Greece – OP “Competitiveness & Entrepreneurship” Pilot Indicators Exercise

1. Hellenic Republic Ministry of Development, Competitiveness, Infrastructures, Transportation & Networks Greece – OP “Competitiveness & Entrepreneurship” Pilot Indicators Exercise Managing Authority of OperationalProgramme  "Competitiveness & Entrepreneurship"   Christos Drymousis UNITA1 - "Programming & Evaluation of OP" March 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

2. Choice for implementation of New Logical Framework: Energy Sector • Priority Axis 4: Integration of the country's energy system and strengthening of sustainability • Questions: • What are our strategic priorities for the Energy Sector? • Which Result Indicators can demonstrate this direction better? • Will our Output Indicators contribute to change in the Result Indicators? • Do we know the baseline values for 2008? Are there validated data? • Could we evaluate the contribution of policy actions? How?

3. Restructuring of Priorities

4. Result Indicators (1/3)

5. Result Indicators (2/3)

6. Result Indicators (3/3)

7. Output Indicators

8. Implementation in Priority 1

9. Conclusions (1/3)About Current Framework • Phrasing of the Priority Axis 4 of OP: • not very clear & open to interpretation, but • flexibility to include or substitute a project • Output Indicators: • somehow vague, not always related directly to their results • do not always reflect the intended effects of the OP explicitly • Result Indicators for Natural Gas  referring to committed values (not actual) or to population covered (potentially, but not necessarily) • Result Indicator – “Annual decrease of Greenhouse Gas Emissions (CO2)” initially not linked to every action separately, as considered result of all • Heavy reliance on the Monitoring System  fine as long as data reported in a timely and correct manner

10. Conclusions (2/3)About New Logical Framework • Indicators: • Result  clear & directly linked to policy intervention • Output  well-defined & measurable • Data / Sources: • explicitly identified for each indicator • statistically validated data - promptly collected mostly by Ministry of Environment, Energy & Climate Change • Baseline values: • available only after energy inspections are conducted / no values indicated • difficulties in defining when change can be expected (i.e. consumption of natural gas, real data one year after the end of project)

11. Conclusions (3/3)General Comments • In the design phase of an OP  wide variety of fields (R&D, Tourism, Entrepreneurship, Financial Engineering, Energy, Culture, etc.): • no information about resource allocation or programme architecture • not always easy to implement the “smart approach” to other areas (i.e. measurement of state aid effect to exports of an enterprise) • sometimes difficult to determine the exact time of expected change to actually emerge • Concentration is the key:fewer indicators - deliberation process • Data / Databases: • proper monitoring – statistically validated past data • identification of intended results that reflect the strategy of the OP • Results: affected by other factors, like great economic crisis & recession (i.e. energy saving not by interventions, but because of decreased oil / electricity consumption in houses)

12. Q & Q U E S T I O N S A N S W E R S Thank you very much for your attention ! A