EVALUATION OF THE MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS OF COHESION POLICY PROGRAMMES AND ...

146 Pages·2013·2.09 MB·English

by  Pascal Chazaud

EVALUATION OF THE MAIN ACHIEVEMENTS OF COHESION POLICY
PROGRAMMES AND PROJECTS OVER THE LONGER TERM IN 15
SELECTED REGIONS
(FROM 1989-1993 PROGRAMMING PERIOD TO THE PRESENT)
(2011.CE.16.B.AT.015)

CASE STUDY Aquitaine

Pascal Chazaud & Delphine Paumelle
19 July 2013
European Policies Research Centre
University of Strathclyde
Graham Hills Building
40 George Street
Glasgow G1 1QE
United Kingdom
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

E-mail: [email protected]
[email protected]
http://www.eprc.strath.ac.uk/eprc/

The University of Strathclyde is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, number SC01526
Evaluation of the main achievements of Cohesion policy programmes and projects over the longer term in 15
selected regions: Aquitaine Case Study
PREFACE
This report presents the case study for Aquitaine as part of the study ‘Evaluation of the Main
Achievements of Cohesion Policy Programmes over the Longer Term in 15 Selected Regions (from
1989-1993 Programming Period to the Present)’ which is being managed by the European
Policies Research Centre and London School of Economics, jointly with the French network of
consultancies ‘Europe & Territoires Conseil’.
The research was conducted over the period April 2012 to December 2012. The case study was
drafted by Pascal Chazaud and Delphine Paumelle, independent consultants and founders of the
French network of consultancies ‘Europe & Territoires Conseil’. The authors are grateful to a
considerable number of individuals in Aquitaine who participated in the study and provided
valuable insights as well as assistance in tracking down other interviewees. The complete list of
interviewees is listed in Annex IV at the end of the report.

LSE i EPRC
Evaluation of the main achievements of Cohesion policy programmes and projects over the longer term in 15
selected regions: Aquitaine Case Study
LSE ii EPRC
Evaluation of the main achievements of Cohesion policy programmes and projects over the longer term in 15
selected regions: Aquitaine Case Study
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................ 7
1. Introduction ............................................................................................ 13
2. Regional context and analysis of needs ......................................................... 17
3. Programme evolution and relevance ............................................................. 25
3.1 Explicit and implicit strategies and their evolution ................................................. 25
3.1.1 1989-1993: Use of funds simplified by the experience gained through the IMP ........... 26
3.1.2 1994-1999: European programmes regarded first and foremost as financial instruments
28
3.1.3 2000-2006: A more structured strategy, but financial developments during the
programme led to changes in priorities ...................................................................... 30
3.1.4 2007-2013: Radical changes in strategy ........................................................... 32
3.2 Relevance of the programmes in relation to regional needs ...................................... 33
4. Expenditure analysis ................................................................................. 41
4.1 Financial allocations ...................................................................................... 41
4.2 Expenditure compared with allocations ............................................................... 42
4.3 Concentration of expenditure ........................................................................... 44
5. Achievements analysis .............................................................................. 47
5.1 Reported & actual achievements ....................................................................... 47
5.1.1 Programme-level achievements .................................................................... 47
5.1.2 Analysis by theme ..................................................................................... 55
5.1.3 Institutional factors affecting achievements .................................................... 72
5.2 Complementarities and synergies ...................................................................... 74
5.2.1 Complementarity between ERDF-funded programmes ......................................... 74
5.2.2 Complementarity with domestic regional policy ................................................ 75
6. Assessment of achievements against objectives and needs (effectiveness and utility)79
6.1 Overall achievements of ERDF programmes measured against programme objectives
(effectiveness) .......................................................................................... 79
6.2 Overall contribution of ERDF programmes to regional development (utility) .................. 84
6.3 Key elements of success and failure ................................................................... 87
6.3.1 Good practices and successes ....................................................................... 87
6.3.2 Bad practices and failings............................................................................ 88
7. Conclusions ............................................................................................ 91
7.1 EQ1: To what extent did the programmes address regional needs and problems over time?91
7.2 EQ2: To what extent do ERDF achievements meet regional objectives and needs in each
programming period and across all periods? ....................................................... 94
7.3 EQ3: What are the main lessons learnt on the effectiveness and utility of ERDF
interventions ............................................................................................ 98
8. Annex I – Analysis of project samples ........................................................... 103
8.1 Project Bringing businesses to the ‘Route des Lasers’ (Laser Highway) ....................... 103
8.2 Project to promote tourism in Oloron-Sainte-Marie (Valorisation touristique à Oloron-
Sainte-Marie) .......................................................................................... 106
8.3 Project : Aquitaine regional incubator (Incubateur regional d’Aquitaine – IRA) ............. 109
9. Annex II – structure of Aquitaine programmes 1989-2013 ................................. 113
10. Annex III – Reported achievements .............................................................. 121
10.1 1989-93 Regional Operational Programme .......................................................... 121
LSE iii EPRC
Evaluation of the main achievements of Cohesion policy programmes and projects over the longer term in 15
selected regions: Aquitaine Case Study
10.2 1994-99 Regional Operational Programmes Objective 5b ........................................ 121
10.3 1994-1996 and 1997-1999 Regional Operational Programmes Objective 2 .................... 121
10.4 2000-2006 Regional Operational Programmes ...................................................... 124
10.5 2007-2013 Regional Operational Programmes ...................................................... 127
11. Annex IV: List of interviewees .................................................................... 129
12. Annex V: Overview of source used for the case study ...................................... 131
13. Annex VI: References ............................................................................... 133
14. Annex VII: Summary of survey results .......................................................... 137
15. Annex VIII: List of workshop participants ...................................................... 143

LSE iv EPRC
Evaluation of the main achievements of Cohesion policy programmes and projects over the longer term in 15
selected regions: Aquitaine Case Study
Figures and tables

Figure 1. Map of location of Aquitaine in France and map representing infra-regional administrative
divisions ............................................................................................................... 13
Figure 2. Comparative evolution of GDP per capita in Aquitaine ........................................... 17
Figure 3. Comparative evolution of unemployment rate in Aquitaine ..................................... 19
Figure 4. Map of roads and railway transport in Aquitaine .................................................. 21
Figure 5: Eligible area of Objective 5b 1989-1993 in Aquitaine ............................................. 28
Figure 6: Eligible area of Objective 2 1989-1993 programme in Aquitaine ............................... 28
Figure 7: Eligible area of Objective 5b 1994-1999 programme in Aquitaine .............................. 30
Figure 8: Eligible area of Objective 2 1994-1999 in Aquitaine .............................................. 30
Figure 9: Eligible area of Objective 2 2000-2006 programme in Aquitaine ............................... 32
Figure 10: Allocations and expenditure by thematic axis (expressed as percentage) .................. 44

Table 1: Comparison of regional needs and programme responses ........................................ 34
Table 2: Needs and imputed objectives for eight thematic axes ........................................... 38
Table 3: Aquitaine programme allocations 1989-2013 ........................................................ 41
Table 4: Aquitaine ERDF programme allocations and expenditure 1989-2013 ........................... 42
Table 5. Major adjustments in terms of financial allocations between priorities/measures during the
2000-2006 period (unadjusted values) ........................................................................... 44
Table 6. Average ratio per period between the most expensive project and the average project
value. .................................................................................................................. 45
Table 7: Main output indicators for the 1997-1999 programme ............................................ 50
Table 8: Main output indicators for the 2000-2006 programme ............................................ 53
Table 9: Achievements in terms of business accommodation promoting hosting businesses .......... 69
Table 10: Programme objectives and targets for Aquitaine ERDF programmes 1994-2013 and
reported achievements ............................................................................................. 81
Table 11: Achievements compared with imputed objectives for eight thematic axes ................. 83
Table 12: Achievements compared with needs for eight thematic areas ................................. 85

LSE v EPRC
Evaluation of the main achievements of Cohesion policy programmes and projects over the longer term in 15
selected regions: Aquitaine Case Study

LSE vi EPRC
Evaluation of the main achievements of Cohesion policy programmes and projects over the longer term in 15
selected regions: Aquitaine Case Study
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The regional development context
Due to a historical lack of raw materials, Aquitaine lagged behind in terms of industrial
development until the 1950s. However, wine and other food-industry-related products were traded
with foreign entities, thanks to well-developed port facilities in Bordeaux. In the 1960s and 1970s,
the spatial planning policy introduced by the central government had important benefits for the
aeronautics and energy sectors in the region. In the late 1980s, the Aquitaine region was growing
overall, but there were spatial and sectoral disparities. There was also a dichotomy between the
urban and rural parts of the region, in terms of labour market and economic performance, as well
as in terms of differences in production structure and specialisations. In its most densely populated
areas, the Aquitaine region faced a decline in traditional industrial production (chemistry,
aeronautics, etc.). Its needs were the modernisation of industry, the attraction of new companies
and the diversification of activity. Aquitaine’s rural areas faced a decline in agriculture and in
traditional industries (textiles, leather industry, etc.) and needed economic diversification in order
to maintain or attract population and economic activities. Moreover, the region had inadequate
transport infrastructure (rail and road networks) and needed to improve its connectivity. In recent
decades, Aquitaine has shown a growing economic dynamism and an ability to attract innovative
technological activity, and has developed other sectors such as tourism, food and wood processing.
Regional needs changed with the higher exposure to globalisation in the 2000s. Competitiveness has
become the driver of economic activity.
GDP per capita in Aquitaine has risen since the beginning of the 1980s, except in the early 1990s
when an acute recession struck the Aquitaine region and France as a whole. From the mid-1980s,
the level of GDP per capita declined relative to France and the EU15. One reason for this has been
the increasing attractiveness of the region, which induced retired people and young people looking
for a better life or job conditions to move to the region. However, these immigrants did not
proportionally increase economic output. Furthermore, the rather low level of population density
has been an obstacle to positive agglomeration economies, except in Bordeaux, and inhibited the
attainment of economies of scale, which would have increased economic efficiency.
The regional situation has evolved over time, from the fear of unfair competition brought about by
Spain’s entry into the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1986 to the establishment of a
regional innovation system. Major needs and problems have been addressed to a varying degree by
ERDF intervention during the study period. At present, the main needs are clearly related to the
necessity to face up to the challenges of the global economy and to remain a competitive
territory.
The relevance of ERDF programmes for Aquitaine
The Aquitaine region has been eligible for ERDF throughout the period from 1989 to the present,
initially as Objective 2 and 5b, and more recently as a Regional Competitiveness & Employment
(RCE) region. Although comparisons across programmes are difficult, it is estimated that around €1
billion of ERDF (2000 adjusted values) was allocated to the region over this period, representing
an average annual allocation of around €50 million.
LSE 7 EPRC
Evaluation of the main achievements of Cohesion policy programmes and projects over the longer term in 15
selected regions: Aquitaine Case Study
Over the long term since 1989, the orientation of ERDF programmes has been partially consistent
with the main regional needs of Aquitaine. Until 1999, the explicit strategies of ERDF programmes
were essentially in line with existing national policies. The period was characterised by the lack of
a comprehensive territorial socio-economic analysis, by the lack of an overall strategy, and by the
selection of areas of intervention that was based on national policies. In the 2000-2006 period, the
programme did not really have a higher level of strategic focus compared with the previous
periods. This can be explained by the fact that, in order to satisfy the expectations of most
stakeholders, the strategy resulted in a very broad list of priorities and measures. In the current
period, the required thematic concentration in line with the Lisbon strategy has strongly
contributed to improve the strategy of the ERDF programme. The programme has clearer objectives
and is focused on a limited set of priorities. Some fields that benefited from significant funding in
the past, such as transport, tourism, culture, etc., are no longer considered to be high priorities
within the region. This led to some local authority representatives expressing disappointment in
interviews which were undertaken in support of this report.
Over this 20 year period, some needs have persisted in the region, such as the need to manage the
slow but continuous decline in traditional sectors, the need to create more jobs in order to absorb
the increasing number of migrants due to the regional attractiveness, the need to revitalise the
low-density areas, the need to increase the regional GDP via higher exports, and more generally the
need to internationalise the regional economy.
The effectiveness of ERDF spending
The programmes have experienced mixed results in terms of their effectiveness in achieving their
objectives. The 1989-93 programme achievements for both rural and industrial eligible areas were
not reported in any detail and emphasis was only placed on the physical delivery of projects.
The 1994-1996 programme, by contrast, had detailed indicators relating to physical outputs
(although without target values fixed at the beginning), and expected results in terms of jobs
created. However, it had difficulty in meeting targets. The 1997-1999 programme performed
somewhat better, even if it slightly underachieved in terms of job creation, with 3,349 net new jobs
against a target of 3,760. The large majority of measures succeeded in reaching output targets.
The 2000-2006 programme failed to achieve its objective of helping to create 9,700 or so new
jobs. Equally, some measures such as improving business competitiveness, supporting improved
sectoral specialisation, and developing tourism assets failed to meet their objectives. With regard
to the current 2007-2013 programme, the monitoring system does not properly reflect the real
situation at this stage. Nevertheless, it is uncertain whether it can meet its objectives in most
areas of intervention due to the increasingly adverse conditions of the economic crisis.
At a measure level, in general there has been a varying performance in meeting targets.
Infrastructure supporting multimodal transport was delivered well, although results in terms of
changes and real use of new infrastructure are poor. Most rural areas that benefited largely from
EU support have become attractive again, and have increased population, even if businesses do not
seem to have been well prepared to meet the shift towards a greater emphasis on innovation.
Although funds allocated towards environmental issues appeared to be modest until 2006,
environmental issues were reasonably well tackled as a horizontal concern (i.e. across sectors). The
situation changed radically in an unexpected way, from the opposition or indifference to the
LSE 8 EPRC