Administrative Capacity-Building and EU Cohesion Policy EIB University Research Sponsorship. John Bachtler and Alba Smeriglio

Transcription

1 EPRC EIB University Research Scholarship Administrative Capacity-Building and EU Cohesion Policy EIB University Research Sponsorship John Bachtler and Alba Smeriglio EIB - 4 th Annual Meeting of the Knowledge Programme Luxembourg, 8 March 2016

2 Research questions Defining administrative capacity What constitutes administrative capacity for managing and implementing Cohesion policy? How can it be defined and measured? Explaining variations in administrative capacity How does administrative capacity vary across the EU? What are the determinants of administrative capacity? Understanding how administrative capacity relates to quality of government To what extent do differences in administrative capacity reflect the QoG of the country (and region) concerned? What specific factors explain differences? Investigating effective capacity building What builds administrative capacity and strong institutions for managing Cohesion policy effectively? What factors make a difference? Drawing policy lessons What are the policy implications? How could Cohesion policy enhance administrative capacity in and post-2020? 2

3 Refined conceptual approach Administrative capacity defined as the ability of the organisation to deploy sufficient resources of the appropriate quality to achieve implementation objectives Implementation system for Cohesion policy Administrative processes Strategic processes Resources Human resource factors Systems & tools resource factors Operational processes Learning processes Institutional factors (structures) Financial resources 3 Administrative capacity-building: relative influence of factors on performance

4 Patterns of CP performance: Quantitative research Quality of Gov ernment 2013 Large variations in quality of government across the EU at national level and even more at regional level 4 no data 1.1 to to to to to to to -0.9

5 Patterns of CP performance: Quantitative research Spending rate 2013 Do variations in quality of government Influence Cohesion policy performance? - timely spending: financial absorption 5 no data 85 to to to to to to 35 0 to 15

6 Patterns of CP performance: Quantitative research Error Rate 2013 Do variations in quality of government Influence Cohesion policy performance? - legal spending: error rates 6 0 to to 1 1 to 2 2 to to 4 4 to to 34 no data

7 Explaining CP performance: Qualitative research case studies Case studies pilot research in Sicily (IT) and Pomorskie (PL) extended to Puglia (IT) and Malopolskie (PL). Other case studies in CZ, SK, EL(?),RO(?) regions with different records of Cohesion policy management mix of old and newer Member States Sample criteria MA admin staff, general managers national level, reps of socio-economic interests Method and subject of inquiry Grids and semi-structured interviews 7 strengths/weaknesses in implementation processes & evolution over time external/internal factors which have an impact on processes effectiveness & sustainability of administrative capacity-building initiatives

8 Explaining CP performance: Qualitative research preliminary results Resources Sufficient number, qualified & motivated personnel Administrative continuity Fully equipped and well-structured departments Systems and tools functional to the activities to be carried out Key in all stages of the policy cycle & relationship with stakeholders Necessary but not sufficient condition for effective implementation Organisational factors & informal rules Merit-based recruitment and promotion Incentives systems in place Administrative culture 8

9 Explaining CP performance: Qualitative research preliminary results 9 Governance & leadership Strategic orientation of investment priorities Political vision and steering but no interference in the implementation stage Regional political leadership in a MLG system (i.e. vis-à-vis central government) External factors Dimensions of QoG at the national level and MLG Regulatory quality, rules and procedures at the national level (i.e. PP, legislative clarity) Relationship between regional and central level & other national institutional actors Beneficiaries capacity Effective partnership and administrative guidance is central but problems experienced in the implementation stage cannot always be predicted

10 Improving CP performance Qualitative research first lessons for ACB TA considered helpful when used to acquire in-house expertise rather than hiring temporary staff/external consultants Training activities are not effective in regions where there is continuous staff turnover More resources should be invested in building beneficiaries capacity, especially of sub-national actors However, reform is needed to tackle more systemic problems: More efficient management and implementation processes simplification process in order to make legislation more intelligible and clarify what rules apply at the regional level Cooperation across different levels of governance De facto separation of powers between political and administrative levels 10

11 Administrative capacity-building and EU Cohesion policy Thank you for your attention! 11