Guidlelines Workshop evaluation1

Financing Natura 2000

Workshop Guidelines for

national partners

Part 3:

Workshop evaluation

Final draft

nova-Institute
12 May 2006

Content

Introduction

1Workshop characteristics

2Targets and target groups

3Workshop content

4Summary results of the modules

4.1Results of the module “Integration of Natura 2000”

4.2Results of the module “Guidance handbook”

4.2Results of the module “Framework conditions”

4.2.1 Concerning the status of the programming

4.2.2 Concerning the realisation of Natura 2000

4.3Results of the module “National funding information”

4.4Results from other chosen modules

5Feedback from participants

6Summary feedback from national partners

7Annex

nova-InstituteMay 2006

Guidlelines Workshop evaluation1

Introduction

Although the most of you are still busy with preparing the national workshops, we would like to draw your attention early enough to the evaluation and reporting of the workshops. Of course the target groups should benefit immediately from the Guidance handbook and the workshops, but at the same time, the tender project is supposed to support long-term learning processes. Experiences with the “integration option” for financing Natura 2000 may be identified in the Member States as well as across the national states, and concrete starting points for improvements may be found.

For this reason, the technical annex of the tender project describes the following tasks:

“For each workshop a report has to be compiled containing the results of the workshop and open problems coming up during the meeting. At the end a final summary report has to be elaborated. This will be presented and discussed during the final meeting of the accompanying working-group and needs to be adopted by that group. The summary report should summarize the course of action of the workshops, the main problems arisen and possibly make recommendations for further activities.”

While the production of the national workshop reports is part of your contract, the final summary report has to be elaborated by the tender project team. With this third part of the workshop guidelines we aim to agree on a standard evaluation and reporting frame, firstly to facilitate your work and secondly to have a comparable structure of the reports as the basis for the final summary.

The national workshop reports should be structured by the following topics:

-Workshop characteristics (date, place etc.)

-Targets and target groups of the workshop

-Workshop content (selected modules and additional national topics)

-Summary results of the modules (in certain cases added by specific information)

-Feedback from participants

-Feedback from national partners (and national authorities)

-Annex (workshop programme, important material)

Specific information for each topic and working steps to evaluate the workshops and to prepare national workshop reports are set out in the following chapters. Using them as draft, completed by your information and answers, it should not be very difficult to produce your report after the workshop(s).

The report has to be written in English language and should be submitted to the nova-Institute 14 days after the workshop session. Those countries, where two workshops will be held, should deliver one report for each workshop.

1Workshop characteristics

Country
Date of workshop
Duration
Town, place
Number of participants
Responsible environmental organisation (“national partner”)
Responsible authority
(“national authority”)

2Targets and target groups

In the table below are set out important targets of the national workshops as defined in our Guidelines part 2. If you reflect your workshop session, please try to make a ranking, which of the targets were focussed how intensely.

Target / - - / - / 0 / + / + +
To explain the logic of the “integration option” to finance Natura 2000
To inform about EU funding opportunities to finance Natura 2000
To present national programming approach of EU funds
To identify funding gaps
To influence national programming
To inform about national funding opportunities
To create dialogue and networks
Other targets ….

Which target groups were represented on the workshop? Try to make a ranking, which group was represented how strongly by evaluating your list of participants and summarizing the number of representatives of the most important target groups.

Target group / How many representatives?
Authorities:
Ministry of environment
Ministry of agriculture, fisheries, forests etc.
Ministry of work, industry, economy etc.
Ministry of European affaires
Ministry of Finance
Other relevant authorities
Stakeholders / umbrella organisations:
Environmental NGO’s
Farmers, foresters, hunters, fishermen, aquaculturalists
Private and public land owners, land managers
Others

3Workshop content

Which of the modules did you carry out in your workshop? Which other topics (due to national specifics) did you add to the workshop programme? It is assumed that all core modules were adopted. If not, please give the reasons why not.

Content / Yes / No / notes
Core modules:
Integration of Natura 2000
Guidance handbook
Framework conditions
Optional modules:
National funding information
Good practice
Success factors
Using LEADER for nature conservation
Follow-up actions
Other / additional topics:

4Summary results of the modules

To remind you the intention of the modules, the targets (see Guidelines part 2 “Designing the workshops on the basis of improved modules”) are highlighted in boxes firstly, followed by some questions, that should help you to reflect if the module met the target. In certain cases we added some inquiries to deliver specific information or material that will be essential for the elaboration of our overall summery report.

4.1Results of the module “Integration of Natura 2000”

Target

Explaining the logic of the “integration option” to finance Natura 2000.

Before going into details of EU funding options the participants of the workshops should be informed about the background of the integration option for the implementation of Natura 2000. Thus, it is necessary to give a short overview on common obligations for all Member States to be sure, that all participants have the same information level. But it rather should motivate and make aware about the “vision” of integration.

i) Key topics presented?

(Should be identical to the standard presentation of the EC to a large extent. If other important topics were presented, please give some aspects of those excursions)

…

ii) Key questions and answers given during the discussion?

E.g concerning chances and obstacles of the integration option

…

iii) Unresolved questions and potential problems?

…

4.2Results of the module “Guidance handbook”

Target

Information about EU funding opportunities to finance Natura 2000.

This module will present the guidance handbook developed on the European level and clarify any questions in this context. The aim is to inform the participants about the structure and the benefit of the handbook and to give an overview on which measures relevant to Natura 2000 may generally be co-financed.

i) Key topics presented?

(Should be identical to the standard presentation of the Handbook. If other important topics were presented, please give some aspects of those excursions)

….

ii) Key questions and answers given during the discussion?

…

iii) Unresolved questions and potential problems?

…

4.2Results of the module “Framework conditions”

Target

Presenting national programming approach of EU funds to integrate Natura 2000 financing

This module will inform the participants about the status of the programming in the Member State as well as the needs and costs of the Natura 2000 Network, creating the basis for further modules (particularly “National funding information”).

4.2.1Concerning the status of the programming

i) Key topics presented?
Please give a short summary of the key points presented on the national programme planning (in some MS for each sub-national region)? E.g. National Strategy Plans (EAFRD) / Rural Development Plans, National strategic reference frameworks (Structural funds) / Operational Programmes as well as plans for other funds (EFF, Life +).
Important issues are:
-Status quo of programming and timing for each fund
-Objectives and funding areas (particularly with respect to Structural Funds)
-How much money is planned for each fund

….

ii) Key questions and answers given during the discussion?

…

iii) Unresolved questions and potential problems?

…

4.2.2Concerning the realisation of Natura 2000

i) Key topics presented?

Please add short abstracts to the following issues:

-Natura 2000 site designation (timing, number, allocation and types of sites, obligations fulfilled?, problems with site designation?)

-Management of sites (tasks, responsibilities)

-Funding needs (total costs estimated and types of funding needs)

….

ii) Key questions and answers given during the discussion?

…

iii) Unresolved questions and potential problems?

…

4.3Results of the module “National funding information”

Target

Information about national funding opportunities and/or funding gaps

The main focus of this module depends strongly on the state of programming in your country. If it is quite advanced it would be better to give information on funding opportunities to multipliers. If there is still the possibility of influencing the national programmes, it might be worth it to search for funding gaps together with responsible persons from ministries and find ways for closing them.

i) Key topics presented?

Please reflect the following questions:

-Did the participants receive an overview on eligible measures (types of activities) according to land-types resp. types of beneficiaries as well as information about funding requirements, responsible administrations etc.?

-Which if the funds were identified a s the most important for your country?

-Were national funding gaps concerning the implementation of the Natura 2000 network in your country identified?

-Did the participants receive information about other relevant national programmes that could be used as alternative financial sources for Natura 2000 measures?

-How did you manage this module? By prepared lessons / input from selected speakers or by common work (e.g. in working groups) during the workshop? Which material was the working base? Who did the preparation / investigation?

….

Please add some material:

Please add (Power Point) presentations or other (digital) material used at or elaborated during the workshop (e.g. tables co-funded measures / identified funding gaps), as it could be useful information for other relevant people from EC or your country too. We will make it available on the CIRCA website together with our summary report.

ii) Key questions and answers given during the discussion?

…

iii) Unresolved questions and potential problems?

…

4.4Results from other chosen modules

Target of the module “Good practice”:

Showing that integration of Natura 2000 can work

In this module positive examples regarding the financing of Natura 2000 are to be presented. The module serves to convince participants how integration can work and to draw their attention to relevant requirements as well as to show them how to overcome bottlenecks.

Target of the module “Success factors”:

Kick off process competence and long-term learning effects for successful financing of Natura 2000

In this module the success factors for the financing of Natura 2000 are presented and evaluated for the Member State on the basis of a standardised questionnaire. The advantage is to identify and make visible bottlenecks and weaknesses very quickly. But the aim is to produce long-term learning effects by changing processes and improving framework conditions.

Target of the module “Using LEADER for nature conservation”

Drawing attention to special funding opportunities which promotes integration of Natura 2000 within complex regional development strategies.

As LEADER is not an own programme with own funding possibilities but an approach which needs an integrated regional strategy and the co-operation of local actors across all sectors it promotes very good the integration goal for Natura 2000. The aim is to give important information on advantages and requirements of LEADER.

Target of the module “Follow-up actions”

Initiating networks for integration of Natura 2000

The aim of this module is looking into the future and how those ad hoc groups created within the workshops could continue working together in a more integrated approach, because integration needs dialogue.

i) Key topics presented in the chosen modules? (with short abstracts of examples, results etc.)

….

ii) Key questions and answers given during the discussion of the particular modules?

…

iii) Unresolved questions and potential problems with respect to the particular modules?

…

iv) Which other (country specific) modules / topics were part of the workshop? Please give a short overview and summarize the main results of them.

…

5Feedback from participants

Please translate the following questions in your national language in advance and create a one page feedback-paper (copy and paste of the table below), that should be filled out anonymous by the participants at the end of the workshop. Make sure, that they will be collected, e.g. by your staff or in prepared boxes. Please analyse the answers after the workshop and transfer the summarized result into your workshop report.

Feedback to the Workshop “Financing Natura 2000” / - - / - / 0 / + / + +
1 / Did the workshop fulfill your expectations?
2 / Was the organisation (timing, place, composition of content and participants etc. ) adequate?
3 / Is the Guidance handbook a helpful product for the implementation and financing of Natura 2000 in your country?
4 / Are you standing behind the “Integration option” as the new European approach for cross-sectoral financing of nature conservation?
5 / Do you think, that the need of financing Natura 2000 in your country will be covered by the implementation of the integration-option that is incorporated within the new
2007-13 EU funding?
Place for your notes:

6Summary feedback from national partners

Last but not least we would like to have a summary feedback from you as our national partner (and of the persons from national authority you co-operated with). Feel free to write down all experiences and impressions you have and what wishes you have for future projects from EC concerning the implementation of Natura 2000.

Some key issues we are interested in:

-General impression from the workshop (organisation, content, atmosphere etc.)?

-Co-operation with the national authority

-Which module was the “highlight” of the workshop?

-Was the EC tender project helpful for Natura 2000 in your country?

-Which were the strengths and the weaknesses?

-Lessons learnt?

-Wishes for the future?

7Annex

Please add the following documents as electronic versions:

-Workshop invitation and programme

-Presentations / material used for important modules (particularly “Framework conditions” and “National funding information”, see chapter 4.2 and 4.3)

Contact:

Barbara Vay

nova-Institute

Frankfurt Office

Tel.: +49 69 98 19 69 75

Mob: +49 160 91 42 47 97

Peter Torkler
WWF Germany
WWF Berlin Office
Tel.: +49 30 30 87 42 15
Mob: +49 162 29 144 63

nova-InstituteMay 2006