REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Ex Post evaluation of the 2018 European Capitals of Culture (Leeuwarden and Valletta)
Date: 2020-08-18
Institutions: Directorate-General for Education, Youth, Sport and Culture, European Commission
Subjects: EU action, European cultural event, European symbol, Friesland, Malta, Netherlands, capital city

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 18.8.2020  COM(2020) 386 final  REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS Ex Post evaluation of the 2018 European Capitals of Culture (Leeuwarden and Valletta) {SWD(2020) 165 final}  
 
 
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT, THE 
COUNCIL, THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMITTEE AND THE 
COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS  

Ex Post evaluation of the 2018 European Capitals of Culture (Leeuwarden and Valletta) 

1. 

INTRODUCTION 

This report is presented in accordance with  Article 12 of Decision No 1622/2006/EC of the 
European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  24  October  2006  establishing  a  Community 
Action for the European Capital of Culture event for the years 2007 to 20191 (here after, the 
Decision),  which  provides  that  the  Commission  ensures  each  year  an  external  and 
independent evaluation of the results of the European Capital of Culture event of the previous 
year2 and reports on that evaluation to the relevant EU Institutions and bodies. 

The findings and methodology of the ex post evaluation are presented more comprehensively 
in the accompanying Commission Staff Working Document. 

2. 

BACKGROUND TO THE ACTION 

The EU Action for the European Capital of Culture (ECOC) 

2.1. 
Since the launch – at intergovernmental level – of the European City of Culture in 19853, the 
scheme  grew  into  a  fully-fledged  EU  Action  in  19994.  It  is  currently  governed  by  Decision 
No 445/2014/EU5,  but  cities  which  were  designated  as  ECOC  for  the  years  up  to  2019  are 
regulated by Decision No 1622/2006/EC. 

The  ECOC  Action  is  designed  to  highlight  the  richness  and  diversity  of  cultures  in  Europe 
and  the  features  they  share,  thereby  encouraging  a  greater  mutual  understanding  among 
European  citizens.  It  is  also  meant  to  stimulate  a  long-term  culture-based  development  of 
cities  in  the  broader  perception  of  the  term,  which  entails  socio-economic  impacts, 
strengthening of cooperation between cultural operators, artists and cities in Europe, as well 
as local (and foreign) citizens' involvement and participation in culture.  

2.2. 

The selection and monitoring of the ECOC 2018 

In  accordance  with  the  Decision,  Malta  and  the  Netherlands  were  the  two  Member  States 
entitled to host an ECOC in 2018.  

The two-phased selection processes (shortlisting and final recommendation) were carried out 
in  parallel  by  the  relevant  authorities  of  these  two  Member  States  (i.e.  their  respective 
Ministries of Culture). The selection process starts with the publication of a call to trigger off 
applications from interested cities. A panel of thirteen members – six of whom nominated by 
the Member State concerned and the other seven by European Union institutions and bodies – 

1  OJ L 304 of 3.11.2006, p. 1. 
2  Full 

text  of 

the  evaluation  at:  https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/6312a17a-1b6a-11ea-8c1f-

01aa75ed71a1/language-en. 

3  Resolution of the Ministers responsible for Cultural Affairs, meeting within the Council, of 13 June 1985 concerning the 

annual event 'European City of Culture' (85/C 153/02). 

4  Decision No 1419/1999/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 establishing a Community 
Action for the European Capital of Culture event for the years 2005 to 2019 (OJ L 166, 1.7.1999, p.1). That Decision was 
amended by Decision 649/2005/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council (OJ L 117, 4.5.2005). 

5  Decision No 445/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 April 2014 establishing a Union Action 

for the European Capitals of Culture for the years 2020 to 2033 (OJ L 132, 3.5.2014). 

1 

 
 
                                                           
assesses the bids submitted by candidate cities on the basis of the objectives and criteria laid 
down in the Decision.  

Malta  decided  to  proceed  with  its  selection  procedure  one  year  ahead  of  the  normal  time 
schedule in order to finalize major infrastructural projects needed to host the ECOC year. It 
published its call for submission of applications in December 2010. The main stakeholders at 
national and local levels took an early decision that a single application would be submitted 
on  behalf  of  Valletta  but  involving  the  entire  territory  of  the  Maltese  islands.  Valletta’s 
application  was  therefore  the  only  one  submitted  by  the  deadline  of  17  October  2011. 
Following  the  pre-selection  meeting  in  January  2012,  the  city  was  short-listed  and  in 
November  2012,  the  panel  recommended  that  Valletta  be  awarded  the  ECOC  2018  title  in 
Malta6.  

The Netherlands published their call in December 2011, following the normal time line. Five 
cities entered the competition by the deadline of 31 October 2012: Eindhoven,  Leeuwarden, 
Maastricht, The Hague and Utrecht. At the pre-selection meeting in November 2012, three of 
them  (Eindhoven,  Leeuwarden  and  Maastricht)  were  short-listed.  In  September  2013,  the 
panel recommended that the ECOC 2018 title in the Netherlands be awarded to Leeuwarden. 

The Council of the European Union formally designated Valletta and Leeuwarden as ECOC 
2018, respectively in May 20137 and May 20148. 

Subsequently,  both  cities  were  subjected  to  monitoring  arrangements:  under  the  auspices  of 
the Commission, the progress in the cities' preparations was monitored and guided by a panel 
consisting of the seven independent experts appointed by the EU institutions and bodies. The 
panel had the additional task of ensuring compliance with the programme and commitments 
on  the  basis  of  which  the  two  cities  had  been  selected.  Representatives  of  Valletta  and 
Leeuwarden  attended  two  formal  monitoring  meetings  convened  by  the  Commission,  in 
September  2015  and  March  2017.  Upon  completion  of  the  monitoring  process,  the  panel 
made a positive recommendation to the Commission to award a €1.5 million prize in honour 
of Melina Mercouri to each of the two cities. The prize – funded under the Creative Europe 
programme9 – was paid to the two ECOC in the autumn of 2017. 

2.3. 

The themes and focus of the two ECOC 2018 

Valletta is the capital city of Malta and part of a wider metropolitan area of nearly 400,000 
people,  representing  90%  of  the  country’s  population.  The  area  is  heavily  dependent  on 
leisure tourism, whilst other key industries include medical tourism, electronics, textiles and 
film  production.  The  country’s  history  has  given  Valletta  a  rich  cultural  and  architectural 
heritage, which enabled the city to gain UNESCO World Heritage status in 1980.  

Valletta 2018’s initial theme and motto was “Imagine 18”, intended to provide a much-needed 
boost  to  the  city’s  inward-looking  cultural  sector.  The  application  was  connected  with  a 
strategic  development  plan  for  Valletta  and  enjoyed  the  unanimous  support  of  all  68  local 
Councils  and  cross-party  political  support  in  Parliament.  It  pursued  four  main  objectives: 
Making  careers  of  culture;  Growing  internationally;  Establishing  Valletta  as  a  creative  city; 

6  All  panel’s  pre-selection,  selection  and  monitoring  reports  are  available  at:  http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/creative-

europe/actions/capitals-culture_en.htm. 

7  Council  Decision  No  2013/286/EU  of  17  May  2013  designating  the  European  Capital  of  Culture  for  the  year  2017  in 

Denmark and in Cyprus and the European Capital of Culture for the year 2018 in Malta (OJ L 162, 14.6.2013). 

8  Council Decision No 2014/352/EU of 21 May 2014 designating the European Capital of Culture for the year 2018 in the 

Netherlands (OJ L 175, 14.6.2014). 

9  Regulation  (EU)  No  1295/2013  of  the  European  Parliament  and  of  the  Council  of  11  December  2013  establishing  the 
Creative  Europe  Programme  (2014  to  2020)  and  repealing  Decisions  No  1718/2006/EC,  No  1855/2006/EC  and  No 
1041/2009/EC (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013). 

2 

 
 
                                                           
and  Nurturing  sustainable  relationships  with  the  environment.  The  initial  concept  was 
however dropped following a change of leadership after the country’s 2013 general election, 
in  favour  of  “Valletta  2018:  An  island-wide  fiesta”,  the  intention  being  for  the  ECOC  to 
represent  the  whole  of  Malta  and  facilitate  the  participation  of  citizens  across  the  territory. 
This  theme was  also  chosen for its reference to  Malta’s local  traditions  and fiestas bringing 
whole communities together. 

Located in the northwest of the Netherlands, Leeuwarden is a city of 100,000 inhabitants in 
the region of Friesland, which has a population of 646,000 and a total of eleven historic cities 
connected together by  water.  Leeuwarden is  also one of the oldest  cities  in  the north of the 
Netherlands  with  a  rich  history  dating  back  to  the  Roman  age.  The  city  and  the  region  are 
relatively well served as far as cultural infrastructures and activities are concerned, but their 
cultural  sector  is  often  seen  as  being  locally-focussed  and  inward-looking  in  terms  of  its 
cultural content, target audience and ambition. 

Leeuwarden  associated  the  Friesland  region  in  its  bid,  a  key  element  of  which  was  “Iepen 
(open) Mienskip”. Mienskip is a Frisian word and tradition, associated with core values such 
as  mutual  respect,  participation,  grass-roots  development,  equality  and  civic  responsibility. 
The adjective “Iepen” adds an important second element of “openess” and expresses the will 
to include also those not belonging originally to the “Frisian community”. The open mienskip 
approach was  to  dominate the development  work of  Leeuwarden-Friesland 2018, as well as 
the  content  of  its  cultural  programme,  with  a  key  overarching  principle  being  around  using 
culture  to  help  deal  with  society’s  issues.  Against  this  background,  the  cultural  programme 
was organised around the following thematic lines: Nature and Culture; City and Countryside; 
Community and Diversity; Lab Lws (innovation laboratories); and Royal Frisians. 

3. 

EVALUATION  

3.1. 

The terms of the evaluation 

The evaluation explores the implementation and delivery of the two ECOC 2018 programmes 
throughout  their  lifecycle,  from  their  early  inception  through  to  sustainability  and  legacy 
considerations. 

Specifically, it assesses the relevance, efficiency and effectiveness of the two ECOC 2018. It 
also  examines  the  EU  added  value  and  the  coherence  and  complementarity  of  the  ECOC 
Action  to  other  EU  initiatives.  Finally,  it  draws  conclusions  emerging  from  the  two 
experiences.  

3.2.  Methodology and limitations of the approach chosen 

The  evaluation  and  its  methodology  were  designed  to  satisfy  the  requirements  of  the 
Decision,  and  contribute  to  develop  a  more  detailed  understanding  of  the  performance  and 
achievements  of  the  ECOC  Action.  In  particular,  it  constitutes  a  valuable  opportunity  to 
critically  reconsider  the  past  year  in  order  to  highlight  lessons  and  recommendations  for 
reshaping current wisdom and insights in the light of the new experiences of the host cities. 

As  for  all  previous  evaluations,  the  intervention  logic  is  based  on  a  hierarchy  of  objectives 
corresponding to the Decision. 

In  order  for  results  to  be  comparable,  the  methodology  for  this  evaluation  followed  the 
approach for evidence gathering and analysis adopted in previous assessments of the ECOC 
Action10.  

10  See previous evaluation reports at: http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/creative-europe/actions/capitals-culture_en.htm. 

3 

 
 
                                                           
The evaluation was grounded in two types of data and respective sources: 

-  Primary  data  included  either  data  collected  during  fieldwork  or  provided  by  each 
ECOC such as interviews and online questionnaires; interviews in particular sought to 
gain  a  variety  of  perspectives  on  each  ECOC,  including  those  of  the  management 
teams, decision-makers at local and national levels, key cultural operators, a range of 
partners  involved  in  the  delivery  of  the  programme  and  a  sample  of  organisations 
either leading or participating in the actual projects; 

-  Secondary data sources encompassed EU policy and legislative documents relating to 
ECOC, academic research on ECOC and the role of culture in cities development, the 
two  ECOC  2018  original  bids,  internal  reports  linked  to  the  application  processes, 
monitoring and evaluation reports, studies and reports produced or commissioned by 
the  ECOC,  events  programmes,  promotional  materials  and  websites,  as  well  as  key 
statistical  data  collected  by  the  two  cities  on  budgets  and  spend  details,  projects 
numbers and types, participation levels and audience figures, outputs and results; 
-  The  evaluation  does  not  include  a  wider  public  consultation.  As  explained  in  the 
roadmap11,  the  Action  is  considered  to  be  local,  and  international  participation  is 
scattered  within  and  outside  Europe  and  is  difficult  to  reach.  This  conclusion  was 
reinforced  by  the  limited  insight  offered  by  the  public  consultation  conducted  in  the 
framework  of  the  evaluation  of  the  two  ECOC  2017,  as  highlighted  in  the 
corresponding Staff Working Document adopted by the Commission in 201912. 

As was the case with all previous ex-post ECOC evaluations, the Commission maintains that 
the methodology chosen is appropriate to produce a report providing a reasonably solid basis 
on which sensible conclusions may be inferred regarding the ECOC performance. 

However,  as  was  already  highlighted  in  last  year’s  report,  the  lack  of  baseline  data  to  be 
integrated in a comparative study of the city prior to the win of the title, at the start of title-
year and after the implementation of the ECOC year continue to be a limitation. These  data 
are crucial to get a balanced perspective, supported by a cogent and ample data basis, of the 
actual impact of the ECOC Action on a city.  

However the budget  allocated to  the evaluation  work (approximately 75  000 € each  year)  – 
which is proportionate to the modest level of EU funding directly provided by the EU to each 
ECOC  host  (€1.5m  Melina  Mercouri  Prize)  –  doesn't  make  it  possible  to  have  a  before 
('baseline')  study  and  an  after-picture  ('ex-post')  study.  An  additional  consequence  of  the 
modest budget is that the primary evidence data gathering tends to be more of qualitative than 
quantitative nature; while qualitative data still holds a great importance in the evaluation, the 
lack  of  diversity  of  data  sources  translates  into  a  lesser  dependability,  for  instance,  in  the 
process of proving the objective outcomes and impacts of ECOC on widening participation in 
culture. 

Therefore,  the  report  and  its  conclusions  are  substantiated  by  an  ample  basis  of  qualitative 
data  (e.g.  the  views  and  opinions  of  various  types  of  stakeholders)  more  than  by  a 
comprehensive quantitative set of data. 

The Commission can only reiterate in this report what it repeatedly expressed in its previous 
yearly reports on ECOC ex post evaluations, i.e. that it is fully aware of – and accepts – those 
limitations,  which  had  also  been  cleraly  identified  and  communicated  in  a  Staff  Working 

11  See Ares (2018) 1933090 of 11/4/2018.  
12  See SWD (2019) 213 final, chapter 4. 

4 

 
 
 
                                                           
Document  accompanying  the  proposal  for  a  Decision  establishing  a  Union  Action  for  the 
ECOC for the years 2020 to 203313.  

As  mentioned  in  its  previous  reports,  with  regard  to  this  difficulty,  a  subsequent 
Commission's proposal and the Decision ultimately adopted by the European Parliament and 
the Council14 foresee that the designated cities themselves – which are the main funders and 
beneficiaries  of  the  ECOC  Action  and  better  positioned  to  have  baseline  data  and  gather 
primary  data  on  the  impact  of  the  title  –  become  the  main  implementers  of  the  evaluation 
process. 

This new obligation put on the ECOC-cities – instead of the Commission – to perform an ex 
post evaluation of their title-year will however apply only from the 2020 titles. For the ECOC 
2019,  the  Commission  will  therefore  continue  carrying  out  its  own  evaluation  with  the 
limitations  described  above.  At  a  later  stage,  the  Commission  will  also  carry  out  an  overall 
evaluation  encompassing several  ECOC  years, enabling to  measure the long-term impact  of 
the ECOC Action, as indicated in Decision No 445/2014/EU. 

It  is  also  worth  underlining  that  the  outcomes  of  the  extensive  local  research  activities 
commissioned  by  both  Valletta  and  Leeuwarden  fed  into  the  Commission’s  evaluation 
whenever possible. 

In conclusion, despite the deficiency of quantitative data and other independent evidence, the 
Commission finds a sufficient solidity in the evidence gathered to support the evaluation and 
shares its overall assessment and deductions, which are considered to provide a generally true 
and informed picture of the ECOC 2018. 

4. 

MAIN FINDINGS 

4.1. 

Relevance 

According  to  the  findings  of  the  evaluation,  the  objectives  of  both  2018  ECOC  cities  were 
relevant to the objectives of the ECOC Action, as set out in the Decision.  

The  programme  of  Leeuwarden-Friesland  2018  promoted  cultural  diversity  and  a  greater 
understanding  among  European  citizens,  both  in  terms  of  content  (with  the  cultural 
programme  giving  prominence  to  European  themes,  such  as  minority  languages  or  the 
connection  between  city  and  countryside)  and  in  terms  of  process  (with  1,600  international 
collaborations covering 87 countries). The programme was also relevant to the ECOC’s own 
objectives, in particular those which were linked to enhancing the range and diversity of the 
cultural offer and to widening access to and participation in culture; indeed, the ECOC used 
culture as a vehicle through which to engage with local people and saw the open programme 
(with its bottom-up principles) as the central spine of the whole project rather than a specific 
and separate community ‘add-on’.  

As  far  as  Valletta  is  concerned,  the  ECOC  programme  featured  much  more  extensive 
collaborations  with  European  artists  and  cultural  organisations  compared  to  the  cultural 
offering  of  Malta  in  previous  years,  including  for  example  a  new  scheme  of  artistic 
residencies  that  enabled  50  international  artists  to  perform  in  the  country.  It  also  explored 
relevant  European  themes  such  as  migration.  Finally,  though  the  programme  changed 
considerably  from  the  application,  it  remained  broadly  consistent  with  three  of  the  four 
original objectives with  less focus being  given in practice to  the fourth  objective relating to 
the environment. 

13  See SWD (2012) 226 final, point 2.4.4. 
14  Decision 445/2014/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council, see footnote n° 5. 

5 

 
 
                                                           
4.2. 

Efficiency 

Overall, the available evidence suggests that ECOC remains an efficient EU Action providing 
good levels of returns at EU level for a relatively modest EU investment: the awarding of the 
title itself has a substantial leverage effect on the amount of funding that host cities dedicate 
to designing and delivering the ECOC cultural programme, and it is a significant generator of 
interest  and  financing  from  a  broad  array  of  stakeholders,  including  regional  and  national 
authorities  and  private  contributors.  Moreover,  the  absolute  value  of  the  Melina  Mercouri 
Prize,  which  is  the  only  direct  monetary  contribution  that  host  cities  receive  from  the 
European  Union,  is  modest  (€1,5m  per  ECOC)  in  comparison  to  the  overall  costs  of  an 
ECOC:  the  operating  expenditure  of  the  ECOC  2018  were  approximately  of  €104,6m  for 
Leeuwarden-Friesland and €26,5m for Valletta. 

At city level, the evaluation concludes that the efficiency of management arrangements varied 
between  the  two  cities,  with  those  in  Leeuwarden-Friesland  being  generally  strong,  whilst 
Valletta  went  through  considerable  changes  and  lost  important  expertise,  which  ultimately 
impacted  on  the  artistic  direction  and  content  of  the  cultural  programme.  The  political 
dimension of the Valletta 2018 Foundation also attracted criticism locally and internationally. 
Last  but  ot  least,  Leeuwarden-Friesland  raised  sufficient  funds  to  implement  a  sizeable 
cultural  programme.  Funding  in  Valletta  was  more  modest  but  still  sufficient,  although  the 
final  operational  budget  was  considerably  lower  than  the  one  proposed  in  the  application 
(€49,6m against €26,5m). 

4.3. 

Effectiveness 

The  evaluation  comes  to  the  conclusion  that  the  two  2018  ECOCs  made  a  significant 
contribution to the achievement of the Decision’s objectives.  

Both  presented  cultural  programmes  that  were  more  extensive,  diverse,  innovative  and 
international compared to the baseline cultural offering in previous years.  

Both helped widen access to and participation in culture, though the evidence is stronger for 
Leeuwarden-Friesland  with  its  “Iepen  Mienskip”  approach  (5,4  million  people  attended 
ECOC  projects  and  60,000  local  people  actually  took  part  in  the  ECOC  as  performers  or 
volunteers)  than  in  Valletta  (overall  audience  estimated  at  400,000  people)  due,  to  a  great 
extent, to the unstability in the latter’s leadership.  

They also helped strengthen the cultural capacity of their cultural and creative sectors as well 
as their links with other sectors.  

Moreover, the two ECOCs raised the international profile of both cities (6% of the audiences 
were  international  in  Leeuwarden-Friesland  while  Malta  registered  a  14,3%  rise  in  inbound 
visitors  from  2017  to  2018)  although  Valletta  suffered  considerable  adverse  international 
publicity, as described above. 

At  the  time  of  writing,  Leeuwarden-Friesland  had  a  less-developed  plan  for  legacy.  The 
Valletta Cultural  Agency  will be a clear mechanism to  continue activities beyond 2018, not 
least  the  Valletta  Design  Cluster,  which  will  help  sustain  the  culture-driven  regeneration  of 
the city. 

4.4. 

Coherence 

The ECOC Action is coherent and complementary to the EU Creative Europe Programme, in 
that  it  promotes  the  objectives  of  Creative  Europe  and  is  distinct  from  the  other  activities 
supported by the programme. The ECOC Action is also coherent with and complementary to 
the  European  Structural  and  Investment  Funds.  Most  notably  in  Valletta,  some  significant 

6 

 
 
investments in cultural infrastructure that were implemented by the Valletta 2018 Foundation 
received co-financing from the ERDF (in particular the new MUŻA museum and the Valletta 
Design  Cluster)  and  will  enhance  the  legacy  of  the  year  by  providing  new  venues  for 
activities.  

4.5. 

EU added value 

As  already  mentioned  and  illustrated  above,  the  ECOC  Action  has  achieved  an  impact  that 
would not have arisen through the actions of Member States alone. 

The evidence from both cities shows that the ECOC provides titleholders with the impetus to 
implement more extensive cultural programmes than they would otherwise do. The title also 
helps  them  attract  resources  from  both  the  public  and  private  sectors  and  increase  their 
international  profile.  The  European  Commission  plays  a  key  role  in  promoting  the  ECOC 
Action  via  publications,  events  and  the  Europa  website,  albeit  with  relatively  limited 
resources. These activities support the ECOCs’ own promotional activities.  

5. 

CONCLUSIONS 

The Commission concludes from the evaluation that the ECOC Action remains relevant at EU 
level  as  well  as  greatly  valuable  for  host  cities,  and  that  it  generates  extensive  cultural 
programmes  with  positive  outputs  and  impacts  which  cannot,  however,  be  fully  assessed  at 
the current evaluation stage, so shortly after the end of the ECOC year. The intention of the 
Commission  is  to  assess  these  outputs  and  impacts  in  a  broader  perspective  at  a  later  stage 
within  the  framework  of  the  long-term  evaluation  it  will  conduct  as  specified  in  Decision 
445/2014/EU. 

Another conclusion is that the programmes implemented by the two 2018 title-holders were 
consistent  with  the  objectives  of  the  ECOC  Action.  They  reflected  its  European  dimension 
through the themes addressed and international connections made. Furthermore, they involved 
local  residents  and stakeholders while  widening  access  to  and participation in  culture. They 
also helped strengthen the cultural capacity of the local cultural and creative sectors and their 
links with other sectors. 

These  findings  confirm  those  that  emerged  from  all  previous  ECOC  evaluations,  i.e.  that 
ECOC  title-holders  carry  out  cultural  programmes  that  are  more  extensive  and  innovative 
than the cities' usual  annual  cultural  offer, with  a strong European dimension  and involving 
local citizens as well as international visitors, in line with the objectives of the Treaty and the 
ECOC Action. 

After more than ten years of similar yearly ex post evaluations, the evaluator produced a very 
limited number of recommendations, all of them addressed to the Commission. Surprinsigly, 
all these recommendations are related to  the selection, monitoring and financing procedures 
introduced  by  Decision  No  445/2014/EU.  It  is  the  Commission’s  view  that  these 
recommendations,  though offering interesting food for thought,  are not  clearly connected to 
and substantiated by the core findings of the ex post evaluation of the two ECOC 2018, which 
were subject to the procedures of another legal basis (i.e. Decision No 1622/2006/EC).  

The Commission, while accepting these recommendations as valuable elements nourishing its 
overall reflection, considers that at this stage, it is too early to draw conclusions regarding the 
performance of the new procedures introduced by Decision No 445/2014/EU. It will however 
take  account  of  the  evaluator’s  recommendations  when  preparing  the  above-mentioned 
longer-term evaluation under the new legal basis. 

7 

 
 
In particular, the Commission does not agree with the recommendation that it should consider 
advising panel members to invite no more than two applicants per Member State to progress 
from  the  pre-selection  to  the  final  selection  stage  in  each  competition,  given  the  resources 
required  to  prepare  a  full  application.  First,  the  Commission  underlines  that  the  current 
practice  is  that  the  panel  only  puts  forward  cities  that  it  considers  to  have  a  real  chance  of 
receiving  its  recommendation  at  the  final  selection  stage.  Second,  in  the  case  of  the  two 
ECOC 2018, the ex post evaluation  showed that a limited number of applications without a 
real competition (as was the case in Malta) can result in a more problematic course than when 
a  city  is  selected  from  more  than  just  two  pre-selected  cities  (as  was  the  case  in  the 
Netherlands). Third, experience shows that though preparing  a full  application has indeed  a 
cost, the bidding process in itself has its merits and value as this is the opportunity for cities to 
further reflect on how culture and Europe can shape their overall development. 

The evaluator also recommends that the Commission should consider whether the procedures 
introduced by  Decision  No 445/2014/EU will be appropriate to  a situation where a national 
Government  is  likely  to  be  both  the  organiser  of  the  selection  process  and  one  of  the  key 
players in an ECOC application even if indirectly, e.g. via a body under its control, as was the 
case in  Malta. While recognizing the relevance of such a recommendation, the Commission 
would like to point out that such an occurrence is exceptional. In the guidelines it provides to 
Member  States  to  help  them  prepare  their  respective  competitions,  the  Commission  will 
however introduce a warning to make that point clear and ensure that this is not repeated.  

Regarding  the  recommendation  that  the  Commission  should  review  the  effectiveness  of  the 
procedures  introduced  by  Decision  No  445/2014/EU  and  consider  whether  to  introduce  a 
written  agreement  with  successful  applicants,  the  Commission’s  view  is  that  at  this  stage, 
there  is  still  too  little  first-hand  experience  (with  only  the  two  ECOC  2020  having  been 
through the whole cycle of the monitoring process) to come to solid conclusions. This may be 
covered in the frame of the first evaluation to be carried under the new legal basis. 

On evaluation and, more specifically, on the organisation of an evaluation seminar for title-
holders, the Commission points out  that in  September 2019, it launched a capacity building 
scheme for the benefit of ECOC delivery teams. As part of this 30-month project, academic 
camps will be organised while MOOCs and webinars will be produced on various areas which 
are relevant to ECOC delivery teams, including monitoring and evaluation. 

8