Download Document

MANAGING EXTERNAL AID
PROGRAMMES
mag. Peter Ješovnik
Deputy Director
Beograd, 7-8 december 2005
PRE-ACCESSION PROCESS – MILESTONES
•
•
•
1992: PHARE Framework Agreement signed (September)
1993: Cooperation Agreement signed (April)
1993: Cooperation Agreement entered into force (September)
•
1993: Exploratory talks for Association Agreement with
started (December)
1995: Negotiations for Association Agreement started (March)
1996: Association Agreement signed (June) and the
Slovenia applied for full membership.
1997: Interim Agreement entered into force (January)
1998: Accession negotiations started (April)
1999: Association Agreement entered into force (February)
2002: Accession negotiations concluded (13th December)
2003: Accession Treaty signed (16th April)
2004: Membership in the EU (1st May)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
TRANSITION INTO MARKET - DRIVEN ECONOMY
•
•
•
•
•
Major structural changes.
Shift from social to private ownership.
Shift from industrial to service economy.
Shift from large to small-sized companies.
Redirection from the markets of former Yugoslavia
into more competitive European markets.
• Shift from a supply driven economy into a demanded
led.
This was made possible by the liberalization of trade,
liberalization of the Company law, as well as the
changes in ownership structure of the existing
socially owned companies.
AND WHAT IS THE FINAL ROLE OF THE
ACCESSION TO THE UNION
•
BREAKING OF THE EXISTING BARRIERS OF INWARD-ORIENTED
STATE OF MIND BY MORE REFRESHING OPEN-SOCIETY WIND,
INCREASED SELF-CONFIDENCE
•
ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMON EUROPEAN RULES RESULTING
IN INCREASED TRANSPARENCY, STABILITY AND
PREDICTABILITY OF THE ECONOMY, WHICH IS PARTICULARLY
IMPORTANT FOR OPERATING OF ECONOMIC SUBJECTS
•
BECOMING A PART OF EUROPEAN AREA OF STABILITY
SECURITY AND PROSPERITY BASED ON POSITIVE INTERNAL
SOLUTION SEEKING INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK
PRE-ACCESSION PROCESS – FINANCIAL ASPECTS
•
Between 1992-2003, Slovenia has received assistence
from three pre-accession instruments:
–
–
–
PHARE – 339,1 MEUR
ISPA – 84,5 MEUR and
SAPARD – 25,7 MEUR
TOTAL: 449,3 MEUR
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1992–1996
1997
PHARE
1998
1999
2000
ISPA
2001
2002
SAPARD
2003
EVOLUTION OF PHARE – ROADMAP FOR CARDS/ISPA
PERIOD
1989 – 1997
CENTRALISED
• SUPPORT TO ECONOMIC
TRANSITION OF THE CENTRAL
EUROPEAN COUNTRIES
• DEMAND DRIVEN
1997 – 2002
DECENTRALISED
• SUPPORT THE PROCESS OF THE
ACCESSION
• ACCESSION DRIVEN (ONLY
PRIORITIES FOR ACCESSION)
2002 – ACCESSION
DECENTRALISED +
EXTENDED
DECENTRALISED
• SUPPORT FOR TRANSITION TO
STRUCTURAL FUNDS AND
COHESION FUND
• DEVELOPING MANAGEMENT FOR
THE COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE FOR
MEMBER STATES.
MANAGEMENT REFORM FOR PHARE 1997
REFORM (ACCESSION DRIVEN)
1997
Before
After
Management
model
Development
Aid
Partnership
Strategy
Demand driven
Accession Driven
Implementation
Centralised
Decentralised
Monitoring
Centralised
Joint
Evaluation
Centralised
Centralised
DIVISION OF RESPONSIBILITIES UNDER
DIFFERENT IMPLEMENTATION SYSTEMS
Type of
Implementation
System
Centralised
Deconcentrated
Decentralised
(DIS)
Extended
decentralised
(EDIS)
Phase
Programming
(ex-ante
evaluation)
EC, NAC,
line
ministries
EC, EC
Delegations,
NAC, (EAR),
Ministries
EC, EC
Delegations,
NAC,
line Ministries
EC, NAC, line
Line
ministreies
Implementation
EC,
line
ministries
Line ministries
DEK, EAR
Line inistries,
CFCU
Line
ministries,
CFCU
Monitoring
EC
EC Delegations
(EAR)
Ministries,
NAC, EC
Delegation
Line
ministries,
NAC
Interim
evaluation
EC
EC Delegations
(EAR)
EC
Delegations
NAC
Ex-post
evaluation
EC
EC Delegations
EC
EC
PROGRAMMING
• Line ministries
• National Aid Co-ordinator (NAC)
• EC Delegation
• Commission Services HQ
IMPLEMENTATION
• National Fund = MF/NAO (Paying)
• Implementing Authority= CFCU/PAO (Tendering,
Contracting)
• Implementing Agencies at the Ministries (Tendering,
Contracting)
• Final beneficiaries: ministries/institutions/local
communities (Contracting Authority)
• EC Delegation (ex-ante control) & NAC (Observers)
MONITORING
•
LINE MINISTRIES/CONTRACTING AUTHORITIES/AT
PROGRAMME LEVEL;
•
STEERING COMMITTEES/AT PROJECT LEVEL;
•
SECTORAL MONITORING SUB-COMMITTEES (2 PER YEAR);
•
MONITORING COMMITTEES ISPA, SAPARD (2 PER YEAR);
•
JOINT MONITORING COMMITTEE (1 PER YEAR) .
* Under centralised implementation system monitoring was
responsibility of the european commission.
EVALUATION
1. Centralised Implementation System (CIS)
a) Ex-ante: EC
b) Mid-term: EC
c) Ex-post: EC
2. Decentralised Implementation System (DIS):
a) Ex-ante: EC Delegation
b) Mid-term: EC (OMAS, EMS etc.)
c) Ex-post: EC
3. Extended Decentralised Implementation System (EDIS):
a) Ex-ante: CFCU & Line ministries
b) Mid-term: NAC
c) Ex-post: EC
* SAPARD is implemented exclusively under EDIS.
NATIONAL AID COORDINATOR - GOEA
• Overall responsibility for planning, programming,
implementing and monitoring of PHARE programme.
• Responsible also for co-ordination of activities, related to
accession activities.
• Minister, responsible for European Affairs in Slovenia was
nominated as NAC.
• Sector for technical assistance have implemented coordinatio tasks on his behalf.
LESSONS LEARNED AT GOEA
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
PLANNING OF TIME SCHEDULE FOR THE WHOLE PROJECT CYCLE.
ROLES AND PROCEDURES AT EACH STAGE MUST BE CLEAR.
ADDRESSING OF PROBLEMS IN A TIMELY MANNER (EXPIRY DATES).
ABSORPTION CAPACITY OF BENEFICIARY SHOULD BE CHECKED
BEFORE APPROVING NEW PROJECTS/ LESSON LEARNED FROM
PREVIOUS PROGRAMME YEAR.
FOR PROJECTS WITH SEVERAL BENEFICIARIES, STEERING
COMMITTEES ARE NECESSARY.
THE PROGRAMMING CYCLE MUST FIT WITH THE NATIONAL BUDGETARY
CYCLE (GOOD PLANNING OF NATIONAL CO-FINANCING FUNDS – MULTIANNUAL APPROACH).
ASSURANCE OF ADEQUATE LOCAL STAFF SUPPORT (TWINNING).
CO-ORDINATION WITH OTHER DONORS.
INCLUSION OF EC DELEGATION STAFF IN ALL PHASES OF PROJECT
MANAGEMENT CYCLE TO AVOID PROBLEMS AT LATER STAGE
(MONITORING, EVALUATION).
EXCEPTIONS ARE ALWAYS POSSIBLE – NEGOTIATE WITH EC AND
DELEGATION FOR DEROGATIONS ON CASE-BY CASE BASIS.
ECONOMIC COHESION OF EU-15 IN 1980
140,0
120,0
100,0
80,0
60,0
NK
SW
E
BE
L
FR
A
NL
D
AU
T
FI
N
IT
A
G
BR
G
RC
ES
P
IR
E
PR
T
D
D
EU
40,0
OECD, 2004
ECONOMIC COHESION OF EU-15 IN 2002
140.0
120.0
100.0
80.0
60.0
OECD, 2004
IT
A
ES
P
PR
T
G
RC
IR
E
DN
K
BE
L
AU
T
NL
D
SW
E
FI
N
FR
A
DE
U
G
BR
40.0
Time distances in years between EU15 average
and Slovenia for selected indicators for 2003 (+
time lead, - time lag for the EU15)
30
S-time-distance in years
25
20
15
10
5
18
4
0
26
14
0
6
(2002)
-2
-5
-10
-15
GDP per capita
Employment
Rate
Annual Hours
Worked
GDP per
employed
economic indicators
R&D per capita
Life expectancy
females
Infant survival
rate
social indicators
COMPARISON OF TIME DISTANCES: USA-EU15 AND
EU15-SLO
Time distances in years between EU15 average and Slovenia for
selected indicators for 2003 (+ time lead, - time lag for the EU15)
30
25
S-time-distance in years
20
15
10
5
18
4
0
26
14
6
0
(2002)
-5
-2
-10
-15
GDP per capita
Employment
Rate
Annual Hours
Worked
GDP per
employed
economic indicators
R&D per capita
Life
expectancy
females
Infant survival
rate
social indicators
Year in which Slovenia catches up the EU15 average under
various assumptions
2130
GDP per capita
Employment Rate
2120
GDP per employed
2110
GDP per hour
R&D per capita
2100
Year of catch up
2090
2080
2070
2060
2050
2040
2030
2020
2010
2000
0,5%
1%
1,5%
2%
2,5%
3%
3,5%
4%
4,5%
Required positive growth rate of Slovenia compared to the EU 15 average
5%
IS SLOVENIAN ECONOMIC COHESION IMPROVED?
OLD RESULTS – NEW MESSAGES?
Current development model
Vision of the new social
development model
regulation and bureaucratisation of
markets
deregulation and liberalisation of
markets
restrictive business enviroment
promoting the creation and growth
of enterprises
relatively closed financial markets
open financial markets and
competition
insufficient flexibility of the labour
market
a more flexible labour market
collective social security systems
individual needs and responsibility
corporatism of large social partners
open, broad-based partner cooperation
bureaucratic and hierarchical public
administration
decentralisation and public-private
partnerships
focus on macroeconomic and social
balances
focus on sustainable development
based on structural reforms and a
more dynamic society
SHARE OF HI-TECH PRODUCTS IN EXPORT (1999)
50
IRL
40
USA
NLD
GBR
EXPORT (%)
30
JPN
FIN
HUN
FRA
CHE
SWE
20
DNK
ISR
ISL
DEU
NOR
RUS
CAN
EST
AUT
LTU
10
GRC
HRV
KAZ
MDA
ARM
KGZ
BGR
MKD
ITA
CZE
LVA
TUR
BLR
ROM
ESP
BEL
PRT
SVK
CYP
SVN
POL
ALB
0
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
GDPpc
25000
30000
35000
GROWHT OF STUDENT POPULATION
University of Ljubljana:
University of Maribor:
University of Primorska:
Colleges:
Upper-secondary schoole:
SUMMARY:
1990/91
2003/04
22.824
10.741
33.565
55.993
24.020
4.373
2.545
12.061
98.992