Commission staff working document - Accompanying document to the Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2702/1999 on measures to provide information on, and to promote, agricultural products in third countries and Council Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000 on information and promotion actions for agricultural products on the internal market {COM(2006) 855 final}
Date: 2006-12-22
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU financing, agricultural product, consumer information, report, sales promotion, third country













EUR-Lex - 52006SC1785 - EN






Important legal notice




|



52006SC1785

Commission staff working document - Accompanying document to the Report from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2702/1999 on measures to provide information on, and to promote, agricultural products in third countries and Council Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000 on information and promotion actions for agricultural products on the internal market {COM(2006) 855 final}  /* SEC/2006/1785 */  








[pic] | COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES |Brussels, 22.12.2006SEC(2006) 1785COMMISSION STAFF WORKING DOCUMENTAccompanying document to the REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL AND THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT on the application of Council Regulation (EC) No 2702/1999 on measures to provide information on, and to promote, agricultural products in third countries and Council Regulation (EC) No 2826/2000 on information and promotion actions for agricultural products on the internal market {COM(2006) 855 final}TABLE OF CONTENTSANNEX 1 – IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE PREVIOUS REPORT 31.1. Amendments of the regulations 31.2. Development since the previous report 31. The European dimension of the promotion programmes 32. The quality of the proposals and their evaluation by the Member States 33. Check of the information and promotion material 44. Drafting and transmission to the quarterly and annual report Commission 45. On-the-spot checks, in particular within the framework of the follow-up groups 46. State aid 47. Selection of the implementing bodies 58. Improvement of the effectiveness of the promotion strategy 59. Methods of co-financing of the programmes 510. Determination of eligible themes and products 611. Improvements in administrative management 6ANNEX 2 – PROMOTION PROGRAMMES ACCEPTED BETWEEN MARCH 2004 AND JULY 2006: TABLES VENTILATED BY PRODUCT SECTOR, ACCORDING TO THE DURATION AND ACCORDING TO THE BUDGET 72.1. Third countries 72.2. Internal market 13ANNEX 3 – PROGRAMMES ACCEPTED BETWEEN DECEMBER 2001 AND JULY 2006: TABLES VENTILATED BY COUNTRY, BY PRODUCT SECTOR, ACCORDING TO THE DURATION AND ACCORDING TO THE BUDGET 203.1. Third countries 203.2. Internal market 27Table of graphs 34ANNEX 1 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE PREVIOUS REPORT1.1. Amendments of the regulationsFollowing to the recommendations made in the previous report and approved by Parliament and the Council, a number of amendments were brought to European regulation in force:-  Council Regulation (EC) No 2060/2004 amended the Regulations (EC) No 2702/1999 and (EC) No 2826/2000 concerning the actions of information and of promotion, respectively in third countries and on the internal market,-  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1346/2005 replaced Regulation (EC) No 2879/2000 laying down detailed rules for the led actions of information and of promotion in third countries,-  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1071/2005 replaced Regulation (EC) No 94/2002 lying down detailed rules for the led actions of information and of promotion on the internal market.1.2. Development since the previous reportDuring the reference period, several improvements were made to the management of the programmes, accordingly, in particular, to the conclusions of the previous report. The following sections give a concrete outline of the changes made.1. The European dimension of the promotion programmesAs in the past, priority was granted to programmes involving more than one Member State both on the internal market and in third countries. In addition, the Member States cooperating under a multi-countries programme have now to choose a coordinating Member State. The setting up of these provisions did not increase the number of multi-countries programmes significantly the percentage of which in number of submitted programmes did not exceed 10% during the reference period.2. The quality of the proposals and their evaluation by the Member StatesIn accordance with the guidelines given in the report drawn up in 2004, the methods of evaluation of the quality of the proposals were specified better by various working papers drawn up by the Commission for its own use or placed at the disposal of the national administrations and proposing organisations.In addition, the reduction of the deadlines of tender of the programmes from 4 to 2 a year, allowed a more detailed evaluation of the programmes and a better respect of the regulatory deadlines, in particular by avoiding the multiplication of the administrative procedures.3. Check of the information and promotion materialMember States must check the conformity of the promotion material with the Community and national legislations. For the initial period of application of the new regulations governing the promotion actions, the Commission decisions approving programmes foresee that a copy of the finalised material shall be sent for information to the Commission.This measure was judged necessary due to the public's reactions relating to certain equipment which contained erroneous messages. However, the requirements of the new arrangement at present well being established, this procedure was modified and the Commission departments, from now on, no longer check ex ante the advertising equipment.4. Drafting and transmission to the quarterly and annual report CommissionThe information communicated by the Member States in the Commission, in their quarterly and annual reports, being necessary for the Commission to follow and appreciate the correct running of the programmes, the obligation to provide these reports was maintained in Community legislation.However, with a view to reducing the administrative workload of the national authorities, it is now foreseen that:-  the quarterly reports have to be sent to the Commission only twice a year;-  the annual report covering the past year can include the quarterly report concerning the fourth quarter.5. On-the-spot checks, in particular within the framework of the follow-up groupsThe obligation for the Member States to organise follow-up groups, at the meetings of which the Commission takes part, existed previously for the programmes implemented in third countries. It was extended to the programmes concerning the internal market.The Commission may carry out any additional checks it considers necessary. Due to budgetary constraints, these controls are often entrusted to the representatives of the Union in the countries and regions concerned. Those report then to the Commission services.Regarding the monitoring of the actions on the spot, the obligation was introduced into the specimen contract, under penalty of non-eligibility of expenditure, to point out, before each quarter, the actions envisaged during the quarter in question.6. State aidA provision was introduced into Community legislation envisaging that Articles 87, 88 and 89 of the Treaty relating to the State aid do not apply to the financial contributions of the Member States, or to the financial contributions coming from Para fiscal revenues or from obligatory contributions of the Member States and/or proposing organisations in the case of information or promotion programmes which can benefit from Community co-financing under the regulatory provisions referred to above.7. Selection of the implementing bodiesThe rule according to which the implementing bodies have to be selected within the framework of a procedure of competition was maintained. However, Community legislation envisages, from now on, for the proposing organisation, the two following possibilities:-  it can, under certain conditions, carry out itself a part of the actions envisaged in the programme;-  the implementation body can be selected after the transmission of the programme to the Commission, until the signature of the contract.8. Improvement of the effectiveness of the promotion strategyThe possibility for the Union of financing 100% of the budget of information campaigns was extended for the internal market to the community systems relating to the protected designation of origin (PDO), to the protected geographical indications (PGI), to the traditional speciality guaranteed (TSG) and to organic production, and to other community systems concerning the quality standards, the labelling of the agricultural products and of food and the graphic symbols envisaged in the Community legislation.Moreover, regulation permits now the Commission:-  to launch promotion and information programmes in the third countries for sectors, products or topics which have a pan-European importance,-  to fix lower limits and/or higher than the cost of the programmes.Regulation envisages now also the obligation, for the proposing organisations, to envisage and carry out evaluation actions of their programmes, the expenses of which are eligible for co-financing by the EU, to 3% of the total cost of the actions.9. Methods of co-financing of the programmesThe level of the Community contribution was fixed at 50% both for the total duration of each programme and for each year of its implementation. The decreasing percentages of Community co-financing for the multi-annual programmes were suppressed.Regarding the participation of the Member States, the possibility has been introduced of a zero financial contribution, while remaining responsible for supervision and the control of this programme. Similarly, if there is absence of proposal for programmes in a given sector, a Member State can introduce a programme for this sector. This programme is then co financed 50-50 by this Member State and the Community.10. Determination of eligible themes and productsBoth Commission Regulations regarding respectively the internal market and third countries include now, in their annexes, a list of the eligible themes and products – and, for the third countries, eligible destinations – which is regularly updated.11. Improvements in administrative managementSince the adoption of the last report, significant improvements have been introduced:-  all documents concerning programme selection and management have been examined and improved. They have been adapted to the existing regulation and enriched by a more precise description of the actions and the budget of the programme;-  a database entitled "management of promotion programmes" (MPP), which has been in preparation for several years, is now operational, allowing in particular a better monitoring of the actions and budget of the running programmes. This database also allows better use of the statistical data of the sector and their presentation in developed written forms.ANNEX 2 Promotion programmes accepted between March 2004 and July 2006: tables ventilated by product sector, according to the duration and according to the budget2.1. Third countriesTable 2.1.1 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – from 2004) |Budget (EUR million) | No of programmes |Member State | Total | EU co-financing | approved |Cyprus | 4.5 | 2.2 | 2 |Finland | 0.8 | 0.4 | 1 |Greece | 15.8 | 7.9 | 8 |Italy | 26.4 | 13.1 | 19 |Lithuania | 2.9 | 1.4 | 1 |Multi MS | 19,5 | 9.7 | 7 |Netherlands | 2.6 | 1.3 | 3 |Poland | 1.8 | 0.9 | 1 |Portugal | 5.3 | 2.7 | 4 |Total | 79.5 | 39.7 | 46 |Graph 1 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – from 2004)[pic]Graph 2 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – from 2004)[pic]Table 2.1.2 – Accepted programmes by target countries (third countries – from 2004) |Proposing Member States |EU co-financing |Duration (years) | No of programmes | EUR million | percentage |1 year | 4 | 2.0 | 5.14% |2 years | 9 | 5.8 | 14.72% |3 years | 33 | 31.8 | 80.14% |Total | 46 | 39.7 | 100.00% |Graph 3 – Number of programmes per duration type (third countries – from 2004)[pic]Graph 4 – Amounts per duration type (EUR million) (third countries – from 2004)[pic]Table 2.1.5 – Accepted programmes by the size of their budget (third countries – from 2004) |Total budget of the programme (€ million) | No of programmes | % of programmes | Total budget (€ million) | % of budget |0.1 – 0.3 | 2 | 4.3% | 0.6 | 0.8% |0.3 – 1.0 | 15 | 32.6% | 12.1 | 15.3% |1.0 – 2.5 | 18 | 39.1% | 29.8 | 37.5% |> 2.5 | 11 | 23.9% | 36.9 | 46.5% |Total | 46 | 100.0% | 79.5 | 100.0% |Graph 5 – Number of programmes by the size of their budget (third countries – from 2004 )[pic]Graph 6 – Total budget by the size of the budget of the programmes (EUR million) (third countries – from 2004)[pic]Table 2.1.6 – Accepted programmes by product sector (third countries – from 2004) |Product sector | Total (€ million) | EU co-financing (€ million) | % | No of programmes |Fresh fruit and vegetables | 9.9 | 4.9 | 12.4% | 6 |Milk and milk products | 4.1 | 2.1 | 5.2% | 2 |Multi Products | 11.3 | 5.6 | 14.2% | 6 |Olive oil and table olives | 6.1 | 3.0 | 7.5% | 4 |Organic farming and products | 1.1 | 0.5 | 1.3% | 1 |Ornamental horticulture | 5.1 | 2.5 | 6.4% | 4 |PDO, PGI and TSG | 15.8 | 7.9 | 19.9% | 8 |Processed cereals & rice | 0.8 | 0.4 | 1.0% | 1 |Processed fruit and vegetables | 2.9 | 1.5 | 3.7% | 2 |Quality meat | 8.2 | 4.1 | 10.3% | 3 |Spirit drinks | 2.9 | 1.4 | 3.6% | 1 |Wines | 11.5 | 5.7 | 14.4% | 8 |Total | 79.5 | 39. 7 | 100.0% | 46 |Graph 7 – EC participation per product (third countries – from 2004)[pic]2.2. Internal marketTable 2.2.1 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – from 2004) |Budget (EUR million) | No programmes |Member State | Total | EU co-financing | approved |Austria | 7.8 | 3.9 | 4 |Belgium | 7.7 | 3.9 | 7 |Cyprus | 1.1 | 0.5 | 1 |Czech Republic | 0.2 | 0.1 | 1 |Denmark | 2.7 | 1.4 | 2 |Estonia | 0.3 | 0.1 | 1 |Finland | 3.9 | 1.9 | 6 |France | 24.6 | 10.0 | 10 |Germany | 34.2 | 17.1 | 10 |Greece | 14.4 | 7.2 | 6 |Hungary | 1.2 | 0.6 | 2 |Ireland | 1.5 | 0.7 | 3 |Italy | 38.4 | 19,2 | 23 |Latvia | 1.4 | 0.7 | 4 |Multi MS | 27.9 | 13.9 | 8 |Netherlands | 13.6 | 6.8 | 11 |Poland | 6.6 | 3.3 | 4 |Portugal | 13.9 | 7.0 | 8 |Spain | 16.7 | 8.3 | 6 |Sweden | 1.3 | 0.6 | 3 |United Kingdom | 13.5 | 6.8 | 8 |Total | 232.8 | 114.0 | 128 |Graph 8 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – from 2004)[pic]Graph 9 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – from 2004)[pic]Table 2.2.2 – Accepted programmes by target countries (internal market – from 2004) |Proposing Member States |EU co-financing |Duration (years) | No of programmes | EUR million | percentage |1 year | 27 | 7.1 | 6.25% |2 years | 27 | 18.3 | 16.04% |3 years | 74 | 88.6 | 77.71% |Total | 128 | 114.0 | 100.00% |Graph 10 – Number of programmes per duration type (internal market – from 2004)[pic]Graph 11 – Amounts per duration type (EUR million) (internal market – from 2004)[pic]Table 2.2.5 – Accepted programmes by the size of their budget (internal market – from 2004) |Total budget of the programmes (EUR million) | No of programmes | % of programmes | Budget total (EUR million) | % of budget |0.1 – 0.3 | 19 | 14.8% | 3.8 | 1.7% |0.3 – 1.0 | 37 | 28.9% | 24.3 | 10.4% |1.0 – 2.5 | 40 | 31.3% | 65.6 | 28.2% |> 2.5 | 32 | 25.0% | 139.0 | 59.7% |Total | 128 | 100.0% | 232.8 | 100.0% |Graph 12 – Number of programmes by the size of their budget (internal market – from 2004)[pic]Graph 13 – Total budget by the size of the budget of the programmes (internal market – from 2004)[pic]Table 2.2.6 – Accepted programmes by product sector (internal market – from 2004) |Product sector | Total (€ million) | EU co-financing (€ million) | % | No of programmes |All agricultural products | 2.8 | 1.4 | 1.2% | 1 |Fresh fruit and vegetables | 35.9 | 18.0 | 15.8% | 18 |Honey and beekeeping products | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.5% | 4 |Labelling of eggs | 6.7 | 3.4 | 2.9% | 14 |Milk and milk products | 45.9 | 22.9 | 20.1% | 17 |Multi Products | 4.5 | 2.2 | 2.0% | 3 |Olive oil and table olives | 8.1 | 4.0 | 3.5% | 5 |Organic farming and products | 25.7 | 12.8 | 11.3% | 14 |Ornamental horticulture | 28.4 | 14.2 | 12.4% | 14 |Outermost regions | 9.2 | 2.3 | 2.0% | 1 |PDO, PGI and TSG | 18.0 | 9.0 | 7.9% | 12 |Processed fruit and vegetables | 6.2 | 3.1 | 2.7% | 2 |Quality meat | 22.4 | 11.2 | 9.8% | 12 |Seed oil | 5.4 | 2.7 | 2.4% | 3 |Wines | 12.6 | 6.3 | 5.5% | 8 |Total | 232.8 | 114.0 | 100.0% | 128 |Graph 14 – EC participation per product (internal market – from 2004)[pic]Table 2.2.7 – Indicative annual budget in the guidelines for promotion compared to accepted budget since 2004 (internal market – two and a half year period) (1) |ANNEX 3 Programmes accepted between December 2001 and July 2006: tables ventilated by country, by product sector, according to the duration and according to the budget3.1. Third countriesTable 3.1.1 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – all years) |Budget (EUR million) | No of programmes |Member State | Total | EU co-financing | approved |Belgium | 1.7 | 0.9 | 3 |Cyprus | 4.5 | 2.2 | 2 |Denmark | 1.5 | 0.8 | 1 |Finland | 0.8 | 0.4 | 1 |France | 5.2 | 2.6 | 4 |Greece | 15.8 | 7.9 | 8 |Italy | 33.4 | 16.6 | 27 |Lithuania | 2.9 | 1.4 | 1 |Multi MS | 44.0 | 21.9 | 17 |Netherlands | 2.7 | 1.4 | 4 |Poland | 1.8 | 0.9 | 1 |Portugal | 6.8 | 3.4 | 7 |Spain | 3.6 | 1.8 | 1 |Total | 124.6 | 62.2 | 77 |Graph 15 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – all years)[pic]Graph 16 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – all years)[pic]Table 3.1.2 – Accepted programmes by target countries (third countries – all years) |Proposing Member States |Table 3.1.3 – Accepted programmes by Member State & product sector (third countries – all years) |Participating Member States |EU co-financing |Duration (years) | No of programmes | EUR million | percentage |1 year | 12 | 4.4 | 7.12% |2 years | 18 | 12.9 | 20.79% |3 years | 47 | 44.8 | 72.09% |Total | 77 | 62.2 | 100.00% |Graph 17 – Number of programmes per duration type (third countries – all years)[pic]Graph 18 – Amounts per duration type (€ million) (third countries – all years)[pic]Table 3.1.5 –Accepted programmes by the size of their budget (third countries – all years) |Total budget of the programmes (EUR million) | No of programmes | % of programmes | Total budget (€ million) | % of budget |0.1 – 0.3 | 6 | 7.8% | 1.6 | 1.3% |0.3 – 1.0 | 28 | 36.4% | 21.7 | 17.4% |1.0 – 2.5 | 24 | 31.2% | 37.7 | 30.3% |> 2.5 | 19 | 24.7% | 63,7 | 51.1% |Total | 77 | 100.0% | 124.6 | 100.0% |Graph 19 – Number of programmes by the size of their budget (third countries – all years)[pic]Graph 20 – Total budget by the size of the budget of the programmes (third countries – all years)[pic]Table 3.1.6 – Accepted programmes by product sector (third countries – all years) |Budget (€ million) |Product sector | Total | EU co-financing | % | No of programmes |Fresh fruit and vegetables | 17.5 | 8.7 | 14.1% | 15 |Milk and milk products | 8.9 | 4.4 | 7.1% | 5 |Multi products | 22.8 | 11.4 | 18.3% | 12 |Olive oil and table olives | 6.6 | 3.3 | 5.3% | 5 |Organic farming and products | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.9% | 1 |Ornamental horticulture | 5.1 | 2.5 | 4.1% | 4 |PDO, PGI and TSG | 19,5 | 9.8 | 15.7% | 11 |Processed cereals & rice | 2.3 | 1.2 | 1.9% | 2 |Processed fruit and vegetables | 2.9 | 1.5 | 2.3% | 2 |Quality meat | 19,7 | 9.8 | 15.8% | 7 |Spirit drinks | 2.9 | 1.4 | 2.3% | 1 |Wines | 15.3 | 7.6 | 12.3% | 12 |Total | 124.6 | 62.2 | 100.0% | 77 |Graph 21 – EC participation per product (third countries – all years)[pic]3.2. Internal marketTable 3.2.1 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – all years) |Budget (EUR million) | No of programmes |Member State | Total | EU co-financing | approved |Austria | 17.3 | 8.7 | 9 |Belgium | 15.0 | 7.5 | 12 |Cyprus | 1.1 | 0.5 | 1 |Czech Republic | 0.2 | 0.1 | 1 |Denmark | 6.2 | 3.1 | 6 |Estonia | 0.3 | 0.1 | 1 |Finland | 5.0 | 2.5 | 8 |France | 63.2 | 29.3 | 23 |Germany | 46.0 | 23.0 | 20 |Greece | 19,3 | 9.6 | 11 |Hungary | 1.2 | 0.6 | 2 |Ireland | 2.1 | 1.1 | 5 |Italy | 66.3 | 33.2 | 47 |Latvia | 1.4 | 0.7 | 4 |Multi MS | 40.8 | 20,4 | 11 |Netherlands | 20,5 | 10.3 | 15 |Poland | 6.6 | 3.3 | 4 |Portugal | 14.3 | 7.2 | 9 |Spain | 49.8 | 24.9 | 14 |Sweden | 4.0 | 2.0 | 7 |United Kingdom | 18.0 | 9.0 | 12 |Total | 398.7 | 197.0 | 222 |Graph 22 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – all years)[pic]Graph 23 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – all years)[pic]Table 3.2.2 – Accepted programmes by target countries (internal market – all years) |Proposing Member States |Table 3.2.3 – Accepted programmes by Member State and product sector (internal market – all years) |Participating Member States |EU co-financing |Duration (years) | No of programmes | EUR million | percentage |1 year | 55 | 18.6 | 9.46% |2 years | 45 | 29.6 | 15.03% |3 years | 122 | 148.8 | 75.51% |Total | 222 | 197.0 | 100.00% |Graph 24 – Number of programmes per duration type (internal market – all years)[pic]Graph 25 – Amounts per duration type (€ million) (internal market – all years)[pic]Table 3.2.5 – Accepted programmes by the size of their budget (internal market – all years) |Total budget of the programmes (€ million) | No of programmes | % of programmes | Total budget (€ million) | % of budget |0.1 – 0.3 | 32 | 14.4% | 6.8 | 1.7% |0.3 – 1.0 | 70 | 31.5% | 44.9 | 11.3% |1.0 – 2.5 | 69 | 31.1% | 111.5 | 28.0% |> 2.5 | 51 | 23.0% | 235.5 | 59.1% |Total | 222 | 100.0% | 398.7 | 100.0% |Graph 26 – Number of programmes by the size of their budget (internal market – all years)[pic]Graph 27 – Total budget by the size of the budget of the programmes (internal market – all years)[pic]Table 3.2.6 – Accepted programmes by product sector (internal market – all years) |Budget (€ million) |Product sector | Total | EU co -financing | % | No of programmes |All agricultural products | 2.8 | 1.4 | 0.7% | 1 |Fresh fruit and vegetables | 111.9 | 55.9 | 28.4% | 42 |Honey and beekeeping products | 1.1 | 0.5 | 0.3% | 4 |Labelling of eggs | 6.7 | 3.4 | 1.7% | 14 |Milk and milk products | 63.4 | 31.7 | 16.1% | 33 |Multi Products | 7.9 | 3.9 | 2.0% | 5 |Olive oil and table olives | 13.0 | 6.5 | 3.3% | 10 |Organic farming and products | 44.0 | 22.0 | 11.2% | 29 |Ornamental horticulture | 38.9 | 19,4 | 9.9% | 23 |Outermost regions | 9.2 | 2.3 | 1.1% | 1 |PDO, PGI and TSG | 29.8 | 14.9 | 7.6% | 18 |Processed fruit and vegetables | 6.2 | 3.1 | 1.6% | 2 |Quality meat | 35.8 | 17.9 | 9.1% | 21 |Seed oil | 5.4 | 2.7 | 1.4% | 3 |Wines | 22.9 | 11.4 | 5.8% | 16 |Total | 398.7 | 197.0 | 100.0% | 222 |Graph 28 – EC participation per product (internal market – all years)[pic]TABLE OF GRAPHSGraph 1 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – from 2004) 7Graph 2 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – from 2004) 8Graph 3 – Number of programmes per duration type (third countries – from 2004) 9Graph 4 – Amounts per duration type (EUR million) (third countries – from 2004) 10Graph 5 – Number of programmes by the size of their budget (third countries – from 2004 ) 10Graph 6 – Total budget by the size of the budget of the programmes (EUR million) (third countries – from 2004) 11Graph 7 – EC participation per product (third countries – from 2004) 12Graph 8 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – from 2004) 14Graph 9 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – from 2004) 14Graph 10 – Number of programmes per duration type (internal market – from 2004) 17Graph 11 – Amounts per duration type (EUR million) (internal market – from 2004) 17Graph 12 – Number of programmes by the size of their budget (internal market – from 2004) 18Graph 13 – Total budget by the size of the budget of the programmes (internal market – from 2004) 18Graph 14 – EC participation per product (internal market – from 2004) 19Graph 15 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – all years) 20Graph 16 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (third countries – all years) 21Graph 17 – Number of programmes per duration type (third countries – all years) 24Graph 18 – Amounts per duration type (€ million) (third countries – all years) 24Graph 19 – Number of programmes by the size of their budget (third countries – all years) 25Graph 20 – Total budget by the size of the budget of the programmes (third countries – all years) 25Graph 21 – EC participation per product (third countries – all years) 26Graph 22 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – all years) 28Graph 23 – Accepted programmes by proposing Member State (internal market – all years) 28Graph 24 – Number of programmes per duration type (internal market – all years) 31Graph 25 – Amounts per duration type (€ million) (internal market – all years) 31Graph 26 – Number of programmes by the size of their budget (internal market – all years) 32Graph 27 – Total budget by the size of the budget of the programmes (internal market – all years) 32Graph 28 – EC participation per product (internal market – all years) 33