Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The role, advantages and
disadvantages of shared
implementation:
Partnership Principle
Seventh meeting of the High Level Expert Group
on simplification for beneficiaries of ESI Funds
Brussels, 24 January 2017
Massimo Sabatini
Regional Policy and Territorial Cohesion
Confindustria
PURPOSE OF THE PRESENTATION
2
Defining the role of partnership within the main
principles of actual cohesion policy and its evolution
Assessing the current implementation
Summarizing some key points for next
programming period as shared by the HLG
Putting forward some proposals on how to reform
the principle for post-2020
PARTNERSHIP DEFINITION
3
• Is one of the main principles of Cohesion
policy
• Is strictly related to multilevel governance
• It implies close cooperation between public
authorities and any other relevant partner
• It increases the quality of interventions and of
the policy itself
PARTNERSHIP IN THE CURRENT REGULATION
4
- A broad and inclusive system…..
-…. with many tasks
In a nutshell, partnership principle is seen as part of
administrative capacity of institutional authorities
“The institutional capacity is not just a technical issue, but it depends also on
the way public administration interacts with business and citizens and
provides them with the services they need” (6th Cohesion report)
In other terms, the capacity to interact with all the
partners involved is a part of a well-functioning P.A.
A EUROPEAN CODE OF CONDUCT
5
Main contents
• Adoption of a common legal basis
• Clearer extension of partnership rules to all MS
• Transparent procedures for identification of relevant
partners for PA and for OP
• A broader involvement in the implementation phase
(e.g. in the calls for proposals)
•Main principles and good practices concerning the
involvement
• Use of the ESI Funds to strengthen the institutional
capacity of relevant partners
FIRST ASSESSMENT
6
• Principle satisfactorily respected in a wide range of
countries and programmes.
• Challenges across MS on partners’ mobilization;
• The modified legal framework increased awareness
and visibility of the partnership principle.
•Stakeholder involvement improved since 2007-13 PP
•Sometimes differences between content of
programming documents and perception of
stakeholders
Implementation of the partnership principle and multi-level
governance during the 2014-2020 ESI Funds, July 2016
…. AND SOME CLARIFICATIONS
7
…. from the partner’s point of view,
Main lessons:
- A fundamental principle not applied in a coherent and uniform
way all across the MS :
- sometimes seen as an “obligation” to be fulfilled rather than an
added value from which take advantage of;
- partnership principle part of a system more focused on formal
compliance and less on results
- the Code of Conduct: a “compliance” approach;
- Advantages and disadvantages of extension to new partners;
- The role of intermediate organized bodies: the need of
differentiated involvement
SOME KEY POINTS
8
Starting from HLG recommendations & common points
- fully adopting the beneficiaries point of view:
- ensuring effective involvement of relevant stakeholders
- promoting more trust amongst the different political
and administrative level involved, to increase
subsidiarity, and certainty;
But mainly, we have agreed on the necessity to tend to a
more “result oriented” cohesion policy
A POLICY FOCUSED ON RESULTS
9
- Diversifying results from MS to MS
- Concentration issue
- a policy more focused on results, less on formal
compliance
- establishing results to be achieved linked to CSR
- a consistent partnership system, “result oriented”
- A streamlined, clear and effective delivery system,
with clear responsibilities at each single level
EX ANTE CONDITIONALITIES: A CRUCIAL ROLE
10
- One of the EAC must be the set up of a mechanism of
involvement regarding all the partners concerned:
- MS have to demonstrate:
- how to fulfill not only the requirements of ECCP but…
- mainly, which added value is expected from each partner;
- how to gain it;
- and how to give evidence of concrete contributions obtained
In the current system, responsibility is in charge of MS that, in accordance with
its institutional and legal framework, have to organize a partnership with the
competent regional and local authorities and other relevant partners
- Involvement is now not binding: commitment must be strengthen
MONITORING COMMITTEES
11
In this context, the role of Monitoring Committee, and
the role of the partners within the MC, should be
modified accordingly
- from financial management to strategy assessment
- (direct impact on partners’ selection);
- increasing role for monitoring and evaluation
- decision making role on follow up actions
- a wider & better use of partners’ competences
- a targeted technical assistance
PARTNERS CAPACITY
12
In this new framework, partners have to modify their
concrete involvement, and more accountability from
their side is needed. It means:
• to be able to identify the needs and expectations of
members/represented in terms of expected results;
• to develop strategic programming capacity;
• to develop planning capacity
• to be able to participate in projects selection;
•to increase involvement in evaluation, and in use of
results
A MORE EFFECTIVE SHARED MANAGEMENT NEEDS…
13
Partnership
Subsidiarity
Competences
The beneficiaries’ point of view
Results
Thank you for your attention
Massimo Sabatini
Regional Policy and Territorial Cohesion - Confindustria