LEADER / CLLD 2014-2020

- Approach and expectations from the

EU - Pedro Brosei

28 October 2015

Added value of CLLD/LEADERADDED VALUE OF CLLD

Flexible response to needs

Mobilises knowledge, energy and resources

Linkages and synergy. Horizontal and vertical

New markets, products, and ways of doing. Social innovation

Transfer of good practice, joint solutions to common problems

R

E

S

U

L

T

SNetworking and cooperation

(also Article 32..d CPR)

Innovation

(Article 32.2.d CPR)

Integrated multi-sectoral local strategies (Article 32 .2 .c CPR)

Community led partnerships - Part icipatory and partnership approaches (Article 32.2.b CPR)

Sub-regional areas - The local territorial approach (Article 32 .2 .a CPR)

Evolution of the LEADER approach

Leader I (1991-93) – experience : following the criticism of the « single project » approach in the structural policy

Leader II (1994-99) – laboratory : limited to less favoured rural areas, innovation, pilot actions; introduction of transnational cooperation

Leader + (2000-06) – maturity phase : eligibility of all rural areas; reinforcement of the role to be played by networks and of transnational cooperation (Leader + type measure for the new Member States 2004-2006)

« Integrated Leader » (2007-13) – Leader axis – no specific Leader programmes; Leader as a methodological approach following the general programming of rural development

+ LEADER under IPARD, + Axis 4 of the EMFF

Leader approach as a base for the community-led local development (CLLD) approach carried out by local actors in the 4 ESI-Funds 2014-2020

2

Community-led local development (CLLD) in the new

frameworkEurope 2020 strategy: Territorial development on

sub-regional level as a cross-cutting issue for inclusive growth

Common Sttrategig Framework for the ESI-Funds addresses CLLD as a tool for territorial development

Partnership Contracts will had to address CLLD

Common Provisions Regulation for the ESI-Funds: offers a common approach to support community-led local development: single set of rules (art. 28-31), which are complemented by fund-specific features (in case of EAFRD and EMFF).

From LEADER I to LEADER/CLLD

Funds EU Budget (EUR) LAGs

Leader I 1991-1993 EAGGF-Guidance, ESF, ERDF

450 million 217

Leader II 1994-1999 EAGGF-Guidance, ESF, ERDF

1.7 billion 821

Leader+ 2000-2006 EAGGF-Guidance 2.1 billion 893 in EU-15(+ 250 under Leader+ type measure 2004-2006 in 6 NMS)

Leader Axis 2007-2013 EAFRD 5.5 billion = 6% of the EAFRD

fundingTotal public:8.9 billion

2.416 in 27 Member States

CLLD„Leader 5.0“

2014-2020 EAFRD, ESF, ERDF, EMFF

EAFRD: +/- 4.5 billion (min. 5% in each RDP)Total public funding in RDPs: 9.4 billion

Expected 2.050 LAGs supported by RDPs in 28 Member States

3

Indicative allocation of budget for LEADER 2014-20 (total

public)Source: ENRD LEADER sub-group, state of play: April 2015

EAFRD, ERDF, ESF and EMFF

BG, DE, ES, FR, GR, IT, PL, PT, RO, SE, UK

EAFRD, ERDF and ESF CZ, HU

EAFRD, ERDF and EMFF SI

EAFRD and ERDF AT, SK

EAFRD and EMFF CY, DK, EE, FI, HR, IE, LT, LV

EAFRD and ESF NL (possibly)

EAFRD only BE, LU, MT

11

3

11

3

4 Funds 3 Funds 2 Funds 1 Fund

ESI-Funds supporting CLLDacross MS

Lessons learnt from the pastwhich are reflected in the 2014-20 legal framework

• Some rigidities in the use of LEADER as driver for CLLD

• Limited quality of strategies

• Unclear responsibilities of different involved parties

• Limited LAG's capacities to develop and implement a Local Development Strategy (LDS)

• Limited level of participation and limited interest by the private sector

What was the way forwardfor 2014-2020 ?

• Strengthening the role of LDS as central tool to meet core objectives at local level, unlocking strategies from RD measures

• Greater focus on animation and capacity building

• Strengthening the participation of the private sector in the partnerships

• Reinforced networking tools for LAGs on EU and national level

• Streamlined transnational cooperation

High quality local development strategies

integrated

multi-sectoral

Local innovatio

n

cooperation

networking

Linkages between develop-

ment actions

• Analysis of the development needs and potential of the area

• Objectives, including clear and measurable targets for outputs or results

• Community involvement in the development of the strategy

• Action plan

• Management and monitoring arrangements

• Financial plan(viable budget)

(see Art. 33.1 CPR)

Elaboration of local development strategies

- Contribution to programme objectives

- Coherence and consistency with

"top-down" or other strategies

- Local needs identified through

SWOT analysis- Bottom-up process

The mobilisation of the key actors and building the partnerships

• Build on existing experience whenever possible

• Encourage bottom-up processes

• Range of sectors to be included in the partnerships

• Clarity on the administrative and financial capacity as well as the tasks of LAGs

• Balance between "public" and "private" and the role of the civil society

• Working procedures, rules and structures for decision-making

Tasks of the LAGs (Art. 34 (3) CPR)

a) building the capacity of local actors to develop and implement operations including fostering their project management capabilities;

b) drawing up a non-discriminatory and transparent selection procedure and objective criteria for the selection of operations, which avoid conflicts of interest, and ensure that at least 50% of the votes in selection decisions are cast by partners which are not public authorities, and allow selection by written procedure;

c) ensuring coherence with the CLLD strategy when selecting operations, by prioritising those operations according to their contribution to meeting that strategy's objectives and targets;

d) preparing and publishing calls for proposals or establishing an ongoing project submission procedure, including defining selection criteria;

e) receiving and assessing applications for support;f) selecting operations and fixing the amount of support and, where relevant, presenting

the proposals to the body responsible for final verification of eligibility before approval;g) monitoring the implementation of the CLLD strategy and the operations supported, and

carrying out specific evaluation activities linked to that strategy.

Selection of local development strategies: an effective process• Timing: One or several selection rounds

• Types of calls depending on the readiness of LAGs

• Selection criteria have to reflect the added value of the CLLD approach

• Strategies should compete against a common standard rather than against each other

• Selection committee:

• Administrative arrangements in case of multi-funding

• Overall coordination of the selection process

How to ensure a more efficient use

of LEADER/CLLD?• Support capacity-building at all implementation levels

• Raise awareness of specificities of CLLD for all players involved in CLLD: MAs, Pas, Audit Authorities, LAGs/ project promoters

• Clear division of responsibilities, avoid duplication• Reduce administrative burden for all

• Simplify procedures for public co-financing• Simplified procedures for small projects• Simplified cost options (small projects, running costs,

etc.)• Speed of overall approval process and payments• Encourage advance payments (to LAGs and

beneficiaries)• Keep additional rules to necessary minimum

• Avoid restrictions of eligibility which limits the capacity of the LAGs to respond to local needs and support innovation

• Evaluate efficiency of delivery systems

Thank youfor your attention!

Advantages of the common CLLD approach

Common approach for local development under all European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF): fosters integrated regional development

17

- Added value for rural areas: more comprehensive strategies and LAG-partnerships, improvement or rural-urban relationships, synergies with the groups of the fisheries' areas.

- Harmonized rules for planning and implementation

- "Multi-Fund" LEADER-strategies enable a contribution of the different related EU policies to reach regional/local

Rural areaEAFRD

ERDF

ESF

Member States with CLLD possible also in urban areas