10. Bibliografía
10.3. Fuentes Normativas:
It is interesting to make a comparison between this catalogue, the content of the grid cells and the measures currently in the second pillar. This reveals two important points – one concerning the scope for simplification or degree of overlap in the current menu of RD measures, and the other concerning opportunities for new instruments. Both these points are relevant to our study.
Synergies, simplification and/or overlap in measure design
It is clear that the current suite of individual EAFRD measures presents very different degrees of coverage, in respect of the distinct roles identifiable in our catalogue and presented in the cells within table 5.2. Some measures correspond to several cells combined, while others correspond only to a partial coverage of one cell. For example, some of the axis 1 measures, because they are limited to farming and forestry, only address parts of individual cells (e.g. measure 114 - support for young farmers). Others have potential to achieve the aims of more than one cell, and axis 4 has the broadest coverage of all. Among measures with a fairly broad coverage we could include 111 training, 321 village renewal, and 211-4 Less Favoured Area aids.
In some cases it is clear that a multi-purpose instrument is likely to be more efficient and just as effective as a whole series of single purpose ones. This is probably the case in respect of RD information and advice networks, for example. Many of the cells in the right-hand column of the grid can potentially be served by a single instrument promoting best practice examples and offering advice on how to implement successful models or approaches, for different aspects of RD, across a whole programme area or even between programme areas. This is essentially equivalent to role envisaged for the EAFRD’s national and European rural development networks. Such networks could deliver most of the roles listed in this column, except advice and information which are locally-specific.
In other cases, there may be good reasons why a combined-purpose, single instrument could lead to less effective performance in respect of either purpose, than a single instrument pursuing only one of these purposes. Consider, for example, a regular payment which seeks simultaneously to sustain rural labour and to promote sensitive environmental management. Ideally a payment to support rural labour should be related to the extent of labour provided by each beneficiary, just as the payment to promote sensitive environmental management should relate to the level of management cost involved in so doing. While labour is one factor in management cost, it is not the only one. If the two purposes are jointly pursued, therefore, there is likely to be a trade-off between effective targeting of the two goals.
So, where current instruments combine different cells identified in table 5.2, we should
consider whether this offers synergies of effectiveness with potentially greater efficiency, or trade-offs between two qualities which might compromise performance. Similarly, for occasions where more than one of the current instruments delivers against a single cell in
table 5.2, we should examine whether this leads to potentially overlapping instruments, or whether they each target different kinds of detailed action. This generates ideas for combining or simplifying measures.
Scope for new RD instruments
The combined coverage of existing measures does not correspond to the potential coverage of the full 70 cells in the grid or 35 instruments in the catalogue - gaps are apparent. These tend to concern: areas of the wider economy beyond agriculture and forestry; the potential to do more to tackle key environmental needs and opportunities (particularly climate change);
137
and some aspects of rural quality of life. Seven new areas where instruments could be envisaged are apparent from the catalogue. These are summarised briefly here.
Supporting and managing collaborative groups and linkages to promote innovation - to cover
the ongoing costs of organising and maintaining enabling and facilitating services to support business groups and business mentoring for innovation in rural products and services. This measure could particularly target areas of significant environmental degradation or management decline, or social need (high unemployment, low skills and dependency culture). Eligible beneficiaries could be not-for-profit organisations or local public entities. Aid could be offered for business support services operating to an agreed plan of action with targets for successful group formation, growth in membership and business outcomes.
Rural service access schemes for disadvantaged groups - to enable disadvantaged groups
to achieve a fair level of access to infrastructure and services provided by the state or by commercial operators in rural areas (eg telephones, IT, transport services, nurseries or other childcare). Payments could be offered to intermediary, not-for-profit organisations to provide vouchers or other kinds of subsidised approach to disadvantaged individuals in rural areas which could reduce the cost to them of accessing necessary infrastructure and services. Targeting of appropriate beneficiaries could be achieved by working through trusted third party expert providers in the social and voluntary sectors. Payments could be made via intermediary non-profit organisations working to an agreed plan or strategy with the programme authority or groups of local municipalities.
Local Agenda 21 innovation and achievement - to stimulate the setting and attainment of
new, higher standards of local recycling, energy efficiency and renewable energy use in order to contribute to climate change mitigation and a more efficient use of natural resources. Support could be given to local municipalities and NGOs working in partnership to set and to deliver against ambitious targets for recycling, energy efficiency and use of renewable energy sources in public and communal buildings and other facilities. Aid could cover planning, equipment, promotional campaigns, redesign of waste and energy facilities, home insulation grants, etc. Funds could be awarded by competitive bidding by municipalities to a central fund held by the programme authority, with funding awarded on the basis of those with a strong and ambitious project plan.
Local credit and local finance provision - to support local farm and non-farm entrepreneurs
and communities to access credit, and to operate schemes to capture the financial benefits of RD activities within the local area and minimise ‘leakages’. This could probably be made available to communities on demand. A central team could be established by the programme authority with expertise in local credit and local trading schemes, to promote and support the adoption of these kinds of scheme in areas where interest or specific need is identified by local municipalities or commercial groups (farmers, foresters, local traders). The team could offer training, start-up assistance and then ongoing mentoring to those groups who decided to pursue these models, and would promote best practice in their application.
Ecosystem service payments for climate change mitigation and adaptation - to offer
payments to land holders and managers to sustainably manage areas of priority for carbon storage or water retention, into the long term, in ways which will not undermine their ecosystem service provision. Priority areas could be defined by the Member States according to common criteria based upon:
• the most important rural resources for carbon storage or water retention,
• degree of threat to, or need to restore, sensitive management to retain these functions
The measure could require management plans drawn up between environmental agencies and land holders, to secure appropriate management in agreements lasting 10-15 years. The long-term and low intervention nature of such management would distinguish it from existing agri-environment approaches.
Public land purchase for long-term environmental, community and amenity management - to
enable municipalities and community groups to purchase land in order to manage and use it for long-term environmental, community and amenity benefits which cannot be guaranteed if the land remains in private or commercial ownership. Support could be offered to not-for- profit community groups or local public bodies to help them to raise funds and offer match funding to purchase land for these purposes and also to provide a modest endowment. The endowment would be necessary to support ongoing management of the areas purchased (to top-up likely available funding from other sources such as community events, local taxes, grazing licence fees, etc). This measure is probably best administered by a specialist agency acting at the level of the programme authority, inviting bids from eligible groups and then helping them to develop and agree plans for how the land would be held, used and management sustained financially, into the future.
Rural lifelong learning - to enable remote municipalities and community groups to identify
and organise programmes for lifelong learning, to improve quality of life and foster a culture of self-reliance and collective problem-solving. Support could be offered to partnerships established between education institutions and remote local rural groups or municipalities to develop and operate lifelong learning programmes. These could draw upon the existing skills held by local residents and in the partnerships with further, higher and adult education institutions, using distance learning, IT and other innovative approaches to expand the range of materials and methods available for teaching and learning. Payments could be a mix of investment funds to enable purchase of equipment (IT, visual aids, transportation) and to fund facilitator time, as well as regular funds for building and maintaining on-line library and archive resources, organising events, etc. Such an instrument should probably be administered at the level of the programme authority/main delivery agency, who could invite bids from eligible partnerships and scrutinise and agree action plans and targets. It should be noted that a measure of this kind is currently able to be funded by the ESF, within Structural Fund programmes. However because it is clearly highly relevant to RD goals, we suggest that it should be included within the scope of pillar 2 aids.
139