Ex-Post Evaluation of Cohesion Policy Programmes 2007-13, Focusing on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and Cohesion Fund (CF): Work Package 3: Financial Instruments for Enterprise Support - Draft Final Report

Fiona Wishlade, Rona Michie, Giovanni Familiari, Peter Schneiderwind, Andreas Resch

Research output: Book/ReportCommissioned report

Abstract

For many Member States financial instruments were a new approach to delivering Cohesion policy. Their increased use in 2007 - 13 created significant challenge s especially for MAs with limited experience. The regulatory framework provided flexibility to accommodate domestic arrangements, but demanded considerable administrative capacity. FIs can be more sustainable than grants, generate better quality projects, and may be considered more cost - effective in some circumstances . However, their main rationale in the OPs has been to facilitate access to finance for SMEs, which became more important in the crisis. The scale of FI varies between countries , as does the sh are reaching final recipients. In most countries, FI are over 80% invested, but some very large FIs have been overcapitalised and the EU average is 61%. Governance arrangements tend to be context specific, but build heavily on existing public financial ins titutions. Implementing FI proved complex with demands for greater clarity and certainty met through successive changes to the Regulations and guidance, many of which have been consolidated into the 2014 - 20 regulatory framework. Monitoring systems for FI a re weak, with little hard data on outcomes such as private funding, job creation and innovation, but some evidence that FI increase access to finance and can help develop private markets.
LanguageEnglish
Place of PublicationBrussels
Commissioning bodyEuropean Commission
Number of pages237
Publication statusUnpublished - 5 Oct 2015

Fingerprint

group cohesion
regional development
finance
job creation
evaluation
grant
flexibility
recipient
EU
funding
governance
monitoring
innovation
regulation
market
costs
evidence
experience
Access to finance
Cohesion policy

Keywords

  • EU cohesion policy
  • cohesion fund
  • regional development fund

Cite this

@book{771b620661c6442d843da82a61c03985,
title = "Ex-Post Evaluation of Cohesion Policy Programmes 2007-13, Focusing on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and Cohesion Fund (CF): Work Package 3: Financial Instruments for Enterprise Support - Draft Final Report",
abstract = "For many Member States financial instruments were a new approach to delivering Cohesion policy. Their increased use in 2007 - 13 created significant challenge s especially for MAs with limited experience. The regulatory framework provided flexibility to accommodate domestic arrangements, but demanded considerable administrative capacity. FIs can be more sustainable than grants, generate better quality projects, and may be considered more cost - effective in some circumstances . However, their main rationale in the OPs has been to facilitate access to finance for SMEs, which became more important in the crisis. The scale of FI varies between countries , as does the sh are reaching final recipients. In most countries, FI are over 80{\%} invested, but some very large FIs have been overcapitalised and the EU average is 61{\%}. Governance arrangements tend to be context specific, but build heavily on existing public financial ins titutions. Implementing FI proved complex with demands for greater clarity and certainty met through successive changes to the Regulations and guidance, many of which have been consolidated into the 2014 - 20 regulatory framework. Monitoring systems for FI a re weak, with little hard data on outcomes such as private funding, job creation and innovation, but some evidence that FI increase access to finance and can help develop private markets.",
keywords = "EU cohesion policy, cohesion fund, regional development fund",
author = "Fiona Wishlade and Rona Michie and Giovanni Familiari and Peter Schneiderwind and Andreas Resch",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "5",
language = "English",

}

TY - BOOK

T1 - Ex-Post Evaluation of Cohesion Policy Programmes 2007-13, Focusing on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and Cohesion Fund (CF)

T2 - Work Package 3: Financial Instruments for Enterprise Support - Draft Final Report

AU - Wishlade, Fiona

AU - Michie, Rona

AU - Familiari, Giovanni

AU - Schneiderwind, Peter

AU - Resch, Andreas

PY - 2015/10/5

Y1 - 2015/10/5

N2 - For many Member States financial instruments were a new approach to delivering Cohesion policy. Their increased use in 2007 - 13 created significant challenge s especially for MAs with limited experience. The regulatory framework provided flexibility to accommodate domestic arrangements, but demanded considerable administrative capacity. FIs can be more sustainable than grants, generate better quality projects, and may be considered more cost - effective in some circumstances . However, their main rationale in the OPs has been to facilitate access to finance for SMEs, which became more important in the crisis. The scale of FI varies between countries , as does the sh are reaching final recipients. In most countries, FI are over 80% invested, but some very large FIs have been overcapitalised and the EU average is 61%. Governance arrangements tend to be context specific, but build heavily on existing public financial ins titutions. Implementing FI proved complex with demands for greater clarity and certainty met through successive changes to the Regulations and guidance, many of which have been consolidated into the 2014 - 20 regulatory framework. Monitoring systems for FI a re weak, with little hard data on outcomes such as private funding, job creation and innovation, but some evidence that FI increase access to finance and can help develop private markets.

AB - For many Member States financial instruments were a new approach to delivering Cohesion policy. Their increased use in 2007 - 13 created significant challenge s especially for MAs with limited experience. The regulatory framework provided flexibility to accommodate domestic arrangements, but demanded considerable administrative capacity. FIs can be more sustainable than grants, generate better quality projects, and may be considered more cost - effective in some circumstances . However, their main rationale in the OPs has been to facilitate access to finance for SMEs, which became more important in the crisis. The scale of FI varies between countries , as does the sh are reaching final recipients. In most countries, FI are over 80% invested, but some very large FIs have been overcapitalised and the EU average is 61%. Governance arrangements tend to be context specific, but build heavily on existing public financial ins titutions. Implementing FI proved complex with demands for greater clarity and certainty met through successive changes to the Regulations and guidance, many of which have been consolidated into the 2014 - 20 regulatory framework. Monitoring systems for FI a re weak, with little hard data on outcomes such as private funding, job creation and innovation, but some evidence that FI increase access to finance and can help develop private markets.

KW - EU cohesion policy

KW - cohesion fund

KW - regional development fund

UR - http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/en/policy/evaluations/ec/2007-2013/#1

M3 - Commissioned report

BT - Ex-Post Evaluation of Cohesion Policy Programmes 2007-13, Focusing on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and Cohesion Fund (CF)

CY - Brussels

ER -