CELEX: 52004PC0840
Language: en
Date: 2004-12-28
Title: Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 as regards its expiry date and certain provisions related to the execution of the Budget

Important legal notice

|

52004PC0840

Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 as regards its expiry date and certain provisions related to the execution of the Budget  /* COM/2004/0840 final - CNS 2004/0288 */  

	Brussels, 28.12.2004COM(2004) 840 final2004/0288 (CNS)Proposal for aCOUNCIL REGULATIONamending Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 as regards its expiry date and certain provisions related to the execution of the Budget(presented by the Commission)EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM1. INTRODUCTION1.1. BackgroundThe Union has consistently attached high importance to developing close political, economic and trade relations with industrialised non-member countries[1]. In order to further reinforce our relations with these countries, it is important for the Community to have at its disposal an instrument enabling it to implement bilateral cooperation activities. Council Regulation No 382/2001 of 26 February 2001[2] provides the legal basis for this type of activity. This instrument provides a framework for Community interventions aimed at:-  promoting cooperation in support to the objectives laid down in the various bilateral instruments between the European Union and the partner countries, in order to create a more favourable environment for the conduct and further development of the relations between the European Union and the partner countries and to ensure that the EU, its institutions and its policies are better known among the general public and opinion leaders in these countries;-  building stronger economic, commercial and financial links by assisting EU industry in its efforts to get better access to the markets of these countries, in particular those where structural impediments make it hard for EU companies to consolidate their presence (Japan and Korea).Projects in these areas of cooperation and promotion of commercial links between the EU and the industrialised countries of North America, North East Asia and Australasia have developed steadily in recent years on the basis of this Regulation and in line with the policy objectives set out in various political instruments governing bilateral relations (Framework Agreements, joint Political Declarations, joint Actions Plans, New Transatlantic Agenda, Partnership Agendas …etc) adopted in the past decade.1.2. Cooperation with industrialised countriesThe Regulation has provided an integrated and coherent framework in which to develop projects underpinning the EU’s political and economic relations with six countries: the United States, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Australia and New Zealand (hereinafter referred to as “the partner countries”). It has also usefully complemented specific bilateral agreements between the Community and some of these countries, such as the cooperation agreements in the field of higher education with the United States and Canada or the framework agreement on trade and economic cooperation with the Republic of Korea.The 2001 Regulation covers two overarching themes: a) development of broad-based bilateral co-operation and b) promotion of commercial relations, the former concerning all the countries covered by the Regulation, the latter being exclusively focused on Japan and, to a lesser extent, on Korea.Projects for the development of bilateral cooperationAs regards co-operation with the partner countries, the 2001 Regulation addresses co-operation in the following fields:-  Cultural, academic and people-to-people links;-  Science and technology, energy, transport and environmental matters;-  Bilateral dialogues between political, economic and social partners and NGOs of the EU and the partner countries;-  Customs co-operation;It also defines a number of specific objectives and principles that should guide the award of Community funding:-  Educating and informing the public (including decision makers, opinion formers and other multipliers) on the bilateral relations between the EU and the partner countries;-  Enhancing research work and studies on a broad range of topics in order to promote or prepare co-operation initiatives with the partner countries;-  Enhancing the visibility of the European Union in the partner countries;-  Developing pilot schemes in view of testing out possible new activities;Since the entry into force of the 2001 Regulation this co-operation agenda has been realised in a number of projects, the most significant of which are:-  The consolidation and expansion of a network of EU Centres at universities in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and, in 2004, in Japan;-  The support to the New Transatlantic Agenda policy dialogue;-  The support to pilot projects in the field of higher education with Australia and New Zealand;-  The development of research work by different think tanks and other organisations in the USA and Canada;-  The reinforcement of people-to-people links through initiatives such as Business or Consumers dialogues;-  The organisation of various events in the partner countries in order to enhance the general understanding of the EU in partner countries or to inform the public on specific EU-related topics such as the introduction of the Euro or Enlargement;In the field of co-operation, the establishment and development of 23 EU Centres in five out of the six countries covered by the Regulation represents a significant achievement and is the financially most important initiative under this chapter.The creation of these EU Centres was originally initiated in the US from 1998. This experience has been pursued and consolidated under the Regulation during the period 2001-2003 and extended to other partner countries: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and, finally, Japan. All EU Centres are hosted in the partner countries by reputable Universities which provide co-financing for their functioning. Their main objective is to promote, in the partner countries, a better understanding of the European Union, its institutions, its history, its economy and its policies notably by:-  Creating and developing EU and Europe-focused teaching ;-  Stimulating research on subjects related to the EU and its bilateral relations with the partner countries ;-  Organising seminars, workshops, conferences and other events EU-related topics;-  Developing information tools (Web Sites, publications, newsletters etc…) on the European Union-  developing visitors’ programmes and academic exchanges ;Under the Regulation, Community support has been provided to 15 Centres in the US, 5 in Canada, 1 in Australia, 1 in New Zealand and 1 in Japan. The Initiative has provided opportunities for increased understanding of the EU in the partner countries through its broad based research, teaching and outreach activities. It has helped to develop EU-studies as a distinct subject as well as increased the EU-focus within European Studies. 264 new EU certificates and courses were generated as a result. EU policy-oriented research also increased of which 462 PhD students and 1,731 research publications are proof. Moreover, it is estimated that at least 42,000 graduates have built up their knowledge about the EU through the Centres. The experience as a whole was the subject of an external evaluation in the course of 2003/2004, in compliance with Article 11 of the 2001 Regulation.Projects for the promotion of commercial relationsThe objective of facilitating market access for EU companies in Japan and Korea and improving their business presence constitutes the second focus of the 2001 Regulation. In fact, the bulk (almost 75%) of the Community funding under the Regulation during the period 2001-2003 has been directed towards the programmes aimed at this objective.-  ETP is a human resources development programme consisting of an intensive language course (Japanese or Korean) coupled with a series of business seminars, industrial visits, regional visits and home stays. This is followed by a period of in-house training in Japanese/Korean companies where participants can use their skills in a real work environment. The Executive training programme in Japan was first established in 1979. Its 22nd intake will graduate in November 2004. The 23rd group is now under training while the 24th group is under recruitment. To date more than 850 European executives have participated in this programme. A general survey of the ETP population carried out during the first semester 2003 confirmed that this programme constitutes an excellent base for EU companies to develop their business in Japan and for executives to develop their management skills and enhance their career. In view of the growing importance of the Korean economy for EU companies, the 2001 Regulation established the principle of extending the ETP training concept to Korea. A Korean version of the programme, adapted to the circumstances of the Korean market, was therefore launched in 2002. A first group of European executives graduated in October 2003, a second group is now under training and a third one under recruitment.-  The EU Gateway to Japan Campaign entered into its third phase under the 2001 Regulation. Gateway to Japan is an commercial promotion programme aimed at assisting EU SMEs in their efforts to develop their business and expand their sales on the Japanese market. The Gateway to Japan concept was launched in 1993, followed by a second edition between 1997 and 2001. The current third edition of Gateway to Japan started in October 2002 and is set to run for four years. The core of the Gateway to Japan campaign consists in the organisation of group participation of EU SMEs in sectoral trade missions to Japan and in trade fairs in Japan. In the first two editions of the programme some 1,500 EU SMEs have taken part. Gateway to Japan III is intended to introduce an additional 880 plus EU SMEs from 8 industry sectors to Japan through 32 events (mostly trade missions) divided into four annual rounds organised to be carried out over a period of 48 months (2002-2006) with the final events of the Campaign planned for the second half of 2006.The most important challenge ahead for both these programmes is their geographical extension as a result of the Enlargement: they have to be publicised and participants will have to be recruited in an enlarged European Union of 25 Member States. The two programmes were the subject of an external evaluation in the course of 2003/2004, in compliance with Article 11 of the 2001 Regulation.1.3. Financial aspectsArticle 2 of the 2001 Regulation provides that the Community funding necessary for the activities covered by the Regulation is established annually by the Budget Authority.The budget actually allocated was €15.240.000 in 2001, €16.025.000 in 2002 and €16.800.000 in 2003.To date, commitment credits have been used as follows (in €)[3]:+++++ TABLE +++++2. EVALUATION OF THE ACTIONS AND PROGRAMMES FUNDED UNDER THE EXISTING REGULATIONIn compliance with article 11.2 of the 2001 Regulation, the Commission has organised an evaluation of actions and programmes funded in this framework. This evaluation focused on the most important projects from the perspective of budgetary resources, policy relevance and operational importance: the Executive Training Programme in Japan and Korea, the Gateway to Japan Campaign and the EU Centres established in four[4] out of the six partner countries were covered by the evaluation. These projects and programmes altogether total more than 90% of the Community funding awarded under the Regulation.The evaluation was carried out during the period December 2003-June 2004 by two independent evaluation teams contracted following an open call for tenders. Both evaluations confirmed the importance of the projects and programmes concerned.The main conclusions of the evaluation as regards the appropriateness of continuing these initiatives are as follows:-  EU Centres in the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand-  The centre initiative as a whole is progressing well and provides a high level of return considering the investment;-  It is recommended to continue the initiative and where possible to extend the scope of the EU Centres concept to other regions and countries;-  It is recommended that funding is organised in a multi-annual framework to provide more predictability and flexibility to the host institutions-  Executive Training Programme and Gateway to Japan-  Both programmes fit with the objectives of increasing exports to Japan/Korea-  Both programmes are found to be appropriate and should be continued;-  The effectiveness of both programmes is judged medium/high to high with some room for improvement, in particular as regards ETP;-  The ETP programme has still a specific development potential if adapted to the current needs of the EU business-  EU Enlargement provides new development opportunities for both programmesThe evaluation has validated therefore the approach taken by the Commission services in implementing the initiatives concerned. However some adjustments and improvements are suggested by the evaluators and these will be taken into account as far as possible.The envisaged improvements concern first and foremost the Executive Training Programme for which the services have developed a substantial adaptation plan in order to take account of the evolving business environment in Japan and in the EU. In particular the following aspects are under careful examination:-  The need to shorten the duration of the programme in order to better correspond to the constraints and possibilities of EU companies and executives;-  The need to review the balance between the language component and the management / business component of the programme;-  The desirability to create an EU-based inception training module prior to the Japan (or Korea) based immersion training module-  The need to associate reputable education institutions in EU, Japan and Korea to programme delivery;-  The need to adapt the programme promotion strategy.No major overhaul is recommended by the evaluators as regards Gateway to Japan; nevertheless, a thorough analysis of the programme and its potential evolution in the light of evolving market circumstances will be carried out in the coming year.As far as the EU Centre initiative is concerned, the evaluation does not call for a major adaptation of the experience. Rather, it suggests that good practices identified could be generalised in view of a new funding cycle and that a more strategic approach could be developed across the various partner countries hosting EU Centres.3. SUBSTANCE OF THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION3.1. Time extensionThe main purpose of this proposal for amending the 2001 Regulation is to extend in time its period of validity so that it forms a bridge with the new legal instruments in the field of external relations which are expected to enter into force at the beginning of 2007, at the same time as the new Financial Perspectives (2007-2013).In its Communications of 10 February and of 14 July 2004[5], the Commission indicated that, for the period of the new Financial Perspectives, the large number of legal instruments currently existing in the field of External Relation will be consolidated into a much more limited (6) number of instruments. The type of activities currently carried out with industrialised countries in the framework of Council Regulation 382/2001 will therefore no longer be covered by a stand alone Regulation, but, will be covered by one of the new instruments[6].In order to ensure continuity between the existing Regulation –which expires at the end of 2005- and the future instruments –which are expected to enter into force in 2007- the most appropriate solution consists in extending, in almost identical terms, the existing Regulation for an adequate period of time.In order to avoid any gap between the two bases it is proposed to extend the current Regulation for 2 years (until end 2007). In any event, when entering into force, the new instrument will repeal the extended Regulation.3.2. Compliance with the New Financial RegulationOn 25th June 2002, the Council adopted a new Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities[7] which entered into force on 1 January 2003. Some provisions set out in the Financial Regulation are applicable contingent upon being specifically referred to in the basic act. This concerns in particular article 114 (award of grants to natural persons) and article 76.3 (possibility of breaking down budgetary commitments) of the new Financial Regulation.Participants in the ETP Japan and Korea programmes at present receive monthly an accommodation and subsistence allowance which, in order to comply with the Financial Regulation is assimilated to a training scholarship. Similar circumstances can occur in the framework of education co-operation projects, such as the EU/Australia pilot projects in the field of higher education (mobility scholarships for students) or the EU Centre. It is important to note –bearing in mind the objective of effective management of programmes and projects- that a number of financial provisions set out in the Financial Regulation are waived in the case of grants and scholarships to natural persons[8], hence the need to refer to this possibility in the basic act.It is therefore proposed to take advantage of the time extension of the Council Regulation 382/2001 in order to bring it in line with the provisions introduced in the new Financial Regulation:-  In compliance with article 114 of the Financial Regulation, a new provision should be introduced to indicate that grants may be awarded to natural persons when implementing the co-operation or commercial relations projects referred to in articles 4 and 7 of the 2001 Regulation. This is particularly necessary as far as the Executive training Programme is concerned (scholarships to trainees);4. LEGAL BASEThe Legal bases chosen for the amended Regulation are partly different from the ones used for the initial Regulation, reflecting new provisions introduced with the adoption of the Nice treaty. This proposal is therefore based on article 133 (unchanged) and article 181a (new) of the Treaty (economic, financial and technical cooperation with third countries).5. CONCLUSIONIn view of ensuring the continuity of cooperation and commercial promotion activities between the EU and the industrialised countries of North America, the Far East and Australasia until the adoption of the new legal instruments in the field of external relations under the new Financial perspectives (2007-2013), it is proposed to extend the period of validity of Council Regulation 382/2001 by a maximum of 2 years, that is to say until 31/12/2007.In addition, it is proposed to bring in line this Regulation with certain requirements and possibilities of the new Financial Regulation, notably by mentioning expressly the possibility to award grants and scholarships to natural persons.The objectives and the substance of the original Regulation are left unchanged by the proposed modifications.2004/0288 (CNS)Proposal for aCOUNCIL REGULATIONamending Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 as regards its expiry date and certain provisions related to the execution of the BudgetTHE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 and 181a thereof,Having regard to the proposal from the Commission[9],Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament[10],Whereas:(1) Council Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 of 26 February 2001 concerning the implementation of projects promoting cooperation and commercial relations between the European Union and the industrialised countries of North America, the Far East and Australasia and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1035/1999[11] provides a legal framework for the enhancement of co-operation and commercial relations with those countries until 31 December 2005.(2) In its Communication of 10 February 2004 « Building our common future – Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union (2007-2013) »[12] the Commission announced that during the next period of Financial Perspectives (2007-2013) the Community intervention in the area of external relations will be organised in a simplified architecture, based on six instruments, replacing more than thirty different instruments. One of those proposed instruments, the financing instrument for development cooperation and economic cooperation[13], is intended to provide the legal framework for Community cooperation with a broad range of countries, including the industrialised countries covered by Regulation (EC) No 382/2001. The promotion of cooperation and economic relations with industrialised countries will therefore fall under that new instrument once it enters into force.(3) However, the Regulation establishing that instrument will only apply from 1 January 2007, at the earliest. As it is crucial to ensure continuity in cooperation activities with industrialised countries, it is therefore necessary to avoid the potential absence of a legal framework for those activities between the current expiry date of Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 and the date from which the new Regulation will apply. Extending the validity of Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 for an appropriate period will make it possible to bridge any potential gap in the legal framework governing cooperation with industrialised countries and will facilitate the transition between the current (2000-2006) and the future (2007-2013) Financial Perspectives.(4) The extension in time of Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 is all the more justified as the evaluation carried out in 2004 of the projects and programmes financed under that Regulation established their effectiveness and continued relevance.(5) Article 114 first paragraph (2) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities[14] provides for the possibility of awarding grants to natural persons, by way of exception, when provided for by the basic act. Such situations arise regularly in connection with the implementation of the Executive Training Programmes in Japan and in Korea and may occasionally arise in the case of other cooperation activities with industrialised countries, in particular in the framework of education cooperation or people-to-people exchanges.(6) Council Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 (26.2.2001) should therefore be amended accordingly,HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:Article 1Regulation (EC) No 382/2001 is amended as follows:(1) In Article 5, the following paragraph is added:“When appropriate, in particular in the case of education and training projects, or other similar projects from which individuals may benefit, Community support may take the form of grants to natural persons. These grants may take the form of scholarships.”(2) In Article 7, the following paragraph is added:“To this effect, Community support may take the form of grants to natural persons. These grants may take the form of scholarships.”(3) In Article 13, the second paragraph is replaced by the following:“It shall expire on 31 December 2007.”Article 2This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union .This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.Done at Brussels,For the CouncilThe PresidentANNEX LEGISLATIVE FINANCIAL STATEMENT+++++ TABLE +++++1. BUDGET LINE + HEADING19 05 02 - Cooperation with industrialised non-member countries2. OVERALL FIGURES2.1. Total allocation for action (Part B): 17 ,000 € million for commitment2.2. Period of application:2006-20072.3. Overall multi-annual estimate of expenditure:As the Regulation does not provide for a global financial envelope deemed necessary for its entire duration, figures are provided for 2006 only.(a) Schedule of commitment appropriations/payment appropriations€ Million+++++ TABLE +++++(b) Technical and administrative assistance and support expenditure+++++ TABLE ++++++++++ TABLE +++++(c) Overall financial impact of human resources and other administrative expenditure+++++ TABLE ++++++++++ TABLE +++++2.4. Compatibility with financial programming and financial perspectives[X] Proposal is compatible with existing financial programming.Proposal will entail reprogramming of the relevant heading in the financial perspectives.Proposal may require application of the provisions of the Inter-institutional Agreement.2.5. Financial impact on revenue:[X] Proposal has no financial implications on revenue3. BUDGET CHARACTERISTICS+++++ TABLE +++++4. LEGAL BASISTreaty articles 133 and 181a5. DESCRIPTION AND GROUNDS5.1. Need for Community intervention5.1.1. Objectives pursuedThe objectives pursued are essentially based on the joint policy statements and instruments (joint declarations, joint action plans, framework agreements, New Transatlantic Agenda and other Partnership Agendas…) between the EU and the partner countries concerned. These are major economic players and important commercial and political partners for the EU and it is vital that the bilateral political dialogue wit them is underpinned and enhanced by concrete cooperation actions. The overall objective of the Community intervention is therefore twofold:-  to contribute to the creation of a more favourable environment for the conduct and development of the political relations between the EU and the partner countries thus strengthening the determination of the EU and the partner countries to build stronger links in all relevant areas;-  to enhance the commercial relations between the EU and the partner countries, in particular Japan and Korea, by stimulating the EU business presence there;The specific objectives of cooperation and commercial promotion initiatives towards the partner countries include among others:(1) The promotion of a better understanding of EU related matters (institutions, policies, positions on global issues…) in the partner countries;(2) The education and information of decision makers, opinion leaders, futures elites, the business communities and, more generally, the general public on the bilateral relations between the EU and the partner countries;Both objectives can be attained notably through the consolidation and further development of EU Centres establishing themselves as centres of academic excellence as well as research and information reference points on EU matters in partner countries.(3) The enhancement of people-to-people, cultural and academic exchanges between the EU and the partner countries, notably through support to projects in the field of higher education;(4) The promotion of the dialogue between political, economic and social partners, NGOs and the civil society in all relevant sectors;(5) The further development of cooperation in various fields of common interest for the EU and partner countries, such as: the environment, science and technology, customs, transport and energy;(6) The facilitation of exports, investment and market access for EU goods and companies in Japan and Korea through human resource development (Executive Training programme) or through direct product exposure on, and business contacts with, the relevant market segments and actors;5.1.2. Measures taken in connection with ex ante evaluationIn 2004, the main initiatives implemented during the period 2001-2004 have been the subject of an external evaluation. Two separate evaluation exercises have been carried out in parallel, one focused on the EU Centre initiative, the other focused on the initiatives relating to the promotion of commercial relations (ETP and Gateway to Japan). During the period 2001-2003 this set of initiatives has mobilised slightly over 90% of the Community funding awarded under the budget line concerned (B7-665 and then 19 05 02, cooperation with industrialised non-member countries). The evaluation carried out is therefore believed to be fully representative of the results achieved under the Regulation for the period 2001-2004. This evaluation was designed to both assess the results achieved and the impact of the initiatives and to assess their continued relevance. It therefore fulfils at the same time the objectives of an ex-post and an ex-ante evaluation.The evaluation studies were conducted in parallel during the period December 2003 – August 2004 by two independent firms identified following an open call for tenders. In addition to these evaluation studies a survey of all the beneficiaries (response rate close to 20%) of the Executive Training Programme since its inception in 1979 was carried out during the first half of 2003. The results of this survey were fuelled into the evaluation work undertaken in 2004.The conclusions of both evaluations are overwhelmingly positive and call for a continuation and consolidation of the initiatives. The main findings, conclusions and recommendations are as follows:-  EU Centres in the USA, Canada, Australia and New Zealand-  The centre initiative as a whole is progressing well and provide a high level of return considering the relatively small investment;-  The “EU brand” is one of the strongest potential factors contributing to the strength of the Centres;-  It is recommended to continue the initiative and where possible to extend the scope of the EU Centre concept to other regions and countries;-  It is recommended that a more strategic approach is adopted in renewing the funding cycle;-  It is recommended that funding is organised in a multi-annual framework to provide more predictability and flexibility to the host institutions;-  Executive Training Programme and Gateway to Japan-  Both programmes fit with the objectives of increasing exports to Japan/Korea;-  Both programmes are found to be highly appropriate and should be continued;-  Market circumstances an business practices in Japan / Korea have evolved but continue to justify specific support to EU companies;-  The effectiveness of both programmes is judged medium/high to high with some room for improvement, in particular as regards ETP-  The ETP programme has still a specific development potential if adapted to the current needs of the EU business;-  The Community initiatives complements well the initiatives existing at Member State level;-  The EU Enlargement provides new development opportunities for both programmes;5.1.3. Measures taken following ex post evaluationThe evaluation has validated most of the lines taken by the responsible department as regards the implementation of the initiatives concerned. However some adjustments and improvements are suggested by the evaluators and will be taken into account where deemed appropriate and feasible.The envisaged modifications concern first and foremost the Executive Training Programme, and, to a lesser extent the EU Centre initiative.As far as the Executive Training programme –which over the past 3 year has represented alone roughly 50% of the budget allocated to cooperation with industrialised non-member countries- is concerned, the reflection of services is well advanced (a roadmap for the adaptation of the programme has already been prepared) and, as a matter of fact, the evaluation confirms most of the adaptations envisaged. These adaptations concern in particular:-  The need to shorten the duration of the programme in order to better correspond to the constraints and possibilities of EU companies and executives;-  The need to review the balance between the language component and the management / business component of the programme;-  The desirability to create an EU-based inception training module prior to the Japan (or Korea) based immersion training module-  The need to associate reputable education institutions in EU, Japan and Korea to programme delivery;-  The need to adapt the programme promotion strategy;Proposals in this regard are under preparation and will be submitted to the programme committee in the autumn of 2004.As far as the EU Centre initiative is concerned, the evaluation does not call for an in-depth adaptation of the experience. Rather, it suggests that the different good practices identified in the various projects are taken into account when drafting the terms of reference for the new funding cycle so that they can benefit to the entire network in the future. The evaluation recommends that more flexibility is introduced in the way the Commission awards grants to Centres. This is why it is proposed, in the amendment of the Regulation, to introduce a specific reference to the mechanism of budgetary commitment splitting which is established in article 76.3 of the Financial Regulation. This will allow the shift from an annual grant award exercise which is extremely time and work-consuming for Commission services and beneficiary institutions whilst not giving any predictability or flexibility beyond an annual horizon.5.2. Actions envisaged and budget intervention arrangementsEU Centres-  Target population: leading universities in the partner countries. An indicative number of 20 to 25 Centres across the partner countries could be envisaged, in compliance with the recommendations by the evaluators.-  Specific objectives (and indicators): curriculum development (number of EU related courses created, number of students enrolled in EU-related modules); research work (number of publications, number of research fellows and scholarships); outreach (number of workshops and conferences; number and type of attendees; media coverage);-  Implementation measures: calls for proposals. Community support will take the form of grants with a funding rate in the 50-75% range.-  Outputs: enhanced understanding of the EU, its policies, its institutions and what it stands for by the present and future elites as well as the general public;Other cooperation projects (Policy advice, Public diplomacy, People-to-people exchanges, public outreach),-  Target population: foundations, think-tanks, NGO’s, education institutions, research institutions. An average of 15/20 beneficiaries per year is envisaged.-  Specific objectives (and indicators): reinforced people-to-people links (academic exchanges, joint courses developed; student mobility; faculty mobility); research work and policy advice (number of publications and other forms of providing policy advice); outreach (number of workshops and conferences; number and type of attendees; media coverage); dialogues (relevance of sectors; number and quality of stakeholders involved);-  Implementation measures: calls for proposals. Community support will take the form of grants with a funding rate in the 50-75% range.-  Outputs: enhanced understanding of the EU, its policies, its institutions and what it stands for by the present and future elites as well as the general public; enhancement of bilateral links between the EU and partner countries;Commercial Relations-  Target population: EU companies and EU executives. ETP targets 40 participants per year for Japan and 15 for Korea. Gateway aims to bring around 220 companies per year in Japan.-  Specific objectives (and indicators): trade missions and fairs (number of EU participating companies; number of Japanese attendees; number of business leads; sales figures evolution); development of a pool of EU executives able to work in the Japanese / Korean market (number of candidates; number of graduates; career development of alumni; proportion of graduate settling in Japan/Korea);-  Implementation measures: Procurement procedures for the establishment of the programme components. Calls for proposals for the selection and award of scholarships to ETP participants.-  Outputs: enhanced EU business presence on the Japanese / Korean market; increased EU exports and investment to Japan and Korea; improved market access and regulatory framework in Japan for EU products and services; Consolidated EU business lobbying force in Japan and Korea;5.3. Methods of implementationThe Commission will continue to implement the projects under direct management. This will involve both headquarters and the delegations concerned, under a deconcentration model.6. FINANCIAL IMPACT6.1. Total financial impact on Part B - (over the entire programming period)6.1.1. Financial interventionCommitments (in € million to three decimal places)+++++ TABLE +++++6.2. Calculation of costs by measure envisaged in Part B (over the entire programming period)Commitments (in € million to three decimal places)+++++ TABLE +++++7. IMPACT ON STAFF AND ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITUREThe needs for human and administrative resources shall be covered within the allocation granted to the managing DG in the framework of the annual allocation procedure.7.1. Impact on human resources+++++ TABLE +++++7.2. Overall financial impact of human resources+++++ TABLE +++++The amounts are total expenditure for twelve months.7.3. Other administrative expenditure deriving from the action+++++ TABLE +++++The amounts are total expenditure for twelve months.+++++ TABLE +++++8. FOLLOW-UP AND EVALUATION8.1. Follow-up arrangementsThe monitoring of projects is ensured by the desks and the delegation concerned through regular contacts / meetings with and reports from beneficiaries and contractors.As far as ETP and Gateway to Japan in-built performance indicators are regularly updated making it possible to follow progress in implementation, measure users’ satisfaction rate, identify potential weaknesses and take the appropriate remediation measures. Follow-up questionnaires and survey of participants are organised on a regular basis to measure medium-term business impact and career development.As far as EU Centres are concerned, planning and work programme approval mechanisms make it possible to the Delegation to ensure compliance of the activities effectively carried out with the overall and specific objectives of the initiatives. Beneficiaries report to the Commission on a regular basis. In this regards, best practices have been identified during the evaluation exercises and could be generalised for the next funding cycles (activity-based reporting and accounting). Standards indicators such as student enrolment; number of scholarships; number of teaching modules or courses; number of outreach event and related participants; number of publications… can be included in the reporting obligations of the beneficiaries for monitoring and impact measurement purposes.8.2. Arrangements and schedule for the planned evaluationAn ex-post evaluation may be organised, if deemed necessary, in 2006 or 2007. However, it should be noted that the time span between this new evaluation and the most recent one (2004) would only be in the range of 2 to 3 years.9. ANTI-FRAUD MEASURESProjects and programmes will be implemented directly by the Commission both in Brussels and, in the case of cooperation with USA and Japan, in Washington and Tokyo by the respective Delegations under a deconcentrated model for parts of the programme.The European Commission and the European Court of Auditors may conduct on-the-spot checks and inspections of the projects and programmes, in order to safeguard the European Communities’ financial interests.Control provisions (submission of reports, submission of justifying documents, on-site control by the Commission, by any entity mandated by the Commission or by the Court of Auditors…) are therefore included in all contracts and grant agreements.On-the-spot audits may be carried out if deemed necessary.[1] Within the meaning of the Regulation, “industrialised non-member countries” refers to: the USA, Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand and South-Korea.[2] Council Regulation concerning the implementation of projects promoting cooperation and commercial relations between the European Union and the industrialised countries of North America, the Far East and Australasia and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1035/1999, published in the OJ L57 of 27.2.2001.[3] More details to be found in the implementation report submitted by the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council COM(2004)803.[4] The USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand. The Japan Institute, established only at the end of 2003 was, quite logically, not included in this evaluation exercise.[5] COM (2004)101: “Building our common future – Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union 2007-2013)” and COM (2004) 487 on “Financial Perspectives 2007 – 2013”.[6] To date, it is envisaged that the activities implemented under the 2001 Regulation will be integrated into an instrument dealing with Development cooperation and Economic cooperation with third countries.[7] Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) n°1605/2002 of 25/06/2002 published in the OFEC L248 of 16/09/2002.[8] Article 165 §2 of Commission Regulation (EC, Euratom) N°2342/2002 of 23 December 2002 laying down detailed rules for the implementation of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) n° 1605/2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities.[9] OJ C […],[…], p. […].[10] OJ C […],[…], p. […].[11] OJ L 57, 27.2.2001, p.10[12] COM(2004)101final[13] COM(2004)629final[14] OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p.1.