Workshop 3Cooperation with non-EU members

Overview

Overview

Key points of presentationsheld in WS 3.3 presentations:

• Introduction and global overview presented byIvana Lazić (INTERACT)

• Experiences and Challanges identified in Programmes involving the Republic of Serbia, Sanda Šimić (EU Integration Office of Serbia)

• The Northern Periphery and Arctic Programme presented by Ole Damsgaard (Head of JS)

Key points of presentationsheld in WS 3.Wide spectrum of reasons for cooperation

„Laboratory“ for EU integration process•Collaboration on policy level• Inspiration•Research and Development•Stability in crisis or former crisis regions•Common economical development (e.g.

tourism)•…

Key points of presentationsheld in WS 3.

• Big differences in geography, social relations, history, people’s mindset, economy etc.

• Type/level of problems differs a lot

• E.g. one takes efforts against climate change the other enhances ecomical growth, the third promotes safety…

• Cooperation on the fields of ‚culture’ and ‚education’ are the biggest intersections

Key points of presentationsheld in WS 3.

•Common challenges:More complicated administrationPeripheralityFragile local economies

Labour market/demography challenge

•BUT:High level of interestMore financial sourcesOverall management development on many levels

Key points of presentations held in WS 3.•More difference between Programmes

• Big differences in geography, social relations, history, people’s mindset, economy etc.

• Type/level of problems differs a lot

•One takes efforts against climate change the other enhances ecomical growth

• Cooperation on the fields of ‚culture’ and ‚education’ are the biggest intersections

World Café conversations

• Enthusiasm and high interest from non eu countries

• National funds are put into these programmes that would not happen, access to new funds

• Transfer of know how to non eu countries

• Small communities on border benefit from these funds

• Environmental benefits due to the programmes

• Macro regional strategies are beneficial for transnational programmes

• Building trust between neighbours

• Projects want to work together even when political level are not working well together

• Implement projects to reduce he historical wounds

• Border programmes are very visible and due to brexit media, people are realizing what they have

• Different legislation administration

What were the benefits?

World Café conversations

• Political and historical challenges -

• Different legislation/ administrations- both at EU level and at Country level makes implementation challenging, for both authorities and projects

• Eg Procurement not undertaken on electronic system not eligible, but non EU countries do not have the e system

• Different rules for verification/ reporting problems in sfc for non EU countries

• Reliance on a memorandum of understanding because national authority not included in EC regulations

• Difference in cultures /languages

• Different mindset and ways of working together

• Plea for DG Regio and DG NEAR to work and communicate better

• Need clear rules for integrated approach between programmes

• Brexit media has created some euro sceptics because people are aware that all is not perfect

What were the challenges?

World Café conversations

• Harmonised Regulations across Programmes

• Simplification – radical changes of procedures and controls

• Funds –across both EU and non EU countries in one pot and one set of rules

• Communication needs to be improved so that people learn about the work of EU / INTERREG Programmes

• Promote good project success

• Sharing experiences between Programmes and countries

• Have possibility to implement small value projects

• Provide guidance on a regular basis to non EU applicants and beneficiaries

• Commission to include non EU countries in planning and to understand experiences

• Relevance of thematic objectives in some regions?

• Pre financing is crucial for beneficiaries

• Should there be only CBC or transnational programmes not both

What can be improved?

World Café conversations

• NGOs are the energy in some of the Programmes, can they be involved more?

• Regional level participation can make cooperation easier• Eligibilty of the applicants depends on the place of

registration unless they have a statutory function for implementation

• Can funds across programmes be blended as the cross border funding can be small

• Better design within programmes for SMEs• Scientific institutions are not involved at a strategic level and

should be.• Some universities do not want to be involved in INTERREG

because of administration required

Including other actors in region

VotingPlease take your voting device

QUESTION RESULTS

RESULTS QUESTION 1

QUESTION RESULTS

RESULTS QUESTION 2

Final Thought

•What would be the impact on the future of the EU if we don’t cooperate with our neighbours !