Technical Assistance for the Capacity Improvement in the Economic and Social Cohesion (ESC) Policy (Phase II), in Turkey
EUROPEAID: 130083/D/SER/TR
TR2009/0322.01-01/001
Component 1: Improved Participatory Programming and Coordination Capacity of the Strategic Coordinator
Activity 1.7 (2): Programme Operational Guide, Implementation Manual and Structure and Content of a Regional Operational Programme
Output 1
Programme Operational Guide
Version 2, 27 September 2013
Contents
ABBREVIATIONS
1.Purpose of the Programme Operational Guide
2.National Strategic Planning and key assumptions
3. Legal basis
4. Structure and contents of an EU-IPA funded Operational Programme
4.1. FICHE No. 1 - National-Level Strategies for Regional Development
5. Programming Options
5.1. Strategic Consistency and “unique” Programming Framework
5.2. Options regarding the envisaged focus of Sectoral Support
5.3. Complementarity, Coordination and Synergy
5.4. The ROP regional dimension and territorial scope
5.5. Partnership role and contribution
5.6. Options for financing
5.6.1 FICHE No. 2 – Assessment of Regional Disparities
5.6.2 FICHE No. 3 – Differentiated Regional Allocations
5.6.3 FICHE No. 4 – Regional Development Support and Intensities
5.7. Definition and typology of indicators
5.7.1. FICHE NO. 5 - Regional Development Indicators, Dashboards, Benchmarks
6. ROP Contents
6.1. Introduction to the ROP
6.2. Diagnosis of the Situation
6.2.1 Analysis of the Situation
6.2.1.2. FICHE NO. 6 - Regional Development Analysis -Rural versus Urban
6.2.2 SWOT Analysis
6.3. Strategy
6.4. Priority Axes
6.5. Cross-cutting themes
6.6. Complementarity and coordination
6.7. Financing Plan
6.8. Implementing provisions
6.9. Evaluation
6.9.1. Ex-ante evaluation of the Regional Operational Programme
6.9.2. Other relevant evaluations
6.10. Partnership contribution to Programme preparation and implementation
ANNEXES
Annex 1 - Template for ROP preparation
Annex 2 - Context analysis of policies and aid measures for regional development
Annex 3 - Terms of Reference for Ex-ante evaluation of private sector development
ABBREVIATIONS
AA / Audit AuthorityCAO / Competent Accrediting Officer
DG / Directorate General
EC / European Commission
ERDF / European Regional development Fund
ESF / European Social Fund
EU / European Union
GO / General Objective
IPA / Instrument of Pre-Accession
IPA IR / IPA Implementing Regulation
IPA I / IPA 2006-2013
IPA II / IPA 2014-2020
IPARD / IPA Rural Development
MoD / Ministry of Development
MoSIT / Ministry of Science, Industry and Technology
NAO / National Authorizing Officer
NF / National Fund
NIPAC / National IPA Coordinator
NSRD / National Strategy for Regional Development
OP / Operational Programme
OS / Operating Structure
PA / Priority Axis
R&D / Research and Development
RCOP / Regional Competitiveness Operational Programme
RDI / Research, Development and Innovation
SC / Strategic Coordinator
SMEs / Small and medium Enterprises
SO / Specific Objective
SWOT / Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats analysis
1.Purpose of the Programme Operational Guide
ToR: “The main objective of this guide is to establish what are the necessary and desirable content of the regional operational programs, ensuring consistency of the programming exercise with the mandates and responsibilities of relevant strategic documents. The Guide shall be highly practical and useful for the elaboration of regional operational programmes. The programme operational Guide must have, at least, the following content:
- Diagnosis of the situation (Objective, Analysis of situation, SWOT analysis)
- Strategy (Objective, Contents/priorities axes/justification, Monitoring and Evaluation)
- Priorities Axes (Objective, Contents/priorities themes/justification, Perform and results, Financial indicators)
- Implementing provisions (Objective, Procedures, Information and publicity)
- Financing plan (Objective, Annual tables, Axes tables)
- Evaluation (Objective, Contents/Ex-ante evaluation)
- Definition and typology of indicators”
Taking the above mentioned objective into account the methodology for the preparation of the Programme Operational Guide is based on the assumption that one Regional Operational Programme (ROP) shall be prepared for the programming period 2014-2020 (with 7 years scope or shorter). The territorial dimension of the ROP will be the whole territory of the Republic of Turkey or part of it, depending on the strategic options that will be selected. Said Operational Programme can be funded under IPA II, and/or under the national budget.
This Guide has the purpose to establish what are the necessary and desirable contents of the Regional Operational Programme, ensuring the consistency of the programming exercise with any relevant strategic documents as well as the financing options.
The Guide is structured in two main parts.
The first part on “Programming Options”(section 5) makes some considerations on the approach that could be adopted when launching the programming exercisefor a Regional Operational Programme at this specific time (last months of 2013) in Turkey. Furthermore, it discusses the strategic options relevant to ROP design, presenting the pros and cons of each. The purpose is to advise the Ministry of Development on strategic decisions regarding the programming process and ROP design.
The second part on “ROP contents” (section 6) presents the focus of each ROP Chapter and provides concise drafting guidance. This section is conceived as a self-standing Guide for the Regional Operational Programme drafting, and it is complemented by Annex 1 “Template for ROP Preparation”, and Annex 2 “Context analysis of policies and aid measures for regional development”.
2.National Strategic Planning and key assumptions
The Ministry of Development has just concluded the preparation of the “National Strategy for Regional Development 2014-2023”. The final version of the Strategy is the result of a comprehensive planning effort which extended over 3 years, and is expected to be approved soon.
Focusing on the “regional development policy” that corresponds to the overall mission and policy remit of the Ministry, this document is likely to qualify the Ministry of Development, together with its Development Agencies’ network, for EU IPA assistance under the new IPA Regulation.At the same time, the a.m. Strategy, by stating the priorities indicated by the Government of Turkey for the next programming period as regards regional development, will put the bases for launching the ROP 2014-2020 programming exercise.
This is especially important considering that the strategic documents that Turkey provided to the Commission as the basis for starting the programming consultations for the period 2014-2020, do not include “Regional Development” as a self-standing “sector”. For this reason, the newly prepared National Strategy of Regional Development is expected to play a key role in reconciling the sectoral IPA approach with the priorities determined by the Government of Turkey.
This is crucial particularly in case it is assumed that the current Operational Programmes funded by IPA in Turkey, would be maintained under the next programming period with the same approach as well as institutional set up, and therefore the Ministry of Development is not going eventually to lead any of them. In this case, the National Strategy for Regional Development will be used to demonstrate the need for a “Regional Development Sectoral Support Programme” in Turkey, which does not duplicate other existing initiatives and also provides a “template” that the Commission may replicate in other countries as good practice example.
Therefore, the programming options that will be discussed under section 5 of this document, will take into account the possibility that, among the possible alternatives, the Ministry of Development discusses with the Turkish programming authorities, and subsequently with the Commission, a National Operational Programme for Regional Development Sectoral Support in Turkey – Regional Operational Programme (ROP). This Operational Programme financed in principle by national funds, may receive complementary IPA funding under the new IPA Regulation.
By responding to the above mentioned “agenda”, the Guide is nevertheless drafted as a practical tool for preparing an “Operational Programme for Regional Development Support” in the IPA programming and funding environment[1].
Finally, one must recognise the difficulty of getting IPA support in this specific sector for 2014-2020. Firstly, in mid-2013 Commission DG Enlargement services have taken over the IPA Turkey’s desk from the Commission DG REGIO services, and although inter-services consultations on programming by Candidate Countries will surely continue, the “regional development” expertise might not be found at the same level within the newly established DG ENLARG desk for Turkey as in DG REGIO. Secondly, EU-Turkey programming negotiations are currently in a sort of stall, until the publication of the Commission 2013 Progress Reporton Turkey, which is confirmed inter alia by the fact that the opening of chapter 22 of the negotiations is being postponed.
3. Legal basis
Assuming that the Regional Operational Programme being prepared as an operational framework to deliver the “Regional Development Sectoral Support” policy in Turkey will be co-financed by IPA, the guidance provided in the following sections explicitly refers to the current IPA Regulatory framework as well as to the new IPA financial perspective and tools.
In particular, the following legal acts are considered:
- The EU Financial Regulation, i.e. Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 Of The European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union and repealing Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002.
- The Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No 1268/2012 of 29 October 2012 on the rules of application of Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 966/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the financial rules applicable to the general budget of the Union –RAP as per the Commission’s acronym.
- The “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Instrument of Pre-accession Assistance, and Common Implementing Rules (IPA II)” (still with proposal status).
- The current IPA Regulation and Implementing Regulation (IPA I).
It is observed that, once the IPAII rules will be approved, a review of the present Guide may prove necessary in order to align it to the new legal framework.IPAI/IPAII articles are quoted whenever relevant, and their applicability to the programming exercise is commented, aiming to ensure that guidance provided under the Guide is fully in line with the legislation in force.
A number of other EU Regulations could be relevant for IPA programming. This is particularly the case for the State aid Regulations, most of which expire on 31.12.2013 and therefore, are also being amended by the Commission[2].
4. Structure and contents of an EU-IPA funded Operational Programme
The Operational Programmes co-financed by Community funds have generally the following structure:
- I.Context analysis, incorporating the results of the ex-ante evaluation, SWOT analysis and lessons learned
- II.Strategy, including aims and general objectives, external and internal consistency, complementarity and synergy
- III.Priorities of Intervention (generally termed “Priority Axes”), spelling out the operational objectives, contents of the activities, measures and eligible actions, beneficiaries, relevant indicators
- IV.Procedures and implementation modalities: Managing Authority, eventually delegated Bodies, evaluation and selection of operations, financial flows, monitoring and evaluation, applicable forms of coordination
- V.Financial framework
- VI.Attachments, giving account of the consultations carried out on the OP analysis and strategy, and the ex-ante evaluation report in extenso.
According to the in-force IPA Implementing Regulation, Article 155:
“Operational programmes shall contain:
(a) an assessment of medium term needs and objectives, highlighting the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats in the relevant sectors, themes and regions (see I above);
(b) an overview of the consultation of the relevant socio-economic partners and, where relevant, civil society representatives (see VI above);
(c) a description of the chosen strategic priorities, having regard to the strategic coherence framework and the sectoral, thematic and/or geographical mechanisms of concentration of assistance, as well as the results from the ex ante evaluation referred to in Article 57(4) and 166 (see II and III above);
(d) information on the priority axis, the related measures and their specific targets. Such targets shall be quantified, when appropriate, using a limited number of result indicators. These indicators shall make it possible to determine the progress for implementing the selected measures, including the effectiveness of the targets attached to the priority axis and measures (see III above);
(e) when some measures are intended to be implemented through aid schemes for enterprises, related modalities shall be described (see III above);
(f) a description of the technical assistance operations, which shall be undertaken under a specific priority axis. Community support for this priority axis can be up to a ceiling of 6 % of the Community contribution allocated to the operational programme. In exceptional cases and when duly justified with regard to the scope of the programme, this ceiling may reach 10% (see III above);
(g) an identification, for each measure, of the intended final beneficiaries, the expected selection modalities and possible related specific selection criteria (see III above);
(h) a financial table specifying, for each year covered by the applicable multi-annual indicative financial frameworks, for each priority axis and, in an indicative way, for each related measure:
(i) the total amount of the Community contribution;
(ii) the national contribution, where applicable identifying other external contributions. Where the Community contribution, under the human resources development component, is calculated with reference to the total expenditure, the table shall give the indicative breakdown of the national contribution between its public and private components;
(iii) the resulting rate of Community contribution;
(see V above)
(i) the proposed evaluation and monitoring indicators and modalities, including indicative evaluation activities and timing (see III andIV above);
(j) for the regional development component, an indicative list of major projects, accompanied with their technical and financial features, including the expected financing sources, as well as indicative timetables for their implementation (see III above);
(k) a description of the relevant structures and authorities for the management and control of the operational programme, in accordance with Articles 21 to 26, 28, 29 and 31. (see IV above)”
The above mentioned provisions are reflected in Annex 1 – Template for ROP preparation
In the following section titled “Programming Options”, a number of pre-conditions for starting the programming exercise are presented. The options that will be selected, shall then have to be presented under the relevant Operational Programme (or Sector Support Programme as the case might be). For ease of reference the Programme considered for preparation will be termed in this Guide as ROP (irrespective of the type of Programme which might be actually developed for 2014-2020).
The existence of the National Strategy for Regional Development 2014-2023 is an essential pre-condition for the above”.
For informative purposes, Fiche No. 1 below presents Poland’s experience in Regional Development strategic planning, as well as the approaches most commonly adopted by EU Member States.
4.1. FICHE No. 1 - National-Level Strategies for Regional Development
“The new regional policy is a policy oriented at all Polish regions and territories as it focuses on their strong points and makes use of the opportunities, and where need be – provides external resources to level out development gaps. Such an approach should allow to exploit hidden and insufficiently used resources and the specialisation of territories both in rich and poor regions” (Elżbieta Bieńkowska, Minister of Regional Development of Poland, 2010, introductory speech on “The National Strategy for Regional Development of Poland 2010-2020).National strategies for regional development provide a national policy framework for regional-level development strategies on which they are built through a bottom-up approach. These strategies take into account the territorial diversity of the country and territorial development potentials, for the purpose of achieving in a long‑term perspective the national development objectives.
It is underlined that national-level strategies for regional development can be promoted irrespectively on the level of country’s devolution (i.e. local government decentralization). This is particularly important since in some countries where administrative regions are not established, there is some banishment of “regional” approaches – even if these are promoted by the national level – due to the fear that “regional approaches” would inevitably bring to weakening of central powers. On the contrary it should be stressed that both national-level and regional-level strategies for regional development, can be designed and implemented in different administrative contexts from high levels of centralization of state policies, to countries with high level of devolution.
In the EU Member States, there are two main approaches to national-level strategy document addressing regional development:
- National spatial strategies: these strategies are designed to deliver more balanced social, economic and physical development between regions, and provide strategic planning guidance for a range of Government policies and regional and local plans. These strategies set out how all areas of the country will have the opportunity to develop to their potential, but often do not foresee a financial framework for implementation.
- More comprehensive national strategies for competitiveness and cohesion, that foster coordination and concentration of measures undertaken within the framework of regional policy, with mainstreaming of financial resources to the “territorialisation” of sectoral policies.
- The territorialisation of sectoral policies is generally weak, since the territorial focus of implementation of sectoral policies is often left to political discretion rather than being guided by strategic and efficiency mechanisms;
- The algorithms for distribution of national (sectoral) funds, when they exist, are not altogether coordinated: this relates both to the method of their creation (selection of criteria on the basis of which the funds are distributed) and to their implementation (respective ministers have great freedom both in creation of distribution mechanisms and in deciding on matters pertaining to areas where distribution algorithms are not formalised). Consequently, the “real regional policy” does not stem from measures oriented towards specific measures, but from separately functioning mechanisms of allocation of funds, whose disbursement is not, in fact, coordinated by anybody.