Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee – Towards a greater involvement of Member States, Regions and Civil Society actors in the implementation of the Long-Term Vision for the EU's Rural Areas (own-initiative opinion)
Date: 2024-04-25
Institutions: European Economic and Social Committee
Subjects: EU action, EU regional policy, civil society, economic and social cohesion, regional development, rural community, rural development, rural population, rural region, sustainable development








C_202404055EN.000101.fmx.xml












Official Journal of the European Union


EN
C series













C/2024/4055


12.7.2024







Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee


Towards a greater involvement of Member States, Regions and Civil Society actors in the implementation of the Long-Term Vision for the EU's Rural Areas


(own-initiative opinion)

(C/2024/4055)


Rapporteur: 
Marc DECOSTER






Advisor


Hubert DELORME




Plenary Assembly decision


13.7.2023




Legal basis


Rule 52(2) of the Rules of Procedure




Section responsible


Agriculture, Rural Development and the Environment




Adopted in section


9.4.2024




Adopted at plenary session


25.4.2024




Plenary session No


587




Outcome of vote
(for/against/abstentions)


163/0/0




1.   Conclusions and recommendations









1.1.


The European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) reiterates its support for the long-term vision for the EU’s rural areas (LTVRA) and its commitment to its implementation. It notes that the measures set out in the EU Rural Action Plan and the Rural Pact largely meet rural stakeholders’ expectations, in particular with regard to rural proofing, the Rural Observatory and the Action Plan’s initiatives. Nevertheless, it calls for the Rural Action Plan to be supplemented by new arrangements and updated to better cover the needs of the rural environment, with an annual assessment of its implementation at national and regional level.












1.2.


The EESC points out that the success of the LTVRA relies on the close involvement of the Member States, regions, local authorities and economic, social and civil society stakeholders at all levels. It is up to them to set priorities for action for their own areas at local level in line with their specific circumstances. With this in mind, the Rural Pact was set up to encourage the involvement of all stakeholders at all levels. The EESC supports this multi-level and multi-stakeholder governance approach and calls for it to be strengthened so as to effectively bring together all economic and social stakeholders and administrative authorities to determine and implement the measures set out in the Action Plan and the Rural Pact at EU, national, regional and local level.












1.3.


In this regard, the EESC welcomes the fact that a number of Member States and regions have adopted rural development schemes such as rural agendas and rural pacts. The publication of the strategic guidance document on Making the Rural Pact happen in Member States (1) should serve as a guide for Member States to launch or step up their own action for rural areas. The EESC proposes adopting a European charter of rights and responsibilities for rural and urban areas based on these schemes.












1.4.


The EESC draws attention to the Council conclusions from 20 November 2023 (2), which call for the rural vision to be turned into a fully-fledged EU rural strategy in the form of a comprehensive approach developed by rural stakeholders in cooperation with the relevant local authorities. This new strategy should make it possible to develop a new European rural model.












1.5.


The EESC believes that the Rural Pact and the Rural Action Plan form the basis for the post-2027 rural development policy, targeting all rural areas and tailored to their specific circumstances. To achieve this long-term vision, the EESC calls on the Commission to explore the possibility of creating a specific policy dedicated to implementing the Rural Action Plan and the Rural Pact, with suitable funding to ensure consistent implementation of the provisions proposed in the LTVRA. It is essential that this new policy take advantage of all available funds, including the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the Structural Funds and cohesion policy, in order to implement the long-term vision effectively.












1.6.


The EESC believes that the future rural development policy should place particular emphasis on family structures, modestly-sized companies and community-based activities.












1.7.


The EESC considers the European Rural Observatory to be a key asset for rural development and calls on the Commission to use it to learn more about rural stakeholders, in particular SMEs and micro-enterprises, agricultural activities, cooperatives and the role of women, as well as about their complementarity and cross-sectoral consultation, their economic and social importance and their needs. The monitoring of the implementation of the priorities set in the Rural Pact and the Rural Action Plan could be an additional responsibility of the observatory.












1.8.


The EESC recommends that the Rural Action Plan include specific objectives, especially related to living conditions in rural areas, such as the quality of public services, access to healthcare, digital connectivity, mobility and transport, and housing. These aspects are essential in providing people living in rural areas with a good quality of life and making these areas more attractive.












1.9.


The EESC calls for the Rural Action Plan to be updated, specifying in particular the rules and commitments of Member States and regions in relation to rural development. This approach must ensure a more comprehensive, integrated and proactive vision, supported by clear objectives, with precise timeframes and rigorous monitoring.












1.10.


The EESC particularly welcomes the adoption of the funding toolkit (3) for rural areas but regrets the lack of EU funds. It calls for these funds to be strengthened, for financial tools such as InvestEU (4) to be used and for crowdfunding to be supported, as well as access to bank credit through the development of mutual guarantee systems. Moreover, the EESC suggests strengthening the European Investment Fund tools and therefore proposes that the Commission consider creating the new post-2027 rural development policy mentioned above.












1.11.


The complexity of accessing various EU funds discourages project developers. The EESC proposes simplification measures, including a single project submission procedure, proportional checks, new payment rules, regional single points of contact and swift dispute resolution. The EESC points out that the vast majority of rural actors can only benefit from EU funding for rural development through collective projects carried out by local or regional organisations, among others.












1.12.


Local and regional organisations play a key coaching and mentoring role, particularly for agricultural and non-agricultural SMEs and micro-enterprises. The EESC suggests that the Commission strengthen collective action and improve access to the mentoring offered by these intermediary organisations by setting out support measures aimed at them in the Rural Action Plan, promoting access to technical assistance and capacity-building measures and setting up information and mentoring points at NUTS level 3. It also calls for joint local development initiatives such as LEADER and Smart Villages to be greatly enhanced and for innovative local initiatives to be promoted.












1.13.


The EESC notes that many local players are unaware of the long-term vision and calls on the Commission to strengthen its communication plans with economic and social partners, civil society and the media in order to inform local players and local and regional public authorities. For its part, the EESC will continue its promotion and mobilisation activities, as stated in its commitment (5) to the Rural Pact.




2.   General comments









2.1.


In its opinion NAT/839 (6) on the LTVRA, the EESC expressed its support for the Commission’s proposal and endorsed the measures of the Rural Action Plan and Rural Pact, stressing that, if they were actually implemented, there would be real grounds for optimism and confidence about the future of rural Europe.












2.2.


Rural areas are often presented as the EU’s future economic and industrial areas, characterised in particular by intergenerational links, a close relationship with the environment and a dynamic entrepreneurial spirit. Rural policies must take into account the diversity of each rural area and be designed and implemented in close cooperation with all local players.












2.3.


The EESC points out that rural development policy must target all rural areas without exception, responding to the realities and needs specific to each area.












2.4.


The success of the long-term vision will largely depend on the engagement of all Member States, regions and local communities and on the quality of the involvement of local communities, farmers, businesses and civil society. In this sense, the EESC supports the Rural Pact and calls for it to be strengthened.












2.5.


At EU level, all departments in the EU institutions must be involved in implementing the priorities of the Rural Pact and the Rural Action Plan, the ideas of which should be integrated into all EU policy priorities and operational programmes. All EU legislative and operational proposals should be subject to assessments of their impact on rural areas and to systematic consultations of representatives of rural stakeholders before being adopted.












2.6.


The EESC believes that the comprehensive vision of the LTVRA means that all stakeholders benefit from the schemes under the Rural Action Plan and the Rural Pact. Therefore, it is up to local players and political and administrative authorities at all levels to jointly determine the priorities for action and funding. These priorities must not only be able to adapt to specific situations, such as in mountain areas, coastal areas, islands and peripheral and outermost regions, but also – like the Recovery Assistance for Cohesion and the Territories of Europe (REACT-EU) (7) and the Just Transition Fund (JTF) (8) – respond quickly to emergencies and specific issues of local interest, such as the effects of climate change and the economic and social impact of business closures and international policy decisions.












2.7.


The challenges facing rural areas have been properly identified. However, the EESC notes a gap in the data and emphasises the lack of comprehensive studies, particularly as regards the integration of economic activities other than agriculture.












2.8.


The EESC believes that the long-term vision must be the cornerstone of the post-2027 rural development policy, which should be based on the proposals of the Rural Action Plan and should strengthen the implementation of the Rural Pact. It regrets that many policymakers are not yet aware enough of this vision.












2.9.


The EESC therefore calls on the European institutions to adopt a new rural development policy embodying the Council’s recommendations of 20 November 2023 and to create the corresponding operational programmes.












2.10.


The EESC welcomes the European Commission’s recent report (9) on the key achievements of the vision and possible ways forward, and notes with satisfaction the similarities with the recommendations and possible ways forward presented in this opinion. It also welcomes the fact that the opinion addresses several questions in the report and proposes a number of innovative solutions and initiatives.




3.   Specific comments


The Rural Pact and the toolkit









3.1.


The EESC notes with satisfaction that the measures in the Pact largely meet expectations and welcomes the creation of the Rural Pact Community and the various actions launched. It encourages the Commission to develop its activities in this context and to widely disseminate the work and its results.












3.2.


The EESC welcomes the Commission’s publication of the toolkit on EU funds for the development of rural areas. It suggests disseminating the toolkit to all rural players, in particular through national and regional authorities, which will be able to complement it with their own national and regional funding schemes. It also suggests setting up an information and training programme (including technical assistance and capacity building) for economic and social bodies that coach and mentor rural players.





Rural proofing









3.3.


In opinion NAT/839, the EESC welcomes the strengthening of the rural proofing mechanism, aimed at assessing the impact of EU legislative initiatives on rural areas. It calls for full transparency regarding the proofing already carried out, as well as an assessment of the extent to which rural realities are taken into account in the legislative process. It also calls on the European Parliament and the Council to apply rural proofing in their procedures.












3.4.


The EESC calls on the relevant partners at European level and in the Member States to inform the Commission, including in the context of the work of the Rural Pact Community, of existing legislative texts that are not adapted to the realities of rural areas and should be revised.












3.5.


The EESC notes with satisfaction that the Member States are invited to carry out proofing at national, regional and local level. However, in order to increase the transparency and efficiency of the process, it strongly encourages the Commission to include the publication of an annual report on the implementation of proofing in the Member States in the Rural Action Plan. This report should not only provide a detailed assessment of how proofing is carried out at different levels, but should also highlight the good practices observed. This approach will increase the clarity and visibility of the rural proofing process, while promoting the exchange of knowledge and the dissemination of good practices among Member States, thus contributing to the development of a more coherent and effective proofing policy.












3.6.


The EESC considers it particularly urgent to eliminate overregulation in EU legislation that has a negative or dissuasive impact on professional and social activities in rural areas and to simplify legislation by limiting it to what is strictly necessary. It calls on the Commission to review these regulations with economic and social partners.












3.7.


The EESC calls on the Commission to encourage the Member States to adopt similar measures at national and regional level, in cooperation with the relevant stakeholders, in view of the administrative obstacles and sometimes conflicting regulations, particularly with regard to granting permits to construct, restore or convert premises in rural areas.





Rural Observatory for rural needs









3.8.


The EESC stresses the importance of the Rural Observatory, whose work should go beyond collecting and disseminating statistical data on the rural environment to engage in in-depth analyses and research projects. The EESC recommends drawing up a work programme for the observatory in consultation with rural stakeholders, focusing in particular on knowledge of the various rural economic and social players and their needs, on the sectors of activity and their evolution, as well as on the economic and social impact of European rural development initiatives. In addition, the Rural Observatory could disseminate good practices, thus helping to improve the effectiveness and coordination of EU and national rural development policies. The monitoring of the implementation of the priorities set in the Rural Pact and the Rural Action Plan could be an additional responsibility of the observatory.












3.9.


The EESC regrets in particular the lack of data on the economic and social impact of initiatives such as LEADER, community-led local development (CLLD), Smart Villages and Bauhaus. Comprehensive analyses of the quality of these initiatives are essential for disseminating them as good practices to policymakers and rural stakeholders.












3.10.


One of the major challenges for integrated rural development is to provide young people with jobs and prospects for the future. Despite their crucial role as the main creators of jobs in rural areas, SMEs and micro-enterprises in these areas, of which there are almost 8 million in Europe, are overlooked. The EESC stresses their essential contribution to the economic and social balance of rural areas. It points out that many SMEs and micro-enterprises in rural areas are active in both national and international markets and that many of them are considered hidden champions, including in very high-tech fields.












3.11.


The cooperative sector, despite its size and potential, also remains overlooked, even though it includes all agricultural and non-agricultural economic activities and promotes cooperation between them. The EESC believes that this sector is key to promoting business development and competitiveness and guaranteeing the income of rural entrepreneurs. It is essential to adopt a strong policy to support this sector.












3.12.


Although the agricultural sector has been extensively studied, a better understanding is needed of its specific characteristics in different types of rural area, particularly areas with ‘handicaps’ and peripheral and outermost regions.












3.13.


The EESC calls on the Commission to launch Europe-wide studies and analyses on SMEs, micro-enterprises, cooperatives and the agricultural sector as soon as possible, using the Rural Observatory as a central tool for gathering data, carrying out sectoral analyses and formulating recommendations.












3.14.


The EESC also stresses how important it is that these activities complement each other, especially when it comes to producing and promoting local products, agri-food, forestry products and building work. The EESC calls for the observatory to conduct studies to identify problems and needs and determine how they are dependent on and complement each other.












3.15.


The observatory should also address the issue of women in rural areas – particularly in both agricultural and non-agricultural businesses – whose work as entrepreneurs, associates in the family business and family carers, as well as their social involvement in rural life, are often not recognised. Moreover, it should provide recommendations for best practices, in particular to help set up economic and social activities and enable a work-life balance.












3.16.


The EESC notes the crucial importance of volunteering in rural life, for economic activities as well as for social, environmental and public ones, which allows certain hindrances in the rural environment to be overcome or reduced. It calls for the observatory to examine this and to propose support and reinforcement measures.





Rural Action Plan









3.17.


The EESC believes that the four priority areas of action, nine flagship initiatives and 15 accompanying measures cover all activities and provide a solid basis for the future rural development policy that should be updated to ensure greater involvement of Member States, regions and civil society. The update process should be transparent and inclusive and ensure that all stakeholders can be actively involved in determining the priorities and actions to be implemented. The EESC recommends that the Rural Action Plan include specific objectives related to living conditions in rural areas, such as the quality of public services, access to healthcare, digital connectivity, mobility and transport and housing. These aspects are essential in providing people living in rural areas with a good quality of life and making these areas more attractive. Moreover, it is crucial that rural proofing be at the heart of this update.












3.18.


The EESC believes that the future rural development policy should place particular emphasis on small and modestly-sized companies, family economic structures, community-based activities and measures to promote local employment. A strong policy to provide support in this regard can boost rural areas’ economies and combat depopulation.












3.19.


Nevertheless, while recognising these arrangements as important avenues and highlighting opinion NAT/839, which already stressed the importance of a detailed and operational approach, the EESC reiterates the need to expand and update the action plan in practical terms. It proposes including specific measures related to rural life, such as access to local healthcare services, refurbishing of housing and commercial buildings in line with environmental standards, preservation of cultural, historical and gastronomic heritage as well as housing, industrial and religious architectural heritage, support for young entrepreneurs, promotion of local know-how, responsible tourism, civil protection, the fight against the effects of climate change, and water treatment, among others.












3.20.


In this regard, the EESC believes that the Rural Action Plan should significantly strengthen measures related to education, vocational training, apprenticeships and the recognition of professional experience. It suggests setting up or enhancing Erasmus schemes for rural economic and social stakeholders.












3.21.


In line with opinion NAT/839, the EESC calls for clear and specific indicators to be established related to NUTS level 3 and, where possible, the local administrative units (LAUs), with a clear objective and an effective monitoring system to assess the implementation of the Rural Action Plan. In particular, these indicators would make it possible to adjust and improve the actions undertaken and assess their impact, thus helping to make the Action Plan more effective.












3.22.


Furthermore, the EESC believes that the updated Rural Action Plan should significantly strengthen and develop the many initiatives that have proven to be effective and important – notably LEADER, Smart Villages and the European Bauhaus – while promoting new pilot projects and innovative initiatives at European, national and local level.












3.23.


To this end, the EESC stresses the importance of the rural revitalisation platform and the various rural networks, which it considers essential tools for fostering cooperation and partnerships between different sectors of activity and economic and social actors. It strongly encourages rural communities; national, regional and local authorities; and civil society organisations to actively engage with these networks with a view to creating synergies, exchanging best practices and strengthening links between project developers. The aim of this approach is to boost rural development by encouraging collaborative initiatives, thus contributing to the economic and social balance of rural areas.





For a budget commensurate with political realities and declarations









3.24.


In line with its previous observations (NAT/839), the EESC notes that the budgets currently allocated to rural development do not correspond to political declarations, deeming them too low. It calls on the Council and the Parliament to provide rural programmes with significant budgets in line with political ambitions.












3.25.


The EESC recommends using financial tools such as InvestEU and wonders whether a new tool should be created for rural activities – based on the example of the existing tool for urban areas, JESSICA (10) – which would also support young rural entrepreneurs. It would be useful to couple it with advisory support, reduced bank costs and strong tax incentives, in particular to promote the creation and takeover of businesses in all sectors of the rural economy, as well as tangible and intangible investments to make them more competitive and improve market access.












3.26.


Furthermore, the EESC suggests more effective coordination between EU funds and recommends complementing them with national and regional funding, such as crowdfunding and surety and mutual guarantee schemes. It calls for the rural development programme to support this funding at regional and local level and for the Member States to adopt strong tax provisions to promote local and family investment by members of the public in economic and social activities in rural areas. It must be emphasised that this coordination should incorporate rural proofing to ensure that funding is in line with the needs and realities of rural areas.












3.27.


Moreover, the LTVRA refers to the contribution of many EU funds to rural development. However, the sheer number of these funds, the different procedures specific to each one, as well as the cross-compliance criteria specific to each Member State, lead to confusion and administrative complexity, which may discourage project developers.












3.28.


There is no specific EU policy for rural areas, which mainly rely on cohesion policy and the CAP. With this architecture, it is not possible to coherently and sufficiently take into account all the challenges facing these areas. In the EESC’s view, the problem is that rural development policy is neither an agricultural policy nor a cohesion policy but rather a combination of several EU policies for the development of individual areas that falls under the classification level of LAUs, below NUTS level 3.












3.29.


The EESC stresses the need for an in-depth reflection on rural development policy post-2027. It recommends creating this new policy so that the Rural Action Plan and the Rural Pact can be implemented effectively. This recommendation aims to make the long-term vision a reality, with the new policy making use of all available funds, including those mentioned in the Communication on the LTVRA, combined with the new measures recommended in this opinion, to meet the specific needs of rural areas. It is essential to stress that it is not necessary to move funds from the CAP for this proposal, but rather to mobilise the resources needed to create this new rural development policy.












3.30.


Given the complexity of the sources of funding and their specific criteria, the EESC would like regional single points of contact or one-stop shops to be set up at the closest level to local initiatives, ideally NUTS level 3, to coordinate all EU, national and regional funds for implementing the Rural Action Plan and to which rural project developers can turn. These regional single points of contact could be managed effectively by monitoring committees comprising public and administrative authorities, economic and social partners and representatives of civil society at NUTS level 3. These monitoring committees set up at regional and local level could be the same as those provided for under cohesion policy by the Code of Conduct on Partnership.












3.31.


At the same time, a major information and training programme should be initiated in each region, at NUTS level 2 or 3, raising awareness among intermediary organisations representing economic and social stakeholders and among local authorities of the possibilities for action available under rural development funds.





Involving the Member States and implementing the Rural Action Plan









3.32.


Some Member States and regions have adopted rural development schemes such as national rural agendas. The EESC welcomes the publication of the strategic guidance document on Making the Rural Pact happen in Member States, which lists all these schemes and presents the key elements or ‘ingredients’ needed to mobilise stakeholders and foster concerted action. It can serve as a guide for Member States and rural players. The EESC stresses the need to coordinate these schemes and encourages Member States to implement the Rural Pact at national and regional level, taking inspiration from the best practices detailed in the publication, such as the Czech national rural pact.












3.33.


The EESC underlines that the success of the long-term vision depends on the participation of all Member States, regions and local communities, as well as the Council and the Parliament. In its opinions NAT/820 (11) and NAT/839, the EESC stresses that, in order to become a true source of inspiration, the vision must be firmly supported by a European charter of rights and responsibilities for rural and urban areas that is based on the principles of existing national schemes and is disseminated in all languages to foster understanding and commitment.












3.34.


With this in mind, the EESC calls for the Rural Action Plan to be updated, specifying in particular the rules and commitments of Member States and regions in relation to rural development, as well as the governance rules governing partnerships, and the involvement of economic and social partners and of civil society in the design and implementation of operational measures. This approach must ensure a more comprehensive, integrated and proactive vision, supported by clear objectives, with precise timeframes and rigorous monitoring.





Involving all rural actors









3.35.


The success of the LTVRA also depends on the mobilisation of stakeholders, economic and social partners and civil society and on the quality of their involvement in drawing up action programmes. However, many national and regional administrative authorities do not involve them sufficiently in the design and implementation of rural development programmes or merely consult them with no real effect.












3.36.


In line with opinion NAT/893, the EESC stresses that young people are key to rural development, as are older people and retired people, most of whom are actively involved in rural economic and community life. It is essential to fully involve these major economic and social players in the implementation of the rural vision and to take their realities and needs into account in the Rural Pact and the Rural Action Plan.












3.37.


The EESC welcomes the level and quality of involvement of representatives of the various rural stakeholders in the Rural Pact’s measures. It calls for this involvement to be enhanced and for all stakeholders to be involved in the decision-making process at all levels, particularly at national, regional and local level, in the form of multilevel and multi-stakeholder governance to ensure that decisions correspond to the realities of each region and to the specific needs of the stakeholders.












3.38.


The EESC recommends:






—


incorporating the rural development policy into the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) (12) and applying to rural development the partnership principle set out in Article 8 (Content of the Partnership Agreement) of the CPR and the provisions of the Code of Conduct on Partnership (13), in particular the creation of monitoring committees at regional or local level;










—


clarifying the rules on stakeholder participation in order to involve them in an optimal way;










—


enshrining the partnership principle in the ex ante conditionalities of the future rural development policy and making the allocation of EU funds conditional on its application.









Simplifying procedures









3.39.


The EESC recommends significantly reducing administrative formalities for project developers and beneficiaries to make it easier for them to access EU funds. Although the Commission has greatly simplified the project-submission, audit, control, digitalisation and payment procedures, there are still differences – in particular, due to some Member States applying additional procedures and regulations (overregulation).












3.40.


The EESC stresses that these administrative difficulties are often the source of disputes for project developers, in particular regarding late payments, an unwarranted excessive burden of audits and controls, and so on. Apart from the fact that these disputes discourage project owners, they may cause serious financial difficulties for beneficiaries, which have sometimes led to reliable activities shutting down simply because of the rigidity and shortcomings of certain managing authorities. To enable disputes to be dealt with quickly, the EESC recommends setting up alternative dispute resolution systems such as the SOLVIT (14) system, by supporting the mediation work of advisors in intermediary organisations and, where necessary, helping establish mediators at NUTS level 3 or in local authorities. The monitoring committees mentioned in paragraph 3.29 could also be entrusted with the task of swiftly resolving disputes.












3.41.


In order to promote small projects and collective projects in rural areas in line with the ‘think small first’ principle set out in the Small Business Act (SBA) (15), the EESC suggests in particular:






—


applying the principle of proportionality by adopting ultra-simplified de minimis or control procedures for small projects throughout their implementation, reducing, simplifying or even abolishing final controls;










—


ensuring that beneficiaries are not required to provide advance funding, by making an initial payment before projects are launched, and complying with EU legislation on payment deadlines;










—


authorising guarantee schemes from sources other than banks, in particular for collective projects managed by reliable and responsible intermediary organisations;










—


applying the ‘only once’ principle contained in the SBA, allowing project developers to carry out administrative control procedures only once before the immediate managing authorities, who must then pass on the information to the national and EU levels.









Supporting intermediary organisations









3.42.


The EESC points out that most rural players, who are often involved in small-scale projects, depend in particular on collective action taken by organisations representing them at local or regional level in order to access EU funding due to the administrative burden and payment deadlines. These organisations also provide essential support and coaching, in particular to SMEs and micro-enterprises.












3.43.


The EESC calls for measures in support of these organisations to be included in the Rural Action Plan, and for them to have easy access to the technical assistance funds provided for in the programmes and to benefit from capacity-building measures enabling them to carry out their activities.





Strengthening communication and information









3.44.


The success of the rural vision depends on the mobilisation of local stakeholders, members of the public, and local and regional authorities, in particular mayors of rural municipalities. However, the EESC notes that many of these public and private stakeholders are unaware of the long-term vision and the opportunities provided by the Rural Pact and the Action Plan, even though this information is available online. It also notes that they have received almost no coverage in national and regional media so far.












3.45.


To remedy this situation, the EESC recommends that the Commission, together with all relevant European partners, launch a particularly dynamic communication strategy, including national, regional and local events. It also suggests organising training programmes through networks of organisations representing rural stakeholders.












3.46.


The EESC asks the Commission to regularly update it on the steps taken and the progress made.






Brussels, 25 April 2024.


The President


of the European Economic and Social Committee

Oliver RÖPKE
               





(1)  
            Making the Rural Pact happen in Member States: https://rural-vision.europa.eu/system/files/2023-09/rpso-policy-briefing-rural-pacts-draft-230920_0.pdf.

(2)  
            Conclusions on a long-term vision for the EU's rural areas: Agriculture and Fisheries Council – Consilium (europa.eu).

(3)  
            https://funding.rural-vision.europa.eu/?lng=en.

(4)  
            https://www.eib.org/en/products/mandates-partnerships/investeu/index.htm.

(5)  
            The EESC commits to supporting the EU's Rural Pact: https://www.eesc.europa.eu/en/news-media/news/eesc-commits-supporting-eus-rural-pact.

(6)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee: Long-term Vision for the EU’s Rural Areas (COM(2021) 345 final) (
OJ C 290, 29.7.2022, p. 137).

(7)  
            https://commission.europa.eu/funding-tenders/find-funding/eu-funding-programmes/react-eu_en.

(8)  
            https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-2019-2024/european-green-deal/finance-and-green-deal/just-transition-mechanism/just-transition-funding-sources_en.

(9)  
            The long-term vision for the EU's rural areas: key achievements and ways forward (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=comnat%3ACOM_2024_0450_FIN).

(10)  
            Joint European Support for Sustainable Investment in City Areas: https://www.eib.org/en/publications/jessica.

(11)  Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee: Long-term Vision for the EU’s Rural Areas (COM(2021) 345 final) (
OJ C 290, 29.7.2022, p. 137).

(12)  
            Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund Plus, the Cohesion Fund, and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and financial rules for those and for the Asylum and Migration Fund, the Internal Security Fund and the Border Management and Visa Instrument (COM/2018/375 final - 2018/0196 (COD)).

(13)  Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 240/2014 of 7 January 2014 on the European code of conduct on partnership in the framework of the European Structural and Investment Funds (OJ L 74, 14/3/2014, p. 1).

(14)  
            https://ec.europa.eu/solvit/index_en.htm.

(15)  Communication from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions – ‘Think Small First’ – A ‘Small Business Act’ for Europe: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex%3A52008DC0394.


ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/C/2024/4055/oj
ISSN 1977-091X (electronic edition)