  three  Member  States  (Italy, Luxembourg,  Netherlands),  transfers  represent  a quarter  of  the 
initial  assistance. For the new Member States, only Finland  programmed  Objective  2 in two phases 
(1995-96 and  1997-99); it also transferred  an  appreciable fraction  of  the appropriations  to  1997-99 
(21%). Transfers  for the French and Italian programmes alone represented 45% of total Objective 2 
appropriations  transferred  (while the  share  of  these  countries  in  total  assistance  is  35%). With  the 
addition  of  the transfers  for  the  Spanish  and  United  Kingdom programmes, the total  for  these  four 
Member  States  represents  80% of transfers  for  the ten Member  States  (which  is comparable  to the 
share of the four Member States concerned in Objective 2 assistance as a whole). 

3.3.  Preparing for the period 1997-99 

In the context  of  Objective  2, a large part  of the year  was spent preparing for  the second  phase of 
programming in 1997-99. In accordance with Article 9 of the Framework Regulation, the Commission 
established  the list of regions eligible under Objective 2 for the period  1997-999 in the nine Member 
States  concerned10  on  26  July  1996,  after  receiving  a  favourable  opinion  from  the  Advisory 
Committee  on the Development  and Conversion  of Regions. The list is the same as the one for  the 
period  1994-96, with the exception of a few minor changes in Italy, the Netherlands and Spain, where 
the  extension  of  eligibility  to  certain  areas  of  the  Madrid  region  brought  in  areas  inhabited  by  a 
further  5 000 people. As this increase was offset  by a reduction in Zaragoza, however, the population 
eligible under Objective 2 as a percentage of total population has not changed, and it remains constant 
within  each  Member  State. The overall  percentage covered  is still  16.4% of total  population  of the 
Union. Total financing available between 1997 and 1999 is ECU 8 147 million (at 1996 prices), a real 
increase of  13.8% in relation to the period  1994-96, as decided by the Edinburgh European Council. 
On  19 July, the Commission  had established  the indicative allocation  of commitment  appropriations 
by Member State for  1997 to 1999.11 

9  Commission  Decision 96/472/EC of 26 July  1996, OJ No L  193, 3.8.1996. 
10 The  areas  eligible  under  Objective  2  in  the  three  new  Member  States  were  defined  in  1995  for  the  period 

1995-99. 

1 «  Commission  Decision 96/468/EC of  19 July  1996, OJ No L  192, 2.8.1996. 

38 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Table 1-12: 

Indicative  allocation  by Member  State of total  financing  1997-99 (ECU million -1996  prices) 

Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Spain 
France 

Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
United Kingdoi 

186 
65 
854 
1.318 
2.059 
TOTAL 

798 
8 
359 
2.500 

8.147 

B 

DK  D 

I 

L 

NL  UK 

On 30 April  1996 the Commission  sent the Member States guidelines for preparing new programmes 
for the second phase  1997-99. Job creation  was to be the paramount priority in the new programmes, 
and  was  to  be  achieved  by  improving  production  structures  and  raising  qualification  levels  in  the 
labour  force.  This  general  aim  should  be  supported  through  four  priorities:  competitiveness  and 
development  of  SMEs,  which  means  paying  special  attention  to  locally-generated  potential  and 
exploiting  local  potential  through  local  development  and  employment  initiatives;  research  and 
development  and innovation (see, box); environment and sustainable development,  targeted especially 
on  remedying  the  damage  caused  by  industry  and  on  exploiting  eco-products  and  environmental 
services;  and  finally,  equal  opportunities  for  men  and  women,  with  the  central  issue  of  reconciling 
working and family  life. 

Promotion  of technological  innovation: apriority  under Objective 2 for  1997-99 
One of the four  priorities  in the Commission's  guidelines for  the preparation  of programmes for  1997-99 is 
research and development  along  with innovation.  The guidelines  stress the importance  of R&D  in increasing 
competitiveness,  and they  encourage  the regions  to seek  greater  synergy  and effectiveness from  actions for 
research,  development  and innovation,  and to establish  regional  innovation  and technological  development 
strategies.  Specifically,  the Commission  urges  that programmes  should  aim at taking  advantage  of  certain 
factors: 
•  better  use should be made  of those facilities  which already  exist in the area for  industrial  research:  such 
facilities  are usually  already  in place  in Objective  2  areas,  and they provide  a  basis for  improving  co 
operation  between firms and research institutes  in areas such as production  processes,  the introduction of 
advanced  technologies and new product  development; 

•  priority  should  be given  to the practical  application  of research  results and the transfer  of  technological 

• 

• 

• 

innovations  to local business  and  industry; 
innovation  should  be  encouraged,  not  only  in  terms  of  technology  but  also,  since  it  underpins  the 
emergence  of new sectors of economic activity,  in terms of human and organisational factors,  especially in 
relation  to the capacity of firms to absorb  technology and their access to information  regarding  customer 
needs for  new products  and  services; 
the emphasis  in small firms should be on practical  ICT applications  services within firms, and measures to 
raise  awareness,  disseminate  best practices  and improve  information  services,  and set  up  co-operation 
networks  between firms for  the transmission of data; 
training  of workers should  concentrate on specific measures to encourage adjustment and raise  awareness 
of the new technological  environment  with special  reference to the increasing  links between  service  sector 
activities and industrial  production. 

Initial  information  available  on the programmes  prepared  by the Member  States  in the last  quarter  of 1996 
indicates that  the RTD effort has been substantially  increased,  rising to over 18% of Community financing for 
the period  1997-99. 

The  Commission  guidelines  also  highlight  a  number  of  ways  in  which  the  content  and  quality  of 
conversion  plans  and  programming  documents  for  1997-99  might  be  improved.  They  involve 
improved  application  of  the principles  of  partnership  and  additionality,  and  the use  of  appropriately 
quantified impact indicators, especially  as regards job creation. 

Most  of  the  Member  States'  conversion  plans  were  presented  to  the  Commission  in  August  and 
September  1996; after prior appraisal, the preparation of SPDs began in October and lasted until early 
1997. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

39 

4.  Objectives 3 and 4 

4.1.  Implementation  of Objectives 3 and 4 in 1996 

1995  was  not  a full  year  of  implementation  for  Objective  3 because  the  CSFs  and  SPDs  of  the  three 
new  Member  States  were  adopted  in  the  course  of  the  year;  in  1996,  however,  all  the  programmes 
were  established  and  implemented.  Although  there  was  still  some  concern  about  the  low  level  of 
commitments  in  certain  Member  States,  the  implementation  of  Objective  3  was  encouraging.12  In 
most  of  the  Member  States,  the  initial  stage  of  implementation  enabled  the  programmes  to  gather 
momentum  and  structures  and  aims  were  established.  The  advertising  effort  was  a  significant  factor 
here.  Moreover,  all  the programmes  were  successful,  to  a varying  extent,  in  achieving  concentration 
of  Objective  3  measures  on  the  most  disadvantaged  groups.  In  all  the  Member  States,  the  notion  of 
"integration  pathways"  was  reflected  in  practical  measures.  The  results  clearly  show  that  integrated 
projects  providing a wide range of aid,  such as back-up, counselling  and  periods  of  work  experience, 
attract much more attention  than individual training measures. 

Measures under  Objective  4 really  got under  way in  late  1995 and  early  1996, with  a few  exceptions 
(Spain, Ireland, Luxembourg  and Finland, where the level of implementation  was fairly  high in  1995). 
The  CSF  for  Belgium  and  the  SPDs  for  Denmark,  Germany,  France,  and  Luxembourg,  which  had 
been  approved  for  1994-96,  were  extended  until  1999.  The  programming  documents  of  the  other 
Member  States  (Spain,  Italy, the Netherlands)  had been  approved  in  1994 for  the entire period  1994-
99.  The  SPDs  for  Austria  and  Finland,  approved  in  July  1995,  and  that  for  Sweden,  approved  in 
February  1996, also cover the period to  1999. 

A progress report on the implementation  of Objective 4 and Adapt13 was sent at the end of  1996 to the 
Council,  the  European  Parliament,  the  Economic  and  Social  Committee  and  the  Committee  of  the 
Regions.  According  to  that  report,  the  main  effects  of  implementing  Objective  4  were:  to  reinforce 
active labour market policies to reach workers in employment; the establishment  and involvement of a 
wide  partnership  in  the  design,  implementation  and  monitoring  of  actions;  the  organisation  and 
strengthening  of  continuing  training  structures  in  a  number  of  countries.  It  proposed  addressing 
certain  weaknesses  in  implementation.  This  means  in  particular  reinforcing  anticipation  and  linkage 
with  training  plans,  the  need  to  focus  on  SMEs  and  giving  priority  to  the  workers  most  at  risk  of 
unemployment  as a result of industrial change. 

The promotion of technological innovation in the areas eligible under Objectives 3 and 4: 
Information  technologies  are an important factor  in measures  under Objective  3,  which encourages  the 
emergence of job potential in the context of the information society.  The relevant measures concern training 
to provide a wide range of basic IT skills,  often the first stage in the process of reintegration into the world of 
work, especially for  people previously  employed  in traditional  sectors or for  young people.  Objective  3 
measures also contribute to the development of more advanced skills to make full use of new technologies. 

Example of project: the  use of communications  technologies  in  Germany  (Objective  3).  In  Kiel  an 
association  is helping  women who wish to re-enter the labour market after dedicating  several years to 
their families  by  providing them  with  a  year's  training in  using  information  and  communications 
techniques  and project creation. Working  within  social institutions,  the women  draw up the forma for 
information brochures,  develop Internet sites and produce and distribute calendars of events intended for 
children. Their abilities  are  assessed  at  the beginning  of  the  course and this provides the  basis for 
individual training plans.  The  training is  intended both  to  utilise information  and  communications 
technologies  and to develop creativity  and a  sense of  initiative  among those taking  part.  The ESF is 
contributing ECU 63 500 towards the total cost of the measure amounting to ECU 325 000. 

The ESF Regulation  specifies  that Objective 4  "should concentrate  on operations  in the areas of training 
related to the introduction,  use and development of new or improved production methods,  in particular new 
organisational techniques and new technologies ". Thus a large part of the measures implemented under this 

12 For more details, see Chapter V. Country-by-country survey. 
13 SEC(96) 2150. See also Chapter V. Country-by-country survey. 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

CHAPTER  11  BUDGET  IMPLEMENTATION,  CHECKS AND  FINANCIAL 
MANAGEMENT,  COORDINATION  OF THE VARIOUS  FINANCIAL 
INSTRUMENTS,  COMPLEMENTARITY  WITH THE OTHER  COMMUNITY 
POLICIES 

A. BUDGETARY  IMPLEMENTATION  OF THE STRUCTURAL  FUNDS 

1. Budget  implementation  in  1996 

1.1. General  implementation  in  1996 
1.2.  Implementation  of each  Fund in  1996 in the context  of  1994-99 

2. Implementation  of programming  for  1994-99 

2.1.  Implementation  1994-96 
2.2.  Implementation  of each  Fund  in  1994-96  in the context  of  1994-99 

B. CHECKS  AND  FINANCIAL  MANAGEMENT 

1. Checks 

1.1. Checks  carried  out by the Commission's Structural  Funds departments 
1.2. Inspections carried  out by Financial  Control 
1.3. Enquiries  carried  out by the anti-fraud  unit 
1.4. Notification  of  irregularities by the Member  States 

2. Improving  financial  management 

C. COORDINATION  OF THE VARIOUS  FINANCIAL  INSTRUMENTS 

1. Cohesion  Fund 
2. The  EIB 
3. ECSC 
4.  European  Investment  Fund 
5. The  financial  mechanism  of the European  Economic Area 

D. COMPLEMENTARITY  WITH THE OTHER COMMUNITY  POLICIES 

1. The  Structural  Funds and employment 
2. The  Structural  Funds and equal opportunities 
3. The  Structural  Funds and the environment 

,  4. The  Structural  Funds, the common  agricultural  policy and rural  development 

5. The  Structural  Funds and the common  fisheries  policy 
6. The  Structural  Funds and  SMEs 
7. The  Structural  Funds and tourism 
S. The  Structural  Funds and  energy 
9. The  Structural  Funds and trans-European  Networks 
10. The  Structural  Funds and the transparency  of public contracts 
11. The  Structural  Funds and  competition  policy 
12. The  Structural  Funds, education  and training 
13. The  Structural  Funds and  culture 
14. The  Structural  Funds and  disability 

INTER-INSTITUTIONAL  DIALOGUE,  REGIONAL 

CHAPTER  III 
PARTNERSHIP  DIALOGUE WITH THE ECONOMIC AND  SOCIAL 
PARTNERS,  INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION 

A. INTER-INSTITUTIONAL  DIALOGUE 
1. Dialogue  with  the  European  Parliament 
2. Dialogue  with  the  Economic  and Social Committee 
3.  Relations  with  the Committee  of the Regions 
4.  Informal  meetings  of the ministers responsible  for  regional  policy  and spatial  planning 
5. Committee  opinions 

85 

87 
87 
87 
94 
101 
101 
102 

107 
107 
107 
109 
109 
109 
110 

110 
110 
111 
112 
112 
113 

113 
113 
114 
115 
116 
117 
118 
120 
120 
121 
123 
124 
125 
125 
126 bis 

127 

129 
129 
130 
131 
132 
133 

40 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Objective are directly  related to technological development.  They aim at: 
• 

improving  the technical  skills  of employees  through  training  in new technologies,  especially  information 
and  communication 
technologies  (ICT).  This  may  involve,  for  example,  training  relevant  to  the 
introduction  of  "green "  technologies,  design  software  and computer-assisted  design,  data  transmission, 
the  development  of  automated  techniques,  the application  of  ICT,  total  quality  management  and the 
introduction  of EDI  (Electronic Data Interchanged between producers,  suppliers and customers  on the one 
hand, and contractors and subcontractors  on the other; 
the use of Hew technologies as a basis for  training measures  in the context of improving training  systems. 
This involves  the application  of ICT  to training  methods and the design  of new  teaching  tools  (especially 
multimedia  training  techniques),  and  the  development  of  co-operation  networks  between  training 
institutes  (public  and private  training  establishments,  scientific  and  research  institutes,  chambers  of 
commerce,  social partners,  etc.). 

• 

Example  of project:  hypermedia  training in Finland (Objective 4).  The HYPMED project  is aimed at the 
staff of small  firms in the region ofJyvàskylâ  and is being carried out jointly  by the Jyvàskyla  Technology 
Centre Ltd, firms and the research institute on information technologies  of the University of Jyvàskyla.  It is 
intended  to improve know-how among the staff of small firms in the sectors which are currently  of greatest 
importance  to the region (paper, energy, the environment, information and communications  technology) to 
encourage  them to use the hypermedia and devise their own applications, for  example, in the areas of staff 
training  and customers, product  documentation  and marketing.  Training  in running a multimedia  project 
is an integral part  of the project  and may be carried out alongside preparation  for  a university  diploma. 
Firms  which  took part  in the first phase  of training  and which  apply  this  technology  will  take part  in a 
number of national  and Community research projects  on multimedia and hypermedia  technologies. 

42.  1996 in the context of programming  for  1994/95-96/99 

Table1-13:  Objectives 3 and 4 - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994/95-96/99  (ECU  million) 

JUL 

Objective 3 
Financing 
Commi tments 

% of financing 

Payments 

%nffin-nrin-

Nftgfm_Miirai*** 

Objective 4 
Financing 
Commitments 

% of  financing 

Payments 

% of 

fin-nrin-

401.9 ' 
192.6 
48% 
156.4 

268.1  ' 
127.0 
47% 
115 2 
m4^m 

1.68Z1  ' 
820.4 
49% 
521.8 
3 1* 

12 

1.480.3 ' 
666,5 
45% 
516.7 
35% 
11 

2.562.4 " 
1.200.0 
47% 
906.6 
35% 

1.300.1  ' 
350.3 
27% 
202,7 
16% 
16 

70,3  " 
16.4 
23% 
8.2 
12% 

38.9* 
13.0 
33% 
10,7 
27% 

265.3  ' 
56.2 
21% 
23.5 
9% 

368.8 " 
167.8 
46% 
76.0 
21% 

653,4 ' 
187,1 
29% 
97.3 
15% 

398.8 " 
98.9 
25% 
49,4 
12% 

20.7' 
9.9 
48% 
8.9 
43% 

2 3* 
0.9 
38% 
0.6 
25% 

N o n f m r a m r "» 
' PniErammcil by SPD. •• Pn>sr_nmed by CSF; ••• OP/SPD 

__L_ 

935.3 ' 
434.5 
46% 
.377,9 
40% 

____. 

J___ 

Tntal 

334,0" 
129,8 
39% 
103.8 
31% 

258,4' 
953 
37% 
51.3 
20% 

347.0" 
73.0 
21% 
36.5 
11% 

3.177.5 " 
2.051.8 
65% 
1.400,3 
44% 

12,767.9 
6.151.0 
48% 
4398.0 
34% 

156.2 ' 
22.2 
14% 
11.1 
7% 

61.0' 
11.7 
19% 
9,4 
15% 

84.6' 
23.6 
28% 
12.9 
15% 

173.0" 
37.5 
22% 
18.8 
11% 

2_573 
6353 
28% 
317.9 
14% 
_1_ 

Objective  3  programmes  are  progressing  satisfactorily  on  the  whole,  and  financial  implementation 
was better in  1996 than  in  the two preceding  years. In general,  this  progressive  acceleration  reflects 
the  trends  initially  provided  for  in  the  multiannual  programme  budgets.  However,  the  commitments 
and payments  made by  the Commission  are only  an imperfect  reflection  of  actual  achievements  and 
payments  at  the  level  of  the  Member  States.  ESF  programmes  are  closed  each  year,  and  actual 
achievements  for  a  given  year  are  known  only  at  the  end  of  June  of  the  following  year,  when  the 
Member  States  send  the  Commission  the  annual  reports  on  implementation.  The  Commission's 
figures  for  financial  implementation  do,  however,  reflect  a  trend  towards  greater  implementation. 
Within this general  tendency, -implementation  of the programmes of the new Member States (Austria-
Finland  and  Sweden),  which  were  adopted  in  1995,  lag  somewhat  behind  the  general  trend.  The 
decline  in  payments  for  Sweden  and  Finland  is  more  apparent  than  real,  since  the  level  of 
implementation  actually  rose  in  1996. The table does not take account  of  the  share of  appropriations 
unused in the initial year of  1995, which was carried over to  1996, since these appropriations already 
paid were used for payments for measures carried out in 1996. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

41 

Table 1-14:  Objective 3 - Implementation  from  1994 to 1996 (ECU  million) 

______ 
64.4 
44,0 
259,6 
219,6 
381,6 
200,5 
3,2 
138,4 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
478.0 
1.789.2 

Commitments 
1996 
J___L 
33,4 
41,0 
48,2 
207,0 
396,8 
0,0 
3,3 
143,8 
64,1 
60,3 
73,0 
___LÛ 
_______ 

94,8 
42,0 
512,6 
239,9 
421,6 
149,9 
3,4 
152.2 
65,7 
35,0 
0,0 
1,076,? 
2,793,? 

_L22__& 
192,6 
127,0 
820,4 
6663 
1.200,0 
3503 
9,9 
4343 
129,8 
95_3 
73,0 
___2_L_ 
-.1.1.0 

-122-L 
32.2 
35.2 
129.8 
74.9 
190.8 
100.2 
1.6 
110.8 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
____! 
JL__2__ 

Payments 

J22_-

42,3 
39,0 
104,5 
169,7 
312,9 
0,0 
4,0 
142,6 
32,0 
30,2 
36,5 
436.2 
_L_____ 

J2___ 
81,9 
41,0 
287,5 
272.1 
402,9 
102,4 
3,4 
124,6 
71,8 
21,1 
0,0 
581.7 
1.990.3 

______£ 
156,4 
115,2 
521,8 
516,7 
906,6 
202,7 
9,0 
377,9 
103,8 
513 
363 
1-400-3 
________ 

B 
DK 
D 
E 
F 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
FIN 
S 
______ 
TOTAL 

Fig. I~5: 

Objective 3 • Share  of each year  in implementation  1994 to 1996 

0_iii_iiH—» 

Rçjjnrts 

M U *— 

KIK, 

•AW 

_ 
—fl 

i 1 .^ 
i 1 s 
=1 
Ï 

II 

1 . H . A H N S IX 

n  -»* 

JO* 

- R-

IX 

X* 

D 

B 

E 

F 

1 

. 

• HW 

• MR 

0|9» 

1 

1 .-_. 

The  level  of  implementation  of  Objective  4  was  fairly  low  in  1994  and  1995.  This  was  mainly 
because Objective 4  is a new Objective, because the problems  of industrial  change  are complex,  and 
because  of the need  to  set up a wider partnership. All this made it necessary  in  most  of the  Member 
States to raise awareness and provide information,  and to support the setting up of projects.  However, 
the  rate  of  implementation  did  rise  throughout  1996.  Measures  are  concentrated  mainly  on  further 
training  for  workers,  so as to  improve  their  technological  skills  and  their  adaptation  to new  ways  of 
organising work. 

Table 1-15:  Objective 4 - Implementation  1994 to 1996 (ECU  million) 

B 
DK 
D 
E 
F 
I 
L 
NL 
A  ' 
FIN 
S 
TOTAL 

1994 

4,6 
1.0 
29,6 
55,6 
95,4 
60,6 
0,3 
22,2 
0,0 
0,0 
Q_Q 

_______ 

Commitments 
1995 

1994-96 
16,4 
13,0 
56,2 
167,8 
187,1 
98,9 
0,9 
22,2 
11,7 
23,6 
37.5 
6353 

Payments 

1994 

2,3 
0,5 
14,8 
27,9 
47,7 
30,3 
0,1 
11,1 
0,0 
0,0 

CLQ 
1M.7 

______ 
0,0 
2,5 
0,0 
38,1 
0,0 
0,0 
0,2 
0,0 
5,9 
7,4 
-JLQ. 
-__J 

1996 

5,9 
7,7 
8,7 
10,0 
49,6 
19,1 
0.3 
0,0 
3,5 
5,5 
L8__ 
1291 

1994-96 
8,2 
10,7 
233 
76,0 
973 
49*4 
0,6 
11,1 
9,4 
12,9 
-8__ 
317.9 

-_____. 
11,8 
7,0 
26,6 
49,5 
91,7 
38,3 
0,4 
0,0 
0,0 
8,8 
37.5 
271.5 

0,0 
5,0 
0,0 
62,7 
0,0 
0,0 
0,3 
0,0 
11,7 
14,8 
___Q 
_2___ 

42 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Fig. 1-6:  Objective 4 -  Share of each year in implementation  1994 

to 

1996 

Cuiiiiilii—its 

I_vm__ 

KIM. 

WW,' 

WW-

nr», 

«K. 

sw. 

«NI. ill JJilhlfliil  p»i 

BJU5 

NS 

SS 

D

D

N

C

R

X

A

N

A

L

L

E

T

B

L

E

F

F

F

1

1

I

-

.

5.  Obiective  5(a) 

5.1.  Objective 5(a)  agriculture 

Objective  5(a) is a horizontal  Objective,  relating to farming  throughout  the Union  and  supporting  the 
modernisation  of  agricultural  structures.  This  ties  it  closely  to  the  common  agricultural  policy. 
Objective  5(a)  measures  are  taken  pursuant  to  specific  regulations,  the  most  important  being 
Regulation  (EEC)  No  2328/91  for  production  structures,  Regulations  (EEC)  No  866/90  and  No 
867/90  for  marketing  and  processing  of  products,  and  Regulation  (EEC)  No  1360/78  for  aid  to 
producer groups. 

Measures financed under Objective  5(a)  agriculture:14 
Objective 5(a) may be summarised as follows: 
Competitiveness and employment:  These two basic objectives  are pursued 
through:  aid  for  training,15  setting-up  aid  to  young  farmers,16  aid  for 
investment in agricultural holdings,17 back-up measures to assist agricultural 
holdings  (management  services,  self-help,  accounting),18  aid  to  producer 
groups,19  investment  aid  for  processing  and  marketing  of  agricultural  and 
forestry products.20 
Territorial  balance and employment:  This  objective  is  to  be  achieved  in 
particular through specific measures to assist mountain and hill farming and 
farming  in certain  less-favoured  areas,21, which are intended  to compensate 
for the natural handicaps faced by farming in those areas. 
Following  amendments  to  several  programming  documents  coming  under 
Regulations (EEC) No 866/90 and No 867/90, and updating of the forecasts 
for expenditure under Regulation  (EC) No 2328/91, the indicative  financial 
programming  for  Objective  5(a)  measures  outside  Objective  1  and  6 
regions22 for 1994-99, in force on  31  December 1996, is as follows: 

____ 

14 For more details, see Annual Reports for 1994 and 1995. 
15 Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91, Article 28. 
16 Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91, Articles  10  and 11. 
17 Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91, Articles 5 to 9. 
18 Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91, Articles 13 to 16. 
19 Regulation (EEC) No 1360/78. 
20 Regulations (EEC) No 866/90 and 867/90. 
21 Regulation (EEC) No 2328/91, Articles 17 to 20. 
22  In  Objective  1 and  6 regions,  measures  under  Objective  5(a)  are programmed  within  CSFs/SPDs. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

43 

Table  1-16:  Objective  5(a)  agriculture 
99  (ECU  million) 

-  Forecasts  of  implementation 
' 

1994-

Indicative total:  5.195,9 Production 

Processing and marketing 

4.190,3 
_______ 

81% 
19% 

through 

innovative 

in  particular 

innovation  under  Objective  5(a)  agriculture: 

(EEC)  No  866/90  and  No  867/90  on  improving 

Promotion  of  technological 
Measures  under  Regulations 
conditions  for  agricultural  and  forestry  products  contribute 
which, 
markets.  A  clear  indication  of  the  importance  of  these  activities 
priority  given  to  such  investment  among  the  selection  criteria  governing 
not  the  main  purpose  of  the  measures 
role  to  play  in  technology 
research  and  demonstration  projects.  They  may,  organise  and  facilitate 
innovation  with  a  view 
agricultural  products.  In practice, 

the  processing  and  marketing 
techniques, 
investment,  help  to  develop  new  products  and  to  open  up  new 
is  the 
it  is 
they  have  a  major 
scale  of 
technological 
of 

transfer,  and  in  the  practical  application  on  an  industrial  or  commercial 

the  competitiveness 
the  measure  offers  the following 

the  development  of  new  technologies, 

in  the  framework  of  the  Regulations 

to  the  application  of  new  processing 

the  aid  arrangements.  Although 

the  dissemination  of 

and  marketing 

of  production, 

opportunities: 

to  improving 

to  encourage 

processing 

• 

the  main  aspect  of  the  development  of  new  products 
only  in  response  to  evolving  demand  but  also  to  contribute 

is  the  creation  of  new  types  of  packaging, 
to  improving  product  quality; 

not 

•  new  markets  are  opened  up  by  promoting  products  for  non-food  use,  such  as  new  packaging 
materials  and  products  for  the  strengthening  and  treatment  of  plants  (organic  plant  protection 
methods). 

Implementation  of  Objective  5(a)  agriculture 

in  1996 

Table 1-17:  Objective 5(a) agriculture  - physical  implementation  1995 

Member State 

Setting-up aid for young fanners 
(Art.  10) 
Number of henefitjiaries 

71 

______  ______ 
557 
514 
3.443 

402 
1.085 
4.623 
156 
884 
222 

n.a. 
1.059 
__ 
_____ 
n.a 
n.a. 
0 
3-511 

998 
7.631 

1.489 
72 
n.a. 

14.704 

n.a. 
J__ 
14.809 

Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Netherlands 
Portugal* 
United Kingdom 
Total EV12 
Austria 
Finland 
Sweden 
Total EUlf 
n.a.: not applicable 
*  1994 figures 

Investment aid for 
young farmers (Art. 11) 
. Number of beneficiaries 
Total 
Other 

Obi.l 

39 

46 
371 
2.458 
29 
32 
25 

471 
394 
548 

316 
2.681 

540 
41 
24 

____ 
n.a. 
n.a. 
JUL 
3.025 

_____ 

5.0391 

510 
394 
594 
371 
2.774 
2.710 
32 
565 
41 
26 

_Z 
8.064 
n.a. 
n.a. 
J__ 
8.064 

Investment aid 
(Art. 7) 
Number of beneficiaries 
Total 
Other 

Obi.l 

123 

2.837 
9.146 

1.344 
1.384 
2.793 

1.877 
2.726 
10.241 
67 
133 
447 

1.467 
1.384 
4.670 
2.726 
13.078 
9.213 
133 
4.299 
71 
9 
226 
2.353 
2.353 
______ 
_____ 
1,77? 
_____  ______  ______ 
n.a. 
n.a. 
0 
n.a. 
___ 
22.339 

n.a. 
n.a. 
JUL 
_____ 

3.852 
71 
217 

__-___-

Compensatory 
allowances (Art. 19) 
Number of holdings 

6.636 
n.a. 
228.919 
180.825 
185.373 
131.997 
92.636 
49.969 
2.402 
4.850 
82.139 
______ 
'-"22.927 
92000 
23181 
7 * 7^ 
1..1..M1 

Total 

628 
514 
3.845 
1.085 
5.621 
7.787 
884 
1.711 
72 
n.a. 
1.059 
__. 
23.206 
n.a. 
n.a. 
JLH 
23T320 

In  1996, the Commission  proposed  that the Council  should consolidate Regulations  (EEC) No  866/90 
and No  867/90, along with  Regulation  (EEC) No  1360/78 on aid to producer groups,23 to  incorporate 
a  number  of  amendments  to  these  Regulations.  The  purpose  of  consolidation  is  to  insert  successive 
amendments  to  the  original  texts  and  to  simplify  and  clarify  certain  aspects.  The  Council  and  the 
European  Parliament  had  not  completed  their  examination  of  this  proposal  by  the  end  of  1996.  The 
implementation  for  1996 is shown  below. 

23  COM(96)  58  final,  OJ  No  C  115,  19.4.1996.  The  consolidated  regulations  were  adopted  by  the  Council  on  20 

May  1997  (Regulations  (EC)  Nos  950/97,  951/97  and  952/97  - OJ  No  L  142,  2.6.1997). 

44 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Table  1-18:  Objective  5(a)  agriculture  -financial 

implementation  1996  (commitments 

- ECU  million) 

Member State 

Indirect measures 
"production 
structures" 

Processing and 
marketing (Reg. 
866/90) 

Total 

Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Spain 
France 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Austria 
Netherlands 
Finland 
Sweden 
United  Kingdom 

TOTAL! 

21,8 
17,0 
143,3 
0,0 
174,8 
0,0 
4,3 
44,8 
2,1 
53,3 
15,5 
_____ 
__2__l 

5,0 
5,1 
48,5 
25,0 
45,9 
131,7 
0,0 
31,2 
7,0 
0,0 
11,0 
00 
-10.4 

26,8 
22,1 
191,8 
25,0 
220,7 
131,7 
4,3 
75,9 
9,1 
53,3 
26,5 
-J___ 
802.4 

In  general,  the  implementation  of  measures  to  improve  the  conditions  for  the  processing  and 
marketing  of  agricultural  and  forestry  products  as  provided  for  in  Regulations  (EEC)  No  866/90  and 
No  867/90  continued  in  the  framework  of  prograirtining  for  1994-99.  The  work  of  the  Monitoring 
Committees  showed  that,  after  some  delay  getting  started,  the rate  of  implementation  of  programmes 
gathered  pace  in  most  of  the  Member  States.  Monitoring  and  assessment  procedures  continued  to 
improve  in  the  framework  of  partnership.  More  specifically,  the  implementation  of  measures  in  the 
Italian  CSF  led  to  the  approval  of  13 OPs  to  improve  the  conditions  for  processing  and  marketing 
agricultural  products  and  12 OPs  for  forestry  products.  Objective  5(a)  measures  got  under  way  in 
Sweden  when  the SPD  was  adopted in  1996.  The  SPD  for the United  Kingdom  was  amended  in  1996 
to  take  account  of  the  decision  to  limit  application  of  the  measure  to  Wales  and  Scotland  from  31 
March  1996.  There  was  also  a  Council  decision  defining  new  less-favoured  areas  in  Ireland.  This 
extension  covers  about  105 000  hectares  and  increases  the  less-favoured  areas  in  Ireland  to  73%  of 
total usable  agricultural  area. 

On  4  September  1996,  the  Commission  adopted  a  report  on  young  farmers  and  the  problem  of 
succession  in European  agriculture for presentation  to the Council,  to Parliament  and  to the  Economic 
and  Social  Committee  and the  Committee  of  the Regions.  This  report, the Commission's  contribution 
to  the  debate  on  the  establishment  of  young  farmers,  considers  the  economic,  social,  legal  and  fiscal 
difficulties  encountered  by  new  farmers.  It goes  on  to  examine  the  present  Community  measures  for 
promoting  their  installation  and  assisting  young  people  in  rural  environments,  describing  how  these 
are applied  and with  what results  in the Member  States. Proposals  and recommendations  are made  for 
action  at both  Community  and national  level  to  make  help  for young  farmers  in  the  Community  more 
consistent  and  effective. 

Several  Member  States  have  sent  the  Commission  their  ideas  on  strengthening  Community  policy  in 
favour  of  mountain  and  hill-farming  areas.  The  Commission  is  continuing  the  dialogue  with  the 
Member States  on practical needs  in the different  mountain  regions. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

45 

1996 in the context  of programming for  1994-99 

Table 1-19:  Objective 5(a) agriculture  - financial implementation  of programmes  (ECU  million) 

Assistance 
Commitments 

% of assistance 

Payments 

___ 
170.4  ' 
79,8 
47% 
59,1 
35% 

X 
626.1  ' 
249,2 
40% 
99.8 
16% 

__L_ 
118,0' 
34.3 
29% 
18.6 
16% 

38.4" 
164 
43% 
10.6 
28% 

392,8' 
137,4 
35% 
107.9 
27% 

_____ 
337,3 
114.7 
34% 
57.3 
17% 

92.2' 
40.2 
44% 
34.7 
38% 

No of measures*** 
* Programmed by SPD  (Reg.  No 866/90 and  No X67/90) and forecasts of implementation (Reg. No 2328/91 ) 
* * Programmed  by CSF  (Reg.  No 866/9(1 and No 867/90) and forecast, of implementation (Reg.  No 2328/91 ) 
•"  OP/SPD/Forecasts d'exécution 

26 

-UK. 
185,7  ' 
100.4 
54% 
75.7 
41% 

Total 
5.195.8 
2.188.9 
42% 
1.4253 
____ 
61 

The first two years of the period  1994-99 were marked by delays in the approval and implementation 
of programmes. In  1996, lost time  was made up in most of  the Member States. In terms of  financial 
commitments, this is reflected  in the rate of implementation of the amount entered in the programmes, 
which rose to 84% in  1996 compared with 66% in  1995. For the whole range of programmes in force, 
budget  commitments  in  1996  represented  37% of  commitments  made  between  1994  and  1996.  The 
problems with implementation  in  1996 were concentrated in certain countries, as most of the Member 
States  had achieved  a normal  rate of  annual  implementation.  There are a number of  reasons  for the 
problems, and they  vary from one Member State to another. They  include changes  in  the method  of 
granting investment  aid, technical  problems arising at the beginning of  the period of  implementation 
in  one  of  the  three  new  Member  States  and  the  lack  of  interest  in  the  measures  proposed  among 
potential  beneficiaries,  owing  to  the  difficult  economic  environment.  The  under-utilisation  of 
appropriations  explains  why  two  Member  States  in  1996,  Spain  and  Luxembourg,  transferred 
appropriations  within  Objective  5(a)  to  measures  relating  to  the  processing  and  marketing  of 
agricultural products. 

' 

For the first  three years of  programming, the rate of financial  implementation  was fairly  satisfactory 
in  terms  of  commitments,  as  42%  of  total  assistance  entered  in  the  programmes  was  committed 
between  1994  and  1996.  However,  the  level  of  payments  is  still  quite  low:  at  the  end  of  1996, 
payments represented 27%  of the  assistance provided for in  1994-99. 

Table 1-20:  Objective 5(a) agriculture - implementation 1994 to 1996 (ECU million) 

B 
DK 
D 
E 
F 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
FIN 
S 
____ 
TOTAL 

_l____ 

22,8 
21,9 
157,6 
56,3 
265,8 
117,5 
6,7 
20,4 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
62.4 
731.4 

Commitments 
1995 

30,2 
16,7 
165.1 
21,1 
252,1 
0,0 
5,5 
4,9 
61,5 
61,4 
13,7 
_____ 
655.1 

______  ______ 
26,8 
79,8 
22,1 
60,8 
191,8 
514,6 
25,0 
102,4 
220,7 
738,6 
131,7 
249,2 
4,3 
16,5 
34-3 
9,1 
137,4 
75,9 
114,7 
53,3 
40,2 
26,5 
______ 
_____ 
______  _______ 

Payments 

1994 

__2S__ 

______ 

______ 

3,8 
2,7 
48,9 
28,2 
0,0 
58,7 
3,4 
10,2 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
___l 
175J 

12,8 
16,5 
160,9 
27,7 
242,1 
0,0 
2,0 
2,0 
30,8 
30,7 
6,9 
_____ 
554.6 

42,6 
22,1 
177,3 
28,7 
206,9 
41,1 
5.2 
6,5 
77,1 
26,6 
27,9 
34.0 
696.0 

59,1 
41,3 
387,2 
84,6 
449,0 
99,8 
10,6 
18,6 
107,9 
573 
34,7 
75,7 
_______ 

46 

8th Annual Report on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

Fig. 1-7: 

Objective 5(a) agriculture - Share of each year in implementation 1994 to 1996 

0_rn_n__> 

i_*TTEr_> 

B t XD 

E 

F 

I

.

L M A F NS 

UK  EJUS 

5.2.  Objective  5(a)  fisheries 

Implementation  of  Objective 5(a) fisheries  in  1996 

The  purpose  of  FIFG  structural  assistance  in  the  fisheries  and  aquaculture  sector  is  to  achieve  a 
sustainable  balance  between  resources  and  exploitation  by  adjusting  fishing  efforts,  and  to  support 
and  strengthen  the  entire  European  fisheries  sector.  For  the  adjustment  of  fishing  effort,  the  FIFG 
contributed  in  1996  to  financing  the  reduction  of  the  European  fleet  in  accordance  with  the  Multi-
annual  Guidance  Programmes  for  1993-96, through  the permanent  withdrawal  of  vessels  (scrapping, 
exportation  or  the  creation  of  joint  enterprises).  Efforts  to  strengthen  the  European  fisheries  and 
aquaculture  industry  also  continued,  especially  in  the  areas  of  modernisation  of  the  fleet,  processing 
and  marketing  of  products,  aquaculture  and  port  facilities.  The  main  developments  in  1996  were  as 
follows.24 

Suspension  of  FIFG  aid  to  the  fishing  fleet:  After  the  breakdown  of  negotiations  on  the 4th  Multi-
annual  Guidance Programme for  1997-2002,25 the Commission  concluded  on 23 December  1996 that 
from  1 January  1997 arrangements  for  FTFG contributions  to the fleet  (aid  towards  adjusting  fishing 
effort  and  for  the  renewal  or  modernisation  of  the  fleet)  should  be  suspended.  Such  aid  represents 
about 50% of FIFG appropriations  altogether. The Council  set a deadline  of  30 April  1997.£or taking 
a decision. 

Specific  measures  for  conversion  of  the  Italian  fleet  using  drifting  gillnets  ("Spadare").26  Under 
the conversion  plan  drawn  up for  this  segment  of the fleet  by the Italian  authorities, the  Commission 
proposed  to  the  Council  the  adoption  of  a  specific  measure  to  enable  aid  to  be  granted  to  the 
fishermen  and  shipowners  involved.27  The  tide-over  allowance  for  fishermen  (granted  on  condition 
they undertake  to switch  to another type of fishing  or to a different  job  outside the  industry)  may  not 
exceed  ECU 918.23  a  month  per  person  (with  a  maximum  duration  of  six  months).  It  may  be 
combined  with  a  severance  grant  of  up  to  ECU 50 000  for  those  giving  up  economic  activity 
altogether,  or  up  to  ECU 20 000  for  those  switching  to  another  job  inside  or  outside  the  fishing 
industry.  For  shipowners,  aid  between  ECU 20 000  and  ECU  156 000  is  offered  for  definitive 
withdrawal  from  fishing,  or between  ECU  10 000 and ECU  146 000  for  conversion  to  other  types  of 
fishing, depending on the engine power and the year of departure or conversion. 

24 For more details, see Chapter V. Country-by-country survey. 
25 This programme defines fishing efforts  for each country and each segment of the fleet. The Council did not, in 
the course of  1996 (meetings in October, November and December), reach an agreement on the reduction of 
effort  proposed by the Commission (COM(96) 203 final  of 30 May  1996 and COM(96) 237 final  of 29 May 
1996). 

26 These are fishing  vessels flying the Italian flag and fishing  for tuna and swordfish  in the Mediterranean with 

drifting gillnets. 

27 COM(96) 682 final of 16 December 1996. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

47 

Amendments  to  the*  FIFG  Regulation:  Regulation  (EC)  No  3699/93  laying  down  the  criteria  and 
arrangements  regarding  Cornmunity  structural  assistance  in  the  fisheries  and  aquaculture  sector, 
amended  twice  already  in  1995,  was  amended  twice  more  in  1996. The  third  amendment28  adapted 
the  arrangements  for  FIFG  premiums  by  capping  appropriations  by  country  and  year  for  temporary 
cessation  of  activity,  and  by  holding  constant  premiums  for  permanent  withdrawal  of  vessels  over 
thirty years old. The fourth  amendment29  introduced  official  recognition  of origin, with reference  to a 
specified  geographical  zone for a product or process, under promotion  campaigns part-financed  by the 
FIFG. 

1996 in the  context  of programming  for  1994-99 

The  rate  of  consumption  of  appropriations  returned  to  a  satisfactory  level  in  1996,  following  the 
difficulties  of  the  previous  year,  which  had  been  one  of  preparation  for  this  new  financial 
instrument.30  However,  in  many  cases,  actual  implementation  (expenditure  implemented  as  a 
percentage  of  that  planned)  was  well  below  budget  implementation  because  the  budgetary 
implementation  of  programmes  was  faster  at  the  beginning  of  the  period  (virtually  automatic 
commitments)  than  later.  This  means  that  the  actual  implementation  off  the  programmes  on  the 
ground  has  to  be  monitored  carefully.  However,  programme  implementation  has  made  considerable 
progress  in  a  number  of  countries  thanks  to  a  closer  partnership  between  the  Corrimission  and  the 
national authorities and a greater ability to submit coherent  and appropriate projects  by those engaged 
in the industry. 

Table 1-21:  Objective 5(a) fisheries -1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 (ECU million) 

Assistance 
Commitments 

%  of  assistance 

Payments 

%  of  assistance 

No of  measures 

B 
24.5 
24.5 
100% 
19,6 
80% 
1 

DK 
139.9 
69,9 
50% 
30,3 
22% 
1 

D 
76,0 
37,6 
50% 
20,0 
26% 
.  1 

E 
121.9 
59.7 
49% 
42,7 
35% 

F 
189.9 
63.3 
33% 
41,1 
22% 

1 

1 

I 
134.4 
44.8 
33% 
23,1 
17% 
1 

L 

1.1 
1,1 
100% 
0,3 
30% 
1 

NL 

A 

FIN 

46.6 
15,5 
33% 
12,7 
27% 
1 

2,0 
2,0 
100% 
1,0 
. 50% 
1 

23,0 
23,0 
100% 
6,9 
30% 
1 

s 
40.0 
40.0 
100% 
12,0 
30% 

1 

UK 

Total 

88,7 
44,3 
50% 
20,1 
23% 
1 

888.0 
425.7 
48% 
229.9 
26% 
12 

Table 1-22:  Objective 5(a) fisheries - Implementation 1994 to 1996 (ECU million) 

B 
DK 
D 
E 
F 
1 
L 
NL 
A 
FIN 
S 
____ 
_______ 

-____. 
4,1 
23,3 
12,4 
19,9 
31,7 
22,4 
0,2 
7,8 
0,0 
0.0 
0,0 
J4_8 
136.5 

Commitments 
______  _____  ______  _______ 

Pavments 

0,0 
23,3 
12,5 
19,9 
31,6 
22,4 
0,9 
1,4 
2,0 
23,0 
40,0 
_____ 
176.9 

20,4 
23,3 
12,8 
19,9 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
6,4 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
29.6 
112.3 

24,5 
69,9 
37,6 
59,7 
633 
44,8 
1,1 
15,5 
2,0 
23,0 
40,0 
_____ 
425.7 

2,0 
11.7 
6,2 
10,0 
15,8 
11,2 
0,1 
3,9 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
7.4 
_____ 

______  ______  ______ 
19,6 
30,3 
20,0 
42,7 
41,1 
23,1 
03 
12,7 
1,0 
6,9 
12,0 
_____ 
229.9 

16,3 
0,0 
3,9 
32,7 
0,0 
11.9 
0,2 
6,5 
0,8 
0,0 
0,0 
_____ 
___$ 

1,2 
18,6 
9,9 
0,0 
25,3 
0,0 
0,1 
2,3 
0,2 
6,9 
12,0 
4.4 
81.0 

28 Council Regulation (EC) No 965/96 of 28 May 1996, OJ No L 131,  1.6.1996. 
29 Council Regulation (EC) No 25/97 of 20 December  1996, OJ No L 6, 10.1.1997. 
30 Taking all the Objectives  together, from  1994 to  1996 ECU 748 million  (64%) was paid of the ECU  1 168 
million committed. The percentages were 70% for Objective  1, 54% for Objective 5(a) and 50% for Objective 
6. By the end of  1996, 45% of the total programme assistance for the programming period  (including FIFG 
assistance to programmes under Objectives  1  and 6) had been committed. 

48 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Fig. 1-8: Objective 5(a)  fisheries  - Share of each year  in implementation  1994 to 1996 

Grtnrrttm—__ 

Payments 

B

U K D

E

F

1

L M .

A

R

N

S

UK 

EURU 

B D K D E

F

I

L N L A R N S UC 

ELRIS 

6.  Obiective 5(b) 

6.1.  The implementation of Objective 5(b) in 1996 

The  main  effort  in  1996  involved  continuing  the  implementation  of  the  SPDs  approved  in  earlier 
years, but in many cases  1996 was the first  year of effective  and full  application  of the programmes. 
The Commission also approved some new programmes, the five Swedish SPDs. This brings the total 
number of SPDs implementing Objective 5(b) to 83. 

The  programmes31  were  implemented  in  the  framework  of  partnership.  The  various  Monitoring 
Cornmittees for Objective 5(b) ensure that implementation is properly monitored, and that evaluation 
procedures are organised and carried out. In  1996, the 83 different  Monitoring Committees continued 
their work on a number of important questions. The first relates to information  systems to ensure that 
the committees are informed  of the type of projects actually approved and the financial  implications 
of the commitments and payments made during the year. The second is the organisation of programme 
assessment,  i.e. the preparation  of an assessment  plan, terms of reference  for  the contract  assessors 
and  monitoring  of the actual  appointment  of  assessors.32 The preparation  of  assessment  procedures 
was  a  challenge  to  which  most  of  the Monitoring  Cornmittees  rose  satisfactorily.  The  Monitoring 
Cornmittees also specified  the arrangements for providing technical assistance and the details  of the 
communications programmes. 

Promotion  of technological  innovation in the areas eligible under Objective 5(b): 
Measures  identified  as  being  directly  linked  to  technological  development  in  rural  areas  represent  about 
1.2%  of  Community  appropriations  programmed  in  the  SPDs.  Within  this  assistance,  the  ERDF  represents 
75%  of Community  financing,  the ESF 15% and the EAGGF  10%.  Measures in favour  of RTD  represent  over 
two  thirds of  the  technological  development  and  innovation  measures  financed,  a  figure  comparable  to that 
for  the  Objective  1 programmes.  They concentrate  on  technology  transfer,  diversification  of production  and 
the identification  of new markets. A distinctive feature  of Objective 5(b) programmes  is the share  of  Structural 
Fund  appropriations  spent  on  data  transmission  applications,  i.e.  contributing  to  the  penetration  of  the 
information  society  in  rural  areas  that  are  often  isolated.  These  measures  account for  27%  of  Community 
appropriations for  technological  development,  the development  of new applications  such as distance  working 
and  distance  learning.  Expenditure  in  the  sector  of  telecommunications  is fairly  low  (less  than  10%)  and 
concerns  the improvement  of infrastructure in the most isolated areas. 

• 

31  For more details, see Chapter V. Country-by-country  survey. 
32  See Chapter IV. Evaluation. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996). 

49 

Table  1-23:  Objective  5(b) and  technological  development,  1994-99  (ECU  million) 

__QT___ 

_______ 
Telecommunications 12) 
Dnt_ transmission  C\> 
TOTAL 
(1). (2). (3). (4), (5): See notes to Table 1-4  (Chapter 1) 

'11.7 
•21.9 
jsfe 
_____  ____ 
100% 
__!__. 

______ 
41.9 
___; 
IRQ 
J___ 

Structural FinnK 
EST  _______ ______ 

8.6' 
___. 
___. 
- UI 

-Ll 
j __ 
0.6 
j __ 

___£ _______ 
___  ______ 
____. _______ 
«s.i  -___. 

Publjç 

iyf_-mlwrS__.es 
Private 

Total 

«1.1 
JJ_ 
____ 
____. 

_7___ 
___t 
J___ 
____ 

___.  _____ 
______  _z___i 
J_L_  _______ 
23^.0  ____, 

6.2.  1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 

Table  1-24:  Objective  5(b) - 1996 in the  context  of programming 

for  1994-99  (ECU  million) 

Assistance 
Commitments 

%  of assistance 

Payments 

%  of assistance 

No of  measures 

B 
78,1 
16,0 
21% 
8,1 
10% 
3 

DK 

54,8 
13.5 
25% 
5,8 
11% 
1 

n 
1.229,0 
449,5 
37% 
346,8 
28% 
8 

E 
666.9 
334,4 
50% 
242,8 
36% 
7 

F 
2.245,8 
709,1 
32% 
508,1 
23% 
20 

I 
904,3 
140,6 
16% 
84,7 
9% 
13 

T, 

6,0 
0.8 
14% 
0.4 
7% 
1 

NT. 
150,0 
41,2 
27% 
25,3 
17% 
5 

A 
411,0 
130,0 
32% 
78.5 
19% 
7 

FTN 
194,0 
49,1 
25% 
23,6 
12% 
2 

s 
141,0 
64,9 
46% 
22,6 
16% 
5 

Total 
l']K 
820.5  6.901J 
203.6  2.152.6 
3 1% 
25% 
140,9  1.487.6 
22% 
17% 
11 
83 

At the end of  1996, the rate of financial  implementation  was satisfactory  on the whole, as most of the 
programmes  were  approved  between  1995  and  the  first  quarter  of  1996. For  the  total  of  83  SPDs, 
commitments  represented  31% of  assistance  for  the  period  as  a whole. In  some Member  States,  the 
regional  authorities  succeeded  in  implementing  programme  measures  quite rapidly,  and  were  able  in 
1996 to request  commitment  of the  appropriations  for  1997. It  is clear,  however,  that  some  Member 
States are too slow, and  will have to make a major  effort  if  they  are not to be left  behind. This  is the 
more  important  as  the  Commission  does  not  make  payments  until  the  projects  have  been  fully 
completed,  and  as at the end  of  1996, the level of payments  had reached 22% of assistance  for  1994-
99.  With  this  in  view,  care  should  be  taken  to  promote  measures  enhancing  information  and 
advertising  to potential  beneficiaries.  In  certain  Member  States, the  Commission,  in  agreement  with 
the  authorities  concerned,  paid  special  attention  to  the  situation  of  conunitments  and  payments,  in 
view of the especially difficult  progress of the projects. 

Table  1-25:  Objective  5(b) - Implementation 

in  1994 to 1996 (ECU  million) 

P-Yrpenti 

1996 

B 
DK 
D 
E 
F 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
FIN 
S 
____ 
TOTAL 

1994 

0,0 
6,4 
126,0 
73,5 
262,7 
75,5 
0,8 
18,3 
0,0 
0.0 
0,0 
_____ 
______ 

Commitments, 
1995 

9,2 
3,4 
135,8 
88,6 
110,5 
31,5 
0,0 
7,3 
78,3 
32,8 
0,0 

______ 
6,9 
3,7 
187,7 
172,3 
335,9 
33,6 
0,0 
15,6 
51,6 
16,3 
64,9 

!______. 
16,0 
13,5 
449,5 
334,4 
709,1 
140,6 
0,8 
41,2 
130,0 
49,1 
64,9 
203.6 
2.152.6 

1994 

0,0 
3.2 
63,0 
36,8 
131,4 
37,8 
0,2 
3,1 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
_____ 
298.4 

-L2___ 
4,6 
2,5 
71,2 
81,7 
76,6 
15,8 
0,2 
9,5 
39,2 
15,9 
0,0 
_46_4 
363.4 

______ 
.71.? 

______ 
971.4 

______ 
8,1 
5,8 
346,8 
242,8 
508,1 
84,7 
0,4 

2 53 
78,5 
23,6 
22,6 
______ 
1.487.6 

3,5 
0,1 
212,6 
124,4 
300,2 
31,2 
0,0 
12,7 
39,3 
7,7 
22,6 
71.4 
_____ 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

B. REGIONAL  PARTNERSHIP 

1. Consideration  and promotion  of new  forms  of partnership 
2. Increasing the partners' capacities 
3. Opinions  of the other institutions on the application  of the partnership principle 

C. DIALOGUE  WITH THE  ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL  PARTNERS 

1. The socio-economic  partnership  in the  implementation  and monitoring of structural  assistance 
2. The economic  and social partners at Community  level 

D. INFORMATION  AND COMMUNICATION, SPREADING  GOOD  PRACTICE 

1. Information  and  communication 
2. Spreading  good  practice and exchanges of experience 

CHAPTER  IV  EVALUATION 

INTRODUCTION 

A. PRIOR  APPRAISAL OF OBJECTIVE  2 (1997-99) 

B. ON-GOING  ASSESSMENT 

C.  EX POST  EVALUATION 
1. Objective  2  1989-93 
2. Other ex post  evaluations 

D. ASSESSMENT  OF MAJOR PROJECTS 

1. Introduction 
2. Assessment  of the appraisals 

E. THEMATIC  EVALUATION  AND OTHER  EVALUATION  ACTIVITIES 

PART  B  THE  STRUCTURAL  FUNDS IN DETAIL 

CHAPTER  V  SUMMARY  BY MEMBER  STATE 

1. BELGIUM 

1.1. Implementation of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
1.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

2.  DENMARK 

2.1.  Implementation  of assistance by Objective  in  1996 
2.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

3.  GERMANY 

3.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
3.2.  Implementation  of the Community  initiatives  in  1996 

4. GREECE 

4.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
4.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

5. SPAIN 

5.1.  Implementation  of assistance by Obiective  in  1996 
5.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

134 
134 
136 
137 

137 
137 
138 

141 
141 
143 

147 

149 

149 

152 

154 
154 
158 

15S 
158 
160 

161 

163 

165 

165 
165 
171 

174 
174 
177 

180 
180 
189 

192 
193 
196 

198 
19S 
207 

50 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

Fig. 1-9: 

Objective 5(b) • Share of each year in implementation 1994 to 1996 

C-.-iifii_-__, 

t_yir-9_t 

B O KO 

E 

f 

I 

L M A R N S IK 

BJFflS 

- K D EF 

t 

L  M. 

A 

FIN 

S 

IK  EUU5 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

5J 

B.  OTHER ASSISTANCE 

1.  Community Initiatives 

1.1.  Overview 

Allocation of the reserve and new strands 

A major  event in  1996 was the adoption  by the Commission  on 8 May of a Decision  allocating the 
reserve  for  Community  Initiatives. Financial  decisions  adopted  in  the two preceding years33 meant 
that the total reserve available for a supplementary allocation between the Member States was ECU 1 
665 million (at 1995 prices), comprising ECU 690 million for Objective  1  and Objective 6 areas, and 
ECU 975 million  for  areas not  eligible under  those  Objectives. After  a series of  consultations, the 
Commission endorsed the allocation of the reserve between Initiatives and between Member States as 
agreed  with.all  its  institutional  partners  and  in  particular  in  accordance  with  the  code  of  conduct 
agreed  with  Parliament.  The allocation  took  into  account  the following  priorities: the  fight  against 
unemployment;  equal  opportunities for  men and  women; the environment; and the  strengthening of 
the territorial and spatial  aspects of the structural  policies. It allows industrial  conversion  Initiatives 
(Rechar,  Résider,  Retex  and  Konver)  and  the  Leader,  Pesca,  Urban,  Adapt  and  Employment 
Initiatives to be strengthened and extended until  1999. The Commission also endorsed changes to the 
guidelines for the Urban, Adapt and Employment Initiatives, as well as new guidelines for Interreg II 
C: 

• 

• 

the guidelines for  Urban  were amended  with  a view to promoting: equal opportunities; the  fight 
against long-term unemployment; and the urban environment in medium-sized towns; 
the Employment and Adapt Initiatives were each strengthened and supplemented by a new strand: 
Employment  - Integra  (combating  social  exclusion)  and Adapt  - BIS ("Building  the  Information 
Society") respectively; 

•  Interreg  II C provides  for  action  on three  separate  fronts,  in  each  case  involving  general trans 

national cooperation: development planning; flood prevention and drought control. 

33  See  1995 Annual  Report. 

52 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

Table 1-26 :  Allocation  of  the  reserve  for  the  Community  Initiatives  and  allocation  for  1994-99  (ECU 

million, at 1996  prices) 

SMEs 

Dj-han 

RettPT 

1994-99 

Rtf-Pc 

1994-99 

All 

ant 

Reserve 

1994-99 

Reserve 

1994-99 

6,80 
1,62 
23.24 
2.81 
31.52 
23.65 
6.21 
25.82 

10.94 
1.76 

3,42 
1,62 
24.36 

38.63 
31.73 
256,70 
33.53 

278.44 
27.84 
219.69 
0.31 
69.62 
13.59 
21.43 
23.56 
13.12 
316.81 

13.04 
2,87 
40,99 
4.97 
55.65 
41.71 
10.96 
45,57 

19.31 
3.09 
4 35 
3.42 
2.86 
44.28 

45.79 
14.10 
200.99 
70.69 
450.14 
191.20 
88.61 
401.39 
0.31 
62.58 
26.56 
45,47 
33,16 
23.96 
193,77 

,  ft-S-P__ 
2,06 
1,80 
30.67 
15.01 
48.31 
38.29 
15.68 
41.00 
0 02 
3.03 
3.26 
11.92 
3.46 
1.98 
11,83 

16T78 
51*9 

1.6*8.16 
525.33 

29*08 
9 * o* 

1.84*72 
1.068.99 

M .» 
115.62 

1994-90 

10.22 
9.96 
208^2 
163.98 
405.45 
229.11 
84.05 
328.76 
1.24 
11.60 
27.05 
130.29 
28.72 
16,47 
78.46 
34.69 
1.76X26 
1.086.11 

,. Rwr^e 
0,45 
3.15 

334 
339 
5,29 
1.01 
2.87 

1994-99 
2.49 
19.88 
23.47 
30.99 
45,94 
33.76 
7,85 
37.26 

2,02 

12.94 

3.16 
0,42 
0.49 
5.92 

31.71 
12.08 

29.28 
3.49 
4,06 
43.57 
5.10 
300.08 
153.92 

R«-h_r 

Knnv-r 

Recidrr 

Rrtfv 

12.35 
2 35 
188.98 
83,88 
252.75 
58.88 
28.98 
191.63 
031 
10.41 
8,98 
124.80 
11,09 
17,21 
68,78 
25.51 
1.087.07 
845.61 

2.25 

2.25 

p. 
Reserve 

Reserve  , 
331 

1994-99 

R^fFf 

1994-99 

28.16 

1.01 

5.48 

1994-99 

Reserve 

Reserve 

1994-99 

Reserve 

1994-99 

1.01 

16.96 

2,96 

21.66 
1.51 

2.55 

183.05 
3.04 
34.21 
36.25 

115,19 
9,77 

15.63 

0.19 

1.88 

18.47 

15.13 

14.61 
2.39 
338.40 
22,74 
23.70 
87,00 

6435 
0,36 
27.28 

1.37 

1.85 
2.25 

6.05 

13.99 

18.22 

182.28 

38.44 

3 35 
140,89 

46.52 
15 48 

461.76 
l-S.fifl 

221.64 
110.24. 

7*9.27 
2R1.?7 

15.54 
131 

4.73 

6 30 
1.01 
5,04 

2.02 

4.76 

44-42, 
11-ft 

20936 
6.22 
'73,64 
6733 

92.11 
13.55 
23.69 
5.24 
9.05 

6.48 
3,03 
29.64 
12.10 

6,69 

10.08 

76,07 
78,82 
. 105,43 
37.33 
9.46 
75.05 

1.02 
2 39 
174.90 

60,44 

50.36 

3.96 

40.79 

241.74 

Rçwrç 
830 

17,03 
5,35 
27.16 
24,98 
4.86 
18.36 

13.11 
339 
5.16 
3.87 
134 
24,96 

1994-99 
1902 
133 
115.81 
51.48 
241.85 
81.10 
20.68 
136.02 
0.51 
22.60 
13,54 
49,75 
7,83 
4.97 
124.14 

218.37 
267.35 

126.53 

612.24 
612.24 

158.49 
61.58 

891.02 
« E J tt 

. 

lnf#r~M> 

TOTAL 

! 994-99 
99,76 
22.10 
455.02 
632.35 
693.31 
269.80 
165.78 
388.07 
3,67 
189,44 
49.83 
354.95 
48.91 
4732 
123.68 

..Rescryf 
5502 
13.47 
317,67 
72.52 
312,96 
187.72 
41.75 
199.06 
103 
184.55 
18.00 
52.43 
18.91 
15.76 
188.80 

16,09 
4,03 
44,61 
25.21 
117.09 
18.78 
3.03 
3338 

115,97 
631 
832 
431 
7 07 
12.05 

1994-99 

293.68 
104.23 
2056,07 
1.177,72 
2344.79 
1.63734 
493,69 
1.936.41 
20O5 
431,17 
14901 
1.082.67 
156,75 
130.67 
1.60508 
65.31 
14*78.59 
072.11 

578.70 
17*02 

72.99 
*919 

«Wi.95 
m__ 

. 
. 

«12.18 
M2.1R 

416.66 
1*5.51 

5.544.19 
2610.66 

1.680.05 
7.5.72 

B 
DK 
D 
GR 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
AT 
P 
RN 
S 
UK 
Networks 
TOTAL 
of which: O» 

B 
DK 
D 
GR 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
AT 
P 
RN 
S 
UK 
Networks 
TOTAL 
of which; ftt 

For  the  purpose  of  conducting  new  operations  following  the  adoption  of  the  reserve,  the  Member 
States  were  invited  to propose to the Commission  the incorporation  of the additional  financing  until 
1999  through  adjustment  of  the  financing  tables  for  the  current  programmes.  In  the  case  of  the 
changes  to  the  Urban,  Adapt  and  Employment  guidelines  and  the  new  Interreg  II  C  strand,  the 
Member  States  were  invited  to  propose  to  the  Commission  new  programmes  or  supplements  to 
existing  programmes.  The  time-limits,  calculated  from  the  date  of  publication  of  the  amended 
guidelines  in the Official  Journal,34 were four months in the case  of Adapt and Employment  and six 
months  in the case  of Urban and Interreg 33 C. The final  months  of the year were given over to talks 
on those changes, which  were expected to lead to Commission decisions  from the beginning of  1997 
onwards. 

Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in 1996 

Altogether  123 of the 430 operational programmes scheduled for  1994-99 were adopted in  1996. They 
entail  an  aggregate  contribution  from  the  Structural  Funds  of  ECU  2  380  million,  i.e.  17% of  the 
Community  Initiatives  total  for  1994-99  (including  the  reserve  and  the  appropriations  intended  for 
Peace).  All  the  programmes  under  the  following  Community  Initiatives  have  now  been  adopted: 
Rechar H, Retex H, Urban, Pesca, Adapt, Employment  and Regis H. Only eleven programmes remain 
to be approved  in respect  of  1997: three Interreg II "A", two  Konver,  one Résider E,  one  SMEs and 
four Leader. 

3 4O J N o C 2 0 0,  10.7.1996. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

53 

Table 1-27:  Community Initiative programmes adopted in 1996 and since 1994 

____! 

Urban 

TOTAL 

E m s. 

_-i_  a V» 

IfM-Vft 

-frmwr 

I v-«xs  a ______£ 

fimatoymnH 

Leader. 
L_t_ 

J—sca_ 

_SME__ 

_ 
te,  I94-V6 

«» 

" » "* 

______ 

0 

1 
15 
1 
17 
20 
1 

22 

1 

4 

«  9 

1 

2 

2 

5 

B 
DK 

D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
1 
L 
NL 
AT 
P 
R 
SE 
UK 

171  34  102 3 
110* 
17 

_!__  14 
13 

39 
36 

Planned 
' " " " T" 
Planned 
Peace 
TOTAL 
Planned 
Includin. programmes adopted in 1993 and amended since 1994 
' Including one nrocramme adopted in respect of the reserve 
' Includinc 98 proiirammes. three national networks adopted in 1996 and the Community network 
Including the national networks 

30| 

30 

431 
45 

28 

21 

3 

1 

10 

1 

1 
8 
I 
1 

1 

2 
25 
I 
1 

1 

10 

1 
0 
2 
0 
0 
8 
I 
1 

0 

0 
l2 
0 

1 

1 

9 
25 

19 
7 

3 
2 
16 
83 
0 
9 
3 
26 
23 
70 
I 
7 
14 
33 
1 
5 
1 
13 
17 
13 
11 
0 
5 
7 
6 
8 
38 
10 
98  3531 

_2_ 

367 
54 
Jl 

123  4131 

430 

The  Initiatives  must  have  a  demonstration  value  and  give  rise  to  exchanges  of  experience  that  are 
likely  to  enhance  the  usefulness  of  the  innovative  operations  and  sound  practice  featured  in  the 
programmes, the aim being to include the subjects  concerned  in a CSF or an SPD. Since almost every 
programme  has  now  been  approved  by  the  Cornmission,  implementation  cannot  be  limited  to 
individual  projects  selected  by Member  States  or  regions. The  programmes  must  be  seen  in  a  wider 
national  or  regional  context  than  that  of  their  implementation,  particularly  in  the  case  of  the  least 
developed  regions,  where  the demand  for  the  transfer  of  know-how  is  strongest.  It  is  for  this  reason 
that  the Commission  has decided  to implement  a number  of trans-national  measures. Accordingly,  in 
order  to  enhance  the  usefulness  of  the  measures  implemented  in  the  context  of  the  four  industrial 
conversion  Initiatives  (Résider  H, Rechar  H, Retex  II  and  Konver),  the  Cornmission  has  decided  to 
launch  various  operations  aimed  at  exchanging  experience  and  sound  practice.  Similarly,  in 
connection  with the SMEs Initiative, the Commission opted, in the context of its  1994 DecisiTJh on the 
initial  allocation  of  appropriations,  to  earmark  ECU  25  million  for  trans-national  operations.  This 
allowed  the following  three operations  to be launched  at the end  of  1996: a call  for  proposals  for  the 
creation,  at  European  level,  of  an  Internet  network  for  SMEs  operating  in  the  field  of  tourism  in 
Objective  1, 2, 5(b) and  6 regions;35 financial  support for  the holding  of  purchaser  exhibitions  (Ibex) 
for SMEs in Objective  1, 2, 5(b) and 6 regions;36 exchanges of experience specific  to SMEs by way of 
awareness, information  and communication  measures aimed at identifying  "sound practice". 

Trans-national  cooperation,  exchanges  of  experience  and  the transfer  of  know-how  constitute  one  of 
the new fields  of the Leader Initiative, which  is bolstered  by a network  (the European  Observatory  of 
Rural  Innovation  and  Development),  one  of  whose  tasks  is  to  provide  technical  assistance  in  the 
context  of trans-national  cooperation. An  indicative amount  of  2.5% of the total financing  for  Leader 
is  intended  to fund  the  activities  of  the  Community  network  and  the  national  networks.  In  1996  the 
body selected by the Commission  to organise and run Leader's  European  Observatory  proceeded  with 
its work: publications, seminars, exchanges of experience and setting-up of a multilingual  information 
system on the Internet. Trans-national measures were also launched  in the context of Pesca in  1996, in 
the shape of invitations to tender and calls for proposals. The three calls for  tenders issued  concerned: 
the dissemination  of an information  bulletin; the organisation  of  inter-regional  meetings  and  thematic 
conferences;  and the organisation  of two partnership meetings, scheduled  for  1997 and  1999, between 

35 See 1.2 below: Presentation of each Initiative in turn - The SMEs Initiative. 
36 See Chapter II.D.6. Structural Funds and SMEs. 

54 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

firms  belonging  to  the  industry.  The  call  for  proposals  was  aimed  at  the part-financing  of  trans 
national  cooperation  and  networking  projects  in  the  field  of  training,  retraining,  economic 
diversification,  local  development,  etc. A total  of  seven projects received  Community  support  in the 
context  of that call  for proposals. In the case  of  Adapt and Employment,  the trans-national  technical 
assistance  programme  launched  in  1995  to help  the Commission  and the Member  States  implement 
the two Initiatives continued to operate in  1996. The support frameworks  at national and at European 
level (Europs) served to coordinate the setting-up of trans-national partnership projects throughout the 
Union, underpin the execution of projects and collate the first structured data on the work carried out. 

Community Initiatives and development  of technological  potential: 
Many  Community  Initiatives  underpin  technological  development  in  the process  of attaining  their  principal 
objectives.  In the case of the most representative  Community Initiatives,  under the SMEs Initiative,  promoting 
competitiveness  among  firms  and job  creation  is achieved  through  the development  of new  information  and 
telecommunications  technologies,  RTD  networks  and  innovation.  The  Interreg  programmes  are  aimed  at 
alleviating  the  adverse  effects  of  cross-border  location  by  extending  cross-border  cooperation  to  research 
and  the  new  technologies.  Technological  development  also  plays  a  major  role  in  the  diversification  of 
economic  activities  and  the  strengthening  of  the  regional  capacities  that  are  the  subject  of  the  industrial 
conversion  Initiatives.  In  terms  of  human  resources,  the new  technologies  are  one  of  the principal  fields  in 
which  close  cooperation  is  developing  between  training  centres  and  the public  and  private  sectors  in  the 
context  of Adapt  and, in the case of Employment,  they facilitate  the development of reliable databases  and  the 
integration  into the labour  market of the unemployed,  the disabled and other disadvantaged groups.  For  their 
part,  the  Leader  programmes  highlight  the  importance  of  data  transmission  in  rural  development,  in 
particular  in providing  support for  local production  centres. 

1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-97/99 

All  the  institutional  partners  have  recorded  delays  in  the  approval  of  certain  programmes,  delays 
which  are  due  to  the  very  nature  of  the  Community  Initiatives  which,  in  relation  to  the  CSFs  and 
SPDs,  have  certain  special  features  that  make  them  specific  instruments  of  the  Union's  structural 
policy: implementation from the bottom up; a high profile  in the field in the context of a broad-based 
partnership; innovative approach (in certain cases); and trans-national, cross-border and inter-regional 
cooperation. It is not always easy to incorporate these special features at the prograrnming stage. The 
requirement  of  a broad-based  partnership, for  instance,  represents  a major challenge.  It may  be  the 
first  experience some of the socio-economic  actors involved in a programme have had of this working 
method.  These  multiple  partnerships  feature  numerous  levels  of  intervention  which  are  sometimes 
difficult  to  manage.  Moreover,  in  order  to  give  Community  Initiatives  a  true  trans-national, 
cross-border or inter-regional  dimension, pride of place is given to trans-national cooperation between 
projects. This  is  a new  and complex  process  on this  scale.  Innovative  action  and measures  featuring 
strict  selection  criteria at regional  and national  level  often  call  for  lengthy  analysis  at Member State 
level. 

The Commission  is, however, keen to endorse quality programmes  satisfying  those requirements. On 
the  whole,  with  the  industrial  conversion  Initiatives,  it  has  more  often  than  not  been  a  question  of 
consolidating  existing  experience.  For other Initiatives  approaching  new  issues,  further  negotiations 
with  the Member  States  on  the  content  of  the  programmes  proved  necessary.  This  was  the  case  for 
instance  of  the  SMEs  Initiative,  the  programmes  for  which  gave  rise  to  numerous  adjustments,  in 
particular concerning the innovative and internationalisation aspects of SMEs. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

55 

Table 1-28:  Community Initiatives -1996 in the context of programming for  1994-97/99 (ECU million) 

|  Adapt 

|  mploymenl  U * d er 

| 

P e n» 

| 

SMEs 

|  R e t» 

|  Rechar  |  Konver  |  Résider  |  R e t e s"  |  U r b an 

| 

I n t e r r e r"  1  T o t al 

1994-99  a l l o c a t i o n "" 

Assistance  adopted 

%  adopted 

Commitments in 1994-96 

• / . of  assistance 
Payments in 1994-96. 

*/• of assistance 

*  Including networks 

1638.2 

1 444.9 

88% 

530,1 
37% 

239.6 

17% 

1 848.7 

1.768,3  • 

300.1  • 

1.087.1  • 

I  524,2 

1.511.9 

82% 

572.0 

324,6 

2 1% 

86V. 

720.4 

48% 

266.3 

18% 

265.0 

88% 

187,7 

7 1% 

37,8 
14% 

1.004,3 

92% 
385.4 

38% 

156,4 

16% 

612.2 

607.0 

99% 

216.8 

36% 

157,6 

26% 

461.8 

411,2 

89% 

292.5 
7 1% 

137,2 

33% 

739.3 

503.0 

68% 

371.2 

74% 

182.4 

36% 

578.7 

518.9 

90% 

311.5 

60% 

157,9 

30% 

606,9 
526,5 
87% 

319,6 

6 1% 

143.3 
27% 

891.0 

681.9 

77% 

-.  372,4 

55% 

166.2 
24% 

3.846.4 

14.378,6 

3.170.5 

12.169,2 

8 2% 
1432,9 

4 5% 
706.6 

2 2% 

85% 

5.712,4 

4 7% 

2.676,0 

22% 

•*  Includes only  1994-97 appropriations 

• *•  Including Peace 
• • **  At  1996 prices, including reserve 

Table 1-29:  Community Initiatives in 1994-96 (ECU million) 

1994 

Commitments 
1996 
1995 

0,0 
201,2 
0,3 
23,7 
0,0 
0,0 
-0,0 
0,0 
4,3 
79,7 
0,0 
0,0 
309,2 

307,7 
107,7 
468,5 
29,4 
203,5 
58,8 
172,5 
238,2 
172,8 
164,8 
157,4 
585,3 
2.666,7 

222,4 
263,1 
251,7 
134,6 
181,9 
158,0 
119,9 
133,0 
134,4 
154,4 
215,0 
847,6 
2.816,0 

1994-96 
530,1 
572,0 
720,4 
187,7 
385,4 
216,8 
292,4 
371,2 
311,5 
399,0 
372,4 
1.432,9i 
5.791,8 

Payments 

1994 

1995 

0,0 
100,6 
0,0 
11,8 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
1,3 
68,7 
0,0 
0,0 
182,5 

152,6 
53,6 
132,7 
5,3 
67.7 
22,0 
75,6 
87,3 
77,0 
75,4 
58,1 
241,4 
1.048,9 

1996 

87,0 
170,3 
133,6 
20,6 
88,7 
135,6 
61,6 
95,1 
79,6 
67,8 
108,1 
465,2 
1.513,2 

1994-96 
239,6 
324,6 
266,3 
37,8 
156,4 
157,6 
137,2 
182,4 
157,9 
211,9 
166,2 
706,6 
2.744,6 

Adapt 
Employment 
Leader 
Pesca 
SMEs 
Regis 
Rechar 
Konver 
Résider 
Retex* 
Urban 
Interreg** 
Total 

Including  1993. 
k* Including  Peace 

Fig. 1-10: 

Community Initiatives - Annual figures in relation to the total for 1994-96 

G o n - i i t n c n ts 

Payments 

• w o* 

80% 

80% 

7 0* 

flOH 

SIM 

4 0*  f-

30% 

20% 

10% 

0% 

o>-
5" 

•  1—4, 

• 1—5 
urns' 

illlMl •  19B4 

01—61 

a i s e s! 

S  2 

s  g 

i  s 

- 

tr 

For the Community Initiatives generally, about 47% of the commitments entered  into since  1994 have 
been  implemented.  The overwhelming majority  of the programmes totalling  less than  ECU 40 million 
were  the subject  of a single  commitment  when  the programmes  were  approved.  The  total  annual 
commitment  mirrors  the  rate  of  approval  of  the  programmes.  The four  industrial  conversion 
Initiatives  and  Pesca  recorded  the  highest  percentage  of commitments,  this  being  attributable  to the 
fact  that  the  programmes  under  those  Initiatives  are  mostly  below  the  ECU 40 million  level  and are 
under  regional  management.  Since  most of the  programmes  were  approved  at the  end of 1995 or,  in 
some  cases,  in  1996  they  are at the  start-up  phase.  This  explains  why  the  level  of payments  (about 
22%  of all  Structural  Fund  assistance  for  Community  Initiatives  generally) is in some  cases  low.  The 
bulk of the  implementation  and monitoring of the programmes  is expected to take place in 1997. 

56 

. 

. 

.  • 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

12.  The individual  Initiatives 

Adapt (1994-99) 

Adapt (ECU  1 638 million37) is aimed at encouraging the adaptation  of the workforce  to industrial change, 
helping  firms  increase  their  productivity,  and  fostering  the  emergence  of  new  activities.  The  measures 
concerned  cover:  training,  counselling  and  guidance,  anticipation  and  promotion  of  new  employment 
opportunities, adaptation of support structures and systems, information, dissemination and greater awareness. 
Ilie main beneficiaries are workers affected  by industrial change. 

Adapt and the anticipation of technological change: 
The initial Adapt guidelines provided for encouragement for cooperation and exchanges between enterprises 
and  research  centres with a  view to assisting  the transfer  of technology,  and for  studies focusing on the 
introduction of new production processes and systems and the use of communication and information systems. 
In the programmes  that have been adopted,  measures  relating  to telecommunications  and the  Information 
Society are provided for  by a number of Member States,  namely  Italy, Greece,  Portugal,  France,  Ireland, 
Finland and the  United  Kingdom.  In particular,  the programme for  France  earmarks  4%  of  the  overall 
budget for  training in the new technologies and the use of flexible systems and distance learning, while under 
the programme for Portugal 10% of the overall budget is to be allocated to data transmission applications 
and 20% to RTD in measures  to introduce  new technologies  and encourage  the setting-up  of information 
networks. 
In  1996 a  new strand was added to Adapt: Adapt-BIS (Building the  Information Society), which  will 
encourage programmes to take into account the emergence of the Information Society and its consequences 
as far  as the competitiveness  and the way in which  European firms operate  are concerned.  In particular, 
Adapt-BIS is aimed at encouraging: 
• 

the  identification and  transfer  of  sound  practices  as  regards  the  use  of  new  information  and 
communications technologies that are suited to local development conditions,  requirements and levels; 
large-scale  experimentation and. dissemination of the findings in Europe,  to include  the results  already 
obtained thanks to Community RTD and vocational training programmes. 

• 

A  significant  feature  of  the  implementation  of  Adapt  in  1996  was  the  build-up  of  projects  selected 
following  the first call for  projects  in  1995. Some  1 400 projects  were launched or, as was mostly  the 
case,  were-implemented  for  their  first  full  year. Calls  for  tenders  for  the  evaluations  in  the  Member 
States were also  issued  in  1996. A first  series  of  interim reports  was expected  to be  submitted  to  the 
monitoring committees by the end of March  1997 at the latest. This first  series of projects - now being 
implemented  - has  already  revealed  concerns  and  interests  that  are  common  to  the  various  Member 
States  and  regions. Many  relate  to at least one  of the principal  themes  of the Initiative:  development 
of,  and support for,  SMEs; nature and impact of changes in the way work is organised; anticipation  of 
labour  market  trends;  qualifications;  effectiveness  of  local  labour  markets;  job  creation;  and  the 
impact  of  the  Information  Society.  The  projects  are  supported  and  organised  by  labour  market 
agencies generally: enterprises (in particular SMEs), groups of firms, sectoral organisations, chambers 
of  commerce,  craft  industries  and  agriculture,  trade  unions  and  other  workers'  organisations,  public 
and  private  training  agencies  and  universities,  local  and  regional  authorities,  local  development 
agencies and NGOs. 

This  increased  level  of  activity  has  had  an  impact  on  the  Commission's  level  of  financial 
implementation  in  1996. Total commitments  rose from  ECU 307.7 million  to ECU  530.1 million  and 
payments as a whole went up from  ECU  152.6 million to ECU 239.6 million. 

37 At 1996 prices, including the reserve. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

57 

Table 1-30:  Adapt  - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 (ECU million) 

Member  State 
(number of 
programmes) 

Belgium (2) 
Denmark (1) 
Germany  ( 1 ) 
Greece (1) 
Spain  (1) 
France (1) 
Ireland (1) 
Italy (1) 
Luxembourg  (1) 
Netherlands (1) 
Austria (1) 
Portugal (1) 
Finland  (I) 
Sweden  ( 1 ) 
United Kingdom  (2) 
Total  (17) 
* Excluding reserve 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1)' 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(l) 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

31,2 
29,5 
228,8 
30,1 
256,4 
249,7 
21,2 
190,0 
0,3 
57,6 
11,6 
21,0 
19,7 
11,3 
286,6 
1.444,9 

25,5 
24,2 
33,8 
20,3 
33,7 
0,0 
3,5 
45,6 
0.2 
0,0 
0,0 
17,0 
0,0 
0,0 
18,7 
222,4 

31,2 
29,5 
76,7 
27,4 
81,8 
46,9 
7,4 
81,7 
0,3 
11,5 
11,6 
21,0 
19,7 
11.3 
72,2 
530,1 

100% 
100% 
34% 
91% 
32% 
19% 
35% 
43% 
100% 
20% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
25% 
37% 

6.5 
6,2 
17,3 
4,8 
18,7 
0,0 
4.0 
23.1 
0.1 
0,0 
0,0 
4.3 
1,2 
0,0 
0,8 
87,0 

9,4 
8,9 
38,8 
8.4 
42.7 
23,5 
6,0 
41,1 
0,1 
5,8 
5,8 
6,3 
9,9 
5,6 
27.5 
239,6 

30% 
30% 
17% 
• 28% 
17% 
9% 
28% 
22% 
30% 
10% 
50% 
30% 
50% 
50% 
10% 
17% 

Employment  and Human Resources  (1994-99) 

Employment  and  Human  Resources  (ECU  1  849  million38):  the  aim  is  to  use  an  integrated  approach  to 
underpin  the recover)' of employment  and promote  solidarity  and equal opportunities  on the labour market. A 
total of four strands - each with  its own budget - are currently  covered: 
•  Now (ECU 496 million) supports innovative approaches to vocational training for women; 
•  Horizon  (ECU  513  million)  encourages  the  disabled  and  other  disadvantaged  groups  to  enter  working 

life; 

•  Youthstart  (ECU 441 million) helps young people without qualifications  enter working  life; 
• 

Integra  (ECU 385 million), a new strand  adopted  in  1996, is aimed at making access to the labour market 
easier for  vulnerable  groups that are excluded  or at risk of being excluded  from  it. This strand now  covers 
Horizon measures in favour  of disadvantaged  persons. 

Employment and adaptation  to the new technologies  : 
Thanks  to  each  strand  of  Employment,  measures  can  be funded  that  encourage  new  information  and 
communications  technologies  (Now  :  training  in  new  skills  in the  field  of  RTD  and  innovative  technology; 
Horizon  : adaptation  of  the  workplace  through  the  development  of  new  technologies  and  distance  working 
and flexible  training  and  learning, such  as  distance  learning  and  learning  by computer;  Youthstart :  giving 
young  people  access  to  the  labour  market  through  distance  learning).  The  new  technologies  constitute  a 
major avenue towards possible  improvements in the employment prospects  of the Employment Initiative target 
groups: firstly  they afford  interesting possibilities  of innovation  in terms of training methodology, be it in the 
case  of  distance  learning  or  of  training  assisted  by  modern  means  of  information  technology;  secondly 
introducing new technologies  changes working  methods  and,  in some  cases, contributes to creating new  jobs 
or occupations. 
Accordingly,  to  take  account  of  that  impact  and  give  a greater  share  of  the  working population  access  to 
those new jobs,  the training needs to be adapted  in terms both of content and methods. For example some  7% 
of  the  projects  covered  by  Youthstart focus  on  activities  relating  to jobs  arising from  new  information 
technologies,  and  one  fifth  of the Horizon projects  explore  the ways  in which  new technologies can help  the 
disabled secure employment. 

As  in  the  case  of  Adapt,  a  significant  feature  of  the  implementation  of  Employment  in  1996  was  the 
strong  showing  of  projects  selected  at  the  time  of  the  first  call  for  projects  in  1995.  Some  2 400  were 
launched  or,  in  the  majority  of  cases,  completed  their  first  full  year  of  implementation.  Activities 
focusing  on  training  -  which  have  always  constituted  a  major  component  of this  type  of  programme  -
are  increasingly  integrated  in  more  general  measures  based  on  cooperation  between  local  actors  and 
aimed  at  providing  the  target  groups  with  integrated  solutions  in  terms  of  access  to  the  labour  market 

38  At  1996 prices, including the reserve. 

58 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

or  training  systems.  Notable  also  are  the  search  for  new jobs  and  the  desire  to  encourage  the  creation 
of  new  firms  (in  particular  under  Now),  above  all  in  what  are  regarded  as  promising  sectors. 
Generally  speaking,  training  centres  remain  major  players,  although  there  is also  a strong  showing  by 
local  and  regional  authorities,  in  particular  in  Southern  Europe,  and  by  NGOs  and  associations.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  two  sides  of  industry  do  not  appear  to  be  playing  a  sufficiently  prominent  role  in 
the  implementation  of  the  projects.  The  Commission  would  like  to  see  greater  activity  on  their  part  in 
the  second  phase  of  the  Initiative,  the  aim  being  to  forge  a  link  between  the  projects  and  the  concerns 
felt  by  economic  operators. 

impact  of  this 

The 
in  1996  is  significant. 
Commitments  went  up  from  ECU  236  million  to  ECU  572  million  and  payments  from  ECU  117.8 
million  to  ECU  324.6  million. 

level  of  activity  on  financial  execution 

increased 

Table 1-31: 

Employment - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99,(ECU million) 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Belgium  (2) 
Denmark  ( 1 ) 
Germany  ( 1 ) 
Greece  (1) 
Spain  (1) 
France (1) 
Ireland  (1) 
Italy (1) 
Luxembourg  (1) 
Netherlands  (1) 
Austria  (1) 
Portugal  ( 1 ) 
Finland  (1) 
Sweden  (1) 
United  Kingdom  (2) 
Total  (17) 
* Excluding reserve 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(D 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(D 

32,1 
10,6 
156,8 
64,4 
386,6 
146,5 
76,1 
348,7 
0,3 
42,4 
23,0 
40,3 
29,2 
20,7 
146,5 
1.524,2 

10,4 
9,0 
26,8 
4,6 
56,0 
27,3 
21,7 
82,7 
0,0 
2,2 
0,0 
3,9 
0,0 
0,0 
18,4 
263,1 

32,1 
10,6 
50,0 
12,6 
114,7 
49,6 
29.3 
134,2 
0,3 
6,5 
23,0 
9,6 
29,2 
20,7 
49,8 
572,0 

100% 
100% 
32% 
20% 
30% 
34% 
39% 
38% 
100% 
15% 
100% 
24% 
100% 
100% 
34% 
38% 

5.2 
2,4 
29,5 
2,3 
35,3 
15,6 
13,3 
41.9 
0,0 
1,1 
0,0 
2,1 
0,0 
0,0 
21,6 
170.3 

16.1 
3,2 
41,0 
6,4 
64,6 
26,7 
17,0 
67,6 
0,2 
3,2 
11,5 
5.0 
14,6 
10,3 
37,3 
324,6 

50% 
30% 
26% 
10% 
17% 
18% 
22% 
19% 
50% 
8% 
50% 
12% 
50% 
50% 
25% 

2 1% 

Leader II  (1994-99) 

Leader  (ECU  1 768 million39)  supports rural  development  projects  devised  and  managed  by  local partners  in 
which  the  emphasis  is on measures that are  innovative, have  a demonstration  value and are transferable.  The 
projects  have  to  be  based  on  development  strategies  that  are  consistent  and  adapted  to  the  areas  concerned. 
Assistance  from  Leader  II is available  only to local action groups (public  and private  partners jointly  devising 
a development  strategy) or other rural  collective bodies (local  authorities, chambers  of agriculture,  commerce 
and  industry,  cooperatives,  etc.),  provided  their  operations  fit  in  with  a  development  strategy  at  local  level. 
Leader  II  applies  to  rural  areas covered  by Objectives  1, 5(b)  and  6 (with  ECU  1 086 million  earmarked  for 
Objective  1  and Objective  6 regions). 

Leader  and technological  innovation in rural areas: 
Through its  "rural innovation programme"  strand, Leader encourages  innovation - adapted in the light of the 
local  context  -  in  terms  of  methods,  products,  processes  and  markets  and  the  demonstrability  and 
transferability  of  projects.  It  accordingly fosters  local  development  initiatives  aimed  at  achieving  new 
dynamism.  The operations receiving assistance are varied and may concern:  measures that supplement  those 
relating  to agricultural  markets  (including the environmental aspects  and  renewable sources  of energy);  the 
application  of new information and communication technologies  to the rural  environment; or the design and 
marketing  of new products  and services. Among the measures eligible  are  those for  rural tourism  (innovative 
investment  and  the  introduction  of  booking systems  based  on  information  technology);  SMEs  (measures  to 
improve  access  to  technology  transfer  services and  the  development  of  distance  working, the  aim  being  to 

At  1996 prices,  including the reserve. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

59 

obtain the best return from agricultural products or promote the transfer of technology,  telemarketing  and 
alternative and renewable sources of energy); and the environment (waste  recycling).  Quantifying the funds 
made  available  for  technological  development  is  no  mean task. The appropriations  for technological 
innovation  are, however,  allocated to the use of information  technology  applications,  seen as a  means  of 
reducing the isolation of rural areas.  These operations concern distance working,  communication centres and 
the development of telecommunications for firms. While few resources are allocated to RTD as such,  applied 
research projects are aimed mostly at obtaining the best return from local produce. 
Examples of innovative applied research projects: 
• 

the ARCA Umbria area (Perugia),  which specialises in ceramics - an industry facing a pollution/waste 
problem - had developed a waste-recycling process that was in need of experimentation.  Leader made it 
possible for  the  experimentation  phase to  begin and for  the  system -  which can be  applied to the 
management of other pollutants - to be developed. 
the Sierra de Bejar Francia group (Salamanca), which is situated in an olive-growing area threatened by 
low farm incomes, has, thanks to a study financed by Leader, developed a new process for the treatment of 
olive oil waste.  The process allows the waste to be transformed into reusable by-products,  thus alleviating 
a major environmental problem. 
the Creuse programme (Limousin) is aimed at updating traditional know-how by creating new products, 
encouraging apprenticeships; and promoting products commercially. A prototype workshop designs new 
productsbased on local know-how, in particular in the field of screen printing and furnishing fabrics. 

• 

• 

•  atAnogia  (Crete), the Leader group has, thanks to the programme, been able to build premises and equip 
the centre for  the diagnosis and control of zoonoses,  infectious animal diseases that are transmissible to 
man. The research centre is operating in collaboration with the University of Crete and the Anogia health 
centre and is recognised by WHO as a collaborating centre for  research and training for Mediterranean 
areas affected by zoonoses. 

Since  1994  the  Cominission  has  received  from  the  fifteen  Member  States  102  proposals  for 
programmes  (not  including  technical  assistance  programmes)  under  Leader. It  has  seen  to  it  that,  in 
accordance  with  Leader .II  guidelines,  the  proposais  are  the  outcome  of  broad-based  concertation 
between  local actors. Following on from  the 67 programmes and global grants it adopted  in  1995, the 
Commission  adopted 34 programmes in  1996 - 31 regional programmes (11 of which concern the new 
Member  States)  and  three  technical  assistance  programmes  (implementing  national  networks).  The 
new programmes represent a total of ECU 253.4 million in Structural Fund assistance and account  for 
14%  of  the  total  budget  for  Leader  (including  the  reserve).  Only  the  Belgian  programmes  and  the 
balance  of  the  technical  assistance  programmes  remained  to  be  adopted.  By  the  end  of  1996, 
Commission-approved  programmes accounted for 99% of the overall budget for Leader (not  including 
the reserve). 

Slh Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

6.  FRANCE 

6.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
6.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

7. IRELAND 

7.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
7.2. Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

8.  ITALY 

8.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
8.2. Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

9. LUXEMBOURG 

9.1.  Implementation  of assistance by Objective  in  1996 
9.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives in  1996 

10. THE  NETHERLANDS 

10.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
10.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

11. AUSTRIA 

11.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
11.2. Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

12.  PORTUGAL 

12.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
12.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

13.  FINLAND 

13.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
13.2. Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

14. SWEDEN 

14.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
14.2. Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

15. UNITED  KINGDOM 

15.1.  Implementation  of assistance  by Objective  in  1996 
15.2.  Implementation  of the Community  Initiatives  in  1996 

CHAPTER  VI  FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  1996 

TABLE  1: FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  BY OBJECTIVE  IN  1996 

TABLE  2: FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  OF THE COMMUNITY  INITIATIVES 

TABLE 3: FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  OF TRANSITIONAL  AND  INNOVATIVE 
MEASURES 

209 
209 
218 

221 
221 
223 

225 
225 

' 

11 

237 
237 
240 

242 
242 
248 

251 
251 
256 

259 
259 
262 

265 
265 
270 

273 
273 
279 

281 
281 
289 

293 

295 

303 

304 

60 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Table 1-32:  Leader II - Programmes  adopted in 1996 (ECU million) 

Denmark 

Germany 

Technical  assistance  (national  network) 

Schleswig-Holstein 

France 

Alsace 

Centre 

C  'hampagne-Ardenne 

Douai,  Valenciennes 

Upper  Normandy 

Lorraine 

Midi-Pyrénées 

Loire  Region 

Rhône-Alpes 

Italy 

Technical  assistance 

(national  network) 

Lazio 

Liguria 
Lombardy 

A iarche 

Kiolise 

Piedmont 

Sicily 

Trento 

Veneto 

Austria 

Technical  assistance 

fnational  network) 

Lower  Austria 

Carinthia 

Upper  Austria 

Salzburg 

Styria 

Tyrol 

I  'orarlberg 

Finland 

Finland  (Obj.  5(b)) 

Finland  (Obj.  6) 

Sweden 

Sweden  (Obj.  5(b)) 

Sweden  (Obj.  6) 

T O T AL 

*  Excluding  reserve 

Total cost 

Total 

ERDF 

ESF 

EACGF 

For 

FIFG 

Objective 

%  for 

Objective 
areas 

Assistance  from  the  Structural  Funds* 

26.7 

18.6 

2.0 

16,6 

158,1 

A'.-/ 

15.1 

6.9 
4.5 

1.8 

16.0 

58,5 

IS.S 

28, I 

319.6 

3,1 

60.6 

15,6 

U.6 

35,9 

Jfi.l 

39,9 
65,2 

8,6 

5'.9 

66,0 

0.5 
N.I) 

8.4 

19.0 

2.8 

14.9 

5,3 

1.0 

76,5 

413 

32,1 

85,9 

-J.8 

14,1 
751,31 

8.2 

7.6 

1.0 

6,6 

67,1 
3, ~ 
6,4 

2.2 

2.0 

0.8 
~,4 

22,0 

9.3 

13,2 

105.5 

2,0 

16,3 

3,9 
4,5 

8.4 

9.8 
9.3 

32,6 

2,2 

16,3 

20.8) 

0,3 

5.6 

2.9 

4,9 

0,8 

4,3 
/." 
0,4 

28.1 

16,2 

11.9 

16.1 

12,1 
4.0 

3.3 

3.7 

0.0 

3,~ 

35.0 

I 

2.9 

1.0 

1.3 

0.4 

4.0 

13,9 

4.6 

5,3 

41.7 

0.0 

6,5 

2.1 

2~ 

3.4 

2.9 

5.0 

11.9 

0.9 

6,3 

9.0 

0.0 

3.0 

1.3 

2.2 

0.3 

1,6 

0.5 

0,1 

11.2 

6.5 

4.8 

8.1 

6.1 

2.0 

253,4 

111,8 

1.6 

0.5 

0.0 

0.5 

10.5 
0.4 

1.0 

O.i 

0.1 

0.2 

0 

3.1 

2.0 
2,-

16,6 

0,0 

2.5 

0.5 

0.5 

1.5 

1,9 

0.6 

6.1 

0.2 

3.2 

2.7 

0,0 

1.1 

0.4 

0.5 

0.2 

0.2 

0.3 

0.0 

4,2 

2.4 

1.8 

2,7 

2,1 
o.~ 
38,9 

3.3 

3.4 

1,0 

2.4 

21,6 

1.6 

2.6 

0.9 

0. 

0.3 

2~ 

5.1 
7  _ 

5.2 

47,3 

2,0 

".4 

1.4 

1.4 

3.S 

5.1 

3.6 

14.6 

1.2 

6,8 

9,2 

0,3 

1,5 

1.2 

2,3 

0.4 

2,5 

0.9 

0.2 

12.6 

5.4 

5.3 

4.0 

1.3 

102,7 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 
o.o 
0.0 
o.o 
0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 
o.o 
0.0 
o.o 
0.0 
o.ol 
0.0 

0.0 

0.0 
o.o 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 

o,q 

0,0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

2.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0,0 

2.0 

0,0 

0.0 

0,0 

0.0 

0.0 

42,4 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

9.8 

0,0 

32,6 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0,0 

0,0 

0,0 

0,0 

11.9 

0.0 

11.9 

4,0 

0.0 

4,0 

60,4 

0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
3% 
0% 
0% 
0% 

100% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
40% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 

100% 
0% 

100% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
42% 
0% 

100% 
25% 
0% 

100% 

24% 

Most of the  programmes  adopted  in  1996 include the three  measures  provided  for  in the  Commission 
guidelines for Leader II, namely: 
•  acquiring  skills:  this  measure  provides  for  finance  for  informing  and  motivating  local  people, 

• 

• 

analysing the area's strong and weak points and drawing up a development  strategy; 
rural  innovation  programmes: this measure  provides  support  for the  development  strategies  drawn 
up by local operators for the area concerned; 
trans-national  cooperation:  this  measure  helps  with  joint  projects  undertaken  by  local  action 
groups or other potential  beneficiaries  from  more than  one Member State. 

A total  of four  national  networks (three of them assisted) were set up in  1996 with  a view to  fostering, 
in  each  Member  State,  the  exchange  of  information  and  experience  between  Leader  II  beneficiaries 
and,  more  generally,  those' involved  in  rural  development.  The  national  networks  are  expected  to be 
set up in the other Member  States in  1997. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

61 

Table 1-33: 

Leader II - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 (ECU million) 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

1996 

1994-% 
(2) 

(2)/(l) 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(D 

8,2 
177,4 
148.0 
354,8 
190.0 
67,9 
288,7 
1,0 
8.5 
23,4 
117.6 
28.1 
16,1 
66,2 
16.0 
1.511,9 

6,5 
15,9 
0,0 
9,5 
92,7 
0,0 
49,3 
0,0 
0,0 
18,1 
4.0 
28,1 
13,4 
10,0 
4,1 
251,7 

6,5 
140,5 
22,6 
121,6 
188,3 
7,5 
77,9 
1,0 
8,2 
20,1 
10,7 
28,1 
13,4 
66,2 
7,8 
720,4 

80% 
79% 
15% 
34% 
99% 
11% 
27% 
100% 
97% 
86% 
9% 
100% 
83% 
100% 
49% 
48% 

2,0 
14,3 
0,0 
9,8 
45,6 
0,0 
22.3 
0,0 
0,0 
5.7 
4,9 
8,4 
4,0 
14,8 
1,8 
133,6 

2,0 
53.1 
11,3 
44,7 
61,1 
3,8 
36.3 
0,4 
2,5 
6.1 
8.4 
8,4 
4,0 
19,6 
4.7 
266,3 

24% 
30% 
8% 
13% 
32% 
6% 
13% 
40% 
29% 
26% 
7% 
30% 
25% 
30% 
30% 
18% 

Member State 
(number of 
programmes) 

Denmark (1) 
Germany (15) 
Greece ( 1 ) 
Spain (17) 
France (20) 
Ireland (1) 
Italy (22) 
Luxembourg ( 1 ) 
Netlierlands (4) 
Austria (9) 
Portugal (1) 
Finland (2) 
Sweden (2) 
United Kingdom (5) 
Eur. network ( 1 ) 
Total (102) 

Including national 

networks but not 
reserve 

Pesca  (1994-99) 

Pesca  (ECU  300  million40)  provides  financing  to  complement  the  structural  aid  available  under  CSFs, 
helping  fishermen  to  retrain  and  firms  in  the  sector  to  diversify.  Operations  relate  to  diversification  in  the 
fisheries  sector  (into  tourism  and  crafts),  improvement  of  occupational  skills  of  fishermen,  or  obtaining  the 
best  return  from  fisheries  products  and  improving  distribution  channels.  Pesca  applies  mainly  in  areas 
dependent  on  fisheries  situated  in Objective  1, 2, 5(b) and 6 areas, with  half the funding  being  earmarked  for 
Objective  1 and Objective  6 regions. 

In  the  wake  of  the  difficulties  that  affected  its  launch  in  1995  (late  adoption  of  the  programmes, 
complex  nature  of  the  management  machinery,  etc.), the  Pesca  Initiative  had  a  slow  but  steady  start. 
While  several  projects  were  already  being  implemented  in  Germany,  Denmark,  Spain,  Ireland  and  the 
United  Kingdom,  a  number  of  major  difficulties  remained  to  be  resolved  in  France,  Italy  and  the 
Netherlands.  Other  significant  events  in  1996  were  the  adoption  of  the  Pesca  programmes  for  Sweden 
and  Finland  and  the  launch  of the trans-national  Pesca  measures.41 

Table 1-34: 

Pesca - Programmes  adopted in 1996 (ECU million) 

Finland 
Sweden 
TOTAL 
* Excluding  reserve 

Assistance from  the Structural  Funds* 

Total cost 

Total 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

8.8 
10,5 
19.3 

3,4 
4.0 
7,4 

0.9 
0,8 
1,6 

0,5 
1.0 
1.5 

0,0 
0.0 
0,0 

For 
Objective 
areas 

V.. for 
Objective 
areas 

2,1 
2.2 
4,2 

0,6 
0.0 
0,6 

17% 
0% 
8% 

Compared  with  1995  there  has  been  a  marked  improvement  in  financial  implementation  in  terms  of 
commitments:  a  total  of  ECU  134.6  million  was  committed  in  1996  -  in  many  cases  in  single 
instalments  -  bringing  the  total  for  1994-96  to  ECU  187.7  million  (71%)  of  the  ECU  265  million 
earmarked  for  the  entire  programming  period  prior  to  the  allocation  of  the  reserve.  In  the  case  of 
the 
Belaium,  Germany,  France,  Sweden  and  Finland,  all  the  appropriations  provided  for 

in 

40  At  1996 prices, including the reserve. 
41  See  above. 

62 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

programming  plans  have  been  committed.  The  extent  to  which  payments  have  been  taken  up  remains 
relatively  low,  however:  altogether,  ECU  20.6  million  has  been  paid  to  the  thirteen  Member  States 
concerned,  bringing  the  total  for  the  period  to  ECU  37.9  million,  i.e.  14% of the  assistance. 

Table 1-35: 

Pesca - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99  (ECU million) 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Belgium  (1) 
Denmark  ( 1 ) 
Germany  ( 1 ) 
Greece  (1) 
Spain  (1) 
France (1) 
Ireland  (I) 
Italy (1) 
Netherlands  (1) 
Portugal  (1) 
Finland  (1) 
Sweden  (1) 
United  Kingdom  (1) 
Total  (13) 
* Excluding reserve 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(I) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(D 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

2,0 
16,4 
23,0 
27,1 
41,5 
28,3 
7,8 
34.2 
10,6 
29,3 
3,4 
4,0 
37,4 
265,0 

1,7 
9,5 
19,4 
22,3 
0,0 
9,5 
6.1 
0,0 
9,3 
23,2 
3,4 
4,0 
26,2 
134,6 

2.0 
12,3 
23.2 
26,8 
6,9 
28,3 
7,2 
4,4 
10,5 
27,5 
3,4 
4,0 
31,3 
187,7 

100% 
75% 
101% 
99% 
17% 
100% 
91% 
13% 
99% 
94% 
100% 
100% 
84% 
7 1% 

0,4 
0,8 
0,0 
0,3 
0,0 
8,5 
0,7 
0,0 

1.1 
4,5 
1,1 
1,2 
1,9 
20,6 

0.6 
2,2 
1.9 
2,6 
3,5 
8,5 
1.3 
2.2 
1.7 
6.6 
U 
1.2 
4,5 
37,8 

30% 
13% 
8% 
9% 
8% 
30% 
17% 
6% 
16% 
23% 
33% 
30% 
12% 
14% 

SMEs Initiative  (1994-99) 

The SMEs  Initiative  (ECU  1 087 million42)  responds to the need  for  SMEs to  adapt  to the  constraints  of the 
internal market and the globalisation  of economies. The SMEs Initiative  is intended  in particular  for  Objective 
1 and Objective  6 regions, where close on 80% of the appropriations will be spent. 

through  non-tangible 

Technological  innovation at the heart of the SMEs Initiative: 
This  is  the principal  Community  Initiative  that fosters  technological  development  in small  firms.  Under the 
programmes,  more  than  15%  of  the  Structural  Funds  appropriations  are  allocated  to  research  and 
development,  to  telecommunications  services  and  to  data  transmission  applications,  the  latter  being  the 
subject  of  close  attention.  It  should  be  recalled  that  the  SMEs  Initiative  is  a  continuation  of  the  Stride 
(strengthening  technological  potential  in less-favoured  regions),  Prisma  (improved  services for  firms)  and 
Télématique (using advanced  telecommunications services) Initiatives, some  of the current programmes  being 
based  on  the  experience  gained  and  the progress  achieved  in  the  context  of  those  Initiatives.  Measures 
eligible for  support  cover,  on  the  one hand, improvements  in production  and  organisation  systems  in small 
firms 
investments  (technological  innovation  and  advanced  communication  and 
information  systems)  and,  on  the  other, cooperation  between  research  centres  and  SMEs,  the  aim  being  to 
match  regional  research  activities  and  local  needs  and  thus  better  satisfy  SME  requirements  in  terms  of 
technological  transfer  and  applications.  Under  the  programmes,  adapting  to  the  new  information  and 
communication  technologies  and applications thereof within firms qualifies for  about  40% of the Community 
appropriations  intended for  technological  innovation.  The measures  concern  in particular  improved access 
for  SMEs  to  data  transmission  services  and  networks  and  distance  working.  As  regards  measures  to 
encourage  RTD,  which  attract  over  a  third  of  the  appropriations for  technological  innovation,  there  are 
significant  differences  as between programmes  with none provided for  under  the Greek programmes  whereas 
they  constitute  a major  component  of other programmes  (e.g. 47%>  both for  the  United Kingdom and for  the 
Netherlands).  Such  measures  include support for  innovation, technological  transfer  and  cooperation  between 
SMEs and research  and technology  transfer centres). 

. 

42  At  1996 prices, including the reserve. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

63 

Tourism SMEs  on the  Internet: 
Encouraging  SMEs  operating  in the tourist industry to advertise and trade via the Internet is one of the three 
trans-national  measures  launched  by the  Commission  in  1996.43  It  is aimed  at  helping  tourism  SMEs  to be 
present  on  worldwide  multimedia  networks,  and  thereby  enable  them to  benefit from  electronic  advertising 
and  commercial  activities.  In  an  industry such  as  that  of tourism,  in which the  emphasis  is  increasingly  on 
large-scale  markets  and  on highly integrated supply,  it is very difficult for  SMEs to fund  marketing  strategies 
on a pan-European  scale,  hence the need for  coordination at local, regional and Community level.  The aim is 
accordingly: 
• 

to create,  at European  level, a coordination  structure  that will constitute a common Internet  access  point 
for  tourism  SMEs; 
to set  up a system  of regional  or local agents  responsible for  concentrating and managing  the  provision, 
via  the  Internet,  of services  to tourism SMEs  and for  creating an  interface between potential  clients  and 
local  SMEs. 

• 

The Commission  has  received  more than 180 proposals for  projects relating to agents whose task would  be to 
coordinate  the  regional  or local initiatives. Selection  was expected to take place  in the first  half  of  1997, the 
programmes  themselves  being launched before the end of that year. 

In  relation  to  the  36  programmes  planned  overall,  a  total  of  14  new  programmes  were  adopted  in 
1996,  accounting  for  ECU  511.8 million  in  assistance  from  the  Structural  Funds,  i.e.  about  47%  of  the 
total  (ECU  1  087  million  including  the  reserve  and  ECU  1  062  million  without  it).  Since  21 
programmes  were  adopted  in  1995,  there  remained  only  one  SMEs  Initiative  programme  to  be 
adopted  (that  for  the  United  Kingdom). 

Table 1-36: 

SMEs  Initiative  - Programmes  adopted in 1996 (ECU million) 

Be\aium-Flanders 
Denmark 
Germany 

Baden-  Wurltemberg 
Lower  Saxony 
Brandenburg 
Rhineland-Palatinate 
Saarland 
Schleswig-Holstein 

Spain 
Italy 
Luxembourg 
Austria 
Finland 
Sweden 

T O T AL 

Excludinu  reserve 

Total  cost 

Total 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

For 
Objective  1/6 
areas 

%  for 
Objective  1/6 
areas 

Assistance  from  the  Structural  Funds* 

8,6 

5,1 
43.5 
1.8 
9.5 
20.9 
4.6 
3.1 
3.6 
1.383,1 
645.5 
1.4 
34,8 
27.9 
48.8 
2.198,8 

2.7 
2.6 
26,2 
0,9 
4,~ 
14.9 
2.3 
1.5 
1.8 
251,1 
191,7 
0.3 
9.C 

11.1 
17,2 
511.8 

2,7 
2,6 
21,2 
0.9 
4.3 
10,4 
2.3 
1.5 
1.8 
251,1 
184,0 
0,3 
7,6 
7.4 

13.0 
489,9 

0,0 
0,0 
5,0 
0.0 
0.5 
4.5 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
7,6 
0.1 
1,4 
3,7 
4,2 

21,9 

0,0 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 

0,0 

o,c 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
0,0 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,(1 

0.0 
0,0 
14,9 
0.0 
0.0 
14.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
226.8 
160.4 
0,0 
0,8 
5,1 
3,6 

411,6 

0% 
0% 
57% 
0% 
0% 
100% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
90% 
84% 
0% 
8% 
46% 
2 1% 
80% 

In  1996  the  Commission  committed  ECU  181.9  million,  corresponding  to  35%  of  the  amount  for  the 
programmes  approved  in  1996  and  18%  of  the  total  for  programming  under  the  SMEs  Initiative 
approved  since  1994.  In  terms  of  commitments  these  are  fairly  low  figures  compared  with  other 
Initiatives.  Of  the  fourteen  programmes  adopted  in  1996,  two  are  financially  sizeable  programmes 
under  national  management  (Spain  and  Italy).  Since  these  are  Community  Initiative  programmes  of 
upwards  of  ECU  40  million,  the  commitments  concern  the  1996  instalment  only.  The  twelve  other 
programmes,  covering  smaller  amounts,  were  the  subject  of  a  single  commitment.  The 
total 
commitment  in  respect  of  the  SMEs  Initiative  since  1994  is  38%  of  the  total  for  the  programmes 
approved  under  that  Initiative.  The  level  of  payments  (less  than  half  that  of  commitments)  shows  that 
the  programmes  are  still  at  an  initial  phase. 

43  See  1.1  above:  Overview. 

64 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Table 1-3 7:  SMEs Initiative - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 (ECU  million) 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Pavments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(D 

t 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

12,1 
2,6 
184,2 
83,3 
251,1 
58,5 
28,8 
191,7 
0,3 
10,3 
9,0 
124,0 
11,1 
17,2 
20,1 
1.004,3 

4,6 
2,6 
41,7 
18.3 
35,3 
0.4 
2,3 
44,7 
0,3 
0,8 
9,0 
1,2 
7,4 
13,0 
0,4 
181,9 

12,1 
2,6 
142,9 
28,8 
35,3 
15.8 
28,8 
44,7 
0,3 
10,3 
9,0 
14,4 
7,4 
13,0 
20,1 
385,4 

100% 
100% 
78% 
35% 
14% 
27% 
100% 
23% 
72% 
100% 
100% 
12% 
67% 
76% 
100% 
38% 

1,8 
0,8 
26,3 
9,2 
17,6 
0,2 
0,7 
22,4 
0,1 
0,2 
'2,7 
0,6 
2.2 
3,9 
0,1 
88,7 

4.0 
0,8 
57,1 
14,4 
17,6 
4,8 
8,6 
22,4 
0,1 
3,1 
2,7 
7,2 
2,2 
3,9 
7,4 
156,4 

33% 
30% 
31% 
17% 
7% 
8% 
30% 
12% 
22% 
30% 
30% 
6% 
20% 
23% 
37% 

16% 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Belgium  (2) 
Denmark  (1) 
Germany  (15) 
Greece  (1) 
Spain  (1) 
France(3) 
Ireland (1) 
Italy (1) 
Luxembourg  (1) 
Netherlands (1) 
Austria ( 1 ) 
Portugal  ( 1 ) 
Finland  (1) 
Sweden  ( 1 ) 
United  Kingdom  (4) 
Total  (35) 
* Excluding  reserve 

Regis  (1994-99) 

Regis  (ECU  612  million44)  is  intended  to  improve  integration  into  the  Community  of  the  most  remote 
regions. The measures  are aimed at achieving diversification  of economic  activity,  consolidation  of  links with 
the rest of the Union, cooperation  between remote regions, natural risk prevention  and vocational  training. 

Regis and the development of the technological potential  of the most remote regions: 
The measures  being considered  with a  view  to forging  closer  ties  between  the  most  remote  regions  and  the 
rest  of the  Community  include in particular  the  upgrading of telecommunications  infrastructure  and  training 
in  the  new  technologies.  They  represent  5.5%  of  Structural  Fund  appropriations for  Regis  programmes. 
Measures  in the field of RTD -  in particular  support for  the transfer of know-how  - make  up  the  bulk  of the 
appropriations  earmarked for  technological  development. Access  to advanced  telecommunications  and  data 
transmission  services also accounts for  a major share, the aim being to bring the regions  concerned  closer to 
the sources  of information and thus reduce their isolation. 

In  1996  three  new  programmes  for  France  were  adopted  which  together  attracted  a  contribution  of 
ECU  150.5  million  from  the  Structural  Funds,  i.e.  about  25%  of  the  total  of  ECU  612  million 
earmarked  for  Regis.  Following  the  adoption  of  three  other  programmes  in  1995,  all  the  programmes 
under  Regis  have  now  been  approved. 

Table 1-38: 

Regis - Programmes adopted in 1996 (ECU million) 

France 

(iuudeloupc 
French  (iuiana 
Xlartmiaue 

TOTAL 

Excluding  reserve 

Assistance  from  the Structural  Funds* 

Total  cost 

Total 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

295,0 
123.9 
4~,3 
123.8 
295,0 

150,5 
61.3 
28.4 
60.8 
150,5 

79,2 
33.8 
16,3 
29.1 
79,2 

25.3 
10.0 
4.2 
11.1 
25,3 

44.5 
16,5 
',4 
20.6 
44.5 

For 
Objective 
areas 

%  for 
Objective 
areas 

1.5 
1.0 
0.5 
0.0 
1.5 

150,5 
61,3 
28.4 
60.8 
150,5 

100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 

In  1996  the  Commission  committed  ECU  158  million,  with  the  commitment  in  respect  of  the  second 
instalment  for  1996  for  the  two  programmes  with  the 
largest  amounts  (Portugal  and  Spain) 
accounting  for  about  80%  of  this  figure.  Altogether  36%  of  the  Structural  Funds  assistance  for  this 
Initiative  has 

44  At  1996  prices. 

Slh Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

65 

been  committed  since  1994.  This  level  of  commitment  and  the  level  of  payments  show  that  the 
implementation  of  these  two  programmes  is progressing  satisfactorily. 

Table 1-39: 

Regis - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-99 (ECU million) 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Spain  (I) 
France (4) 
Portugal  (I) 
Total  (6) 
* Excluding  reserve 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

216,9 
266,1 
124,0 
607,0 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(D 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

47,4 
52.2 
58,3 
158,0 

75,4 
60,9 
80,4 
216,8 

35% 
23% 
65% 
36% 

59,9 
20,4 
55.3 
135,6 

59.9 
24,8 
72.9 
157,6 

28% 
9% 
59% 
26% 

The industrial  conversion Initiatives  (Rechar, Résider and Konver) and technological innovation: 
The  industrial  conversion  Initiative  guidelines  attach  a  great  deal  of  importance  to  adapting  to  the  new 
technological  environment.  They  encourage  cooperation  between  firms  and  research  centres,  universities, 
technology  transfer  and  training  centres;  innovation  in  industry  and  services  through  the  gathering  of 
information  on innovative products  and processes;  and,  in particular  in the case of Konver, the dissemination 
of  innovative  methods  of production  and  new  systems  of  business  organisation.  It  is  difficult,  however,  to 
draw  up a  detailed  list  of the  measures  and,  therefore,  of  the appropriations  specifically  allocated  to  those 
measures  under  the  various  programmes  since  they  are  more  often  than  not  part  of  larger  industrial 
conversion  measures. 

Rechar  (1994-99) 

Rechar  (ECU  462  million43)  supports  conversion  in  the  areas  worst  affected  by  the  decline  of  the  coal 
industry,  with  priority  being  given  to  environmental  protection,  to  the  rehabilitation  of  former  mining 
buildings, to new economic activities (in particular for  SMEs) and to training and employment. 

In  relation  to the  planned  overall  total  of  30  programmes,  four  new  programmes  were  adopted  in  1996 
which  together  accounted  for  a  Structural  Funds  contribution  of  ECU  83.2  million,  i.e.  18%  of  the 
ECU  462  million  earmarked  for  Rechar  II  (including  the  reserve  -  ECU  408  million  without).  All  the 
Rechar  II  programmes  have  now  been  adopted,  since  26  had  already  been  adopted  in  1995. 

Table 1-40: 

Rechar - Programmes  adopted in 1996 (ECU million) 

Germany:  Urandenhurg 
Spain 
France; Xord-'l'as-de-t 'alais 
Austria: Stvria. Upper Austria 
TOTAL 
* Excluding  reserve 

Assistance  from  the Structural  Funds* 

Total cost 

Total 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

49,3 
60,0 
39,3 
7,0 
155.6 

30,3 
34,2 
16,9 
1.8 
83,2 

21.2 
34.2 
16,9 
1.4 
73,7 

9,1 
0,0 
0.0 
0,4 
9.5 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 

For 
Objective 
areas 

%  for 
Objective 
areas 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
0,0 

30.3 
28,4 
8.3 
0,0 
66,9 

100% 
83% 
49% 
0% 
80"/,. 

Rechar - Example  of a programme  adopted in 1996 : Nord/Pas-de-Calais region (France) 
The programme  will, in the context  of the redevelopment  of former  industrial  land,  encourage 
the  setting  up of  schemes  to restructure  sites  for  multi-purpose  uses and  enhance  the  value  of 
the  industrial  heritage.  Part-financed  operations  will  have  to  be  fully  integrated  into  the 
development  strategy  of the areas concerned  and give due  importance to quality.  Priority  is in 
particular  given  to the three sites steeped  in the region's  mining history  (Pit  11/19 at  Loos-en-

45  At  1996 prices, including the reserve. 

66 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds  (1996) 

Gohelle, Pit 9/9a at Oignies and the Aremberg pit at Wallers), the aim being to link up  in a 
network  with  the  mining  centre  of  Lewarde.  The  heritage  and historical  value  of  the three 
sites  is officially  recognised  and there  is, by virtue of the  location  (proximity  to the mining 
belt, the future Dourges hub and the State forest), genuine potential for development. 

The  1996  commitments  correspond  to  29%  of  the  Structural  Funds  assistance  for  programmes 
approved  since  1994.  With  the  exception  of  some  programmes  adopted  in  1995  (Rhineland-
Westphalia,  East  Midlands  and  Yorkshire),  Rechar  programmes  fell  under the  ECU 40  million  mark 
and,  when  they  were  adopted, ^were  the  subject  of  a  single  commitment.  Accordingly,  the  1996 
commitments  largely concern  programmes  adopted  in  1996. The  1996 payments  also relate  above  all 
to  programmes  adopted  in  1996.  Aggregate  payments  in  1994-96  represent  33% of  the  assistance 
from  the Structural  Funds for programmes  adopted  during that period. Since this  is an  Initiative  which 
was  initially  scheduled  for  1994-97,  the  level  of  payments  in  1994-96  suggests  that  some  CI 
programmes  might,  with  the  benefit  of the  flexibility  afforded  in the context  of the  allocation  of  the 
reserve, be extended  until  1999. 

Table 1-41:  Rechar - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-97 (ECU million) 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(I) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(l) 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

15.7 
158,6 
1,5 
34.2 
33,5 
1,7 
1.8 
0,9 
163,2 
411,2 

0,0 
62.6 
0.2 
32.7 
17,9 
0,0 
1,1 
0,0 
5,6 
119,9 

15,7 
118,5 
1,5 
32,7 
33.3 
1-7 
1,1 
C9 
87,1 
292.5 

100% 
75% 
100% 
95% 
99% 
100% 
60% 
100% 
53% 
71% 

0,0 
23,2 
0.1 
16.3 
14,9 
0.5 
0,6 
0.4 
5,7 
61,6 

7,8 
50,0 
0.8 
16.3 
16,7 
0.8 
0,6 
0,7 
43,6 
137,2 

50% 
32% 
50% 
48% 
50% 
50% 
30% 
80% 
27% 
3 3% 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Belgium  (2) 
Germany  (7) 
Greece  (1) 
Spain  (1) 
France (7) 
Italy  (2) 
Austria  ( 1 ) 
Portugal  (1) 
United  Kingdom  (8) 
Total  (30) 

Excluding  reserve 

Konver (1994-99) 

Konver (ECU  739  million46)  supports  economic  diversification  in areas that  are  heavily  dependent  on  the 
defence  industry, through the conversion of activities related to that sector and the encouragement of activities 
in  non-military  industrial  sectors. At least  50% of the  financing  is earmarked  for  Objective  1, 2, 5(b)  or 6 
areas. 

In  relation  to  a  planned  total  of  45  programmes  for  1994-99,  six  new  programmes  were  adopted  in 
1996. The  Structural  Funds assistance was ECU  136.3 million,  i.e. about  18% of the total  of  ECU  739 
million  (including the reserve - ECU 509 million  without  it). After the adoption  of 37  programmes  in 
1995  only  two  Konver  programmes  remained  to  be  adopted,  one  for  Spain  and  the  other  for 
Luxembourg. 

46 At  1996 prices, including the reserve. 

8th  Annual  Report  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

Table 1-42: 

Konver - Programmes  adopted  in  1996 (ECU  million) 

Assistance  from  the Structural  funds* 

Total cost 

Total 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

146.4 
sir 
53.9 

40.9 

250.4 

32.0 

11.4 
440.3 

74.9 
12.-
3-.1 
25.1 
46.1 
12,0 
3.3 

54,9 
11.3 
26,0 
1~,6 
46,1 
11,0 
2,6 

136,3 

114,6 

20.0 
1.3 

11.1 
~t5 
0.0 
1,0 
0,7 
21,7 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
o.o 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 

t 

For 
Objective 
areas 

%  for 
Objective 
areas 

62.2 
0.0 
3'.1 
25.1 
6,3 
0.0 
0.0 

68,5 

83% 
0% 
100% 
100% 
14% 
0% 
0% 

5 0% 

0.0 
0,0 

o.o 
o.o 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,(1 

Germany 

Baden-  Wuritemberg 
Brandenburg 
Saxony 

Italy 

Netherlands 
Sweden:  Karlskoga.  Karlsborg 
TOTAL 
'  Excluding reserve 

With  the  exception  of  the  Italian  programme,  Community  assistance  for  the  programmes  adopted  in 
1996  was  less  than  ECU  40  million  and,  accordingly,  was  generally  committed  in  full.  Moreover, 
most  of  the  1996  commitments  concern  programmes  adopted  in  the  course  of  that  year.  Altogether, 
commitments  and  payments  up  to  1996  account  for  74%  and  36%  of  total  assistance  respectively. 
Since  this  is  a  new  Initiative,  delays  in  the  implementation  of  certain  programmes  could  well  justify 
possible  requests  that  they  be  extended  beyond  the  period  originally  planned. 

Table 1-43: 

Konver - 1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-9 7 (ECU million) 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(D 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

11,5 
2,4 
233,9 
12,9 
71,0 
46,1 
12,0 
7,9 
3,3 
101,9 
503,0 

0,0 
0,0 
89,0 
0,0 
6,3 
21,6 
11,0 
0,0 
2,6 
2,5 
133.0 

11,5 
2,4 
219,6 
11,5 
70,7 
21,6 
11,0 
7,9 
2,6 
12,5 
371,2 

100% 
100% 
94% 
89% 
100% 
47% 
91% 
100% 
78% 
12% 
74% 

0,0 
0.0 
70,8 
0,0 
3.1 
10.8 
3,3 
0,0 
0.8 
6,2 
95.1 

5,7 
1.2 
109.5 
5,7 
35,1 
10,8 
3,3 
3,9 
0,8 
6,2 
182,4 

50% 
50% 
47% 
44% 
49% 
23% 
27% 
50% 
24% 
6% 
36% 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Belgium  (3) 
Denmark  (1) 
Germany  (16) 
Greece (1) 
France (17) 
Italy (1) 
Netherlands (1) 
Portugal  (1) 
Sweden  (1) 
United  Kingdom  (1) 
Total  (43) 

Excluding  reserve 

Résider  (1994-99) 

Résider  (ECU  579 million47) supports  conversion  in steel-producing  areas. Like Rechar  II,  it gives priority  to 
environmental  protection,  to  new  economic  activities  and  to  human  resources,  the  aim  being  to  speed  up 
adjustment  to radical  change  in the economic  conditions  in the  areas concerned.  The  measures  planned  are of 
the same type as those under Rechar II. 

In  1996  a  total  of  seven  new  programmes  were  adopted  out  of  the  28  planned,  the  assistance  from  the 
Structural  Funds  being  ECU  232.5  million,  i.e.  40%  of  the  total  of  ECU  579  million  (including  the 
reserve  -  ECU  524.6  million  without  it) allocated  to  Résider. This  leaves  only  one  Résider  programme 
to  be  adopted  - a programme  for  Luxembourg  -  since  twenty  were  adopted  in  1994  and  1995. 

47  At  1996 prices,  including  the  reserve. 

68 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Table 1-44:  Résider - Programmes adopted in 1996 (ECU million) 

Germany: Brandenburg 
Spain 
France 

Lower Normandy 
X'ard/Pas-de-C 'alais 

Italy 
Austria-S/yriu, Lower Austria,  Upper Austria 
United Kingdom: England 
TOTAL 
•  Excluding reserve 

Total cost 

Total 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

Assistance from  the Structural  Funds* 

42.4 
464.3 
67,5 
2ir 
45.' 
505.6 
30.4 
48.9 
1.159,0 

26.2 
73.6 
19.5 
5.1 
14.4 
85,6 
5.2 
22.3 
232,5 

18,4 
73.6 
19.5 
5.1 
14.4 
85,6 
4.4 
19,0 
220,5 

7.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.8 
3.3 
12,0 

0.0 
o.o 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 

0.0 
0,0 
0.0 
o.o 
0.0 
o.o 
0.0 
0.0 
o.c 

For 
Objective 
areas 

%  for 
Objective 
areas 

26.2 
35.4 
2.8 
0,0 
2.8 
29.0 
0.0 
0,0 
93,5 

100% 
48% 
15% 
0% 
20% 
34% 
0% 
0% 
40% 

Résider - Examples of programmes adopted in 1996 : 
In  Spain the Avilés area  is using Résider to equip and  launch  an enterprise 
centre housed on the former site of the "Curtidora" firm. The conversion work 
is being  funded  by Résider. The new facilities  will  comprise  23 office  units 
totalling 4 200 m2 and 1  200 m" of workshops. 
In  France (Lower  Normandy),  the  cessation  of  steelworking  at  Caen  has 
made  it  imperative to define  a strategy  for  converting  the  employment  area 
(industrial and port activities, training and land use). The central concern is to 
define  a new economic activity, the aim being firstly  to establish  a link with 
the conurbation,  by including the' converted site in the  local  public transport 
network  and by  involving  local  SMEs  in  the  work,  and  secondly  to set up, 
with the help of firms, a prospecting and engineering method that can lead to 
the  creation  of  a  sizeable  agri-foodstuffs  site  at  Caen.  Several  stages  are 
planned: 
•  surveys covering potential major  international  investors and SMEs within 
the  industry,  the  aim  being  to  identify  the  most  dynamic  sectors  and 
investors' actual expectations; 

•  development  of the area: clean  factories,  technological  and display area; 
(biotechnology, 

reception  area 
from  other 
pharmaceuticals, cosmetics) and joint services. 

sectors 

firms 

for 

Most  of the  Community  assistance  has  been  committed,  except  for  the  three  biggest  programmes  in 
financial  terms  (Rhineland-Westphalia, Italy and  Spain), for  which  only the first  instalment  has  been 
committed.  The  1996  commitments  accordingly  concern  programmes  adopted  in  the  course  of  the 
year. They correspond  to about 26% of the Structural  Fund assistance  approved  up to the end of  1996. 
Cumulative  commitments  and  payments  since  1994  amount  to  60%  and  30%  respectively  of  the 
Community  assistance  for approved  programmes. 

Table 1-45:  Résider - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-97 (ECU million) 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Belgium (2) 
Germany  (9) 
Greece (1) 
Spain (1) 
France (7) 
Italy (1) 
Netherlands  ( 1 ) 
Austria  (I) 
Portugal  (1) 
United Kingdom  (3) 
Total  (27) 

Excluding  reserve 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(D 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(D 

24,4 
192,8 
4,7 
73.6 
62.1 
85,6 
18,1 
5,2 
6,9 
45,5 
518,9 

0,0 
36,6 
0,6 
7,6 
23,5 
42.8 
0,0 
4,4 
0,0 
19.0 
134,4 

23,7 
99,1 
4,7 
7,6 
62,1 
42,8 
18,1 
4,4 
6,9 
42,2 
311,5 

97% 
51% 
100% 
10% 
100% 
50% 
100% 
84% 
100% 
93% 
60% 

6.3 
20,8 
0.3 
3.8 
II.7 
21,4 
1,0 
2.2 
2.6 
9,5 
79,6 

11,8 
52,0 
2,3 
3,8 
29,3 
21,4 
8,4 
2,2 
5,5 
21,1 
157,9 

48% 
27% 
50% 
5% 
47% 
25% 
46% 
42% 
80% 
46% 
30% 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Retex  (1994-99) 

69 

Retex  (ECU  607  million48)  aids economic  diversification  in areas  heavily  dependent  on  textiles  and  clothing 
by:  encouraging  counselling  services  and  non-productive  facilities  that  can  improve  the  expertise  of  firms; 
and  providing  support  for  local  groups  of  firms  and  for  cooperation  measures,  staff  training  and  business 
services. 

In  1996,  of  the  21  CIPs,  three  new  programmes  were  adopted  and  one  programme  (Baden-
Wurttemberg)  extended  until  1997.  Assistance  from  the  Structural  Funds  totalled  ECU  7.3  million, 
i.e.  about  1%  of  the  ECU  607  million  (including  the  reserve  -  ECU  525  million  without  it)  allocated 
until  1999.  All  Retex  II  programmes  have  now  been  approved  or  -  in  the  case  of  those  adopted  in 
1993 at  the  time  of  the  launch  of the  Initiative  -  extended. 

Table 1-46: 

Retex  - Programmes  adopted in  1996 (ECU  million) 

Belgium:  Flanders 
Germany:  Brandenburg 
Austria:  Lower  Austria.  Styria  and  Vorarlberg 

T O T AL 
*  1994-97. excluding  reserve 

Total  cost 

Total 

ERDF 

ESF 

E A G GF 

FIFG 

Assistance  from  the  S t r u c t u r al  Funds* 

For 

Objective 
areas 

%  for 

Objective 
a r e as 

3.0 

6.0 

16.2 
25.3 

1,4 
3.3 
2.6 
7,3 

0.9 

2,3 

1.9 
5.1 

0.5 
1.0 
0," 
2.2 

0.0 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 

0.0 
0.0 
0.0 

0.(1 

0,0 
3.3 
0.0 
3,3 

0% 

100"!'. 
0% 
45% 

is  the  only  Initiative  covering  the  period  1993-97,  Community  assistance  and 

Since  this 
the 
commitments  and  payments  also  concern  programmes  adopted  from  1993  onwards.  In  the  case  of 
programmes  adopted  in  1996  the  commitments  and  payments  for  1996  substantially  exceed  the 
assistance  from  the  Structural  Funds.  For  1994-96,  commitments  and  payments  account  for  66%  and 
35%  respectively  of the  assistance  from  the  Funds. 

Table 1-47: 

Retex  - 1996 in the context  of programming  for  1994-97  (ECU million) 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(l) 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

Belgium  (2) 
Germany  (8)** 
Greece (1)** 
Spain (1)** 
France (1)** 
Ireland (1)** 
Italy (2)** 
Netherlands  (I) 
Austria  (1) 
Portugal (1)** 
United  Kingdom  (2) 
Total  (21)* 
*  Excluding  reserve 
** Including programmes  adopted  in  1993 (1993-97  assistance, commitments  and  payments). 

100% 
46% 
71% 
43% 
24% 
71% 
15% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
99% 
66% 

4,4 
32,3 
62,0 
38,5 
7,0 
8,1 
12,1 
1,0 
2,6 
194,8 
36,1 
399,0 

4,4 
70,3 
87,5 
90.4 
28,9 
11,4 
79,0 
1.0 
2.6 
194.8 
36.6 
607,0 

1,4 
9,5 
50,2 
0,0 
0,0 
1,1 
0,0 
0,0 
2,6 
83,4 
6,2 
154,4 

0,7 
8,6 
25,9 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
0,0 
0,0 
1.3 
27,4 
4.0 
67,8 

2.2 
16,7 
35,0 
34,2 
3.4 
4,1 
6.0 
0.5 
1.3 
90,4 
18.1 
211,9 

50% 
24% 
40% 
38% 
12% 
35% 
8% 
50% 
50% 
46% 
49% 
35% 

Urban  (1994-99) 

Urban (ECU  891 million49) helps in the search  for  solutions to the crisis affecting  a number  of urban  areas. It 
does  so  by  supporting  economic  and  social  revitalisation  via  the  launch  of  new  economic  activities:  the 
renewal  of  social,  health  and  safety  infrastructure  and  facilities;  employment  for  local  people;  and  the 
improvement  of the environment  in connection  with the above-mentioned  measures. The projects  must have a 
demonstration  effect  as  regards  other  urban  areas  and  should  be  part  of  longer-term  urban  integration 
strategies. Two thirds of the financing  is earmarked  for Objective  1 regions. 

48  At  1996 prices, including the reserve. 
4Q At  1996 prices, including the reserve. 

8th  Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

CHAPTER  VII  FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  1994-96 

TABLE  1 : FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  1994-96 BY OBJECTIVE 

307 

309 

TABLE  2 : FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  1994-96 OF THE  COMMUNITY  INITIATIVES 

317 

TABLE  3: FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  1994-96 OF TRANSITIONAL  AND 
INNOVATIVE  MEASURES 

CHAPITER VIII  REGIONAL  BREAKDOWN  OF FINANCIAL 

IMPLEMENTATION 

TABLE  1 : REGIONAL  BREAKDOWN  OF  FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  1996 

TABLE  2 : REGIONAL  BREAKDOWN  OF  FINANCIAL  IMPLEMENTATION  1994-96 

CHAPTER  IX  MAJOR  PROJECTS 

MAJOR  PROJECTS 

CHAPTER  X  ERDF AND ESF  PILOT  PROJECTS 

ABBREVIATIONS  AND ACRONYMS 

326 

329 

331 

337 

343 

345 

347 

355 

70 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

In relation  to a total  of  44  programmes  submitted by the Member States, 25  new programmes  were 
adopted in  1996, including one in respect of the reserve. Assistance from the Structural Funds totalled 
ECU 296.6 million, i.e.  about 33% of the ECU 891 million (including the reserve - ECU 668  million 
without  it)  allocated  to  Urban.  All  Urban  programmes  have  now  been  adopted,  since  eighteen  had 
already been adopted in 1995. 

Table 1-48: 

Urban - Programmes  adopted in 1996 (ECU  million) 

ToUl cost 

ToUl 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FTFG 

Assistance from  »h> Stn.ri.,r_l Fynilc 

Belgium: Brussels 
Germany 

Saxtmy-Anhalt (Halle) 
Saarhruek 

France 

Alsace (Mulhouse) 
Ile-de-France (Aulnay-sous-Bois) 
Ile-de-France (Les Mureaux) 
Nord/Pas-de-Calais ( Rtmhaix-Tourcoing) 
Nord/Pas-de-Calais (Valenciennes) 
Picardy (Amiens) 
Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur (Marseille) 
Rhône-Alpes (L\on-£st) 

Ireland 
Italy 
Austria: Graz** 
Sweden: Malmtl*** 
Finland: Joensuu 
United  Kingdom 

East London and the Lee Valley (Hackney) 
East Midlands (Nottingham) 
Scotland (Glasgow) 
London (Park Royal) 
Manchester 
Merseyside (North Huvton.  Liverpool. Netherton) 
Wales (Swansea) 
West Midlands (Birmingham) 
Yorkshire and Humberside (Sheffield) 

11.1 
.27.7 
5.2 
22.6 
152.7 
20.9 
22.8 
17.0 
17.6 
9.7 
20.5 
17.6 
26.6 
21,1 
280,7 
23,4 
11,9 
5.3 
181.9.. 
17.3 
14.9 
32.7 
16.3 
17.7 
35.7 
11.7 
20.6 
14.8 

TOTAl 
* Excluding reserve, except for Austria and Sweden (see notes below) 
** Programme adopted in respect of the reserve 
*** Amounts include those of tbe reserve 

71S.7I 

2,2 
10,7 
2.7 
8.C 
55,7 
7.0 
8.9 
7.0 
7.0 
4.9 
7.0 
7,0 
7.0 
15,8 
117.7 
3.6 
. 5.C 
4,C 
81.S 
8.0 
6.8 
13.6 
7,7 
8,0 
17.3 
5.6 
8.0 
6.8 
296-til 

1.8 
8.3 
2.7 
5.6 
45.9 
6.0 
7.8 
6.5 
5.4 
4.5 
5.3 
3.9 
6.4 
7.9 
102,0 
2,9 
3,1 
3,1 

64.61 
6.4 
5.6 
10.0 
6.1 
5.8 
14.8 
4.4 
6.4 
_______ 
239.81 

0.4 
2.4 
0.0 
2.4 
9.8 
1.0 
1.1 
0.5 
1.6 
0.4 
1.7 
3.1 
0.6 
7,9 
15.6 
0,7 
1.8 
0,8 
17,2 
1.6 
1.2 
3.7 
1.5 
2.2 
2.5 
1.2 
1.6 
1.7 
-___J 

0.0 

0,0 

0.0 

0,0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 
0,0 

0.0 

0,0 

0,0 

0.0 

0.0 

0.0 

0,0 

0.0 

0.0 

0,0 

0.0 
JUL 
0.01 

0.C 

0.C 
o.t 
o.c 
o.c 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
o.c 
o.c 
o.c 
0.C 
0.C 
0.C 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
____> 
0.C 

For 
Objective 
areas 

0,0 
2.7 
2.7 
0,0 
4.9 
0.0 
0,0 
0.0 
0.0 
4.9 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
15.8 
97.8 
0.0 
0.0 
4,0 
17.3 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
0.0 
17.3 
0.0 
0.0 
_____ 
142.51 

% for 
Objective 
area. 

0% 
25% 
100% 
0% 
9% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
0% 
100% 
0% 
0% 

0% 
100% 
83% 
0% 
0% 
100% 
2 1% 
0% 

0% 

0% 
0% 
0% 
100% 
0% 
0% 

0% 
0% 

firms 

Urban - Examples  of programmes  adopted in 1996 : 
In  France  the  programme  of  the  city  of  Tourcoing  (Nord/Pas-de-Calais) 
primarily  supports  a technology  centre  planned  and built  in partnership  with 
local 
in  one  of  the  most  disadvantaged  neighbourhoods  ("la 
Bourgogne")-  It  will  each  year  provide  technical  training  for  fifty  young 
people  up to CAP (Certificat d'aptitude  professionnelle)  level. In the context 
of  this project  there  will  be a general  neighbourhood  educational  project, the 
aim being to address the shortage of skills and the exclusion  of young people. 
As  well  as being  innovative  and partnership-based,  it will be in keeping  with 
the strategy of redevelopment and monitoring of industrial  changes in the area 
(Objective 2). 
In  Italy  the cities  of Syracuse  and Bari  are each  planning  to revitalise  their 
historical  centre  ("Isola  d'Onigia" and "Borgo Antico" respectively).  Poverty 
and  a diminishing  population  will  in  both  cases  be addressed,  firstly  by the 
development  of  new  tourism-related  activities  and  targeted  training  for 
residents,  and secondly  by improving  living  conditions  and controlling  urban 
delinquency. 
In  Finland  the city of Joensuu  (Northern  Karelia,  covered  by Objective  6) is 
facing  the country's  worst  unemployment  problem.  Much  of  its  population, 
lives  in  the  "Rantakylà-Utra" 
exeluded  from 
neighbourhood,  a  municipal  housing  area  where  alcohol,  drugs  and  the 
break-up  of  families  are  major  problems.  The Urban  programme  will  take 
action  in  the  area  by  introducing  measures  to  encourage  employment  and 
businesses, improve living conditions and promote training. 

the  employment  market, 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

71 

The  large  number  of  programmes  adopted  in  1996  accounts  for  the  year's  good  showing  (58% and 
65%  respectively)  in terms of commitments and payments for the period  1994-96. By the end  of  1996 
about  55%  of  the  assistance  from  the  Structural  Funds  for  the  Initiative  had  been  committed  and 
about  24%  had  been  paid.  The  level  of  payments  (less  than  half  that  of  commitments)  shows  that 
most of the programmes are still at the start-up phase. 

Table 1-49:  Urban - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-97 (ECU million) 

Member  State 
(number  of 
programmes) 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(D 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

Belgium  (3) 
Denmark  ( 1 ) 
Germany  (10) 
Greece  (1) 
Spain  (1) 
France (8) 
Ireland (1) 
Italy (1) 
Luxembourg  (1) 
Netherlands  (2) 
Austria  (2) 
Portugal  (1) 
Finland (1) 
Sweden  (1) 
United  Kingdom (10) 

10,4 
1,5 
97.3 
45,2 
162,6 
55,7 
15,8 
117,7 
0,5 
•9,3 
13,4 
44,6 
4,0 
5,0 
98,8 
681,9 
Total  (44) 
* Excluding reserve, except  for Austria (one programme) and Sweden 

2,2 
0.2 
12,0 
1,1 
33,2 
53,8 
1.8 
26.4 
0,0 
0,0 
5,8 
0,0 
3,1 
3,1 
72.3 
215,0 

10,4 
1,5 
91,0 
5,6 
56,0 
53,8 
1,8 
26,4 
0,5 
7,9 
12,7 
9,2 
3,1 
3,1 
89,2 
372,4 

100% 
100% 
93% 
12% 
34% 
96% 
11% 
22% 
100% 
85% 
95% 
21% 
80% 
63% 
90% 

55% 

1,1 
0.1 
11,3 
0,6 
22,7 
17,1 
0,9 
13,2 
0,2 
0,0 
2,3 
0,0 
1,6 
0,9 
36,1 
108,1 

5,2 
0,5 
34,5 
2,3 
34,1 
17,1 
0,9 
13,2 
0,3 
2,4 
5,8 
4,6 
1.6 
0,9 
43,0 
166,2 

50% 
32% 
35% 
5% 
21% 
31% 
6% 
11% 
50% 
25% 
43% 
10% 
40% 
19% 
43% 
24% 

Interreg  II 

(1994-99) 

Interreg  II  (ECU  3  544  million50)  Now  has  three  strands:  cross-border  cooperation  (ECU  2.4  billion  at  1994 
prices,  7 5% of which  is  for  Objective  1 areas); Regen  (ECU  500  million  at  1994  prices),  i.e.  the  completion  of 
energy  networks  to  link  them  up  to  wider  European  networks;  and  the  new  Interreg  II  C  (ECU  412.8  million 
at  1996  prices),  i.e.  cooperation  in the  field  of  development  planning. 

also 

invited 

Interreg 

improving 

to  increase 

the  systems 

the  Commission 

II  A  guidelines, 

the  Member  States 

can  serve  to  supplement 

This  applies  in particular 

terms  of  amenities,  where 

in  the field  of  research,  technology  and  telecommunications. 

technological 
to  areas  with  a  shortfall 

the programmes  generally  earmark  2.5%  of  the  Structural  Funds  appropriations 

in 
the  trans-European  networks.  Similarly, 

Interreg  IIA  and  the  technological  development  of  border  areas: 
inter-regional 
In  the  Interreg 
to  aid  for 
cooperation 
transfer  and  cross-border  networks  of  SMEs  can  be  developed.  It 
SMEs,  for  which  cross-border 
of 
applies 
encourages 
telecommunications 
in  the  field  of  education  and  culture,  including  cooperation  between  research  centres  in  border 
cooperation 
for  this  type 
areas.  Although 
the  situation  varies  between  Member  States.  The Netherlands,  Spain,  Greece  and  Ireland  place 
of  investment, 
in the  shape  of  measures  to  develop  cross-border  networks  and  services 
the  emphasis  on  telecommunications, 
(fibre  optic 
activities,  and 
information  networks).  Other  Member  States  with joint  programmes  focus  on  RTD:  France,  Belgium  and  the 
Netherlands,  which  provide  for  measures  aimed  at  technological 
in  the  field  of  research 
and  training  in  new 
Example 
programme,  which  was  adopted 
cross-border  multidisciplinaiy 
dealing  direct  with  enterprises  with  a  view  to  providing 
service.  The  teams  ' tasks  are  as  follows: 
to provide  direct  technical  assistance 
• 
technical  problems  or  technological  advice; 

WallonidNord/Pas-de-Calais/Picardy 
innovation  among  SMEs.  Two 
technological 
teams  have  been  created,  one  to  conduct  a  technology  watch  and  the  other 
transfer 

identifying  raw  materials  and  solving 
^ 

-  Technical  cooperation  between  France  and  Belgium:  The 

technical  assistance  and  a  technological 

in  1996,  is aimed  at  supporting 

in  the form  of product-testing, 

centres,  promotion  of  data 

transfer,  cooperation 

telecommunications 

links,  advanced 

transmission 

technology. 

50  At  1996  prices,  including  the  reserve. 

72 

8th  Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

making  available  to  firms  a  test  laboratory  using  the facilities  and  expertise,  of  the  two  cross-border 
teams; 
introducing new ceramic materials as an alternative solution; 
transferring technical and scientific expertise gained at the two research centres, in particular  in the field 
affine  ceramics; 
monitoring technological developments as regards products and processes; 
transferring technology via a specific training scheme for  the  workers concerned. 

In  the  case  of  the  cross-bordée cooperation  and  Regen  strands,  out  of  a  total  of  62  programmes 
presented  by  the  Member  States  for  1994-99,  25  were  adopted  in  1996,  for  a total  of  ECU  701.9 
million in assistance from the Structural Funds, i.e. about 23%  of the total of ECU 3 063 million (not 
including the reserve). Altogether, three Interreg II cross-border cooperation programmes remain to be 
adopted (Italy/Slovenia, Italy/Austria and Italy/Greece), since 34 were adopted in 1996. 

Table 1-50: 

Interreg II - Programmes adopted in  1996 (ECU million) 

Gcnnany/AuMriu 
Bclgium/Francc/L-Xcmhourj::  Wallnnia-Lt>rraine-Luxemhourg 
Belgium/France: Ardennes 
Denmark/Sweden 
Spain/Morocco 
Finland/Baltic  Stales: Southern Finnish coastal  area 
Finland/Russia:  Karelia 
Finland/Russia: Southeast  Finland 
Finland's wcden/Norwuy: North Cape 
Finland/Swedcn/Norway: Kvarken and Mittxkundia 
Finland/Sweden:  islands 
France/Belgium: Nord/Pas-de  Calais and  Flanders 
France/Belgium:  Wallonia. Nord/Pas-de-Calais  and  Picardy 
France/Spain 
France/Italy:  Corsica/Sardinia 
France/Italy: Carxica/Tuxcanv 
France/Unilcd Kingdom:  Upper  Normandy. Picardy  and East 
France/United  Kingdom: Nord/Pas-de-Calais  and Kent 
Italy/Albania: Apulia 
Italy/France 
Italy/Switzerland 
Swcden/Finland/Norwuy/Ru.-ax Barents Sea 
Sweden/Norway: Nordic  Green Belt 
Sweden/Norway: Gothenburg/Bohus/Àlvshitrg 
Sweden/Norway: Inner Scandinavia 
TOTAL, 
1 Excluding  reserve 

Total  cost 

ToUl 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

Awktanre from the Stnirtiiral  Flunk' 

56,3 
62,2 
27.8 
28,0 
185.3 
22,7 
31.8 
4<),7 
29.2 
14,6 
93 
38,3 
148.4 
142,6 

74.2 
58.2 
80,8 
95.3 
178.2 
160,3 
52.7 
23.4 
13.0 

13.0 
10.8 
_1___2__ 

2A,( 
30.2 
12.5 
13.C 
101.4 
6.1 
13.S 
9.< 
i2 a 
6/ 
4.C 
1X,( 
7 13 
62.4 
33.7 
18.f 
34.1 
45.1 
81.5 
57.C 
20.C 
10.5 
5.5 
5.5 
4. 

701.' 

17.5 
25.5 
9,7 

10.6 

100.3 

3.2 
92 
7.2 
7.2 
4.1 
3.0 
16.9 
58.6 
4 83 
30.0 
17.9 
29.8 
4 13 
70.1 
492 
15,6 
6.7 
2.1 
4.5 
3_l 
S913I 

3.8 
4.7 
22 
2,4 
1.1 
2,0 
3.4 
1.9 
3,4 
1.6 
0,4 
1.1 
10,7 
33 
0.7 
0,4 
43 
3,8 
8.9 
3.1 
0,0 
3,8 
2,4 
1,0 
1.4 

33 
0.0 
0.6 
0,0 
0,0 
0,8 
13 
0,5 
1.6 
0.9 
0,6 
0,0 
12 
10.9 
2,9 
03 
(),() 
0.0 
23 
4.7 
4,4 
0,0 
1,0 
0,0 
0.0 

71.91 

3831 

0,C 
0.(1 
0,C 
(),( 
0,t! 
o.r. 
o.c 
0.C 
o.c 

0,(1 
o.c 
o.c 
().(! 
o.c 
(),( 
0.C 
o.c 
0.C 
0,( 
(),(] 

0.C 
o.c 
o.c 
o.c 
o.rtl 

For 
Objective 
areas 

%for 
Objective 
?rwff 

0.0 

0.(1 

1.0 

0,0 

0% 
0% 
8% 
0% 

101,4 

100% 

0,0 

12.7 
4.8 
9.4 
1.1 
0,0 
0.0 

5 73 
0.(1 
33.7 
11.6 
0.0 
0.0 
8 13 
0,0 
0,0 
9.4 
53 
0.0 
L4 
330.91 

0% 
91% 
50% 
77% 
17% 
0% 
0% 
80% 
0% 

100% 
63% 
0% 
0% 
100% 
0% 
0% 
90% 
100% 
0% 
30% 
47%1 

The Interreg IIC strand, which was adopted in  1996, is a new instrument of trans-national  cooperation 
in  the  field  of  development  planning.  Its  purpose  is  to  contribute  to  more  evenly  balanced  land 
development  in  Europe  by  seeking  a  better  spatial  allocation  of  activities  and  the  correction  of 
disparities  as part of  a strategy  of  sustainable  development.  Interreg II C is  also aimed  at improving 
the  impact  of  Community  policies  on  land  development  and  at encouraging,  in  the  context  of  land 
development  priorities  that  are common  to  adjoining  geographical  areas, trans-national  cooperation 
between  Member  States  and  the  authorities  responsible  for  land  development.  Interreg  II C  is  also 
expected  to help Member States  and their regions  adopt  a preventative  and cooperative  approach  to 
water-management  problems  caused  by  drought  and  floods.  It  covers  three  main  themes:  general 
trans-national  cooperation,  flood  prevention  and  drought  control.  The  programmes  are  of  a trans 
national  nature and tend  to  concern  at least  three countries,  of  which  at least  two  must be  Member 
States,  except  for drought  control,  which  can concern  a single  Member State,  and flood  prevention, 
where bilateral  programmes  are allowed. At the end of  1996 the Member States  let  it be known that 
they intended to develop jointly  14 operational programmes, which were expected to be proposed and 
approved in  1997. 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds (1996) 

Table 1-51: 

Interreg IIC  - Proposals for programmes received in 1996 (ECU million) 

Field/Programme 

Overall budget/countries  taking  part 

General  transnational  cooperation 
A. Western  Mediterranean  and  Latin  Alps 
B. Southwest  Europe 
C. Atlantic  area 
D. Central  and  northwestern  metropolitan  area 
E. North  Sea  area 
F. Baltic  Sea area 
G. Centre. Adriatic, Danube  and southeast  Europe 
Flood  prevention 
H.  Rhine-Meuse 
1. France  and  Italy 
J. Greece and  Bulgaria 
Drought control 
K.  Portugal 
L. Spain 
M. Italy 
N.  Greece 

TOTAL 

120,69 

(Spain, France, Italy) 
(Portugal, Spain,  France) 
(Portugal, Spain, France, United  Kingdom,  Ireland) 
(France, Luxembourg, Belgium, Germany, Netherlands, United  Kingdom,  Ireland) 
(United  Kingdom, Netherlands, Germany,  Denmark, Sweden. Norway) 
(Germany, Denmark,  Sweden, Finland,  Baltic  States) 
(Germany, Austria, Greece,  Italy) 

(France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Germany,  Switzerland) 

148,15 

114,00 

382,84 

The  commitments  and  payments  made  since  1994 concern  only  cross-border  cooperation  and  energy 
networks  (';A"  and  "B"),  no  decision  having  been  taken  on  the  programme  proposals  for  the  "C" 
strand  - trans-national  cooperation  - transmitted  to the Commission  at the end of the year.  Community 
assistance  for  five  of  the  25  programmes  adopted  in  1996  (Spain  -  Morocco,  France  -  Belgium 
(Wallonia/Nord/Pas-de-Calais/Picardy)8  France - Spain, Italy  - Albania  and  Italy - France)  accounted 
for  more  than  half  (54%)  of  the  assistance  approved  in  1996.  Only  the  first  instalment  of  those  five 
programmes  was  committed  in  1996.  The  commitments  in  1996  exceed  those  in  respect  of  the 
programmes  adopted  in  the  course  of  the  year  since  they  also  cover  the  second  instalment  of 
programmes  adopted  in  earlier  years.  Payments  amount  to  23%  of  the  assistance  from 
the 
Community,  showing that the programmes are mostly still at the start-up phase. 

Table 1-52: 

Interreg II - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-97 (ECU million) 

Assistance* 

Commitment 

Commitment 

% 

Payments 

Payments 

% 

(1) 

2.870,5 

1996 

1994-96 
(2) 

(2)/(l) 

1996 

1994-96 
(3) 

(3)/(l) 

752,0 

1.306,2 

46% 

423,5 

650,1 

23% 

(number  of 
programmes) 

Total  (59) 
* Excluding reserve 

Peace (1994-97) 

Peace (ECU  302  million51):  The  programme  for  peace  and  reconciliation  in  Northern  Ireland  is  aimed at 
supporting  the  construction  of  a  more  peaceful  and  stable  society  by  providing  the  resources  needed  to 
maintain the local social and economic fabric. The objective is to promote the social  integration of people on 
the margins of economic and social life, to restore economic growth and encourage social renewal in the areas 
that have suffered  most from the conflict. 

In  1996  the  programme  became  fully  operational.  One  of  its  features  is  that,  where  possible,  the 
process  of decision-making  and  implementation  involve the persons concerned.  Implementation  itself 
is built  around  eight  non-governmental  bodies  (groups  and  cooperatives,  including  one  cross-border 
structure)  and  26 district  partnerships  (bringing together  representatives  from  political,  economic  and 
trade  union  circles,  industrial  promotion  associations  and  private  initiatives),  which  is why  setting  up 
the programme  proved  time-consuming. The first  awards of aid  by the  non-governmental  bodies  were 
announced  in  March  1996  and,  by  June,  all  were  in  a  position  to  fund  projects.  The  26  district 

51 At 1996 prices. 

74 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

partnerships  were  approved  and  issued  calls  for  local  projects  to  be  included  in the  action  plans, the 
first  part-financing  of which  was adopted at the end of the year. Decentralised  structures are  currently 
responsible  for  57% of the funding  provided  for  in the programme. Standard  activities  include aid  for 
industrial  promotion  associations  and  private  schemes,  which  often  operate  in  collaboration  with 
victims  of violence  and  with  women, young people, ex-prisoners  and the  long-term  unemployed.  The 
emphasis  is on  access  to the  employment  market,  in particular  by  providing  resources  for  those  who 
are excluded  from  it and  by helping them take part in decision-making.  Support  for  local potential  is a 
key  component,  especially  at  district  partnership  level,  and  includes  measures  aimed  at  urban  and 
rural  renewal  and  the  revitalisation  of the  physical,  economic  or social  environment.  The  granting  of 
interest  rate  subsidies  in  respect  of  investment  loans and  related  services,  in  particular  for  SMEs  and 
tourism,  is another  activity that has proved  very  successful. 

Events  in  1996  suggest  that  achieving  lasting  peace  may  well  be  a  slow  process.  By  putting  the 
emphasis  on  consensus,  on  a joint  approach  aimed  at  achieving  concrete  results  and  on  forward 
planning,  however,  the  programme  is a constructive  component  able to  underpin  initiatives  at various 
levels.  Introduced  for  the  first  time  in  a  Structural  Funds  programme,  the  Consultative  Forum  -  an 
instrument  within  which  representatives  of  all  sectors  and  allegiances  are  responsible  for  the 
management  of  the  programme  -  highlights  these 
indispensable  principles  of  participation, 
cooperation  and  concrete action  in a new European  context. 

Table 1-53:  Peace - 1996 in the context of programming for  1994-97 (ECU million) 

Total 

(D 

300,0 

Assistance 

Commitment 
1996 

Commitment 
1994-96 
(2) 

% 

(2)/(D 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-96 
(3) 

% 

(3)/(l) 

95,6 

126,7 

42% 

41,7 

56,5 

19% 

2. 

Innovative  measures  and technical  assistance 

Each  Structural  Fund  may  finance  its  own  specific  measures  covering  surveys,  pilot  schemes  or 
technical  assistance. There are ceilings  in respect of each Fund:  1.5%  of the ERDF's  annual  allocation 
and  1%, 0.5% and 2%'in the case of the EAGGF, the ESF and the FIFG  respectively. 

2.1.  Innovative  measures and technical  assistance  under Articles 7 and  10 of the ERDF 

Regulation 

Innovative  measures  under  Article  10 of the ERDF  Regulation 

The  Commission  has,  for  1995-99,  defined  four  priorities  -  each  with  a  multiannual  budget  -
implemented  by  pilot  projects  selected  following  a call  for  proposals.  Following  the  definition  of  the 
priorities  in  1994,52  and  the  issuing  of the  calls for  proposals  in  1995,53 the  process  of  selection  took 
place  in  1996, with  the  help  of  independent  panels of experts, and  innovative  measures  funded  under 
Article  10 of  the  ERDF  Regulation  were  launched  in  the  field.  It  is  worth  underlining  the  success  of 
the  calls  for  proposals  for  the  various  innovative  action  programmes:  for  external  inter-regional 
cooperation,  the  new  sources  of  employment  and  cultural  cooperation  programmes,  for  instance,  the 
Commission  received  a total  of  865  proposals  for  projects  (the  actual  figures  were  243, 357  and  265 
respectively)  but,  because  of  the  overall  budget  and  the  amounts  earmarked  for  each  project,  it  was 
able  to  select  only  123  (50,  41  and  32  respectively).  Similarly,  142  and  503  proposals  have  been 
received  for  development  planning  projects  and  urban  pilot  projects,  of which  14 and  25  respectively 
may well  be selected  (in  1997). 

52 See  1994 Annual report. 
53 See  1995 Annual Report. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

75 

Table 1-54: 

Innovative  measures  (Article  10  of  the  ERDF  Regulation)  -  Main  areas  of  assistance  in 
1995-99  (ECU million,  at1995  prices) 

Main  area  of assistance 
Inter-regional cooperation 
- internal inter-regional cooperation 
- external inter-rerional cooperation 
Innovative regional development 
measures 
- promoting technological innovation 
- Information  Society 
- culture and economic development 
- new fields of employment 
Development  planning 
Urban pilot projects 

Total 

180,0 
110,0 

90,0 

15,0 
15,0 
15,0 
___!__ 
45.0 
MSL 
395.0 

Inter-regional  cooperation: 

Pacte  1996programme:  38 Pacte  (initiation  to inter-regional  cooperation)  projects  had  been  selected 
in July  1995, with  an  implementation  phase  running  from  February  1996 to  December  1997. On  the 
programme launch days in Brussels on  11 and  12 March  1996, project  leaders and partners took part in 
training  sessions  and  meetings  with  the programme's  managers.  Mid-term  review  days  to be  held  in 
1997 will provide an opportunity for project leaders to present the results. 

Recite  internal 
inter-regional  cooperation  programme:  1996  saw  the  closure  of  the  Recite  I 
programme  and  the  launch  of  Recite  H  An  evaluation  report  on  Recite  I  was  drawn  up  in  January 
1996 by the programme's  technical  assistance office.  A total  of  thirteen* projects  were  completed  and 
brought to a close, leaving a further  23 to be closed*. Recite I facilitated  the creation  of 36 cooperation 
networks,  in  which  a  total  of  405  partners,  regional  and  local  municipalities,  development  agencies, 
chambers  of  commerce  and  private  partners  took  part.  Some  of  the  partners  were  involved  in  more 
than  one  network.  The  work  consisted  of  joint  measures  and  transfers  of  expertise  via  technical 
workshops  and  working  parties,  exchanges  of  staff,  technical  fact-finding  missions  and  public 
conferences. Concomitantly  with these exchange activities, some projects  developed  training  activities 
for  staff  participating  in  the  networks  and  for  those  involved  in  regional  development.  Numerous 
theme-based  studies  have  been  carried  out,  supplemented  by  comparative  studies  that  have  enriched 
the mutual understanding between  partners from  different  regions. Exchanges of expertise have helped 
to forge  closer  links and  develop common  approaches, develop  and  put  into practice  new  information 
and communication  technologies and test evaluation  methodologies. 

The  significant  features  of  the  launch  of  Recite  II  are  the  publication  of  the  terms  of  the  call  for 
proposals  and  the  setting-up  of  a  technical  assistance  bureau.  The  call  for  proposals,  which  was 
published  in  the Official  Journal  on  31 October  1996 with  15 May  1997 as the closing  date,  selected 
five  fields  for  cooperation:  developing  specific  local  potential,  particularly  for  the  creation  of 
permanent  jobs;  improving  access  to  the  European  market  for  SMEs  through  appropriate  techniques 
for  cooperation  between  firms;  improving  the  supply  to  SMEs  of  services  that  encourage  them  to 
innovate; establishing  and  developing  resource centres  to enhance  the  value  of  work  and  improve  the 
integration  of  women  into economic  life;  preserving  and  improving  the  environment,  in particular  by 
promoting  renewable  sources of energy and energy  saving and introducing - in particularly  vulnerable 
areas  - new  methods  and  techniques  to prevent  the degradation  of  the  environment.  Community  part-
financing  per project  (one third  of  the partners  in  which must be from  areas  eligible  under  Objectives 
1 and/or 6) will be between ECU  1 and 3 million. 

76 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

Ecos-Ouverture  external  inter-regional  cooperation  programme:  In  1996 the  programme  entered  a 
new  phase,  with  an  increase  in  the  overall  budget  and  coverage  extending  for  the  first  time  to  cities 
and  regions  in  non-member  Mediterranean  countries.  A  call  for  proposals  was  issued  at  the  end  of 
1995 with  1  April  1996 as the closing date. A total of 243 proposals were submitted  in response to that 
notice,  a considerable  increase  on  the  160 submitted  in  November  1994. Of  the  243  proposals,  fifty 
were  selected  for  funding  by  the  ERDF  and  Phare.  They  cover  an  eighteen-month  period  and  some 
were launched  as early as the autumn  of  1996. 

Innovative  regional  development  measures 

New  sources  of  employment:  In  the  White  Paper  on  Growth,  Competitiveness  and  Employment,  the 
Commission  identified  the sectors of activity with the greatest potential for employment,  and the main 
obstacles  to the development  of  that  employment.  It is in  that  context  that  measures under  Article  10 
are  aimed,  on  the  one  hand,  at  promoting  regional  or  local  strategies  in  terms  of  new  fields  of 
employment  and,  on  the  other,  at  testing  the  creation  of  proximity jobs  by  promoting  pilot  projects. 
This  applies  to a number  of priority  areas, namely  services to people  (children,  the  aged,  etc.), living 
conditions  (renovation  and  modernisation  of  housing,  collective  transport,  proximity  shops  in  rural 
areas,  etc.)  and  the  environment  (recycling,  nature  reserves, the  control  of  pollution,  etc.). The  pilot 
projects  are  implemented  for  24  months  and  are  based  on  a  wide-ranging  partnership  between  local 
authorities  and  the  private  sector  in  areas  with  a  population  of  at  least  200  000.  By  the  time  of  its 
closing  date  (3.1  January  1996)  the  call  for  proposals,  which  was  issued  in  September  1995,  had 
attracted  357  projects,  mainly  from  Spain  (97), Italy  (82)  and France  (47). After  evaluating  them  the 
Commission  selected a total of 41 projects.54 

Table 1-55: 

Pilot projects  - New sources  of employment  - Breakdown  of projects  selected in  1996 

freographical origin 

Belgium 
Denmark 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Portugal 
Finland 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Total 

Principal them. 

Personal services 
Services related to living conditions 
Services related to the environment 
Combination of the various themes 

7 
1 
5 
28 

__U 

.41 

The  selected  projects  will  receive  an  average  of  ECU  371  000  in  Community  part-financing  (total: 
ECU  15.2  million)  towards  an  average  total  budget  of  ECU  823 000.  A  launch  seminar  was  held  at 
Oberhausen  in  November  1996  in  collaboration  with  the  Land  of  North  Rhine-Westphalia.  This 
enabled  the  representatives  of  the  41  projects  to  engage  in  an  exchange  of  views  and  experience,  to 
receive  expert  advice  in  terms  of  management  and  monitoring  and  for  the  seeds  of  network 
cooperation  based on topics of common interest to be sown. 

Cultural  inter-regional  cooperation:  In  response  to  the  call  for  proposals  published  in  September 
1995, the Commission  received  265 proposals for pilot projects  on inter-regional  cultural  cooperation, 
of  which  it selected  32. The aim of the pilot projects  is to enhance the value of the regional  and  local 
cultural  heritage  and to establish  cultural  networks  between  EU regions  and  cities. A total  of ECU  15 
million  has  been  earmarked  for  these  measures,  with  part-financing  limited  to  ECU  600  000  per 
project.  Implementation  of  the projects  was  expected  to begin  on  1 January  1997  and  last  two  years. 
Cooperation  could  cover  in  particular  the  enhancement  of  the  value  of  the  historical,  architectural, 
industrial  and  craft-industry  heritage.  The  projects  selected  concern  mainly  the  enhancement  of  the 

54  For  projects  adopted,  see  Chapter  X  - Pilot  projects  under  Article  10 of  the ERDF  Regulation. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996), 

77 

value  of  the  heritage,  the transfer  of  know-how  with  a view  to  carrying  out  restoration  work,  devising 
cultural itineraries and the use of  new  information  technology  in the creation  of  a virtual  museum. 

Table 1-56: 

Pilot projects  -  Inter-regional  cultural  cooperation  •  Breakdown  of  the projects  selected  in 
1996 

Geographical origin 

Sample themci 

Belgium 
Germany 
Greece 
Spain 
France 
Ireland 
Italy 
Netherlands 
Austria 
Portugal 
Sweden 
United Kingdom 
Total 

Revitalizing the rural heritage in 
mountain areas 
Redeveloping mining sites for 
tourism purposes 
Enhancing the value of the maritime heritage 
Integrated development of spa towns 

1 
3 
4 
5 
4 
3 
3 
1 
1 
3 
1 
-1 
31 

Technological innovation and the Information Society in ERDF innovative  measures: 
Promoting  technological  innovation,  underpinning  technology  transfer and  helping  the  regions  adapt  to the 
Information Society are the major themes of the measures financed under Article  10 of the ERDF  Regulation. 
The  measures  are  based  on  a  coordination  of  the  Commission's  measures  in favour  of  innovation  (Action 
Plan for  Innovation).  In  particular,  Community  action  is aimed, on  the  one  hand, at  providing  firms  with 
appropriate  technology  and  making  them  aware  of  the  advantages  of  innovation  and,  on  the  other,  at 
promoting  an environment that lends itself to the use of technology by firms, thanks to': 
•  better  understanding  of the process  of innovation,  the dissemination  of best practice  and  the  exchange  of 

experience; 

•  an improvement in the professional capabilities of the intermediaries providing  support for  innovation; 
•  a  greater  ability  on  the  part  of  businesses  and/or  research  centres  to  make  the  best  possible  use  of 

innovative techniques and processes; 

•  a financial environment that encourages innovation. 
Innovative  measures funded  under Article  10 of  the  ERDF  Regulation  are  in  keeping  with  this  approach, 
which  is based on closer  cooperation between the public  and  the private  sector  and on  cooperation  between 
regional firms and the regional infrastructure offering or services related to technological  innovation  and the 
Information  Society.  They  consist  of  social  engineering  measures  aimed  at  bringing  about  socio-economic 
and  institutional  conditions  that  lend  themselves  to  the  development  of  technological  innovation  and  the 
Information  Society.  The  thinking  behind  these  measures  can  be  summed  up  as  "cooperating  (and  thus 
innovating)  at local level in order to become competitive at global  level".  Such  cooperation  is seen  as a key 
factor  in the establishment of a innovative regional environment. 
Innovative  measures and promoting  innovation: 
A total of ECU 15 million  is earmarked for funding  regional innovation strategies in 1995-99.  Implementation 
is  in two parts,  the  first  being an  experimental phase  covering  1994-96.  In  both  cases  two  types  of  measure 
have  been  selected: innovation  strategies  and  technology  transfer  projects.  The period  I994-9655  saw  the 
implementation  of  eight  regional  technological  plans  (four  in  Objective  2  areas  and  four  in  Objective  1 
regions56)  and three technology  transfer  projects.57 

•  Example  -  the  Regional  Technology  Plan  for  Wales:  is  aimed  at  making  businesses  more 
competitive by way of an action plan drawn  up in the light of two years'  consultations  with nearly 
600  regional  firms  and  organisations.  It provides for  more  than sixty projects  and  measures,  of 
which forty  are expected to be launched in 1996. 

•  Example  • the Implace project:  This is a  technology  transfer project  coordinated  by  the Castile-
La  Mancha  and  Northern  Ireland  regions,  both  of  which  are  eligible  under  Objective  I.  It  is 
aimed  at  encouraging  the  use  of  advanced  information  and  communication  technology  by 
manufacturing SMEs in less-favoured regions. 

55  See  1995 Annual  Report. 
56  Saxony, Wales, Lorraine and Limburg  (Objective  2) and Castile-Leôn, Central Macedonia, Abruzzi  and  None 

(Objective  1) respectively. 

57 Coordinated  by Extremadura, Apulia, Castile-La Mancha and Northern  Ireland  respectively. 

7$ 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

For  1995-99  a  total  of  19  RIS  (Regional  Innovation  Strategies)  and  seven  RTT  (Regional  Transfer  of 
Technology)  projects  have  been  selected following  a  call for  tenders.  The  Commission formally  adopted  12 
RIS  in  199658.  Regional  Innovation  Strategies  are  aimed  at  promoting,  within  the  traditional  productive 
tissue,  the  various  expressions  of  innovation:  technological  innovation  and  research,  plus  economic  and 
institutional  innovation. 

Innovative  measures and promotion  of the Information  Society: 
Innovative  measures for  the Information  Society also feature  two project phases  (1994-96  and  1995-99) and 
two  types  of  measures  (drawing  up  regional  strategies  and  developing  data  transmission  applications).  A 
total of ECU  20 million  (ECU 15 million from  the ERDF and ECU 5 million from  the ESF) is earmarked  for 
1995-99. 
The  period  1994-96  saw  the  launch  of  six  Irisi  pilot  schemes  and  one  multiregional  data  transmission 
application  project  involving seven  regions: 

.  « 

• 

Irisi projects:  In each of the regions,59  a broad-based partnership  has been forged  between  local 
and  regional  institutions  and  representatives  of  the  world of business,  training,  education,  trade 
unions,  chambers of  commerce and  the cooperative  movement with a  view to devising  a  regional 
strategy for  the development  of the Information  Society.  The project  is aimed at developing,  and 
facilitating  access  to,  various  fields:  distance  working,  distance  learning,  university/research 
networks,  data  transmission  services  for  SMEs,  the  use  of  data  transmission  for  health-care 
purposes,  etc. 

•  The  Wolf project  (World  Wide Web opportunities for  less-favoured  regions): Seven  regions  are 
working  together  to  identify  social,  economic  and  technical factors  that stand  in the  way  of the 
deployment  of  telecommunications  services  in  less-favoured  regions.  The project  supports  the 
development  of about  100 SMEs from  these  regions  through  the  use of  the Internet  and  related 
services. 

For  1995-99,  a total of 22 pilot projects  introducing RISIs (Regional Information Society Initiatives) and nine 
RISI  2  regional  data  transmission  application  projects  are  planned.  Altogether  15  RIS1 projects  were 
adopted  in  199660: 

•  The RISI  (14 funded  by  the ERDF  and  eight by the ESF) are aimed at  identifying  the  economic 
opportunities  and  risks  inherent  in  the  Information  Society  so  as  to anticipate  their  effects. The 
focus  will  be  on forging  a  regional  consensus  as  to  how  to  integrate  the  Information Society-
concept within regional development.  Each  region draws up a strategy and action plan  approved 
by local operators  and featuring,  in the  case of the strategy, an analysis  of the  current  situation 
with regard to human resources and employment and scenarios for  the integration of new services 
and, in the case of the action plan,  a feasibility  study on the applications  considered. 

•  The RISI 2  (seven funded  by the ERDF and two by the ESF) are aimed at demonstrating  the best 
practices  as  far  as  regional  responses  to  the  Information  Society  are  concerned.  Several 
municipalities  will  work  together  to  prepare  and  launch  data  transmission  applications,  with 
priority  being given  to applications  involving at least three regions, each of which must belong to 
a  different  Member  State,  and  one  third  of  the  regions  at  least  must  qualify  under  Objective  1. 
Major  emphasis  is placed  on applications  that are likely to produce  economic and  social  benefits 
and dovetail with regional development priorities  on a larger scale. 

Altogether  these  pilot  projects  in favour  of  regional  innovation  and  the  Information  Society  are  being 
implemented  by  about  fifty  regional  authorities  and  will  mobilise  more  than  a  thousand  public  or  private 
regional  operators.  Included  among  the  first  generation  of pilot  projects  were four  Regional  Technological 
Plans  completed  in  1996  and  six  Irisi  about  to  be  completed  with promising  results,  especially  as  regards 
mobilising  and  drawing  the attention  of local operators  to the importance  of innovation  and  the  Information 
Society  in the context of economic development.  The results will also prove  useful in terms of the  development 
of a  regional  strategy for  public  intervention  in these two fields and  in terms of identifying priority  objectives 
in the context of the second programming  phase (1997-99) in Objective 2 regions. 

Development  planning:  Two  types  of  measures  are  provided  for  in  the  field  of  development  planning 
under  Article  10  of  the  ERDF  Regulation.  Firstly  the  Terra  programme  of  pilot  projects  (to  which 
about  ECU  20  million  has  been  allocated)  is  aimed  at  implementing  innovative  projects  with  a  high 
European  content/value  concerned  with  the  integrated  development  of  specific  areas,  viz.  coastal 

58 For projects  adopted, see Chapter X. Pilot projects  under Article  10 of the ERDF Regulation. 
59  Saxony, Central Macedonia, Valencia, Piedmont, Nord/Pas-de-Calais  and Northwest  England. 
60  For projects  adopted, see Chapter X.  Pilot projects  under Article  10 of the ERDF Regulation. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

79 

areas, river basins, mountain  areas, areas  whose  natural  or cultural  heritage  is  being  threatened,  etc. 
The  projects  relating  to  coastal  areas are  also  part  of  the  Community  demonstration  programme  of 
integrated  development  of  coastal  areas.  A  call  for  proposals  was  issued,  in  respect  of  the  Terra 
programme to regional and local authorities in the Union in  1996, in response to which  142 proposals 
were  received.  A  limited  number  of  proposals  was  preselected  following  their  evaluation  by  an 
independent panel of experts and by the Commission and five were approved in 1996.61 

Moreover,  pilot  measures  implemented  in  close  collaboration  with  Member  States  under  the  ESDP 
(European  Spatial  Development  Perspective)  cover  large  trans-national  European  areas:  These 
measures  are  supplementary  to  and  concomitant  with  the  Interreg  II  C  Initiative  and  have  been 
allocated  a total  of  ECU  20  million.  In  1996 Member  States  were  invited  to put forward joint  pilot 
measures  with  the  same  objectives  as  the  Interreg  II  C  Initiative,  of  a  trans-national  nature  and 
involving  three  different  countries  (including  at  least  two  Member  States).  The  Member  States' 
expressions  of interest served to indicate five areas: the northern rim (Denmark, Finland, Sweden and 
Norway),  the  eastern  Alps  (Austria,  Italy  and  Germany),  the  southeastern  Mediterranean  (Greece, 
Italy,  Malta  and Cyprus), the Rhineland-Lotharingian  area (Belgium, Luxembourg,  France, Germany 
and Switzerland)  and a cooperation  area involving Portugal,  Spain and Morocco. The pilot  measures 
are expected to be presented, assessed and approved in 1997. 

Urban pilot projects:  Following the call for proposals issued in  1995 with an April  1996 closing date, 
the Commission  received  503  proposals  for urban pilot projects,  of  which  only  25  could  be  selected 
(this  was  scheduled  for the beginning of  1997). The theme that recurred most often  in  (in more than 
20% of  the proposals) was that of an integrated approach to the development  of urban areas. Dealing 
with  obsolescent  amenities  and  improving  the  environment  also  featured  prominently.  The  themes 
vary  according  to  the  geographical  provenance  of  the  proposals:  in  France,  Italy  and  Austria  a 
significant  number  of  projects  focus  on  exploiting  the  assets  of  medium-sized  cities,  whereas  in 
France, Spain and Italy a number of projects also concerned aspects of  suburban development not yet 
brought under control.  Other themes/topics, such  as equal  opportunities  and information  technology, 
have been incorporated in broader strategies. Moreover, some twenty of the pilot projects for  1989-93 
remained to be completed in  1996. They had reached the final  phase, with upwards of  80% of ERDF 
appropriations paid. 

Table 1-57:  Measures financed under Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation (ECU million) 

Inter-regional cooperation 
- internal inter-regional cooperation 
- external  infer-retnonal cooneration 
Innovative regional development 
measures 
- promoting technological innovation 
- Information Society 
- culture and economic development 
- new sources of emnlnvmem 

fMhM-

*  1995  prices 

overall budeet 
1995-99 
m 

180,0 
110,0 
70.0 

90,0 

15,0 

15,0 

15.0 

4 50 

45.0 

80.0 

Total 

395.0 

Commitments 
1996 

18,0 
2,0 
16.0 

8^ 

2,5 

0.0 
\9 

14.0 

1.0 

«.0 
47J 

Commitments 
1994-96 
m 

% 

Payments 
1996 

Payments 
1994-1996 

% 

23,0 

7,0 
16  0 

14,1 

6,4 

0.0 

\9 

14.0 

1.0 

7.2 

59.3 

1 3% 

6% 
2 3% 

1 6% 

4 2% 

2 5% 

0,0 

9% 
3 1% 

1% 

1 5% 

1,9 
1.9 

03 

0.1 

0,7 

0,0 

0.0 

4.9 

0.0 
2ft 
9.5 

4,7 
4,7 

4,0 

2,6 
1.4 
0.0 
00 

4.9 

0.0 

2.7 

16.4 

3% 

4% 

0% 

4% 

17% 

10% 

0% 

0% 

1 1* 

0«7-

4% 

61 For projects adopted, see Chapter X.  Pilot projects under Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation. 

80 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Technical assistance  under Article  7 of the ERDF  Regulation 

Subject  to  a  limit  of  0.5%  of  the  ERDF's  annual  allocation,  preparatory,  prior  appraisal,  monitoring 
and ex post  evaluation  may be funded  under Article 7 of the ERDr] Regulation. Such measures  include 
studies,  technical  assistance  and  information  by  experts  not  belonging  to  the  Commission  or  by  the 
Commission  itself.  In  1996  commitments  for  these  accompanying  measures  conducted  at  the 
Commission's  initiative  totalled  ECU  17.9  million,  ECU  3.9  million  up  on  the  preceding  year.  This 
accounts for 0.12% of the ERDF allocation  (0.11% in  1995). 

Table 1-58:  Measures funded  under Article  7 of the ERDF  Regulation  (ECU  million) 

Preparatory  measures  and  monitoring 
Evaluation 
Regional  studies 
Conferences,  symposia  and  seminars 
Information  and  publicity 
Technical  assistance  and  equipment 
TOTAL 

Commitments 

Commitments 

122É 

4.6 
1,4 
0.2 
1,8 
6,2 
__L7 

Jill 

13,5 
1,4 
1,5 
2,7 
14.6 

43.9 

The  appraisals  (8%) begun  in  1996 deal primarily  with programmes  relating to Objective  2 during  the 
1989-93  programming  period  and  with  a  number  of  pilot  projects  funded  under  Article  10  of  the 
ERDF  Regulation.  Information  measures  (35%),  including  the  publication  of  the  first  Report  on 
economic  and  social  cohesion,  contributed  to  making  regional  policies  and  projects  funded  by  the 
Commission  more  visible.  Preparatory  and  follow-up  measures  (26%)  led  to  studies  covering  the 
implementation  of  Community  policies,  in  particular  as regards  equality  of  opportunity  between  men 
and  women, job  creation,  sustainable development  and the environment. Expenditure  on seminars  and 
conferences  (10%)  includes, for  instance, preparing for  the April  1997 Forum  on economic  and  social 
cohesion,  the  regional  seminars  in  Objective  2 areas  and  a  conference  on  inter-regional  cooperation. 
The  regional  studies  (0.2%)  launched  in  1996  are  of  a  statistical  nature.  The  various  technical 
assistance measures (21%) covered experts'  reports on regional policy. 

2.2.  Innovative measures and technical assistance under Article 6 of the ESF Regulation 

With  regard  to  innovative  measures,  the  Commission  decided  in  1996  that  the  allocation  of 
appropriations  under Article  6 of  the ESF Regulation  would  from  then  on  be the subject  of  a call  for 
proposals  administered  at  Community  level.  A  call  for  proposals  was  accordingly  issued  on  26 
October  1996 on the theme of new fields of  employment. An  initial  selection  of 52 projects  (from  the 
210 received)  was carried  out  in respect  of  1996 for  a total  of ECU  25 million  (the projects  still  have 
to be  formally  approved  in  1997). A second  selection  was due to take place in mid-1997. Compliance 
with, and the strengthening  of,  of Community  measures centred  on priority  political themes have been 
key  factors  in  project  selection  (equality  of  opportunity,  overcoming  exclusion,  etc.). With  regard  to 
projects  selected  in  earlier  years  there  were  thirty  or  so  projects  selected  in  199462  and  58  projects 
selected  in  199563  and  formally  adopted  in  April  1996,  for  a  total  of  ECU  23.8  million.  All  these 
projects  cover  the  strengthening  of  the  employment  systems,  in  particular  the  search  for  sharper 
growth in employment, improving the labour market and underpinning  training systems. An evaluation 
system  was set up for  those  projects  in  1996 in  order to assess their degree of  innovation  and  the best 
practices, the results  of the evaluation  were  expected  to lead  to a seminar  in  which, depending  on  the 
topics  of  concern  to  them,  project  managers,  officials  from  the  ministries  of  the  Member  States  and 
experts would  take part. 

62  See  1994  Annual  Report. 
63  See  1995  Annual  Report. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Fundi (1996) 

81 

ESF pilot projects  and Information Society: 
In the context of the above-mentioned  RISI and RISI 2 projects  the ESF is providing funding  totalling ECU  five 
million for  eight  RISI  projects  in  regions  or  cities  in  Wales, Midi-Pyrénées,  Murcia,  South  West  England, 
Attica,  Bremen,  Northern  Karelia  and  Blekinge.  It  is  also funding  two  RISI  2 projects.  Other pilot  projects 
funded  under Article  6 of the ESF Regulation also underpin the process of adapting to the Information  Society. 
Example  - Internet in the school  Pilot project  in Castile-Leôn:  This project  is aimed  at  introducing 
the  Internet  in four  schools  situated  in  rural  areas.  Its  purpose  is  to  make  Information  Society 
concepts  an  integral part  of the practice  of teaching, to enable teachers and pupils  to gain  access  to 
the Internet for  teaching  and culture purposes,  to provide  schools  with the necessary  measures,  and 
to promote  the creation of networks between the region's  schools and the rest of the world in order to 
exchange  experience, form  discussion forums  and promote  the  teaching  of foreign  languages.  In  the 
context  of this project  a server containing  cultural and  educational  information will  be set  up  in the 
region's  technology park. 

With  regard  to  technical  assistance,  implementation  of  the  Employment  and  Adapt  Community 
Initiatives  was  actively  supported,  as  in  1995, by  the  support  structure  set  up  in  1995, Europs.  The 
year  1996 was essentially  one of gathering and analysing information  on the first series of projects  and 
preparing  a series  of publications  on the various  strands  of  the two  CIs. Thanks  to collaboration  with 
national  support  structures  a  guide  on. trans-nationality  was  prepared  for  the  benefit  of  project 
promoters. Work  preparatory  to the  launch  of  the  second  phase  of  projects  has begun.  Moreover,  the 
intermediate  support  structure  specialising  in public  relations  and communication  activities  has begun 
the information  and communication  activities for the ESF. 

Table 1-59: 

Innovative  measures and technical  assistance funded  under Article  6 of  the  ESF  Regulation 
(ECU million) 

Commitments  Commitments 

1996 

1994-96 

Innovative measures, studies 
Technical assistance 
TOTAL 

, 

I 

34,4 
____l 
_M 

56,6 
____% 
122_1 

2 3.  Innovative measures and technical assistance under Article 8 of the EAGGF Regulation 

Under  Article  8  of  the  EAGGF  Regulation,  funding  may  be  given  for  measures  concerned  with 
evaluation,  monitoring  and  technical  assistance,  pilot  projects  relating  to  the  adaptation  of  farming 
structures  and  promoting  rural  development,  demonstration  projects,  and  measures  necessary  for  the 
dissemination  of  the  results  of  experience  and  work  on  rural  development  and  the  improvement  of 
farm  structures. Measures funded  in  1996 in respect  of Article  8 of the EAGGF Regulation  concerned 
35 pilot  and  demonstration  projects,  four  dissemination  projects  and  three  studies. The  commitments 
entered into in this respect in  1996 total ECU  15.4 million and payments ECU 9.2 million. Since  1994, 
commitments  in  respect  of  Article  8  of  the  EAGGF  Regulation  have  totalled  ECU  21.2  million  and 
payments ECU 23.9 million. 

Evaluation,  follow-up,  technical  assistance  and  study  work  was  aimed  at  prior  appraisal  of  two 
multiregional  OPs in Objective  1  regions in Italy, the ex post  evaluation  of the Leader I Initiative64 and 
the setting up of a programme of rural indicators for underpinning a rural development  policy. 

The  pilot  and  demonstration  projects  (35  altogether),  the  call  for  proposals  for  which  was  due  to 
close  in  1995,65 were  launched  in  1996. They  were  selected  on  the  basis  of  four  priority  fields  and 
covered the following  topics: 

64  See Chapter IV. Evaluation. 
65  See  1995 Annual  Report. 

82 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

•  non-food  production:  growing  of  herbaceous  species 

industry, 
(Malaleuca 
introduction  of  crops 
alternafolia,  myrrh,  liquorice,  Aloe  Vera,  fine  lavender),  processing  of  castor  in  order  to  extract 
natural  aromas; 

the  pharmaceutical  or  cosmetics 

the  building 
industry 

intended  for 

intended  for 

•  agri-environmental  aspects: marketing of biocomponents  and biological farming  products, restoring 

• 

• 

cultivation  terraces in Mediterranean  areas, introducing  a system of mineral  accounting; 
forestry:  regenerating  burnt  forests,  conservation  of periurban  woodlands, obtaining the best  return 
from  coppice wood, optimising farming-forestry  systems; 
rural  development:  diversification  in a rural  environment  towards high value added activities  while 
taking  conservation  into  account  (introduction  of  biological  products  in  the  schools  and  business 
sector,  marketing  of  typical  agricultural  products,  farm  tourism,  etc.),  innovative  schemes  to 
encourage young people to take up farming. 

A  fresh  call  for  proposals  was  issued  in  September  1996  for  pilot, and  demonstration  projects  for 
"innovative  measures for  female  farmers  and  women generally  in the countryside"66  (closing date: 20 
February  1997). Proposals  must  be aimed  at supporting  and  promoting women  in the countryside,  e.g. 
measures  undertaken  by  women  or  female  farmers  to  promote  and  obtain  the  best  return  from 
agricultural  products  and  retrain  or  diversify  , measures  to  create jobs  and  integrate  into  society  and 
the labour  market, training or supervision  measures, or the development  of networks  enabling them  to 
pass on their know-how  and experience. 

Pilot projects in the field of research and technological development: 
Pilot  and  demonstration  projects  eligible for  funding  under  Article  8  of  the  EAGGF  Regulation 
provide  an ideal opportunity for  testing  research findings on a scale approaching  actual  conditions 
and for  demonstrating  the feasibility  of  an  innovative  system,  method  or  production  technique. 
Measures funded  in 1996 thus  concerned, for  instance,  the demonstration  of a simple  and  effective 
technique for  processing  vegetable  fibres  (giant  reeds and  sorghum)  into chipboard,  the  feasibility 
of  a  new  technique  for  extracting  -  at  farm  level  -  natural  flavourings  from  castor,  or  the 
application  to rural firms  of a technology based on the new ISO 9000 quality  concept. 

Dissemination  measures  concerned  the creation  of  a visual  identity  for  rural  development  (logo), the 
publication  of  cards  on  rural  development  and  the  holding  of  a seminar  on  the ecological  benefits  of 
sustainable  agriculture. 

2.4.  Innovative action and technical assistance under Article 4 of the FIFG Regulation 

In  accordance  with  Article  4  of  the  FTFG Regulation,  the  measures  carried  out  in  1996  consisted  of 
studies,  pilot  projects,  publications,  information  campaigns  and  technical  assistance.  The  studies 
covered:  fleet  diagnostics  and  identifying  measures  to  be  carried  out  in  the  three  types  of  fisheries 
occupations  in  the  Mediterranean  (tuna  seine  fishing,  trawling  and  minor  occupations);  the use  made 
of  fisheries  products  withdrawn  from  the  market;  and  the  impact  of  the  Community's  autonomous 
quotas  and  suspensions  on  the  extractive  producer  sector  and  the  fisheries  products  processing 
industry.  With  regard  to  publications,  the  Commission  edited  information  brochures  on  measures  to 
assist  fishing,67  republished  the report  entitled  "Aquaculture  and  Environment"  and  the  record  of  the 
"Shellfish  Farming  and  Coastal  Development"  Conference.  Work  began  on  two  major  events 
scheduled  for  1997:  the  first  Euro-Moroccan  partnership  meeting  between  firms  from  the  fishing 
industry  (Casablanca  '97  Partnership  -  Fishing  Industry)  and  a  European  Information  campaign 
designed  to  encourage  the  consumption  of  fisheries  and  aquaculture  products.  Lastly,  in  the  field  of 
technical  assistance, the Community  register  of fishing  vessels  was updated  and there was funding  for 
training  in  the  "Infosys"  information  technology  system  of  monitoring  and  evaluation  of  FTFG-
financed  structural  measures. 

66 Call for proposals 96/C 284/10, OJ No C 284, 27.9.1996. 
67 See Chapter III.D.l. Information  and communication activities. 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fundi (1996) 

83 

Table  1-60: 

Measures 

funded  under  Article  4  of  the  FIFG  Regulation 

(ECU) 

Studies 
Publications 
Technical assistance» 
TOTAL 

Including pilot projects and events 

Commitments 

Commitments 

Payments 

156.250 
17.520 
.585,741 
_252_511 

4.027.736 
79.908 
__L_H2_2_£ 
i&ijm 

867.213 
37.068 
685.145 
1-S89.426 

Payments 
im-n 
2.766.949 
67.863 
_U_Z______i 
3-857.71» 

s s 

CHAPTERII  , 

BUDGETIMPI_EM^ATÏON, 

C H £ C K S _ ^ W F l N Â N ( ^ A ^ À 6 _ _ M E^ 

COORDINATION OF THE VARIOUS E.NANOAL INSTRUMENTS, 

COMP___EMENTARITY WITH THE OTHER COMMUNITY POLICIES 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

87 

A.  BUDGETARY IMPLEMENTATION OF THE STRUCTURAL FUNDS 

1.  Budget implementation in 1996 

1.1.  General implementation in 1996 

The  aim  of  this  section  is  to  look  at  implementation  of  the  1996  budget  as  a  whole,  that  is,  of 
appropriations for  1994-99 and those for previous periods. In the case of  1996, it distinguishes between 
implementation of appropriations newly entered in the budget and the implementation of appropriations 
carried over to  the  1996  budget from the previous year. 

Table II-l: Origin and  implementation of commitment appropriations in 1996  (ECU  million) 

C SF 

E R DF 

C SF 

E SF 

11.KX3.70 

7 . 1 4 5 . 80 

CSF 

C SF 
__________ 
- E EC 

3 . 7 7 2 , 00 

450.35 

2 . 9 6 8 . 10 

296.10 

().(X) 

().(X) 

0.00 

().<X) 

(MX) 

(UK) 

0.(X) 

(MX) 

(),(X> 

(MX) 

0,(X) 

(MX) 

C o m m u n i ty  Transitional  Anti-fraud 
laitiatixcs  mcaaus 

F o r m er 

T O T AL 

Total  appropriations  1 9 96 

ll.XX3.70 

7.145.X» 

3.772.(X) 

"50,35 

2.968.10 

296.10 

(MX) 

(MX) 

(MX) 

O.(X) 

4.32 

(MX) 

(MX) 

(MX) 

(MX) 

1-1.883.70 

7.150.12 

3 . 7 7 2 . 00 

11.862.50 

7.150.12 

3.772.IX) 

•99.8% 

100% 

100% 

21,20 

(MX) 

0,00 

0,(X) 

(MX) 

(),(X) 

(MX) 

(MX) 

(MX) 

450.35 

337.19 

75% 

113.16 

0,(X) 

0.00 

20.42 

0.01 

2 . 9 8 8 . 52 
2.81937 
94% 

169,16 

(MX) 

O.(X) 

45.88 

7.14 

341.9X 
19936 
58% 

142.62 

4.65 

0.75 

0 , 00 

0,(X) 

0.75 

(MX) 

(MX) 

0.75 

0.70 

94% 

0,05 

0 , 00 

2 6 - 5 1 6 , 80 

0 , 00 

0,00 

2 6 - ? 1 . . 80 
0,00 
70.63»)| 

tt.?87.43  O) 
26.141.24 

98% 

4 4 6 , 19 

4 , 65 

Initial  budget 

Transfer  of  appropriations 

Supplementary  and  amending  budget 

Appropria-ions  made  available  again 

Appropriations  carried  over 
Appropriations Mnckçd 
Appropriations  available 

Implementation 

Rate  of  implementation 

Appropriations  not  implemented 

Appropriations  carried  over  to  1997 

D e c o m m i t m e n is  excluding  appropriations 

made  available  acain 

Appropriations  reentered  in  the  budget  for 

subsequent  years 

D-Commitmenls 

21,20 

216.30 

101.42 

51.73 

113.16 

126.34 

169,16 

_ £ _ _ _ ]_ 

142,62 

29.81 

j__2_ 

446,14 
________ 

(1)  Of  which  E CU  7 . 16  million  blocked. 

(2)  E CU  26  4 8 0 . 27  million  after  deduction  of  tbe  E CU  7 . 16  million  blocked. 

Table 11-2: Implementation of appropriations in  1996  (excluding carry-overs - ECU million) 

Budget 

headings 

Appropriations 

onolabU 

(A) 

Vtibzntion  ofapprops. 

Appropu  carried  over  to  1997  (C) 

(B) 
P-Turcirt. 

CrfflnmitinMte 
0.00 

Approps.  not  implemented 
Parmtnt-
______________ 

(AMBHQ 

O b j e c t i ve  1 

O b j e c t i ve  2 
Objective 3 

O b j e c t i ve  4 

O b j e c t i ve  5 ( a)  a g r i c u l t u re 

( e x c l u d i ng  O b j e c t i v es  I  a nd  5 ( b )) 

O b j e c t i ve  5 ( a)  a g r i c u l t u re  ( in  O b j.  5 ( b) 

O b j e c t i ve  5 ( a)  f i s h e r i es 

O b j e c t i ve  5 ( b) 

O b j e c t i ve  6 

C o m m u n i ty  I n i t i a t i v es 

T r a n s i t i o n al  a nd  i n n o v a t i ve  m e a s u r es 

A n t i - f r a ud 

F o r m er  G PR 

T O T A L. 

Cfflnmittn.nl.  P-Tmtm. 

15.438.65 

14.777.51 

Cwnmittntnt- 
15369.13 

2.726.40 

2.793.92 

271 JO 

425.83 

376.60 

156.00 

971.50 

91.45 

1.66438 

2.188.25 

129.08 

599.84 

505.10 

148.10 

1.033.80 

53.14 

2.705.45 

2.793.92 

271.50 

425.83 

376.60 

115.03 

971.38 

88.65 

14.699,47 

1.636.02 

2 . 1 8 8 25 

129.08 
388.87 

3 4 33 
86.03 
922,89 

51.14 

2.968.10 

2.115.16 

2.798.96 

1.69139 

296.10 

0.75 

0.00 

314.00 

0.70 

148.69 
.3,677.7.1 

161.05 

0.70 

fl.00 

-6.078.-l) 

188.03 

0.45 

______ 

22.444.41 

_____m_ 

0.00 

0,00 

0,00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

29.18 

29.181 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

4.65 

0.00 

0.00 

4.65 

6 9 33 

20.95 

0,00 

0.00 

0.00 

0.00 

40.97 

0.12 

.  2,80 

169.14 

130.40 

0.05 

0.00 

433.95 

78.04 

2 8 36 

0.00 

0.00 

210,97 

161.81 

62.07 

110.91 

2.00 

423.77 

125.97 

0.25 

0.00 

1.204.15 

Taking all the assistance and all the Funds together, during  1996 the Commission committed ECU 26 
078  million  and  paid  ECU  22444  million  from  the  1996 appropriations  (excluding  carry-overs  and 
appropriations made available again). In addition, ECU 63  430 000 was committed from appropriations 
carried  over from  the previous year. These figures  should be compared  with the ECU 26 517 million 
available for commitment appropriations  (ECU 26 587 million including carryovers) and the ECU 23 
678 million available for payment appropriations. In all, ECU 439  million in commitment appropriations 
(ECU 446 million  including carryovers) and ECU  1 234 million  in payment appropriations remained 
unused, i.e. 2%  and 5%  respectively of thev available appropriations. Of these appropriations, ECU 4 650 
000 in commitment appropriations and ECU 29 180 000 in payment appropriations were carried over to 
the  1997 budget and ECU 446  140  000  in commitment appropriations will entered in budgets for later 
years. 

88 

Table II-3: 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Implementation of appropriations in 1996 by budget heading (excluding decommitments 
and carry-overs) 

Number 

Hiding 

Commitments 

Payments 

Total  EAGGF 

3.772.000.000 

3-381-592.786 

CSF 

CSF 

Objective 1 

Objective 5(a) (excluding  1  and 5(b) areas) 

Objective 5(a) (in 5(b) areas) 

o 
tu 
o 
< 
_u 

P 
tu 

B2-100 

B2-1000 

B2-1001 

B2-1002 

B2-1003 

B2-1004 

B2-110 

B2-1100 

B2-1101 

B2-1102 

B2-1110 

Objective 5(b) 

Obiective 6 

CSF 

Objective 1 

Objective 5(a) 

Objective 6 

2.416.500.000 

2.157.600.000 

425.830.000 

376.600.000 

508.400.000 

44.670.000 

388.871.575 

343.290.916 

455.173-295 

36.657.000 

222.155.100 

115.033.372 

335.559.359 

86.025.422 

0 

0 

0 

0 

Social measures linked to forced  tving-up 

B2-120 

CSF 

tu 
O 
ft. 
a 

B2-1200 

B2-1201 

B2-1202 

B2-1203 

Objective 1 

Objective 2 

Objective 5(b) 

Obiective 6 

B2-130 

B2-1300 

B2-1301 

B2-1302 

B2-1303 

B2-1304 

B2-1305 

CSF 

Objective 1 

Objective 2 

Objective 3 

Objective 4 

Objective 5(b) 

Obiective 6 

tu 
00 
tu 

Total  FIFG 

337.188.4721 

421-584.781 

9.331.069.380 

2.139.947.430 

360.982.929 

30.500.000 

9.095.903.618 

1.149.818.694 

357.814.862 

6.720.000 

Total ERDF 

11.862.499.7391 

10.610-257.173 

3.399.403.000 

3.110.408.000 

565.500.000 

2.793.917.000 

271.500.000 

102.000.000 

13.480.000 

486.200.000 

2.188.250.174 

129.081.826 

109.900.000 

7.760.06*5* 

Total ESF 

7.145.800.000 

6.031.600.000 

œ M M U M i i r^ 

PESCA (restructuring the fisheries sector) 

ESF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

Total Pesca 

Inter-regional cooperation 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FTFG 

ERDF 

Total  Interreg 

Total Peace 

B 2-140 

B2-1400 

B2-1400 

B2-1400 

B2-141 

B2-1410 

B2-1410 

B2-1410 

B2-1410 

B2-1412 

B2-1412 

B2-1412 

B2-1412 

7.946.110 

47.759.926 

78.251.000 

133.957.036 

35.335.858 

31.256.000 

461.000 

684.972.620 

752.025.478 

35.321.500 

8.125.000 

0 

52.114.000 

95.560.5001 

2.854.655 

16.870.669 

1.224.900 

20.950-224 

12.547.628 

12.436.506 

230.500 

398.298.651 

423.513-285 

17.660.750 

4.062.500 

0 

19.956.500 

41.679.750 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

89 

Heading 

Commitments. 

Payments 

Number 

B2-142 

B2-I420 

B2-1420 

Emplyment and development of human resources 

ESF 

ERDF 

B2-1421 

B2-1421 

ESF 

ERDF 

B2-1422 

B2-I422 

ESF 

ERDF 

=  H  i  B2-1423 
t: *  , 
O  £ 
f 
>- 

i  B 2-1423 

ESF 

ERDF 

B2-1424 

B2-1424 

ESF 

ERDF 

Total Now 

Total Horizon 

Total Integra 

Total Youthstart 

Total Adapt 

B2-143 

B2-1430 

B2-1430 

Industrial  restructuring 

ESF 

ERDF 

B2-1431 

B2-1431 

ESF 

ERDF 

B2-1432 

B2-1432 

ESF 

ERDF 

B2-1433 

B2-1433 

ESF 

ERDF 

Total Rechar 

Total Reader 

Total Konver 

Total Retex 

B2-144 

B2-1440 

B2-1440 

B2-1440 

B2-I440 

B2-145 

B2-1450 

B2-1450 

B 2-146 

B2-1460 

B2-1460 

B2-1460 

Regis (most remote regions) 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

Total Regis 

Urban (urban areas) 

ESF 

ERDF 

Total Urban 

Leader (rural development) 

ESF 

EAGGF 

ERDF 

Total Leader 

1.925.000 

1.555.002 

3.480.002 

147.654.076 

1.832.705 

149.486.781 

12.683.663 

792.501 

13.476.164 

99.902.820 

898.353 

100.801.173 

93.731.429 

56.068.962 

0 

0 

93.731.429 

56.068.962 

222.428.048 

86.962.641 

0 

0 

222.428.048 

86.962.6411 

16.167.800 

103.765.360 

119.933.1601 

15.749.500 

118.620.644 

134-370.144 

42.093.000 

90.908.620 

133.001.620 

11.620.000 

142.812.118 

154.432.118 

11.886.000 

17.002.000 

800.000 

128.267.000 

157.955.0001 

27.063.500 

187.938.458 

215.001.958 

68.638.607 

83.110.837 

99.926.948 

251.676392 

8.083.900 

53.542.693 

61.626-593 

8.894.750 

70.693.622 

79-588372 

21.046.500 

74.024.226 

95.070.726 

5.810.000 

61.996.767 

67.806.767 

5.100.200 

7.027.000 

300.000 

123.125.700 

135-552.900 

11.391.550 

96.722.929 

108.114.479 

25.357.755 

57.304.395 

50.944.274 

133.606.423 

5) 

INTRODUCTION 

90 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Heading 

Commitments 

Payments 

Number 

B2-147 

B2-1470 

B2-1470 

SMEs Initiative 

ESF 

ERDF 

Total SMEs 

Reserve for earlier and future measures 

ESF 

EAGGF 

ERDF 

RESERVE 

ESF 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

Total earlier measures (*) 

Total Community Initiatives 

OTHER ASSISTANCE 

Total Anti-fraud 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

ESF 

Total Transitional and innovative measures 

14.540.000 

167.378.400 

181.918.400 

5.315.000 

83.396.120 

88.711.1201 

45.623.082 

22.117.352 

110.117.803 

177-858-237 

425.303.856 

102.947.753 

17.401.169 

752.100.428 

139.493.837 

49.020.926 

1.858.342.875 

1.145.735.039 

2.798.958.0661 

1.691387.817 

703.000 

703.0001 

453.350 

453350 

23.031.897 

20.424.764 

80.666.861 

36.928.208 

161.051.730 

22.965.810 

8.788.863 

102.932.766 

53.343.102 

188.030-541 

Structural measures under Reg. (EEC) No 3575/90 (former GDR) 
ESF 

- 

52.243.683 

EAGGF 

FIFG 

ERDF 

Total Former GPR 

- 

- 

- 

. 

24.517.342 

196.699 

42.552.901 
119-510.626 

B2-148 

B2-1480 

B2-1480 

B2-1480 

B2-1480 

5  => 
<  2 
if," 

"§ .5 

B2-150 

B2-180 

B2-181 

B2-182 

B2-183 

B2-190 
B2-1900 

B2-1900 

B2-1900 

B2-1900 

(*) Payment for  1989-93 

Table II-4: 

Commitments  in 1996 (excluding  decommitments  and carry-overs  - ECU  million) 

TOTAL 

% 

Ohi.  1 

O h i.  2 

Ohi  •» 

C SF 
Ohi  4 

Ohi.  ««•> 

Ohi  «M 

O h i .« 

Total 
C S F, 

C o m m u n i ty 

Transitional 

Anti-fraud 

T o Ul  available 
Total  • m p i - m e n t ed 
% 

26-516.80 

26.07S.20 
9*JS% 

text* 

15.43X.65 
15369.13 
1 0 0* 

2.726.40 

2.705.45 
99% 

2.793.92 
2.7934)2 
100% 

271.50 
271.50 
100% 

958.43 
917.46 
96% 

E R DF 

E SF 

E A G GF 

F I FG 

O t h er 
* 

13-M>1_51 

53% 

7J>34__3 
3_»34_53 
406.63 

30% 

15% 

7% 

0_70 
100% 

....I». 

9 3 3 1 . 07 

3.399.40 

2.416-50 

222.16 

59% 

2.139.95 
565-50 

2.793.92 

271-50 

802.43 
115.03 

4% 

11% 

971-50 
971.38 
100% 

360.98 

102.00 

508.40 

91.45 
88,65 
97% 

30.50 
13.48 
44.67 

0% 

23.251.85 
23.117,49 
99% 

2.968.10 
X798_»6 
94% 

11.862-50 

1.858.34 

7.145.80 

3.772.00 
337.19 
DJK 
KV% 

752.10 

139.49 

49.02 

//* 

296.10 
161.05 
54% 

80.67 
36.93 
23.03 
20.42 

1% 

0.75 
0.70 
94% 

0.7.0. 
09-

In  terms  of  progranimiiig,  1996  saw  the  adoption  of  the  last  SPDs  and  Community  Initiative 
programmes.  Budget  implementation  was  therefore  primarily  concerned  with  implementing  the 
programmes  decided  on  in  1994  and  1995.  The  commitment  implementation  rate  thus  improved 
appreciably  in  1996,  increasing  from  91% in  1995  to  98%  of  the  available  appropriations,  or  ECU 
26 078 million, excluding carry-overs and appropriations made available again. 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural Funds (1996) 

91 

Implementation  of the various Objectives  varies little from  one Fund to another and within each  Fund, 
except  for  the  FIFG.  Implementation  always  stands  at  or  near  to  100%,  except  for  the  Community 
Initiatives, which  are  still  at early  stage. Similarly,  the  slower  implementation  of  the  FIFG  (98.66%) 
has  little  effect  overall,  which  is  understandable  given  the  amount  of  appropriations  involved. 
Commitments  on  the  Community  Initiatives  amounted  to ECU  2 799  million  (excluding  carry-overs 
and  appropriations  made  available  again), leaving ECU  169  160 000 unused,  representing  6%  of  the 
funding  available in  1996. 

Table II-5: 

Payments in 1996 (excluding carry-overs - ECU million) 

TOTAL 

Vt 

Ohi  1 

Ohi  ? 

Ohi  1 

CSF 

<*i?  * 

Ohi  w*\ 

Ohf  Cfh> 

Ohi  « 

Total  available 
Total  implemented 

23-577,75 
22.444.42 
94,79% 

ItXfi 

I4.777.J1 
14.699,47 
vv% 

ERDF 
ESF 
E A C CF 
FIFX; 

11.901,48 
6.56149 
3 . 5 3 - 42 
447,97 

imn 

53% 
29% 
16% 
2V 
tn 

9.095.90 
3.110.41 
2.157.60 
335.56 

1.664.38 

1.636,02 
VK% 

1.149.82 
486.20 

2.188.25 

-.18JU5 

129.08 

129X18 
mn 

1.253.04 

818.19 
65% 

1.033.80 
9 2 2 -» 
K9% 

2.1K8.25 

129.08 

357.81 
109.90 
455.17 

732.16 
86.03 

7% 

un 

1% 

4% 

4% 

53.14 
51,14 
V6% 

6.72 
7.76 
36.66 

m 

T.lttl 
LSF 

21.099.20 
20.445,03 
97% 

10.610.2(1 
6.031.60 
3.381.59 
421-58 

Cummonitv 

Transitional 

Anti-frao-

Former 
envt 

0.70 

0.45 
6i<7. 

2.115.16 
1.691.39 
KIH 

1.145.74 
425.30 
102.95 
17.40 

314.00 
188.03 
6rn 

102.93 
53.34 
22.97 
8.79 

R% 

1% 

VA5 
tn 

148.69 
119-51 
K<)% 

42.55 
52.24 
24.52 
0.20 

/* 

Payment  appropriations  implemented  in  1996  totalled  ECU  22 444  million  (excluding  carry-overs), 
i.e.  94.8%  of  the  available  appropriations  (ECU  23 678  million).  Appropriations  unused  therefore 
totalled  ECU  1 233  million.  Implementation  improved  because  a  large  number  of  programmes  had 
already  been  adopted. The  variation  in  the implementation  of payment  appropriations  is  significantly 
greater  than  for  commitment  appropriations.  Objectives  1,  3  and  4  had  implementation  rates  of  or 
close  to  100%.  Those  Objectives  with  lower  implementation  rates  (Objective  5(a)  in  particular) 
account for the smallest amounts in terms of the overall total, however. 

The above paragraphs refer to the implementation  of appropriations entered  in the  1996 budget for  the 
first  time, that  is, excluding  carry-overs. Commitment  appropriations  carried  over from  1995 to  1996 
and  used  in  1996  represent  only  a  limited  proportion  of  total  budget  implementation  (ECU 
70 630 000).  They  comprise  ECU  4 320 000  for  the  ESF  (Objective  3  -  United  Kingdom)  (100% 
implementation),  ECU  20 420 000 
(100% 
implementation)  and ECU 38 310 000 for  innovative and transitional  measures (out of a total  of ECU 
45 880 000  available). In total, ECU 63 040 000 was committed  in  1996 using appropriations  carried 
over  or  made  available  again  (89%  implementation).  Payments  from  appropriations  carried  over 
related only to the ESF for Objective 3 (United Kingdom) and represent ECU 4 320 000 (100%). 

the  Community 

(Employment) 

Initiatives 

for 

92 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

Table 11-6:  Payments in 1996 for  assistance prior to the second programming period (including  carry 

1994 

1989-93 
B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
Fx 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
P 
UK 
C<mm 

overs - ECU million) 

ERT>F 

861.93 

460.21 

EST 
138*7 

13X.35 

Objective 1 
Total 
Fisheries 
_________ 
_U ___._.  mtâmLmwlltlmLmL 
23.92 
739,27 
116.78 
0.17 
0.17 

52.24 (1) 

45.89 
7.48 

19.80 

12.94 

42-55 (1) 
90.23 
225.53 
4.08 
29.36 
31.45 

16.64 
20.23 
0,1? 

Objective  S(h) 

24.52 (I) 
7.71 
5.67 
0,97 
7.58 
66,15 

0.25  (I) 
3.47 
2.42 
2.88 
0,64 
7.29 

119-57 (1) 
101.41 
279.5) 
15.41 
37.59 
124.70 

3,46 
0,72 

0.03 
5,35 
1.41 

0.03 
38.39 
22.36 

0.13 

________ ______ _LâJ___£_  Total 
»7.0* 

_______ 
55.98 

______ 
19.32 
0,38 
1.52 
7.58 

1334 

2.42 
4.65 

0.34 
7.77 

1.10 
13.15 

1989-93 
B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
P 
UK 
(""mm 
(1 ) Including  former  GDR  (heading  B2-1900). 
(2) No payment was  made under Objective 4. 

3.26 
1939 

19.72 

0,43 

0.06 

0.64 

1.09 

ERDF 

94.18 

94.18 
0.34 

3.26 

13.52 
51.82 

Objective  I 
______ 
-i___ 
31.33 
0.03 
1.41 
19,81 

1.18 

Total 

25.5 

125.51 
0.37 
1.41 
23.07 

13.52 
53.00 

Obi.  3_ 
ESF. 

702.24 

202.24 

0.11 
19.84 

111.91 

_2__________al 

_________ _______ 

3.99 

_________ 
______ 
36.16 
1.20 
3.74 
0.98 

3.99 
0.29 
0.33 
0.59 

8.22 

5.39 

13.61 

36.00 

22.97 
0.02 

>K.21 

3.52 

11.73 

30.05 

8.81 

8.81 

4.32 

1.31 

2.46 

4 ( U5 

40.15 
1.50 
4,07 
1.57 

6.11 

24.44J 
0.02 

f*nn^np|nif  Initiative* 
_______ ______ _____£__.  Total 
45.62 

97.04 
0.38 
2.61 
34.27 

6.03 
31.81 

20.81 
0,43 
0.64 

0.06 

110.12 
0.41 

6.66 
13.48 
8,47 
16.28 
15.00 
10.67 
3.58 
1.97 
24.17 
2,81 
6  6? 

45.62 
0.72 
1.26 
10,29 
7.65 
10.32 
8.40 
0.39 
3.37 

0.17 
2.36 
0.70 

22,12| 
0.04 

0.35 
13,05 
4.46 
0.67 
0.06 

2.82 
0.67 

ERDF 

087.97 

686,25 
0.75 
1.10 
65.62 
103,71 
249,94 
76.83 
44.36 
50.34 
4.01 
10.18 
40.81 
31.84 
6.76 

ESF 
,437f38 
436.87 
1,13 
4.30 
109.76 
7.65 
168.46 
24.83 
0,39 
65,64 

231.04 

TOTAL  m 
Efcherie 
_________ 
_22_ 
27.91 
0.47 
0.33 
0.84 
3.47 
2.42 
2.88 
0.64 
8,76 

231.04 
1.24 
3.74 
39.04 
8,06 
21.98 
30.93 
8.25 
108.90 
0.02 

34.39 
15.30 
5.02 

6.28 
Z 60 

0.03 
5,35 
2.73 

Total 
1.784.68 

1.382,07 
3,59 
9,46 
215,26 
122-89 
44241 
135,46 
53,64 
233,65 
4,02 
44,60 
67,74 
42-20 
______ 

--___. 
177.86 
1.17 
1.26 
16,95 
21,48 
31.83 
29.14 
16.05 
14.10 
3.58 
2,14 
29.35 
4.18 
6 62 

A significant  number of payments were also made in respect of operations decided on before  1994 for 
the  first  programming  period  (1989-93),  or earlier  in  some  cases.  The overall  figure  amounted  to 
ECU  1 785  million  (7% of  all  payments  made  in  1996),  of  which  ECU  1 382  million (77%) 
corresponded  to the commitments in the period  1989-93. These  are payments  made as normal  as the 
first  programming period comes to a close. Assuming that the commitments on these operations  were 
made as required before the end of 1993 (except where programmes are extended), the Member  States 
had  a period  of two  years  until  31 December  1995 to make  payment  to the final  beneficiaries  and a 
further  six  months,  until  30 June  1996 at  the  latest,  to  send  the  expenditure  statements  to the 
Cornmission. The Commission's  payments in 1996 thus reflect  the closure of the programmes for the 
first programming period. 

In  1996, 796 ERDF operations relating to the period before  the reform of the Structural Funds in 1988 
were  settled,  often  automatically  under  Article  12 of Regulation  (EEC) No 4254/88. The  closure of 
operations  involved  paying  outstanding  amounts  totalling  ECU 401 700 000,  of  which  ECU  378 
million  related  to Italy  (645 cases),  ECU 12 million  to the United  Kingdom  (97 cases),  ECU  10 
million  to  Greece  (22 cases)  and ECU 2  million  to  other  Member  States  (32 cases).  Some  170 
operations  in respect  of  1989-93  were  closed  in  1996, the outstanding  amounts  paid  totalling  ECU 
535 million, of which ECU 241 million  related  to Spain, ECU  91 million to Greece, ECU 44  million 
to Ireland, ECU 42 million to Italy, ECU 40 million to Portugal  and ECU 77 million to other  Member 
States. 

ESF payments  related  almost  entirely to the first  programming period  and  represented  one  more  step 
towards  closure  of the  programmes  concerned  (some  have  been  extended). The programmes  before 
this  first  period  involve  Italy  and  Portugal.  EAGGF  payments  made  in  1996 in  respect  of the 
programming period  1989-93 amount to ECU 231  170 000. It should be noted  that the Member  States 
were  somewhat  slow  in  submitting  applications  for outstanding  balances. At the end of  1996  ECU 
83  100 000 for all the Objectives  was  still not settled  because  the Member  States had not submitted 
applications, Portugal  and France in particular for Objective  1 and France and Italy for Objective  5(b). 

8th Annual Report  on the Structural  Funds  (1996) 

93 

In  the  case  of  fisheries,  the  payments  include  the  appropriations  needed  to, settle  the  commitments 
relating to the structural  measures decided before  the entry into force of the FTFG (Regulations  (EEC) 
Nos 4028/86 and 4042/89). 

Table II-7: 

Appropriations outstanding at 31 December 1996 (ECU million) 

Obj  1 

Obj 2 

Obj 3 

Obj 4 

Obj 5(a) 

Obj 5(b) 

Obj 6 

Total oumanriing 
end 1996 
(A+B4C) 

1996 commitments 
outstanding (A) 

1994-95 commitments 
outstanding 
(B) 

Commitments from 
before 1994 (C) 

14.180:34 
8.874.49 
2.888.97 
2.053.08 
363.79 
8.145,64 
5.180.91 
1.333.23 
1.516.68 
114.82 
3.114,54 
1.984.24 
752.55 
271.41 
106.34 
2.920,15 
1.709.33 
803.20 
264.99 
J42.63 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
FIFG 

ERDF 
ESF 
EAGGF 
ELFQ. 

3.686,70 
3.149.64 
537.06 

1.856.33 
339.24 

863,61 
747.65 
115.96 

607,51 
545.66 
61.85 

2.064.62 

317.37 

1.064,59 

2.064.62 

317.37 

852.03 
212.56 

1.408,50 

.....2S-A.J 

«60,39 

1 

1.408.50 

223.19 

961,53 
381.07 
125.94 
454.52 

48630 
145.76 
58^2 
28232 

454,56 

J_UI 

454.56 

94.18 

201,56 

O/» 

201.56 

0.00 

581.91 
78,48 
301£8 

181.23 
120.65 
10232 
i 

88.89 
13.41 

.....ISA?» 
107.44 
3194 
45.90 

288,95 
127.87 
34.79 
126-29 

100,47 
45.91 
21.97 
31.88 
0.72 

«.Î.0 
30.50 
5.72 
31.88 
0,00 

15.41 
16.25 
0.00 
0.72 
0,00 

Transit 

Former 
RDR 

Anti-

3.76V» 

36634 

131,49 

0,30 

TOTAL 
M»tlOQ« 
26.640,43 

% 

100» 

1.671^37 

L  »%P3 

0,00 

[ 

Sri?. 

14.997,37 

569-

1.376,46 

79,26 

o,op 
1 

0,03 

6.503,17 

2 4* 

718,76 

169A05 

131,5? 

0.00 

5.139,90 

19* 

Total 
<-SF 
2-375,62 
12.451.12 
5.955.93 
3.391.51 
577.07 

13307,7} 
7.213.51 
3.388.10 
2412.79 
193.30 
5.047,42 
2.854.74 
1.466.43 
498.55 
227.70 
4.120,50 
2.382.86 
1.101.40 
480.17 
156.06 

The  increase  in  commitment  appropriations  available  arising  from  the  Edinburgh  undertaking  and 
carryovers  from  1995  and  the  failure  to  use  all  the  payment  appropriations  has  an  impact  on  the 
payment  appropriations  outstanding  at  the  end  of  the  year.  The  rate  of  settlement  has  however 
improved,  rising  to  56%  in  1996  as  against  46%  in  1995.  There  were  two  reasons  for  this:  the 
settlement  of  commitments  for  the  current  year  and  the  settlement  o£ appropriations  committed  in 
previous years. The appropriations outstanding that correspond to the first  programming period  (1989-
93)  represent  19% of  all  outstanding  appropriations  at  the  end  of  1996,  whereas  they  represented  a 
third  of those  outstanding  at the end  of  1995. This  reduction  results  from  the closure  of  a very  large 
number of programmes  in  1996. Thus, taking all Objectives  and Funds together, payments have been 
made in respect  of  85% of the appropriations  committed in  1992 and  1993. The results of this closure 
have been  most notable in the case of the ERDF: outstanding ERDF commitments  made before  1994 
were reduced from  ECU 4 465 million to ECU 2 913 million in  1996. 

The shares of each Fund in the total appropriations  outstanding at the end of  1996 are: ERDF: 55.6%; 
ESF: 26.6%; EAGGF:  15.2%', FIFG: 2.6%. These figures  differ  slightly  from  those for  1995 (ERDF: 
56%;  ESF:  27%;  EAGGF:  13%; FIFG:  4%)  and,  with  the  exception  of  the  EAGGF,  the  rate  of 
settlement has clearly  improved. 

Table II-8: 

Trend of outstanding appropriations (ECU million) 

(Current  prices) 

Total outstanding 

ÙS+B.+Ç). 

Annual variation 

Appropriations oustanding 
for the year (A) 

Annual variation 

TOTAL 
end  1996 
26.640,43 

% 

100% 

+13% 

TOTAL 
end 1995 
23.529,46 

14.99737 

56% 

12.030,77 

Appropriations outstanding 
1994(B) 

6-503,17 

Annual variation 

Appropriations outstanding 
from before 1994 (C) 

+25% 
24% 

+68% 

3.880,02 

5.139,901  19% 

7.618,68 

Annual variation 

-33% 

% 

100% 

+22% 
51% 

+34% 
16% 

-
32% 

-26% 

TOTAL 
end 1994 
19324,88 

% 

100% 

9.009,96 

47% 

-

0% 

10315,10 

_ 
53% 

-

94 

8th  Annual  Report  on the Structural  Fund* 

(1996) 

1.2.  Implementation of each Fund in 1996 in the context of 1994-99 

The  aim  of  this  section  is  to  look  at  the  implementation  of  appropriations, for  1994-99,  excluding 
implementation for previous years. 

Table 11-9: 

Implementation  in  1996 for  the period  1994-99  (including  decommitments,  carry-overs  and 
appropriations  made available again - ECU  million) 

Available 
imfr 
26.244,66 

Obi.  1 
15-369,11 

Ohi  ? 
2.668.28 

Obi. 3 
2.793,92 

122,69 

2.040.97 
1.590.01 
4.614.84 
296.95 
1.181.34 
2.038,70 

4.80 
4.96 
2.967,96 

78,44 
22.78 
379,07 

94,80 
42,00 
512,62 

377.18 
655,77 

239,91 
421.59 

214,02 
-1.47 
99,14 
11,40 

149,87 
3,40 
152.23 
65,69 

21,32 

34.99 

505.88 

810.63 

1.076.80 

Total 
ft  f-Vfl) 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
Comm 

Toul 
tmpfcm.m 
22-260,26 

Total 

________ 

13.671,00 

1-510,51 

__bL2 
1.99034 

rOMlvnTMFNTS 
CSF 

Ohi  4  Ohi  SfntA  Ohi  S(a>F  Ohi  Sml 
271,50 
971J8 

802.43 

112,27 

20,42 
23,28 
12,77 

19,89 
0.00 

0,00 
0.00 
6.36 

0,00 
0.00 
29.55 

6,86 
3,73 
187,71 

172.30 
335.91 

33.59 
0,00 
15.56 
51.62 

16.27 
64.91 
82.93 

11.75' 
7,00 
26.61 

49,54 
91.68 

38.28 
0,37 

8.77 
37.50 

26.80 
22.08 
191,84 

25,00 
220.66 

131.69 
4,31 
9,05 
75,94" 

53,32 
26.50 
15,23 

PAYMENTS 
CSF 

Obi,4  Q-j,  ?f.)A  obi,  iffalF  Ohi  .sft?) 
825,72 
129,08 

696,00 

8038 

________ 
B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
Comm, 

91,77 

2.094,42 
1.646,08 
3.817,12 
251,21 
900,76 
1.926,12 

11.84 
12.61 
2.43437 

20.69 
3.67 
182.75 

81,91 
40,96 
28730 

5,91 
7,68 
8,70 

4239 
22.07 
177.34 

159,26 
412,16 

272,12 
402,88 

10.02 
49,62 

28.74 
206,89 

95.08 
0,29 
39,29 
11,59 

102.44 
3.36 
124.62 
71,77 

14,24 

21,10 

19.14 
0,25 

331 

530 
18,75 

41.08 
5,21 
6,49 
77.13 

26,60 
27.86 
34,01 

1630 

3.88 

32,74 

11,93 
0,00 
6.46 
0.80 

0,00 
0.00 
8,27 

3.47 
0.14 
21237 

124.40 
300,20 

31,15 
0,00 
12,70 
39,34 

7,67 
22,64 
71,44 

48430 

571.49 

581.69 

Community 
Initiatives 

Ohi 61 _______ 
88,65  23.077,54 
&£__ 
361.76 
120.87 
3.351,59 
1.590.01 
5.498,67 
2.022.55 
1.18134 
2.606.15 
6.62 
287,14 
209.61 
2.967.96 
211.86 
140.37 
2.321,03 

77.18 
11.47 

2-815,98 
Li-., 
58.04 
56.44 
357,42 
129.29 
256,26 
295,79 
37.83 
316-55 
0.86 
23.37 
46.62 
191.13 
44,71 
40,28 
223,85 

7?7.S? 

QfaL-i 
51,14 

Total 
18.95437 

Community 
Initiatives 

1.513,22 

____; 

262,85 
74.52 
2.967,17 
1.646.08 
4.444.39 
1.622.96 
900,76 
2.226.95 
9.11 
201.38 
216,75 
2.43437 
117.22 
78,27 
1.751.40 

26.41 
1334 
225.89 
4935 
184.75 
141,60 
20,45 
156,95 
0.46 
6,81 
16,49 
102.10 
15,36 
11,77 
123,05 
________ 

42,12 
9.02 

TOTAL 
f.) 
25JS9332 
9 9* 
419,80 
177,30 
3.709,01 
1.719 JO 
5.754.93 
2.318.34 
1.219,18 
2.922,70 
7,47 
310.51 
25603 
3.159.10 
256.57 
180.65 
2.744,87 
737.55 

TOTAL 
L__— 
20.46739 
2 
289,26 
88.05 
3193.05 
1695,43 
4629,14 
176436 
921,21 
2383,90 
937 
208.20 
233.24 
2536,67 
132.57 
90.04 
1874,44 
418-26 

8th Annual  Report  on the Structural  Fund* (1996) 

95 

ERDF 

Table IhlO:  ERDF implementation in 1996 for the period 1994*99 (including decommitments, carry-overs 

and appropriations made available again - ECU million) 

COMMïTMFIvrrS 
-CSE. 
Ohi. 2  Ohi.gfh) 

Ohi  6 

9.331,05 

2.102,78 

360.98 

30.50 

Available 
1 ??.(!) 
9.331,20 
2.160,90 
361,10 

1.901-30 
13.78S.0fl 

Objective 1 
Objective 2 
Obj.  5(b) 
Obiective 6 
CIs 
Total 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
Çv-rom, 

74,25 

897,35 
1.157,34 
2.756.72 
132,82 
591,86 
1.640,22 

0,00 
0,00 
1.833,28 

247,21 

61,50 
19,70 
284.84 

24532 
587.77 

177,12 
-1,47 
77,02 
7,62 

21,32 
0,00 
622,03 

0,00 
0,00 
72,65 

37,33 
127,16 

0.00 
0,00 
2,09 
8,33 

15,16 
34,09 
64,17 

30,50 
0,00 

Community 
Initiative 

1.859,14 
-L___2_14 
5,33 
10,82 
20937 
84,17 
15430 
156-25 
7,01 
146,66 
0,25 
15,79 
26,46 
151.32 
22,63 
27,67 
103,63 
73709 

"Total 
9.331,05 
2.102.78 
360.98 
3030 

11.825.31 
135.75 
19,70 
1.254,84 
1.157,34 
3.039,37 
847.75 
591,86 
1.817,34 
-1,47 
79,12 
15.95 
1.833.28 
66,98 
34.09 
933,42 
_____ 

-__-i-i-JL 
8.270,43 

Total 
impl.m 

9.138,46 
1.14932 
35731 
6,72 
1.145,74 

___________ 

Objective 1 
Objective 2 
Obj.  5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Total 

PAYMENTS 

CSF 

Obi. 2  Qhi. stb\ 

ohi  6 

1.055,64 

336,07 

6,72 

Community 
Initiative 

_______ 
8.270,43 
1.055.64 
336,07 
6,72 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
UK 
Çwm 

59,99 

1.213,40 
1.243.11 
1.799,52 
113,43 
336,09 
1.644,14 

8.00 
5,99 
1.569,29 

277,47 

10,02 
2,11 
126,34 

46,39 
345,36 

69,33 
0,00 
21,01 
7,47 

14.24 
0,00 
41337 

0,00 
0,00 
99,21 

33,49 
117,63 

0.00 
0,00 
5,03 
11,17 

4,46 
11.71 
53,36 

________$ 
70,01 
2,11 
1.438,95 
I_243,ll 
1.879,40 
576,42 
336,09 
1.713,47 
0,00 
34,04 
24,63 
1369,29 
25,42 
11,71 
744,201 

1.035,62 
1035 62 
8,39 
1,74 
131,28 
33,76 
119,47 
70,10 
1.71 
72.94 
0,29 
3,31 
9,61 
88,63 
7,42 
830 
60,41 
*).,261 

6.72 
0.00 

% 
am) 
100% 
97% 
100% 
100% 
98% 
99% 

nvm 

91% 
92% 
94% 
100% 
90% 
91% 

TOTAL 
(2). 
9331,05 
2.102,78 
360,98 
3030 
1-359,14 
13.flH.4g 
141,08 
3032 
1.464,41 
1.241,51 
3.193,87 
1.004,00 
598,87 
1.964,00 
-1,22 
94,90 
42,41 
1.984.60 
89,61 
61,75 
1.037,04 
7?7,Q9 

TOTAL 
_______ 
8.270,43 
1.055,64 
336,07 
6,72 
1.035,62 
1..7ft4.48 
78,41 
3,85 
1370,24 
1.276,87 
1.998,87 
64632 
337,80 
1.786,41 
0.29 
37.35 
34,24 
1.657,92 
32.83 
20,01 
804,61 
4 > ?,26 

Total  implementation  of  ERDF  appropriations  in  1996  was  very  high,  amounting  to  99%  of  the 
commitment  appropriations  and  96.8% of  the payment  appropriations. The  amounts  entered  in  the 
budget were sufficient  to cover the overall funding needs for each chapter. 

In the case of implementation of the CSFs and SPDs, Objective  1 operations were yet again the most 
dynamic  this  year  in  terms  of  their  ability  to  draw  down  appropriations.  The  relevant  budget  line 
(B2-1200)  had  to  be  increased  by  ECU  115 300 000  in  commitment  appropriations  and 
ECU 700 million in payment appropriations through transfers from other Objectives. 1996 is a special 
year for Objective  2 in that it is the last year of the first phase established  for this Objective  (1994-
96).  In  budget  terms  this  means  that  all  the  aid  had  to  be  committed  before  the  end  of  1996 and 
explains why the Objective 2 budget heading (B2-1201) had to be increased  by ECU 162 500 000 in 

96 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1996) 

commitment  appropriations.  On  the  other  hand,  that  same  budget  heading  transferred  ECU 
584 500 000  in  payment  appropriations  to  Objective  1. Furthermore,  as  a result  of  the  decisions  to 
reduce the Community contribution for certain Objective 2 operations, ECU 37 million committed in 
1994  and  1995  was  decommitted.  In the  case  of  Objective  5(b),, ECU  223 500 000  in  commitment 
appropriations  and ECU  80 700 000  in payment  appropriations  were  transferred  to  other Objectives 
while  no commitment  or payment  was  made  in  1996  for  Italy,  Belgium,  Denmark  or Luxembourg. 
Implementation  of  this  Objective  is  being  hampered  by  funding  difficulties  at Member  State  level. 
Under Objective 6, ECU 54 300 000 in commitment appropriations and ECU 34 800 000 in payment 
appropriations  has  been  transferred  to  other  headings.  Sweden  in  particular  has  not  recorded  any 
commitment or payment operations. 

In the case  of  the Community  Initiatives,  the implementation  rates  overall  for ERDF  appropriations 
(Chapter  B2-14)  amounted  to  97.8%  for  commitment  appropriations  and  79.8%  for  payment 
appropriations.  In  1996,  the  initial  ERDF  allocations  were  maintained  overall  (ECU  7 400 000  in 
commitment  appropriations  and  ECU  8  million  in  payment  appropriations  were  released  to  other 
Funds). Large movements of appropriations between Initiatives proved necessary, however, to  satisfy 
the varying paces at which funding was being taken up. Thus, the commitment appropriations for the 
Pesca, Interreg, Regis and Urban Initiatives had to be supplemented using appropriations taken from 
other Initiatives. The total amount of ERDF appropriations transferred between Community Initiatives 
amounted to ECU 276 400 000, of which Interreg alone accounted for ECU  127 800 000. In addition, 
a significant  proportion  of  the commitments  (ECU 730 700 000)  arose directly  from the adoption  of 
new  programmes.  This  is  particularly  the case  for  the  three  new  Member  States  but  also  for  those 
other programmes whose approval by the Cornmission was delayed. Lastly, the first decisions to grant 
aid  from  the  financial  reserve  for  the  Community  Initiatives  were  taken  in  1996.  The  amounts 
engaged were not large, however. 

Lastly,  as  regards the transitional  and innovative  measures, ERDF implementation  (Article  B2-182) 
amounted to ECU 52.5% in commitment  appropriations and ECU 72.8% in payment appropriations. 
This  budget  heading finances measures  adopted by the Commission  under Articles  7  and  10 of  the 
ERDF  Regulation  and  Article  16  of  the  Regulation  coordinating  the  Structural  Funds.  The  new 
procedures  adopted  by  the  Commission  for  adopting  Article  101  pilot  projects  ran  into  unexpected 
implementation  difficulties,  which  resulted  in  delayed  approval  of  the  projects  and,  as'a  further 
consequence,  slack take-up of commitment appropriations. The late start will be made up for in 1997 
and 1998. 

See Chapter I.B.2. Innovative measures and technical assistance 

8th  Annual  Réport  on  the  Structural  Funds 

(1996) 

97 

ESF 

Table 11-11:  ESF  implementation  in 1996 for  the period 1994-99  (including decommitments,  carry-overs 

and  appropriations made available again - ECU  million) 

COMMITMENTS 
_£SE-
___i_i 

Obi,. 

Total 

Community]!  TOTAL 

_______ 
3.399,40 
0,00 

565,50 

Objective 1 
Objective 2 
Objective 3 
Objective 4 
Obj.  5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 

Available H 

3399,40 
56530 
2.798,20 
27130 
102,00 
1330 
861,70 
8.011.80 

2.793,92 

271.50 

102,00 

13.48 

271.50 
102.00 
13,48 

_____£_ 

(2i/m 

100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
89% 
_22___ 

3399,40 
56530 
2.793,92 
27130 
102,00 
13,48 
76933 
_L__L___i 
213,14 
89,89 
1.399,99 
146,01 
1.690,41 
792,44 
348.81 
540.13 
4.38 
177.61 
91.30 
759,33 
63.08 
51.32 
1.M7.IW 

769,53 
769.53 
46,51 
37.81 
141,68 
29,27 
99,48 
99,96 
27,61 
143.18 
0.61 
3,01 
7.99 
21.83 
4,72 
0,99 
104.88 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
_____ 

40,44 

609.47 
116,74 
1.160,33 
82,80 
321,20 
171,47 

0,00 
0,00 
737,50 

159.46 

16.94 
3,08 
94.23 

94.80 
42.00 
512,62 

131,86 
68,00 

239.91 
421,59 

36.90 

22.12 
3.77 

149.87 
3.40 
152,23 
65,69 

0,00 
0.00 
188.59 

34,99 
0.00 
1,076,80 

11,75 
7,00 
26,61 

49.54 
91,68 

38.28 
0.37 
0,00 
0,00 

8.77 
3730 

2,71 
0,00 
15.39 

9.28 
28,41 

0,42 
0,00 
0.25 
13.85 

1,11 
12,83 
17.76. 

13,48 

_______ Obi. . 
3.023.79 

454,87 

PAYMENTS 

_______ 

CSF 
______ 

ohi.  sfhi 

ohi t> 

1.990.34 

129,08 

Total 
imnl.fll 
3.162,65 
486.20 
2.19237 
129,08 
109,90 
7,76 
42530 
____LL____ 

Objective 1 
Objective  2 
Objective 3 
Objective 4 
Obj.  5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
IfltaJ 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
______ 

28,27 

458,46 
120,43 
1.230,17 
77,94 
306.01 
122.34 

0,00 
131 
524.72 

1??,?* 

10.67 
137 
56,40 

81,91 
40,96 
287.50 

112,87 
66,80 

272,12 
402,88 

102,44 
3,36 
124.62 
71.77 

25.75 
0.29 
18.28 
4.12 

0.00 
0,00 

21.10 
0.00 
_______ 

________ 

Community 
Initiative* 

TOTAL 

Total 
3.023,79 
454.87 
1.990,34 
129,08 
90,58 
7.76 

5,_9..41 
128,84 
50.34 
822,53 
120.43 
1.631.41 
634.251 
306.01 
269.93 
3.90 
143.28 
93,88 
524.72 
34,44 
23.34 
________ 

96% 
94% 
91% 
100% 
82% 
100% 
89% 
93% 

3.023,79 
454,87 
1.99034 
129,08 
9038 
7,76 
379,68 
_________ 
144,43 
60,34 
905.57 
129,79 
1.688.99 
677,59 
323,91 
341,84 
4,07 
145,64 
97.08 
531.68 
37.17 
23.64 
964 36 

379,68 
_______ 
15,59 
10.00 
83,04 
9.36 
57,57 
43.34 
17,90 
71.91 
0,17 
2.37 
3.20 
6.97 
2.73 
0.30 
55.24 

90,58 

2,07 
0,14 
11.46 

6.24 
37,01 

0,27 
0,00 
0,38 
12,96 

0.08 
4.59 
15.38 

5,91 
7.68 
8.70 

10,02 
49,62 

19,14 
0,25 
0.00 
3,51 

5,50 
18,75 

7.76 

7,76 

To  take  account  of  actual  progress  on  the  ground,  the  ESF  appropriations  (both  commitments  and 
payments)  available  in  1996 were  rebalanced  in  the  Chapter,  resulting  in  rates  of  implementation  of 
almost  100% for commitment  appropriations and 93% for payment  appropriations, compared  to  1995, 
when  implementation  was 76% for  commitment  appropriations  and  81% for  payment  appropriations. 
The result  was achieved  thanks to close cooperation  with the Member  States through  the  introduction 
of a forecast  system that will now be maintained. 

As  for  progress  under  each  Objective,  in  the  case  of  Objective  1 it  is  likely  that  Portugal  and,  to  a 
lesser  extent,  the  United  Kingdom  will  offset  the  feeble  results  achieved  in  Greece  and  Italy.  In  the 
case  of  Objective  2, work  in  Spain  and  Germany  is  helping  to  offset  the  slow  progress  made  by  the 
French,  Italian  and  United  Kingdom  SPDs.  Germany  and  the  United  Kingdom  are  making  good 

98 

8th Annual Report on the Structural Fund* (1996) 

progress  under  Objective  3, while all Member  States are experiencing  delays, under  Objectives  4  and 
5(b). Sweden is somewhat behind in implementing Objective  6. 

Various transfers  were made between the Community Initiatives during the year to take account  of the 
reprogramming  of  numerous  programmes  due  to  their  late  launch  in  1994  and  the  inclusion  of 
amounts  from  the  reserve.  Overall,  89%  of  the  ESF  commitments  appropriations  relating  to  Article 
B2-14  were  used,  as  were  81%  of  the  payment  appropriations.  Under  Article  B2-142,  the 
implementation  rates  were  96%  and  91%  respectively.  In  the  case  of  the  Employment  Initiative, 
implementation  reached  almost  100%  for  both  commitment  and  payment  appropriations  while  the 
rates  for  Adapt  were  92%  for-commitments  and  80%  for  payments.  The  late  adoption  of  the 
programmes  and  the  ESF's  specific  computer  requirements  were  the  root  cause  of  these  relatively 
poor rates. 

8th Annual  Report on the Structural  Fund* (1996) 

99 

EAGGF 

Table 11-12:  EAGGF implementation  in  1996  for  the period 1994-99  (including decommitments,  carry 

overs and  appropriations made available again  - ECU  million) 

Qhi.1 
2.416.50 

COMIVITTMENTS 
CSF 
Obi.  Sa  Ohi.  f 

ft)  Qhi.fi 

802.43 

508.40 

44.67 

Available 
_1__2_L_11_ 
2.41630 
802,40 
508,40 
44,70 
173,60 
3.945.60 

Objective 1 
Obj.  5(a) 
Obj.  5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Tfttal 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
JUL 

8,00 

506,65 
315,93 
539,48 
81,33 
260,07 
227,01 

4,80 
4,96 
377,03 

?1,24 

26.80 
22.08 
191.84 

4,16 
3,73 
99.68 

25.00 
220,66 

125.69 
180.33 

131,69 
4,31 
9,05 
75,94 

53,32 
26,50 
_JL____L 

33,17 
0,00 
13,21 
29,45 

0,00 
17,99 
1.Q0 

33,20 
11,47 

Ohi  i 
2.065.33 

Qbi.Sa 

696.00 

PAYMENTS 

CSF 
__________) 

________ 

399,07 

36,66 

Total 
impl.fl) 

2.182,12 
732,16 
455,17 
36,66 
102,95 
___MM 

Objective 1 
Obj.  5(a) 
Obj.  5(b) 
Objective 6 
CIs 
Total 

B 
DK 
D 
EL 
E 
F 
IRL 
I 
L 
NL 
A 
P 
FIN 
S 
_____ 

3,50 

407,41 
272,89 
557,96 
59,84 
250,24 
140,42 

3,84 
5.11 
315,48 

48.64 

42,59 
22,07 
17734 

28.74 
206,89 

41,08 
5,21 
6,49 
77.13 

26.60 
27.86 
34.01 

1.40 
0.00 
101.90 

84.67 
14537 

30.89 
0.00 
7,28 
15,20 

3,13 
6.34 
2.70 

27,64 
9,02 

(ZVil) 
100% 
100% 
100% 
100% 
80% 
99% 

% 
J2___L 

95% 
95% 
88% 
100% 
79% 
93% 

Total 
2.416.50 
802.43 
508.40 
44,67 

3.772.00 
38,96 
25,81 
798,17 
315,93 
690.17 
482.32 
260,07 
391.87 
4.31 
27.06 
110,35 
377,03 
86,52 
55,96 
107.47 

Total 
2.065,33 
696.00 
399,07 
36.66 

3.197.06 
47,49 
22.07 
686,66 
272,89 
671,37 
412,29 
250,24 
212,38 
5-21 
17,61 
97,44 
315,48 
57,36 
43.22 
85.35 

Community 
Initiatives, 

139.48 
JL______ 
4.52 
3.27 
6,17 
11.83 
2.27 
38,78 
0,00 
26,70 
0,00 
0,00 
12,17 
0,88 
15.31 
9,44 
8.13 

Community 
Initiatives 

80,83 
_££____ 
1,99 
0,98 
11,57 
5.91 
7,71 
22,23 
0,00 
12,10 
0,00 
0,00 
3,68 
2.23 
4,59 
2,52 
5.33 

TOTAL 
(2) 
2.416,50 
802,43 
508,40 
44,67 
139,48 
?.?.1.4fi 
43,48 
29,07 
804.34 
327.76 
692.44 
521,10 
260,07 
418.57 
4.31 
27.06 
122.53 
377.92 
101,83 
65,40 
115.59 

TOTAL 
(2) 
2.06533 
696,00 
399,07 
36,66 
80,83 
2.277.8? 
49,49 
23,05 
698.22 
278.81 
679,08 
434,52 
250,24 
224,48 
5.21 
17,61 
101,12 
317,7] 
61,96 
45.73 
90,67 

As  in  the  case  of  the  other  Funds,  the  amounts  entered  in  the  budget  for  the  EAGGF  had  to  be 
adjusted  in  1996 as  a result  of  the  decisions  approving  new  programme,  in particular  those  assisting 
the new Member States and for Leader. The adjustments  resulted  in transfers  of appropriations  within 
chapter  B2-10  (CSFs/SPDs).  Implementation  of  the  available  commitment  appropriations  stood  at 
99%,  i.e.  100% for  the CSFs/SPDs but  80% for  the Community  Initiatives. In the case of the  latter, a 
significant  number of Leader II programmes  were committed  in a single instalment  in  1995, so that no 
commitment  was made in 1996.