Eu Cohesion Policy 2007-13 Evaluation Essay

Regional Policy InfoRegio

Accessibility tools

Service tools

Language selector

Evaluations of the 2007-2013 programming period

Ex Post Evaluation of the ERDF and CF: Key outcomes of Cohesion Policy in 2007-2013

Work packages

The DG REGIO Evaluation unit - in cooperation with the Member States – is carrying out the ERDF/Cohesion Fund ex post evaluation 2007-2013 of 320 co-funded programmes. The evaluation consists of a set of 15 working packages most of them thematic in nature.
Work package 0 - Data collection and quality assessment
Work package 1 - Synthesis
Work package 2 - Small and medium sized enterprises, innovation, ICT
Work package 3 - Financial Instruments for Enterprises
Work package 4 - Large enterprises
  • Summary: Large enterprises play an important role in regional development, but much of the evidence so far questions the impact of public support on large enterprise investment decisions – and their long term commitment to the region of location. This evaluation assesses the rationale, implementation and evidence of effectiveness of Cohesion Policy support in the 8 countries which account for 75% of ERDF support to large enterprises. The evaluation will compare direct effects and wider benefits as well as export-led, FDI-based strategies and development of the indigenous large enterprise base.
  • Deliverables:
  • Work package 5 - Transport
    • Summary: This evaluation presents main achievements of cohesion policy in the area of transport infrastructure. It also offers assessment of the EU contribution to the comprehensive transport networks and its strength and weaknesses, focusing in particular on the financial analysis underlying the infrastructural projects.
      • At over € 82 billion, transport accounts for the biggest share of cohesion policy allocation (over 30%).
      • This contribution enabled Member States to upgrade or expand their transport networks. By the end of 2013, the managing authorities reported 3,875 km of new roads built and over 23,000 km of roads reconstructed, as well as 269 km of new railroads and 3,136 km of reconstructed railroads.
      • New or enhanced infrastructure provided better connectivity both within and across Member States borders. 47% of roads and 49% of railroads receiving the cohesion policy support were part of the TEN-T.
      • Cohesion policy also stimulated improvement in the way transport interventions are planned (development of transport strategies) and prepared (improvement in quality of major projects applications).
    • Deliverables:
      • Terms of Reference
      • Final report bringing together the findings from all evaluation tasks and including catalogue of challenges (problems within the ex-ante financial analysis of major projects and solutions to overcome them)
      • Executive summary
      • Map of road projects supported by Cohesion policy between 2000 and 2013 (and operational by the end of 2014)
      • Map of rail projects supported by Cohesion policy between 2000 and 2013 (and operational by the end of 2014)
      • 10 major project case studies to better understand the implementation context and verify the underlying assumptions (BG, CZ, DE, EE, ES, HU, PL and RO / road, railway and urban transport)
      • 6 Member State case studies to explore the contribution of cohesion policy to the national and EU transport policy (ES, FR, HU, IT, PL and RO)
      • Inception report
    Work package 6 - Environment
    • Summary: The evaluation analysed the progress and achievements of Cohesion Policy for environment related infrastructure focusing on two areas: waste management and water. The study assessed to what extent Cohesion Policy funding contributed to Member States' implementation of EU environmental directives and 2) environmental projects co-funded by Cohesion Policy are financially sustainable. In order to answer these questions, a broad review of the portfolio of projects and operational programmes and a more detailed analysis of the quality of the financial analysis for 20 selected major projects were carried out. 10 case studies examined implementation issues and provided a contextual understanding of the financial analysis: 3 projects for waste management (Poland/ Gdańsk, Portugal/ERSUC, Romania/Cluj County) and 7 projects for water (Czech Republic/Brno, Estonia/Kohtla-Järve Area, Greece/Koropiou & Paianias, Lithuania/Vilnius, Malta, Poland/ Żory, Portugal/SIMARSUL).
      1. The study found that the support for environment for the programming period 2007-2013 represented about € 46.5 billion and the decided amounts accounted for over 17% of all Cohesion Policy resources. In many EU13 and southern EU15 Member States, Cohesion Policy is one of the main sources of public financing and therefore provided a major contribution to achieving EU water and waste targets. Many of these countries have made broad progress: in the area of waste, the recycling rate increased in almost all EU13 Member States; in the area of water, projects financed by the ERDF and Cohesion Fund improved drinking water supply for at least 4 million EU citizens and contributed to better wastewater treatment for over 7 million EU citizens.
      2. The evaluation found that the financial analysis undertaken as part of the preparation of the examined major projects on water and waste management was of reasonable good quality and provided a sound basis for financial sustainability of those environmental projects.
    • Deliverables:
    Work package 8 - Energy efficiency
    Work package 9 - Tourism and Culture
    Work package 10 - Urban development and Social infrastructure
    Work package 11 - European territorial Cooperation
    Work package 12 - Delivery System
    Work package 13 - Geography of expenditures

    Evaluations undertaken for the Commission

    2007-2013   2000-2006   1989-1999


    Evaluations of the 2007-2013 programming period

    Expert Evaluation Network Delivering Policy Analysis

    The objective of this network of experts is to synthesise evidence on the performance of Cohesion policy in the 2007-2013 period by examining the physical and financial performance of the operational programmes and evaluation and other evidence available. Every year the expert network produces country reports on the achievements of cohesion policy and on a selected theme. For 2011 the theme is renewable energy and energy efficiency in residential housing. The network will also identify examples of good practice in evaluation (interesting methods, good data, etc.).

    ERDF and Cohesion Fund Support to Regions with Specific Geographical Features - Islands, Mountainous and Sparsely Populated areas

    This study will analyse the extent to which cohesion policy interventions have been appropriate and effective in the special territories for the 2000-2006 and 2007-2013 periods. Fifteen selected regions will be covered and six of them will be selected for an in-depth case study analysis. The evaluation will explore policy and governance approaches to identify good practices in implementing territorial cohesion and will conclude on the key factors to maximise the effects of the Structural Funds. The final report is expected by the end of 2011.

    First Intermediate Report

    Inception Report

    Terms of Reference

    Local development approach in the delivery of ERDF interventions

    The study will assess the contribution of the local development approach to the effective delivery of Cohesion Policy. It will cover interventions co-financed by the ERDF in the 2000-2006 and 2007-13 programming periods. Findings from the review of 38 Operational Programmes and the in-depth analysis of 5 regional cases will serve as a base for operational recommendations on how and when local development could be used to deliver Cohesion Policy and how to monitor and evaluate the effects of local development interventions on economic, social and territorial cohesion.

    Inception Report

    Terms of Reference

    Evaluation on the potential for regional policy programmes, 2007-2013, to contribute to the Lisbon and Gothenburg objectives for growth, jobs and sustainable development

    The study evaluates the potential for current regional policy instruments to contribute to the achievement of growth, jobs and sustainable development. The analysis is based on examination of the Cohesion policy instruments in all 27 Member States including all 246 operational programmes supported by the ERDF and Cohesion Fund, as well as the National Strategic Reference Frameworks, the National Reform Programmes and the National Sustainable Development Plans. Conclusions are drawn at the level of each objective (Convergence and Regional Competitiveness and Employment) at the EU level.

    Promotion of gender equality, non-discrimination and accessibility for disabled persons

    A study on the Translation of Article 16 of Regulation EC 1083/2006 forCohesion policy programmes 2007-2013 co-financed by the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund

    The study analyses the integration of the gender perspective, non-discrimination and accessibility for disabled persons in Cohesion policy programmes co-financed by ERDF and the Cohesion Fund. 15 examples of good practices across Member States and policy areas will be identified and analysed. Conclusions and useful lessons to strengthen the gender, non-discrimination and disability dimensions in the current and next policy programming period will be derived.

    Main Findings, Recommendations and Reports

    Macro economic modelling:
    Feasibility study on Rail Baltica railways
    Strategic Evaluation on Innovation and the Knowledge based Economy in relation to the Structural and Cohesion Funds, for the programming period 2007-2013
    Strategic evaluation on Environment and Risk Prevention under Structural and Cohesion Funds for period 2007-2013 (November 2006)
    Strategic Evaluation on TransportInvestment Priorities under Structural and Cohesion Funds for the Programming Period 2007-2013 (October 2006)


    2007-2013   2000-2006   1989-1999


    Last modified on: 

    Categories: 1

    0 Replies to “Eu Cohesion Policy 2007-13 Evaluation Essay”

    Leave a comment

    L'indirizzo email non verrà pubblicato. I campi obbligatori sono contrassegnati *