1 / 15

INTERREG –Experiences and Challenges

INTERREG –Experiences and Challenges. Sverre Mauritzen Norway’s role in transnational and interregional programmes (B and C) NIBR – report 2010:22, English Summary available. Challenges after the 1994 referendum. Set the EEA Agreement to work Participation in relevant EU - initiatives

sheri
Télécharger la présentation

INTERREG –Experiences and Challenges

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. INTERREG –Experiences and Challenges • Sverre Mauritzen • Norway’s role in transnational and interregional programmes (B and C) • NIBR – report 2010:22, English Summary available

  2. Challenges after the 1994 referendum • Set the EEA Agreement to work • Participation in relevant EU - initiatives • Cross – border co-operation important ; nordic traditions. Norway partner from 1995 • EU introduced transnational programmes: Norway interested and was invited

  3. Some issues in the report • Tangible results from project activities ? • Norwegian contributions to the development in European regions ? • Main problems and challenges

  4. The short story • Results: Lead Beneficiary in more than 30 successful projects, participant in over 200. • Norwegian contributions: Especially within maritime sector (Northern Maritime Corridor, Safety at Sea) and culture/tourism projects (North Sea Cycle Route, Nortrail). • Challenge: Better information, simpler procedures

  5. Development 1997 - 2011 • Programmes new both to EU and Norway • From launch to ”EU main stream” policy • A tool for practical implementation of EU policies • Norwegians active partners also in the programming process

  6. Dynamic Development • Geography: from 12 to 27 Member States • Themes: from planning to development, with emphasis on cohesion, innovation and sustainability • New developments: Espon Interact og Urbact

  7. INTERREG and EU policies • Lisbon and Gøteborg Agendas • Northern Dimension • Maritime Policy • Macro Region: The Baltic Sea • Mountain Policy

  8. Norwegian political participation • Nordic Council of Ministers • Baltic Sea Council • Arctic Council • BSSSC • CPMR and its Commissions • The Barents Co-operation

  9. SWOT – STRENGTH • Puts visions in concrete terms • Stimulates strategic thinking and actions • Stimulates development in rural areas

  10. SWOT - WEAKNESS • Weak synergies with other EU programmes • Complicated application procedures • Not attractive for private partners

  11. SWOT - OPPORTUNITIES • Accomplishment of important tasks • Enforcement of international contact network • Development of European strategies

  12. SWOT - THREATS • Increasing level of ambitions compared to formal competence of the regions • Weak links to regional strategies, food for consultants • The initiative disappears after the project period

  13. National Co-ordination • Good co-ordination by the Ministry of Regional Development • National Contact Points • Programme drafting activities • Political involvement • Norwegian Mission to the EU • Regional offices in Brussels

  14. Conclusions (I) • Territorial Cooperation – a flexible and useful instrument, now part of EU main stream policy • Norway high level of activity, should be followed up • Norway: serious and accountable partners producing project initiatives of high standard • The best projects are built on solid regional strategies, important for Norway to act as Lead Beneficiaries.

  15. Conclusions (II) • Increased level of programme ambitions means need for a closer co-operation between domestic levels of administration • Be aware of what can be achieved throughout a limited project period and establish procedures for implementation of and dissemination of results • Be selective, don’t respond to all fancy project invitations ! • Thank you !

More Related