Current Programming Period Research Articles

Strengthening AKIS for Sustainable Agricultural Features: Insights and Innovations from the European Union: A Literature Review

The Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System (AKIS) and the Farm Advisory Service (FAS) are important elements of the current Programming Period of the Common Agricultural Policy (2023–2027), as it is now deemed necessary to transition the European agricultural model to more sustainable forms, through the dissemination of agricultural knowledge, while simultaneously promoting innovative methods. An Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation System must be able to propose and develop ideas for the transmission of agricultural knowledge, promoting innovation and the exchange of ideas. The present study includes a significant number of investigations on the effectiveness of the implementation of the AKIS and the FAS so that the conclusions are representative of the scope of the work. The object in question is now the cornerstone of the modernization of agricultural production and an important way out towards more competitive models of agriculture. The purpose of this paper is to give an extensive overview of the degree of implementation of Agricultural Knowledge and Innovation Systems in the countries of the European Union (including the United Kingdom until 2019) from 2014 until today, essentially during the implementation of the second period of Common Agricultural Policy. In the context of this article, the main results of the research carried out in the EU countries during the period under study and the proposed improvements by the researchers, where they are mentioned, are recorded epigrammatically. Finally, the countries are categorized according to the degree of implementation of the AKIS and the contribution of the Agricultural Advisory System to more sustainable forms of agricultural practices.

Opportunities for local fishing action groups for transformation of rural areas

The importance of territorial governance structures in the context of neo-endogenous and locally based development is increasing for the development of rural areas in the European Union. EU policy and practice of involving stakeholders and building public-private partnerships (PPPs) are among the main tools for implementing this type of governance in rural and fishing areas. Local Action Groups (LAGs) and Fisheries Local Action Groups (FLAGs) work within the framework of Community-Led Local Development (CLLD) and ensure the participation of local residents in the planning and implementation of their Local Development Strategies (LDSs). The purpose of the report is to assess the distribution, development and problems of FLAGs and their role in the transformations and development of fishing territories. Opportunities and guidelines for their development during the current programming period should be presented on this basis. In the assessment of the development and problems of FLAGs, information from primary and secondary sources was used for the implementation of the Maritime and Fisheries Operational Programme (MFOP) and for the implementation of the Community-Led Local Development approach.

Evaluating the New Common Agricultural Policy: Improving the Rules

SummaryThirty years after their conception and adoption, European rural development policies are about to enter a new programming period, splitting away from the cohesion funds and showing, for the first time since the implementation of agricultural policies, real integration with the so‐called first Pillar of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The proposal for the new CAP from 2023–2027 includes some improvements through a new delivery model and organisational approach, which may reinforce future evaluations. As to overseeing the implementation of the CAP, the Commission proposed to move from a compliance‐based to a performance‐based approach. Nevertheless, we can highlight some elements that may weaken evaluation processes, with the risk of repeating past failures, as is the case in the current CAP programming period from 2014–2020. This article analyses the new framework proposed for the evaluation of the future CAP and is intended to promote a discussion on how to make evaluations more usable, useful and reliable for their users and evaluation practitioners. The analysis concerns only the rules for evaluation and does not discuss other specific monitoring, performance framework and control requirements, which are interrelated with evaluation.

The Evaluation Framework in the New CAP 2023–2027: A Reflection in the Light of Lessons Learned from Rural Development

The new Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) proposal includes few improvements compared to previous programming periods which may reinforce future evaluation, but we can also observe elements that may weaken the assessment, with the risk of repeating past failures. The objective of this essay is to analyse the new framework proposed for evaluation in the future CAP and to promote a collective discussion on how to make evaluations more usable, useful and reliable for users and practitioners. The first part of the paper analyses the main elements of evaluation during the different rural development programming cycles. A second part is dedicated to an examination of the current programming period (2014–2020) and the implications of the introduction of the Common Monitoring and Evaluation Framework (CMEF) and the evaluation plan. In a third part, we critically discuss the proposals for the next programming period and we offer some concluding reflections and two main open questions. From the analyses carried out, many elements emerge to encourage discussion on the role that evaluation has played and can play and the critical points to face. The experiences in rural development policies have introduced important changes in theoretical and implementation terms. In particular, they helped to build evaluation capacity and enabled the involvement of the civil society. However, it is also clear that the European Commission (EC) designed path has often led to an increase in rigidity and orthodoxy towards common frameworks compliance.

‘Greening’ Green Infrastructure. Good Italian Practices for Enhancing Green Infrastructure through the Common Agricultural Policy

The Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) was established by the European Community in the 1950s to provide financial support to farmers in member states, increase agricultural productivity by promoting technical progress, and ensure a fair standard of living for farmers. Over time; awareness about the externalities of intensive farming would prompt environmentally friendly practices. These include, in the current programming period 2014–2020, the so-called “greening”, which consists of: (i) crop diversification; (ii) the maintenance of permanent grassland surfaces; and (iii) the availability of 5% of arable land for ecological focus areas devoted to agricultural practices beneficial for the climate and the environment. These provisions, spurred by a decades-long debate that also stresses the importance of creating/restoring ecological connectivity on different scales to counter land fragmentation, are in tune with spatial planning initiatives throughout Europe. Here the point is how to combine these directions with either “ecological networks” (EN), designed as physical corridors to be preserved and enhanced for plants and animals’ mobility needs; or “green infrastructure” (GI), defined on the European level as a “strategically planned network of natural and semi-natural areas with other environmental features designed and managed to deliver a wide range of ecosystem services” (European Commission; 2013). While in several European countries environmental measures targeting farmers and ecological networks directed at specific areas have been merged in a place-based approach, Italy is lagging behind. In general, no guidelines have been provided on the national level to support regional paths, while regions and municipalities lack the resources to implement GI. Conversely, while greening policies in the framework of the CAP are properly funded, they lack directions to be efficiently allocated. Against the backdrop of such concerns, this paper frames and reflects upon ongoing practices in three pilot areas in different Italian regions, selected based on desk analysis, in-depth interviews, and direct knowledge. Here, despite or thanks to the legislative framework, experimental approaches have been adopted to harness performance issues in targeted areas through broad participation by public and private stakeholders and multilevel governance schemes, opening possible pathways in view of the forthcoming programming period.

Miestny rozvoj vedený komunitou ako integrovaný nástroj podpory spolupráce a miestneho ekonomického rozvoja

Community Led Local Development is a tool for involving local actors in decision making of social, economic and environmental development of their territory during the Programming period 2014 – 2020. This approach enable to enforce own local solutions for the problems of rural areas and use local development potential. These solutions are realized by local people and are sustainable in the long term period. European Structural and Investment Funds should therefore be used to addressing specific local problems with the sustainable use of local potential and resources. The object of this article is CLLD and its implementation in the current programming period in the Slovak Republic. The paper is focused on theoretical works and studies and is aimed to analyze the theoretical background of the issue and the real implementation of this approach. An important fact is that the CLLD strategies should have been fully implemented in Local Action Groups by this time. Due to the various issues described in this paper there is a possibility that the potential of this tool would not be fully used in the Slovak Republic during this programming period.

Community-Led Local Development (CLLD)- A Tool for Implementing Regional Development Policies

In the current programming period of the EU Cohesion Policy, 2014-2020, two instruments have been introduced to implement territorial strategies based on economic and social cohesion: Community-led Local Development (CLLD) and Integrated Territorial Investments (ITI). These refer to all the funds covered by the Common Strategic Framework (European Regional Development Fund, European Social Fund, European Agricultural Fund for Regional Development, European Fisheries Fund and Cohesion Fund).

SPECIFIC MARKETING COMPLEX IN THE SPHERE OF EU FUNDING IN BULGARIA

Following the accession of Bulgaria to the European Union a number of new obligations for the country have been arisen but also new opportunities for public and corporate project funding have been opened.The government of the country has developed seven operational programs, operating within the period from 2007 to 2013, through which the public and private sectors were able to benefit from funding various initiatives through European financial instruments. In the current 2014-2020 programming period seven operational programs are active again, their scope being changed in comparison to the previous period on the basis of the performed analyses of the implementation and for greater expediency.As a new and modern phenomenon in the Bulgarian economic practice, the operational programs have been of interest to the researches of a number of Bulgarian scientists. Some of them go beyond their bounds and focus on the overall European integration at the supranational level. Others examine the effect of our national operational programs on the national economy. There are also scientists focusing on the microeconomic effect from the program implementation in relation to individual business units.In spite of the serious scientific interest in the opportunities for EU funding there is not enough work in Bulgaria concerning the relations between the programs and their beneficiaries.Despite some differences between them, the completed operational programs and the active operational programs have similarities in regard to their attitudes to their end users – the beneficiaries. In this regard, we can examine EU funding, channeled through the seven programs, from a marketing aspect.In this paper we will pay attention to a specific product offered to the beneficiaries, then we will consider the price paid for it, we will examine the channels through which this product reaches its end users and will study the communication channels for connection with them.The four elements of the marketing complex related to the EU funding through the operational programs differ significantly from the elements related to traditional products. They are strictly specific and the main purpose of the paper is to demonstrate these differences but also to characterize them.As a subject of the paper, the specific elements of the marketing mix in the sphere of EU funding can be pointed out through the mechanisms of the developed operational programs.The main object of the paper are the active operational programs in the current programming period in Bulgaria as well as the programs of the previous programming period in our country.

Podnikatelské subjekty a podpora poskytovaná z fondů EU – případová studie Operačního programu podnikání a inovace (OPPI)

Finances are an essential part of entrepreneurial activity without the entrepreneurial subject could not exist. The article focuses on the comparison of entrepreneurs' access to the financial support provided from EU funds, focusing on the Operational Programme Enterprise and Innovation (OPEI), which was implemented by the Ministry of Industry and Trade. The article focuses on an identifying differences in behavior, access and attitudes of small, medium and large enterprises in relation to the provided OPEI support. On the basis of the analysis and testing of the dependencies of the results of the questionnaire survey, it can be stated that the behavior of the beneficiaries varies from one category to another, the behavior of medium-sized enterprises is approaching rather the behavior and characteristics of large enterprises. Based on the answers received in the questionnaire survey, the areas in which the subjects' access differs (eg cluster membership) and areas where access is the same, such as the use of consultancy services, have been identified. The analysis confirmed that smaller businesses do not have the financial capabilities in particular to carry out more projects. The second part of the article aims to find the most appropriate model for identifying entrepreneurial subjects / projects that are potentially at risk of failure to default on project sustainability by assessing the financial health of beneficiaries of OPEI support that can be applied for the current and future programming period. The most suitable model that was identified is Taffler's model. Then the possibility of its application to the current and future programming period, both in the project run / administration phase and in the project application phase, is suggested.

EU INDUSTRIAL POLICY BEFORE THE NEW PROGRAM PERIOD 2021-2027

The main objective of the European Union's (EU) industrial policy is to increase the competitiveness of European industry so that it can continue to play its role as a driver of sustainable growth and employment in Europe. In order to provide better framework conditions for the EU industry, different strategies have been adopted. At the beginning of the current programming period (2014-2020), the European Commission (EC) calls on Member States to recognize industry's leading role as a factor for economic growth, employment and competitiveness through measures in all policy areas. The new approach to industrial policy, formulated in the Europe 2020 strategy, aims at boosting EU competitiveness, generating growth, creating jobs and enabling the transition to low-carbon economy and efficient use of resources. The EU-prepared and European-level discussion of a "Renewed EU Strategy for Industrial Policy" of 2017 is a first step towards the development of an EU-oriented industrial strategy that needs a common approach based on the competitive advantages of the economy and businesses, taking into account the European model of high environmental and social standards and setting an ambitious long-term vision for industry over a decade and beyond a future for the benefit of citizens and the economy. Industrial policy should not protect aging businesses, but should eliminate unfair commercial practices and draw up an action plan in line with strategic objectives. It should become part of the “Sovereign Europe Program.”

The Lubelskie region as a beneficiary of the EU cohesion policy funds – experiences and prospects

Lubelskie voivodeship belongs to Eastern Poland regions, these face numerous difficulties such as economic backwardness, underdeveloped infrastructure, ageing and depopulation, as well as border location. As a result, Lubelskie voivodeship was qualified as the least development areas (NUTS 2) in the European Union. The goal of the article is to investigate the scopes and the directions of allocation of the EU assistance in programmes in the years 2004–2006 and 2007–2013, as well as in the current programming period. Lubelskie voivodeship is an active participant of EU funds and uses the growth opportunities offered by regional programme and Development Eastern Poland Programme. Compared to other voivodeships, received one of the lowest values of co-financing under national programmes. The largest EU support for the Lubelskie voivodeship in the years 2004–2013 was spent on transport, enterprises, social and local infrastructure. In the current programming period, it is planned to increase funding for enterprises, strengthening the cooperation between science and business, low carbon economy and RES, labour market and social inclusion.

Implementing ITI for urban development locally

In the current Programming Period (2014-2020) the European Commission has introduced a new strategic instrument, the Integrated Territorial Investment (ITI), which shifts the decisions on allocation of funds to the local level and, most importantly, enables drawing of funds from several priority axes and from several European Structural and Investment Funds. Greece is one of EU member countries that has committed on using ITIs as a tool for urban development. In August 2016, in the Region of Central Macedonia, urban authorities with a population of over 10.000 inhabitants were invited by the Managing Authority of the Regional Operational Programme to submit a Strategy for Sustainable Urban Development (SUD), through the mandatory implementation of the ITI tool. The paper focuses on one of these municipalities, the city of Veria, where the ITI approach has been implemented for the design of an ITI of urban scale (ITI-SUD). The integrated approach prescribed by regional authorities forced Municipalities to adopt government approaches uncommon until now: to involve multiple stakeholders in the entire process, from strategy development to project selection and implementation. The paper describes the benefits and challenges of the new approach as applied in the local context, showing the vertical and horizontal connections of urban development strategies. Most importantly, in the context of ‘procedural learning’ happening in Europe in the field of territorial cohesion, it offers an insight on how European cohesion policy strategies and tools are tested at the local level.

Regional Innovation Strategy — from Design to Implementation. Lubelskie Voivodship Case Study

The objective of the article is to present the process of designing and implementing Regional Research and Innovation Strategy for Smart Specialisation (RIS3). The paper is composed of two parts. The first part presents the idea of Smart specialization and its implementation in the current programming period, as well as the legal basis, premises, and assumptions of development of RIS3. In the second part, in the context of endogenic potentials, competitive advantages, and level of competitiveness of the region, the process of development of Regional Innovation Strategy for the Lubelskie Voivodship 2020 is presented in practice from the stage of identification of the areas of regional smart specialization in the entrepreneurial discovery process, through defining goals, priorities, and directions of measures and determination of the implementation assumptions, to the specification of financing sources. In the context of financing, the assumptions of the strategy were confronted with the provisions of the Regional Operational Programme of the Lubelskie Voivodship 2014–2020. This permitted drawing conclusions regarding financing pro-innovation measures on the regional level. In comparison to the assumptions of Regional Innovation Strategy for the Lubelskie Voivodship 2020 a considerable increase of resources in the scope of the Priority Axis 3 aiming at the improvement of competitiveness of SMEs was recorded. The cognitive value of the article is the presentation, in a broader context, of the methodology of development of RIS3 of the Lubelskie Voivodship, and translation of provisions of the strategy into specific measures in the financial sphere.

Institutional Framework for Support of Local Entrepreneurship Within Leader Approach in Slovakia

Abstract Current development of rural areas of Slovakia is not fully reflecting the measures taken at the level of the European Union. Contrary, the differences between the territories seem to be deepening. When analysing the critical factors, job creation together with unemployment seem to be among the most pressing ones. The academics believe that the local entrepreneurship and development of small and medium size enterprises (SME) in rural areas have significant impact on accelerating the development of these communities, yet, only limited measures are taken to support them. Therefore, the main objective of the paper is to analyze the institutional framework for support of local SME within implementation of the LEADER approach as a direct instrument of the rural development policy. The emphasis was put on the last programming period (2007 – 2013) and the conditions set for the current programming period (2014 – 2020).

Promoting investment in sustainable urban development with JESSICA: Outcomes of a new EU policy initiative

Between 2007 and 2015, the European Commission invested €1.846 billion in a new policy initiative called JESSICA (Joint European Support for Sustainable Investment in City Areas). Since European cities in particular have perceived a shortage of investment dedicated to urban regeneration projects, JESSICA will finance more than 2000 higher risk projects through Urban Development Funds as a financial intermediary in order to create economic stimulus. Moreover, replacing traditional grant funding by revolving financial instruments (loans, guarantees and equity capital) is a central part of the ongoing reform of EU cohesion policy. The special challenge of JESSICA is to combine these financial engineering instruments with integrated urban planning issues in a sustainable fund model. However, it is not yet clear whether this new policy instrument is as effective as European decision-makers believe, because up to now there has been no evaluation available on how successful JESSICA has been in achieving its ambitious objectives. Our empirical analysis is the first one to cover the impact of this innovative EU initiative in all 28 EU member states by making outcomes of the policy change measurable in monetary terms. Since revolving financial engineering instruments are a central part of the Europe2020 strategy, we derive key success factors for sustainable urban finance and give recommendations to adjust the policy instrument in the current programming period as part of the ongoing process of a reformed EU cohesion policy.

Addressing health inequalities by using Structural Funds. A question of opportunities

Making up a third of the EU budget, Structural and Investment Funds can provide important opportunities for investing in policies that tackle inequalities in health. This article looks back and forward at the 2007–2013 and 2014–2020 financial periods in an attempt to inform the development of health equity as a strand of policy intervention under regional development. It combines evidence from health projects funded through Structural Funds and a document analyses that locates interventions for health equity under the new regulations. The map of opportunities has changed considerably since the last programming period, creating more visibility for vulnerable groups, social determinants of health and health systems sustainability. As the current programming period is progressing, this paper contributes to maximizing this potential but also identifying challenges and implementation gaps for prospective health system engagement in pursuing health equity as part of Structural Funds projects. The austerity measures and their impact on public spending, building political support for investments as well as the difficulties around pursuing health gains as an objective of other policy areas are some of the challenges to overcome. European Structural and Investment Funds could be a window of opportunity that triggers engagement for health equity if sectors adopt a transformative approach and overcome barriers, cooperate for common goals and make better use of the availability of these resources.

Could Cohesion Policy push EU climate efforts?

ABSTRACTThe main purpose of this article is to evaluate the extent to which the Cohesion Policy of the EU contributes to its climate change mitigation effort. While climate change mitigation and the EU Cohesion Policy have been both thoroughly studied theoretically, the novelty of the present article lies in an analysis of their mutual relationship. Also, a unique feature of this research is an analysis of the contribution of the Cohesion Policy to climate change mitigation over a period of 20 years, including a comparison of the three last programming periods (2000–2006, 2007–2013 and 2014–2020). The results of this research suggest that, while the beginning of the new millennium saw the Cohesion Policy neglecting the issue of climate change mitigation, the current programming period (2014–2020) placed it among its key priorities. This conclusion is supported by a comprehensive set of data on five selected indicators. This article also displays the results against the perspective of the overall climate change mitigation objectives of the EU.POLICY RELEVANCEThe present article shows how a policy, which used to be considered rather distant from climate change, progressively adopted climate change mitigation as one of its principal objectives. As such, it provides a practical guidance on the integration of climate change mitigation in other policy areas, which may be applied not only in a supranational organisation but also on a national, regional or local level.

Economic and social importance of vertical and horizontal forms of agricultural cooperation in Hungary

In the development of a market economy, the ability to cooperate is a major factor determining the competitiveness of economic actors. With complex instruments intended to stimulate cooperation among the actors in farming, the agri-food chain, forestry and rural development, strengthening cooperation is a priority of the Common Agricultural Policy in the current European Union programming period. This paper evaluates the development of different forms of vertical and horizontal cooperation between actors in Hungarian agriculture in the period 2007-2013. Our defi nition of cooperation is based on a regular market relationship, and our analysis includes not only formal forms of horizontal and vertical cooperation but also the informal networks offering business benefi ts for producers. The main conclusion is that, owing to the continuing low level of horizontal cooperation in Hungary, high-level vertical integration ensures that producers can achieve a favourable negotiating position, and this in turn reduces the potential for the development of horizontal cooperation. Informal relationships, such as doing favours without charge, are not negligible ways of accessing resources, especially for small farms. A development path for agricultural cooperation in Hungary might be for actors to make collective investments in order to increase value-added and utilise economies of scale, and to organise themselves into alliances, associations, networks and clusters. Beyond the benefi ts originating from market concentration, these steps could stimulate the dissemination of expertise, improve effi ciency and increase innovation capacities.

Economic and social importance of vertical and horizontal forms of agricultural cooperation in Hungary

In the development of a market economy, the ability to cooperate is a major factor determining the competitiveness of economic actors. With complex instruments intended to stimulate cooperation among the actors in farming, the agri-food chain, forestry and rural development, strengthening cooperation is a priority of the Common Agricultural Policy in the current European Union programming period. This paper evaluates the development of different forms of vertical and horizontal cooperation between actors in Hungarian agriculture in the period 2007-2013. Our defi nition of cooperation is based on a regular market relationship, and our analysis includes not only formal forms of horizontal and vertical cooperation but also the informal networks offering business benefi ts for producers. The main conclusion is that, owing to the continuing low level of horizontal cooperation in Hungary, high-level vertical integration ensures that producers can achieve a favourable negotiating position, and this in turn reduces the potential for the development of horizontal cooperation. Informal relationships, such as doing favours without charge, are not negligible ways of accessing resources, especially for small farms. A development path for agricultural cooperation in Hungary might be for actors to make collective investments in order to increase value-added and utilise economies of scale, and to organise themselves into alliances, associations, networks and clusters. Beyond the benefi ts originating from market concentration, these steps could stimulate the dissemination of expertise, improve effi ciency and increase innovation capacities.

Regional sectoral structure of the support realised through the Operational Programme Enterprise and Innovation 2007–2013

Abstract Within the previous programming period, the Operational Programme Enterprise and Innovation represented the main tool of the EU cohesion policy in the Czech Republic for the support of businesses in manufacturing and related services. The article analyses sectoral structure of realised projects and financial subsidy allocated through the programme at the level of Czech regions. A significant part of branches strongly represented by realised projects in particular regions belongs at the same time to branches considerably concentrated within the same regions. Nevertheless, besides these regionally traditional branches of manufacturing industry and related services, a number of other branches were identified with an above-average representation on projects or financial subsidy within particular regions. In the last part of the text, results of the sectoral structure analysis are looked at from the perspective of smart specialisation areas which form a binding support framework for the area of entrepreneurship, innovation and research in the current programming period. Certain continuity in the importance for regional economies can be noticed in the case of many traditional regional industries - their position strengthened by the investment in the last programming period has been confirmed by inclusion of these branches into the list of smart specialisation areas for the current programming period.