The capitalisation of multiregional programmes and their prospects in light of the future of the cohesion policy after 2013

Transcription

1 avec urop Act european programme s K N OW I N G The capitalisation of multiregional programmes and their prospects in light of the future of the cohesion policy after 2013 Study overview May 2011 Edition Premier Ministre Avec : Ministère de l Agriculture, de l Alimentation, de la Pêche, de la Ruralité et de l Aménagement du Territoire Délégation interministérielle à l Aménagement du Territoire et à l Attractivité Régionale Ministère de l Intérieur, de l Outre-Mer, des Collectivités Territoriales et de l Immigration Délégation Générale à l Outre-Mer This document is co-financed by the European Union as part of the Europ Act programme Europe supports France with the European regional development fund.

2 The cohesion policy and interregional cooperation in France Major river plans and coverage of the flood risk areas studied Mountain massif areas Major river plans and coverage of the flood risk areas studied Major river plans Flood risk areas studied Source: Department of pollution and risk prevention French environmental institute Source: map library: Francièmes All rights reserved Created by Datar Territorial observatory 2011 Specific territorial realities calling for specially tailored projects Interregional cooperation in France is a response to the existence of areas of the country s territory which, due to their specific geographic features, face shared development issues that go beyond regional administrative boundaries and therefore require a coordinated project on an interregional scale in order to be dealt with effectively. In the country s river basins, the presence of the river creates a de facto interdependence between the areas situated upstream and downstream, and on each side of the river. An interregional approach is therefore crucial in order to deal with shared challenges such as protecting populations and activities against the risk of flooding, preserving the quality of the water and the natural environments, or developing river transport. In the mountain massifs, pooling resources and coordinating policies on an interregional scale is a way to increase the scope, efficacy and relevance of the initiatives implemented to deal with shared challenges such as accommodating new populations and activities, developing tourism, protecting the natural heritage, exploiting the area s energy potential or diversifying the local economy. The progressive implementation of a system of governance and planning and financing tools dedicated to interregional cooperation Interregional cooperation in France s mountain massifs and river basins has been built up over the past decades on the basis of two founding laws. On the one hand, the law of 9 January, 1985, or Mountain Law, facilitated the speedy implementation of a policy dedicated to the country s mountain massifs and designed to promote the sustainable, integrated development thereof in accordance with a comprehensive approach to their unique issues. On the other hand, the law of 16 December, 1964 introduced the principle of a policy to manage and protect the water and natural environments found in the country s river basins. These two laws laid down the foundations for the system of interregional governance that has grown up progressively and is organised around a coordinator Prefect in charge of managing the projects. The Prefect s support system includes interregional advisory organisations, the Mountain Massif Committees and Basin Committees, which bring together the territories main representatives of civil society and are in charge of determining and monitoring the implementation of priorities. 2

3 In addition, the law instituted interregional planning and interregional cooperation tools to determine its major strategic priorities: on the one hand are the country s Mountain massif development plans, which follow the overall mountain policy approach. On the other hand are the Major River Plans, whose priorities go beyond those of water policy to promote a cross-cutting approach to river basin development. The objectives of these framework documents are set out in the form of financial planning instruments, State-Region interregional project Contracts (CPIER), whose credits are granted under the authority of the coordinator Prefect. Interregional mountain massif plans (Alps, Massif central, Pyrenees, Vosges, Jura Mountains) Major River Plans (Rhone, Loire, Seine, Garonne) Interregional Mountain Massif Agreement (CIM) securing financing from the State-Regions and sometimes other partners (departments, etc.) Interregional component or programme receiving ERDF financing Interregional State-Region project contract (CPIER) securing financing from the State-Regions and other partners (water agencies, etc.) Interregional component or programme receiving ERDF financing Experience with cooperation varies by territory, with an upward trend across the board Cooperation is generally better-established and better structured in the mountain massifs. Indeed, implementation began in some of these areas in the 1970s, and was then gradually extended and structured until the first Mountain Massif agreements were signed for the period. However, in France s river basins, with the exception of the Loire-Brittany basin, an interregional cooperation programme going beyond water policy was only implemented more recently, at the time the Major River Plans began to be generalised in the beginning of the 2000s. The first river basin CPIERs and dedicated governance systems were implemented for the first time for the period. However, an overall increase in interregional cooperation has been observed everywhere over the past few years, whether through the extension of the related priorities, the increase of dedicated credits, the strengthening of interregional governance or the more structured and ambitious nature of the projects on this scale. European funds contribute to interregional cooperation in France in a manner fully consistent with the cohesion policy s new objectives In , in light of this strengthening of interregional cooperation, the possibility was extended to apply to the ERDF through multiregional programmes as a way to add to and support CPIER financing. The ERDF was rolled out in France on an interregional scale in in a manner fully compliant with the principle of subsidiarity: these programmes are not designed to substitute, but rather to work with and complement structural fund-financed regional programmes with a goal of increased efficacy, and in line with the principle according to which only those aspects with shared interests are handled on an interregional level. As a result, they are fully consistent with the ongoing work on the cohesion policy pertaining to identifying the most relevant levels at which public policy should act, and satisfy several objectives and EU principles which have been announced as important to the future of the cohesion policy (territorial cohesion, multi-level governance, and functional territory in particular), of which they are now a perfect illustration. 3

4 What are the multiregional ERDF programmes? 4 multiregional operational programmes: Loire Plan, Rhone Plan, Massif Central and the Alps 5 multiregional components: Garonne Plan, Seine Plan, the Vosges, the Massif of the Pyrenees, and the Jura Mountains In total, 9 interregional ERDF-funded programmes covering the mountain massifs and river basins were rolled out for These programmes, which have been implemented in areas with widely ranging geographic sizes and numbers of partner regions, have been granted a total of approximately m200 million in European credits. 50 The 9 ERDF-funded interregional programmes 40 34,9 40,6 33,8 33, , POP Alpes km POP Massif-central km 2 POP Loire km 2 5 POP Rhône km 2 10,9 9, VOP Vosges 7500 km 2 VOP Pyrénées km 2 VOP Jura km 2 7,9 7, VOP Seine km 2 VOP Garonne km 2 ERDF funding in M Number of departments covered Number of regions covered Source: VIAREGIO Unlike the period, when structural funds were exclusively granted to the multiregional priorities determined by regional Single Programming Documents (VOP multiregional component), the solution of a specific multiregional operational programme (POP) was chosen for 4 territories in These programmes, which receive the highest level of ERDF financing, are subject to the same regulatory requirements that govern the implementation of an Operational Programme (PO) as any other regional programme. Unlike the multiregional components, whose governance partially overlaps with that of the regional Operational Programme to which they are connected, the implications for the POP include the adoption of a specific programming document and the implementation of an independent, interregional system of governance that is entirely dedicated to the coordination of the multiregional ERDF. Strategies strongly tied to the priorities of the CPIER and focused on maximising the appreciation of the multiregional ERDF The ERDF-funded multiregional programmes focus on those aspects related to the mountain massifs and river basins that require coordinated action on a multiregional scale. The action priorities and criteria selected strongly match those of the national cooperation planning and financing instruments. The scope of the issues covered by the selected priorities varies depending on the choice made by the interregional partnership with regard to the specific characteristics unique to each territory. Strategies in every area were also determined based on the ERDF s specific objectives as a way to maximise its leverage and added value, particularly by considering the priorities of the Lisbon-Göteborg strategy and the considerable importance placed on innovation and to projects with a strong potential impact at the interregional level. 4

5 Instruments and methods are in place to guarantee the interregional scope of the supported projects and to ensure they work together optimally with regional programmes Given the nature of the issues related to cooperation, some of the areas covered by the multiregional ERDF programmes necessarily overlap with those covered by the other Europeanfinanced programmes, mainly the regional ERDF Operational Programmes but also, to a lesser extent, the INTEREG, EAFRD and ESF programmes. In order to optimise how the different levels of financing work together and guarantee the added value of the multiregional ERDF, all of the programmes have begun examining the added value from the actions taken at this scale and have, to varying degrees, implemented instruments and methods to better determine what is covered by the interregional scope. A range of solutions have been tried out as part of this process, ranging from holding pre-project working meetings between the stakeholders involved in multiregional and regional programmes, to adopting a precise, concrete and shared cross-functional definition of the factors that help to define a project as interregional, to drawing up tables precisely identifying each level s scope of action. A leadership and coordination system run by players dedicated to implementing interregional programmes The governance of the multiregional ERDF programmes is subject to regulatory requirements and is strongly connected across the board with that of the CPIER, with the players in charge of the coordination and leadership being generally the same for both financing systems. For all programmes, the management authority function is performed by the coordinator Prefect. However, the management systems that have been implemented do have specific characteristics depending on the nature of the programmes (POP or multiregional component) and on the historical and partnerrelated history of cooperation within the territories covered. In accordance with regulatory requirements, the 9 programmes are served by a monitoring and programming committee co-presided by the State and the regions. The committees covering the multiregional components are those of the local regional ERDF Operational Project, with players in interregional cooperation covering issues related to multiregional priorities. However, specific committees entirely dedicated to coordinating the interregional ERDF programme have been put together for the POPs. The coordinator Prefect is assisted by his General Secretary for Regional Affairs (SGAR) for the operational management of the programmes. In the mountain massif areas, Massif Commissions, historic organisations driving mountain policy, play an active role in implementing the programmes by maintaining contact with project owners and by heading the missions of project coordination, examination, and follow-up, along with the coordination of the interregional partnership. In the river basins, the SGAR does this coordination work himself; the missions related to project coordination and follow-up are divided among a number of players designated based on their skills to work on the programmes various priority issues. Innovative solutions to develop the programmes partnership-based aspect One of the challenges involved in the governance of multiregional programmes lies in managing to involve all of the players in all of the regions of the given territory, including those in the bordering regions. The main partners participate in decision-making through their status as members of the steering committees that oversee all of the programmes and perform project selection. On the technical level, programmes are mainly supported by a varying number of interregional working groups, which are often topic-specific and generally the same for ERDF and CPIER. These groups include competent players from all of the partner regions, who not only prepare for the decision-making committee meetings, but also assist in coordination, bring out new project ideas, and promote the coordination and development of a shared interregional culture. The partnership principle is also made a reality by the State- Regions co-governance system that is implemented by all of the programmes, whether through the systematic co-presidency of the decision-making bodies, or the participation, to a greater or lesser degree of formality depending on the programmes, of the regional authorities in the interregional working groups and other partnership-based leadership and examination systems. 5

6 What do the multiregional ERDF programmes contribute? Multiregional ERDF programmes, with their strategy and specific governance, contribute considerable added value over a juxtaposition of several separate regional programmes: this can be seen at several levels. Numerous, high-quality projects with proven interregional scope that involve a wide range of partners Considerable added value with which to handle shared, integrated issues Due to their interregional scope, the funded projects have a strong potential impact on interregional priorities. This impact, which has already been objectively measured for Despite their experimental nature, the average progress of the multiregional programmes at the halfway point is satisfactory and the momentum with which they are being planned and carried out is accelerating everywhere. In total, over 750 projects have already been scheduled at the halfway point and are supported by a wide range of players, mainly from the public sector, but there is also a strong involvement of interregional players or networks, which are often association-based, particularly in territories where cooperation is the most long-standing. Cofinanced interregional projects see a certain amount of variety in intensity of cooperation, depending on the length of the history of cooperation in the territories and/ or the areas covered: this ranges from the non-material actions involved in setting up cooperation (reviewing current situations, sharing expertise, drawing up shared strategies, etc.), to interregional networking, engineering, leadership or communication projects, to material operations that apply priorities that have been agreed upon. A strong majority of cofinanced operations are viewed as high-quality, they provide satisfaction with regard to their set objectives and contribute a considerable interregional added value. Indeed, the extent of this interregional added value varies by programme and by area, subject to a variety of factors such as previous history of cooperation, the potential of players able to put together and lead projects on this scale, or the quality of the selection criteria and how well the interregional and regional strategies work together. But the implementation of effective tools and the use of selective criteria to choose projects are good ways to optimise the quality and the interregional scope of the supported operations, with the latter measured less in terms of the location of the projects or the number of regions cofinancing them than by their nature and their contribution to an interregional priority. As a result, funded projects include both those that are essentially interregional and implemented on an interdepartmental or interregional scale, and localised operations that offer interregional added value either as part of a concerted strategy on an interregional scale or by serving as an experiment that can be transferred to the rest of the territory involved in cooperation. some of the projects (e.g. increased tourism and positive employment-related effects for certain economic projects in the mountain massifs, or increased awareness and reductions in the costs of flood-related damage to the river basins) demonstrates the indisputable added value that comes from handling shared development issues on an interregional scale. Indeed, interregional financing is more than simply additional financing and provides more than the simple sum of regional funds: by networking the players together, agreeing on priorities, pooling resources and expertise, building technical and financial solidarity and the sharing of expertise, all of which are inherent to cooperation, these programmes increase the extent, relevance and efficacy of theinitiatives that target shared strategic challenges. They also encourage the creation of new, more integrated projects that would not have been possible within a solely regional context and make sense because they are organised on a different scale and take account of various territorial and topic-related aspects. In addition, in the cross-border mountain massif and river basin areas that are part of a more extended area of territorial cooperation, increased coordination among the French players is a crucial factor to optimising a link with the applicable INTERREG programme or programmes and, more broadly, to the development at the same time of effective and strengthened cooperation on a cross-border or transnational scale. 6

7 Specific governance that acts as a driver for cooperation and partnerships and promotes the creation of high-quality interregional projects The types and instruments of interregional governance implemented by the programmes have a decisive impact with regard to building cooperation, one that is strongest in those territories where cooperation is most recent. From the partners perspective, they provide a framework that not only brings all of the partners together and facilitates communication and coordination, and thus the building of shared policies and projects, but also helps to create interregional momentum and to raise awareness of shared interests and develop the spirit of cooperation. As seen by the project leaders and players on the ground, the opportunity to work with a single, interregional financier rather than having to apply to several different regional financiers greatly simplifies the process and promotes the creation and implementation of interregional projects. The level of involvement among regional partners, along with the quality and balance of relations among partners, vary by the programme and field at hand due to a combination of factors: past history of cooperation, political issues and personal involvement, the regions positions, the efficacy of the tools set up to guarantee the partnership, and more. Additionally, the participation of communities on the infraregional level and of players in civil society could be strengthened further, as could the management, information and communication on the programmes and on cooperation overall, which suffer from a general lack of resources. Example of a projet: In the Jura Mountains and the Massif of the Pyrenees, there are many ERDF-funded projects for the coordination, promotion and sustainable development of tourism opportunities in the mountain massifs. In addition to the operations to develop tourist sites and activities or the products traditionally identified with the territories, ERDF funds shared programmes for the leadership, communication, support and creation of networks for area players, which are led by groups including Montagnes du Jura and the Pôles Touristiques Pyrénéens. These avenues for improvement reflect the idea that no cooperation is ever to be taken for granted and that all cooperation requires constant leadership and awarenessraising work. Despite these facts, and notwithstanding the differences that can be observed between one programme and another, the systems of governance that have been implemented facilitate a very good level of involvement by the different partners, a good balance in the State-regions governance, and they are considered to be very effective overall in guaranteeing a high level of quality and a good pace in implementing the ERDF funding and in driving the partnership and cooperation forward. 7

8 Example of a projet: As part of the Loire Plan, the ERDF is funding several projects that are helping to build an overall, basic, working awareness of the Loire basin and its tributaries. For the 2007 to 2013 period, the Loire Plan includes a component aimed at boosting research/data/ information, a source of innovation to help the players involved in public decision making to make the Loire a European reference for the management of a major river. These projects involve universities, researchers and the French National Centre for Scientific Research (CNRS) in partnership with the Loire Plan s Scientific Council. The ERDF is also cofinancing the operations coordinated by the Etablissement Public Loire as part of the industrial flood vulnerability reduction programme for economic activities (information, vulnerability studies, experimental measurements, etc.). A decisive contribution by the ERDF towards better handling of the issues facing territories of interregional cooperation The implementation of multiregional ERDF programmes is very strongly linked to that of CPIERs in terms of both priorities and governance, creating a strong synergy and efficacy that benefit the interregional territories. This does not call into question the special added value of ERDF funding on this scale. Due to its specific priorities and high standards, the ERDF has a decisive impact on the substance and the quality of funded projects, on building their innovative aspect and structure, and on multiregional programmes contribution to the objectives of the Lisbon strategy in such areas as ICT, natural resource management or the promotion of new energies and, more generally, to sustainable growth. ERDF is also a driver of interregional cooperation, by encouraging an increased focus on defining interregional added value and by boosting partnerships through its specific management and government rules. An original, ground-breaking territorial approach on the European level France is the only EU member state that has implemented multiregional programmes whose primary objective is related not to a specific topic, but rather to territorial development within areas of cooperation facing common challenges. This also makes France the only European country currently testing a new type of governance for structural funds that takes account of the specific characteristics of certain territories that go beyond the usual boundaries within which regional policy is implemented. As a result, the implementation of multiregional programmes in France is ground-breaking on the European level, with the reinforced application of a certain number of principles set forth by the cohesion policy which will be applied even more strongly in the future, such as joining public policies together to serve the territories, going beyond the established administrative borders or the extended implementation of the partnership principle. 8

9 Prospects for the future The implementation of multiregional ERDF programmes is influenced by a variety of different factors whose nature and intensity differ for each programme based on the context in which it operates. Indeed, these programmes have been set up in response to a wide variety of interregional situations and historic backgrounds that gives each of them a certain number of unique characteristics. The challenge for each of them, depending on their unique characteristics, consists of being able to act on these factors by drawing on what has been learned at present and by pooling best practices. Outside constraints that must be considered in order to understand and develop multiregional programmes A large number of the factors that influence the implementation of programmes stem from the general context of cooperation in the territories. Their socioeconomic and geographic characteristics obviously determine the nature of the cooperation priorities but also potentially influence the degree of involvement of the regions covered, which partially depends on their geographic position with regard to the centre of the cooperation territory. Likewise, the difference between the mountain massif or river basin territories as concerns the institutional and regulatory framework applicable to cooperation, the level of integration of the various policies implemented there and the breakdown in the scopes of activities among the players involved have an influence on the reach of the strategies and on the level of integration of the corresponding programmes. Finally, the level of cooperation-related experience is a factor with a highly significant impact on the programmes implementation, both the experience of the players in charge of programme governance and that of those on the ground in charge of creating and leading the interregional projects. The importance of prior drafting of strongly concerted strategies and of developing a shared method to determine what is considered interregional The quality and the interregional added value of the funded projects are largely dependent on the relevance of the strategies and of the efficacy of the instruments set up to optimise how they connect together with the other territorial scopes of action. An action strategy is best drafted when the process is accompanied by a collective examination of the definition of interregional and by a shared method to guarantee that the initiatives target the projects with the highest interregional added value. In this way, concrete solutions have been successfully applied, such as the implementation of precise, cross-cutting criteria for the advance assessment of the interregional scope of the projects or the occasional issuance of invitations to tender to clarify the expected interregional added value in a given field. In improvement in how the multiregional ERDF programmes work together with the ESF and EAFRD programmes would facilitate the financing of integrated operations with a strong potential impact on interregional priorities. The impact of the type and tools of governance on programme efficacy and on partnership quality While it is only an instrument used to implement a strategy, the system of governance and partnership has a strong impact on the quality and efficacy of how programmes are implemented. As such, the survey has found that there is no ideal governance model for multiregional programmes: indeed, a governance system cannot be built out of nothing but must rather be adapted to the specific context of each programme of cooperation. 9

10 However, the exchange of best practices and the definition of minimum obligations to guarantee the partnership-based and interregional aspect of the governance system may be useful strategies. As a result, due to the special regulatory requirements applicable to it, the solution of a specific multiregional operational programme offers indisputable advantages over that of a multiregional component, particularly with regard to the independence and clarity with which the dedicated ERDF credits come into play, the truly interregional aspect of the ERDF s coordination and management tools, as well as the momentum and balance of the interregional partnership. However, this solution is only effective when certain conditions related to the general context of the cooperation programme come together (appropriate territorial scale, how well the cooperation is structured, size of the dedicated budgets, etc.). More broadly, while selecting the general form of governance is indeed important, the quality and efficacy with which programmes are implemented also depend on the procedures and types of organisation set up under the responsibility of the coordinator Prefect in order to run the programmes. For example, certain solutions clearly promote active partner involvement, such as putting together interregional technical working groups to facilitate prior concertation, involving the partner regions in the topic-specific coordination that has been set up or systematically consulting them when examining individual applications. Likewise, due to the programmes interregional scope, certain projects become particularly extensive and require the commensurate resources and tools: this is true for the coordination and engineering support of interregional projects on the ground, as well as for coordinating the interregional partnership and the communication on the programmes results. The necessary consideration of specific time limitations and of the complexity inherent to any interregional cooperation programme While the complexity sometimes observed in these management and coordination systems is an incentive to seek out solutions to limit the negative effects thereof, it appears that it does not have a decisive impact on programme implementation and that a certain degree of complexity is inherent in the attempt to bring together a variety of players to draw up and implement shared policies on a new territorial scale. Indeed, all cooperation depends primarily on shared trust among the various partners involved, who must all play a part in the programmes governance. Action on a multiregional scale also requires that the necessary additional time be factored in to structure cooperation and set up essentially innovative partnershipbased systems of governance, as well as to reconcile diverging viewpoints, coordinate initiatives, and put together multiregional projects and get them up and running. Similarities therefore appear between the past history of multiregional ERDF programmes in France and that of the implementation of INTERREG programmes, for which several generations of programmes were needed to move gradually from a joint implementation to a shared, integrated one, all without calling into question the very relevance of concerted action on this scale. For these programmes to succeed, these specific requirements must be accepted: interregional cooperation is complex and is built up over time, and the cooperation programmes of today are laying the foundations for the cooperation of tomorrow. 10

11 Highly useful programmes that must be supported in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and a functional territorial approach The progress that has been made in implementing mountain massif and river basin programmes in France over the past few years is very extensive as concerns both the quality of the initiatives and the efficacy of their governance and partnerships. The added value they contribute to dealing with certain specific issues is undeniable. More than a financing instrument, these programmes are tools that help build an effective new approach to territorial development. An overwhelming majority of the partners of the current programmes are calling for initiatives on this scale to be continued and strengthened, while exploring avenues for improvement and remaining in line with the principle of subsidiarity. Additional, as one of the major challenges of these programmes was to reconcile the territorial approach on which they were originally based with an approach built on more sector-based priorities, which is also strongly promoted by the EU through the current Lisbon strategy and the future EU 2020 strategy. The current experimentation must also cause those involved on the European and national levels to examine the best ways to transpose the strategies and topic-based priorities onto these specific territorial scales, in accordance with the principle of territorial cohesion. Examples of projets: As part of the Rhone Plan s Flooding component, the ERDF allowed the national geographic institute to create a database of the Rhone River s topography, which offers precise, standardised topographical information along with innovative options such as 3D geo views. The ERDF is also funding the construction of a small hydroelectric plant on the Rochemaure dam, equipped with a fishway and contributing to the objective of the ecological recovery and increased reserved flows on the Old Rhone while developing renewable energy resources. In the Massif Central, the ERDF is funding the Vivier Bois Massif Central project, which is designed to develop the construction wood and energy wood industries and is led by an association that brings together players involved in the pre- and post-production phases. This project includes several components: interregional coordination, research and development, training, and more. At the same time, a call for tender has been launched to support industry businesses in their innovative programmes. In the Alps, the ERDF is cofinancing the initiatives led by local pilot communities on integrated natural risk management. The objective is to try out new types of risk governance on the territorial scale while building risk awareness by better integrating risk before projects begin and by promoting feedback on the scale of the entire mountain massif. The ERDF is supporting the Garonne Plan by cofinancing initiatives implemented by the Migado association as part of its programme to promote the restoration and management of migratory fish (monitoring control stations, population monitoring, restocking projects, etc.). In the Vosges, the ERDF is supporting an emblematic project to save the Vosgienne breed of cattle, which was recognised by the 2011 Agricultural Exhibition. This project includes a variety of components such as conducting a genetic improvement programme or setting up economic development initiatives such as those involved in the development of short supply chains. As part of the Seine Plan, the ERDF is supporting the implementation of the flood risk management strategy action plan coordinated by the Public Territorial River Basin Organisation (EPTB) Oise Aisne, designed to limit average river level rises and to lower the average cost of flood damage (building surplus water constructions, putting in slopes, etc.). 11

12 This study, conducted by VIAREGIO, is the result of an in-depth, comparative analysis of the 9 interregional ERDF-funded programmes in France: four multiregional programmes (Rhone Plan, Loire Plan, the Alps, Massif Central) and five multiregional components (Garonne Plan, Seine Plan, the Vosges, the Massif of the Pyrenees and the Jura). Based on an analysis of the documentation along with interviews with the main players and partners involved in the 9 programmes, as well as a benchmark approach carried out on the European level, this study is designed both to provide a progress report and results on the implementation of these programmes at the halfway point, and to use these as a learning experience and an indicator of future prospects for the consideration of the specific nature of interregional issues in the next planning period after KNOWING European programmes is a collection initiated by the Europ Act European technical support and coordination programme. This collection is designed to provide the stakeholders of the European cohesion policy in France with elements to reflect upon with a view to reinforcing and improving the monitoring and steering of European programmes. It includes several types of support such as survey summaries, analytical tools and conceptual frameworks. Useful links Contacts: For information on European funds in France, go to: For information on Europ Act and the KNOWING European funds collection, go to: europact@datar.gouv.fr For information on multiregional programmes: Trouver-une-aide Djamila IOUALALEN-COLLEU Project manager Regional development and European policy team djamila.ioualalen-colleu@datar.gouv.fr Serena LORENZETTI Project manager Regional development and European policy team serena.lorenzetti@datar.gouv.fr Layout : Indie November 2011