REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION SEVENTH ANNUAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN FISHERIES FUND (2013)
Date: 2014-12-16
Institutions: European Commission
Subjects: EU Member State, European fisheries fund, aquaculture, audit, financial control, financial management, fishing industry, private investment, public investment













EUR-Lex - 52014DC0738 - EN











|



52014DC0738

REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION SEVENTH ANNUAL REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN FISHERIES FUND (2013) /* COM/2014/0738 final */









TABLE OF
CONTENTS
1........... INTRODUCTION....................................................................................................... 1
2........... OVERALL
ASSESSMENT OF EFF IMPLEMENTATION..................................... 1
2.1........ Financial
implementation of the EFF by the Member States....................................... 1
2.2........ Main
areas of intervention for the EFF........................................................................ 3
2.3........ Evolution
per priority axis............................................................................................ 3
2.4........ Budget
implementation by the Commission................................................................. 4
2.5........ Use of
technical assistance by the Member States....................................................... 5
2.6........ Use of
technical assistance by the Commission............................................................ 5
2.6.1..... Information
technology................................................................................................ 5
2.6.2..... Support
Unit for the European Fisheries Areas Network............................................. 5
2.6.3..... Studies.......................................................................................................................... 5
2.6.4..... Non-permanent
staff..................................................................................................... 5
2.7........ Coordination
of the EFF with the Structural Funds and the European Agricultural Fund for
Rural Development (EAFRD)................................................................................................ 6
2.8........ Preparatory
work for the programming period 2014-2020: the European Maritime and Fisheries
Fund    6
3........... ASSESSMENT
OF EFF IMPLEMENTATION PER AXIS...................................... 6
3.1........ Axis 1............................................................................................................................ 6
3.1.1..... Economic
performance of EU fishing fleet in 2012 (based on Annual Economic Report 2014 –
data 2012)...................................................................................................................................... 6
3.1.2..... Permanent
cessation of fishing operations.................................................................... 6
3.1.3..... Temporary
cessation of fishing operations................................................................... 7
3.1.4..... Investments
on board fishing vessels and selectivity................................................... 7
3.1.5..... Socio-economic
compensation for the management of the fishing fleet...................... 7
3.2........ Axis 2............................................................................................................................ 7
3.2.1..... Inland
fisheries............................................................................................................. 7
3.2.2..... Aquaculture.................................................................................................................. 7
3.2.3..... Processing..................................................................................................................... 8
3.3........ Axis 3............................................................................................................................ 9
3.3.1..... Fishing
ports, landing sites and shelters....................................................................... 9
3.3.2..... Development
of new markets and promotional campaigns.......................................... 9
3.3.3..... Pilot
operations............................................................................................................. 9
3.4........ Axis 4............................................................................................................................ 9
4........... First
set of operational conclusions on the EFF for the period 2007-2013................ 10
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION
SEVENTH ANNUAL
REPORT ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE EUROPEAN FISHERIES FUND (2013)
1.           INTRODUCTION
In line with
Article 68 of the European Fisheries Fund (EFF) Regulation[1], by 31 December each year the Commission must forward to the
European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee
and the Committee of the Regions a report on how the EFF is being implemented.
The report is based on an examination and assessment by the Commission of the Member
States’ annual reports and on any other available information. It also includes
an analysis of the implementation of some key EFF measures.
The accompanying
Commission staff working document includes a summary of EFF implementation in
each Member State as well as five tables with detailed information on financial
execution[2]. As per the Regulation, it also provides a summary of the audits on
management and control systems set up by the Member States that are carried out
on behalf of the Commission and a summary of the outcome of audits on EFF
assistance carried out by the Member States, where appropriate showing the
financial corrections made.
This report
presents an overall assessment of EFF implementation by the Member States and
by the Commission during 2013, which is the final year of programming. In some
cases data provided by Member States were sufficient for a more extensive
analysis up until 31 May 2014, thus providing a more comprehensive picture of
the current implementation of the EFF less than two years before the deadline
for EFF implementation on the ground (31 December 2015).
2.           OVERALL
ASSESSMENT OF EFF IMPLEMENTATION
2.1.        Financial
implementation of the EFF by the Member States
Certified
interim payments sent by Member States in 2013 totalled EUR 544 million,
compared to EUR 589 million in 2012. By 31 May 2014,
EFF commitments amounted to EUR 3.413 billion. This represents an increase of
18 % over 31 May 2013 (EUR 515 million in one year).  
The public
national contribution up to 31 May 2014 was EUR 2.088 billion, which represents
an increase of EUR 360 million over 31 May 2013 (+21 %). These figures
show a significant acceleration of national commitments over the previous
twelve months, which could indicate that Member States are starting to overcome
the difficulties created by the fiscal consolidation period.
Over the
same period, private contributions to EFF-supported measures amounted to EUR 2
497 billion. Private contributions can mainly be found in processing (42.67 %),
aquaculture (23.25 %) and investments on board (9.68 %). Together,
these measures account for 75 % of the total private funding.
In total,
investments into the fishery and aquaculture sector for the period from 1
January 2007 to 31 May 2014 amounted to EUR 8 billion: 42.67 % from the
EFF, 26.11 % from national public contributions and 31.22 % from
private funding.
In terms of
the leverage effect, every euro of EFF support committed generates EUR 1.34 of
committed national support, EUR 0.732 of private funding and EUR 0.612 of
national public contribution[3].
Rules concerning aid intensity and co-financing determine to a large extent
such leverage effect, but not entirely. For example, aid intensity and
co-financing rates are the same for aquaculture, processing and marketing; and
even if the national public contribution is similar, private contributions are much
higher in processing.
The table
below shows leverage effects per axis and categories of measures:
 Measures || Leverage effect of EUR 1 in 
 Total (public + private) national funding(EUR) || National public funding (EUR) || Private contribution funding (EUR) 
 1.1: Permanent cessation of fishing activities || 0.711 || 0.705 || 0.006 
 1.2: Temporary cessation of fishing activities || 0.646 || 0.646 || 0.000 
 1.3: Investments on board fishing vessels and selectivity || 3.257 || 0.777 || 2.480 
 1.4: Small-scale coastal fishing || 0.655 || 0.429 || 0.227 
 1.5: Socio-economic compensation for the management of the fleet || 1.482 || 0.656 || 0.827 
 2.1: Aquaculture || 1.613 || 0.435 || 1.179 
 2.2. Inland fishing || 1.503 || 0.447 || 1.056 
 2.3. Fish processing and marketing || 2.503 || 0.542 || 1.961 
 3.1: Collective actions || 1.152 || 0.930 || 0.221 
 3.2: Protection and development of aquatic fauna and flora || 0.652 || 0.558 || 0.094 
 3.3: Fishing ports, landing sites and shelters || 0.756 || 0.611 || 0.145 
 3.4: Development of new markets and promotional campaigns || 0.702 || 0.566 || 0.137 
 3.5: Pilot operations || 1.300 || 0.912 || 0.389 
 3.6: Modification for reassignment of fishing vessels || 4.204 || 1.567 || 2.637 
 4.1: Development of fisheries areas || 1.153 || 0.441 || 0.712 
 5.1: Technical assistance || 0.483 || 0.480 || 0.003 
 Total || 1.344 || 0.612 || 0.732 
The most significant
leverage effects can be found in measures supporting modification for
reassignment of fishing vessels, investments on board fishing vessels, fish processing
and aquaculture. With regard to national public contributions, the leverage
effects are greatest in relation to measures supporting modification for
reassignment of fishing vessels, collective actions, pilot operations and
investment on board fishing vessels. With regard to private sector
co-financing, the most significant leverage effects relate to modification for
reassignment of fishing vessels, investments on board fishing vessels, fish
processing and marketing, aquaculture and inland fishing.
The above
aggregated leverage effect is below the EUR 1.67 resulting from the Financial
Instrument for Fisheries Guidance (FIFG) (2000-2006)[4], of which EUR 0.56 was
public national support and EUR 1.11 was private support.
2.2.        Main
areas of intervention for the EFF
The table
below compares the levels of commitments for the five most used measures by the
end of July 2012, May 2013 and May 2014, respectively:
 31 July 2012 || 31 May 2013 || 31 May 2014 
 Permanent cessation (19.61 %) || Processing (17.41 %) || Processing (16.65 %) 
 Aquaculture (12.98 %) || Permanent cessation (17.25 %) || Permanent cessation (15.44 %) 
 Processing (12.79 %) || Aquaculture (14.83 %) || Aquaculture (14.43 %) 
 Fishing ports (10.89 %) || Fishing ports (11.46 %) || Fishing ports (11.61 %) 
 Temporary cessation (7.67 %) || Temporary cessation (7.40 %) || Development of fisheries areas (9.25 %) 
The situation
at 31 May 2014 was substantially the same as the year before, with the
exception of Axis 4[5],
which saw improvement of almost 30 % between May 2013 and May 2014. However,
as explained below, Axis 4 is still lagging behind the rest.
The
concentration of EFF commitments on these five measures is quite high (67.39 %);
however, the figure for 31 May 2014 shows a modest decline compared with the
same figure the year before (68.86 %). Leaving aside the progress made
with Axis 4, such a (modest) change could indicate that other measures are
attracting more commitments than in previous years.
It should be
noted that out of these five areas, permanent cessation is the one measure
which is steadily decreasing in importance (-21.5 %). The same applies to
temporary cessation, which represented 6.76 % of commitments by 31 May
2014 (-12 % compared to 31 July 2012). This trend could indicate that
traditional fleet measures are losing importance.
2.3.        Evolution
per priority axis
The table
below shows the evolution of the relative importance of total commitments per
priority axis for the period from July 2012 to May 2014.
The table confirms
the relative decline of Axis 1 (-16 %) and the quick progress made in
respect of Axis 4. Axis 3 is also progressing, although at a slower pace. By 31
May 2014, Axis 2 was the most important one; this corresponds to the original
allocation of the EFF funding.  
 Priority Axis || 31 July 2012 || 31 May 2013 || 31 May 2014 
 Axis 1 || 33.05 % || 30.42 % || 27.77 % 
 Axis 2 || 28.96 % || 32.64 % || 31.44 % 
 Axis 3 || 27.59 % || 27.38 % || 28.46 % 
 Axis 4 || 7.1 % || 7.2 % || 9.25 % 
 Axis 5 || 3.29 % || 2.42 % || 3.07 % 
The table
below shows the relation between actual commitments and planned expenditure for
the programming period per priority axis.
 Priority Axis || 31 July 2012 || 31 May 2013 || 31 May 2014 
 Axis 1 || 67.24 % || 74.36 % || 79.61 % 
 Axis 2 || 56.6 % || 77.47 % || 86.77 % 
 Axis 3 || 57.8 % || 67.31 % || 83.80 % 
 Axis 4 || 28 % || 44.60 % || 56.89 % 
 Axis 5 || 44.04 % || 44.60 % || 65.34 % 
 Total EFF || 56.31 % || 67.37 % || 79.33 % 
By 31 May
2014, only 79 % of the EFF had been committed. Despite an acceleration since
July 2012, a significant part of the EFF has not been committed yet, which, as
in the case of certified payments, is a cause of some concern considering that the
final date for eligibility of expenditure is 31 December 2015.
Axes 2 and 3
are the most advanced in terms of commitments, with Axis 2 being the one
progressing the most in the reference period. Rapid progress has been made with
Axis 4, but it still lags behind.
2.4.        Budget
implementation by the Commission
In 2013, in
terms of annual commitments, 16.4 % (EUR 691.5 million) of the total
appropriations for the period 2007-2013 were committed, comprising
EUR 528.35 million  for convergence and EUR 163.15 million for
non-convergence regions.
 In 2013, in
terms of payments, 12.7 % (EUR 546.78 million) of the total
appropriations were paid, comprising 78.9 % for convergence (EUR 431.35
million) and 21.1 % for non-convergence regions (EUR 115.43 million).
These payments were made in the form of pre-financing (for Croatia) and interim payments. Detailed information is provided in Annex 1 and in the
accompanying staff working document.
2.5.        Use
of technical assistance by the Member States
In 2013, 21 Member
States committed amounts under the technical assistance budget (Axis 5). The
larger amounts were committed by the Netherlands (58.3 % of the EFF funds
allocated to Axis 5), Slovenia (51.6 %), the United Kingdom (51.2 %),
 Portugal (38 %), Poland (15.75 %) and Spain (10.9 %). Actions
financed included strengthening administrative capacity, IT development,
publicity and information, as well as supporting the management and
implementation of the operational programmes.
2.6.        Use
of technical assistance by the Commission
In 2013, the
Commission committed EUR 3.48 million of the technical assistance budget for the
following:
2.6.1.     Information
technology
EUR 0.35
million for computer equipment and services related to the maintenance and
development of the Commission’s information systems necessary for EFF
implementation.
2.6.2.     Support
Unit for the European Fisheries Areas Network
EUR 2.74
million for the FARNET Support Unit. In 2013, FARNET continued to play a major
role in the implementation of Axis 4 of the EFF through methodological and
thematic support to managing authorities and fisheries local action groups
(FLAGs) (thematic seminars, specific meetings, ad hoc support in the Member
States). FARNET contributed to the visibility of Axis 4 through its website,
including accounts on several popular social networks (Facebook, Twitter,
U-Tube, Linkedin), the collection of good practice project examples, a regular
newsletter and two issues of its Magazine.
2.6.3.     Studies
EUR 0.4
million for conducting a study on ‘Implementation of Axis 4 in the EFF’.  
Based on a survey undertaken in
September 2013 at the Commission’s initiative, the study on the implementation
of Axis 4 showed that 312 groups have supported over 8 500 projects, creating
an estimated 8 000 jobs, whilst a further 12 500 jobs are reported to
have been maintained. The study also estimates that the support from the
European Fisheries Fund through this innovative approach has contributed to the
creation of 220 SMEs and microenterprises. These figures are likely to increase
once the programming period has ended, given that implementation on the ground
has progressed steadily since the survey was done.  
The implementation of Axis 4 has
resulted in a leverage factor of 1.15, meaning that one EFF euro has attracted
another EUR 1.15 (private and public). Furthermore, FLAGs expect that 61 %
of projects will continue once EFF support stops. Despite some difficulties,
generally speaking there has been no shortage of projects, with demand for
funding outstripping supply.
The study also provides valuable pointers
for improving the delivery mechanisms over the 2014-2020 period.
Country-specific recommendations have been issued for 15 Member States.
The report, together with an
executive summary, is available on DG MARE’s website at: http://ec.europa.eu/fisheries/documentation/studies/axis-4/index_en.htm
2.6.4.     Non-permanent
staff
EUR 0.85
million for the salaries of non-permanent staff involved in the implementation
of the EFF, in particular in order to ensure proper coverage of official EU
languages.
2.7.        Coordination
of the EFF with the Structural Funds and the European Agricultural Fund for
Rural Development (EAFRD)
The operational
programmes (OPs) show that from the outset Member States have been aware of the
need to ensure consistency and coordination in EFF implementation with the
Structural Funds, as well as with the EAFRD. The OPs provide information about
the systems established (or being set up) in the Member States in order to
avoid overlapping, as required by Article 6 of the EFF Regulation. Member
States’ annual implementation reports do not explicitly refer to fundamental problems
of coordination.
2.8.        Preparatory work for the programming period 2014-2020:
the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund
In 2013, the
Commission started working on a proposal for a new fund, the European Maritime
and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), which would be the financial instrument supporting
the reformed common fisheries policy (CFP) in the period 2014-2020. The EMFF
proposal was based to a certain extent on the assessment of the implementation
of the EFF. The EMFF was eventually adopted in May 2014.
3.           ASSESSMENT OF EFF
IMPLEMENTATION PER AXIS
3.1.        Axis
1
3.1.1.     Economic performance of EU
fishing fleet in 2012 (based on 2014 Annual Economic Report –2012 data[6])
Data for
2012, on which the annual economic report (AER) for 2014 is based, show that
although revenue generated by the fishing fleet decreased compared to 2011,
costs fell even more, making the EU fishing fleet generally more profitable
than in 2011. The decrease in revenue is consistent with a drop in the total
weight and value of seafood landed by the EU fleet.
The EU
fishing fleet generated EUR 6.9 billion in revenue, amounting to EUR 3.3
billion in gross value added, EUR 1.3 billion in gross profits and EUR 458
million in net profit. Despite higher fuel prices, energy costs were largely
unchanged because the energy consumption of the EU fleet fell. This is due to
different factors including the shift to more fuel-efficient fishing gear with
EFF and national public support, fleet reduction and changes in fishing
behaviour and fleet dynamics.
However,
this overall positive evolution in 2012 did not apply to all fleets. Five
national fleets made net losses. And whereas the performance of the large-scale
and distant-water fleets improved from 2008 to 2012, that of small-scale fleets
tended to deteriorate.
Concerning
employment, in 2012 the number of fishers was slightly over 120 000 FTE.
3.1.2.     Permanent
cessation of fishing operations
By 31 May
2014, the EFF had contributed to 4 087 permanent cessation operations
(+2.5 % over 31 May 2013), at a total public cost of EUR 898.58 million,
with EUR 527.03 million from the EFF.
The figures
per operation do not change significantly compared to the year before. The
total cost per operation amounts to EUR 220 064 (the fourth largest), EUR
128 953 of which is EFF funding (the third largest).
3.1.3.     Temporary
cessation of fishing operations
Although
slightly reduced since last year in relative terms, temporary cessation remains
the most used measured in terms of number of operations (61 715
operations, 51 % of the total), Average costs per operation remain the
lowest in the EFF (EUR 6 158 total costs, EUR 3 740 EFF costs), and have
been decreasing since July 2012 (-3.3 %).
3.1.4.     Investments
on board fishing vessels and selectivity
Operations
in these fields remain the second most used set of EFF measures (12 090
operations); however, their relative importance (9.99 %) was 10 %
below that of 31 May 2013.
The total
investment amounted to EUR 415 million; the total public part was EUR 173.23
million. The EFF contribution to the public part was EUR 97.48 million (2.86 %
of total commitments).
The cost per
operation is EUR 34 327 (half the average total cost), to which the EFF has
contributed EUR 8 063 (less than 30 % of the average EFF
contribution). The private contribution per operation is EUR 20 000.
3.1.5.     Socio-economic
compensation for the management of the fishing fleet
Operations
in this field are relatively few in number (5 416 operations, 4.47 %
of the total) and very small in investment terms (the second smallest across
the EFF).
The total
investment amounts to EUR 152.8 million, with a total public contribution of
EUR 101.92 million. The EFF contribution was EUR 61.55 million (1.8 % of
EFF commitments by 31 May 2014).
The cost per
operation amounts to EUR 11 927 (20 % of the average), to which the
EFF contributed EUR 7 205 (25 % of the average EFF contribution). The
private contribution is very small, at EUR 1 632 (10 % of the average
private contribution to EFF-supported measures).
3.2.        Axis
2
3.2.1.     Inland
fisheries
Inland
fishing measures (Article 33 of the EFF Regulation) are few in number and very
small in terms of investment. They are the third least used set of measures in
the EFF. As of 31 May 2014, there were just 944 operations (0.78 % of all
operations). They account for just 0.36 % of total EFF commitments, the
smallest commitment item. They are also the fifth cheapest in terms of EFF
commitments per operation, accounting for EUR 12 967, which is less than
half the average EFF cost per operation (EUR 28 192). The average total
investment per operation is EUR 32 456, which is also the third smallest.
The average public national contribution is below EUR 5 800 and the
average private contribution per operation is EUR 13 696.
3.2.2.     Aquaculture
Aquaculture
measures constitute one of the largest areas of investment for the EFF. The
number of operations is small (6 % of the total), but they consume a
disproportionate part of EFF commitments (14.45 %). The total cost per
operation is EUR 179 000 (the sixth largest), of which EUR 80 600
corresponds to private contributions (4 times the average private contribution)
and EUR 68 333 to the EFF, 2.5 times the average. In absolute terms, EUR 1 287
billion was invested in 7 209 aquaculture operations until 31 May 2014,
including EUR 492.6 million of EFF funding, EUR 214.05 million of national
public contribution and EUR 580.74 million of private funding. Investments in
aquaculture are the second largest for the EFF, behind processing and
significantly ahead of permanent cessation.
According to
AER (data for 2012), sales volume and value reached 1.39 million tonnes and EUR
4.37 billion in 2012. This corresponds to an increase of 3 % in volume and
10 % in value from 2011 and 2012. The total number of enterprises was
around 15 000, 90 % of them micro-enterprises (fewer than 10
employees).
Employment
in aquaculture is estimated to provide around 80 000 total jobs, most of
them part-time. The number of people in full-time employment has decreased
slightly, which might indicate a tendency towards higher specialisation. Against
that, the average salary increased by 9 % from 2011 and 2012.
The
profitability of the EU aquaculture sector decreased between 2011 and 2012,
although it was still positive. Labour productivity in the sector dropped by 4 %
from 2011 to 2012. Marine aquaculture generated EUR 165 million in profits,
followed by the shellfish sector with EUR 32 million profits and the freshwater
sector with losses of EUR 32 million.
In September 2014, the European Court of Auditors published a
special report on ‘The effectiveness of EFF support for aquaculture’. The
report revealed that measures to support aquaculture in the period up to 2013
were not well designed and implemented at EU and Member State level, and that
the EFF failed to deliver value for money and effective support for the
sustainable development of aquaculture.
The auditors found that the framework at EU and Member State level was not suitable for realising the EU’s objectives for the sustainable
development of aquaculture. The Member States’ national strategic plans and
operational programmes did not provide a sufficiently clear basis for supporting
aquaculture, and Member States lacked a coherent strategy for the sector. The
targeting of EFF funding on aquaculture projects was often poor; the auditors found
that projects usually failed to achieve the planned results.
The report is available at:         http://www.eca.europa.eu/Lists/ECADocuments/SR14_10/QJAB14010ENC.pdf 
To ensure
that EU funds available for aquaculture are spent in a targeted way, and
following the adoption in 2013 of strategic guidelines[7] for the sustainable
development of aquaculture, the Commission has asked national authorities to
prepare multiannual national strategic plans for each Member State. These plans address the important factors hindering the development of aquaculture in
the EU (need to simplify administrative procedures and to ensure access to
space and water through integrated spatial planning, improve competitiveness of
the sector, and exploit the competitive advantages of EU aquaculture (level
playing field)). The Commission will use these plans to assist the Member
States in the identification of priorities for projects that can be financed through
the new Fund. Together with the Court's recommendations and the lessons learned
from the 2007-2013 period, the Commission hopes to see a more result-oriented
approach to investments in the aquaculture sector supported by the European
Maritime and Fisheries Fund.
3.2.3.     Processing
With regard to processing, as
explained in previous EFF implementation reports, even if processing operations
are relatively few in number (4.18 % of the total), they represent a
significant part of EFF commitment (16.65 %). The following Member States
are spending more than 16 % of their operational programme budget
(national and EU financial support) on processing: Austria (40 %), Lithuania (26 %), Portugal (25 %), Slovakia (24 %), Latvia (23 %), Malta (22 %), United Kingdom (18 %) and Estonia (17 %). Member States that are
spending less than 5 % of their OP budget are France (4 %), Belgium (2 %) and the Netherlands (2 %).
The EFF cost
per operation (EUR 112 400) is four times the average EFF cost (the fifth
in absolute value). The private contribution (EUR 220 358) is around 10
times the EFF average contribution, the largest in absolute terms. The total
cost per operation (EUR 393 718) is the second largest, with Member States
such as Portugal, Lithuania, Malta and Greece providing more than EUR 500 000
in support per operation. Processing attracts high levels of private funding. Total investments in the processing sector by 31 May 2014 amounted
to EUR 1.99 billion for 5 057 operations. This includes EUR 568.4 million
financed by the EFF, EUR 308 million by national public funding and EUR 1.114
billion by private funding.
3.3.        Axis
3
3.3.1.     Fishing
ports, landing sites and shelters
By 31 May
2014, the EFF was contributing to 1 446 infrastructure projects (1.2 %
of the total EFF operations).
Total
investments amount to EUR 695.97 million, with a public contribution of EUR
639.6 million (EUR 396.4 million funded by the EFF).
Infrastructure
projects are the most expensive in terms of total investment per project (EUR
481 306), in terms of EFF funding (EUR 274 111, nearly 10 times the
average) and in terms of national public contribution (EUR 167 518).
Private funding per project (EUR 39 677, close to twice the average
private contribution) is modest as such and relatively insignificant when
compared with the same figure for processing.
3.3.2.     Development
of new markets and promotional campaigns
By 31 May
2014, the number of financed operations in this field was relatively small (2 232
operations, 1.84 % of the total). However, the amounts involved were
significant: EUR 222.22 million of total investments, with a public
contribution of EUR 204.4 million (EUR 130.56 million financed by the EFF, 3.82 %
of total EFF commitments).
Operations
in this field are the cheapest in Axis 3. The total investment per project is
EUR 99 560; EUR 58 492.5 financed by the EFF, EUR 33 082 by the
national public contribution and EUR 7 985 by private funding.
3.3.3.     Pilot
operations
Pilot
operations are key to promoting innovation in the EFF. In the sixth EFF
implementation report the Commission expressed its concerns regarding the low
number of operations and the high dependence of these operations on public
support. Figures as of 31 May 2014 confirm these concerns. The number of
operations (592) remains very low (0.49 % of the total), despite
considerable progress made since 31 May 2013 (+18 %).
The total
investment per operation (EUR 350 193) is the third largest across the
EFF, and is increasing. The leverage effect remains below the EFF average,
particularly the private part, which has even decreased compared to that of the
previous year. It shows the reluctance of private funding to embark on risky
projects.
3.4.        Axis
4
The
implementation of Axis 4 progressed substantially in 2013. The 21 Member States
which implement Axis 4 selected their FLAGs and by May 2014 the number of groups
had reached 312.
2013 was a
busy time for all Axis 4 stakeholders, FLAGs and project promoters, as well as
managing authorities and intermediate bodies, who were all actively preparing,
selecting, approving and paying projects. The related figures show a steady rise
in project approval: whilst there were only 2 756 projects selected on the
ground at the end of 2012, this figure jumped to 6 353 projects in one
year. This trend continued and by 31 May 2014, 8 800 projects had been
approved, for a total EFF commitment of EUR 328 million. The total estimated
value of these projects was over EUR 690 million.
Some Member
States modified their Axis 4 allocations in 2013. The two Member States with
the largest Axis 4 budgets (Poland and Romania) recently reduced their
allocations, which brought the total budget of Axis 4 to just over EUR 500
million.
4.           First
set of operational conclusions on the EFF for the period 2007-2013
·        
Both commitments and certified expenditure at
the level of the Member States have improved; but there is still some way to
go.
By the end of
2013, only two years before the end of EFF implementation, certified interim
payments sent by the Member States represented just over half of the overall
EFF allocation. The extent of commitments at national level at this stage is
significantly higher (80 %) but still below the ideal/expected 100 %.
 
These low
figures towards the end of the programming period could mean that the Member
States will not be able to make full use of 20 % of the funds available in
support of the implementation of the CFP unless additional funds are committed
in the remaining time until the end of the programming period, i.e. 31 December
 2015.
·        
Trends highlighted in previous implementation
reports are confirmed; fleet measures, although still important, have gradually
decreased. Aquaculture and processing continue to be important areas of
investment for the EFF. Axis 4 is gradually progressing.
The last two
years (2012-2013) show a decline in EFF support to measures under Axis 1 while
support to Axis 2 measures increased, both for aquaculture and for processing,
with a high level of private funding for processing. Investments in aquaculture
were the second largest for the EFF, behind processing. Axis 3 also seems to be
making progress although at a slower pace. The implementation of Axis 4 progressed
well in 2013, but still lags behind the rest.
·        
General conclusion on audit. In 2013, DG MARE
carried out a review of the work of the audit authorities in certain Member
States. Seven operational programmes were audited. DG MARE concluded that, in
all cases, the opinions of the audit authorities were reliable (although some
improvements were needed).
FINANCIAL EXECUTION OF THE EFF BY THE
COMMISSION IN CONVERGENCE AND NON-CONVERGENCE REGIONS
 Country ||   || Decided a || Committed b || Paid c || % (b) / (a) || % (c) / (a) 
 Belgium || Period 2007-2013 || 26 261 648.00 || 26 261 648.00 || 15 856 227.33 || 100.00% || 60.38% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 4 566 926.00 || 4 566 926.00 || 0.00 ||   
 Bulgaria || Period 2007-2013 || 71 742 671.00 || 71 742 671.00 || 30 422 962.96 || 100.00% || 42.41% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 14 817 432.00 || 14 817 432.00 || 5 920 289.26 ||   
 Czech Republic || Period 2007-2013 || 27 106 675.00 || 27 106 675.00 || 19 509 468.35 || 100.00% || 71.97% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 4 395 714.00 || 4 395 714.00 || 0.00 ||   
 Denmark || Period 2007-2013 || 133 675 169.00 || 133 675 169.00 || 83 243 496.02 || 100.00% || 62.27% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 20 249 424.00 || 20 249 424.00 || 2 127 292.84 ||   
 Germany || Period 2007-2013 || 137 537 645.00 || 137 537 645.00 || 81 831 242.83 || 100.00% || 59.50% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 22 785 090.00 || 22 785 090.00 || 15 490 828.28 ||   
 Estonia || Period 2007-2013 || 84 568 039.00 || 84 568 039.00 || 54 336 527.77 || 100.00% || 64.25% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 15 488 132.00 || 15 488 132.00 || 12 107 723.59 ||   
 Ireland || Period 2007-2013 || 42 266 603.00 || 42 266 603.00 || 33 467 120.83 || 100.00% || 79.18% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 7 350 203.00 || 7 350 203.00 || 0.00 ||   
 Greece || Period 2007-2013 || 207 832 237.00 || 207 832 237.00 || 145 700 703.39 || 100.00% || 70.10% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 29 020 837.00 || 29 020 837.00 || 50 836 540.00 ||   
 Spain || Period 2007-2013 || 1 117 001 406.00 || 1 117 001 406.00 || 666 766 521.03 || 100.00% || 59.69% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 164 369 114.00 || 164 369 114.00 || 67 686 522.28 ||   
 France || Period 2007-2013 || 213 025 429.00 || 213 025 429.00 || 131 616 673.94 || 100.00% || 61.78% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 32 728 219.00 || 32 728 219.00 || 34 523 047.25 ||   
 Croatia || Period 2007-2013 || 8 700 000.00 || 8 700 000.00 || 2 175 000.00 || 100.00% || 25.00% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 8 700 000.00 || 8 700 000.00 || 2 175 000.00 ||   
 Italy || Period 2007-2013 || 414 060 995.00 || 414 060 995.00 || 240 995 602.39 || 100.00% || 58.20% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 63 740 728.00 || 63 740 728.00 || 77 515 835.93 ||   
 Cyprus || Period 2007-2013 || 19 724 418.00 || 19 724 418.00 || 15 546 048.76 || 100.00% || 78.82% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 2 987 900.00 || 2 987 900.00 || 65 839.24 ||   
 Latvia || Period 2007-2013 || 125 015 563.00 || 125 015 563.00 || 102 422 830.92 || 100.00% || 81.93% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 22 451 354.00 || 22 451 354.00 || 16 022 380.73 ||   
 Lithuania || Period 2007-2013 || 54 713 408.00 || 54 713 408.00 || 39 794 284.68 || 100.00% || 72.73% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 9 332 205.00 || 9 332 205.00 || 11 169 512.89 ||   
 Luxembourg || Period 2007-2013 || 0.00 || 0.00 || 0.00 || 0.00% || 0.00% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 0.00 || 0.00 || 0.00 ||   
 Hungary || Period 2007-2013 || 34 769 572.00 || 34 769 572.00 || 25 655 937.59 || 100.00% || 73.79% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 6 540 370.00 || 6 540 370.00 || 4 216 277.97 ||   
 Malta || Period 2007-2013 || 8 372 329.00 || 8 372 329.00 || 4 493 345.49 || 100.00% || 53.67% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 1 645 221.00 || 1 645 221.00 || 1 630 914.58 ||   
 Netherlands || Period 2007-2013 || 48 578 417.00 || 48 578 417.00 || 27 186 099.98 || 100.00% || 55.96% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 7 358 771.00 || 7 358 771.00 || 5 982 530.89 ||   
 Austria || Period 2007-2013 || 5 259 318.00 || 5 259 318.00 || 4 722 272.76 || 100.00% || 89.79% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 790 279.00 || 790 279.00 || 347 511.09 ||   
 Poland || Period 2007-2013 || 734 092 574.00 || 734 092 574.00 || 390 177 612.90 || 100.00% || 53.15% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 126 330 307.00 || 126 330 307.00 || 116 130 228.87 ||   
 Portugal || Period 2007-2013 || 226 746 668.00 || 226 746 668.00 || 146 115 817.00 || 100.00% || 64.44% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 36 914 101.00 || 36 914 101.00 || 34 325 919.48 ||   
 Romania || Period 2007-2013 || 196 181 626.00 || 196 181 626.00 || 87 676 530.55 || 100.00% || 44.69% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 45 362 301.00 || 45 362 301.00 || 55 376 542.06 ||   
 Slovenia || Period 2007-2013 || 21 640 283.00 || 21 640 283.00 || 13 481 826.73 || 100.00% || 62.30% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 3 071 793.00 || 3 071 793.00 || 4 345 441.02 ||   
 Slovakia || Period 2007-2013 || 12 898 749.00 || 12 898 749.00 || 8 304 073.77 || 100.00% || 64.38% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 2 543 929.00 || 2 543 929.00 || 3 133 897.42 ||   
 Finland || Period 2007-2013 || 39 448 827.00 || 39 448 827.00 || 27 428 599.57 || 100.00% || 69.53% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 5 975 800.00 || 5 975 800.00 || 5 086 898.73 ||   
 Sweden || Period 2007-2013 || 54 664 803.00 || 54 664 803.00 || 35 167 059.56 || 100.00% || 64.33% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 8 280 751.00 || 8 280 751.00 || 10 167 185.03 ||   
 United Kingdom || Period 2007-2013 || 134 201 597.00 || 134 201 597.00 || 62 339 357.56 || 100.00% || 46.45% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 23 710 811.00 || 23 710 811.00 || 10 392 606.72 ||   
 Total || Period 2007-2013 || 4 200 086 669.00 || 4 200 086 669.00 || 2 496 433 244.66 || 100.00% || 59.44% 
 Financial year: 2013 || 691 507 712.00 || 691 507 712.00 || 546 776 766.15 ||   
[1]               Art.
68 of Council Regulation (EC) No 1198/2006 of 27 July 2006 on the European
Fisheries Fund, OJ L 120, 15.8.2006.
[2]               Table I. Financial execution in convergence regions.
                Table II. Financial
execution in non-convergence regions.
              Table III. Financial
execution in convergence and non-convergence regions. 
                Table IV. EFF
programmed amounts by priority axis and by Member State.
                Table V. EFF
certified expenditure by priority axis and by Member State.
[3]               As of 31 May 2014.
[4]               Measured at the level of certified payments.
[5]               There are no individual measures within Axis 4. Hence
the comparison of the total axis with individual measures in other axes
distorts the comparison somewhat.
[6]               Data collected by Member States under the Data
Collection Framework have a 2-year lag.
[7]               Strategic Guidelines for the sustainable
development of EU aquaculture COM(2013)229