Structural fund implementation ‘improving’

Date: 31/10/1996

By Mark Turner

THE EU's structural funds were better implemented and better monitored in 1995, according to the European Commission's annual report released this week.

But it suggests that many member states are still failing to allow local authorities sufficient input into their deployment.

The report assesses the first full year's implementation of the 1994-1999 funding period.

The structural funds, which will account for 141 billion ecu of EU spending over the six-year period, are bound by the principles of 'partnership' (with regional and local authorities), 'concentration' (on needy areas), and 'additionality' (matching funds from member states).

The fund has six objectives, including the development of regions whose prosperity lags far behind the Union average (Objective 1), promoting rural development (Objective 5) and helping regions with a very low population density (Objective 6).

The Commission's report says that although partnership with regional bodies has been satisfactory of late, there is insufficient lower-level involvement in decisions on how available funds should be spent.

Commission officials believe that this reflects a failure by traditionally centralised administrations in many member states to recognise the value of a more bottom-up approach.

The report also maintains that member states were slow to concentrate funds on those geographical areas which most needed them during 1995, with officials laying some of the blame for this on political considerations resulting in structural fund money being spread too broadly.

Additionality proved much harder to evaluate in 1995, as seven member states provided incomplete or no data.

Nearly all the programmes for 1994 and 1995 were adopted by the end of 1995, with almost one-third of available assistance committed and one-fifth paid out during the first two years.

The countries which joined the EU in January 1995 - Austria, Finland and Sweden - are praised for swift implementation of the various structural fund objectives.

The Commission also highlights the symbiotic relationship between the structural funds and 'green' objectives, stressing, for example, the attraction of a high-quality environment to investors and its spin-off for employment.

It adds that EU structural policies have enabled less-favoured regions to comply with Community environmental standards and acted as a catalyst for other sustainable development projects.